RCRA
Legislative
Hi story
esource
Volume 3
1984
-------
,4. &/T 6.c )
H. R. 2867—47
TITLE rn—PROVISIONS RELATING TO SUBTITLE D OF THE
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL ACF
SIZE OF WASTE-TO-ENERGY FACILITIES
SEC. 301. (a) Section 4001 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by adding the following at the end thereof: “In developing
such comprehensive plans, it is the intention of this Act that in
determining the size of the waste-to-energy facility, adequate provi-
sion shall be given to the present and reasonably anticipated future
needs of the recycling and resource recovery interest within the
area encompassed by the planning process.”.
b) Section 4003 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by
adding the following new subsection at the end thereof:
“(d) SIZE or WASTE-TO-ENERGY FActu ’rIrs.—Notwithstanding any
of the above requirements, it is the intention of this Act and the
planning process developed pursuant to this Act that in determining
the size of the waste-to-energy facility, adequate provision shall be
given to the present and reasonably anticipated future needs of the
recycling and resource recovery interest within the area encom-
passed by the planning process.’.
COAJF 17-P7, II
SECTION 301—SIZE OF WASTE-TO-ENERGY FACILITIES ) I
House bill. —The House bill states that in developing comprehen-
sive State solid waste plans (under Subtitle D), the determination
of the size of waste-to-energy facilities shall consider the present
and future needs of recycling interests in the area.
Senate amendnzent.—The Senate amendment includes an identi-
cal provision.
Conference substitute.—The Conference substitute adopts this
provision.
30f
-------
H 6
BIER OF CERTAIN FACILITIze
Sac. 9. (a) FuTuRE Naaos.—Section 4001 is amended by adding the foUowing at’
the end thereof: “In developing such comprehensive plans, it is the intention of this
Act that in determining the size of a waste-to-energy facility, adequate provision I
shall be given to the present and reasonably anticipated future needs of the recy-I
cling and resource recovery interest within the area encompassed by the planning
process.”. I
(b) AMENDMENT OP. SECTION 4003.—Section 4003 ii amended by redesignating the
second subsection (b) as (c) and by adding the following new subsection (d) at the end I
thereof: I
“(d) Siza OF WASTE-TO-ENERGY F*ciunze.—Notwithatanding any of the above re-i
quirementa, it is the intention of this Act and the planning process developed pursu-
ant to this Act that in determining the size of a waste-to-energy facility, adequate I
provision shall be given to the present and reasonably anticipated future needs ofl
the recycling and resource recovery interest within the area encompassed by the
planning process.”.
Section 9. Size of certain facilities I
This provision expresses the Committee’s clear intent that, when
the size of waste-to-energy facilities are being planned, adequate
consideration should be given to encouraging recycling and re-
source recovery projects.
r - 1
61 S -‘• 1 - ’ I
COMPATIBILITY OF RECYCLING AND ENERGY RECOVERY
The reported bill amends sections 4001 and 4003, dealing with
State or regional solid waste management planning, to require thel
potential for recycling and materials recovery in an area to bej
taken into consideration in planning a waste-to-energy facility. De-
pendence on a certain waste stream as fuel for an energy recovery I
facility should not be allowed to interfere with the Act’s goal of en-I
couraging materials recovery and resource conservation.
3o /
-------
ç 1 t 1 c
COMPATIBILITY OF RECYCLING AND ENERGY RECOVERY
SEC. 21. (a) Section 4001 of the Solid Waste Dispos-
al Act is amended by adding the following at the end there-
of: “In developing such comprehensive plans, it is the inten-
tion of this Act that in determining the size of the waste-to-
energy facility, adequate provision shall be given to the
present and reasonably anticipated future needs of the recy-
cling and resource recovery interest within the area encom-
passed by the planning process. “
(b) Section 4003 of such Act is amended by adding the
following new subsection at the end thereof:
“(d) SIZE OF WASTE-TO-ENERGY FAcILiTIEs.—
Notwithstanding any of the above requirements, ii is the in-
lention of this Act and the planning process developed pur-
suant to this Act that in determining the size of the waste-
to-energy facility, adequate provision shall be given to the
present and reasonably anticipated future needs of the recy-
cling and resource recovery interest within the area encorn-
passed by the planning process. ‘
30/
-------
4qy5 1)
3 SIZE OF CERTAIN FACILITIES
4 SEC. 11. (a) FUTURE NEEDS.—Section 4001 is amend-
5 ed by adding the following at the end thereof: “In developing
6 such comprehensive plans, it is the intention of this Act that
7 in determining the size of a waste-to-energy facility, ade-
8 quate provision shall be given to the present and reasonably
9 anticipated future needs of the recycling and resource recov-
10 ery interests within the area encompassed by the planning
11 process.”.
12 (b) AMENDMENT OF SECTION 4003.—Section 4003 is
13 amended by redesignating the second subsection (b) as (c) and
14 by adding the following new subsection (d) at the end thereof:
15 “(d) SIZE OF WASTE-TO-ENERGY FACILITIEs.—Not-
16 withstanding any of the above requirements, it is the inten-
17 tion of this Act and the planning process developed pursuant 1
18 to this Act that in determining the size of a waste-to-energy
19 facility, adequate provision shall be given to the present and
20 reasonably anticipated future needs of the recycling and re-
21 source recovery interest within the area encompassed by the
22 planning process.”.
3ô/
-------
(+ 21C rniu i ff1 r f ft.7ij
CoM4tt b L .4- ,tAAL/j I i13 pZ’
15 SIZE OF CERTAiN F.4CILITZES
16 SEC. 9. (a) FUTURE NEEDs.—Section 4001 is amend-
17 ed by adding the following at the end thereof: “In decelcpb:g
18 such comprehensive plans, ii is the intention of this Act that
19 in determining the size of a waste-to-energy facility, adequate
20 provision shall be given to the present and reasonably antici-
21 paled future needs of the recycling and resource recovery in-
22 lerest within the area encompassed by the planning process.
23 (s,) 4ME.VDMENT OF SECTION 4003.—Section 4003 is
24 amended by redesignating the second subsection (b) as (c.)
30
1 and by adding the following new subsection (d) at the end
2 thereof:
3 “(d) SIZE OF WASTE-TO-ENERGY FACILITIES.—.
4 Notwithstanding any of the above requirements, it is the in-
5 tention of this Act and the planning process developed puTs? !-
6 ant to this Act that in determining the size of a waste-jo-
7 energy facility, adequate provision shall be given to the
8 present and reasonably anticipated future need.s of the recy-
9 cling and resource recovery interest within the area encom-
10 passed by the planning process. ‘
.30/
-------
tpt’r 7
18 COMPATIBILiTY OF RECYCLING AND ENERGY RECOVERY
19 SEC. 21. (a) Section 4001 of the Solid Waste Disposal
20 Act is amended by adding the following at the end thereof:
21 “In developing such comprehensive plans, it is the intention
22 of this Act that in determining the size of the waste-to-energy
23 facility, adequate provision shall be given to the present and
24 reasonably anticipated future needs of the recycling and re-
84
1 source recovery interest within the area encompassed by the
2 planning process. “.
3 (2) Section 4003 of such Act is amended by adding the
4 following new subse tion at the end thereof:
5 “(d) SIZE OF WASTE-TO-ENERGY FAciLiTiEs.—
6 Notwithstanding any of the above requirements, it is the in-
7 tention of this Act and the planning process developed pursu-
8 ant to this Act that in determining the size of the waste-to-
9 energy facility, adequate provision shall be given to the
10 present and reasonably anticipated future needs of the recy-
11 cling and resource recovery interest within the area encom-
12 passed by the planning process. “
-------
a L fVb I £.
7 SIZE OF CERTAIN FACILITIES
8 SEc. 9. (a) Section 4001 of the Solid Waste Disposal
9 Act is amended by adding the following at the end thereof:
10 “In developing such comprehensive plans, it is the intention
11 of this Act that in determining the size of the waste-to-
12 energy facility, adequate provision shall be given to the
13 present and reasonably anticipated future needs of the recy-
14 cling and resource recovery interest within the area encom-
15 passed by the planning process.”.
16 (b) Section 4003 of such Act is amended by adding the
17 following new subsection (c) at the end thereof:
18 “(c) SIZE OF WASTE-TO-ENERGY FACILITIEs.—Not-
19 withstanding any of the above requirements, it is the inten-
20 tion of this Act and the planning process developed pursuant
21 to this Act that in determining the size of the waste-to-
22 energy facility, adequate provision shall be given to the
23 present and reasonably anticipated future needs of the recy-
24 cling and resource recovery interest within the area encom-
25 passed by the planning process.”.
HR 2867 IH
-------
II 6760
costs and benefits of alternatives to abate-
ment and containment.
(19) Assess State and Federal groundwater
law and mechanisms with which to manage
the quality and Quantity of the groundwater
resourct
(20) Assess the adequacy of existing
groundwater research and determine future
groundwater research needs.
(21) Assess the roles of State. local, and
Federal Governments in managing gound-
water quality and quantity.
(C) Mirsszasezp.—(1) The Commission
shall be composed of seventeen members as
follows:
(A) Four appointed by the Speaker of the
United States House of Representatives
from among the Members of the House of
Representatives. two of whom shall be
members of the Committee on Public Works
and Transportation and two of whom shall
be members of the Committee on Energy
and Commerce;
(B) Pour appointed by the majority leader
of the United States Senate from among the
Members of the United States Senate:
(C) Eight appointed by the President as
tollows
(ll Four from among a list of oomtnationz
submitted to the President by the National
Governors Association. two of whom shall
be represeotatlves of grounds ater appropri-
ation States and two of whom shall be rep-
resentatives of grounds ater riparlan States;
(U) One from among a list of nominations
submitted to the President by the National
League of Cities;
(iii) One from among a list of nominations
submitted to the President by the National
Academy of Sciences:
(iv) One from among a list of nominations
submitted to the President by groups, orga-
nizations, or associations of industries the
activities of which may affect groundwater
and
(v) One from among a list of nominations
submitted to the President from groups, or-
ganizations, or associations of citizens which
are representative of persons concerned
with polution and environmental issues and
which have participated, at the State or
Federal level, in studies, administrative pro-
ceed.ings. or litigation (or any combination
thereof) relating to poundwater and
(D) the Director of the Office of Technol-
ogy Assessment.
A vacancy hi the Commission shall be IWed
in the manner In which the original ap-
polntmerit was made. Appointments may be
made under this subsection without regard
to section 5311(b) of title L United States
Code. Not more than two of the tour mem-
bers appointed under subparagraph (A) and
not more than two of the four members ap-
pointed under subparagraph (B) may be of
the same political party. No member ap.
pointed under paragraph (C) may be an off I-
cer or emplo)ee of the Federal Go ernznent.
(2) If any member of the Commission who
was appointed to the Commission as a
Member of the Congress leaves that off ice,
or if any member of the Commission who
wss appointed from persons who are not of-
ficers or employees of any government be-
comes an officer or employee of a govern-
mint, be may continue as a member of the
Commission for not longer than the ninety.
day period beginning on the date he leaves
that office or becomes such an officer or
employee, as the case may be,
(3) Members shall be appointed for the
life of the Commission.
(4)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph
(Bl, members of the Commission shall each
be entitled (subject to appropriations pro-
tided in advance) to receive the daily equiv-
alent of the maximum annual rate of basic
4-)’ 1j 7 a. .
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
pay in effect for grade GS-lB of the Gener-
al Schedule for each day (including travel
time) during which they are engaged in the
actual performance of duties vested In the
Commission. While away from their homes
or regular places of business in the perform’
ance of services for the Commission, mem-
bers of the Commission shall be allowed
trarel expenses, Including per diem in lieu
of subsistance, in the same manner as per-
sons employed intermittently In Govern.
ment service are allowed expenses under
sectIon 5703 of title 5 01 the United States
Code.
ffi) Members of the Commission who are
Members of the Congress shall recei .e no
additional pa”, a!losances, or benefits by
reason of their seri-.ce on the Commission.
(5) Five members of the Commission shall
constitute a quorum but Iwo may hold bear.
(6) The Chairman of the Commission
shall be appointed by the Speaker of the
House of Representatives from among mem-
bers appointed under paragraph (l)(A) of
this subsection and the Vice Chairman of
the Commission shall be appointed by the
niajozity leader of the Senate from among
members appointed under paragraph (IXB)
of this subsection. The Chairman and the
Vice Chairman of the Commission shall
serve for the life of the Commission unless
they cease to be members of the Commis-
sion before the termination of the Commis-
sion.
(7) The Commission shall meet at the call
of the Chairman or a majority of Its mem-
hers.
(d) Dutzcroa aim STAPT a, Coiwiss ioir
EXPERTS AND CONsULTAsTs.—(1) The Com-
mission shall have a Director who shall be
appointed by the Chairman, without regard
to section 5311(b) of title 5, United Slates
Code.
(2) The Chairman may appoint and fix
the pay of such additional personnel as the
Chairman considers appropriate.
(3) With the approval of the Commission.
the Chairman may procure temporary and
intermittent services under section 3109 (b)
of title 5 of the United States Code.
(4) The Commission shall request, and the
Chief of Engineers and the Director of the
Geological Survey are each authorized to
detail, on a reimbursable basis, any of the
personnel of their respective agencies to the
Commission to assist it In carrying out Its
duties under this section. Upon request of
the Commission, the bead of any other Fed.
eral agency is authorized to detail, on a re-
imbursable basis, any of the personnel of
such agency to the Commission to assist it
In carrying out Its duues under this section.
Ce) Powsas or Co issioii.—(l) The Corn-
mission may. for the purpose of carrying
out this section. hold such hearings, sit and
act at such times and places, take such testi-
mony, and receive such evidence, as the
Commission considers appropriate.
(2) Any member or agent of the Commis-
sion may. if so authorized by the Commis-
sion. take any action which the Commission
is authorized to take by this section.
(3) The Commission may use the United
States malls in the same manner and under
the same conditions as other departments
and agencies of the United States.
(4) The A4 ,nin trator of General Services
shall provide to the Commission on a reim-
bursable basis such administrative support
services as the Commission may request.
(5) The Commission may secure directly
from any department or agency of the
United States information necessary to
enable it to carry out this section. Upon re-
quest of the Chairman of tbe Commission,
the bead of such department or agency
September 8, 1982
shall furnish such Information to the Com-
mission.
U) RssoR’r.—( 1) The Commission shall
transmit to the President and to each House
of the Congress a report not later than Oc-
tober 30. 1985 The report shall contain a
detailed statement of the findings and con-
clusions of the Cummission with respect to
each item listed in subsection (hI, together
with its recommendations for such legisla-
tion: and administrative actions, as it consid-
ers appropnate.
(2) Not later than one year after the en
actrnent of this Act, the Commission shall
complete a preliminary study concerning
groundwater contamination from hazardous
and other solid waste and submit to the
Presadent and to the Congress a report con-
taining the findings and conclusions of such
preliminary study. The study shall be con-
tinued thereafter, and final findings and
conclusions shall be incorporated as a sepa-
rate chapter in the report required under
paragraph (1). The preliminary study shall
Include an analysis of the extent of ground-
water contamination caused by hazardous
and other solid waste, the regions and major
water supplies most significantly affected
by such contamination, and any recommen-
dations of the Commission for preventive or
remedial measures to protect human health
and the environment from the effects of
such contamination.
(g) TERMINAtION —The Commission shall
cease to exist on October 30, 1985.
(h) Ac-riloftIzarIoN or APpRopslAnoNs.—
There is authorized to be appropriated for
the fIscal years 1983 Lhrough 1985 not to
exceed $7,000,000 to carry out this section.
PSESESVATIOW 0? OT RIGHTS
Sm. 10. Section 7002(f) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act is amended by striking out
‘section” and substituting “Act”.
Sec. 11 Section 1004(27) of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act is amended by adding
the following at the end thereof: “The Ad.
uilnlstrator shall promulgate such regula-
tions as may be necessary to protect human
health and environment ensuring that the
use, reuse, recycling, and reclamation of
hazardous waste Identified or listed under
section 3001 Is conducted In a manner con-
sistent with such protection.”.
SIZE 0? CERTAIN PACLUTIES
Bzv. 12. (a) Section 4001 of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act L i amended by adding
the following at the end thereof: ‘In devel-
oping such comprehensive plans, it is the in-
tention of this Act that in determining the
size of the waste-to-energy facility, adequate
provision shall be given to the present and
reasonably anticipated future needs of the
recycling and resource recotery Interest
within the area encompassed by the plan-
ning process.”.
(b) &‘ct.on 4003 of such Act is amended
by adding the following new subsection (C)
at the end thereof.
“Cc) SizE or WAsTS .yo-Esincy PActU-
rrrs —Notwithstanding any of the above re-
quirements. It is the intention of this Act
and the planning process developed pursu-
ant to this Act that in determining the size
of the waste-to-energy facility, adequate
provision shall be given to the present and
reasonably antIcipated future needs of the
recycling and resource recovery interest
within the area encompassed by the plan-
ning process.”.
ODIONSTRATX0N PtOThCT
Sac, II. Section 4008 of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act Is amended by adding the to!-
lowing new subsection at the end thereof:
(h) RecvcLzwo Iin’* uiz r* r Psocrasriro
Cssrrza.—(1) The Administrator Is author-
- oI
-------
Z ’6 - .‘ cMfl.oL..C..f.D , )b
SUBTITLE 0 IMPROVEMENTS
SEC. 302. (awl) Subtitle D of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by adding the following new section after section 4009:
“ADEQL’ACY OF CERTAIN GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA
“SEc. 4010. Ia) Siun —The Administrator shall conduct a study
of the extent to which the guidelines and criteria under this Act
‘other than guidelines and criteria for facilities to which subtitle C
applies which are applicable to solid waste management and
disposal facilities. including. but not Limited to landfills and surface
impoundments. are adequate to protect human health and the
environment from ground water contamination. Such study shall
include a detailed assessment of the degree to which the criteria
under section 1008(a) and the criteria under section 4004 regarding
monitoring, prevention of contamination, and remedial action are
adequate to protect ground water and shall also include recommen-
dation with respect to any additional enforcement authorities which
the Administrator, in consultation with the Attorney General,
deems necessary for such purposes.
“(b) REP0R’r.—Not Later than thirty-six months after the date of
enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984,
the Administrator shall submit a report to the Congress setting
forth the results of the study required under this section, together
with any recommendations made by the Administrator on the basis
of such study.
“(C) REVISIONS OF GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA—Not later than
March 31, 1988, the Administrator shall promulgate revisions of the
criteria promulgated under paragraph U) of section 4004(a) and
under section 1008 (aX3) for facilities that may receive hazardous
household wastes or hazardous wastes from small quantity genera-
tors under section 3001(d). The criteria shall be those necessary to
protect human health and the environment and may take into
account the practicable capability of such facilities. At a minimum
-------
H. R. 2867—48
such revisions for facilities potentially receiving such wastes should
require ground water monitoring as necessary to detect contamina-
tion, establish criteria for the acceptable Location of new or existing
facilities, and provide for corrective action as appropriate?’.
(2) The table of contents for such subtitle D is amended by adding
the following new item after the item relating to 4009:
“Sec. 4010. Adequacy of certain guidelines and cntena.”.
(b) Section 4004(c) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by
striking all after “subsection (a)” through “later”.
(C) Section 4005 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by
adding the following new subsection after subsection (b):
“(c) CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS Dispos*z..--(1XA) Not Later than 36
months after the date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984. each State shall adopt and implement a
permit program or other system of prior approval and conditions to
assure that each solid waste management facility within such State
which may receive hazardous household waste or hazardous waste
due to the provision of section 300 1(d) for small quantity generators
(otherwise not subject to the requirement for a permit under section
3005) wilL comply with the applicable cnteria promulgated under
section 4004(a) and section 1008a 3).
“(B) Not later than eighteen months after the promulgation of
revised criteria under subsection 4004(a) (as required by section
4010(c)), each State shall adopt and implement a permit program or
other system or prior approval and conditions, to assure that each
solid waste management facility within such State which may re-
ceive hazardous household waste or hazardous waste due to the
provision of section 300ltd) for small quantity generators (otherwise
not subject to the requirement for a permit under section 3005) will
comply with the criteria revised under section 4004(a).
“(C) The Administrator shall determine whether each State has
developed an adequate program under this paragraph. The Adminis-
trator may make such a determination in conjunction with
approval, disapproval or partial approval of a State plan under
section 4007.
“(2XA) In any State that the Administrator determines has not
adopted an adequate program for such facilities under paragraph
(1XB) by the date provided in such paragraph, the Administrator
may use the authorities available under sections 3007 and 3008 of
this title to enforce the prohibition contained in subsection (a) of this
section with respect to such facilities. -
“(B) For purposes of this paragraph, the term ‘requirement of this
subtitle’ in section 3008 shall be deemed to include criteria promul-
gated by the Administrator under sections 1008(aX3) and 4004(a) of
this title, and the term hazardous wastes’ in section 3001 shall be
deemed to include solid waste at facilities that may handle hazard-
ous household wastes or hazardous wastes from small quantity
generators.”.
(3 ’,)—
-------
1 ( iiF. 1 P-1..)
SECTION 302—SUBSTITUTE D IMPROVEMENTS
House bill.—The House bill requires a study of the adequacy of
current criteria for solid waste management and disposal facilities
and revision of those criteria as necessary to protect human health
and the environment.
The Administrator is directed to prepare a report containing the
results of the study, together with recommendations, for submis-
sidn to Congress within 36 months after enactment. -
Senate amendment—The Senate amendment requires a revision
of the current criteria for sanitary landfills as necessary to protect
human health and the environment. In addition, the Senate
117
amendment requires States to have programs enforcing the current
criteria within 3 years, and implementing the revised criteria
within 18 months after revision. In States which have no program
to implement the revised criteria, the Administrator is authorized
to enforce the prohibition on open dumping. Civil actions against
persons subject to a compliance schedule issued by the State under
an approved program are prohibited.
The Senate amendment authorizes $15 million from funds appro-
priated for FY 1985 and authorizes $20 million to be appropriated
each year through FY 1989 for the purpose of assisting States in
the implementation of Subtitle D programs.
Conference substjtute.—The Conference substitute adopts the pro-
vision of the House bill directing the Administrator to conduct a
study, as well as the Senate amendment, with the exception of the
Senate provisions which prohibits civil actions, which is deleted. In
addition, the period of reauthorization extends only though FY
1988.
The States and the Administrator should act expeditiously in im-
plementing these revisions and improvements to Subtitle D. Sub-
title D facilities are the recipients of unknown quantities of hazard-
ous waste and other dangerous materials resulting from the dispos-
al or household waste, small quantity generator wastes and illegal
dumping. Since construction, siting, and monitoring standards for
these facilities are either nonexistent or far less restrictive than
those governing hazardous waste disposal facilities, environmental
and health problems caused by Subtitle D facilities are becoming
increasingly serious and widespread. A high proportion of sites
listed on the National Priority List were sanitary landfills. Without
the additional environmental protection that the implementation
of this provision will provide, even more Subtitle D facilities are
destined to become Superfund sites.
-------
1i- .pt
49
SUBTITLE D IMPROVEMENTS
The reported bill adds a new paragraph to section 4004(a), a part
of subtitle D of the Solid Waste Disposal Act. New section 4004(a)(2)
requires the Administrator within twenty-four months after enact-
ment of these amendments to promulgate revisions of the criteria
for distinguishing sanitary landfills and open dumps under sections
1008(a)(3) and 4004(a)(1). These revisions are to reflect the need to
protect human health and the environment, and improvements in:
the state of control and measurement technology.
Substantial quantities of material of a hazardous nature finds its
way into subtitle D disposal facilities (i.e., all those not required to
have a permit under subtitle C). This includes hazardous wastes
not required to go to a subtitle C permitted facility because they
come from “small quantity generators.” While the exact quantity
of such wastes is not yet known, it clearly totals millions of tons
each year, and can exceed tens of thousands of gallons per year at
a single facility. Also, the household waste exclusion allows hazard-
ous materials to enter subtitle D facilities. Because of the currently
inadequate procedures for identifying, listing, and delisting hazard-
ous wastes, many troublesome materials currently unregulated
under subtitle C will go to subtitle D facilities. These include infec-
tious wastes and wastes delisted through marginal neutralization
of their corrosivity characteristic. Illegal dumping of hazardous
wastes is regulated under subtitle C, but the likelihood of such
dumping at subtitle D facilities must be considered.
Many sites addressed by the cleanup program under the Compre-
hensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
(Superfund) were originally municipal landfills. To avoid creating
another round of Superfund candidates through our current subti-
tle D disposal practices, the subtitle D facility criteria must be re-
vised. New section 4004(a)(2) requires such revisions to take into ac-
count the potential receipt by subtitle D facilities of hazardous
waste in household waste and from small quantity generators and
the possibility of illegal dumping. As directed by section 1008(a),
such revised criteria should include information for deciding the
adequate location, design, and construction of subtitle D facilities,
including the consideration of regional, geographic demographic,
and climatic factors.
A principal purpose of these revised criteria is the protection of
ground and surface water and drinking water supplies. Appropri-
ate closure requirements should be part of the revised criteria. The
Agency is expected to examine improvements in waste disposal
control and measurement technology. EPA must also consider the
appropriate standards to protect human health and the environ-
ment, taking into account the si e of the facility, its location rela-
tive to populated areas and the degree of industrialization, the
proximity of ground and surface water, the disposal method, and
the amounts and characteristics of the waste received.
The Agency is granted some discretion in determining the appro-
priate design and operating standards for various subtitle D facili-
ties. For example, smaller and more remote facilities, especially
those not close to drinking water sources, seem less likely to cause
public health problems than large facilities or those near populated
-------
50
areas or receiving wastes from industrialized areas. The multiple
liner-leachate collection system requirements of new section 3004(0
applicable to subtitle C facilities are not to be automatically incor-
porated in revised criteria for landfills or surface impoundments
which are subtitle D facilities.
The impetus for requiring these revisions is primarily the con-
cern for potential disposal of hazardous materials with nonhazard-
ous wastes. Therefore, in revising the criteria the Agency should
focus initially on municipal landfills and subtitle D surface im-
poundments where this is most likely to occur. For facilities poten-
tially receiving hazardous waste in household waste or from small
quantity generators the revised criteria at a minimum must re-
quire groundwater monitoring, and provide for corrective action
where necessary to protect ground or surface water or otherwise
prevent release of hazardous materials into the environment.
Groundwater monitoring requirements can contain the flexibility
currently provided in the subtitle C regulations. This requirement
does not apply to facilities which only receive wastes the regulation I
of which is suspended under section 3001(b) (2) or (3).
To make it clear that the prohibition of facilities not in compli-
ance with the subtitle D criteria is a direct Federal requirement,
not dependent on the approval of a State plan containing that re-
quirement, section 4004(c) is amended by striking any reference to
State plan approval.
As originally conceived in the 1976 amendments to the Solid
Waste Disposal Act, subtitle D was intended to provide a compre-
hensive program for the management and disposal of solid waste.
The development and implementation of State plans are to address
both hazardous and nonhazardous wastes. The ban on open dump-
ing of section 4005 applies to solid waste and hazardous waste. Sub-
title D, however, provides the Act’s only regulatory framework for
the environmentally sound disposal of solid waste at landfills and
impoundments not subject to subtitle C permits. The purpose of
these amendments is to strengthen State and Federal oversight of I
subtitle D facilities, particularly those which might receive hazard-
ous wastes from small quantity generators or in household wastes.
These subtitle D improvements require action at both the Federal
and the State level.
The reported bill adds a new subsection to section 4005 of the
Act, requiring each State to adopt an enforceable system of prior
approval and conditions (e.g., a facility permit program) to assurei
compliance with the revised criteria by each solid waste manage-
ment facility which may receive hazardous waste in household
solid waste or from small quantity generators. Each State must
begin to enforce such a system no later than forty-two months after
enactment of these amendments. Most States already have in place
permit systems for solid waste disposal facilities. Since these sys-
tems are likely to require modifications to incorporate the revised
criteria, the bill provides time after the deadline for revising the
criteria for States to make such modifications.
The Agency is expected to work with the individual States to
assist them in adopting appropriate and enforceable permit or
other systems for assuring compliance with the revised criteria.
States should make use of the open dump inventory, and permits
-------
51
issued under such systems should reflect or constitute the compli-
ance schedule required by section 4005(a). The Agency is expected
to make funds available to the States, through performance-based
grants under section 4008(a)(1) or an augmented section 3011 pro-
gram, to assist State progress in revising their regulations and
solid waste management plans and their permit and enforcement
programs. Such funding should be stable over a period of years, for
the States to reliably make use of it.
Experience with the original subtitle D program indicates that
some States may be unable or unwilling to adopt an enforceable
program to assure compliance with the criteria at all facilities. To
provide for this contingency, under new section 4005(c) the Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency is authorized to enforce the prohibi-
tion of section 4005(a) with respect to facilities receiving hazardous
wastes in household or from small quantity generators, in any
State which fails to adopt and enforce the required compliance as-
surance program within forty-two months after enactment of these
amendments. The Agency will determine a State’s compliance with
the requirements of section 4005(c) through the review and approv-
al of State solid waste management plans under section 4003.
The Agency may use the enforcement authorities of sections 3007
and 3008 to enforce the prohbition on open dumping and the re-
vised criteria. Under section 3007 EPA employees or representa-
tives can enter, inspect, and obtain samples at any facility to the
same extent that the authority exists for hazardous waste facilities
regulated under subtitle C. This authority will allow EPA to evalu-
ate against the revised Federal criteria any disposal facility which
may receive hazardous waste in household waste or from small
quantity generators. Under section 3008 the Administrator has the
authority to issue compliance orders and to assess civil and crimi-
nal penalties for violations of the criteria. Citizens may continue to
use the enforcement authority of section 7002 to enforce the prohi-
bition on open dumping and the revised criteria.
-------
P tSS ,/f’ 1
3 ADEQUACY OF CERTAIN GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA
4 SEC. 30. (a) Subtitle D is amended by adding the fol-
5 lowing new section at the end thereof:
6 “ADEQUACY OF CERTAIN GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA
7 “Sec. 4010. (a) STUDY.—The Administrator shall con-
8 duct a study of the extent to which the guidelines and criteria
9 under this Act (other than guidelines and criteria for facilities
10 to which subtitle 0 applies) which are applicable to solid.
11 waste management and disposal facilities, including, but not
12 limited to landfills and surface impoundments, are adequate
13 to protect human health and the environment from ground
14 water contamination. Such study shall include a detailed as-
15 sessment of the degree to which the criteria under section
16 1008(a) and the criteria under section 4004 regarding moni-
17 toring, prevention of contamination, and remedial action are
18 adequate to protect ground water and shall also include rec-
19 ommendation with respect—to any additional enforcement au-
20 thorities which the Administrator, in consultation with the
21 Attorney General, deems necessary for such purposes.
22 “(b) REPORT.—NOt later than thirty-six months after
23 the date of the enactment of the Hazardous Waste Control
24 and Enforcement Act of 1983, the Administrator shall submit
25 a report to the Congress setting forth the results of the study
302 -
-------
95
1 required under this section, together with any recommenda-
2 tions made by the Administrator on the basis of such study.
3 “(c) REVISIONS OF GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA.—
4 Following submission of the report required under subsection
5 (b), the Administrator shall revise the guidelines and criteria
6 referred to in subsection (a) to the extent necessary to insure
7 that such guidelines and criteria are adequate to protect
8 human health and the environment from ground water con-
9 tamination.”.
10 (b) The table of contents for such subtitle D is amended
11 by adding the following new item at the end thereof:
“Sec. 4010. Adequacy of certain guidelines and criteria.”.
-------
t $ T’/ 5 -’ p i
SUBTITLE D IMPROVEMENTS
SEC. 14. (a) Section 4004 (a) of the Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act is amended by inserting “(1)” after “LAND-
FILLS.—” and by adding the following new paragraph:
“(2) Not later than March 31, 1988, the Administrator
shall promulgate revisions of the criteria promulgated under
paraqraph (1) and section 1008(a) (3) for facilities that may
receive hazardous household wastes or hazardous wastes
from small quantity generators under section 3002(b). The
criteria shall be those necessary to protect human health and
the environment and may take into account the practicable
capacity of such facilities. At a minimum such revisions for
facilities potentially receiving such wastes should require
ground water monitoring as necessary to detect contamina-
tion, establish criteria for the acceptable location of new or
existing facilities, and provide for corrective action as ap-
propri ate. “
(b) Section 4 004(c) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by striking all after “subsection (a)” through
“kzter’
(c) Section 4005 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by adding the following new subsection:
30?—
-------
54
“(c) CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS DIsPOsAL.—(1)(A)
Not later than thirty-six months after the date of enactment
of the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1984, each
Slate shall adopt and implement a permit program or other
system of prior approval and conditions to assure that each
solid waste management facility within such State which
may receive hazardous household waste or hazardous waste
due to the provision of section 3002(b) for small quantity
generators (otherwise not subject to the requirement for a
permit under section 3005) will comply with the applicable
criteria promulgated under section 4004 (a) and section
1008(a) (3).
“(B) Not later than eighteen months after the promul-
gation of revised criteria under subsection 4004 (a) (2), each
State shall adopt and implement a permit program or other
system or prior approval and conditions, to assure that each
solid waste management facility within such State which
may rec3ive hazardous household waste or hazardous waste
due to the provision of section 3002(b) for small quantity
generators (otherwise not subject to the requirement for a
permit under section 3005) will comply with the criteria re-
vised under section 4004 (a) (2).
“(C) The Administrator shall determine whether each
State has developed an adequate program under this para-
graph. The Administrator may make such a determination
-------
55
in conjunction with approval, disapproval or partial approv-
al of a State plan under section 4007.
“(2) In any State that the Administrator determines
has not adopted an adequate program for such facilities
under paragraph (1)(B) by the dale provided in such para-
graph, the Administrator may use the authorities available
under sections 3007 and 3008 of this title to enforce the
prohibition in subsection (a) of this section with respect to
such facilities. In no event shall the Administrator or any
other person be authorized to bring a civil action under
paragraph (a) of this section against any person subject to a
compliance schedule issued by the State under a program
that the Administrator has determined to be adequate under
this paragraph. For purposes of this paragraph, the term
‘requirement of this subtitle’ in section 3008 shall be
deemed to include criteria promulgated by the Administrator
under sections 1008(a) (3) and 4004 (a) of this title, and the
term ‘hazardous wastes’ in section 3007 shall be deemed to
include solid waste at facilities that may handle hazardous
household wastes or hazardous wastes from small quantity
generators. “.
(d) Section 4008(a) (2) of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act is amended by adding the following new subparagraph:
“(D) There are authorized (i) to be made avail-
able $15,000,000 out of funds appropriated for fiscal
-------
56
year 1985 and (ii) to be appropriated $20,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 1986, 198Z 1988, and 1989, for
grants to States and, where appropriate, to regional,
local, and interstate agencies to implement programs
requiring compliance by solid waste management fa-
cilities with the criteria promulgated under section
4004 (a) and section 1008(a) (3) and with the provi-
sions of section 4005. To the extent practicable, such
programs shall require such compliance no later than
thirty-six months after the date of enactment of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1984. ‘
302 —
-------
S wbrL7 fi’ ii /
21 SUBTITLE D IMPROVEMENTS
22 SEc. 14. (a) Section 4004(a) of the Solid Waste Dis-
23 posal Act is amended by inserting “(1)” after “LAND-
24 FILLS.—” and by adding the following new paragraph:
72
1 “(2) Not later than twenty-four months after the enact-
2 ment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1983,
3 the Administrator shall promulgate revisions of the criteria
4 promulgated under paragraph (1) and section 1008(a) (3) to
5 reflect improvements in the state of control and measurement
6 technology and the need to protect human health and the en-
7 vironment. Such revisions shall take into account the poten-
8 hal receipt by such facilities of hazardous waste in household
9 waste and from small quantity generators under section
10 3002(b), and the possibility of illegal dumping of hazardous
11 wastes in such facilities. At a minimum such revisions for
12 facilities potentially receiving such wastes should require
13 groundwater monitoring, and provide for corrective action as
14 appropriate. “
15 (b) Section 4004(c) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
16 amended by striking all after “subsection (a)” through
17 “later’
18 (c) Section 4005 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
19 amended by adding the following new subsection:
20 “(c) CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS DISPOSAL.—NOS later
21 than forty-two months after the enactment of the Solid Waste
22 Disposal Act Amendments of 1983, each State shall adopt
23 and begin to enforce a permit program or other system of
24 prior approval and conditions, to assure that each solid waste
25 management facility within such State which may receive
¼3i12
-------
73
1 hazardous waste in household waste or due to the provisions
2 of section 3002(b) for small quantity generators (otherwise
3 not subject to the requirement for a permit under section
4 3005 of this Act) will comply with the criteria revised under
5 section 4004 (a) (2). In any Stale which does not adopt such a
6 program for such facilities by the dale forty-two months after
7 the enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments
8 of 1983, the Administrator shall use the authorities available
9 under sections 3007 and 3008 of this titleto enforce the pro-
10 hibition in subsection (a) of this section with respect to such
11 facilities. For purposes of this paragraph, the term ‘require-
12 ment of this subtitle’ in section 3008 shall be deemed to in-
13 dude criteria promulgated by the Administrator under sec-
14 tions 1008(a) (3) and 4004 (a) of this title, and the term ‘haz-
15 ardous wast es’ in section 3007 shall be deemed to include
16 solid wastes received at such facilities. ‘
-------
4r2. V ,4
3 ADEQUACY OF CERTAIN GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA
4 Sec. 30. (a) Subtitle D is amended by adding the fol-
5 lowing new section at the end thereof:
6 “ADEQUACY OF CERTAIN GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA
7 “SEC. 4010. (a) STUDY.—The Administrator shall con-
8 duct a study of the extent to which the guidelines and criteria
9 under this Act (other than guidelines and criteria for facilities
10 to which subtitle C applies) which are applicable to solid
11 waste management and disposal facilities, including, but not
12 limited to landfills and surface impoundments, are adequate
13 to protect human health and the environment from ground
14 water contamination. Such study shall include a detailed as-
15 sessment of the degree to which the criteria under section
16 1008(a) and the criteria under section 4004 regarding moth-
17 toring, prevention of contamination, and remedial action are
18 adequate to protect ground water and shall also include rec-
19 ommendation with respect- to any additional enforcement au-
20 thorities which the Administrator, in consultation with the
21 Attorney General, deems necessary for such purposes.
22 “(b) REPORT.—NOt later than thirty-six months after
23 the date of the enactment of the Hazardous Waste Control
24 and Enforcement Act of 1983, the Administrator shall submit
25 a report to the Congress setting forth the results of the study
HR 2867 RFS
-------
95
1 required under this section, together with any recommenda-
2 tions made by the Administrator on the basis of such study.
3 “(c) REVISIONS OF GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA.—
4 Following submission of the report required under subsection
5 (b), the Administrator shall revise the guidelines and criteria
6 referred to in subsection (a) to the extent necessary to insure
7 that such guidelines and criteria are adequate to protect
8 human health and the environment from ground water con-
9 tamination.”.
10 (b) The table of contents for such subtitle D is amended
11 by adding the following new item at the end thereof:
“Sec. 4010. Adequacy of certain guidelines and criteria.”.
-------
S 13814
planatory statement of the committee
of conference. (‘The Confei-ence sub-
stitute Is the same as the Senate
amendment.”)
Before I yield the floor, Madam
President, I should like to ask my dis-
tinguished colleagues, Senators
CHAFES and RANDOLPH. whether this
explanation of the conference agree-
ment on section 703 of this bill, deal-
ing with uranium mill tailings, Is con-
sLstent with their understanding of
this provision, and the agreement of
the conferees?
Senator CHAFEE. Yes. Madam
President. the explanation of the Sen-
ator from Wyoming accurately ex-
plains the agreement of the conferees.
Senator RANDOLPH. I, too. agree
with that explanation, and concur
that It represents the agreement
reached by the conferees.
Senator SIMPSON. I thank my dis-
tinguished colleagues for those assur-
ances. Thank you Madam President.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Madam President,
the conference report on H.R. 2867,
the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1934, represents a 3-
year effort to address the serious prob-
Iems of hazardous and municipal
waste disposal in this country. This
measure makes major improvements
In existing law. When enacted, greater
protection to public health and the en-
vironment will be provided.
I have said in the past that the 1976
amendment, the Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act, was misnamed,
because it did little to.move the Nation
toward materials and energy recovery.
The hazardous waste regulatory pro-
gram under subtitle C, which is the
heart of the 1976 act, was disappoint-
ingly slow in Implementation. This
bill, however, by adding real teeth to
the regulatory program and firmly
moving away -from land disposal for
hazardous wastes, could legitimately
be called the Recycling, Incineration,
and Treatment Act of 1984. In making
these changes in the law, the Congress
shows that It Is serious about encour-
aging the use of. alternative technol-
ogies.
‘On July 25 of this year. the Senate
unanimously adopted amendments to
the Solid Waste Disposal Act. The
House approved similar legislation
nearly a year ago. Over the past 2
weeks, the 26 House and Senate con-
ferees met on four occasions to resolve
differences between the two measures.
The conference report contains
changes from the previously adopted
bill, S. 757, that merit clarification and
discussion. Accurate Interpretation
and implementation of several provi-
sions requires that the Intent be care-
fully understood. The statement of
managers describes many of these pro-
visions, but I wish to make additional
observations about several of particu-
lar concern to me.
Among those of greatest Interest for
me are amendments revising subtitle
D of the Solid Waste Disposal Act. Im-
plementation of the existing program
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
has faltered, primarily because of
budget decisions. The subtitle D pro-
gram has not been funded or imple-
mented for several years, prompting
me to Introduce the amendment that
was adopted during earlier Senate con-
sideration of this measure.
That amendment seeks to Improve
the management of municipal landfills
and eliminate open dumps. It author-
izes funding to enable States to oper-
ate programs upgrading sanitary land.
fills and closing out existing open
dumps. The lack of Federal assistance
in recent years has brought this effort
to a standstill. Under my amendment
$15 million of the budget provided the
Environmental Protection Agency in
fiscal year 1985 could be allocated for
this purpose. Our expectation is that a
portion of the congressional increase
In the EPA budget will be used for this
work. The amendment authorizes $20
million for each year through fiscal
year 1988.
The Administrator of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency will be re-
quired to revIse existing landfill crite-
ria In recognition of the fact that vir-
tually all landfills serve as repositories
for some hazardous waste. Household
waste, small generators, and Illegal
dumpers contribute to landfills. It Is
necessary to apply controls and moni-
toring requirements to assure that
these facilities are adequate. The
amendment requires that these stand-
ards be promulgated by March 31,
1988. This will allow consideration of
the Information gathered In the small
quantity generator study.
States will be required to establish
regulatory programs to assure that
solid waste management facilities
comply with subtitle D criteria. This
may include a permitting program or
comparable system subject to the ap-
proval of the Administrator. The
amendment requires that States bring
solid waste facilities Into compliance
with existing requirements in 3 years,
They will have an additIonal 18
months to meet the revised criteria
after they are promulgated. In the
event that a State should fail to Imple-
ment a solid waste management pro-
grain, the Administrator Is authorized
to prohibit open dumps. States Imple-
menting approved solid waste pro-
grams are completely responsible for
enforcement.
The ‘underlying standard for facili-
ties subject to this amendment to sub-
title D remains protection of human
health and the environment. Require-
ments imposed on facilities may vary
from those for subtitle C facilities,
however, and still meet this standard.
They may be phased In over time, as
the Administrator deems appropriate,
to take account of the practicable ca-
pability of the facilities covered.
New statutory requirements for sub-
title D facilities may hasten the clo-
sure of many solid waste facilities that
have only a few years of remaining Ca-
pacity. The requirements could also
precipitate the closure of facilities
October 5, (984
with substantial capacity, but that are
either unable or unwilling to accept
new regulatory costs.
By allowing the administrator to
consider the practicable capability of
solid waste disposal facilities, the Con-
gress has expressed its desire to avert
serious disruptions of the solid waste
disposal industry. The Administrator
could phase In new requirements other
than ground water monitoring and
corrective action over time. Phasing
may be tailored to the characteristics
of broad categories of facilities. Such
phasing might include, for example
imposing requirements first on large
facilities which have the greatest po-
tential for affecting human health
and the environment in the absence of
added regtiiatory controls. Phasing
also might include imposing some re-
quirements Immediately on existing
units but giving time to meet other re-
quirements so that facilities are not
faced with all major new requirements
at once.
The public Is alarmed by The pi-ofu-
sion of chemical contamination inci-
dents that threaten homes, neighbor-
hoods and whole communities. Recent-
ly, this concern has been centered
almost exclusively on massive industri-
al chemical dumps and has let to ne-
glect of a foremost threat to health
and the environment,
Vie assume that our trash will be
picked up at home, but seldom ques-
tion where it goes, how it is disposed
of, or whether it is an environmental
problem. In fact, a substantial amount
of hazardous material finds Its way to
sanItary landfills and open dumps
through household waste, small gener-
ator waste, and illegal dumping. Ne-
glect of open dumps and sanitary land-
fills will continue to produce Super-
fund sites. Fully half of the original
national priority list encompassed
landfills. In most cases ground water
contamination has occurred.
Implementation of the existing sub-
title D program has faltered largely
through misguided budget decisions.
The current administration has failed
to recognize that municipal landfills
and dumps are very much a part of
the hazardous waste disposal problem.
The subtitle D amendments In this bill
will do much to help correct this situa-
tion.
Another area of my concern Is the
exemption for petroleum coke under
the provisions for the control of burn-
ing or blending hazardous waste. The
Agency Is authorized to determine ad.
ministratively which entities must give
notification, and the administrator has
asked that the notification deadline be
postponed until the regulatory pattern
is determined. rn this way. notification
can generally be required from those
the agency proposes to regulate. Since
petroleum coke i exempted from reg-
ulation under these provisions, the
Agency would not be requiring notifi-
cation from purchasers, distributors,
marketers, or users of petroleum coke.
-------
October 5, 1984
IMMINENT HAZARD AND CITIZEN SUITS
Section 7003 of RCRA currently au-
thorizes suit to immediately restrain
any person contributing to handling.
storage, treatment, transportation, or
disposal of any solid waste or hazard-
ous waste that may present an Immi-
nent and substantial endangerment to
health or the environment. Though
the Issue of Inactive waste sites Is not
addressed explicity in section 7003, the
Congress. most courts and every ad-
ministration which has administered
the act has contrued the section to
apply to such sites. Not.withstarrding
an opinion for the U.S. Court of Ap-
peals for the Third Circuit and several
district court decisions upholding the
Government’s position, some courts
ha’e ruled to the contrary. The ad-
ministration testified that clarifying
language amending section 7003 would
be helpful.
This bill will amend sectIon 7003 to
affirm that which is already provided
for under existing law. It will clarify
that section 7003 authorizes suits con-
cerned with inactive sites which may
present an Imminent and substantial
endangerment.
Although section 7003 of RCRA au
thorizes the Administrator to sue to
abate an endangerment whenever the
past or present handling, storage,
treatment, transportation, or disposal
of any solid or hazardous waste may
present on i.mxninent and substantial
endangerment to health or the envi-
ronment, we now know from the Su-
perfund experience that the number
of potential problem sites exceeds the
Government’s ability to take action
each time such action is warranted.
The problem is primarily one of inad-
equate resources.
Therefore, li.R, 2867 will authorize
citizens to bring suit against those who
have, contributed or arc contributing
to a situation which may present an
Imminent and substantial endanger-
ment to health or the environment. To
prevent such suits from inteferirig
with Government enforcement ac-
tions, a number of conditions are
placed on the authority to bring such
suits.
SUBTITLE D IMPROVEMENTS
Even with the phaseout of the small
qua. tity generator exemption, sizable
amounts of hazardous materials from
such generators, household wastes,
and illegal dumping are disposed of in
municipal landfills. Current criteria
for sanitary landfills are inadequate to
deal with these facts. In addition,
there is a need to provide for better
implementatio n of the open dumping
ban and upgraded criteria for sanitary
landfills.
As a result of this bill. EPA must
revise criteria for sanitary landfills
and for determining which practices
constitute open dumping, taking into
account potential for such facilities re
ceiving hazardous waste in household
wastes or fi-om lile al dumping.
Within 42 months, Statezi must estab-
lisli and enforce a permit piogram or
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
other system to assure that sanitary
landfills which may receive hazardous
wastes comply with upgraded criteria.
If States do not adopt such a program.
EPA shall use the enforcement au-
thority in sections 3007 and 3008 to en-
force the ban on open dumps.
AIR EMISSIONS FROM LAND DISPOSAL FACILITIES
Studies of hazardous waste surface
impoundments and landfills report
that significant quantities of hazard-
ous constituents in the wastes may be
emitted into the air. Proposals to regu-
late emissions from hazardous waste
facilities have been published on sev-
eral occasions since passage of RCRA
in 1976. Final regulations have never
been issued. The Agency also has au-
thority to regulate emissions of haz-
ardous air pollutants under the Clean
Air Act, but its performance under
that Act has been appallingly slow.
A provision of H.R. 2867 requires
EPA to promulgate regulations for the
monitoring and control of air emis-
sions from hazardous waste facilities
as may be necessary to protect human
health and the environment,
GROUND WATER MONITORING
Current EPA regulations allow waste
piles, landfills, and surface Impound-
ments that satisfy certain conditions
to claim an exemption from the
ground water monitoring requirements
that are designed to detect any re-
leases of hazardous constituents from
the facilities. The conditions for ex-
emptions. on their face, do not meet
subtitle C’s b.sic requirement of pro-
tecting human health and the environ-
ment. There is evidence, for example.
that a leak could occur even from a
double-lined disposal facility, and that
hazardous constituents can migrate
Into ground water even if the facility
is located entirely above the seasonal
high water table. Similarly, if an in-
spection shows a liner is cracl:ed, the
owner or operator is required only to
repair the crack, not to detect arid
clean up any releases that may have
occurred before the crack v as discov-
ered.
The bill will require that the act’s
ground water monitoring requirements
be completed with whether or not a
facility is located entirely above the
seasonal high water table, the facility
has two lineis and a leachate collec-
tion system, or the facility’s lir.er—or
liners—are periodically inspected. This
section has the effect of nullifying sev-
eral poi tions of EPA’s regulations. It
does not make any changes to the
Agencys regulations concerning
ground water monitoring standai’ds
other than deleting the indicated ex-
emptions.
WASTE MINIMIZATION
Current laws emphasize the need to
piopei’ly treat, store, and dispose of
hazardous wastes. While this contin-
ues to be a primary clement of RCRA
and other pollution control laws, addi-
tional emphasis must be directed
toward first, minimizing the genera-
tion of hazardous wastes and second.
S 13821
utilizing the best treatment, storage,
and disposal techniques for each
waste.
A statement of national policy will
be added to the act as well as a re-
quirement that hazardous waste gen-
,erators certify that they have pro-
grams to reduce the amount and toxlc
ity of their waste and that they are
using methods to minimize the threat
that their wastes pose to human
health and the environment.
DEFINITION OP HEATING OIL IN UNDERGROUND
STORAGE TANK PROVISION -
The underground storage tanks that
ai-e covered by this bill do not include
underground storage tanks used for
storing heating oil for consumptive
use on the premises where stored.
There are many different grades of
heating oil used, including No. 2. No. 4.
and No. 6. The particular type of heat-
ing oil used generally depends upon
the type and size of the furnace In
which it is burned. The reference to
heating oil cited above includes all of
these grades of heating oil, so long as
the tank is used for storing such heat-
ing oil for consunspti e use on the
premises where stored.
OThER iSSUES
Several other issues have been con-
sidered in the course of developing
H.R. 2867 and merit comment. These
include the Issues of permitting of
mobile treatment units: the distinction
between orisite and of fsite facilities;
direct action provisions of Superfund;
and healLh asscssments.
PLRMITT1NG 0? MOBILE TREATMENT UNITS
The EPA. in order to fulfill its leg s-
lative manctaLe. should continually be
looking at innovative, advanced tech-
nological methods to effectively and
safely treat and handle hazardous
wastes. Legislative and regulatory mi’
tiatives are necessary to discourage
the use of landfills and land disposal
genem-ally as a disposal option of fii-st
resort.
For many waste generators, the
availability of mobil treatment units
would make proper waste handling
and treatment economically feasible
and remove the growing financial in
centive for cutting corners or for mid-
night dumping. Clearly, the long-term
tightening of EPA’s current small gen-
erators exemption will mean a signifi-
cant increase in the number of regu-
lated facilities which could handle
their wastes more safely and effective-
ly through use of mobile treatment
technology—either through a circuit
rider approach where the unit perlodi
cally visited a facility—or where a unl
periodically visited a satellite treat-
n cnt ai-ea where waste from several
fii-ms was aggregated and stored pend-
ing treatment.
EPA currently has legislative au-
thority to develop a permit procedure
for mobile treatment units, however,
current permit regulations, as promul-
gated, have stymied the development
of MTU technology. I have reviewed
the work completed in September 1983
-------
November 3. 1983
fiber content, specifimily the postcon-
ter waste fiber content, would In es-
e be the tie-breaking criterion for
qually priced low bids.
.der the minimum content stand-
s option, however, a procuring
agency can specIfy a minimum recov-
ered materials content percentage
which all acceptable bids must comply
with. In other words, the lo est cost
bid will stifi be accepted as long as the
bid meets the minimum content stand-
aid. With respect to paper, the GPO
could, for Instance, require any accept-
able bid to contain no less than 30 per-
cent post-consumer waste fiber con-
tent and then select the lowest cast
bid among all qualifying bids.
I hope this explanation of the intent
of sectIon 23 Is satisfactory to the
chairman of the Joint Committee on
Printing.__
Mr. RAwtur4S. Your explanation Is
clear, however, it does indicate that in-
stances may occur when the Oovern-
merit could be paying more money for
paper In order to encourage the use of
recovered materials. I must respectful-
ly state to the gentleman from Oregon
that the Joint Committee on Printing
is precluded by statute from accepting
other than the lowest priced bid for
printing papers for the Government.
Certainly In the case of tie bids, the
Joint Committee will give ftll consid-
eration to recovered material content
If that content can be verified.
e CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
ion Is on the anaendmnent offered
e gentleman from Oregon (Mr.
EN).
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
Clerk will rest
The Clerk read as foUow
ANDA?O7IT r uOPS -•
Sac. 24. Section 3007 Is amended by Insert-
ing the following new subsection at the end
thereof:
“Cd) MAJmaY0RT Iwspac’rio,qs.—(l) The Ad-
atinistrator (or the State In the case of a
State having an authorized hazardous waste
program under this subtitle) shall -
mence a program to thoroughly inspect
every facility for the treatment, storage, or
disposal of hazardous waste for which a
permit Is required under section 3005 no less
often than every two years as to Its compli-
ance with this subtitle tend the iegulatlom
promulgated under this subtitle). Such in.
spections shall commence not later than
tweli e months after the enactment of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of
1983 The Administrator shall, after notice
and opportunity for public cosnmenee. jwo-
mulgv.e l uIaLlona goverzuzag the mini-
mum frequency and manner of such Inspec-
tions. Including the manner In which re-
cords of such inspections shall be main-
tained and the manner In which reports of
such Inspections shall be filed. The A mITIII.
trator may distinguish between cIsw2 and
categones of facilities commensurate with
the risks posed by each class or category.
“(2) Not later than six months after the
enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
dments of 1983. the Administrator
ibmit to the Congress a report on the
c.aI for inspections of hazardous waste
nent, storage, or disposal facilities by
venmiental inspector, as a supple-
ment in Inspections conducted by officezs,
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
employ . es u TesentaZhes of the vl.
runmenial Pri*ection Agency or States
having authorized hazardous waste pro-
grams or operating under a cooperative
agreement with the AdmInIstrator. Such
jeport shall be prepared in cooperation with
the States. Insurance companies offering en-
vironmental Impairment Insurance, and In-
dependent comparues providing Inspection
aervI . and other • groupe as appropil-
ate. Such report shall contain recommenda-
Lions on pronsions and requLr .m tL far a
program of private hisp cUons to supple-
me.nt governmental -
Mr. FLORIO (during the Teasing).
!r. Chairman. I ask unanimous that
section 24 be considered as seed and
ririnted in the Racoes.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is
there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New Jersey?
There was no objection. -
wr ,. w iT . &XT
Mr. ECKART. Mr. Chairman. I offer
an amendment. - - - -
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. ‘w .r page
58. after line 14, ii -
&D&QVACT or emysni cvmmzees san
. 24k. (a) Subtitle D amen4d by
sdding the iolI uzg new at the end
theseoL
‘a .azeuaer 07 a15 *1 5
8ac. 4010. (a) Svonr.—The Administrator
shall conduct a study of the extent to which
the guidelines and criteria under this Act
(other than guidelines and crIteria for facall-
ties to hlch subtitle C applies) ahich are
applicable to solid waste management and
disposal facilities, including, but not limited
to landfills and surface Impoundments. ate
adequate to protect human health and the
environment from groundwater conLimma-
tion. Such study shall Include a detailed as-
. nent of the degree to which the criteria
under section lOOBIsI and the criteria under
sectIon 4004 regarding monitoring, preven-
lion of contamination, and remedial action
are adequate to protect groundwater and
shall also Include recommendation with re-
spect to any additional enforcement au-
thorities which the Administrator. In con-
mutation with the Attorney General, deems
necessary for such purposes,
“th) Rm ’ont.—Not later than U months
-after the date of the enactment of the Haz-
ardous Waste Control and Enforcement Act
of 1933. the Administrator shall submit a
report to the Congress setting forth the re-
sults of the study required wider this sec-
tion, together with any recommendations
made by the Mminktrator on the basis of
such study.
‘(c) Rsvisiows o GomrLnies arm Casts-
au—Following submission of the report in-
quired wider mub ion (hi, the Administra-
tor stasli revIse the gwdelines and auena
referred to In subsection (a) to the extent
necessary to Insure that such guidelines and
alterla are adequate to protect human
eaIth and the envul,nln.nI trots ground
water fltAI ktJflfl .
(b) The table of contents for such subtitle
D Is amended b adding Ue following new
Item at the end thereof:
‘Sec. 4010. Adequacy of Certain Guidelines
and Criteria”.
And make the neceonry conforming
ehanges In the table of contents.
Mr. ECKART (during the T ng) .
Mr. Chairman, I ask urtanimnus con-
sent that the tnTnent be consid-
H 9161
tied as read asid printed In the
Bacoas. ’
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is
there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Ohio?
There was no objectIon.
(Mr. ECKART asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
Mr. ECKART. Mr. Chairman, today
1 cm offering an amendment to the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act which will push EPA Into deter-
mining whether Its own guidelines and
criteria for landfills and Impound-
menta regulated under zubfltle D ase
adequate to protect human health and
the environment from groundwater
contamination.
As I participated In hearings on the
reamithorzzation of RCRA and the Safe
Drinking Water Act, I became con-
vinced that instances of groundwater
contamination are widespread and
that many Impoundments are still not
adequately regulated under our envi-
ronmental statutes.
Consider the findings of EPA’s still-
unrelated surface Impounthetent as-
sessment study there are over 181,000
surface Impoundments In the United
States. Many of the Impoundments
are located In areas where there Is a
strong chance of groundwater con-
tamlnatlon—85 percent of all sites are
located In areas where there Is a po-
tential drinking water source withtn 1
mile and tu 0-thirds of these sites do
not have liners.
It Is not wonder that we are starting
to see evidence of contamination In
our drinking water supplies through-
out the Natlon—4 ? ut EPA study
showed contamination In 29 percent of
the drinking water zupplies In nitles of
over 10,000 people.
This House has taken a strong posi-
tion against the land disposal of haz-
ardous wastes, recognizing that we
cannot protect groundwater as long as
we continue to store hazardous ‘ ‘P’-1 -
als In the ground- We must also recog-
nize, however, that a waste Can eon-
taminate water supplies even though
ft hasn’t been officially listed as haz-
ardous I,?%,IP! ’ RCHA.
Indeed, In Chaismazi Ytoaro’s sub-
committee we learned that over 75
percent of the waste streams from the
production of compounds that have
been Identified as carcinogens by
EPAi own Carcinogen Assee .srnpnt
Group, and over 50 percent at the
wa_ste streams from the production of
pesticides have not been listed as haz-
ardous wastes under present hazard-
oils waste regulations.
We can prem EPA to take action on
1I stli*, but while the agency moves at
s sna.ll’s pace to list new waste streams
as hazardous. many substances contin-
ue to be put In Impoundments, per-
fectly legally, where they may con-
taminate our drinking water supplies.
The Iandf Ills surface Impoi-
menU cont i Ing these not-yet4lit’d
substan, fall halo a no msns land of
-------
regulatlon.—bt,btitle D of the Solid
Waste Management Act. which e e
xnend ing today. -
All that has be done an far a
survey of the Impoundments an (Mt
we hate a rough idea of how many Im-
poundments there are, but my amend-
nient pushes EPA to study these Un.
poundments and landfills to determine
whether EPA ’s guidelines and criteria
adequately protect human health and
the environment from ground water
contamination. The study shall In-
elude an assessment of the criteria re-
garding ground water monitoring, pie-
venting of contamination. and remedi-
alactun.
WitIla 3 years the Administrator
‘a’fli reort the results of his study and
his recommendations, and most impor-
tantly, the Administrator is directed to
revise the guidelines and criteria to
insure that hijrn2n health and cn n-
ronment are protected.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment
takes the first step In protecting our
ground water from these numerous
Impoundments which may n Iai ger
them and I urge Its adoption.
Mr. PWRZO. Mr. Cliairznan. wilt
the gentleman yield
Mr. ECKART. I yield to the gentle-
man from New Jersey.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr Chairman. I sup-
port this amendment and I commend
my coUeague for offering It. The re-
sults of this study should provide a
very lmporta.rit d4ta bs . e In an area
that has not been carefully lnvestijzat-
ed. Largely because of the small gener-
atcr exemption, hazardous waste from
municipal or so-called sanitary land-
fills may well be a significant source of
ground water contamination. This
study should disclose how extensive
that contamination Is and whether
more stringent regulation of subuue D
facilities is called for.
1 should also point out that the re-
search conducted by the Ground Water
Commission should be helped by the
data collected by EPA. I nresume that
EPA will cooperate in every way with
the Ground Water Commission end
will make available to the Commission
Its findings and data base.
Mr. ECKART. I appreciate the gen-
tleman’s statement, and 1 yIeld ba&
the balance of my tune.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
qi estion Is on the amendment offered
by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
E ). - , -
The amendment was agreed to.
a Lwr orrmm IT *1. 1 T
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman. I offer en
amendment. .
The Clerk read as foliowa
Amendnietit offered by Mr. Lr Page I V
after line 2. ert
Sim op Cmi*ni Pacnjvrm.—U) Sec-
tion 4001, is amended by section 5 of this
Act, is further amended by Inserithg -. In-
eluding those needs created bY thorough im-
plementation 01 iectlon 60021h).” alter
idequa&e pro on shall be gives to tim
ascot *ud resaona p fof
NouemberS, 1D8 . ?
*2 Section lOOSbJ ii amended bY Insert- ather factors win ereate a scarcity oL
- ir tev Cb 11T sU11OW Wriv yded paper and problems for that
D Acni.— and by adding the foI 2
w paragraph a x the end thereof: ______
‘(2) Notwithstanding any other Alter considering these concerns . I
of Isa. Isi developing eoIId called back representatives of the U.S.
the mtenuon of tb s Act tiisl j getermin- Conference of dayora and the paper
lag (M of aitp4e- en rgy fadflLg. industry and asked them to consider a
ideOuSte provision shall be alvea to the number of options for dealing with
pTment and reasonably anilcipazed future this potential factor. I am pleased to
needs inciuding Lb DPedS report that in the same spirit In which -
thorough lementattan of section
6002(b ). of the re clIng section 9 was originally worked out, we
en interests tim - ____ have reached agreement to further wi-
by the solid waste p)as. ’ . - - de1S(X)Y the intent of Congress in this
Mr. Wfl’ (dw’lng tli ____ urea. That intent Is that at the local
Chairman. __ level, that these two important Indus-
that the amendment be considered an - t SreC3 11ng and resource reeov-
read and _____ try—coope ate in detenmmng what.
The cai tAN PrO tempore. Is actual deniand Is for their respective
there objection to the request of the eifOFts, now also taking intO account
gentleman from New y - . the demands created by the Wyden
There was no oblection. amendment.
r. - - gj . This amendment has the m ,port of
mission to revise and extend . all parties to the debate and, as such.
marks.) - . strengthens the general approach al-
Mr. LENT. Mr. ChaIrman, 1 now ready adopted in section 9 to Insure
offer sri amendment relating to the . -that, to the extent possible, a spirit of
_____ lationship between . negotiation, dialog, nd reanonable-
source recovery under the RCR6 p a - ness pervades.
ning proc . ‘. - Mi FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, wID
This amendment than es alightly the gentleman yield?
the existing language cont ne4 In see- Mr. LENT. I sni happy to yield to
tion 9 of this measure and. to addition, the gentleman from New Jersey.
Inserts the amended section 9 lan. FLORIG. Mr. ChaU n. this
guage into section 1006 of RCRA to amendment, which I support, Is tosi-
Insure that this policy is Un lrmented cally a statement of national policy
consistently in other sets. which declares that Congress intends
By asy of background. sectIon 9 01 and expects the pl’innLng process to
the bill a-as designed eapreasly as a consider and take into account recy-
method whereby Congress con under- cling needs when communities build
score that Ii our intention for waste-to-energy facilities.
RCRA that (ii the planning process should be emphasized that re-
for determining the size of a waste-to- cyclers will continue to have complete
energy facility, adequate provision has ‘recovered materials,’
been given to the present and TISOfl namely those materials which can be
ably anticipated future needs of the recycled. but which have not yet en-
recycling and resource recovery Inter- tered the solid waste stream. In terms
eats within the ares encompassed by of “recoverable xnateyjais”—thase that
that planning process. - have already entered the solid waste
We did not create section 9 because stream—the Intention of this amend-
we wished for the Congress to become merit is that Industry and local govem.
the national garbage traffic cop. 6C merit continue to work together to
(Son 9 would not do that. Rather It was that portions of the solid waste
to en ph Ive that adequate prosision stream, particularly revot’erable paper.
should be giren in the plahnin.g proc- be made available to recyc1e s, -
ess to the needs of both technologies.
The balanced language which we de- Mr. LENT. I thank the gentleman
veloped in section 9 was the result of - for his support.
instakimg negotiations in 1982 over S 4r. VARPER. Mr. Vhairman. T
many months between organizations stand In strong Support of the gentle-
representing local governments and man from New York’s amendment
organizations represP! th g the recy- which would focus the Environmental
IJ1dUZIXY. Protection Agency’s attention on the
But during coixunittec deliberations use of public seuces for Itaramious
this rear. the ge of an w _ai di .I.
ment offered by Mr. Wansac changed Once these buardons substances ase
the balance 01 the equation to some discharged Into public sewer systems,
degree. Under that amendment, em- most find their way Into the sludge
bodied in section , ft Is likeLy that ‘which results from the a’ascewal.er
there a-ill be some -owth in the ‘eatment sxoceaa These contammis ..
amount of recycled paper used by the edaludges, In turn. are a serious prob.
Federal Government and its contrac- 1cm. especially on the east coast. The
toes. In addition, with an economy ability to use municipal sludge for
that holds considerable promise for land application and Other beneficial
growth, there is rising concern among purposes Is greatly hindered by the
the recycled paper Industry that the severe conta mtn 1i”°’ of sludges by n-
r1I ,. Ili Iire ffrt of (be Wyden dustrial and other sources of bossed-
m.ndrnpnt, gewwwiik z-’ -,wth sod ous s” ’ - ’ In e (’e , this ‘
119162 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE
3 2 -
-------
Nouember!, 1983
Lamination Is turning a potential te-
‘urce Into a waste.
s a result, New Tort nd several
1 w Jersey niunicipalities feel obliged
to barge their sludges out to sea—out
of sight, out of mind. Other municipal-
fties across the country are likewise
limited in their sludge disposal op-
LiOns.
We can no longer afford to hide our
contaminated wastes under the carpet.
It is time to look seriously at respozisi-
ble management options. Mr. Mouic.
ins’s amendment addresses a senous
1mw to our hazardous waste polIcy In
this country, and I urge my eolleagues
to join In support of this amendment4
D1630 -
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from New York (Mr. L ).
The amendment was agreed to.
On page 58. alter lIne 14, add the follow.
g new 5 tinfl ,. .
SATIONAL CROUSD W 5T C0 iSSZOM
‘ Sse. 24A. (a) £smm.zs IT.—TIsere k
established a commission to be known as
the National Ground Water C” on
(hereinafter in this Act referred to as the
‘Commtsslon”).
“(b) Dui’iss or Cowwiss ioii.—The duUes
of the Commission are to:
“(1) Assess generally the amount. inca.
Lion, and que.lity of the Nauon’s ground
‘eter resources.
“(2) identll) gu e.”ally the sources, exter.t.
! yp ol grourd water contaimnatlon.
3) Assess the scope and nature of the re-
.onshlp betaeen ground aster contami-
iflon and ground aster withdrawal and de-
velop projections of at allable, usable ground
waler in future year-s on a nationwide basis
“(4) Assess the relationship between starS
face waler pollution and ground water pol-
luUon.
“(5) Assess the need for a policy to protect
ground water degradation caused by con-
tamination
“(6) Assess generally the extent of over.
drnftmg of ground water resources, and the
adequacy of existing mech.n,c?rc for pee’
venting such over efting
(7) Assess generally the engineering and
technological capability to recharge
aquifers,
‘18) Assess the adequacy of the present
emderstanding of ground water recharge
annes and sule source aquifers and won
the adequacy of knowledge regarding the In-
terrelatioriship of designated aquifers and
recharge muss.
“(9) Assess the role of land-use patterns as
these relate to protecting ground water
train con m1t tlOn,
“(101 As.s methods fur remedial abate-
merit of ground wale? contamlnatsoo as well
as the costs and benefits of cleaning up pol-
luted ground water and compare deariup
costs to the co I.s of substitute water supply
methods.
(ii) Investigate policies and actima
taken by foreign governments to protect
ground aater from contamination.
“(12 Assess the use arid effectiveness of
vaisting Interstate compacts to address
-‘und waler protection front conl ,amlna-
II I Arajyae existing legal eights and
ediss gegard “‘n”iatlon 01
mind ester,
“(14) ASSeSS the adequacy of existing
standards for ground ussar quality u r
State and Federal ine.
(15) Aw monitoring methodologIes 01
the States and the Federal Government to
achieve the level of protection of (be re-
source as required by State and Federal law.
“(161 £ the selsUonstup between
ground water flow systems (arid associated
recharge areas) and the control of sources
contamination.
“(17) Asson the i-ole ofj,ndergi-ound Injec-
tion practices as a means of disposing of
waste fluids while protecting ground water
born r ntu, , lnstjon ,
(18 A methods for abatement and
tnntaannrent Cf greund water contarnstlon
and for aquifer rmlors.inn thc.uding the
ts and benefits of altenietlve- lo aba-
ment and containment.
“(19) Assess State arid Federal ground
water law and mechanisms with which to
manage the quality and quantity of the
ground water resource,
“(20) - ‘- “- the adequacy of . T(4ing
ground water research arid determine future
pound water research needs.
“(21) Assess the roles of State. local, and
Federal Goi.ernments In managing ground
water quality arid quantity.
“(C) MnssrnsniP.—(l) The Co l on
shall be composed of nineteen members as
b lows:
“ (A Sir appointed by the issker of the
United States Rouse of Represtefl tives
from among the Members of the Rouse of
Representatnes, two of whom shall be
members of the Committee on Energy and
Commerce. two of whom shall be members
of the Committee on Public Works and
Transportation, and two of whom shall be
members of the Cauuniw’e co Interior and
Insular Aft airs:
“(B) POUT appotntrd by the msjortty
leader of the United States Ser:ate fro.•n
among the Members of the Uuited Stales
Senate:
“(C) Eight appointed by the President as
follows;
“(1) Your born among a list of comma-
lions submitted to the President by the Na-
tional Governors Associatu n. two of ohom
shall be representatives of ground water ap-
propriation States and two of whom shall be
representatives of ground water riparlan
States:
‘CiI) One trem among a list of “ nuns-
tions submitted to the President by the Na-
tional League of Cities and the U.S Confer-
of Mayors:
“(W) One from among a list of nomina-
tions submitted to the President by the Na-
tional Academy of Sciences:
“(iv) One from among a list of
tines mibmiued to the President by groups.
organizations, or associations of lndustnes
the activitiu of which may affect ground
wat and
“ Cv) One from among a list of nominations
submitted to the President from groups, or
ganixatlons. or associations of citizens which
-e representative of
with pollution and envIronmental Issues and
which have participated, at the State or
Pederal level, in studies, administrative pro-
ceedings, or litIgation (or any combination
thereof) relating to ground water: and
“C l )) The Director of the Office 01
cology Assemmefli. -.
A vacancy In the Commission sb-all be filled
In the manner in which the original ap-
pointment was made. Appointments may be
made under this subsection without regard
to sectIon 5311(b) of 11th 8 UnIted States
Not more than thres of the sir memO
beTs appointed under subparagraph (A) and
sot more than two of the four membem ap-
pointed under subparagraph (13) may be of
the seine political party. No member ap’
pnmied er paragraph (C) may be an of.
.fl91 3
acer es- employee of the Federal Govern-
ent.
“(3) If any member of the Commission
who was apponfled to the Commission as a
Member of the Congress leaves that office,
or If any member of the Communion s’ho
was appointed from persons who are not of-
ficers or employees of any government be-
comes an of icer or employee of a govern-
ment, he may continue as a member of the
Corrunission for riot longer than the ninety.
day period beginning on the date he leaves
that office or becomes such an off i or
employee, as the case maybe.
“ (3) ILembers shall be appointed fo, the
We of the Commission.
(4b (At Except as provided In subpai’a-
graph (B). members of the Commission
shall each be entitled (subject to appropri-
ations provided In advance) to receive the
daily equivalent of the maximum annual
eate of basic pay In effect Sc, grade OS—18
of the Genera) Schedule for each day (in-
cluding travel time) during which they are
engaged In the actual performance of duties
vested in the Commission. While away from
their homes or regular places of business in
the performance of aervion for the Commis-
sion, members 01 the Co’,” ' ’i ’Ion shall be
allowed travel expenses, Including per diem
In lieu of subsistence, in the ssme manner as
persons employed Intermittently In Govern’
ment service we allowed expenses under
section 6703 of tItle 8 of the United States
Code,
“(B) Members of the Commission who are
Members of the Congress shall receive no
additional pay, allowances, or benefits by
reason of their service on the Commission.
“(5) Fwe members of the Cominissiun
shall cnnstiuite a quc,runt but two may hoid
hearings.
‘(6) The Chairman of the Conimlssion
shall be appointed by the Speaker of the
House of Representatives from among memO
bet’s appointed under paragraph (1 )(A) of
this subsection and the Voe Chafrmnan of
the Commission shall be appointed by the
majority leader of the Senate from among
members appointed under paragraph (1XB)
of this subsection. The Chairman and the
Vice Chairman of the Commission shall
serve for the life of the Commission unless
they cease to be members of the Comnmls-
alon before the termination of the Cr”'”-
“(7) The Commission shall meet at the
call of the Chairman or’ a majority of its
members.
“(d) D i - ann Sean or
ann Cowsvs.rAirrs.—(1) The Corn.
inission shall have a Director who shall be
appointed by the Chairman, without regard
to section 6311(b) of tItle 5. United Siates
Code. -
“(2) The Chairman may appoint and Iii
the pay of such additional personnel as the
Chairman considers appropriate. -
“(31 WIth the approval of the st&s
sion, the Chairman may procure temporary
and inteimlttern services wider sectIon
3109(b) of title S of the United States Code.
“(4) The Commission shall request, and
( se Chief of Engineers and the Director of
thq Geological Survey are each anthoi’bed
to detail, on a reimbursable basis, any Of the
ersonneI of their respective agencies to the
Commission to assist It in carrying out its
duties under this section, Upon request of
the Comxni,ssion , the head of any other Fed-
oral agency is authorised to detail. on a we-
bebursable beds, any of the personnel f
such agency the Commission to wist it
in carrying out Its thltba under this ‘ ‘
“(e Powns or Cosonumow—41) The
Cinv 1rth mu. for the purpose of earm’y-
h cut this ‘ bold such itseringo,
tONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE.
-------
‘
TITLE N—PROVISIONS RELATING PRIMARUJY TO SUBTITLE
G OF THE SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL AC
CTTIZEN SUTI’S
S .c. 401. (a) Section 7002(aXl) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by—
H. R. 2867—49
(1) inserting “prohibition.” immediately after “requirement,”;
(2) inserting “(A)” immediately after “(1)”; and
(3) inserting the following at the end thereof:
“(B) against any person, including the United States and any
other governmental instrumentality or agency, to the extent
permitted by the eleventh amendment to the Constitution, and
including any past or present generator, past or present trans-
porter, or past or present owner or operator of a treatment,
storage, or disposal facility, who has contributed or who is
contributing to the past or present handling, storage, treatment,
transportation, or disposal of any solid or hazardous waste
which may present an imminent and substantial endangerment
to health or the environment; or”.
(b) Section 7002(a) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by—
(1) inserting “or the alleged endangerment may occur” imme-
diately after “the alleged violation occurred” in the first sen-
tence following paragraph (2); and
(2 striking “to enforce such regulation or order, or to order
the Administrator to perform such act or duty as the case may
be” in the portion following paragraph (2) and inserting in Lieu
thereof the following: “to enforce the permit, standard. regula-
tion, condition, requirement, prohibition, or order, referred to in
paragraph (IXA), to restrain any person who has contributed or
who is contributing to the past or present handling, storage,
treatment, transportation, or disposal of any solid or hazardous
waste referred to in paragraph (1XB), to order such person to
take such other action as may be necessary, or both, or to order
the Administrator to perform the act or duty referred to in
paragraph 2), as the case may be, and to apply any appropriate
civil penalties under section 3008 (a) and (g)”.
(Cl Section 7002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by
adding the following new subsection at the end thereof:
“(gi TRANSPORTERS.—A transporter shall not be deemed to have
contributed or to be contributing to the handling, storage. treat
ment, or disposal, referred to in subsection (aXIXB) taking place
after such solid waste or hazardous waste has left the possession or
control of such transporter. if the transportation of such waste was
under a sole contractual arrangement arising from a published
tariff and acceptance for carriage by common carrier by rail and
such transporter has exercised due care in the past or present
handling, storage, treatment, transportation and disposal of such
waste.”.
(d) Section 7002(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended to
read as follows:
“(b) ACTIONS PRowarrED.—(1) No action may be commenced under
subsection (aX1XA) of this section—
“(A) prior to 60 days after the plainfl.ff has given notice of the
violation to—
“(i) the Administrator;
“(ü) the State in which the alleged violation occurs; and
“(in) to any alleged violator of such permit, standard,
regulation, condition, requirement, prohibition, or order,
except that such action may be brought immediately after such
notification in the cue of an action under this section respect.
ing a violation of subtitle C of this Act; or
-------
H. R. 2867—50
“(B) if the Administrator or State has commenced and is
diligently prosecuting a civil or criminal action in a court of the
United States or a State to require compliance with such
permit, standard, regulation, condition, requirement, prohibi-
tion, or order.
In any action under subsection (aX1XA) in a court of the United
States, any person may intervene as a matter of right.
“(2XA) No action may be commenced under subsection (aX1XB) of
this section prior to ninety days after the plaintiff has given notice of
the endangerment to—
“(i) the Administrator
“Ui) the State in which the alleged endangerment may occur
“(iii) any person alleged to have contributed or to be contribut-
ing to the past or present handling, storage, treatment, trans-
portation, or disposal of any solid or hazardous waste referred to
in subsection (aX 1XB),
except that such action may be brought immediately after such
notification in the ca e of an action under this section respecting a
violation of subtitle C of this Act.
“(B) No action may be commenced under subsection (aX1XB) of this
section if the Administrator, in order to restrain or abate acts or
conditions which may have contributed or are contributing to the
activities which may present the alleged endangerment—
“(i) has commenced and is diligently prosecuting an action
under section 7003 of this Act or under section 106 of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act of 1980.
“(ii) is actually engaging in a removal action under section 104
of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act of 1980;
“(iii) has incurred costs to initiate a Remedial Investigation
and Feasibility Study under section 104 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response. Compensation and Liability Act of
1980 and is diligently proceeding with a remedial action under
that Act; or
“(iv) has obtained a court order (including a consent decree) or
issued an administrative order under section 106 of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation an
Liability Act of 980 or section 7003 of this Act pursuant to which
a responsible party is diligently conducting a removal action,
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RIFS) , or
proceeding with a remedial action.
In the case of an administrative order referred to in clause (iv),
actions under subsection (aXIXB) are prohibited only as to the scope
and duration of the administrative order referred to in cLause (iv).
“(C) No action may be commenced under subsection (aX IXB) of
this section if the State, in order to restrain or abate acts or
conditions which may have contributed or are contributing to the
activities which may present the alleged eiidangerinent—
Ii) has commenced and is diligently prosecuting an action
under subsection (aX 11(B);
“UI) is actually engaging in a removal action under section
104 of the Comprehensive - . vironmental Response, Comperisa-
tion and Liability Act of 19.: ‘j; or
“WI) has incurred costs to initiate a Remedial Investigation
and Feasibility Study under section 104 of the Comprehensive
-------
H. R. 2867—51
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of
1980 and is diligently proceeding with a remedial action under
that Act.
“(D) No action may be commenced under subsection (aXIXB) by
any person (other than a State or local government) with respect to
the siting of a hazardous waste treatment, storage, or a disposal
facility, nor to restrain or enjoin the issuance of a permit for such
facility.
“(E) In any action under subsection (aX1XB) in a court of the
United States, any person may intervene as a matter of right when
the applicant claims an interest relating to the subject of the action
and he is so situated that the disposition of the action may, as a
practical matter, impair or impede his ability to protect that inter.
eat, unless the Administrator or the State shows that the applicant’s
interest is adequately represented by existing parties.
“(F) Whenever any action is brought under subsection (aX1XB) in
a court of the United States, the plaintiff shall serve a copy of the
complaint on the Atto iey General of the United States and with
the Admiristrator.”.
(e) Section 7002(e) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by
striking out “to any party” and substituting in lieu thereof “to the
prevailing or substantially prevailing party” and inserting “or sec-
tion 7006” after “this section
Co/JP tLt 7 p
SECTION 401—CITIZEN UNITS
House bill.—The House bill authorizes citizens to bring suits ii
cases where past or present management or disposal of hazardou:
or solid wastes has contributed to a situation that may present ai
imminent and substantial endangerment. If the Administrator oi
the State is diligently prosecuting an imminent hazard action th
right of action is precluded. Citizens may not bring suit under thi
amendment regarding the siting of a facility.
The House bill also provides for the award of costs of litigation t
“the prevailing or substantially prevailing party” in litigatior
under section 7002 and section 7006.
Senate amendment.—The Senate amendment contains a similai
provision, limiting citizens’ right of action but providing a statuto
ry right of intervention and limiting the award of costs of litiga•
tion. In addition, the Senate amendment clarifies that a common
carrier by rail is not subject to citizen suits if he merely transport.
ed the waste under a sole contractual arrangement and exercised
due care.
Conference substitute.—The Conference substitute adopts the
Senate amendment with additional limitations on citizens’ right of
action. Such actions are prohibited in the following cases: (1) with
38—993 0 — 84 — 8
-------
118
respect to siting and permitting of hazardous waste facilities; (2)
where the Administrator has commenced, and is diligently pros-
ecuting, actions under section 7003 of RCRA or section 106 of
CERCLA; (3) while the Administrator or the State is actually en-
gaging in a removal action under section 104 of CERCLA or has
incurred costs to initiate a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility
Study (RIFS) under section 104 of CERCLA and is diligently pro-
ceeding with a remedial action; and (4) where the Administrator
has obtained a court order (including a consent decree) or issued an
administrative order under section 106 of CERCLA, or section 7003
of RCRA pursuant to which a responsible party is diligently con-
ducting a removal action, RIFS or proceeding with a remedial
action. Actions under subsection (a)(1)(B) are prohibited only as to
the scope and duration of the court or administrative order.
Plaintiffs are required to notify the Administrator, the State and
affected parties 90 days prior to commencement of an action under
this section and the plaintiff is required to serve a copy of the com-
plaint to the Administrator and the Attorney General of the
United States.
With respect to the new cause of action pursuant to section
7002(a)(1)(B), the prohibition relating to removal actions under sec-
tion 104 of CERCLA applies only while removal activities are in
progress. The prohibition is not intended to bar an action alleging
an imminent and substantial endangerment which may exist fol-
lowing the termination of any removal action at a site, where no
future remedial action is planned.
A determination as to whether the Administrator “is diligently
proceeding with a remedial action” is, by necessity, a case-by-case
determination. Based upon its experience, the Agency estimates
that it takes eighteen months to complete a RIFS which normally
is immediately followed by an estimated four month period for the
design stage. Actual construction activity should follow shortly
thereafter. The Conferees intend that the section 7002(bX2)(BXiii)
prohibition be applied only when the RIFS, design, and construc-
tion activities at a site occur in a continuous, uninterrupted se-
quence.
Similarly, a determination as to whether a responsible party is
diligently conducting a removal action, RIFS or proceeding with a
remedial action pursuant to an order is, by necessity, a case-by-case
determination. The Conferees intend that the section
7002(b)(2)(B)(iv) prohibition be limited only to the scope and dura-
tion of the court or administrative order. For example, an adminis-
trative order issued under section 106 of CERCLA or section 003
of RCRA for surface cleanup at a site would not bar an action al-
leging that groundwater contamination at the site may present an
imminent and substantial endangerment.
Conference substitute—Finally, the Conference substitute adopts
the House provision limiting the award of costs of litigation with
the understanding that “the prevailing or substantially prevailing
party” may include more than one litigant, where appropriate.
-------
) fTL P7 p 3
Section 11(f) Citizens Suits.—Section 11 confers on citizens a lixn-
ited right under Section ‘7002 to sue to abate an imminent and sub-
stantial endangerment pursuant to the standards of liability estab-
lished under Section 7003. This right can only be exercised if the
Administrator (following notice of the intended litigation) fails to
file an action under 7003.
The Committee believes this expansion of the citizens suit provi-
sion will complement, rather than conflict with, the Administra-
tor’s efforts to eliminate threats as to public health and the environ-
ment, particularly where the Government is unable to take action
because of inadequate resources. It is expected that EPA and the
Department of Justice will carefully monitor litigation under this
provision and file, where appropriate, amicus curiae briefs with the
court in order to assure orderly and consistent development of Ca-
selaw in this area. Moreover, nothing in this provision is intended
to preclude EPA (or an authorized state) from intervening in a suit
filed by a citizen in a 7003 action where such intervention furthers
the expeditious resoluton of the litigation.
Although the Committee has not prohibited a citizen from rais-
ing claims under state law in a section 7002 action, the Committee
expects courts to exercise their discretion concerning pendent juris-
diction in a way that will not frustrate or delay the primary goal of
this provision, namely the prompt abatement of imminent and sub-
stantial endangerments. In addition, the Committee has expressly
precluded citizens from suing to prevent the siting of hazardous
waste facilities. The Committee believes that other legal authority
is available to challenge deficiencies in the permitting process. Fi-
nally, this section does not affect recognized requirements regard-
ing legal standing to bring a case. — -
‘4/
-------
$ 7Z6 7 — z I
CITIZEN SUITS
The reported bill amends section ‘7002 to authorize the Federal
courts, in actions initiated by citizens under section 7002, to apply
civil penalties under section 3008 and to authorize citizens to seek
relief, including abatement, where the past or present handling,
storage, treatment, transportation or disposal of any solid or has-
ardous waste may present an imminent and substantial endanger-
ment to health or the environment.
The conditions placed on such suits are intended to assure that
they will complement, and not interfere with, Federal regulatory
and enforcement programs. Citizen suits under these amendments
may only be initiated one hundred twenty days after the citizen
has notified the Administrator, the State in which the alleged en-
dangerment may occur, and the persons alleged to have contribut-
ed or to be contributing to the activities which may present the en-
dangerment, that there may be an endangerment. As with other
citizen suits under the Act, suits respecting a violation of subtitle C
may be brought immediately after such notification. If the United
States has commenced and is diligently prosecuting an action
under section 7003, or has settled an action to restrain or abatel
acts or conditions which may have contributed or are contributing’
to the activities which may present the alleged endangerment, ant
action under the new provision cannot be filed. If a State has com-
menced and is diligently prosecuting an action under the new pro-
vision, a citizen cannot file such an action. It is recognized that one
hundred twenty days is not sufficient time for the Agency to con-
duct all studies necessary to initiate an enforcement action. Never-
theless, based on current experience, one hundred twenty days
should provide enough time for the Agency to conduct an investiga-
tion satisfactory to the private parties, so that EPA and the private
parties should be able to work out a mutually acceptable way to
proceed.
A determination as to whether the Administrator or a State “has
commenced and is diligently prosecuting” an action is, by necessi-
ty, a case-by-case determination. With respect to the new cause of
action for citizens, “commencement” of an action, as used in these
amendments, means having actually filed suit or having issued an
administrative order. An action has not been “commenced” in a
case that is merely under investigation or a case where only notice
or warning letters have been sent. The scope of the relief being
sought by the Administrator and the opportunity for citizens to in-
tervene are factors to be considered when determining if a case is
being “diligently prosecuted.” A suit filed in court to obtain partial
abatement of a situation presenting an endangerment may be
deemed to be a bar to an independent citizens’ suit under these
amendments. An example is a suit to obtain surface cleanup of a
site without addressing cleanup of contaminated groundwater. By
exercising the statutory right to intervene, the citizen could ade-
quately protect his interest and seek a judicial order for complete
abatement. An administrative order encompassing only a portion
44,
-------
56
of a site, on the other hand, may be deemed to not be a bar to an
independent citizens’ suit. An example of an administrative order I
encompassing only a portion of a site is an order addressing the
cleanup of surface contamination without addressing the cleanup
of surface contamination. Even with the new requirements for
public participation in settlements, participation short of interven-
tion does not provide citizens with the same opportunities to pro-
tect their interests or to seek a judicial order for complete abate-
ment. A decision to bar such an opportunity should not be taken
lightly.
An additional limitation is contained in the provision that no
person, other than a State or local government, may bring such an
action with respect to the siting of a hazardous waste treatment,
storage or disposal facility. Other legal authority is appropriate for
addressing questions arising from the permitting process. This sec-
tion is not intended to be used to reopen or frustrate the permit
process. Finally, this amendment does not affect recognized re-
quirements regarding legal standing.
The amendments are not intended to limit in any way the clear
right of intervention provided to the Administrator. For example, if
the Administrator believes a citizen suit under the provision is not
being prosecuted in the public interest, he may exercise the right I
to intervene in such action and seek from the court restrictions or,
conditions upon the citizen suit, in order to assure that the means
of prosecution and the relief sought are in the public interest. EPA
and the Department of Justice are responsible for taking necessary
steps to assure orderly and consistent development of case law and
legal interpretations, and technical consistency for hazardous wasteL
enforcement. In view of the Agency’s expertise in this area, courts
will accord some deference to the Agency’s technical findings con- 1
cerning the nature and extent of endangerment. The Administra-
tor and the Department of Justice are encouraged to file amicus
curiae briefs with the court, where appropriate.
These amendments provide any person with a statutory right to
intervene as a party to section 7003 suits filed by the Administra-
tor, or new section 7002(a)(1)(B) suits filed by a State, “unless the
Administrator or the State shows that the applicant’s interest is
adequately represented by existing parties.” The rules on interven-
tion are intended to assure that persons living in close proximity to
a site (persons potentially at risk) which is the subject of a govern-
ment-initiated imminent hazard action will be able to intervene as
a matter of right unless the Administrator or the State can demon-
strate that they are adequately representing those persons’ inter-
ests. The purpose of the amendments is to make it easier for indi-
viduals who may be assuming an imminent and substantial risk as
a result of the defendant’s activities to participate in these suits,
particularly in fashioning the appropriate remedy for eliminating
the risk. By requiring the government to demonstrate that the ap-
plicant’s interests are already represented, this amendment re-
verses the normal presumption of Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure.
These amendments are intended to allow citizens exactly the
same broad substantive and procedural claim for relief which is al-
ready available to the United State under section 7003. United
44/
-------
5,7
Stales v. Diamond Shamrock Corporation, Civ. No. C80-1857 (N.D.
Ohio, E.D. May 29, 1981). Any differences in language between
these amendments and section 7003 are not intended to reflect a
difference in such claims, but to merely clarify that citizens will
have the same claim presently available to the United States. Nor
do these amendments limit existing rights. Providing citizens with
the same claim presently available to the United States is not
meant to imply that citizens be accorded the same deference on
technical issues that the courts might accord the EPA or the De-
partment of Justice.
Some liable parties have erroneously asserted that the United
States must exhaust all viable alternatives to injunctive relief
before it may seek such relief under section 7003. Just as the
United States need not utilize resources available to it under sec-
tion 104 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compen-
sation and Liability Act of 1980 (Public Law 96—510) or prove that
such resources are unavailable before it may seek injunctive reme-
dial relief under section 7003 or similar authorities, citizens need
not exhaust or rely upon other resources or remedies, before seek-i
ing relief under these amendments. As with section 7003, these
amendments are to be an alternative and supplement to other rem-
edies. Nevertheless, injunctive relief is an equitable remedy and,
although there is no requirement to exhaust other remedies, courts
should be cognizant of and consider the availability of such alterna-
tives when awarding equitable relief.
Although these amendments do not prohibit a court from allow-
ing a citizen to litigate pendent claims under State law in a section
7002 action, it is intended that citizens and courts will exercise dis-
cretion concerning such claims so that they will not unduly delay
or complicate Federal court proceedings or in any other way frus-
trate or delay the primary purpose of these amendments and sec-
tion 7003—which is the protection of health and the environment
from solid and hazardous waste endangerments. Pendent jurisdic-
tion is a doctrine of discretion, not of plaintiff’s right. Its justifica-
tion lies in considerations of judicial economy, convenience and
fairness to litigants; if these are not present a Federal court should
hesitate to exercise jurisdiction over State claims, even though
bound to apply State law to them. If it appears that the State
issues substantially predominate, whether in terms of proof, of the
scope of the issues raised, or of the comprehensiveness of the
remedy sought, the State claims may be dismissed without preju-
dice and left for resolution to State tribunals. Pendent jurisdiction,
in the sense of judicial power, need not be exercised in every case
in which it is found to exist.
All penalties awarded pursant to these amendments, which allow 1
courts in which citizen suits are brought”. . . to apply any appro-
priate civil penalties under section 3008 (a) and (g),” are to be paid
into the United States Treasury. Litigation of any such request or
the granting of any such award will not, in any way, limit or pre.
dude the right of the United States to seek or obtain the payment
of penalties arising out of the same or related violations, except
that the maximum penalty to be paid for each violation shall not 1
exceed that provided for in section 3008.
4’
-------
4L prL
AWARD OF FEES
This section provides for the awarding of costs of litigation in
citizen suits under section 7002(e) of the Act to prevailing or sub-
stantially prevailing parties.
The purpose of this section is to clarify the circumstances under
which costs may be awarded to parties to citizen suits. In Sierra
Club v. Gorsuch, 672 F. 2d 33 (D.C. Cir. 1982), the Court of Appeals
held that it was “appropriate” under the Clean Air Act to award
attorney’s fees to the petitioner even though the government pre-
vailed on all issues. This decision was later reversed by the Su-
preme Court in Ruckelshaus v. Sierra Club, 103 S. Ct. 3274 (1983).
It is not reasonable or appropriate to compel either the govern-
ment or a private party to pay the costs of an opposing party to a
lawsuit when the opposing party has not prevailed on any of the
issues. Accordingly, this amendment is intended to endorse the Su-
preme Court’s decision in RuckeLshaus v. Sierra Club, confirm its
applicability to the Solid Waste Disposal Act, and provide further
guidance to the courts in determining the circumstances under
which it is appropriate to consider awarding costs of litigation.
This amendment is not intended to preclude an award of costs to
a partially prevailing party with respect to the issues on which
that party has prevailed, if such an award is deemed appropriate
by the court. Conversely, although the amendment does authorize
an award of costs to a party who intervenes in a case and is techni-
cally on the prevailing side, such an award would not be appropri-
ate if the intervenor failed to make a substantial contribution to
the successful outcome of the case. A party may “prevail” by
achieving a successful settlement.
I / O,
-------
(4aVd’ - /ir-- --
16 (e) CITIZEN SuITs.—(1) Section 7002(a)(1) is amended
17 by inserting “(A)” after “(1)” and by inserting the following
18 at the end thereof:
19 “(B) against any person, including the United States
20 and any other governmental instrumentality or agency, to the
21 extent permitted by the eleventh amendment to the Constitu-
22 tion and including any past or present generator, past or
23 present transporter, or past or present owner or operator of a
24 treatment, storage or disposal facility who has contributed or
25 who is contributing to the past or present handling, storage,
HR 2867 RFS
-------
63
1 treatment, transportation, or disposal of any solid or hazard-
2 ous waste which may present an imminent and substantial
3 endangerment to health or the environment; or”
4 (2) Section 7002(b)(1) is amended by striking out all
5 after “alleged violator” down through “; or” and substituting
6 “referred to in subsection (a)(1); or”.
7 (3) Section 7002(a) is amended by striking out “to en-
8 force such regulation or order, or to order the Administrator
9 to perform such Act or duty as the case may be” and substi-
10 tuting “to enforce the permit, standard, regulation, condition,
11 requirement, prohibition, or order, referred to in paragraph
12 (1)(A), to immediately restrain any person contributing to the
13 endangerment referred to in paragraph (0(B), to order such
14 person to take such other action as may be necessary, or
15 both, or to order the Administrator to perform the act or duty
16 referred to in paragraph (2), as the case may be, and to apply
17 any appropriate civil penalties under section 3008(a) and (g).
18 (4) Section 7002(b) is amended by adding the following
19 at the end thereof: “No action may be commenced under
20 subsection (a)(1XB) if the Administrator has commenced, and
21 is diligently prosecuting, an action under section 7003, or if
22 the State has brought an action under this section, to imme-
23 diately restrain any person contributing to the endangerment
24 referred to in subsection (a)(1)(B). No action may be corn-
25 menced under subsection (a)(1)(B) by any person (other than
HR 2867 RFS
44
-------
64
1 a State or local government) with respect to the siting of a
2 hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal facility.”.
4 ô/
-------
A f parVTc t Fr? M
U4- n.t.P1 — its, ,
32
1 (4 CIVIL ACTIOAVS. Scotion 2002 o amondcd b
2 adding the following new subocction et the end thereof :
3 .2(& GIVIL ACTIONS. V 4 e Adminiotrator ohall
4 gucot the Attorney Gcncral ée f e end represent the Admin
5 iotrator i s 7 eny civil action which the Adminiotralor is en-
6 thorizod 4o bring under this 4e If the Attorney General does
7 not
8 “ (A) notify the Administrator within thirty days
9 after the de e en which ouch request is transmitted the
10 ito wiU commence ouch action end rcprcscnt the Ad-
11 minijtrator , end
12 “ (B ) fi’e ouch civil action within one hundred
13 and fifty days after the date of transmittal of ouch
14 rcqucct ,
15 the Administrator shall, cxccpt as providcd is paragraph 4 )
16 have the exclusive authority to commence and conduct the
17 litigation of ouch action , end ant’ appeal of ouch action , is
18 ltie own name . o ’ ouch purposco , the Administrator shall lie
19 represented b one e’i morc attorneys of the Environmental
20 Protection Agency designated li j the Administrator .
21 “ (2) Paragraph 44;) shall net apply in the ease of actions
22 boforc the United States Supreme Court . e provisions of
23 this subsection shall apply iotwithotanding any other provi
24 sionef law.” .
HR2867R11 1
-------
33
1 LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTIIO ITY. 1 ) e Con
2 grcoo findo that
3 44 peroonnal of the Environmental Protection
4 Agcncij e1i e o e cngagod ‘ * invootiyation of activity
5 which ie criminal under the Solid Waotc Diopocal A*
6 particularly criminal activity which ie acoociated with
7 organi cod crimc groupo ( ouch e the illcgal diopocal of
8 hacard cue waotc) , e unable e effectively invootigato
9 ouch activity e d enforce the criminal eanctiono con
10 ccrncd without having f *# l w enforcement powcro , -
11 cluding the authority e make arrcots 4 carry fire
12 arino ; d
13 ( B.) the livoo of ouch poreonncl e o cndangcrcd
14 oituationa whore they a e carrying & t ouch invoetiga
15 tiono bu are authori tid Le carry fircarnw a 4
16 ma/co arrcelo indopondonily of other Federal, Staic , er
17 local law cnforccmont authoritico .
18 ) Any officer e cmplo yea of the Environmental Pro
19 ( potion Agency authorized b the Adminiatrator Lo conduct
20 criminal invcotigatio’no ( e inveetigato , or oupcniioc the invoc
21 Ligation ofr a activity for which a criminal penalty ie pro-
22 vidod) undcr the Solid Wacto Dioposal 4e e hereby wthor
23 iced , * the enforccincnt of ouch 4e4 to —
24 (4:) carry fircarmo ;
HR 2867 RH
44 /
-------
34
1 42) ca ccutc o ,, 4 serve warrants, summons
2 oubpcnaa, isoucd undcr the authority of the United
3 . Statco ;
4 (3 make arrests without warrant fe, offcnocs
5 against Me United States committed their presence ;
6 (4 make arrests without warrant fo felonies eo ’-
7 nizablo undcr the laws of the United States f they,
8 have rcaaonablo grounds e believe the A the person e be
9 arrested h committed ov ie committing ouch fclany ;
10
11 #ëI administer oaths fo the purposes of taking e
12 sworn tjtatcmncnt .
13 49 (d) CITIZEN SuITs.—(1) Section 7002(a)(1) is
14 amended by inserting “(A)” after “(1)” and by inserting the
15 following at the end thereof:
16 “(B) against any person, including the United States
17 and any other governmental inatrumentalily or agency, to the
18 extent permitted by the eleventh amendment to the Constitu-
19 lion and including any past or present generator, past or
20 present transporter, or past or present owner or operator of a
21 treatment, storage or disposal facility who has contributed or
22 who is contributing to the past or present handling storage,
23 treatment, transportation, or disposal of any solid or hazard-
24 ous waste which may present an imminent and substantial
25 endangerment to health or the environment; or”
HR 2867 RH
-------
35
1 (2) Section 7002(b)(1) is amended by striking out all
2 after “alleged violator” down through “; or” and substituting
3 “referred to in subsection (a) (1); or”.
4 (3) Section 7002 (a) is amended by striking out “to en-
5 force such regulation or order, or to order the Administrator
6 to perform such Act or duty as the case may be” and substi-
7 tuting “to enforce the permit, standard, regulation, condition,
8 requirement, prohibition, or order, referred to in paragraph
9 (1)(A), to immediately restrain any person contributing to
10 the endangerment referred to in paragraph (1)(B), to order
11 such person to take such other action as may be necessary, or
12 both, or to order the Administrator to perform the act or duty
13 refen’ed to in paragraph (2), as the case may be, and to apply
14 any appropriate civil penalties under section 3008(a) and
15 (g).
16 (4) Section 7002(b) is amended by adding the following
17 at the end thereof: “No action may be commenced under 3ub-
18 section (a)(1)(B) if the Administrator has commenced, and is
19 diligently prosecuting, an action under section 7003, or if the
20 State has brought an action under this section, to immediate-
21 ly restrain any person contributing to the endangerment re-
22 ferred to in subsection (a)(1)(B). No action may be corn-
23 menced under subsection (a)(1)(B) by any person (other than
24 a State or local government) with respect to the siting of a
25 hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal facility. ‘
HR 2867 RH
-------
- 4 ‘. 1 e ’
i ,t.’i,A c
.4r2.T j.
32
I (d) CiVIL Acrio.vs.—Section 2002 is amended by
2 adding the following new subsection at the end thereof:
3 “(c) CiVIL AcTIoNs.—(1) The Administrator shall re
4 quest the Attorney General to file, and represent the Admin-
5 istrator in, any civil action which the Administrator is au-
6 thorized to bring under this Act. If the Attorney General does
7 not—
8 “(A) notify the Administrator within thirty days
9 after the date on which such reques! is transmitted that
10 he will commence such action and represent the Ad.
11 minis! rator, and
12 “(B) file such civil action within one hundred
13 and fifty days after the date of transmittal of such
14 request,
15 the Administrator shall, except as provided in paragraph (2),
16 have the exclusive authority to commence and conduct the
17 litigation of such action, and any appeal of such action, in
18 his own name. For such purposes, the Administrator shall be
19 represented by one or more attorneys of the Environmental
20 Protection Agency designated by the Administrator.
‘21 “(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply in the case of actions
22 before the United States Supreme Court. The provisions of
23 this subsection shall apply notwithstanding any other provi-
24 sion of law. “.
HR 2867 RH
44/
-------
(H r E.7 i 4 - T irrr .) Ho 5i. /! ‘L
,tiltlvrn- 14fl ,
13 cf,) CITiZEN SuzTs.—(1) Section 7002 (a) (1) is amend.
14 ed by inserting “(A) “after ‘(1)” and by inserting the follow-
15 ing at the end thereof:
16 “(B) against any person, including the United Slates
17 and any other govern7nenlal instrumentality or agency, to the
18 extent permit(ed by the eleventh amendment to the C’onsiilu-
19 tion and including any past or present generator, past or
20 present transporter, or past or present owner or operator of a
21 treatment, storage or disposal facility who has contributed or
22 who is contributing to the past or present handling storage,
23 treatment, transportation, or disposal of any solid or hazard-
24 ous waste which may present an imminent and substantial
25 endangerment to health or the enzironmenl; or”
HR 2867 RH
-------
35
1 (2) Section 7002(b)(1) is amended by striking out all
2 after “alleged violator” down through “; or” and substituting
3 “referred to in subsection (a)(1); or”.
4 (3) Section 7002(a) is amended by striking out “to in-
5 force such regulation or order, or to order the Administratoi
6 to perform such Act or duty as the case may be” and substi-
7 tuting “to enforce the permit, standard, regulation, condition,
8 requirement, prohibition, or order, referred to in paragraph
9 (1)(A), to immediately restrain any person contributing to
10 the endangerment referred to in paragraph (1)(B), to order
11 such person to take such other action as may be necessary, or
12 both, or to order the Administrator to perform the act or duty
13 referred 10 in paragraph (2), as the case may be, and to apply
14 any appropriate civil penalties under section 3008(a) and
15 c’g). No such district court in which an action is brought
16 under paragraph (1)(B) shall have jurisdiction in such I
17 action orer any claim arising under Stale law”.
18 (4) Section 7002(b) is amended by adding the following
19 at the end thereof: “No action may be commenced under sub-
20 section (a)(1)(B) if the Administrator has commenced, and is
21 diligently prosecuting, an action under section 7003, or if the
22 State has brought an action under this section, to immediate-
23 ly restrain any person contributing to the endangerment re-
24 ferred to in subsection (‘a)W B,). No action may be corn-
25 menced under subsection a)W B, by any person (‘other than
36
1 a Slate or local government) with respect to the siting of a
2 ha:ardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal facility. “.
4;,,
-------
ç-: .c:; ç7 c ’
AWARD OF FEES
SEC. 16. Section 7002(e) of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act is amended by inserting “prevailing or substantially
prevailing” before ‘ ar y”in the first sentence thereof.
JUDICIAL REVIEW
SEC. 17. Section 7006 of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act is amended to read as follows:
“SEc. 7006. (a) REviEw OF FINAL REGULATiONS
AND CERTAIN PETJT 10Ns.—A petition for review of the
promulgation of final regulations under this Act and the
Administrator’s denial of any petition for the promulgation,
amendment, or repeal of any regulation under this Act may
be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the Dis-
trict of Columbia or in any United States Court of Appeals
for a circuit in which the petitioner resides or transacts
business which is directly affected by such promulgation or
denial, and such petition shall be filed within one hundred
and twenty days from the date of such promulgation or
denial, unless such petition is based solely on grounds aris-
HR 2867 EAS
4’,
-------
58
ing after such one hundred and twentieth day. Any action
of the Administrator with respect to which review could have
been obtained under this subsection shall not be subject to
judicial review in civil or criminal proceedings for en force-
ment.
“(b) REVIEW OF CERTAIN AcTioNs UNDER SEC-
TIONS 3005 AND 3006.—A petition for review of the Ad-
mini3trator’s action (1) in issuing, denying, modifying, or
revoking any permit under section 3005, or (2) in granting,
denying, or withdrawing authorization or interim authoriza-
tion under section 3006, may be filed by any interested
person in the United States Court of Appeals for a circuit
in which the petitioner resides or transacts business which
is directly affected by such action, and such petition shall be
filed within one hundred and twenty days from the date of
such issuance, denial, modification, revocation, grant, or
withdrawal, or after such date only if such petition is based
solely on grounds which arose after such one hundred and
twentieth day. Any action of the Administrator with respect
to which review could have been obtained under this subsec-
tion shall not be subject to judicial review in civil or crimi-
nal proceedings for enforcement.
“(c) in any judicial proceeding brought under this sec-
tion in which review is sought of a determination under this
Act required to be made on the record after notice and op-
-------
59
portunity for hearing, if a party seeking review under this
Act applies to the court for leave to adduce additional evi-
dence, and shows to the satisfaction of the court that the in.
formation is material and that there were reasonable
grounds for the failure to adduce such evidence in the pro-
ceeding before the Administrator, the court may order such
additional evidence (and evidence in rebuttal thereof) to be
taken before the Administrator, and to be adduced upon the
hearing in such manner and upon such terms and condi-
tions as the court may deem proper; the Administrator may
modify his findings as to the facts, or make new findings,
by reason of the additional evidence so taken, and he shall
file with the court such modified or new findings and his
recommendation, if any, for the modification or setting aside
of his original order, with the return of such additional evi-
dence.
“(d)(1) If petitions for review of the same agency
action have been filed in Iwo or more United States Courts
of Appeals and the Administrator has received written notice
of the filing of the first such petition more than thirty days
before receiving written notice of the filing of the second pe-
tition, then the record shall be filed in that court in which
the first petition was filed. If petitions for review of the
same agency action have been filed in Iwo or more United
States Courts of Appeals and the Administrator has re-
HR 2867 LAS
-------
60
ceived written notice of the filing of one or more petitions
within thirty days or less after receiving written notice of
the filing of the first petition, then the Administrator shall
promptly advise in writing the Administrative Office of the
United States Courts that petitions have been filed in two
or more United States Courts of Appeals, and shall identify
each court for which he has written notice that such pet i-
lions have been filed within thirty days or less of receiving
written notice of the filing of the first such petition. Pursu-
ant to a system of random selection devised for this purpose,
and within three business days after receiving such notice
from the Administrator, the Administrative Office thereupon
shall select the court in which the record shall be filed from
among those identified by the Administrator. Upon notifica-
lion of such selection, the Administrator shall promptly file
the record in 8uch court. For the purpose of review of
agency action which has previously been remanded to the
Administrator, the record shall be filed in the United Slates
courts of Appeals which remanded such action.
“(2) Where petitions have been filed in two or more
United States Courts of Appeals with respect to the same
agency action and the record has been filed in one of such
courts pursuant to paragraph (1), the other courts in which
such petitions have been filed shall promptly transfer such
petitions to the United Stales Courts of Appeals in which
HR 2R 7 F.AS
-------
61
the record has been filed. Pending selection of a court PUT.
suant to subsection (1), any court in which a petition has
been filed may postpone the effective dale of the agency
action until fifteen days after the Administrative Office has
selected the court in which the record shall be filed.
“(3) Any court in which a petition with respect to any
agency action has been filed, including any court selected
pursuant to subsection (d)(1), may transfer such petition to
any other United States Courts of Appeals for the conven-
ience of the parties or otherwise in the interest of justice.
“(e) in any judicial proceeding under this section, the
court may award costs of litigation (including reasonable at-
torney and expert witness fees) to any prevailing or sub-
stantially prevailing party whenever it determines thai such
award is appropriate. ‘
CITIZEN SUITS
SEC. 18. (a) Section 7002(a)(1) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act is amended by—
(1) inserting “prohibition,” immediately after
“requirement, ‘
(2) inserting “(A)” immediately after “(1)” and
(3) inserting the following a! the end thereof:
“(B) against any person, including the United
States and any other governmental instrumentality or
agency, to the extent permitted by the eleventh amend.
46 /
-------
62
men! to the Constitution, and including any past or
present generator, past or present transporter, or past
or present owner or operator of a treatment, storage, or
disposal facility, who has contributed or who is con-
tributing to the past or present handling, storage, treat-
ment, transportation, or disposal of any solid or haz-
ardous waste which may present an imminent and sub-
stantial endangerment to health or the environment;
or
(b) Section 7002(a) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
c mended by—
(1) inserting “or the alleged endangerment may
occur” immediately after “the alleged violation oc-
curred” in the first sentence following paragraph (2);
and
(2) striking “to enforce such regulation or order,
or to order the Administrator to perform such act or
duty as the case may “in the portion following
paragraph (2) and inserting in lieu thereof the follow-
ing: “to enforce the permit, standard, regulation, condi-
tion requirement, prohibition, or order, referred to in
paragraph (1)(A), to restrain any person who has con-
tributed or who is contributing to the past or present
handling, storage, treatment, transportation, or disposal
of any solid or hazar&us waste referred to in pam-
HR 2867 EAS
-------
63
graph (1)(B), to order such person to take such other
action a., may be necessary, or both, or to order the
Administrator to perform the act or duty referred to in
paragraph (2), as the case may be, and to apply any
appropriate civil penalties under section 3008 (a) and
(9). A transporter shall not be deemed to have con (rib-
uted or to be contributing to such handling, storage,
treatment, or disposal, taking place after such solid
waste or hazardous waste has left the possession or
control of such transporter, if the transportation of such
wase was under a sole contractual arrangement aris-
ing from a published tariff and acceptance for carriage
by common carrier by rail and such transporter has
exercised due care in the past or present handling, stor-
age, treatment, transportation and disposal of such
waste. “. -
(c) Section 7002(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended to read as follows:
“(b) AcTioNs PR0HIBITED.—No action may be com-
menced under subsection (a)(1) of this section—
“(1) prior to sixty days after the plaintiff has
given notice of the violation or prior to one hundred
and twenty days after the plaintiff has given notice of
the endangerment (A) to the Administrator; (B) to the
State in which the alleged violation occurs or in which
HR 2867 LAS
-------
64
the alleged endangerment may occur; and (C) to any
alleged violator of such permit, standard, regulation,
condition, requirement, prohibition, or order, or any
person alleged to have contributed or to be contributing
to the past or present handling, storage, treatment,
transportation, or disposal of any solid or hazardous
wa3te referred to in subsection (a)(1)(B) of this section,
except that such action may be brought immediately
after such notification in the case of an action under
this section respecting a violation of subtitle C of this
Act; or
“(2) with respect to an action under subsection
(a)(1)(A) of this section, if the Administrator or State
has commenced and is diligently prosecuting a civil or
criminal action in a court of the United States or a
State to require compliance with such permit, stand-
ard, regulation, condition, requirement, prohibition, or
order: Provided, however, That in any such action in a
court of the United States, any person may intervene
as a matter of right; or
“(3) with respect to an action under subsection
(a)(1)(B) of this section, if the Administrator has com-
menced and is diligently prosecuting an action under
section 7003 of this Act or has settled such action to
restrain or abate acts or conditions which may hate
nfl so_s n.
-------
65
contributed or are contributing to the activities which
may present the alleged endangerment, or if the State
has commenced and is diligently prosecuting an action
under subsection (a)(1)(B) of this section: Provided,
however, That in any such action in a court of the
United States, any person may intervene as a matter
of right when the applicant claims an interest relating
to the subject of the action and he is so situated that
the disposition of the action may, as a practical matter,
impair or impede his ability to protect 1/ia! interest,
unless the Administrator or the State shows that the
applicant ‘s interest is adequately represented by exist-
ing parties. No action may be commenced under sub-
section (a)(1)(B) by any person (other than a State or
local government) with respect to the siting of a haz-
ardous waste treatment, storage, or a disposal facility,
nor to restrain or enjoin the issuance of a permit for
such facility “.
‘/ 0/
-------
5z cfl or .Tqf -zly7
20 CITIZEN SUITS
21 SEC. 18. (a) Section 7002(a)(1) of the Solid Waste
22 Disposal Act is amended by—
23 (1) inserting “prohibition,” immediately after
24 “requirement, ‘
25 (2) inserting “(A)” immediately after “(1) ‘ and
1 (3) inserting the following at the end thereof:
2 “(B) against any person, including the United
3 States and any other governmental instrumentality or
4 agency, to the extent permitted by the eleventh amend-
5 ment to the Constitution, and including any past or
6 present generator, past or present transporter, or past
7 or present owner or operator of a treatment, storage, or
8 disposal facility, who has contributed or who is con-
9 tributing to the past or present handling, storage, treat-
10 ment, transportation, or disposal of any solid or haz-
11 ardous waste which may present an imminent and sub-
12 stantial endangerment to health or the environment;
13 or’
14 (b) Section 7002 (a) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
15 amended by—
16 (1) inserting “or the alleged endangerment may
17 occur” immediately after “the alleged violation oc-
18 curred” in the first sentence following paragraph (2);
19 and
20 (2) striking “to enforce such regulation or order,
21 or to order the Administrator to perform such act or
22 duty as the case may be” in the portion following
23 paragraph (2) and inserting in lieu thereof the follow-
24 ing: “to enforce the permit, standard, regulation, condi-
‘ “ rn, ,’i,n,pn/ nrnhililinn. or order. refer-red to in 44, ,
-------
80
1 paragraph (1)(A), to restrain any person who has con-
2 tributed or who is contributing to the past or present
3 handling, storage, treatment, transportation, or disposal
4 of any solid or hazardous waste referred to in para-
5 graph (1)(B), to order such person to take such other
6 action as may be necessary, or both, or to order the
7 Administrator to perform the act or duty referred to in
8 paragraph (2), as the case may be, and to apply any
9 appropriate civil penalties under section 3008 (a) and
10 (g).’
11 (c) Section 7002(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
12 amended to read as follows:
13 “(b) ACTIONS PROHIBITED.—NO action may be corn-
14 menced under subsection (a)(1) of this section—
15 “(1) prior to sixty days after the plaintiff has
16 given notice of the violation or prior to one hundred
17 and twenty days after the plaintiff has given notice of
18 the endangerment (A) to the Administrator; (B) to the
19 State in which the alleged violation occurs or in which
20 the alleged endangerment may occur; and (C) to any
21 alleged violator of such permit, standard, regulation,
22 condition, requirement, prohibition, or order, or any
23 person alleged to have contributed or to be contributing’
24 to the past or present handling, storage, treatment,
25 transportation, or disposal of any solid or hazardous
-------
81
1 waste referred to in subsection (a) (1) (B) of this section,
2 except that such action may be brought immediately
3 after such notification in the case of an action under
4 this section respecting a violation of subtitle C of this
5 Act; or
6 “(2) with respect to an action under subsection
7 (a)(1)(A) of this section, if the Administrator or State
8 has commenced and is diligently prosecuting a civil or
9 criminal action in a court of the United States or a
10 State to require compliance with such permit, stand-
11 ard, regulation, condition, requirement, prohibition, or
12 order: Provided, however, That in any such action in a
13 court of the United States, any person may intervene
14 as a matter of right; or
15 “(3) with respect to an action under subsection
16 (a)(1)(B) of this section, if the Administrator has corn-
17 menced and is diligently prosecuting an action under
18 section 7003 of this Act or has settled such action to
19 restrain or abate acts or conditions which may have
20 contributed or are contributing to the activities which
21 may present the alleged endangerment, or if the State
22 has commenced and is diligently prosecuting an action
23 under subsection (a)(1)(B) of this section: Provided,
24 however, That in any such action in a court of the
25 United Slates, any person may intervene as a matter
S 757 RS
-------
82
1 of right when the applicant claims an interest relating
2 to the subject of the action and he is so situated that
3 the disposition of the action may, as a practical matter,
4 impair or impede his ability to protect that interest,
5 unless the Administrator or the State shows that the
6 applicant ‘s interest is adequately represented by exist-
7 in9 parties. No action may be commenced under sub-
8 section (a)(1)(B) by any person (other than a State or
9 local government) with respect to the siting of a haz-
10 ardoiis waste treatment, storage, or a disposal facility,
11 nor to restrain or enjoin the issuance of a permit for
12 such facility’
-------
7Z-1 C J’$L dVLi y .
4A l ’r’’1 1 3 r 1
18 (‘b,) ATTORNEY’S FEES.—Section 7002(e) is amended
19 by stril 1 ing out “to any party”and substituting in lieu there-
20 of to the prevailing or substantially prevailing party” and
21 inserting “or section 7006” after “this section “.
22 (c) PREsERvATiON o OrHER RJGHTs.—Seclion
23 7002 (f) is amended by striking out “section” and substilut-
24 my “Act”.
1/i,,
-------
çqrq- Po 7 4 1 -21r1 ,p
As r - -°’ -’
12 AWARD OF FEES
13 SEC. 16. Section 7002(e) of the Solid Waste Disposal
14 Act is amended by inserting “prevailing or substantially pre-
15 vailing” before “party” in the first sentence thereof.
-------
4L.’2.16 - 4S
3 (f) CITIZEN SuITs.—(1) Section 7002(a)(1) of such Act
4 is amended by inserting “(A)” after “(1)” and by inserting
5 the following at the end thereof: -
6 “(B) against any person, including the United
7 States and any other governmental instrumentality or
8 agency, to the extent permitted by the eleventh
9 amendment to the Constitution and including any past
10 or present generator, past or present transporter, or
11 past or present owner or operator of a treatment, stor-
12 age or disposal facility who has contributed or who is
13 contributing to the past or present handling storage,
14 treatment, transportation, or disposal of any solid or
15 hazardous waste which may present an imminent and
16 substantial endangerment to health or the environment;
17 or”
18 (2) Section 7002(b)(1) of such Act is amended by strik-
19 ing out all after “alleged violator” and substituting “referred
20 to in subsection (a)(1); or”.
21 (3) Section 7002(a) of such Act is amended by striking
22 out “to enforce such regulation or order, or to order the Ad-
23 ministrator to perform such Act or duty as the case may be”
24 and substituting “(i) to enforce the permit, standard, regula-
25 tion, condition, requirement, prohibition, or order, referred to
HR 2867 III
4 of
-------
35
1 in paragraph (1)(A), (ii) to immediately restrain any person
2 contributing to the endangerment referred to in paragraph
3 (1)(B), to order such person to take such other action as may
4 be necessary, or both, or (iii) to order the Administrator to
5 perform the act or duty referred to in paragraph (2), as the
6 case may be, and to apply any appropriate civil penalties
7 under section 3008 (a) and (g)”.
8 (4) Section 7002(b) is amended by adding the following
9 at the end thereof: “No action may be commenced under
10 subsection (a)(1)(B) if the Administrator has commenced, and
11 is diligently prosecuting, an action under section 7003, or if
12 the State has brought an action under this section, to imme-
13 diately restrain any person contributing to the endangerment
14 referred to in subsection (a)(1)(B). No action may be corn-
15 menced under subsection (a)(1)(B) by any person (other than
16 a State or local government) with respect to the siting of a
17 hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal facility.”.
44/
-------
October 5, 1984
IMMINENT HAZARD MID CITIZEN SUITS
Section 7003 of RCRA currently au-
thorizes suit to Immediately restrain
any person contributing to handling.
storage, treatment. transportation, or
disposal of any solid waste or hazard-
ous waste that may present an Immi-
nent and substantial endangerment to
health or the environment. Though
the issue of Inactive waste sites is not
addressed explicity In section, 7003. the
Congress, most courts and every ad-
ministration which has administered
the act has contrued the section to
apply to such sites. Notwithstanding
an opinion for the U.S. Court of Ap-
peals for the Third Circuit and several
district court decisions upholding the
Government’s position, some courts
hase ruled to the contrary. The ad-
ministration testified that clarifying
language amending section 7003 would
be helpful.
This bill will amend sectIon 7003 to
affirm that which is already provided
for under existing law. It will clarify
that .section 7003 authorizes suits con-
cerned with inactive sites which may
present an imminent and substantial
endangerment.
Although section 7003 of RCRA au-
thorizes the Administrator to sue to
abate an endangerment whenever the
past or present handling, storage,
treatment, transportation, or disposal
of any solid or hazardous waste may
present on imminent and substantial
endangerment to health or the envi-
ronment, we now know from the Su-
perfund experience that the number
of potential problem sites exceeds the
Government’s ability to take action
each time such action is warranted.
The problem is primarily one of mad-
equate resources.
Therefore, H.R, 2867 will authorize
citizens to bring suit against those who
have, contributed or are contributing
to a situation which may present an
Imminent and substantial endanger-
ment to health or the environment. To
prevent such suits from intefering
with Government enforcement ac-
tions, a number of conditions are
placed on the authority to bring such
suits.
SUBTITLE D IMPROVmENTS
Even with the phaseout of the small
qua. tity generator exemption, sizable
amounts of hazardous materials from
such generators, household wastes,
and illegal dumping are disposed of in
municipal landfills. Current criteria
for sanitary landfills are inadequate to
deal with these facts. In addition.
there is a need to provide for better
implementation of the open dumping
ban and upgraded criteria for sanitary
landfills.
As a result of this bill. EPA must
revise criteria for sanitary landfills
and for determining which practices
constitute open dumping, taking into
account potential for such facilities re-
civing hazardous waste in household
vastes or from illegal dumping.
Within 42 months, States must estab-
lisim and enforce a permit piogram or
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
other system to assure that sanitary
landfills which may receive hazardous
wastes comply with upgraded criteria.
If States do not adopt such a program.
EPA shall use the enforcement au-
thority in sections 3007 and 3008 to en-
force the ban on open dumps.
MR EMISSIONS FROM LAND DISPOSAL FACILITIES
Studies of hazardous waste surface
impoundments and landfills report
that significant quantities of hazard-
ous constituents in the wastes may be
emitted into the air. Proposals to regu-
late emissions from hazardous waste
facilities have been published on sev-
eral occasions since passage of RCRA
in 1976. Final regulations have never
been Issued. The Agency also has au-
thority to regulate emissions of haz-
ardous air pollutants under the Clean
Air Act, but its performance under
that Act has been appallingly slow.
A provision of .FLR. 2867 requires
EPA 1.0 promulgate regulations for the
monitoring and control of air emis-
sions from hazardous waste facilities
as may be necessary to protect human
health and the environment.
GROUND WATER MONITORING
Current EPA regulations allow waste
piles, landfills, and surface impound-
ments that satisfy certain conditions
to claim an exemption from the
ground water monitoring requirements
that are designed to detect any re-
leases of hazardous constituents from
the facilities. The conditions for ex-
emptions, on their face, do not meet
subtitle C’s basic requirement of pro-
tecting human health and the em iron-
merit. There is evidence, for example,
that a leak could occur even from a
double-lined disposal facility, and that
hazardous constituents can migi ate
into ground water even if the facility
is located entirely above the seasonal
high water table. Similarly, if an in-
spectioii shows a liner is cracl;ed, the
owner or operator is required only to
repair the crack, riot to detect and
clean up any releases that may hate
occurred before the crack was discov-
ered.
The bill will require that the act’s
ground water monitoring requirements
be completed with whether or not a
facility is located entirely above the
seasonal high water table, the facility
has two lineis and a leachat,c collec-
tion system, or the facility’s liner—or
liners—are periodically inspected. This
section has the effect of nullifying sev-
eral portions of EPA’s regulations. It
does not make any changes to the
Agency’s regulations concerning
ground water monitoi ing standards
other than deleting the indicated cx-
eniptions.
WASTE MINIMIZATION
Curient laws emphasize the need to
pm opeily treat, store, and dispose of
hazardous wastes. While this contin-
ues to be a pi imary clement of RCRA
and other pollution control laws, addi-
tional emphasis must be directed
toward first, minimizing the genera-
tion of hazardous wastes and second,
S 13821
utilizing the best treatment, storage,
and disposal techniques for each
waste.
A statement of national policy will
be added to the act as well as a re-
quirement that hazardous waste gen-
,erators certify that they have pro-
grams to reduce the amount and toxic-
ity of their waste and that they are
using methods to minimize the threat
that their wastes pose to human
health and the environment.
DEFINITION OF HEATING OIL IN UNDERGROUND
STORAGE TANK PROVISION
The underground storage tanks that
are covered by this bill do not include
underground storage tanks used for
storing heating oil for consumptive
use on the premises where stored.
There are many different grades of
heating oil used, Including No. 2. No. 4,
and No. 6. The particular type of heat-
ing oil used generally depends upon
the type and size of the furnace in
which It is burned. The reference to
heating oil cited above includes all of
these grades of heating oil, so long as
the tank is used for storing such heat-
ing oil for consumptive use on the
premises where stored.
OTHER ISSUES
Several other issues have been con-
sidered in the course of developing
H.R. 2867 and merit comment. These
include the issues of permitting of
mobile treatment units: the distinction
between onsite and of Isite facilities;
direct action provisions of Superiund;
and health asscssments.
PERMITTING OF MOBILE TI1EATMENT UNITS
The EPA. in order to fulfill its leg s-
lative mandate, should continually be
looking at innovative, advanced tech-
nological methods to effectively and
safely treat and handle hazardous
wastes. Legislative and regulatory mi-
natives are necessary to discourage
the use of landfills and land disposal
generally as a disposal option of first
resort.
For many waste generators, the
availability of mobil treatment units
would make proper waste handling
and treatment economically feasible
and remove the growing financial in-
centive for cutting corners or for mid-
night dumping. Clearly, the long-term
tightening of EPA’s current small gen-
erators exemption will mean a signifi-
cant increase in the number of regu-
lated facilities which could handle
their wastes more safely and effective-
ly through use of mobile treatment
technology—either through a circuit
rider approach where the unit periodi-
cally visited a facility—or where a unit
periodically visited a satellite treat-
ment az-ca where waste from several
f mi-ins was aggregated and stored pend-
ing treatment.
EPA currently has legislative au-
thority to develop a permit procedure
for mobile treatment Units, however,
current permit regulations, as promul-
gated, have stymied the development
of MTU technology. I have reviewed
the work completed in September 1983
&l1,
-------
S 9150
Conclusion of this study the Adminis-
trator Is required to promulgate ap-
propriate regulation gover ning the
handling of all hazardous waste pro-
duced In quantities less than 1.000
kilograms per month.
The bill specifies a minimum con-
tent for those regulations. They must
require that the disposal of all such
waste be in facilities with permits
under subtitle C. In fact, If the regula-
tor process does not yield these regula-
tior.s by T.!arch 31. 1986. this minimum
requirement goes Into effect by oper-
ation of the statute, for all generators
producing more than 100 kilograms
per month, together with a limited
manifesting system to assure compli-
ance.
Another element of the minimum
regulatory content provided In S. 757 -
for small quantity generators is the re-
quirement that all hazardous wastes
from generators producing more than
100 kilograms in a month be accompa-
nied by a manifest. This will provide
notice of the hazardous nature of the
waste to transporters and disposal Ia-
cthties.
Originally in the committee’s delib-
erstinn . a cutoff point of 25 kilograms
per month was the threshold for this
requirement, This level would accom-
plish the purpose of curtailing random
disposal practices by generators ex-
empted from EPA regulation while
providing a more practical and en-
forceable definition than if all wastes.
regardless of quar.tity, were covered.
As the committee debated this meas-
ure, an amendment was discussed to
increase this threshold to 100 kilo-
grams per month for compliance with
containerization and off-site transport
recordkeeping requirements. In the
spirit of compromise, I offered an
amendment to relax some of the con-
tainerization requirements but pre-
serve other standards applying to gen-
erators of hazardous waste in quanti-
ties above 25 kilograms per month,
The committee, however, adopted the
higher threshold. I opposed thIs ap-
proach since it permits continued dis-
posal of large amounts of hazardous
waste Into municipal landfills, sewers,
and other inappropriate places, with-
out any notice to those receiving the
waste.
I believe, however, that the broader
objectives of the small generator pi-o-
vision merit support. This provision
will go far In correcting the current
situation and improve management of
waste from small generators.
A related issue concerns facilities
such as sanitary landfills and open
dumps covered under subtitle D.
These facilities are recipients of un-
known quantities of defined hazardoLs
waste and other dangerous materials
through household waste, unregulated
small quantity generator waste dIspos-
al, and illegal dumping, Since con-
struction, siting, and monitoring
standards for these facilities are far
less restrictive than those governing
hazardous waste disposal facilities, a
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
number of environmental problems
are occurring. A high proportion of
sites listed on the National Priority
List undrr the Superfund are munici-
pal landfills, I! we give inadequate at-
tention to these general solid waste fa-
cilities, it will only serve to create ad-
ditional Superfund sites.
A key provision of S. 757 requires
EPA to review and revise criteria for
municipal subtitle D facilities, includ-
ing ground water monitoring stand-
ards and provisions for corrective
action. States are required to establish
enforcement programs to assure that
all facilities are In compliance with re-
vised criteria.
To complement this effort, I will
offer an amendment to authorize
funding to support increased States re-
sponsibilities and for EPA regulatory
support. For the past several years,
funds have not been available to sup-
port any subtitle D activities. Against
the recommendations of EPA’s solid
waste program office, the Office of
Management and Budget has deter-
mined that States have the resources
and responsibility to carry out this
program, In fact, States are channel-
ing limited resources almost exclusive-
ly to hazardous waste management ac-
tivities. The Assocation of State and
Territorial Solid Waste Management
officials recently conducted a survey
of State subtitle D activities. Prelimi-
nary results show that of 43 respond-
ing States, only seven have completed
the open dump inventory. Further-
more. based on responses from the 43
States, it is estimated that 10.399 solid
waste landfills are operating through-
out the country. Adequate enforce-
ment and monitoring is imperative to
assure that these facilities are not al-
lowed to operate L I they are substand-
ard.
There are important policies ad-
vanced In S. 757 that I emphasize for
future consideration of amendments
to the Solid Waste Disposal Act. This
measure calls for minimizing the
amount and kind of hazardous waste
that is generated. This Nation is in the
forefront of technological innovation.
and waste reduction of this kind Is not
only worthy but possi’ole. Technology
should be guided by prudent use and
protection of resources. Maiimizirig
the amount of hazardous waste gener-
ated and continued research into alter-
native waste neutralization and treat-
ment technia,’ies are necessary steps In
diminish ng threats to public hemilth
and the environment,
Mr. President. I have been involi ed
with legislation relating to solid wn te
management and control for more
than 20 years. This bill incorrorates
the latest amendments to the Solid
Waste Disposal Act and greatly en-
hances our ability to address the
issues associated with both hazardous
and nonhazardous wastes. While great
advances have been made, however, it
assuredly will be necessary to main-
tain our oversight of these programs
July 25, 11184
and to consider additional legislation
In the future.
This measure represents a substari-
tial commitment of time and effort by
members of the Committee on En ’i-
ronment and Public Works. I acknowl-
edge particularly the dedicated le:ider-
ship of our able chairman, Senator
STAFFORD. and of the chairman and
ranking minority member of the Sub-
committee on Environmental Pollu-
tion. Senator CmxAFsz and Senator
MITcHZLL.
In developing this legislation, we
have been greatly aided by the com-
mittee staff which has brought its
know ledge and experience to bear on
this subject. I express appreciation for
their work on this bill to members of
the mir.ority staif: Philip T. Cum.
mings; John W. Yago, Jr.; Stephanie
dough: Lee Fuller; Helen Kalbaugh:
Elizabeth Thompson; and Margie
Wright.
Mr. MITCHELL addressed the
Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Maine.
Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Presicler.t. I
thank the distinguished Senator from
West Virginia who has contributed sig-
nificantly not only to this bill but to
virtually every major environmental
law that is now on the books of the
United States.
I thank also the distinguished chair-
man of the subcommittee and manag
er of the bill, Senator CHAFER, whose
leadership has made this legislation
possible as well as other members of
our committee, the distinguished
chairman, Senator STAFFORD of Ver-
mont, Senator BURDICK. and Senator
LAUTENEERG for whom this is such an
important matter in New Jersey.
Mr. President, today we consider leg-
islation which will affect the health
and well-being of literally every person
in these United States. S. 757, a bill to
amend the Resource Conservation and
Reco cry Act, marks yet another mile.
stone in our efforts to protect our-
selvcs from the ubiquitous byproduct
of our highly industralized society—
hazardous waste.
In 1976. the Congress enacted the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act. It was an amibinous, far-reachin
statute. It conferred on the Environ.
mental Protection Agency broad gen-
eral authorities to regulate the genera-
tion, transportation, storage, and dis.
posal of hazardous waste.
Standards for the transportation of
hazardous waste were mandated.
Standards for the storage of hazard-
ous waste were mandated.
Standards fur the disposal of hazard-
ous waste a crc mandated.
Enforcement authorities wete man-
dated.
Citizen particlpailon in regu!atory
and enlorcement proc edit s aas
mandated.
The underlying goal of all of these
activities was proteëtion of public
health and the environment. Indeed.
-------
July 25, 1984
the statutory standard by which the
mandated regulations were and cO ntili-
ue to be measured Is prot&tr)r. of
public health and the en; iicnrtcnt.
Tne statute established a iran;t oriz
for the pre;ention of h’tr’- to inruan
beings and natural rcsourers
Today, we propose a se: !Ca of mend
n;cnts to the basic ta:ute.
The preventive raniework of the
Resource Conservat ion and Recovery
Act L i sound. Today we pro ose niodi-
fications bss d on the kno \iedge at-
gutted &nce 1976. A! of the changes
we are rrecnimentil;’ to the Senate
will strevgthen the ability of the Fed-
eral Gcverruuent to protect public
health and the rntirorinwnt from haz-
an o iis wastes. Th&v are des gned to
g Ive EPA more s;ecif!e guidance,
bacel on our e”pcrirnce with irnple-
mentation of the a :’s general an-
thoritics since 1976.
What have tte learned in 7 years?
We have learned that the magnitude
of the problem Is far greater than be-
lieved. We now know that over 264
million metric tons of hazardous ‘easte
are generated in this country each
year: this estimate is more than four
times greater than pre;iouall thought.
Vie have learned that there are
thousands of waste sites across this
country which present potential or
actual threats to human health or
well-being. EPA now estimates that
there may be 22,000 sites in need of
some type of cleanup; 546 of these
sites have been designated as priorities
for cleanup. The Superfund law en-
acted in 1980 was a necessary response
to our past Inattention to the careful
disposal of hazardous wastes.
S;mply put, past practices hate left
us a legacy of chenfical contamination
which has poisoned our air, our water.
and our land. The price of our Igno-
rance has been high, In human terms
and In dollar value. Present practices.
unless modified, can only multiply
those costs.
The average cost of cleaning up a
hazardous waste site Is esimated to be
$6 million, according to EPA. if just
the priority sites, known to present a
health hazard, were cleaned up. the
cost would be billions of dollars. No
matter who pays the bill. whether It
be the respons:ble party or the Feder-
al Government, that figure is too hign.
We cannot afford the status quo.
We also know now that the genera-
tion of hazardous a aste continues to
grow and that most of that aa ’e—80
percent—Is currently disposed of on or
In the landS
It has become evident that a strong
congressional expression of di approv-
al of EPA’s slow and timid imp men-
tatlon of the existing law is neces ary,
as well as a clear congressional direc-
tive mandating certain bold. preven-
the actions by EPA v. hich will rot be
taken otherwise, despite the exicting.
broad authorities contained in RCRA.
EPA has not Implemented the Re-
source Conservation and Recovery Act
aggressively. The Agency has missed
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
deadlines, proposed inadequate regula-
tions, and eten exacerbated the has-
anions waste problem by suspendng
ceitain regulations.
It has become evident that this slow.
plcdding course ‘.;ill be continued in
the abaence of a clear ccr.gressianai di-
rective. ‘iLls is nut acceptable. AccorJ
ing y, S ‘ :57 protides more spcc 1 f c
guidance to EPA as to how the broid
grants of authority of the ex stntg
RCRA law should be used.
The bill declares as congressional
POliC Y that—
T. a’.o,d subatantai nsk to human hea!th
ani the ei.’.irc’nmeni, reluuice on lani d,s-
paLal should be nilnlmzed aaJ land dispos-
al. parncularl landf li and 5urface im-
po”ndmer.t. should be the least favored
method for managing hazardous astes
It specifically reaffirms the Adminis-
trator’s authority to prohibit land dis-
posal methods that cannot be shown
to be protective of human health and
the environment, and directs the Ad-
rulnistrator to use that authority.
Deadlines are establ shed by which
EPA must evaluate all wastes listed as
hazardous and subject to RCRA regu-
lation, as to the appropriateness of
thair disposal on land.
The bill establishes minimum tech-
nological standards for land disposal
facilities and Incinerators to Insure
that EPA requires the use of the best
technology available at hazardous
wastc disposal farititics.
Henceforth, the use of landfills will
be circumscribed by strict rules gov-
erning, first, under section 5, what
kinds of materials may be land!illed,
and sccond, under section 6, hat the
physical character of the landfills
themselves will be.
The minimum technological require-
mnents under section 6 for new and,
eventually, for existing landfills will
start with double liners, a leachate col-
lection system, and a monitoring
system—as a modicum of protection
and integrity. But it Is necessary to do
more. In its section 5 technical evalua-
tions, EPA will match certain wastes
to certain land d sposal technologies
or determine that no match is feasible.
Within the framework of those evalua’
tions, Congress under the terms of this
legislation is also directing EPA to
take Into account certain locational
characteristics with respect to all land
diposal facilities In the country in
ord i’ to establish a performance range
fo ’ landfills. The locatIonal character-
istics to be factored ln’o EPA’s analy-
ses include, aniong others, the hydro-
genlony of the site, and climatological
and dnmographic effects. Landfills
thus will be ah le to be assessed accord-
Inc to the!r hyrogealog ic performr.nce
and elacsified as fully acceptable, ac
ceptab lc for certain lim:ted uses, and
itnarre;table. W:rh a phaceo’Jt of n f l-
acreptanle Landfills and a highly ana-
lyt c evaluation of the remainder at’-
cerd : g to their highest and best uses,
I anticipate that the health and safety
of the A merican people will be sivttl-
cantly enhanced with respect to their
S915 1
potential exposure to harmful toxics
in the environment.
Thc bill expands the coverawe of the
lax to tho&- who generate bt uet ii lflt)
and l.0efl itlograms of waste a n.m.;th
In ij3O. EPA exempted all generators
of less ussr. 1 000 kilograms. so lely on
the baa’s of its workload. and sst d
ihat it iiitendeo to initiate ruleniaxu’g
to expand the law’s coverage l;iti.ifl
to 5 years.
This has not occurred. Accordingly.
the committee proposes to Implement
EPA’s 19B0 commitment. This will
hi it into the regulatory system an
additional 15 mI llion tons of hazardous
waste.
The bill strengthens signifirantly
the role of citizens in enforcing the
law. As the sponsor of this provision. I
beieve that It ti ill provide an in’.por-
tant and necessary supplement to
EPA’s efforts.
The bill expands the law to prevent
the e’ port of hazardous waste to for-
eign countries witnout the recemsmg
country’s consent.
I would like to diccuss In greater
detail two provisions of S. ‘757 which I
sponsored.
c1Ti755’ suits
The citizen stilt amendments con-
tained in S. 757 provide an important
supplement to the efforts of the Fed-
eral and State G,,vernments to abate
the most serious hinds of hazardous
waste situations: Those that may
present an imminent and substantial
endangerment to human health or the
em ironment.
I reiterate: These amendments are a
supplement to, not a substitute for
Go’. erament action.
Under current law, a citizen may
bring suit to enforce a permit or other
similar RCRA re ulrement If EPA
fails to do so. However, citizens are not
now authorized to sue to abate an -‘Im-
minent and substantial endanger-
ment” to health or the environment.
Only EPA can sue to abate an h tm l-
nent hazard under current law. If EPA
does not act, the endangerment con-
tinues.
In light of the thousands of known
hazardous waste sites across this coun-
try, this simply does not make sense.
The Environmental Protection
Agency clearly does not have the re-
sources to deal with all of these s tcs.
nor do the States.
Citizen suits to abate immineni haz-
ards can expand the nztional effort to
minimize these very real threats to
our well-being.
This bill authorizes citizens to br’ng
imminent hazard sui in the a trr,e,j
of EPA artlon. The iro’.isfon is itruc-
tiir d earefuUy in the following aa c
to insure that citren suits do not
interfere with ongoing Federal or
State enforcement elf ort.s:
CIt ken action cannot occur until 120
days after EPA, the affected State and
the alleged defendant have been given
notice of intent to sue.
4 6 ,
-------
S 9152
If EPA or the State is pursuing an
enforcement action, administratively
or judicIally, citizens cannot bring suit,
but can intervene in the Federal or
State action; and
- I I EPA or the State has settled an
action to abate an activay a hich may
present an Imminent and substantial
endangerment, citizen suit is barred
with respect to that activity.
Tao safeguards against frivolous
suits have been added to the bill, in re-
sponse to concerns expressed by corn-
snittee members. First. attorne)s fees
are authorized to be a%;arded by a
court only to a “substantially pre all-
trig” party. A citizen who brings a suit
which has little or no merit does so
only at his own expense, which may be
considerable.
Second, citizens are prohibited from
bringiag an imminent hazard suit to
challenge the siting of a hazardous
waste treatment, storage or disposal
facility. This precludes the use of this
new authority soleiy as a delaying
tact it. Concerns about the proposed
siting of such facilities are more ap-
propriately raised to the context of
the law’s permitting process.
The citizen suit amendments to S.
757 also clarify the intent of the cur-
rent law that citizens do hate a statu-
tory right to intervene In imminent
hazard cases brought by EPA. This
right of intervention has been an im-
portant mechanism for insuring citi-
zen involvement in litigation and pro-
posed settlements between EPA and
defendant companies.
However, recent court opinions have
held to the contrary. There is now a
conflict in statutory interpretation
which needs to be resoltea.
It is important that the statutory
intent w th respect to int2r ;t-ntion in
imminent hazard cases be c!arilied for
a number of reasons,
First, the citizens of a community in
which a hazardous waste site is located
are the persons most affected by the
health and environmental hazards It
presents The citizens of that commu-
nity therefore have the most at stake
In the adequacy of the Government’s
litigation efforts in court or in a settle-
ment agreement between the two par-
ties. It is an issue of fundamental fair-
ness that those most affected should
be permitted to participate In the judi-
cial resolution of such important prob-
lems without the burden and expense
of seeking permissive intervention by
showing that the Go ernment is not
adequately representing the citizens
interest.
Second, citizen Involvement prot ides
an Important set of checks and bal-
ances in the enforcement process. fly
overseeing the Government’s efforts.
citizens can assure themselves and the
public at large that all views are repre-
sented in the process, and that the
outcome is based on all available
kno’ ledge. This gives the outcome ad-
itional credibility, which is particu-
larly needed after the events of recent
years.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
Third, a statutory right of interven-
tion Is not a unique concept in enviro-
mental law. It is explicitly conferred
by RCRA for cases brought by EPA to
enforce ECRA permits and regula-
tions. The right also exists in enforce-
ment cases brought under the Toxic
Substances Control Act, the Clean Air
Act, the Clean Water Act, and the
Safe Drinking Water Act.
EXPORT OF RAZARDOUS WASTES
The hazardous waste export provi-
sion in 5. 757 seeks to substitute a
tightened export control process for
the notification procedure which has
been in effect since 1980.
The section Is based on the belief
that foreign nations which receive
U.S. hazardous wastes should give
their consent before the shipments
occur. AL the presont time, only an
annual notIce is provided to receiving
countries prior to the Initial shipment.
This notice does not give the receiving
nation any Indication of the quantity
of the waste proposed for export, or of
the frequency of shipments. Moreover,
it does not indicate where the waste is
to be treated or disposed.
If I were the environmental minister
of a foreign nation. I aould want to
know as much as possible about the
hazardous waste coming into my coun-
try. If I were the U.S. Secretai j’ of
State. I would want to be sure that no
American ally or trading partner is
saddled with U.S. wastes It does not
want or does not have the capacity to
handle in an enviionmentally sound
manner.
The export provision will guarantee
that the wishes of foreign states are
considered and tijat U.S. International
interests are safeguarded. It estab-
tithes a more comprehensive and re-
sponssble waste export policy with a
minimum of additional regulatory
burden on U.S. generators.
The proposed permit system is quite
simple. In the absence of a bilateral
agreement between the Uruted States
and the government of the receiving
country setting forth specific not ice,
export, and enforcement procedures
for the transportation, treatment,
storage, and disposal of wastes, no
person shall export hazardous wastes
unless—
First. Such person has notified the
Administrator of the plan to export;
Second. The Government of the re
cehing country has agreed, In writing
to the plan;
Third. A copy of the receiving coun-
try’s written consent is attached to the
manifest accompanyuig each waste
shipment; and
Fourth, The shipment conforms
with the terms of such receiving coun-
try’s consent.
When this program becomes ef fee-
tive, it will at long last become possible
for the executive branch to deterni iie
the amounts and ultimate destination
of U.S.-generated hazardous a aste
which are exported each year. Once
this information is available, EPA and
the Congress will be able to gauge
July 25, .7984
whether the export right is being
abused and whether further controls
are necessary or desirable.
Th:s important new pro;lsion incor-
porates suggestions made by EPA and
industry. It will, I believe, enstire that
the right to export does not become a
right to circumvent RCRA.
coaccusiox
Mr. President, we have worked long
and hard on this package of amend-
ments. I believe that we have achIeved
a workable balance between two con-
flicting considerations:
First. The recognition that unless
the status quo with respect to the han-
dling of hazardous wastes is altered
radically, we will be condoning the
e entual chemical contamination of
all elements of our natural life-sup-
port system—air, water, and land; and
Second. The reality that because the
pervasi e nature of the hazardous
waste problem is largely a result of a
successful Industralized society, the Ul-
timate solution Is a basIc change in the
operation of large segments of our in
dustries—a course that should be
charted carefully and brought about
at a deliberate but measured pace.
5. 757 represents a mandate for
change in the status quo. It also reps e-
scnts a mandate for informed regula-
tion which does not threaten precipi-
tous disruptions which could ultimate-
ly doom our legislative strategy to fail-
ure.
The bill before us is a compromise In
the best sense of that term. It at-
tempts to accommodate the many
varied concerns expressed by htindreds
of persons over the past years. It is
also a compromise in the sense that
probably no one person or interest
supports every sli.gle element of the
legislation.
We have had to make difficult judg-
ments as to how the results we desire
can be best achieved. 5, 757 represents
that judgment. [ urge my colleagues to
support the legislation before the
Senate. If approved it will be another
sign ficant achievement by this body
in assuring a safe environment for all
persons of this country.
Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. President, when
the Commit tee on Environment and
Public Works considered amendments
to the Solsd Waste Disposal Act, it was
confronted V. ith the increasingly diffi-
cult problem of legislating in a com-
plex technical arena. When the com-
mittee first developed the landmark
Resource Conservation and Rccot ery
Act of 1976. it recognized that quick
solutions to the problem of ent iron-
mentally harmful waste disposal
would not be possible. There are mil-
lions of tons of waste generc’ed in the
United States, much of ah’cli is con-
sidered hazardous under the criteria
created by the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act. Eliminating this
waste or assuring its disposal In the
most environmentally protective
manner depends upon a regulatory ap-
proach that alters the cost and avail’
-------
S 9172
health and the environment aiid may take
into account the practicable capacity of
such facilities. At a minimum such revisions
for facuities potentially receiving such
wastes should require groundwater monitor-
(r.g as necessary to detect contamination. es .
tabiish criteria for the acceptable location
of new or eaisttng factl.ttes, and provide for
corrective action as appropriate.”.
On page 72. beginning line 20. strike all
through page 73, line 16. and m a n-I in lieu
thereof the (ottoatng:
‘ Cc) Cosmoi. or Ifanscous Dis posaL—
(l)iA) Not later than thirty.six months
after the date of enactment of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1984.
each State shall adopt and implement a
permit program or other s stem of prlorap-
proval and cond lt long to assure that each
solid waste management facility within such
State which may accelve hazardous house-
hold waste or hazardous waste due to the
provision of section 3002(b for small quan-
tity generators lothcrwise not stib lect to the
reqt.ircment for a permit under section
3005) till comply with the applicable crite-
rla promulgated under section 4004(a) and
section 1005(a)(3).
18 1 Not later than eighteen months
after the promulgation of revIsed criteria
under subsection 40041aW2), each State
shall adopt and implement a permit pro-
grem or other system or prior approval and
conditions, to assure tnat each anhid waste
management tacility within such State
‘s’ffle!. ntiiy reeetve hazardous household
waste or hxardous waste due to the provi-
sion of section 3002(b) for small quantity
generators tothcrwi.ce not subji ci to the it-
quirement for a permit tinder secton 3005)
will comply with the criteria revised under
section 400lfaX2).
-iC The Adminislrator shall detennine
ittietlier each State has detetoped an ade-
qiiate program unoer this paragraph. The
Administrator may make such a determina-
tiun in conjunction with approval, disap-
prinal or partial approval of a State plan
under aectiOn 4007.
(2 in any State that the Administrator
di termi:.cs has not adopted an adequate
proera:n (or such facilittes undei paragraph
(li (S) by the date provided in such pars-
gmph, the Administrator may use the au-
thorities available under sections 3007 and
3008 of this title to enforce the prohibition
in subsection (a) of this section witn respect
to such facilities. In no event shall the Ad-
rnlnistrator or any other person be author.
tzed to bnng a civil action under paragraph
(a) of this section against any person sub.
Ject to a compliance schedule Issued by the
State under a program that the Administra-
tor has determined to be adequate under
this paragraph. For purposes of this pars-
grape, the term ‘requirement of this sub-
title’ in sectlon 3008 shall be deemed to in-
clude ci teria promugaled by the Adnainia-
trator under sections iOO8iaf 3) and 4004(a)
of this tide. and the terni ‘hazardous
wastes” in section 3007 shall be deemed to
Include solid ‘waste at facilitses that ma
handle hazarjotis household wastes or has
ardoiis wastes from s mall quan:ity genera-
tors , -.
AMENaMENT No. 3409
I Purp :ce. To clarify when common earrierc
b) rail are subject to citizen suits)
Propoct’d b Mr. CNAFEE (for himself
and Senator RAND0LflI).
On page 62. lute 25. strike out “and”.
On page 63. line 4. strike out the period
“r d insert in lsrti thereof ‘: and”.
On page 63. after line 4, insert the follow-
ig
“tSP insertIng after the first sentence
thereof the folloa ing:
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
“A transporter shall not be deemed to
have contributed or to be contributing to
such handlIng, storage, treatment, or dispos-
al taking place after such solid waste or haz-
ardous waste has left the possession or con-
trol of such transporter, if the transporta-
tion of such waste a-as under a sole contrac-
tual arrangement arisIng from a published
tariff and acceptance (or carriage by
common carrier by rail and such transporter
has exercised due care in the past or present
handling, storage, treatment. trantportation
and disposal of such waste.”.
On page 80, line 10, insert immediately
after “(g),” the follow’ln
“A transporter shall not be deemed to
have contributed or to be contributing to
such handling, storage, treatment, or dispos-
al, taking pace after such solid waste or
hazardous waste has left the possession or
control of such transporter, if the transpor-
tation of such waste was undcr a sole con-
tractual arrangement arisIng from a pub’
llshed tariff and acceptance for carriage by
common carrier by rail and such transporter
has ecercised due care in the past or present
handling, storage, treatment, transportation
and disposal of such waste.”.
AMENDMENT No. 3409
(Purpose: To clarify the Uniform Manifest
requirements)
Proposed by Mr. CRAflE (for himself
and Mr. R4ND0i,ru)
On page 30. Itne 18, after “manifest”
Insert’ promulgated under this Act”,
On page 31, begInning line 1. strike all
through page 32. line 9.
On page 32, line 10. strike “(31” and insert
in lieu thereof “(2)”.
On page 32, line 11, strike’ f 7j” each place
It occurs and insert in lieu thereof “(6)”.
On page 32, line 20. strike ‘(4)” and insert
In lieu thereof ‘(3)” and strike “paragraphs
(2) and (3)” and insert in lieu thereof “pars’
graph (2)”,
On page 32, tine 24, strike ‘tSi” and insert
In lieu thereof “(4)”.
On page 33. line 9. strike ‘16Y’ and insert
in lieu thereof “(SE’.
On page 33, line 18. strike “(7)” and uu,ert
In lieu thereof “(6)”.
On page 34. line 10. strike all after “prac-
tices.” through line 14.
On page 35, tine 15. strike “(Si” and Insert
in lieu thereof “(4)”.
On page 35, tIne 25. strike “(3)” and insert
in lieu thereof”(2)”,
AMrNiiamErfl No 3409
(Purpose: To make a clarifying amendment
on the use of absorbents)
Proposed by Mr CI IAFEE (for himself
and Senators Srvrroao Rs%ooi,s’n. and
M LTcMEU.),
On page 44. beginning on lit t 2. strike
“(including the mtnim zation of free liquids
by other means than the add’iion of absorb-
ent material, where technologIcally fea.si’
b le,”.
On page 44, line 8, insert imniedia:eiy
after “landfills” the following new’ aen-
tence’ “Such regulations shall also prohibit
the disposal In landfills of liquids that have
been absorbed in materials that biodegrade
or that release liquids when compressed as
might occur dtiring routine landfill opi’r’
ation.”.
July 25, 1984
On page 44. tine 8. strike “of” lmmmedia’
tely after “disposal” and insert in lieu there-
of “In”.
,AaiENDMZNT No. 3409
(Purpose. To substitute (he phrase “oity ma
terials” for the more narrowly defined
term “used oil”)
Proposed by Mr CHAFEE (for himself
and Serators Sttnopo. RANDOLPH and
MITcHELL). -
On page 60, l:nes 4 and 6. strike “used oil”
each place it appears and insert in lieu
thereof ‘ oily materials”.
On pai,e 60, Itne 4. insert a comma imme
diatel after’ refining”.
AssENbvicfn No. 3409
CPuro t’. To delete deadline (or EPA to de-
term:iie appropriateness of using extrac-
tion procedure toxicity characteristics for
evaluating deltstrng pettt(onsl
Proposed by Mr C1 IAFEE (for hmsclf
and Senators Smrroao, Rayooi,PH, and
Mircaza).
On page 53, lines 15 through 22 and insert
in lieu thercoflhefollov.ing:
“MD nct later than twenty-eight months
after the date of enactment of the Solid
Waste D’cpos:il Act Amendmcnts of 1984,
make”
AMazeMENT No, 3409
(Purpose To n’.ske locational criteria appli-
cable it Ad’nimstrator fails to meet land
disposal limitation deadlines)
Proposed by Mr. CHAFEE ((or himself
and &nator’ Srarroan. RANVOLeU. and
Mi’rcHsa).
On page 43. lInes 19, strike ‘( f l” immedi-
atel after ‘ 30 04if)”,
A’sENoMLNT No 3409
sPdrwse To clarify authorit ) of Admmis.
trzitor in estabi.ah treatment star,iJards
applicable so land d:sposah practicesi
Pronosed by Mr CHAFEE (for himself
and Senators Sr rroi’a. R;NaoLPH, and
M ITCHELL).
On paste 38. line 7. Insert “(other than
paragraph (7)” Imntedistel)’ after “subsec-
tion”.
On page 42. line 19. insert “levels or” lm-
mediately af:er “those”.
On page 42. lines 19 to 22. strike “are nec
essary before such method or methods of
disposal of such hazaroous waste would be
prc’tec’ite of human health and the er,ti-
ronmer.(” and Insert in lieu thereo( ‘sub-
stant.a’’) d-m’nsh the toxicity of the waste
or substaniiat!y reduce the likelihood of nu
ration of hazardous con tituen :a from the
waste so that short-term and iong’term
threats to human health and the environ-
ment a c minimized”.
On pace 42. l:nes 22 to 25, and on page 43,
lines I and 2 siri},e all after environment,
and Insert in lieu thereof the following
“If such hazardous waste has been treated
to the letel çr by a ntett.od spect!ied in reg
u.acior,5 prurn..gaied under this para -ap; ,
such waste or residue thereof shall not ot’
subject to any prohit’tion promugated
unoer paragraph ( Ii of this subsection and
ma be d.soosed of in stand disposal filciti:)
which meeis the requIrements of this aiib-
title Any regulation promulgated under
this pa;a;raph for a particular hmyzardous
waste shall become effective on the sante-
dale as any applicable prohibition pron:t:l
1 /0/
-------
July 23, 1984
financial guarantee that qualifies as evl.
dence of financial responsibility pursuant to
the EPA’s regulations. Second. the amend.
nient pros ides that evidence of financial re-
sponsibility may be provided by any one, or
any combination, of the followlrg insur-
ance, letter of credit, guarantee, surety bond
or qualification as seif’insurer.
AMENS IcENT TO CZARIST WHEN COMMON CARRI-
ERS BY RAIL ARE U8JECT TO CITIZEN SUITS
New section 7002(a)(IXB), added by S.
757, alloas citizens to sue any persons who
are contributing to the transportation or
disposal of hazardous nasta which may
pretent an Lnimir,ent and substantial endan.
germent to health or the environment.
Under this section, transporters performing
mere transportation functions potentially
may be sued for dargers presented by has.
ardous waste at h.zardous waste facilities.
Common carrier nansporters of hazardous
waste trust accept for transport shipments
of hazardous a sate. They cannot choose
which shippers or consignees they would
like to serte. Hotiever, under section
7002 (a)(1)iB). such transporters may be
sued even though they properly transported
the hazardous waste and had no other role.
This amendment would correct this Inequi-
ty.
ThIs amendment would be cor.sistent with
the Comprehensive Environmental Re-
sponse. CompensatIon, and Liability Act
(CERCL .). CERCLA provides that a trans-
porter may be liable for damages resulting
from the release of hazardous waste from a
facility, which the can-Icr transported to
that hazardous waste facility—but only if
the carrier actually selected that facility.
Under new section 7002aNl)(B). however, a
citizen could bring an action against the
transporter for contributing to the past
transportation of this hazardous waste even
though It did not select the site. The action
could include a claim that an innocent
transporter should undertake or contribute
to site cleanup CERCLA recognizes that
such a transporter should not be liable
under those clreunlstances. With this
amendment section 70C )2(a)(l)(B) will also
deal a iLls transporters In the same manner.
AMENDMEi .T TO CLARIFY THE UNIFORM
MAINTE5T REQUIREMENTS
Since the Committee reported S. 757 the
Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest regula.
tions have been promulgated, in March of
this year. The Department of Transporta-
tion has indicated that several confornung
changes to the bill would be desirable, parS
ticularly to the small quantity generator
pros isions.
This amendment responds to the concerns
raised by the Department, principally by
striking new section 3002(b)(2). This will
avoid confusion about the applicability of
the Hazardous Materials Regulations as to
contauseiization of wastes. Also. ft will
eliminate the suggestion that States can
impose manifesting requirements other
than those consistent with the Uniform
Hazardous Waste Manifest regulations.
Under (hose reg’jlat ,ons. hosseser, tiure
are a number of regulatory options relating
to man.fesl requirements that are availabie
to the States and that are not preempted by
the rules.
Although no other form may be requirrd
b a Sinte to accompany a waate shi mient
the L’niform Mar.dcst form contains snare
to all&w the entry of certain Oi-.timal State
info’mation items in addition to the federal.
ly.reqiiired Items These items include State
manifest numbcrs; State id ntificatior. num-
bers for generators, transporters, and treat.
ment. storage. or disposal (TSD) fac,lities:
telephone numbers for the transporter and
TSD facilil), EPA or State hazardous waste
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
nwnbers: additional waste descriptions: and
handling codes. States may require genera.
tors to complete any of the informational
items includ d In the optional State section
of the foim prior to the transportation of
the hazardous wa.ite. and may require
owners or operators of facilities to complete
any of these &ate information items as a
condition of the acceptance of waste at TSD
facilities.
States may also require generators or TSD
facilities to send the Uniform Manifest or
other information related to the shipment
under separate cover Ce g.. by mail), as long
as this does not interfere with the actual
movement of the waste. By this means.
Stetes in which hazardous waste disposal fa.
cilities are located may obtain information
from all generators using those facilities, in-
eluding generators located in other States.
These requirements may be imposed both
by the State in a hich the generator Is locat-
ed and the State in which the designated f a.
cility is located. States may unpose sanc-
tions against generators for failing to pro-
vide required State information.
In addition to shipments that are subject
to the Federal manifest requirements,
States may require the Uniform Manifest to
accompany shipments of waste that are not
subject to the Federal requirements. For ex-
ample. States may require the Uniform
Manifest for shipments of wastes that are
defined as hazardous wastes under State
law, but not under Federal law. Further-
more. States may require the Uniform
Manifest for shipments by generators quali-
fying for the Federal small generator ex-
emption.
In addition to the additional information
which States may require, a State may also
reqtiire, with some limitations, generators to
use forms printed by the State; and the
State may print Its name. State-assigned
document number, and other information
on the required form. For example, a State
may print on its form a notice to generators
that they are required to aubmit copies of
the Uniform Manifest to the State.
AMENDMENT TO MAKE A CLARIFYING
AMENDMENT ON ‘tHE USE OF ABSORBENTS
The regulations to be promulgated under
new 3004c). “Liquids In L,andf ills,” shall
prohibit the disposal of liquids In landfills
that have been absorbed in material that
blodegrades or releases liquids when com-
pressed as might occur in routine landfill
operations. The use of absorbents should be
consistent with the purposes and objectit es
of this Act and particularly with the finding
that land disposal In general is the least de-
sirable form of waste management because
of the problems associated with assuring
long-term containment of hazardous wastes.
Tile bill’s current language regarding
“minimization of free liquids by other
means than the addition of absorbent mate-
rial. where technologically feasible” does
not clearly state the intent of the prot ision,
In addit’on, the lancua e only refers to con-
tainerized liqutds. Thts arnendnserit will
elai:fy the intent and make the protisior i
applicabi to ccntaln rizc1 as well as bUik
or rioncontainerized liquid hazardous
wastes.
The goal of minimizIng liculds is to reduce
the reaay migration of liquid wa.c:es a’ o the
potential for subsidence. To this end, the
preferred liquids v.aste management meth.
Ods are. (1) reduction In liquid waste genera-
tion by process design changes (e g, using
less liquid or recirculating rinse a aLert and
by not mising hazardous wastes with liq-
uids. (2) recycling and recovery Ce g.. salt ent
rxtractior I, (31 treatment bY destrtiction
(e g., incineration), (4) treatment to render
the waste or liquid fraction nonhazardous
S 9177
Ce g., coagulation and precipitation). CS)
treatment by removing liquids te g.. decant.
Ing. centrifuge, vacuum drum or con e or,
filter press, distiIlat cn. ret erse osmosist and
(6) treatment by mixing with agens v
chcrsicel rcac nts and certan atscrl ’erls
that remove “free liq 1 iids.’
Chemical rcagents soii :fy and stabii’re’
liquid wastes by such reections as en spsu-
lation, Ion exchange, pre ipitation and
chemical transformations. They also ter.o to
reouce the leachability of chemical con tiiu-
erts. E\anlpies of chemical rezgertts include
cement—or lime.bascd materials. pozzo!ar,:c
materia!s. and therro ia. tic or or-ian.c
binders. By contrast, absorption is priii;aiil
a ph sical proccss got erned ma nl by capl-
lary action, surface tension. and filling soid
space. Absorption does. ho’.ieser, also in
volve chemical and electromaeneuc reac-
tions, and includes many chemical reagents.
Some absorbents are unacceptable for
treating liquids before landfill d sposal be-
cause they either blodegrade or fail to pro’
vide structural stability. Absorbents that
biodegrade (e.g., sawdust, municipal t acte
and shredded gaper) are unacceptable be-
cause when they biodergrade they collapse
and release free liquids. Absorbents that fail
to provide structural stability (e g.. sawdust,
shredded paper and ceitain vermiculites)
are also unacceptable because of their
sporige.like behavior, i.e., they absorb liq-
uids but readily release them under pres.
sures that may occur in landfills. E’tamples
of absorbents that are likely to be found to
be acceptable are the chemical reagents dis-
cussed abose and find.grained earthen ma-
terials (e.g., bentonite, montmorilnonite. ka’
olinite. and Puller’s earth). Fine.grained ma-
terials have a large-capillary potential when
unsaturated, and may be acceptable if they
provide structural stability as well as rernov-
al of “free liquids” The ability of absorbent
materials to retain liquids under pressure is
a function of the amount of pressure, the
percent of sold space filled with liquias. aiid
the structural strength of the material (i e.
the percent of void space retained under
pressure).
EPA is expected to develop and formutsie
criteria distinguishing between acceptable
and unacceptable absorbents. A list of unac
ceptable mixing agents (e.g. biodegradabie
materials and materials that readily reiease
waters or unacceptable charactertstics may
be developed to exclude certain absorbent.i;
altogether from use In hazardous waste
management practices. Absorbents n.n
listed as unacceptable. e g.. fuller s earth,
would have to pass specific performar,ce
standards or test criteria to be pros en ac-
ceptable. Each material from each so i-t’e
projected for use would hate to be sub,ectcd
to testing to determine that it will pcrfcrn
adequately during transpott and in the
landfill ens ironment. Such criteria migtu
also be ap?lied to specific hazardous wa.’ ts
and specuied absorbents to determ:ne corn-
pati’ ’lty on a c’ e by case ba .s under etri.
trolied pres:ure and trrn eiature test cc:’ui-
(tons :muk.:irtg the in e t-nsiror.ment
In addition to per (orrnar,ce crieria. r.PA
Is e’.pc it’d to d isetop ope1aii tg g t,Jt’l 1 iits
for use on a case by cz’.e basis to coritrui
manaaemer.t and dispciszt ; i RC: es F’c e
ample. esen an aicepsabl, ah iber,t r,a%
bcccrr.e unacceptahi2 if urid ir s lir: :ivd
quantities for SIssorbing a rela:i tb lai ,c
quantity of hazerdous w; sIe ‘Inc ma’c’iai
could then become saturrtid w, h the l. iiuJ
waste and subject to read: ri’Ie ; :ng 1iu.:
Use of a larger quantity of ab nrbeni w. ntd
be needed in this case to present the at.:irb
mt from yielding free lIqii Ios Hen ’e the
quantity of absorbent per Unit quantuts’ of
hazardotis waste used In determining tiiit
10/
-------
S 9191
league from Maryland. represantatives
of EPA. the environmental communi-
ty. end Interested members of the af-
fected industries, a solution to this
problem can t e agreed to.
- The Mikulski amendment should not
pose a problem in conference.
Mr. SARBANES. I am pleased to
hear that. Based upon those assur-
ances. I will refrain from o feru spe-
chic language at this time.
citizss suit novisios or RCRA
Mr. WILSON. Mr. President. lll the
Senator yield for a moment?
Mr. CHAFEE. I yield to my good
friend, the Senator from California.
Mr. WiLSON. Mr. President. one Im-
portant provIsion provided by this bill
is the e.tisen suits provision in section
18(a). XL is my understanding that this
section will allow any citizen to seek
relief in Instances where the past or
present handling, storage, treatment,
transportation, or disposal of any haz-
ardous or solid waste may present an
Imminent and substantial endanger-
ment to health or the environment. Is
this a proper reading of the provision?
Mr. CHAFEE. The Senator is cor-
rect.
Mr. WILSON. The need for this pro-
vision is clear and Immediate. During
teatimony before the Environmental
Pollution Subcommittee, one witness
stated that this provision was unneces-
sary due to protections already grant-
ed under the Comprehensive Environ-
mental Response. Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980. better known as
“Superfund.” However, earlier this
year. a Federal district court in Cali-
fornia held that a private party, under
Federal law, does not have a right of
action that would allow it to secure a
cleanup order.
If the distinguished Senator will
allow me to continue for a moment. I
believe the circumstances in this situa-
tion will show it to be the type of situ-
ation Congress Intends to be covered
by Federal law. In 1942. a tract of land
was bought by the Federal Govern-
ment for the war effort and facilities
were built on the site for the manufac-
ture of synthetic rubber. The facilities
were then leased to several companies
until 1955 when the Federal Govern-
ment sold the property to one of the
companies. In 19 2. the company de-
cided to get out of the synthetic
rubber business and sold the land to a
developer who In 1976 sold the land to
the plaintiff in the case. Between 1976
and 1980. the plaintiff developed the
property Into commercial and light In-
dustrial property. In 1981. the plain-
tiff negotiated a sale to a third party.
Portions of this purchase were mutu-
ally rescInded when unknown hazard-
ous wastes ere discovered on the site.
Subsequently, the plaintiff investi-
gated the problem arid determined
that the uastes were migrating to-
wards an aquifer that supplies water
to communities downstream. The
plaintiff notified the companies that
had leased the facilities and the Gen-
eral Services Adnilnlstratlon—succes-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
sor to the Government agency that
had originally purchased the land—of
the problem end requested that. they
take action. No party would agree to
abate the problem. In December of
last year. the plaintiff fIled suit to
force the responsible parties to clean
up the site. In March of this year, the
court ruled that the plaintiff did not
have a right’ of action to secure a
cleanup order.
My understanding, Mr. PresIdent. Is
that Congress intended the Superfur.d
law to include an implied right for pri-
vate parties to obtain a cleanup order.
Under the Cort against Ash doctrine,
authorization for private parties to
bring an action to force cleanup of a
hazardous waste site is Implied when
Congress Intended to allow such a
result. The Federal district judge In
California erroneously ruled that the
Congress had not intended to author-
ize such actions.
Mr. CHAFEE. The Senator’s under-
standing Is correct.
Mr. WILSON. The citizen suits pro-
vision Included In this legislation clear-
ly states the intent of Congress that
this right exists in Federal law. Under
RCRA. the right is made explicit.
There have been ’adeqnate safeguards
placed on such suits to ensure that
they will not interfere with Federal
regulatory and enforcement programs.
The provision is Intended to allow citi-
zens the same substantive and proce-
dural claim to relief as Is already avail-
able to the United States. By creating
an explicit right of action under
RCRA. we are In no way altering the
implied right that exists under Super-
fund.
if the Senator will yield further, I
feel that this citizen’s suit provision
will rededicate our commitment to
eliminate the dangers to the public
health and environment which haz-
ardous wastes pose. It is my sincere
hope that any language compiled for
the legislative history of this bill will
show our strong belief that private
citizens have the right to go to court
to secure cleanup of hazardous waste
sites.
I thank my good friend for yielding
to rae for this discussion.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President. as
always, the Senator from California
makes his points sincerely and concise-
ly. Let me assure him that I will seek
to have the conference report show
the importance we attach to this pro-
vision.
AM . WI ’T 1 (0. 3501 TO THI
RLAUTNOR1ZATIO OP RCIIA
Mr. KASTEN. Mr. President. I un-
derstand the committee would prefer
that I withhold offering amendment
No. 2809 to S. 757. I appreciate the
committee s concern.
At the same time. I am sure the com-
mittee recognizes that there is a need
to encourage innovation in the treat-
ment of hazardous wastes. The com-
mittee has led the way in establishing
a new national policy that will rely
less on land disposal of hazardous
July 25, 1D84
wastes. U we are to rely less on land-
fills, we must have methods of treating
this material. The amendment I am
offering encourages the development
of new treatment technologies.
The 1Iou e ei-sion of the rcauthor-
izat ion of the Resource Conser. ’a:Ion
and Recovery Act contains a prot’i’ion
that Is sirn lar to amendment 2809.
There are, ho ever, two significant
differences betucen the House version
and this amendment. Those diffcr-
ences are as follows: First, this anier.d-
meat specifies that research de elop-
ment arid demonstration permits are
to be effective for 365 operating days.
The House version does not specify op-
erating days. and could be Interpreted
to mean 1 calendar year. Second, this
amendment provides that research
permits may not be renewed after It
has expired. The House version nas no
such provision.
While these are minor differences.
they are important to conservation
and industry groups. For this reason. I
believe amendment 2809 is superior to
the provision in the House bill.
Mr. CRAFEE. I recognize the con-
cerns of the Senator from Wisconsin.
He is correct that there are important
differences between the House version
arid his amendment.
I appreciate the Senator’s efforts to
expedite action on this bill. He has
been most helpful in considering with-
holding his amendment.
Let me assure the Senator that I rec-
ognize the Importance of his amend.
ment. I agree that we need to encour-
age innovation in the treatment of
hazardous wastes,
If the Senator will agree not to offer
his amendment. I will do my best to
have the House language on this Issue
modified to clarify that the permits
run for 365 operating days. and that.
the permits are not renewable.
Mr. 1 .ASTEN. I thank the Senator.
He is most gracious in his offer. With
his assurances that every effort be
made to address this issue in confer-
ence. I will not offer this amendment.
Mr. ROTH. Mr. President. many of
us In coastal States see the disposal of
sewerage sludge as among the most
important solid aaste issues facing the
country. The problem is most critical
because many municipalities and au-
thorities continue to dump tons of this
waste into the ocean daily with little
regard to the effects on our marine en-
vironment.
I believe that It is somewhat regret-
table that we must even discuss this
Issue today. The Congress has spoken
very clearly by providing In the 1977
ocean dumping amendments that
harmful dumping would be ended by
December 31. 1981. Along the Dela-
ware River. municipalities took us seri-
ously and developed safe and efficient
land based disposal alternatives.
In other areas the practice cont:n-
ues. It continues in an atmosphere of
legal uncertainty caused by a Federal
district court decision which we be-
44/
-------
&ptember 8, 198S
rise to state my opposition to the
an,endment.
Mr. Chairman. I am very sympathet-
ic to the plight of my colleague, the
gentleman from Indiana, with respect
to this particular site that be Is con-
cerned about in his own State; but I
did want to point out that this amend-
ment pertains to a statute that is not
presently under consideration. This
applies, this amendment applies to the
Superfund legislation, not the RCRA
legislation.
This Is a subject where we have had
absolutely no hearings, We do not
know with any degree of certainty
what the Impact of this amendment
will be. We do not know how many of
these sites that are owned, but not op.
crated by municpallty or a State. may
exist. There may be scores of them.
There may be hundreds of them
Perhaps, most importantly, the
effect of this amendment if ft Is adopt-
ed will be to dissipate the available
funds In the Super fund and snake less
funds available for cleanup of other
sites, privately owned sites, sites where
no owner can be found or LI the owner
can be found, where the owner is insol-
vent.
Now, one of the gentlemen who
spoke earlier mentioned the GAO. The
GAO estimates that there may be as
many as 50.000 ilh ’gal hazardous dwnp
sites in this country; so I would say to
my colleagues, before you vote “yes”
on this amendment, you had better re-
alize that it could have the effect of
delaying the date on hich some other
dump site in your district or State will
e eligible for cleanup under this Su-
perfund program.
The CHAIRMAN. The question Is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Indiana (Mr. FITHIAN) to
the amendment in the nature of a sub-
stitute offered by the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Fz.onio).
The amendment to the amendment
in the nature of a substitute as
agreed to.
£MEirDP (T OFF IT lOt, RINALSO TO Thin
AME iDMENT IN 7HZ sams O A SUBS’rITVTZ
OrrOtED DY ML 51.0510
Mr. RINALDO. Mr. Chairman, I
of fer an amendment to the amend-
ment In the nature of a substitute.
The Clerk read as follQws:
Amendment offered by Mr. Risutio to
the aim’ndm nt in the nature of a substi.
lute offered by Mr. PLoaxo. Page 35, after
line 7, insert:
CRIMINAL P NALIT1in
Sec. 12. (3) Subsection di of section 3008
of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by striking out “tao years’ in each place it
app ars and substituting fn e years”.
(hi Subsection (e) of section 3008 of such
Act Is amended b sirilcing out 1 years’
and substituting “tue years’ and by strikung
out S ycan.” and substituting ten years”.
Mr. RINALDO durmg the reading).
Mi-. Cha:nnan, I ask unanimous con-
ient that. the amendment be consid-
d as read and printed in the
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey?
There was no objection.
(Mr. RINALDO asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. RINALDO. Mr. Chairman, this
amendment will strengthen the Re-
source Conservation and Recovery
Act’s criminal penalties for the Illegal
disposal of hazardous wastes.
Many of us know from problems in
our districts the serious danger posed
by illegal disposal of hazardous wastes
to the public health and environment.
We aU know about Love Canal. In my
district, the name Chemical Control
calls forth the same dangers from tin.
proper disposal of hazardous wastes. I
believe RCRA’s criminal penalties
should be strengthened and brought
into line with other Federal felony
penalties. Thus, the amendment in-
creases the law’s maximum felony
penalty from the present 2 years to 5
years, which is, typically, the maxi-
mum Federal felony penalty. In add!.
tion, the amendment changes to 10
years from 5 years the maximum pen-
alty for a violation that places another
person In danger of death, provided
the circumstances manifest an ex-
treme indifference to human life.
We know from the experiences of
Love Canal, Chemical Control and
other now Infamous names that felony
violations of RCRA are more serious
than many other crimes and should
carry the same penalty.
This amendment has been endorsed
by leading environmental groups, in-
cluding the Environmental Defense
Fund, the Sierra Club. and the Natu-
ral Resources Defense Council. It will
Improve the deterrent value of the law
and thereby safeguard the public
health. I urge its adoption to make the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act a more effective means of curbing
the illegal dIsposal of hazardous
wastes.
- 01710
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. RINALDO. I would be glad to
yield to my friend, the gentleman
from New Jersey.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I am
pleased to have worked with the gen-
tleman on this amen& .nt. It is a de-
sirable amendment and I would accept
it-
Mr. RINALDO. Mr. Chairman. I
thank the gentleman.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question Is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from New Jersey (Mr. R INA.Lno)
to the amendment in the nature of a
substitute offered by the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. FLoazo).
The amendment to the amendment
in the nature of a substitute was
agreed to,
AMaNOMTNT OFFUin ST KR. DABISZMEYU To
THE AMEWMUI Sit TuB NATS’RE O A
lUTE O?FEP ,ZO BY KB. ?LOPJO
Mr. DANNEMEYER. Mr. Chairman,
I offer an amendment to the amend-
ment In the nature of a substitute.
The Clerk read as follows;
Amendment offered by Mr. Daxcv.ixysn
to the amendment in the nature of a substi-
tute offered by Mr. PLoIuo: Page 30, after
lineS, insert
çj)QI? -l& ( 3O7
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
11 6775
arrosleEr’s rxm
Ssc. 11. Section 1002C c) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act is amended by striking out “to
any party” and substituting In lIeu thereof
‘io the prevasllng or substantially prevail-
ing party”.
Renumber .the following section accord-
bigly.
(Mr. DANNEMETER asked arid was
given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. DANNEMEYER. Mr. Chairman,
I yield to the gentleman from New
Jer .’ey (Mr. FLORIO).
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. I have
reviewed this amendment with the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Lsit’r)
and I would now oiler a unanimous-
consent request to modify it as fol-
lows, and It would then be acceptable.
and It would be acceptable to the gen-
tleman from California (Mr. Dsst rg-
l E STER) 55 well.
Page 30, after line I, insert
Eec. ii. Section 1003(e) is amended by in-
serting the following after the first sen-
tence: “Nothing in the preceding sentence
shall be construed to affect the poser of
any court to award costs or fees unoer any
otber authority of law.”
With that provision, making that
unanImous conSent request—
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would
Insi st that the gentleman submit the
modification to the Clerk for Its perus-
al,
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I
would make that unanimous-consent
request and then the gentleman’s
amendment, as so amended, is fine, de-
sirable, and! think It is a healthy ad-
dition to this legislation.
- - -- The C A1RMAN. The Clerk wifl
now report the modification. -
The Clerk read as follows:
Page 30, after lineS, insert
SAYflICS PROViSION
Sec. 11. Section 7003(e) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act Is amended by insertLng the
following after the first sentence: ‘Nothing
in the preceding sentence shalt be construed
to affect the power of any court to asard
costs or fees under any other authority of
law.”
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mi’. PioRzo) to modify
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from ‘California (Mr. Daz x-
There wa.s no objection.
Mr. LENT, Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield to me?
Ml-. DANNEMEYER. I yield to the
gentleman from New York.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, we hare
examined the amendment. If the gen-
441
-------
H 6776
tieman has no objection to the modifi-
cation to the language of his amend-
ment. it Is certainLy agreeable to the
minority.
Mr. DANNEMEYER. Mr. Chairman.
I have no obiection to the language.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the bal-
ance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from California (Mr. DAN’ E-
MEYER). 55 modified, to the amend-
ment in the nature of a substitute of-
fered by the genUeman from New
Jersey (Mr. Fwiuo).
The amendment. as modified, to the
amendment in the nature of a substt-
tute. was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any
other amendments to the amendment
In the nature of a substitute offered
by the gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. FLORIO)?
Mr. LEVITAS. Mr. Chairman. I
move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I do so to take this
opportunity to engage In a colloquy
with the distinguished chairman of
the subcommittee.
I serve as the chairman of the Sub-
committee on Investigations and Over-
sight of the Committee on Public
Works and Transportation. hich has
joint jurisdiction in certain areas with
the subcommittee that has presented
this bill.
There is one area and one problem
that recently has come to our atten-
tion that I would like to get some
opinion and view of the distinguished
subcommittee chairman on, and that
is this. The Environmental Protection
Agency, which has the responsibility
of identifying certain sites hich con-
tain hazardous and toxic wastes, has
the responsibility of trying to Identify
the generators of that material in
these abandoned sites and require
them, rather than the fund and the
taxpayers, to pay for the cleanup.
They created the problem; they have
the responsibility of paying for it. Yet.
based on preliminary information, it
appears that the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency is not vigorously pursu-
ing these types of identifications fol-
lowup. and In many Instances are let-
ting the large generators string them
along for periods of time, and in many
Instances end up with sweetheart-type
settlements rather than full responsi-
bility.
I wonder if the chairman of the sub-
committee has any information or
view on this problem.
Mr. FUjRIO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. LEVITAS. I yield to the gentle-
man from Ne Jersey.
Mr. FL.ORIO. I thank the gentleman
for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, the gentleman is cor-
rect Ith regard to the rgsponsibilities
under the law. EPA, for any moneys
that are paid out of this fund, is
charged with the responsibility of pur-
suing those who cause the problem.. As
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
a matter of fact, Congress provided an
easier standard for that pursuit, strict
liability. EPA Is charged with going
after those people.
The gentleman is probably making
reference to what it is I have been
seeing In the newspaper, where, as
EPA comes upon a site and finds a
number of generators and it appears
that some of the wealthier generators
are allowed to enter into settlement
contracts, thereby absolving them
from any further responsibility, EPA
then goes and expends its money and
the residual number of generators
that are left that EPA can pursue
under si ict liability may not have the
wherewithal to provide for reimburse-
ment. the result being that the fund is
depleted. ..
So I am very eonccrned about that
apparent initiative that, is being pur-
sued by EPA. It is my Intention and
my committee’s intention to pursue
and look into this practice that ap-
pears to be followed by EPA.
Mr. LEVITAS. I thank the distin-
guished chairman of the subcommit-
tee.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield to me so that I may
engage in a colloquy with the chair-
man of the subcommittee?
Mr. LEVITAS. Let me complete this
one comment, and I would then be
happy to yield to the gentleman.
I appreciate the chairman’s re-
sponse. I think it Is a very, very serious
problem because I think the American
people, the American taxpayers and
the American public may get jerked
around to a very expensive tune if
EPA does not vigorously go after the
people who have created the problem
and make those responsible pay for It.
Mr. Chairman, I ould be happy to
yield to the gentleman from New
York.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, I thank
the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask
the distinguished chairman of the sub-
committee with respect to section 3 of
the substitute, am I correct In my un-
derstanding that for purposes of satis-
fying waste identification, manifesting
and labeling requirements, that It
would be sufficient to make such Iden-
tification on the basis of process iden-
tification such as dry cleaning solvents
and metal plating wastes?
Mr. FLORIO. Yes, the gentleman is
correct in his understanding. Gener-
ators may even make presumptions
that their wastes are hazardous and
treat them accordingly, thereby allevi-
atlng any requirement to test the
waste. However, generators are respon-
sible for knowing whether or not they
are hazardous waste generators.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, if the
gentleman will yield further, I have a
question with respect to section 11,
the recycling provision of this bill.
Mr. Chairman, Is this provision in-
tended to apply to recyclers who do
not deal with hazardous waste?
Mr. FLORIO. The answer Is no.
September 8, 1982
Mr. LENT. I thank the gentleman.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amendment in the nature of a sub-
stitute offered by the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Fi.oRIo), as amended.
The amendment in the nature of a
substitute, as amended, was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. The question Is
now on the Energy and Commerce
Committee amendment in the nature
of a substitute, as amended.
The Energy and Commerce Commit-
tee amendment in the nature of a sub-
stItute, as amended, was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule,
the Committee rises.
Accordingly the Committee rose:
and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
PRICE) ha’ing assumed the Chair, Mr.
MOAKLE’Y. Chairman of the Committee
of the Whole House on the State of
the Union, reported that that Commit-
tee, having had under consideration
the bill (H.R. 6307) to amend the Solid
Waste Disposal Act to authorize ap-
propriations for the fiscal years’1983
and 1984, and for other purposes, pur-
suant to House Resolution 545, he re-
ported the bill back to the House with
an amendment adopted by the Com-
mittee of the Whole.
0 1720
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under
the rule, the previous Question is or-
dered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any
amendment to the committee amend-
ment adopted by the Committee of
the Whole? If not, the question is on
the amendment.
The amendment was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is on the engrossment and
third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed
and read a third time, and was read
the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the
Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have It.
Mr. DAN NEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I
object to the vote on the ground that
a quorum is not present and make the
point of order that a quorum is not
present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evi-
dently a quorum is not present.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify
absent Members.
The vote was taken by electronic
device, and there were—yeas 317, nays
32, not voting 83. as follows:
(Roil No. 3113
YEAS—3 17
Akaka
Albosta
Bellenson
Benedict
Erthkiey
Brodheid
Alexander
Bennett
Brooki
Anderxoa
Andrew
munzio
Applegate
Aspin
AtiJflSOfl
AuCoin
Bailey (PA)
S j 5
BedeU
Bereuter
Betiune
Buigham
Sons
BoIaM
BOiling
Boner
Bonior
SOU U&7d
Boa en
Broomfieid
Brown (CA)
Brown (CD)
Bro hlIl
Buroo Phiibp
Biy n
campliell
Carney
ChIShOijfl
Ci usen
-------
4$ iri -c -D ,1sUT ( -o, ’c-r) pS J
IMMINENT HAZARD
SEC. 402. Section 7 003(a) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by—
(1) inserting “past or present” after “evidence that the”;
(2) striking “to immediately restrain any person” and insert.
ing in lieu thereof “against any person (including any past or
present generator, past or present transporter, or past or
present owner or operator of a treatment, storage, or disposal
facility) who has contributed or who is”;
3) striking ‘to stop” and inserting in lieu thereof “to restrain
such person from’,
(4) striking “or to take such other action as may be necessary”
and substituting “, to order such person to take such other
action as may be necessary, or both”; and
(5) inserting after the first sentence thereof the following: “A
transporter shall not be deemed to have contributed or to be
contributing to such handling, storage, treatment, or disposal
taking place after such solid waste or hazardous waste has left
the possession or control of such transporter if the transporta-
tion of such waste was under a sole contractural arrangement
arising from a published tariff and acceptance for carriage by
common carrier by rail and such transporter has exercised due
care in the past or present handling, storage, treatment, trans-
portation and disposal of such waste.”f’-
C_OQ , P- ’ .,i p l1 )
119
SECTION 402—IMMINENT HAZARD
House bilL—The House bill clarifies that section 7003 of RCRA
applies to actions which took place prior to enactment of RCRA.
Senate amendment—The Senate amendment contains a similar
provision. In addition, the Senate amendment clarifies that a
common carrier by rail shall not be considered to have contributed
to the situation that poses imminent hazard if he merely transport.
ed the waste under a sole contractual arrangement, and exercised
due care.
Conference substitute.—The Conference substitute is the same as
the Senate amendment. Section 7003 focuses on the abatement o
conditions threatening health and the environment and not par-
ticularly human activity. Therefore, it has always reached those
persons who have contributed in the past or are presently contrib-
uting to the endangerment, including but not limited to generators,
regardless of fault or negligence. The amendment, by adding the
words “have contributed” is merely intended to clarify the existing
authority. Thus for example, non-negligent generators whose
wastes are no longer being deposited or dumped at a particular site
may be ordered to abate the hazard to health or the environment
posed by the leaking of the wastes they once generated and which
have been deposited on the site. The amendment reflects the long
standing view that generators and other persons involved in the
handling, storage, treatment, transportation or disposal of hazard-
ous wastes must share in the responsibility for the abatement of
the hazards arising from their activities. The section was intended
and is intended to abate conditions resulting from past activities.
Hence, the district court decisions in United States v. Wade, 546 F.
Supp 785 (E.D. Pa. 1982), United States v. Waste Industries, No. 80-
4-Civ-7 (E.D. N.C. Jan. 3, 1983), and United States v. Northeastern
Pharmaceutical and Chemical Company, Inc., et. al., 579 F. Supp.
823 (W.D. Mo. 1984), which restricted the application of section
7003, are inconsistent with the authority conferred by the section
as initially enacted and with these clarifying amendments. .4’d2 ,,-,
-------
\l Pi ‘ :‘/ , HT! 6 —
Section 11. Enforcement
Section 11(a) Imminent and substantial endangerment: clarifica-
t on of existing law.—These amendments are intended to clarify
t e breadth of Section 703 as to the persons, conditions and acts it
L f
covers. The amendments clearly provide that anyone wno nas con-
tributed or is contributing to the creation, existence, or mainte-
nance of an imminent and substantial endangerment is subject to
the equitable authority of Section 7003, without regard to fault or
negligence. Such persons include, but are not limited to, past and
present generators (both off-site and on-site) of hn iirdous wastes,
past and present owners and operators or waste treatment, storage,
or disposal facilities, and past and present transporters of solid or
hazardous wastes. In addition, Section 7003 is clarified to establish
that it applies to any act, whether past or present, which has re-
sulted in or may result in an imminent and substantial endanger-
ment to public health or the environment. The Environmental Pro-
tection Agency and Department of Justice have used the equitable
authority originally granted in Section 7003 to seek court orders di-
recting those persons whose past or present acts have contributed
to or are contributing to the existence of an imminent and substan-
tial endangerment to abate such conditions. These amendments
ratify this practice and confirm that the abatement authority
vested in EPA and the courts extends to both past and present acts
contributing to an imminent and substantial endangerment.
As evidenced by the definition of “disposal” in Section lO04( ),
which includes the “leaking” of hazardous wastes, Section 7003 has
always provided the authority to require the abatement of present
conditions of endangerment resulting from past disposal practices,
whether intentional or unintentional. These endangerments may
be immediate or long-term problems. The section may be used to
address wastes that fall within the definition of Section 1004 of the
Act or have been identified in published regulations.
Moreover, because Section 7003 focuses on the abatement of con-
ditions threatening health and the environment and not a particu-
lar human activity, it has always reached those persons who have
contributed in the past or are presently contributing to the endan-
germent, including but not limited to generators, regardless of
fault or ne ligence. The amendment, by adding the words “have
contributed’ is merely intended to clarify the existing authority.
Thus, for example, non-negligent generators whose wastes are no
longer being deposited or dumped at a particular site may be or-
dered to abate the hazard to health or the environment posed by
the leaking of wastes they once deposited or caused to be deposited
on the site. The amendment reflects the long-standing view that
generators and other persons involved in the handling, storage,
treatment, transportation, or dipeosal of hwisivdous wastes must
share in the responsibility for the abatement of the hazards arising
from their activities.
In addition, due to the nature of the hazards presented by dispos-
al sites, Section 7003 is “intended to confer upon the courts the au-
thority to grant affirmative equitable relief to the extent necessary
to eliminate any risks posed by toxic wastes.” United States v.
Price, 688 F. 2d 204, 213—214 (3d Cir. 1982). The section was intend-
ed and is intended to abate conditions resulting from past activi-
ties. Hence, the lower court decisions in United States v. Wade, 546
F.Supp. 785 (E.D. Pa. 1982) and United States v. Waste Industries,
No. 80-4-Civ-7 (ED. N.C. Jan. 3, 1983), which restricted the appli-
cation of Section 7003, are inconsistent with the authority con-
ferred by the section as initially enacted and with these clarifying
amendments.
-------
R 1 -•2 ’(
58
IMMINENT HAZARD
The reported bill amends section 7003(a) to clarify the breadth ofi
section 7003 as to the persons, conditions and acts it covers. The!
amendments clearly provide that anyone who has contributed or is
contributing to the creation, existence, or maintenance of an immi-
nent and substantial endangerment is subject to the equitable au-
thority of section 7003, without regard to fault or negligence. Such
persons include, but are not limited to, past and present generators
(both off-site and on-site) of hazardous wastes, past and present
owners and operators of waste treatment, storage, or disposal facili-
ties, and past and present transporters of solid or hazardous
wastes. In addition, section 7003 is clarified to establish that it ap-
plies to any act, whether past or present, which has resulted in or
may result in an imminent and substantial endangerment to
health or the environment. The Environmental Protection Agency
and the Department of Justice have used the equitable authority i
and orginally granted in section 7003 to seek court orders directing!
those persons whose past or present acts have contributed to or are
contributing to the existence of an imminent and substantial en-
dangerment to abate such conditions. This has been an intended
use of section 7003 since 1976. These amendments ratify this prac-
tice and confirm that the abatement authority vested in EPA and
the courts extends to both past and present acts contributing to an
imminent and substantial endangerment.
An evidenced by the definition of “disposal” in section 1004(3),
which includes the “leaking” of hazardous wastes, section 7003 has
always provided the authority to require the abatement of present
conditions of endangerment resulting from past disposal practices,
whether intentional or unintentional. These endangerments may
be immediate or long-term problems. The section may be used to
address any solid or hazardous wastes that fall within the defini-
tions of section 1004 of the Act or have been identified in published
regulations.
Moreover, because section 7003 focuses on the abatement of con-
ditions threatening health and the environment and not a particu-
lar human activity, it has always reached those persons who have
contributed in the past or are presently contributing to the endan-
germent, including but not limited to generators, regardless of
fault or negligence. The amendment, by adding the words “have
contributed” is merely intended to clarify the existing authority.
Thus, for example, non-negligent generators whose wastes are no
longer being deposited or dumped at a particular site may be or-
dered to abate the hazard to health or the environment posed by
the leaking of the wastes they once generated and which have been!
deposited on the site. The amendment reflects the long-standing
view that generators and other persons involved in the handling,
storage, treatment, transportation, or disposal of hazardous wastes
must share in the responsibility for the abatement of the hazards
arising from their activities. The section was intended and is in-
tended to abate conditions resulting from past activities. Hence,
the district court decisions in United Slates v. Wade, 546 F. Supp.
785 (E.D. Pa. 1982) and United Slates v. Waste Industries, No. 80—4-
Civ—7 (E.D. N.C. Jan. 3, 1983), which restricted the application of
-------
59
section 7003, are inconsistent with the authority conferred by thJ
section as initially enacted and with these clarifying amendments.
In addition, due to the nature of the hazards ptesented by dispos-
al sites, section 7003 is “intended to confer upon the courts the au
thority to grant affirmative equitable relief to the extent necessary
to eliminate any risks posed by toxic wastes.” United States v.
Price, 688 F. 2d 204, 213—214 (3d Cir. 1982). An endangerment
means a risk of harm, not necessarily actual harm, and proof that
the past or present handling, storage, treatment, transportation or
disposal of any solid or hazardous waste may present an imminent
and substantial endangerment is grounds for an action seeking
equitable injunctive relief. United States v. Price, supra, and United
States v. Vertac Chemical Corp., 489 F. Supp. 870, 885 (E.D. Ark.,
W.D. 1980). The primary intent of the provision is to protect
human health and the environment; hence, the courts should con-
sider both the nature of the endangerment which may be presented
and its likelihood, recognizing that risk may be “assessed from sus-I
pected, but not completely substantiated, relationships between
facts, from trends among facts, from theoretical projections, from
imperfect data, or from probative preliminary data not yet certifi-
able as ‘fact.’” United States v. Vertac Chemical Corp., supra at
885, citing Ethyl Corporation v. Environmental Protection Agency
No. 73—2205 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 28, 1975) (dissenting op. at 11, 31—33),
reversed en banc at 541 F. 2d 1 (D.C. Cir. 1976), cert. den. 426 U.S.
941, (1976). An endangerment is “imminent” and actionable when I
it is shown that it presents a threat to human health or the envi-
ronment, even if it may not eventuate or be fully manifest for a
period of many years—as may be the case with drinking water con-
tamination, cancer, and many other effects. United States v. Price,
supra, and United States v. Reilly Tar & Chemical Corp., Civ. No.
4—80—469 (D. Minn. Aug. 23, 1982) at 10—13.
Some liable parties have erroneously asserted that the United
States must exhaust all viable alternatives to injunctive relief,
before it may seek such relief under section 7003. The United
States need not utilize resources available to it under section 104 o
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-510) or prove that such re
sources are unavailable, before it may seek injunctive remedial
relief under section 7003 or similar authorities. Section 7003 is an
alternative and supplement to other remedies. Nevertheless, sec
tion 7003 provides for the awarding of equitable relief and, as with
any equitable remedy, requires the court to consider all circum-
stances of the case and to carefully balance all relevant factors. Cf.
United States. v. Price, supra, at 211.
46 -
-------
PA5cID p 61
1 ENFORCEMENT
2 SEc. 14. (a) IMMINENT HAZARD.—Section 7003(a) is
3 amended—
4 (1) by inserting “past or present” after “evidence
5 that the”;
6 (2) by striking out “to immediately restrain any
7 person” and substituting the following: “against any
8 person (including any past or present generator, past or
9 present transporter, or past or present owner or opera-
10 tor of a treatment, storage, or disposal facility) who
11 has contributed or who is”;
12 (3) by striking out “to stop” and substituting “to
13 restrain such person from”; and
14 (4) by striking out “or to take such other action
15 as may be necessary” and substituting “, to order such
16 person to take such other action as may be necessary,
17 or both”.
-------
fr(4V i s.,fl
31
1 ENFORCEMENT
2 SEc. 11. (a) IMMINENT HAZ.4RD.—Section 7003(a) is
3 amended—
4 (1,) by inserting “past or present” after “evidence
5 that the”;
6 (2) by striking out immediately restrain any
7 person” and substituting the following: “against any
8 person (‘including any past or present generator, past
9 or present transporter, or past or present owner or op.
10 erator of a treatment, storage, or disposal facility) who
11 has contributed or who is ‘
12 c’3, by striking out to stop” and substituting “to
13 restrain such person from “; and
14 (4) by striking out “or to lake such other action
15 as may be necessary” and substituting ‘ to order such
16 person to take such other action as may be necessary.
17 or both”.
6’7-i
-------
S i f N’
IMMINENT HAZARD
SEC. 19. Section 7003(a) of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act is amended by—
(1) inserting “past or present” after “evidence
that the”;
(2) striking “to immediately restrain any person”
and inserting in lieu thereof “against any person (in-
HR 2867 EAS——5
-------
66
cluding any past or present generator, past or present
transporter, or past or present owner or operator of a
treatment, storage, or disposal facility) who has con-
Iributed or who is “
(3) striking “to siop” and inserting in lieu thereof
“to restrain such person from ‘
(4) striking “or to take such other action as may
be necessary” and substituting ‘ to order such person
to take such other action as may be necessary, or
both’ and
(5) inserting after the first sentence thereof the
following: “A transporter shall not be deemed to have
contributed or to be contributing to such handling, stor-
age, treatment, or disposal taking place after such solid
waste or hazardous waste has left the possession or
control of such transporter, if the transportation of s uch
waste was under a sole contractural arrangement aris-
ing from a published tariff and acceptance for carriage
by common carrier by rail and such transporter has
exercised due care in the past or present handling, stor-
age, treatment, transportaiton and disposal of such
waste. ‘
-------
r
13 IMMINENT HAZARD
14 SEC. 19. Section 7003 (a) of the Solid Waste Disposal
15 Act is amended by—
16 (1) inserting “past or present” after “evidence
17 that the”;
18 (2) striking “to immediately restrain any person”
19 and inserting in lieu thereof “against any person (in-
20 cluding any past or present generator, past or present
21 transporter, or past or present owner or operator of a
22 treatment, storage, or disposal facility) who has con-
23 tributed or who is”;
24 (3) striking “to slop” and inserting in lieu thereof
25 “to restrain such person from”; and
83
1 (4) striking “or to take such other action as may
2 be necessary” and substituting ‘ to order such person
3 to take such other action as may be necessary, or
4 both’
-------
H ? 1 G ?°
16 ENPO CEMENT
17 SEC. 12. (a) IMMINENT HAZARD.—Section 7003(a) of
18 such Act is amended—
19 (1) by inserting “past or present” after “evidence
20 that the”
21
22
23
24
(2) by striking out “to immediately restrain any
person” and substituting the following: “against any
person (including any past or present generator, past or
present transporter, or past or present owner or opera-
31
1 tar of a treatment, storage, or disposal facility) who
2 has contributed or who is”
3 (3) by striking out “to stop” and substituting “to
4 restrain such person from”; and
5 (4) by striking out “or to take such other action
6 as may be necessary” and substituting “, to order such
7 person to take such other action as may be necessary,
8 or both”.
-------
October 5, 1984
IMMINENT hAZARD AND CITIZEN SUITS
Section 7003 of RCRA currently au-
thorizes suit to inunediately restrain
any person contributing to handling.
storage, treatment, transportation, or
disposal of any solid waste or hazard-
Ous waste that may present an Immi-
nent and substantial endangerment to
health or the environment. Though
the Issue of Inactive waste sites is not
addressed explicity in section 7003, the
Congress, most courts and every ad-
ministration which has administered
the act has contrued the section to
apply to such sites. Notwithstaztding
an opinion for the U.S. Court of Ap-
peals for the Third Circuit and several
district court decisions upholding the
Government’s position, some courts
ha’e ruled to the contrary. The ad-
ministration testified that clarifying
language amending section 7003 would
be helpful.
This bill will amend section 7003 to
affirm that which is already provided
for under existing law, It will clarify
that .sectlon 7003 authorizes suits con-
cerned with Inactive sites which may
present an imminent and substantial
endangerment,
Although section 7003 of RCRA au-
thorizes the Administrator to sue to
abate an endangerment whenever the
past or present handling, storage.
treatment, transportation, or disposal
of any solid or hazardous waste may
present on Imminent and substantial
endangerment to health or the envi-
ronment, we now know from the Su-
perfund experience that the number
of potential problem sites exceeds the
Government’s ability to take action
each time such action Is warranted.
The problem is primarily one of inad-
equate resources.
Therefore, H.R. 2867 wIll authorize
citizens to bring suit against those who
have, contributed or are contributing
to a situation which may present an
imminent and substantial endanger-
ment to health or the environment. To
prevent such suits from intefering
with Government enforcement ac-
tions, a number of conditions are
placed on the authority to bring such
suits.
SUBTITLE D IMPROVEMENTS
Even with the phaseout of the small
qua 1 tit:’ generator exemption, sizable
amounts of hazardous materials from
such generators, household wastes.
and illegal dumping are disposed of in
municipal landfills. Current. criteria
for sanitary landfills are inadequate to
deal with these facts. In addition.
there is a need to provide for better
implementation of the open dumping
ban and upgraded criteria for sanitary
landfills.
As a result of this bill, EPA must
revise criteria for sanitary landfilh
and for determining which practices
constitute open dumping, taking into
account potential for such facilities re-
ceiving hazardous waste in household
wastes or from illegal dumping.
Within 42 months. Statei must estab-
iish and enforce a permit pm ogram or
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
other system to assure that sanitary
landfills which may receive hazardous
wastes comply with upgraded criteria.
If States do not adopt such a program.
EPA shall use the enforcement au-
thority In sections 3007 and 3008 to en-
force the ban on open dumps.
AIR EMISSIONS FROM LAND DISPOSAl.. FACILITIES
Studies of hazardous waste surface
Impoundments and landfills report
that significant quantities of hazard.
ous constituents in the wastes may be
emitted into the air. Proposals to regu-
late emissions from hazardous waste
facilities have been published on sev-
eral occasions since passage of RCRA
in 1976. Final regulations have never
been issued. The Agency also has au-
thority to regulate emissions of haz-
ardous air pollutants under the Clean
Air Act, but its performance under
that Act has been appallingly slow.
A provision of H.R. 2867 requires
EPA to promulgate regulations for the
monitoring and control of air emis-
sions from hazardous waste facilities
as may be necessary to protect human
health and the environment.
GROUND VATER MONITORING
Current EPA regulations allow waste
piles, landfills, and surface Impound-
ments that satisfy certain conditIons
to., claim an exemption from the
ground water monitoring requirements
that are designed to detect any re-
leases of hazardous constituents from
the facilities. The conditions for ex-
emptions. on their face, do not meet
subtitle C’s basic requirement of pro-
tecting human health and the environ-
ment. There is evidence, for example.
that a leak could occur even from a
double-lined disposal facility, and that
hazardous constituents can migiate
into ground water even if the facility
is located entirely above the seasonal
high water table. Similarly, if an In-
spection shows a liner is cracked, the
owner or operator is required only to
repair the crack, not to detect arid
clean up any releases that may have
occurred before the crack was discov-
ered.
The bill will require that the act’s
ground water monitoring requirements
be completed with whether or not a
facility Is located entirely above the
seasonal high water table, the facility
has two liners and a leachate collec-
tion system, or the facility’s liner—or
liners—are periodically inspected. This
section has the effect of nullifyIng sev-
eral portions of EPA’s regulations. It
does not make any changes to the
Agcncy’s regulations concerning
ground water monitoi lug standards
other than deleting the indicated ex-
emptions.
WASTE MINIMIZATION
Current laws emphasize the need to
pioperly treat, store, and dispose of
hazardous wa.ctes. While this contin-
ues to be a primary clement of RCRA
and other pollution control laws, addi-
tional emphasis must be directed
toward first, minimizing the genera-
tion of hazardous wastes and second.
S 13821
utilizing the best treatment, storage,
and disposal techniques for each
waste.
A statement of national policy will
be added to the act as well as a re-
quirement that hazardous waste gen-
,erators certify that they hare pro-
grams to reduce the amount and toxic.
ity of their waste and that they are
using methods to minimize the threat
that their wastes pose to human
health and the environment.
DEFINITION OF HEATING 011. I II UNDERGROUNS
STORAGE TANK PROVISION -
The underground storage tanks that
are covered by this bill do not include
underground storage tanks used for
storing heating oil for consumptive
use on the premises where stored.
There are many different grades of
heating oil used, Including No. 2, No. 4,
and No. 6. The particular type of heat-
ing oil used generally depends upon
the type and size of the furnace In
which it is burned. The reference to
heating oil cited above Includes all of
these grades of heating oil, so long as
the tank is used for storing such heat-
ing oil for con.suniptive use on the
premises where stored.
OTIIER ISSUES
Sevei’al other issues have been con-
sidered in the course of developing
HR. 2867 and merit comment. These
include the issues of permitting of
mobile treatment units: the distinction
between oi site and of fsite facilitles:
direct action provisions of Superfund;
and health asscssmcnts.
P}.RI.I!TTING OF MOBILE TREATMENT UNITS
The EPA. in order to fulfill its leg s-
lative mandate, should continually be
looking at innovative, advanced tech-
nological methods to effectively and
safcly treat and handle hazardous
wastes. Legislative and regulatory ini-
tiatives are necessary to discourage
the use of landfills and land disposal
generally as a disposal option of first
resort.
For many waste generators, the
availability of mobil treatment units
would make proper waste handling
and treatment economically feasible
and remove the growing financial in-
centive for cutting corners or for mid-
night dumping. Clearly, the long-term
tightening of EPA’i. current small gen-
erators exemption will mean a signifi-
cant increase in the number of regu-
lated facilities which could handle
their wastes more safely and effective-
ly through use of mobile treatment
technology—either through a circuit
rider approach where the unit periodi-
cally visited a facility—or where a unit
periodically visited a satellite treat-
ment area where waste from several
firms was aggregated and stored pend-
ing treatment.
EPA currently has legislative au.
thority to develop a permit procedure
for mobile treatment units, however.
current permit regLilations, as promul.
gated, have stymied the development
of MTU technology. I have reviewed
the work completed in September 1083
11e,y,d 4 -( .
4j—t
-------
October 6’, 1982
This amendment has been recom-
mended by the Governor of Missouri.
It has been recommended by the Na-
tional Governors’ Conference and
again it has bçen accepted In commit-
tee on the Senate side.
I urge my colleagues to benefit from
the experience that we had In Missou-
ri and to make these tools that I offer
In this amendment clearly available so
that they can be used, If necessary, In
other parts of the country In the
future.
Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of
my amendment.
POD!? 0? OkDfl
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentle-
scan from New Jersey (Mr. Pl.oazo)
Insist on his point of order?
Mr. FLORIO. Yes. I do. Mr. Chair.
man.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
will state ft.
Mr. PLORIO. Mr. Chairman. I
would just say on my point of order
that this amendment attempts to
amend a portion of the Comprehen-
sive vIronmenta1 -Response, Com-
ponsation, and Uabllity Act Super-
fund, which Is not before this commit-
tee and, accordingly. Is not germane.
On the merits of the proposal, I
would just say that the gentleman Is
attempting to expand the scope of Sn.
- perfund. That may very well be desir-
able, but It should be desirable at the
appropriate time when we are dealing
with that.
I would represent to the gentleman
that my comm1 ee will be undertak.
ing hearings In the immediate future
to propose legislation to reauthorim
Superfund next year, 50 It may very
well be that we can accommodate
some of the gentleman’s needs; but It
Is not appropriate at this point.
Mr. Chairman, I insist upon my
point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentle-
man from Missouri (Mr. S xi.Toiq)
desire to be heard on the point of
order? -
Mr. S TON. I certainly do. Mr.
Chairman.
The fact that sectIon 10 deals with
the Superfund In and of Itself opens
the door. . — -
My colleague, the gentleman from
New Jersey, has indicated his view
that tb’s money In the Superfund was
intended for cleanup alone and that
my amendment takes It beyond that
purpose or that we should limit It to
just that purpose.
I would remind my colleague that
the very title of the Superfund law
Is the Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980.
Section 101, paragraph 23, which I
seek to amend, clearly provides for
compensation as a result of actions
taken by the Administrator or the
President to protect the health and
wellare of our citizens. That is the
entral purpose of the Superfund, to
zotect pecole, All too often we forget
chat that entaIk The people In a con-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
t ,nInnted community have property.
They have jobs and their families to
support. In some cases they own busi-
nesses that provide jobs and provide
an economy for the area.
.1 submIt that a temporary relocation
can cause the death of aJocal econo-
my as quickly as dioxin can cause the
death of a population.
I would like to point out that this Is
not an entitlement, but It Is rather a
useful tool which the Administrator
can use If it Is appropriate.
We do not direct him to take these
actions, but merely make it clear that
they are there in case he needs them.
Now, I also submit to the chairman
that sectIon 10 Is far more sweeping in
Its effect on the Superfund than my
amendment Is. The previous section,
sectIon 10, changes the account of the
State’s contribution for State-owned
kites from 50 percent to 10 percent. be-
cause In some cases they cannot afford
the expense.
All my amendment would, o Is to
clarify that the Administrator can In
his discretion in those rare Instances
where such action is appropriate to
take actions himself to help the resi-
dents of a contaminated area.
The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Eansim).
The Chair is prepared to rule.
SectIon 10 of this bill does amend
aubeection 104(c)(3) of the Superfund
law, Public Law 96-510, but only In a
very narrow respect regarding State
contributions and reimbursements
Srozn the fund. The bill does ziot so
comprehensively amend the Super-
fund law as to permit futher amend-
ments to the law which are unrelated
to the specific changes contained In
the bill.
The amendment from the gentleman
from Missouri relates to eligibility for
certain community relocation assist-
ance for the Superfund and is not re-
lated to $he Issue contained In the bill.
The Chair austains the point of
order.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman. I
move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chafrman. this Is a terribly ha-
portant amendment and the Chair has
made Its ruling and, of course, I abide
by the ruling.
The chairman of the subcommittee.
the gentleman from New Jersey, was
kind enough ‘to point out that next
year his subcommittee would be deal-
ing with this Superfund Issue.
In my opinion, Mr. Chairman, time
Is of the essence. I would urge, because
the Senate committee has included
the same Skelton amendment in Its
bill on the Senate side In the form of a
Danforth-Eagleton amendment, and
the germeneness out of the scope
ruling Is not applicable on the Senate
side, that when this item comes to con-
ference that this body, this subcom-
mittee and this chairman, could look
favorably upon this Issue, because In
my opinion, time Is of the essence.
I do appreciate the attitude of the
gentleman from New Jersey and his
offer to take this up next year; but for
118165
many, Mr. Chairman, should this man-
made tragedy Strike, It would be too
late, I would certainly urge the sub-
committee chairman to do so.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. S TON. I yield to the gentle-
man. -.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I ap-
preciate the gentleman’s comments,
and rest assured that as we ‘ go to con-
terence, we will certainly take Into ac-
count the merit of what It Is the other
body has done and we will look at it
with close scrutiny, because I am sen-
sitive to the problems the gentleman
has raised and certainly we will give
his views appropriate consideration in
the course of our conference.
D 1630
Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SKELTON. I yield to the gentle-
man from Missouri.
Mr. GEPHARDT. I thank the gen-
Ueman for yielding.
I want to commend my colleague
from Missouri for having attempted to
make this amendment. Having a dis-
tict In Missouri where dioxin is prob-
ably - found In the second greatest
quantities in Missouri, I sin well aware
of the problems that are presented to
residents. I am also aware of the prob-
lems we have had with the state of the
present law and superfund and In
other areas In trying to get aid and
relief to these people. I believe this
amendmçnt is very important. I appre-
ciate the chairman’s comments that
he will consider these matters as we go
Into conference.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there further
amendments to section 10’
If not, the Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
- D!PORc e ,T
SEc. Ii. (a) IMICNnI5 HAZAAD.—Sectlon
50O3 a) is amended—
(1) by ln.sertLng “past or present” alter
“evidence that the”:
(2) by striking out “to Immediately re-
strain any person” and substituting the fol-
lowmg “against any person (Including any
past or present generator, Past or present
transporter, or pest or present owner or op-
erator of a Ire . tment. storage, or disposal
facility) who hs,s contributed or who Is”;
(3) by striking out “to stop” and substitut.
Mg “to restrain such person from”: and
(4) bY ariking OUT. “Or to take such Other
action as may be necessary” and substitut-
Ing “. to order such person to Lake such
other action as may be necessary, or both’.
(b) A1’ToRJ!ZY’s Fma.—Seetlon 7002Cc) Is
amended by striking out ‘to any part)’ and
ibstitutlnz to lieu thereof “to the prevail.
Mg or substantially prevailing party” and
Inserting “or section 7006” after “this sec.
Von”.
(C) PRsaERV&TiOI ! or Ovum Ricirrs —Sec-
tion 7002(1) amended by striking out “sec.
lion” and sustituting “Act”.
( 5) CiVIL Acrzotts,—Sectlon 2002 Is
amended by id ng the following new sub.
seclion at the end thereof:
‘nc) CiviL rzoits.—41) The Administra-
tor shall request the Attorney General to
file, and represent the Administrator In, any
-------
118166
civil action which the Admlnlstra&orjs au
thorized to bring under this Act U the At-
torney General does not—
“(A) notify the Administrator within
thirty days after the date on which such ro-
quest Is transmitted that he will commence
such action and represent the Administra-
tor. and
“(B) file such civil action within one hun-
dred and fifty days alter the date of trans-
mittal of such request,
the Administrator shall, except as provided
in paragraph (2), have the exclusive author-
ity to commence and conduct the litigation
of such action, and any appeal of such
action, In his own name. For such purposes.
the M, Inu trator shall be represented by
one or more attorneys of the environmental
Protection Agency designated by the Ad-
ministrator.
“(2) aragrsph (1) shall not apply In the
case of actioca before the United States Su-
preme Court, The provisions of this subsec-
tion shall apply notwithstanding any other
provision of law.”.
(c) Law EJ,PORCZXKNT Aurnosrry.-.(1)
The Congress finds that—
(A) personnel of the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency who are engaged In Investi-
muons of activity which Is criminal under
the Solid Waste Disposal Act artIcular1y
criminal activity which Is associated with or-
ganized crime groups (such as the Illegal dis-
posal of hazardous waste), are unable to ef-
fectively Investigate such activity and en-
force the criminal sanctions concerned with-
out having full law enforcement powers, In-
cluding the authority to make arrests and
carry firearms; and
(B) the lives of such personnel are endan-
gered In situations where they are carrying
out such Investigations but are not author-
Ined to carry firearms and make arrests In-
dependently of other Federal, State. or local
law enforcement authorities.
(2) Any officer or employee of the Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency authorized by
the Administrator to conduct criminal inves-
tigations (to investigate, or supervise the In-
vestigation of. any activity for which a
criminal penalty Is provided) under the
Solid Waste Disposal Act Is hereby author-
ized, In the enforcement of such Act, to—
(1) carry firearms;
(2) execute and serve warrants, summons
and subpenaa, issued under the authority of
the United States;
(3) make arrests without warrant for of-
fenses against the United States committed
In their presencci
(4) make arrests without warrant for felo-
nies cognizable under the laws of the United
States if they have reasonable grounds to
- believe that the person to be arrested has
committed or Is committing such a felony;
and
(5) viyntnf r oaths for the purposes of
taking a sworn statement.
- (f) Crrt i Sinrs.—(l) Section 7002(a)(l)
Is amended by Inserting “(A)” after “(1)”
and by Inserting the following at the end
thereof:
“(B) against any person. Including the
United States and any other governmental
Instrumentality or agency, to the extent
permitted by the eleventh amendment to
the Constitution and Including any past or
present generator, past or present trans-
porter, or past or present owner or operator
of a treatment, storage or disposal faculty
who has contributed or who Is contributing
to the past or present handling storage.
treatment. transportation, or disposal of
any solid or hazardous waste which may
present an imminent and substantial endan-
germent to health or the environment: or”
(2) SectIon ‘1002(bXl) is amended by strik-
ing out all after “alleged violator” down
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
through “: or” and substituting “referred to
in subsection (aX 1); of’.
(3) SectIon 7002(a) Is amended by striking
out to enforce such regulation or order, or
to order the Administrator to perform such
Act or duty as the case may be” and eubeti-
toting “to enforce the permit, standard, reg-
ulation, condiUon, requirement, prohibition,
or order, referred to In paragraph (1XA), to
Immediately restrain any person contribut-
ing to the endangerment referred to in
paragraph (1XB). to order such person to
take such other action as may be necessary,
or both, or to order the administrator to
perform the act or duty referred to In psra.
graph (2). as the case may be, and to apply
any appropriate civil penalties under section
3008(a) and (g).
(4) Section 7002(b) Is amended by adding
the following at the end thereof; “No action
may be commenced under subsection
(aX1XE) If the Administrator has com-
menced, and Is diligently prosecuting, an
action under section 7003, or I L the State
has brought an action under this section, to
Immediately restrain any person contribut-
ing to the endangerment referred to In sub-
section (ax 1MB). No action may be com-
menced under subsection (aXIXB) by any
person ?bther than a State or local govern-
ment) with respect to the siting of a hazard-
ous waste treatment, storage, or disposal fa-
cility.”.
(g) O,mi Duxpn o Exvos r.—.(1) Sec.
tlon 4005 Is amended by Inserting after the
first sentence In subsection (a) the follow-
ing: “The prohibition contained In the pre-
ceding sentence shall be enforceable against
persons engaged In the act of open dumping
under section 7002.”
(2) SectIon 70021aXl) is amended by In-
serting “prohibition,” after “requirement,”.
(h) Mzacvi.siesoos AIsmD 7S RwTnIo
To Enroscssenrr.—(1) SectIon 2002 is
amended by Inserting the following at the
end thereof:
“ Id) CRIMUasL IivVssTxcATIOiqs.—In Carry’
Ing out the provisions of this Act, the Ad-
ministrator, and duly-designated agents and
employees of the Environmental Protection
Agency, are authorized to Initiate and con-
duct Investigations under the criminal provi-
sions of this Act, and to refer the results of
these investigations to the Attorney Gener-
al for prosecution In appropriate cases.”.
(2) Section S008(aXl) Is amended to read
as follows: “(1) Except as provided In para-
graph (2). whenever on the basis of any In-
formation the Mmfnthtrator determines
that any person baa violated or Is In viola-
tion of any requirement of this subtitle, the
Administrator may Issue an order (A) as-
sessing a civil penalty for any past or cur-
rent violation: (B) requiring compUance Im.
mediately or within a specified time period;
or both, or the Administrator may com-
mence a civil action In the United Stales dis-
trict court In the district In which the viola-
tion occurred for appropriate rellel. Includ-
ing a temporary or permanent Injunction.”.
‘(S) Section 3008(a)(3) Is amended to read
as follows:
“(3) Any order Issued pursuant to this
subsection may include a suspension or rev-
ocation of any permit issued by the Admin-
istrator or a State under this subtitle and
shall state with reasonable specificity the
nature of the violation. Any penalty as-
sessed In the order shall not exceed $25,000
per day of noncompliance for each violation
of a requirement of this subtitle. In assess-
ing such a penalty, the Administrator shall
take Into amount the seriousness of the vio-
latIon and any good faith efforts to comply
with applicable requirements.”.
(4) SecUon 3008(b) Is amended by Insert-
ing “the person or” before “persons”.
October 6’, 1983
(5) Section 3008(c) ii amended to read as
follows:
“Ce) VIOLaTIoN OP CoxPuAlics Oanzss.—If
a violator falls to take corrective action
within the time specified In a compliance
order, the Administrator may assess a civil
penalty of not more than $25,000 (or each
day of continued noncompliance with the
order and the Administrator may suspend
or revoke any permit Issued to the violator
(whether Issued by the Administrator or the
State).”. -
(6) SectIon 3008(d) is amended as follows:
(A) in paragraph (1)—
(I) Insert after “knowingly transports” the
following: “or causes to be transported”, and
(U) strike out “sectIon 3005 (or 3006 In the
case of a State program)” and substitute
“this subtitle”;
(B) In paragraph (2)—
(I) strike out “either”;
(U) strike out “section 3005 (or 3006 In the
case of a State program)” and substitute
“this subtitle”: and
(Ill) strike out subparagraph (B) and sub-
stitute:
“(B) In violation of any material condition
or requirement of such permit; or
“(C) In violation of any material condition
or requirement of any applicable Interim
status regulations or standards;”; and
(C) strike out all after paragraph (2) and
substitute:
“(3) knowingly omits material InformatIon
or makes any false material statement or
representation In any application, label,
manifest, record, report, permit or other
document filed, maintained, or used for pur-
poses of compliance with regulations pro-
mulgated by the Administrator (or by a
State in the case of an authorized Stale pro-
gram) under this subtitle;
“(4) knowingly generates, stores, treats.
transports, disposes of, or otherwise handles
any hazardous waste (whether such activity
took place before or takes place after the
date of the enactment of this paragraph)
and who knowingly destroys. alters, con-
ceals or fails to file any record, applicatIon.
manifest, report, or other document re-
quired to be maintained or filed for pur-
poses of compliance with regulations pro-
mulgated by the Administrator (or by a
State In the case of an authorized State pro-
gram) under this subtitle; or
“(5) knowingly transports without a mani-
fest, or causes to be transported without a
manliest, any hazardous waste required by
regulations promulgated under this subtitle
(or by a State In the case of a Slate Pro-
gram authorized under this subtitle) to be
accompanied by a mazuf est
shall upon conviction, be subject to a fine of
not more than $50,000 for each day of viola-
tion, or iniprisorunent not to exceed two
years (five years In the case of a violation of
paragraph U) or (21). or both. If the convic-
tion Is for a violation committed alter a first
conviction of such person under this para-
graph, the maximum punishment under the
respective paragraph shall be doubled with
respect to both find and Imprisonment :’.
(7) SectIon 3008(e) Is to read as folloas’
“Ce) Kxowixc Eroaiicxiuairr—Any person
who knowingly transports, treats, stores or
disposes of any hazardous waste identified
or listed under this subtitle In violation of
paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (5) of subsection
(d) of this section who knows at that lime
that he thereby places another person iii
Imminent danger of death or serious bodily
Injury, shall, upon conviction, be subject 10
a fine of not more than $250,000 or impris-
onment for not more than fifteen years. or
both. A defendant that Is an organization
shall, upon conviction of violating this sub-
-------
mlnlatrative hearings before lasulng
these orders. In most cases, EPA gives
i uTtWi1ty for consultation prior
to an enforcement action, and, In cases
where there Is need for prompt action
to abate an emergency—as opposed to
more long-term remedial action. It
may be appropriate to dispense even
with those procedures.
Similarly, it has always been our
bitent that EPA be able to effectively
enforce orders under sections 7003 and
106. Orders Issued under these provi-
sions should not be subject to Judicial
review except In an EPA action to en-
force them. Allowing preonforeement
review of these orders will seriously
undermine the Agency’s ability to
obtain prompt compliance and slow
clesnup efforts—the primary goals of
both provisions.
In addition, where these orders are
reviewed In an enforcement action,
tJ y should be reviewed based on the
record developed by the Agency and
under an ‘arbitrary and capricious
standard. Requiring de novo review In
a district court would almost inevita-
bly delay compliance. Furthermore, It
would subject EPA decislonmaking to
a standard of review which we believe
Is to stringent given the Important
health and environmental objectives
to be achieved by these provisions.
We trust that EPA will Increasingly
rely on the powerful enforcement
tools that Cotigress has given It In sec-
tIon 7003 and sectIon 106. The amend.
ments added to sectIon 7003 by H.R.
2867 should assist In that effort.
• Mr. PH]LIP M. CRANE. Mr. Chair-
man, In recent years, Americans have
b ecome increasingly frustrated and an-
gered by the Improper disposal of has-
.,rdous wastes. Each new media horror
dory brings court suits, protests, and
calls for restrictive legislation. While
these news accounts have been very ef-
fective In arousing public interest and
concern, they have not provided
Americans with the Information they
need to find practical solutions to our
hazardous waste disposal problems.
Without that Information, we may
find ourselves saddled with new laws
and regulations that will not protect
Americans from hazardous wastes and
that could wreck our economy.
The Federal bureaucracy defines
hazardous waste as discarded material
that may pose a subscantial threat or
potential hazard to human health or
the environment when improperly
handled. These wastes may be toxic,
reactive, combustible, corrosive, or In-
fectious, and they vary widely In the
degree to which they are dangerous to
our health. In fact, almost every small
business, school, or hospital In the
United States produces wastes that
can be classified as hazarc ous_rang.
ing from service station to used
hypodermics or bandages, However,
the problem associated with the dis-
posal of truly dangerous materials has
grown significantly In recent ye .
Old, leaky landfills, illegal dumping,
and accidental spills have created a
H 8167
number of severe environmental prob-
lem areas around the country. The
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
now estimates that there are at least
14,000 sItes nationwide ‘that can be la-
beled as “potentially dangerous.”
These sites pose fire hazards, threaten
ground water resources, or emit nox-
ious fumes. -
I believe that a healthy environment
Is essential to the present and future
well-being of our people, and to sus-
tainable national growth. Unfortu-
nately, I do not believe that the Feder-
al regulatory process is capable of
dealing with the threat posed by inad-
equate hazardous waste disposal. All
too often, the Federal regulation of a
problem Is counterproductive—causing
more harm than It prevents. This Is es-
pecially true In the case of hazardous
waste regulation.
Since 1976, the primary Federal law
governing the disposal of hazardous
wastes has been the Resource Conser-
vation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The
EPA regulations needed to Implement
this extraordinarily complicated law
were not put In place until May 1980.
Now, in 1983, the Congress Is consider-
Ing ER. 2867, a bill intended to
reauthorize and amend RCRA. Before
It was amended on the House floor.
HR. 2867 would have forced hundreds
of t iousands of small businesses to
comply with EPA hazardous waste reg-
ulations—at an average cost of $3,000
each year. As It stands now, the bill
delays the Implementation of new reg-
ulations for a few months and might
reduce the costs to small business. The
rest of ER 2867 Is more a regulatory
blueprint than It Is a legislative docu-
ment.
H.R. 2867 Is a bad bill and It will
make worse law. It Is a bill entangled
In the technical details of hazardous
waste regulation—It Is not a bill that
would set clear, effective standards to
protect Americans from those wastes.
The hazardous waste problem is too
large and too complex for a compara-
tive handful of Federal regulators to
handle. Congress and the EPA have
failed to develop an effective, nation-
wide waste disposal control program.
Instead, we have put in a place an
enormously complicated, costly, and
Inefficient bundle of redt.ape.
A Federal hazardous waste Control
program cannot be effective. Hazard-
ous waste problems vary from State to
State and region to region. The indus-
tries in Illinois are different from
those In Maine. and the hazardous
wastes they produce are not the same
At the same time, air, soil, and water
conditions vary dramatically from area
to area. These environmental condi-
tions play an Important role In deter-
mining which technologies can be used
safely to dispose of hazardous wastes
Clearly, the responsibility for hazard-
ous waste regulation must be placed
where It belongs—at the State and
local level.
O tober 6’, 198!
ONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
suction, be subject to a fine .f cot more tSat
11,000.000.”.
(81 SectIon tOOS(b) Is amended by insert. _____
ing the fellowlng before the last se ense
(herd: “Action of the Admi ,thtrator with
respect to which review could have been ob-
tslned under this aubeection shall sot be
subject to Judicial review in civil er ainilnal
prooeedlngs for enforeement.”.
Mr. FLORIO (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
sent that sectIon 11 be considered as
read and printed In the Racoan.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey?
Thece was no objection.
DiCiA1Y XMiTIIZ
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk wlfl
report the first Judiciary Committee
smendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Committee amendment: Page 32. rilke
out lInes 1 through 24.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, I move be
drike the last word.
I would like to ask the gentleman
from New Jersey If It Is his Intention
to rise very shortly?
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. ( ialrmah. wlfl
the gentleman yield?
Mr. LENT. I yield to the gentleman
from New Jersey.
Mr. FLORIO. It Is my intention to
enter Into a brief colloquy with the
gentleman from New York In response
to his question and then to rise.
Mr. LENT. Can the gentleman ex-
plain some of the reasons behind the
additional amendment to sectIon 7003?
(Mr. PLORIO asked and was given
rmission to revise and extend his re-
irks.)
Mr. FLORIO. As you know, section
1003 together with Its sister, provision,
section 106 of CERCLA, are among
the most Important weapons In the
Agency’s hazardous waste enforce-
ment arsenal, There have been a
number of Federal courts which have
not fully understood the breadth of
these provisions—particularly their
applicability to Inactive facilities and
nonnegllgent generators—and have
Issued decisions suggesting that they
are to be read more narrowly than
Congress intended. The purpose of the
amendments to section 7003 is to clarI-
fy our intent In this regard.
Because of the confusion that has
surrounded the’ Interpretation of sec-
tIon 7003 (and section 106 of
CERCLA). I think It Is Important to
reiterate that these provisions are to
be liberally construed to effectuate
their broad remedial purpose, and to
be Implemented by the courts and
EPA In a manner which will assure
rapid and effective compliance.
This latter concept Is particularly
critical for the successful Implementa-
tion of EPA’s administrative order au-
thority under sections 7003 and 106.
Indeed, Congress has expressly de-
signed those provisions so that orders
can be Issued quickly and enforced ef-
_1’. ively.
example. Congress has never In-
d that EPA provide lengthy ad-
-------
118168
Current Federal waste disposal r4ia-
latlons require business to use certain.
approved technologies. These technol-
ogles are often Ineffective aiid costly.
They cost jobs without solving prob-
lems. State and local laws that set
clear standards for environmental
Quality will encourage the develop-
ment of realistic, innovative, and cost.-
effective waste disposal technologies.
The case for decentr Ii fng hazardous
waste regulation is clear and compel-
ling. State and local control will help
Insure a cleaner environment and a
healthy, growing economy.
While the laws governing hazardous
waste disposal and treatment should
set clear standards for environmental
quality, they should also be adminis-
tered at the lowest possible level of
government. Citizens ought to be able
to take their complaints to a local offi-
cial—they should not be compelled to
‘wander through the bureaucratic mess
In Washington, D.C. Then. If compa-
nies or Individuals break the law, they
can justly be subjected to the harshest
possible penalties for endangering peo-
ples’ lives and property. If the respon-
sibility for hazardous waste regula-
tions Is clearly defined, State agencies
and the Federal Government can no
longer pass the buck back and forth—
as they have at the Antloch landlffl In
my own district. Instead of hiding
behind meaningless questions of juris-
diction, they will have to buckle down
and work to solve the very real hazard-
ous waste problems that plague our
Nation.
Every American desires a clean and
healthy environment, but that goal
cannot be met by a cumbersome anà
costly Federal hazardous waste pro-
gram. As we look for solutions to this
problem, Congress must remember
that our aim should be to clean up
waste, not to create a hazardous waste
bureaucracy. We must protect the en-
vironment, but In doing so, we must
not destroy the American economy.
Returning waste regulation to State
and local governments would be a
giant step In the right direction..
Mr. ORIO. Mr. Chairman, I move
that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly the Committee rose:
- and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
MUIITu%) having assumed the chair,
Mr. Bw nn. Chairman of the Com-
mittee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union. reported that that
Committee, having had under consid-
eration the bill (H.R. 2867) to amend
the Solid Waste Disposal Act to au-
thorize appropriations for the fiscal
years 1984 through 1986, and for other
purposes, had come to no resolution
thereon.
GENERAL LEAVE
Mr. LENT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unani-
mous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days In which to
revise and extend their remarks, and
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
Include extraneous material, on the
legislation just under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore Is
there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New York?
There was no objection.
AMTRAK ThIPROVEMENT AC? OF
1983
The SPEAKER pro teinpore. Pursu-
ant to House Resolution 320 and rule
II, the Chair declares the House
In the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the con-
sideration of the bill. H.R. 3648.
El THE CO T El OP THE WHOLE
Accordingly the House resolved
Itself Into the ,Commlttee of the
Whole House on the State of the
Union for the consideration of the bill
fH.R. 3648) to Improve the cost effec-
tiveness of the National RaI]road Pas-
senger Corporation, to authorize ap-
propriations for such Corporation for
the fiscal year ending September 30,
1984, and for other purposes, with Mr.
in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the
rule, the first reading of the bill is dis-
pensed with.
Under the rule, the gentleman from
New Jersey, Mr. FLoalo, will be recog-
nized for 30 minutes, and the gentle•
man from New York, Mr. LsxT, will be
recognized for 30 mInutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Fi.oiuo).
(Mr. ORIO asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. ORlO. Mr. Chairman, the
House Is now considering BR. 3648,
the Amtrak Improvement Act of 1983.
This is an important piece of legisla-
tion designed to improve Amtrak’s op.
erations.
This bill reauthorizes Amtrak at
$730 safflion for fiscal year 1984 and
makes changes designed to Improve
the cost effectiveness of Amtrak’s
system. The bill ,anticlpates that all
routes in Amtrak’s basic system would
continue to be operated.
Of particular importance, the legis-
lation also deals with the problem of
Amtrak’s debt to the Federal Govern-
ment as a result of loan guarantees
issued in the early 1970’s. When
Amtrak was first established. it was
expected that Amtrak would one day
be profitable and Congress provided
loan guarantees to Amtrak instead of
grants for its capital expenses. Howev-
er, It soon became clear that Amtrak
would not become profitable and Con-
gress decided Instead to use direct
grants for Amtrak’s capital expenses.
In the meantime, Amtrak had accumu-
lated a significant debt to the Federal
Government—close to $1 billion—as a
result: of these loan guarantees.
Originally, this loan was serviced by
direct appropriations to Amtrak for
the purpose. But this amounted to the
Federal Government paying itself. In
1981, Congress decided to defer repay-
O tober 6’, 198 ?
ment until October 1, 1983. The ad-
ministration could have adininistra-
tively extended this date to avoid a de.
fault, particularly In light of the fact
that this legislation sought to avoid
default by extending the existing de-
ferral of Amtrak’s obligation to pay In-
terest until October 1, 1984. Unfortu-
nately, the administration preferred
seeing Amtrak in default rather than
wait for passage of this legislation. It
Is now crucial that this default be
cured, so as to prevent serious ramifi-
cations in the future. I will be offering
an amendment later to do this.
In addition, the bill deals with a
number of other Important rail
Issues—for example, the recent Su-
preme Court decision striking down
the legislative veto provisions which
will affect the sale of Conrail to the
private sector, Because of the impor-
tance of careful oversight of any sale,
the bill would require specific legula-
tion before Conrail could be sold.
Indeed, the Department of Transpor-
tation has said, given the complexity
of the transaction, that legislation will
be required in any event, Also, to im-
prove Congress ability to evaluate a
proposed sale, the bill reauthorizes the
U .S. Railway Association, which serves
as an unbiased source of Information
on Conrail.
I should note that the bill as report-
ed represents a compromise between
the majority and minority on our com-
mittee, with one exception. We have
agreed to disagree on how to deal with
the sale of Conrail. I expect I will have
more to say on this later on.
I also expect that there may be an
amendment dealing with the boxcar
deregulation decision of the ICC. I
want to make clear ,t this point my
strong opposition to this special inter-
est amendment, an opposition which Is
shared by the administration.
This Is a good bill and 1 urge lt.s pas-
sage.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman. I yield
myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. LENT asked and was given per-
mission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in
support of HR. 3648, the Amtrak Im-
provement Act of 1983. This Is an in-
portant piece of rail legislation.
The bill reauthorizes Amtrak for 1
year at a level of $730 million. This
funding will enable Amtrak to contin-
ue to operate service on its existing
system and to undertake capital proj-
ects.
Section 108 of H.R. 3648 would i-c-
quire Amtrak to cover 55 percent of its
operating costs with revenues, corn-
mencing in fiscal year 1984. Currently,
Amtrak is required to meet 50 percent
of its operating costs with revenues
Amtrak met this statutory goal in
fIscal year 1982 and was confident it
could Improve on it in the future. This
provision will encourage Amtrak tc.
become more cost efficient and reduce
Its dependence on Federal subi.idies.
-------
October 81, 198J W i ! LUrIZLJ. t xw — H(j ., ., i
EXTENDING EXPIRATION DATE rule 1Lx11 1 . the Chair declares the sends a signal” to the effect that the
OF EXPORT-IMPORT BANK House In the Committee of the Whole Congress believes the Justice Depart-
ACT OF 1945 •. . • House on the State of the Union for ment ha.s been dilatory and lackadalsi-
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I ask i- the further ‘c nsideratlon of the bill, cal In Its enforcement of ha2 .ardo us
mous consent to take from the Speak- H.R. 867. .: -,‘ .., waste litigation, and that transfer of
- table the Senate Joint resolution ‘: - T COIDUTTss o wflO tbe UtIgating authority to EPA would
Res. 189) extendIng the expira- - ocordingly the -House resolved result in better enforcement of the
date of the Export-Import Bank Itself Into the Committee of the solid and hazardous waste disposal
of 1945, and ask for It s Immed iate Whole House on the State of the l&WL-’
consideration in the Rouse. Union for the further consideration of - The merits of centralizing litigating
The Clerk read the title of the the bill (H.R. 2867) to amend the Solid authority are based primarily on the
Senate Joint resolution. ‘ . . Waste Disposal Act to authorize ap- advantages to be gained by uniformity
The SPEAI pro ternpore. propriatlons for the fiscal years 1984 of the Government’s position. The Ad-
there objection to the request of the through 1986, and for other purposes, vn1nl tr tor of the Environmental Pro-
gentleman from North Carolina? . with Mr. BAanuw In the chair. -. tection Agency, William Ruckelshaus,
Mr. LEACH of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, The Clerk read the title of the bill. In his Senate confirmation hearings
reserving the right to object. I do The CHAIRMAN. When the Cona- testified that:
simply to ask the chairman of the stab- mlttee of the Whole rose on Thursday, 1 ththk for purposes of orderly administra..
committee (Mr. Nw.) to explain the October 6, section ii was considered as I on of justice, there ha.s to be someplace
resolution to the Members of the M T ig been read and open to amend- where. you lodge that final authority. If yo.
-, -- - - - ‘ —•• -- merit at any polnL Pending was the don’t, you get different branches of goveri.-
Mr. NEAL. Mr Speaker, wiu u e first committee amendment recom- ment. . . going into court asking for differ.
gentleman yield?’ -. . mended by t,he Committee on the .Ju- mt interpretations of common statutes tha’.
Mr. LEACH of !owa. I yield to the dIcIaI7. , , -. apply acro , the board and you really have
gentleman. . -. - : . - . Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, this move to strike the requisite number of Mr. Ruekelshaus wrote to Chairman
simple extension of the Export-Import words. . -.‘ .. Ronrrao expressing his strong support
Bank’s authority untIl November 18. (Mr. HUGHES asked and was given for the committee’s action in recom-
As the gentleman knows, the reau- permission to revise and extend his re- mending the deletion of sectIon 11(d).
thorlzatlon of the Exlznbank and marks.) . . . . ., -, • .. .. In that letter Mr. Ruckelshaus stated:
amendments to the Export-Import Mt. HUGHES. Mr. ChalIl]ian - ‘ - I commend and express my strong support
Bank Act are eontalned In the lion 11(d) of the bill, as reported by for the Subcommittee’s unanimous action of
legislation. When no resolution was ‘the Committee on Energy and Corn- Tuesday, June 7th. recommending that Sec-
reached on that legislation by the Sep- merce, provides for specific time- lIon 11(d) be deleted from U.R. 2867.
tember 30 expIration date for the frames within which the Attorney .. ., -. •. :‘ -
Bank, last month we passed a simple General must act upon the request of : g my tenure at the Department of
extension of the Bank’s authority the Administrator of the Envlronmen- Justice, in which I served as both Assistant
from September 30 to october tal Protection Agency to file sod rep- Attorney General for the Civil Division and
Thus, the Eximbank’s authority would resent the AdniinLetrator In a civil Deputy Attorney General, I held the view,
expire as of midnight tonight. The r c a- action. If the Administrator of the which I stW hold today, that the eflective
•‘utlon before the House today ex- EPA requests the Attorney General to implementatIon and enforcement of our
ds the authority once again until act, and the Attorney - Geileral does clvii and criminal statutes Is greatly benefit-
targeted adjournment . , NO. not notify the Administrator withIn 30 ed by centralized and coordinated litigation
,ember 18. to allow for additional time days of his or her intention to repre- by the Department of Justice of a ll matters
to which the Urilted States Is $ party. As I
for the two Houses to work their w ” sent the Administrator and file such said In my confirmation hearing before the
on the broader Exim legislation. - Civil actIon wIthin 150 days after the senate Committee on Environment and
Mr. LEACH of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I, transmittal of the request, the Adinin- Public Works on May 4th, “for purposes of
appreciate the explanation of the gen- Istrator will then have the exclusive orderly administration of Justice, there has
tleman from North Carolina and based authority to commence and conduct to be some place where you lodge that final
on It, the minority has no objection litigation, except In the U.S. Supreme authority.” .
and we would hope hat It goes Court c - . . . ‘I am firmly committed, as I know the Dc-
- - The Committee on the Judiciary pa1 ’ ient of Justice is committed, to prepar-
Mr. Speaker. I withdraw my reserva- struck this provision from the bill in ln& and initiating litigation under our haz-
ardous waste statutes as promptly as possi-
lion of objection. .“ , Its markup and I urge my colleagues to ble. I strongly urge the Judiciary Commit-
The SPEAKER pro tempore. SUPPOrt our action. The committee tee to follow the recommendation and lead
there objection to the request of the strongly believes that such a transfer of the Subcommittee, and move to delete
gentleman from North Carolina? ,. , Is unwarranted and unnecessary. SectIon 11(d) from the bill during mark-up
Therewasnoobjection.- ‘ .I4,t,4. AU of the witnesses who testified at of H.R.2867OnJUfle14Lh.
... The Clerk read the Senate Joint the hearing, including both the De- . B lncerely, - ... -
olutldh, as follows: • p tzn flt of Justice and the EPA. op. • . . WILLIAM I?. RVCXn.BRAOL
- S.J. Rsa. 189 - - posed Inclusion of sectIon 11(d) In the - The Department of Justice and the
- bill. It Is significant that EPA Is not Environmental Protection Agency
_Resolved by the Senate end House of Rep-
resentatives of the United States of America requesting this authority and, In fact, have engaged In cooperative efforts on
in Congress assembled. That sectIon 8 of the opposes the transfer. - r. - - environmental pollution cases, iriclud-
Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 Is amended The opposition was based on three log entering Into a memorandum bf
by striking out “October 31. 1983” and In- different arguments. The first argu- understanding with regard to clean
setting In lIeu thereof “November 18. 1983”. merit Is that the effective implementa. air, clean water, and safe drinking
The Senate joint resolu 1on was oi’ lion and enforcement -of civil and water cases. There Is no reason to
dered to be read a third time, was read Criminal Statutes Is greatly enhanced modify this flexible working arrange-
the thIrd time, and passed. and a by centralized and coordinated litiga- ment by the inflexible terms In the
motion to reconsider was laid on the lion by the Department of Justice bill. Both the Assistant Attorney Qeis-
table. . - .-. ‘ - -over all matters In which the United —eral for Land and Natural Resources
- - ‘ - •‘ V51(, , , .‘ ‘States is a party. Second, the arbitrary Division In the Carter administration
deadlines which the language in sub- and the current holder of that posi-
HAZARDOUS WASTE CONTROL section 11(d) requires are unworkable tion have Indicated that the coopera-
AND ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 1983 and Unrealistic in the context of day- tive working arrangement between the
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pur- to-day operation of litigation. The EPA and the Justice Department is
to House Resolution 274 and third argument Is that the amendment working effectively. Setting the prece-
-------
i18890-;
dent of eroding the central litigating
authority of the Department of .Tus-
In this case, where ft is clearly not
sary or desired by the A or the
tment. Is clearly unwarranted
an overall governmental consist.-
ency perspective. The working ar-
rangement beta een the two agencies Is
described as “excellenr by both par-
ties. Of Vhe 72 referrals received under
RCRA. the Department bed flied on
4 as of June 1983; (be Agency had
withdrawn five cases and the Justice
Department Is urently discussing
with the Agency the withdrawal c i
three more. Y’ • - -
All of the witnesses who thtlfted on
Ibis provision agreed that, even were
the committee to be 0 f a mind to
transfer litigating authority from the
Department to the Agency, freezing
Into statutory language specific dead-
lines unwarranted, unwo&able, and
unrealistic. Cases under RCRA are ex-
tremely complex. Thep often Involve
hundreds of potential defendants and
numerous related d!151,na . under the
strict scheme provided In section 11(d
the Department would e forced La
choose between making hasty prosecu-
tonal decisions, without adequate fan.
tual and policy underpinnings, ‘
- having . Its authority to litigate
stripped from It. Additionally, many of
the cases filed under RCIIA also In-
volve dalins involved under CEECLA.
Lb-i Sale Drinking Water Act. tha
Water Act, the River and
Act, the Clean Air Act, and the
iintances QnXrol Act. Being
Lorfly forced to make a decision
with regard to prosecution of certain
eases Involving claims under any com-
bination of these acts because one of
the r1 1yi Is under RCRA unduly
compromises the prosecutorial cbscre.
Lion and judgment of the btigators in
the Department of JUst .
There is a further problem which is
raised insofar as the potential for
crunixkal proceedings under RCRA and
related acts. The Committee on
Energy and Commerce “emphasizes
that this section does not affect in asiy
way the exclusive authority of the -
partnient of Justice to seek JndicUnet4
of, and to prosecute violators of, crimi-
• nal provisions of RCRA? (H. Rept. 99 -
198. part 1, p. 51.) However. It Is quite
clear that the deadlines Imposed by
section 11(d) could interfere with par-
allel criminal proceedings ‘ .mdes’
RCRA and related ada In a circum-
stance controlled by this fxDVtSlOn. the
Department would be forced to choose
between Initiating a civil notion ‘while
a criminal Investigation or prosecution
48 proceedIng or waiting to commence
the civil action until completion of the
criminal action. The tatter choice
would result In the Department losing
It s uthor1ty to prosecute d c li clalma
id and Natural Resowves Diti-
ses that It baa little control
C timing of Investigation ce
utton of criminal cases and that
iiinii Cases have a south higher psi-
only and should not be threatened by
simultaneous civil sulta,,
Actions filed andes RCRA also in-
volve claims ivo1v1ng other environ-
mental protection statutes. The trig-
gering mechanism under RCRA pro-
vided for In aectlon 11(d) for transfer
pf litigating authority would affect
eases Invoicing all those other acts.
Since the secUon only provides for
anzfer of ECRA litigating autbos-fty.
RCRA claims would have to be
smsght independently by f]’A or con-
solidated with a related action which
would continue to be Inosecuted by
the Department of Justice. This is eb-
viou ly a wastefti xituation a-htth In-
solves duplicative efforts in litigation
resources In the same case. -
There was no testimony at our hear-
big- to Indicate that the Justice Dc-
partrnent has been dilatory or lacka-
daisical In the ps-osecctiot of environ-
mental cases. Assistant Attorney Gen-
eral Dinkens lestified that— -
Eflective managemein of such wastes Iii
top environmental priority 01 the .A 5n ui(s.
tration and effective enforcement of Y der-
al bamrdous west. statates the hIgtre
priority of the Justice Department’s Lini
and Nalxral Resoumea D1 1 1cet. —.. .
- - . ‘Ibe testimony showed that the D c-
artment Is cttvely pursuing these
cases and has dedicated the necessary
resources to theni.-- -. ‘. -.
Former Assistant Attorney Qeneral
Tdoonnazi testd ed that the transfer of
litigating authorIty contemplated In
the bill is ‘the ‘wrong signal at the
wrong tlme Mr. Moorinazi vent on to
say that— ,, - ‘-‘ ‘ ‘ -
Iwie have wltne ed an astonishing ‘two
years of m&nanagemeni at EPA In whlth
tb enforcemenI of the hszai-dous west. dis-
posal laws sufTered greatly - - - I ha e nr*
heard any cogge tion ,-pji4 I believe moose
could fairly sugg t that the Departmem of
Jiistice s in ea.y say resposisthie for the
siti ua -
X soxe my colleagues to wipport the
committee amendment, -
Mr. LENT. Mr. CThairman. a-lU the
gentleman yield,’ - --,-- - 1-
Mr. HuGHES. I era happy to yield
to my coUeag , the gentleman from
tiewYork ,-..w .. -
Mr. LENT. I thank the gentleman
for- yieldzng-.:’ -
Mr. ChaIrman, 1 a-ant to Identify
elysel! ‘with -the gentleman’s (Mr
IItJGin S5 ?emark . I would like to ask
the gentleman one question.... i.
I understand that the current pro-
posal includes appellate litigation as
well as original Jurisdiction litigation
In -wI-itch the role of the Solicitor Get.-
eral will be compromised, -, ... I; , --
Can the gentleman elaborate on
that’ ., ‘_ -..- .‘. - . -
Mr. RUGHES. I think the gentle-
man 1. cos-r-ect. The way tread the leg-
Islation It would viclude not just ovigi-
hal jurisdiction but also appella ju-
tisdicticin, a ’ttit the exception of clabus
before the Qipreme Courg at
Vntted States - - . ‘ —
Xr. LSNT. So It Is conceivable that
the Government would have two law-
Oct ob r 81, 1 98J
je’ri, on each side of an lssae’
during litigation on appeal.
Mi-. HUGHES. The gentleman is ab-
solutely correct.
Mr. LENT. I thank the gentleman. -
Mr. RLIGIfES. Mr. Chairman. I yield
back the balance of any time. - -
Mr. SAWYER. Mr. ChaIrman. 1
move to strike the requisite number of
‘words. and 1 rise in support of the
smentirnent of the Committee on the
Judiciary. —
- 1Hz, SAWYER asked and was given
permission to re ise and extend his re-
Mr. SAWYER. Mr. Chairman. I rise In
support of the amendment by the
Committee on the Judiciary. Section
l1 d) was even opposed by Bill
Ruckelshaus during his confirmation
hearings, -i-ho stated very flatly that It
was a bad idea to give litigating nu-
thoriiy to his prospect ve department.
Mr. James Moorman. Assistant At-
torney General In the Carter adntmis-
(ration, appeared before the Subcom-
mittee on Monopolies and CoiriinercLal
Law of the Committee on the Judici-
ary and also said, In effect, that it was
the wrong Idea being advanced at the
wrong time. It represents an overreac-
tion to the events of last fall In that
Agency. -
The Lands Division of ttw Justice
Department has a very outstanding
record in the handling of these cases
In hlAgation. And of 70 cases which
have been referred to Justice, 63 ac-
tions have been filed (or enforcement,
: D IBOU
So there is no wrong to be corrected.
And as Bert Lance used to say, When
It alrft broke, dcm’t fix IL” And It ii
working very satisfactorily, there (a rio
excuse or no real rea for a cttipliea.
Lion of the litigation purposes and
abilities of the Justice Department by
duplicating it In an ageny that ties,
goodness knows, enougti to do without
handling Its own legal work. . -•
Also, the events of last fall would be
compounded by allowing the agency to
totallyhand]e Its own litigation to (he
exclusion cf the Justice Department,
eliminating an oversight ability arid an
InvestIgative looP by a different 2e-
partment. the Justice Department.
For those and other reasons, I think,
as did the Judiciary Committee as a
-whole, that 11(d) is Improper a
should be removed from the bill.
I ui e support of the Judiciary Corn
nilttee amendment. -
1 yield back the balance of my thne,
Mr. GORE. Mr. ChaIrman. 1 move to
ptrike the requisite number of words.
(Mr. GORE asked and was given per-
mission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr GORE. Mr. Chairman. I rise In
opposition to this amendment. . -
We have before us the reauthoriza-
tIon of the Resource conservation and
Recovery Act. And sa’Members know,
this is one of the key pieces of legtsl&.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSt’
— a.’
-------
October 81, 1982
lion In dealing with the problems of
hazardous chemical waste disposal.
It was passed 1 1976 and then up.
dated in 1980. And it was crafted to
with the Increasingly apparent
for a national strategy for the
ttlon and disposal of dangerous
:dous wastes, to devise realistic
itandards that could be met and un-
derstood by generators and enforce-
ment officials alike. .
The Energy and Commerce Commit-
tee has wrestled long and hard with
this law that is referred to as RCRA..
In an effort to craft the fairest and
most effective set of changes possible,
we have held numerous hearings and
collected testimony train a broad
range of sources, from those who gen-
erate waste to those with the task of
oversight, to those citizens who must
live with the waste. j”.’ •. ‘.
The changes which were made in
the bill were In no way arbitrary or ex-
cessive. We have before us in this law
a good law and all that we have done
Is try to make it work bettey.
Time and again we have heard
horror stories of pollution and con-
tainmatlon that never should have oc-
curred if the law was working the way
we intended It to work when It was
first put Into place. -
Today I want to address particularly
some elements of the bill which I feel
are absolutely essential to Its success-
ful Implementation, that Is, the
strengthening of the enforcement sec-
tions of the law, and the measure ii-
g EPA to litigate civil cases L I the
e Department does not act Ink
fashion. . -S-.
,arding the litigation provision.
action 1l d), that Is under discussion
at this moment, I cannot areas
enough how important ft Is to adopt
changes necessary for the Govern-
ment to expeditiously respond to these
cases which Involve endangerment to
the public health and the environ-
ment. The Department of Justice will
remain the lead agency on litigation,
but this provision creates a safety
valve In the system which gives EPA
the authority to go ahead and act to
protect the public health and safety If
the Justice Department fails to do so
in a timely fashion, And It has failed
todoso Inatimely fashion. -
The legislation gives the Justice De-
partment 150 days to file a case after
Its referral from EPA. Is that not long
enough? We may hear some suggest
that the 150-day limit and the 30-day
notification requirement are Inad-
equate time for the Justice Depart-
ment to evaluate and prepare Its case
for filing. - -..,. 4..
These concerns are simply not aip-
ported by the facts. - ,.
First, several other major environ-
mental statutes, the Clean Air Act, the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act
and the Safe Drinking Water Act. give
‘‘ t litigation authority U the Depart-
Justice does not act In a reason-
me and the two agcnmes them-
have agreed. In a 1977 memo-
randurn of ‘üiiderstanding, that 150
days Is the proper standard for a rea-
sonable time;’;Z ..i.’ :.,
- Are we going to take the position
that hazardous chemical wa.ste Is
simply Less important and less of a
threat to the public health than those
threats posed In these other areas of
legislation? I would certainly hope not.
Yet If you voted for this amendment.
that would be the position you would
be takIng, It seems to me. So I hope
the Members will oppose the amend-
ment. - . — - i . - - .:: . - ..:
Second, as the committee report
UoLes, EPA and the Justice Depart-
ment have adopted formal guidelines,
called the Quantico Guidelines, i’hich
govern the conduct of litigation and.
-specifically, provide for early Justice
Department involvement in the civil
litigation case development process.
So under the present system cases
referred to the Justice Department
should be technically and legally
ready for filing at the time when they
are referred. - , . . - -, - -.
Now, let me underscore that point,
What we are talking about is not 150
days after the time the JusUce Depart-
ment first sets eyes on the case. We
are talking about 150 days after the
justlce Department has already been
fully involved In the development of
the case, before It Is technically re-
.ferred to the Justice Department.
Now the Justice Department attor-
neys would have been active partici-
pants in the development of these
cases prior to the acMial referzal by
EPA.
Third, looking back historically to
1980, a year when the enforcement
system was beginning to work effec-
tively. we see that all of the RCRA
h ardous waste cases referred and
fll’ed by the Justice Department that
year. approximately 91. percent, were
filed within 150 days.
- The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Tennessee Cbfr. Goac)
has expired. ‘ - ‘
(By unanimous consent. Mr. Goax
was allowed ‘to proceed for 2 addItional
minutes.) ‘ - -. -
Mr. GORE. The deadline which we
are asking for, which I believe Is per-
fectly reasonable and consistent with
similar deadlines under other statutes,
will spur the Department of Justice to
de’ute the time, energy, and resources
necessary to proceed expeditiously
with these Important cases to protect
the environment end the public
health. -’r”•- - . . .t: -
Let me give my colleagues an exam-
ple of one case which demonstrates
The need for this provision. In 1973, In
Globe, Aria., a trailer park was built
right on top of milling site absolutely
full of asbestos. The man who sold the
trailer lots and moved in these fami-
lies. coincidentally, &lso owned the as-
bestos mill. It seems he neglected to
mention the asbestos to the folks that
be sold the lots to when they settled
in. We ill know from the shipyard
cases and from other evidence what
118891
the i.errlble evidince Is regarding the
relationship between the exposure to.
asbestos and cases of cancer and other -
lung diseases. , -. . ‘ -;
Well, the topsoil gradually eroded
and the asbestos began to fill the air.
The trailers were contaminated, and
the children were playing right in the
asbestos. The health experts from the
Arizona Health Services, NIOSH, and
the Centers for Disease Control, all
warned of the serious health dangers
from continued exposure to the asbes-
- --
To make a long story short, after the
State took temporary soil capping
measures in 1980, arid after delay by
EPA. due to maladministration by top
-EL lA officials, the enforcement case
was finally referred to the Depart-
nient of Justice In September 1982,
for the purpose of filing an action for
-Injunctive relief under RCRA and Su-
perfund as an imminent and substan-
tial endangerment to the public health
or environment. -
The EPA transmittal letterspeclfl-
cally requested that the referral be
the subject of prompt action—and it
was underlined—due to the nature and
level of exposure to asbestos at the
Mountain View Mobile Home Estates
site. . .—
Yet, the Department -of Justice
failed to file the lawsuit for over 7
months and until after congressional
scrutiny of the situation- The author-
Ising committee has conducted an ex-
tensive investigation of the enforce-
ment of our hazardous waste laws and
believes section 11(d) will be the safety
valve in the current litigation system
necessary to avoid any more cases like
Globe, ArIa.
This provision Is necessary and es-
sentlal and I urge rejection of the
pending amendment
Mr. FISH. Mr. Chairman, I move to
strike the requisite number of words
and I rise In support of the amend-
ment: - - - - -
Mr. Chairman, the House Judiciary
Committee In Its consideration of this
legislation heard Irvin witnesses from
the D partrnent of Justice and EPA.
And I. think it Is important that both
representatives of Justice and EPA op-
posed the transfer language in section
11(d). •. • ..,
In fact, no witness who appeared
before the Subcommittee on Monopo-
lies and Commercial Law favored the.
language In this section that this
amendment would strike, Including
James Moorman, former Assistant At-
torney General for the Lands Division
during the Carter administration. In
his words. It was the “wrong legisla-
tion at the wrong t1me ”- -.
The person you would think who
would have a great Interest In this, the
Administrator of EPA. Mr. Ruckels-
hans, In his confirmation hearings said
It was a bad idea to shift this litigation
authority. • - - ‘ “ ‘“.
-CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOU E -.
-------
H 8892
• .. . • . .•— 0 1610- -.”.’i... , - • -
Now, 11(d). contrary to what we
• have heard. Is simply not necessary to
ave Government expeditiously re-
pond. • - -
You heard that 150 days Is plenty of
time to prepare a case. The facts are
that in 11(d). the deadline, the first
deadline, Is 30 days. In which the Jus-
-lice Department would have to evalu-
ate often very complex cases. The ye.
quirement that a case be filed within
150 days, In fact, might very well prej-
udice effective settlement. -
• Now, what if we did allow EPA to
bring 4ts own cases’ The resources of
the litigation arm of our Federal (}ov-
ernment, the Department of Justice,
its US. attorneys acr the country,
would not be available. requiring EPA
to develop at considerable unnecessary
additional public expense, duplicative
Itigation of resources. -
Mr. Chairman, there Is standard
which our Judiciary Committee unani-
• mously felt should be applied; namely.
that transfers of litigation authority
to an executive agency should occur
only if there is compelling evidence
that the job Is not being done proper-
• “Quite the reverse Is true here today.
The fact Is that the Lands Division
record has been very good with respect
to RCRA cases. Of the 70 cases re-
ferred to Justice by EPA. 63 of these
have been filed. - -
• Now, Mr. Chairman, we have been
‘d that there are precedents in the
leral Water Pollution Control Act
ad the Clean Air Act, the Safe Drink-
log Water Act, where EPA has author.
Ity. •
Now, I think I will take a minute of,
the committee’s time just to analyze
this statement. The facts are that no
other provision in law is as Inflexible
or as restrictive as those provisions
contained In the bill before you. H.R.
2867...
- The Clean Air Act, the Clean Water
Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, con-
tain reasonable time provisions, They
do not provide automatic transfer of
litigation authority, as does the meas-
ure before you, regardless of what you
• have been tOICL .
Cases under the Clean Water Act.
• the Clean Air Act: et cetera, Involve
ascertainment of determinable stand-
ards. Programs are in place to deter-
mine whether standards have been
met and whether enforcement action
Is necessary. ‘:z -. ..• -
The programs utilize discreet scien-
tific methods. One or a few parties are
involved. It Is, therefore, easier to
make a determination as to whether
litigation should be instituted.
In contrast, the measure before us
requires ascertaining whether “Immi-
nent and substantial endangerment” Is
“resent. Standards of proof are amor-
‘us, Evidence, accordingly, takes a
!F time to develop. There are no
.ied standards of what Is a viola-
There are usually multiple par.
sies Involved, varied and different sub-
0
-stances are Involved. These complex-
ities counsel against restrictive and in-
flexible review periods. - -
Mr. Chairman, for the reason that
there is no compelling need to change
the system that Is working well, then
It Is not necessary to have 11(d) in
order to have Government respond cx-
peditiously, and for the other reasons
I have spelled out, I think section
11(d) is unwarranted and unnecessary,
and the amendment to trlke should
beadopted. .r ’ ’.. L - —
Mr. SIKORSKI. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike the requisite, number of
words. .. • . ,..• -
• (Mr. SIKORSKI asked and was
given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.) ‘-. -
- - Mr. SrKORSKI. Mr. Chairman, I
would like to add my remarks to those
of my distinguished colleagues in op.
position to the amendment.
The Judiciary Committee, In repre-
senting the views of the Justice De-
partment In opposing section 11(d)
have attempted to portray tbls provi-
sion as something unique, something
which will undermine some existing
system of centralized litigation au-
thority. fl Is understandable that the
Justice Department would like to have
total control over all governmental
litigation. Of course, the first objective
of any bureaucracy is to increase and
protect Its turf, and the Department
of Justice Is no exception. The issue
here is not protection of bureaucratic
turf but protection of the health and
safety of Americans living on or near
hazardous waste dump sites.
In considering this provision, two im-
portant points should be kept In mind:
First, legislation giving Federal agen-
cies limited litigation authority is not
unique. According to a 1979 study by
the Office of Management and
Budget, there are over 20 statutes
authorizing over 27 departments and
agencies other than the Justice De-
partment to initiate such litigation.
These include the Department of
Energy Organization Act, the Energy
Policy and Conservation Act, and
three specific environmental laws al-
ready administered ‘by EPA—the Fed.
eral Water Pollution Control Act, the
Clean Air Act, and the Sale Drinking
WaterAct. .
Second, section 11(d) does not strip
the Department of Justice of litigation -
authority. It merely provides a safety
valve In the current system to protect
the public health and safety when the
Department of Justice bureaucracy
fails to act In a timely manner. So that
Members further understand the real
need for this, I would like to remind
my colleagues of the details of one
recent case, the Mountain View Mobile
Home Estates case in Globe, Ariz., *1.
ready referred to -by the gentleman
from Tennessee. - . - -
In that case, about ‘130 residents
were living directly on top of an asbes-
tos dump site, Several Federal and
State authorities warned of the seri-
October 81, /983
-ous health risks created by direct con-
tact with a known carcinogen. -
- the Agency has determined that
there stay be an Imminent and substantial
endangerment to the public health or wel-
fare or the environment be use of an
actual or threatened release of hazardous
substances from the site. Due to the nature
and level of exposure to asbestos at the
Mountain View Mobile Home Estates site. In
Its referral, EPA requested that this referral
be the subject of prompt acUon.
-. There was no action taken In re-
sponse to this request for over 7
months after the reftrral, Why? Be-
cause the attorney E4signed to the
G’obe case was busy with other work
and either did not have time or was
simply unwilling to do the filing,
Meanwhile, residents remained ex-
posed to a known carcinogen.
This inaction is unconsionable and
can hardly be called a beneficial
aspect of a centralized litigation
system—it is no Isolated instance in
tact. It Is a too common pitfall, if we
continue this system and, therefore,
allow these kinds of cases to go Un.
filed, we will seriously jeopardize the
health and safety of the American
publIc. • - . - -
The amendment proposed by the
gentleman from New Jersey Is an at.
tempt to block a provision of HR.
2867 which specifically addresses this
problem. This provision gives EPA the
ability to litigate cases on Its own once
the Justice Department has had ample
time to prosecute, but has failed to do
so, What can be more simple, proper. -
lust? EPA must have the authority to
step in and take effective action when
the Justice Department falls to, The
people of this country—the people in
your district—cannot be expected to
sit around, waiting for the attorneys
over at Justice to clear their desks
long enough.to file a preliminary in-
junction. while good Americans live in
hazardous waste and are exposed to
hazardous materials affecting their
organs and blood. Americans deserve
the quickest, most effective relief the
system can provide, and that is what
section 11(d) of HR. 2867 does.
1 ’ urge my colleagues to vote against
the amendment and, therefore, pre-
serve the public’s interest.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. SIKORSKI. I yield to the gen-
tleman from New Jersey,
(Mr. FLORIO asked and was given
permission to revise and extend l J .
marks.) - - - -
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. I rise
In strong oppostion to the amendment.
The litigation authority for EPA
contained In HR. 2867 is necessary to
insure rapid relief in situations which
threaten public health and safety. The
provision is not an attempt to inter-
fere with the authority of the Depart-
ment of Justice. The provision grants
limited authority for the Administra-
tor to commence litigation of hazard.
ous waste cases when the Attorney
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
General falls to act In a timely timely manner wn these hazardous
manner. - _., -• waste cues, this provision will in no
I stress the limited nature of this way affect the Department’s current
slon. When the Administrator litigation authority. Instead. I believe
a a determination that a violation It will create the leverage within the
RCRA has occurred, one which present system to Insure That Impor-
,ose a substantial threat to the taut cases are prosecuted expeditious-
l t . ith and safety of the public, he ly to protect public health and safety.
shall first reiuest the Justice Depart- Granting authority to an agency to
ment to file, and represent the EPA In, litigate cases is not unusual. Other
a civil action against the offender, major environmental statutes—the
Only If the Department of Justice Clear-Air Act, the Federal Water Pol-
falls to act within a specified period of lution Control Act and the Safe Drtnk-
time will the Administrator have au- ing Water Act -pri,v av the Adm1 Jg .
thority to commence and conduct liti- Irator of EPA with authority to liti-
gation in onn name, using EPA gate if tbe Attorney Genera] does not
staff lawyers. Moreover, tn any case notify the Agency ‘wttlth a reason-
that moves to the Supreme Court, the able time” that he will xepreses t the
Attorney General would take over .fld Agency. A 1977 memorandum of un-
represent the Government . ‘ derstanding between DOJ and EPA In-
Why Is the committee so concerned terprets “reasonable time” to be 150
with timely action? - , - ‘ - days after referral by EPA. the same
A few months ago, the Oversight period of time established In HR.
and Investigations Subcommittee en- 2867. In essence, HR. 2867 codIfies the
countered a truly egregious example memorandum of understanding for
of how people were left facing a sell- the Implementation of RCRA.
ous health risk because the current The language in this bill fusures
system failed to operate In a timely that full power to litigate resides first
manner. The case Involved approxi- -and foremost with the Justice Depart-
naat.ely 130 residents of the Mountain inent. Only In cases where Justice fails
View Mobfle Homes tates Trailer to act Is the Administrator granted the
Park Subdivision hi Globe. ATIZ. ThiS authority £0 carry out litigation on his
residential area was situated directly own. All we are doing Is providing one
on top of asbestos wastes generated by more way to protect the public health
a milling facility. State and Federal and safety by enabling timely prosecu-
health authorities, Including the Cen- tion of those eases which must go to
ters for Disease Control, warned of the Hti Uo . . - .- -
serious health risks created by direct In the provision to grant
r nt ct with asbestos, a known - EPA litigation authority If the Depart-
Sn. and exponire to airborne ES ” nient of Justice fails to act within a
fibers. -: - specified period of time Is an Impor-
September 30. 1982. EPA c- tant safeguard for the public. It has
I the Globe case to the Depart- been considered carefully by the Com-
ment of Justice for the purpose of mittee on Energy and Commerce and
flung an action for Injunctive relief neces i. -.
under RCRA and Superfund. More . I urge my colleagues to vote against
than 7 months after the referral, the the amendment to strike.
Department of Justice still had not HUGHES. &. Chairmen, will
tiled the case. At a hearing on May 2, the gentleman yield? - - . . . -
1983. a senior EPA official testified Mr. SIKORSICL I yield to gentle-
that the major problem was that the man from New Jersey. -. - ‘
Justice Department attorney assigned Mr. HUGI . I thank the gentle-
to the case was ocoupled with another for yleld1ng. - -. -
case, the Strlngfellow case, and appar- . Mr. Chairman, where would the gen-
ently was not able to devote the time tleman draw the line? We have literal-
necessary to file the Globe case. One ly hundreds and hundreds of statutes
day after the Committee on Energy that grant various enforcement an-
and Commerce reported H.R. 2887. the thority under the hundreds of pro-
Justice Department rlnally initiated grams that mist at the Federal leveL
litigation In the Globe case. Under cir- Would the gentleman grant transfer
cumstances such as these, EPA should authority to each one of those agen-
have the authority provided by this des? ‘i ’. . - .• - ‘- -
bill to proceed and take the action nec- Mr. SIKORSKI. Obviously, in this
essary to protect the public health and Instance, we had repeated testimony,
safety. •.‘ : .--..‘ witness upon witness, explaining not
Civil Utigatlon Is not regarded as the some hypothetical threats but direct
most expedient of legal remedies. On threats to the health and safety of hi-
the other hand, hazardous waste sites dividual Americans that were left en-
often present an Immediate and con, responded to because cues of over-
tlnuLng danger to human health ‘i4 worked lawyers or undermotivated
safety. If the Government Is to pro’. d lawyers In the Department of Justice
the citizens of the country from su -. were not responded to.
serious dangers in an effective and mc- Mr. HUGHES. If the gentleman will
peditious manner, it must provide a yield. I can say to the gentleman that
- ‘ net mechanism Within the en- I am sympathetic to that.
cut process which will Insure The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
action on Important cases. If gentlemaq from Minnesota (Mr. Si-
Iepartment of Justice act4 In a &oasxz)has expired.
(On request of Mr. HuGxm and by
unanimous consent, Mr. Srzousxz was
allowed to proceed for 3 additional
minutes..) .‘. .. - . -
-
‘ .. 0 1620 .. -
Mr. HUGHES. I get frustrated at
times because the Justice Department
cannot reach criminal prosecutions,
even with the Speedy Trial Act, be-
cause of lack of resources. Is not the
answer to provide the resources that
are needed by the litigating authority,
the Deparirnent of Justice? Is that not
really the answer. fristeaa of trying to
create a whole new litigating agency
within etch of these agencies and de-
partments throughout our Govern-
ment?
Mr. SIKORSKI. The gentleman Is
accurate to the extend that new re-
sources or resources back up to the
previous level are needed In the De-
partment of Justice as well as in EPA,
but let us not conduct ourselves under
some mistaken impression that the
EPA Is not involved In enforcement,
does not have a whole host of attor-
neys who are familiar with and can
prosecute just as easily and just as
well bnd more forthrightly and
quicker than the Department of Jim.
Uce. - - - -. -.
What we are talking about here Is,
again, something not unique, It Is not
strange, it Is not Inappropriate. It Is
fair and proper and something that I
obviously support. - *
Mr. HUGHES. If the gentleman wlfl
yield further, the EPA. the gentleman
has correctly advised us, has in three
specific Instances been given that type
of transfer authority, but does the
gentleman understand that has never
been utilized by the EPA?
Mr. SIKORSKI. I understand it has
not been utilized. I still appreciate
that It Is a necessary safety valve In
the process, and what we are talking
about here Is just such a safety valve.
The Globe, Arlz., case and severs]
other cases have come to our atten-
tion. -
Mr. DINGEIL Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield? -.
Mr. SIKORSICI. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Michigan for a clarifica-
tion on the point of the gentleman
from New Jersey. -
Mr. DINGELL. I thank the gentle-
man for yielding. -, .
Mr. Chairman, I thInk It Is about
time we understood and saw this thing
In perspective. -
The Department of Agricluture has
this authority. The Department of
Labor has this authority. The Depart-
ment of Health and Human Senulces
has this authority. The Department of
the Treasury has this authority. EPA
has this authority In connection With
- not one, but three *her statutes, the
Safe Drinking Water Act, the Federal
Clean Air Act and the Federal Water
Pollution Control A ,,.u-’l ’.’e- -
October-31 1 1983 - -
- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE --
H 8893
-------
118894 . --
In each Instance It was given -for
good reason. There Is nothing sacred
about the right of the Department of
Justice to litigate these’ questions. All
I can observe is that after a long
period of restful tranquility and deep
repose, the Department of Justice now
awakes In a remarkably evil humor.
I say give legislative authority to an
agency which will litigate these ques-
tions. which can be monitored, and
which will not hide behind a smoke-
screen of lawyer-like statements about
why these litigations cannot be com-
menced, when they cannot commence
a suit, as they did In the case of Globe.
Mis., where children were playing
amidst of piles of asbestos, a danger-
ous carcinogen, because the lawyer as-
signed in the Department of Justice
was too busy with other matters.
The CIIAIRMA} 1. The time of the
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Si-
KORSItI) has again expired. . - - -
IOn request of Mr. FLoluo and by
unanimous consent, Mr. SWOESKI was
allowed to proceed for 2 additional
minutes.) . _... . -
Mr. SIKORSKL Mr. Chairman. I
would just like to comment on the
chairman’s point In response to the
gentleman from New Jersey. -
It the authority Is there and unused,
perhaps that Is a spur that is neces-
sary to get the Department of Justice
to act quicker and respond to the
health and safety hazards of people.
Maybe if we give the EPA Just this au-
thority in this Instance they will act
‘licker. - .
r. FLORIO. ‘Mr. Chairman. ‘ will
.e gentleman yield’ - -
Mr. SIKORSKL I yield to the gen-
tleman from New Jersey.
Mr. FLORIO. I thank the gentlemanç
for yielding. - -
Mr. Chairman. I Just want to rein-
force the point that has been made al-
ready that this Is a limited authority
that we are providing to EPA. I would
suggest that this area is of sufficient
Importance to have that residual limit
of authority on the part of EPA.
What we are talking about, and I
would concede the point made by the
gentleman from New Jersey, Is that it
would be nice If we have more re-
sources. We do not, at the Department
of Justice, and In the Interim, while we’
are waiting for tho& budget priorities
to change, we are faced with situations
in context with this statute where we
have individuals exposed to imminent
and substantial hazards to people’s
health and the environment and no
one has either the resources or the
will to go forward In those situations.
What we are saying is that there
should be this residual authority that.
under those circumstances -of immi-
Dent hazard to people’s health, there
should be the capability of going for-
ward. I think that is the key thrust of
what we are doing. We are not talking
‘t a radical departure of existing
ye are saying there should be this
.ual authority &o address Imini-
cONGRESSIONAL RECORD—’ HOUSE
iient roblems that are Impacting
upon individuals. ... - -
Mr. HUOKES. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield further-to me?
Mr. SIKORSKI. Certainly, I yield to
the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. HUGHES. I thank the gentle-
man for yielding. . - - -
Mr. ChaIrman. 1 do not understand
really how, by transferring the author-
ity to the EPA. which does not want
the authority, when we acknowledge
we have a lack of resources, we have
accomplished anything, because we
as-c going to have to have support per-
sonnel. fimtof alt -‘ - . -
It Is the DepartmeM of Justice that
Is the major lft p.ttng authority.
Every agency that has some enforce-
ment authority has lawyers. Are we
going to transfer to them litigating au-
thority In each Instance? They all
think their programs axe just as tin-
portant. . -. . ‘• .: --
Mr. DINGELL Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield’ -
Mr. SIKORSKI. I yield to the geñ-
tleman from Michigan. -
Mr. DINGELL. I thank the gentle-
man for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, the answer Is we are
not transferring litigating authority
from the Department of Justice. We
are just seeing to it that EPA has the
authority to act where the Depart.-
ment of Justice refuses to do so. -
Mr. KINDNESS. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike the requisite number of
worth. — •
(Mr. KINDNESS asked and was
given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.) - . -.. -
Mr. KINDNESS. .Mr. Chairman.
others more erudite arid studious and
persuasive have addressed the subject
before us this afternoon, but I would
Just like to add a comment or two on a
practical level in support of the
amendment to strike section 11(b).
I think that we have heard enough
of the argument that there are other
agencies and departments given simi-
lar litigating authority, and I think we
have heard enough of the argument
that EPA has similar authority under
other statutes passed by the Congress.
Let us assume for a moment that It
is just barely possible that the Con-
gress made a mistake In each of a
number of other instances. What we
need to determine Is not whether what
was done In the past is controlling but.
rather, was It right. Without going
into the question of whether It was
right, let us look at just this circum-
stance. - . . .•
Would It be right to s-eate one more
circumstance Lu which the EPA would
be authorized to conduct Its own litiga-
tion In these matters? EPA- has mdi.
cated. as has been argued here, that It
does not seek to have that authority.
It has lots of other things to do. As
long as the Congress goes In the direc-
tion In which It baa been going In
recent years, creating such authority
and depriving the Departmqnt of Jus-
tice of sufficient resources within the
October 31, 1983
total budget framework to carry. on its
Job, we are going to have to do this in
numerous cases. We are going to bleed
a bit here and bleed a bit there, and
sooner or later we are not going to
have any degree of coordination in the
litigating function of the Federal Gov-
eminent. We have lIttle enough now.
There are priorities that need to be
established by the Department of Jus-
tice in carrying out Its litigating work.
Certainly it sounds difficult, ridiculous
even, to contemplate a situation such
as that described In Arizona where the
7-month delay occurred with asbestos
Conditions creating hazards for people
kving right on it. It does not sound to
me as though that was a case in which
it was a priority judgment that said
this case Is not worthy of attention: It
was just a case in which there were
not sufficient resources in the Depart-
ment of Justice to do the job. -
Why do we not address the problem
correctly and directly and provide the
resources for the Department of Jus-
tice. . - . - -
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield? - -.
Mr. KINDNESS. I yield ‘to the gen-
tleman from New York.
Mr. LENT. I thank the gentleman
for yielding. - . -
Mr. Chairman, I wanted to just
point out to the gentleman and to our.
colleagues that many of these cases
that we are talking about that might
come up under the RCRA legislation
Involve multiple claims where, In addl.
tion to triggering RCRA. we have the
Clean Air Act, we tiave the Clean
Water Act, the Toxic Substances Con-
trol Act, and only the Department of
Justice can really act as the coordina-
tor so as tO consolidate these causes of
action. -
In addition, there are sit iations
where they are related criminal ac-
tions which only Justice can bring, so
It seems to me that it serves no useful
purpose to carve out the RCRA legis-
lation and give EPA litigation authori-
ty in civil matters in that one Instance.
Mr. KINDNESS. The gentleman has
made an excellent point and made It
webi, and It was the next one I intend-
ed to cover, as a matter of fact, -. -
Coordination of litigating authorit ’
In the Departnient Of Justice Is most
Important. The criminal aspect of -
these cases is an important tool In
dealing with the civil actions. Some-
times there are settlement negotia-
tions that can be affected by the -
threat of the coordinated approach of
civil and civil actions. The most effec- -
.tlve way for the laws of the United
Sta to be can-led out is In a coordi-
fashion. - , - - - -.
01630’; -,
In some cases there may Indeed be
Internal Revenue Code violation possi-
bilities. The questIon of organized
crime involvement In dealing with haz-
ardous substances has been raised in
connection with this argument. There
-------
are Various other Federal laws that
may be Involved. EPA does not happen
n be the enforcement authority In
Ing with some of the others. Let us
eate more confusion.
Chairman, this -amendment to
.. e iectlon 411(d) should be agreed
to.- ..
The CHAIRMAN. The question Is on
the Judiciary Committee amendment
The question was taken, and on a di-
vision- (demanded by Mr. HvG )
there were—ayes 8. noes 7.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman. I
demand a recorde I vote, and pending
that. I make the point of order that a
quorum Is not present. -•.: ,
The CHAIRMAN. -Evidently a
quorum Is not prerent. -. -,‘ - ,- -
The Chair announces that pursuant
to clause 2. rule XXIII, he will Vacate
proceedings under the call when a
quorum of the Committee appears. -.
Members will record their presence
by electronic device. , -
The call was taken by electronic
device.- - . - - -
:? , :‘ ‘ ‘. b 165O ; . :-
- The CHAIRMAN pro tempore.(Mr.
Huci ay). A quorum of the Commit-
tee of the Whole has not appeared. -
The Chair announces that a regular
quorum call will now commence. - -. -
Members who have not already re-
sponded under the noticed quorum
call will have a minimum of 15 mm-
to record their presence. The call
e taken by electronic device..
suant to the provisions of clause
.de XXIII. the Chair announces
... .thewlllreducetoamtnlznumof 5
minutes the period of time within
which a vote by electronic device, If or-
dered. will be taken on the pending
question following the quorum cail.
Members will record their presence by
electronic device. -
The call was taken by electronic
device, and the following Members re-
sponded to their names: -.
• .. —: (Roll No.4331 - • ,
Ackerman - Bonkes ’ . . Crilg ‘ -
Addabbo - Boraki - Crane, Daniel
Akaka B6ucher Crane. Philip
Alboata Dreaux ‘‘ Crockett -
Alexander Brltt ..‘ Daniel -.
Mlderlon Brooks Dannetceyer.
Andrews (NC) Broomfield Duchla
Andrews (TX) Brown ICO) 1 ub
*nnunzlo Broybul - de Is Gsr -
Anthony Bryant - Delluma -
Applegate Durtoo (IN) Derrick
Archer - Byron DeWi ne
Aspin - Campbell - Dickinson
AuCoin - - Caroey - .‘ Dingeb - - .
Badharn ;. Carper - ,! Dizon ,
Barnard - Car, •. Dorgan -
Barnes . ‘ - Chandler - Dowdy
Bartlett ‘ Chappell - Downey,.’
Bateman - Chapple • Dreler - ‘ . . -
Bedell Chancy - Duncan’
BeUenson cUnger - Durbin ?,
Bennett Costa ,, flwye, - ,
Screuler Coellto — Dymally
Berman Cole nan M0 Dyson . - -
Bethune - Coleman (TX) Early - -
BevW Collins - Eckszt -
- - Conable $dg ar’ -
Conte — EdwudataL) -
- Conyeri ; , Hdaardc (CA)
Cooper - ‘ Edaarda(OK)
Courter ’ Dnersc -
u , ,‘ r - ,. Co3’De ,.“ •- ‘gJI .
Krdrelcb ‘,.;, ,eeda ZJ, - Rogers
Erlenborn - Siph iaki - Rcse
Eve_n. (CA) - ‘L lngat - Rostenkowaki
Ev e _na(UJ Voyd - -. ‘Roth
P& aceU -, • Loeffler , - Roukema
Fe_rio Long ( I A) Rowland
Feighan - ‘Lox ignW) Roybal
Ferraro - ‘ LeR : ‘ - Rudd
Pledleg •, Lowesy (CA) Rueso
Pielde - LuJe_ ;‘ . ‘ Babo
Fish • r;, Lukon - Savage
Pbppo - Iamdlne ‘ Se_aye,
Ploiio ‘‘ Lung ,. —,, Schaefer :e
Poglleng Ms •_ - ‘Schneider
Foley - _______ Bchroede, ‘,. ,
Ford ( TN) “ )dsdigan - - - &hu lse ,, -
Forsythe - e _ztey - - ‘ - Schumer-
Pbwler - Marriott - SeiberUng
Prank Me_rUn (U ,) ‘Senseobrenneg
Franklin Martin (NC) Shannon
Weosel - :-- Martin (N T ) Shap ,.
Ptiqua - Me_nines - : -
Ma i - ., Shelby - -
Oejdenson Maneulos ‘-‘: -Shuinw
Oeks.s - Ma li - , • Sh r
Oephsrdt Piece_In -- .oee_kI
Gibbons - McC io .kc - Liliander
Oilman - MCCOIIUm ‘ Smaky- -
Gingrich - McCwdy - Skeen’
‘OUcksoan PicEwen ‘ Skelton
Gonzalez McGrath’ &&tZ ., -‘
Goodling Mcflugh - Smith (IA)
Ore-c NeKernan Smith OrE)
Gridison PicKinney ‘ Smith (N.H
Ore_mm McNuIiy Smith, Denny
Orerir Mica -, Smith, Robert
Guarini Michd ‘ iowe -
Gundere_on Mikulaki • Smyder
Hall (IN) Miller (OR) Solomon
Rail (OH) Minets Spence
Hall. Ralph Pimlab -- ., “Spract -‘
Hall, Sam Molinart - SI Oe?maln
Hamilton Moflohan , Stsggcr s
Bammerachmldl Montgomery Biangelsnd
Rs,nee Moody - Stenholos
Hansen ( ID) Piocre -- ‘ - ‘Stokes
Hansen WT) Woorhesd Su’attcc
Barkin Morrison (CT) Stodda
Harrison ‘ Morrls n (WA) Slump
Rartnett ‘ -- Pire_zek 8undqul at ‘‘ -‘
Baa kins .. Murphy’ - Swift -
Bayes .-,. - Murura Syuar •
Hefner - Myers ., Tallon - -
Mattel - ‘ ilatcher - Tauzin
Hwhtoa’er - ‘Neal ‘ - - .“ Taylor
B ,a leT ;,‘ - Nelson - - Thomas (OA)
Wills - - Nichols , Torres -
Molt Niebo TcmnzllI -
Hopkins - - Howe_k - ‘Towns
Horton ‘ -. - O’Brien Trailer -
Howard Oskar .. Udall
foyer - - Obey Valentine
Huckaby - Olin J Vander J eSt
Hughes Ortie: Vandergnfl
Hunter ‘n, ,OtLlnger Vento
Bulb - - Owens Volkmer
Hyde Ozley Waigren -
Ireland r Packard Walker
Jamb. - -,- Panet ia Watkins’
Jenkins P.shayan Weber . -
Johnson • ‘ Fabian - Weiss • —‘
Jones(NC) — Pease - Wheat
Jones (OK) “ ,Fonzty - Whitley -
Jones (TN) • Perkins -. Whittaker.
K.alcb - Petal ,Whilten -
Ktenreler Porter - Williams (M l’)
Kazen Price - Williams (OH)
Kennell, ‘p ” - PUr.ell -. Wilson
Kildee Quillen •, Wlim : .. - -
Kindness RahaJJ - - Wtrth
Eogovaek - - Ringel ,,Wise
Roller’ - - - Rsicflloyd ‘ ‘Wolf- -
Kostinayer ‘ Ray - - Wolpe -
Kramer - RegIna - - Wortley -
Le_Palne. ,, Reid - Wright
lagorasre_Ino Rich.rdso Wydrn
‘Ridge “ - -- Wylie
Loath - -- nu raido ‘ : Yates
Lehman (FL) Ritter -- Ye_Iron
tent - , — Robert. :- ‘Young (AK)
l.evtn ‘ ‘‘ Robinson •‘ oung (FL) -
evirie - : , Rodino Young (MO)
kvltu .1 - . . - Roe - Za bloc ki
lewis (CAi,. Roamer - :
,jl i.p, ..:Oi 0 17O0 - i.,t1 ’.’! -i ‘
‘The CHAIRMAN - pro ‘tempore.
Three hundred seventy-eight Members
have - answered to their names, a
118895
quorum Is present, and the Committee
will resume u.s business_ -, -
• - ‘-... asc ,oRDmvoTz -
The CflAIRMAN pro tempera. The
pending business Is the demand of the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. DIN-
CELL) for a recorded vote - -
‘A recorded vote was ordered. :- -‘
01710 - ‘ -
-. - PARLIAMENTARY UIQUISY
Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I
have a parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
gentleman will state It,
Mr. WATWPR. Mr, Chairman, could
the Cnalr clarify as to just exactly
what the amendment Is that we are
voting on, where we are procedurally?
The CHAIRMAN. We are voting on
the first Judiciary Committee amend-
ment, page 32. It strikes the civil
action section of section 11.
Mr. W &T K’R. Mr. Chairman, did I
understand the Chair to say that the
amendment we are about to vote on
strikes the civil s,ection of the bill, Is
that correct?
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
civil action section of section 11,
- Mr. WALKER. I thank the Chair.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
Chair will advise Members that this Is
a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic
device, and there were—ayes 215. noes
165. not voting 53. as follows: -
(RoU No. 434)
- ‘AYES—215
Akaks Edeards (CA) Johnson
Annunzlo EdaazdstOKi JonesNC
Archer Dnereon - Jones (O K)
Bsdhem Ddreleh - Kaaict i
Bartlett Erlenborn Rasteruneler
Batarnan Evans (I L) He_zen
Bennett Fe_rio - Kindness
Bereuter Feighan - Kramer
Bevill F,rrs.ro L aFe.lee
Bidey Fields - Lanto
Boehlert Fish - Lehman (FL)
Bore_kr Fluppo - , Lent
Boucher - Foley -Lewts(CA)
BrIt t Lord (TN) Lewis FL
Brooks - Forsythe Llplnski
BroornZicld Franklin IJvtn gst
Broyhill Prenrel Lloyd -
Burton (IN) FUqua , Loeffler
Byron Oeks a Loll
Campbell Gingrich Lowery (CA) -
C ernep . . - Gbcknran Lu jan
Cerr . Oradnon Lungi-eri
Chandler - Gre_snot Mack -
CheppeU OuarlnI - MacKay
Chappie - Ounderson Mas-rioti
Chancy - Hall. Ralph Mart.i (IL)
Clinger Buil.Sam M IMNC
Coata HaInsnersclunIdt Martin (NY).
Conable - Hence Mamon
Conyerz Hansen (ID) McCsjn
CrpJg Ihnaen (VT) Idecollum
Crane. Daniel Harrison MeCurdy
Crane. Philip Bennett - McDzde
Crockett Hawkins McE wen -
Daniel Hayes - McKer nsn -
DannemeYer Reffler - IdeK inney
Duchie lieftel Michel
Daub lishbower Miller (OH) -
delsOtras Bile, -.
Derrick Hulls Mollohan
D c Wine - Bolt - ‘ Moore
Dickinson Hopkins - -- Moor-head
Dixon Nueke_by - - Morrison (WA)
Dreler Hughes —. • Myers
Duncan - Hunter , , ‘,, Nichols
Dyrnally - Butt. -. - Nielson
Dyson - - Hyde ‘ -j .. O’Brien : -
Edwp ,r 4L) - Ireland -. Obey .. -
Octobe, Si, JS8S -‘ : coNGREssIoNAL RECORD —HousE•- --’
-------
118896’ CONGRESSTONAL RECORD—HOUSE
:. . : . Siok The ( eit anno mced the following
Owei -. ava Stra&ton . • • .
O—.ky T ’. &wyor • etump P” ’ . . . •..
Packard arf •. &mdquli i . On this vote: ... -, .,. .. ,.
I& yaa &hu1 . -. Mr. Miller of California for, with Mr.
&hun r - • -: Moaklei aga1 ..
• ‘ • ‘ Mr. Bithakis for, with Mr. Lowry of w h:
QW SI way andez ü4 4 fl agalns_
Sahall • Shustar Vanderiilff Mis. Ro” for, with Ma Kaptur
kangel •..- euj d r Wilker - against. - - . .
Ray .• ‘ -i; -. :‘ ‘ & the Judiciary Coa mitt .ee amend-
Rtnildo .8 Ith O E) WhfttakeT - ment was agreed to. -.. • . -
lu l ls ,. in hItte. ,,‘ . The result of the vote was .
RObUIaOI i . •. . nourtced as above gecorded, .•
kodl.o . . Snowe . , - Wortlejr ,, . , , . . ... . ,..: .
:• - -• •• A . . — -s.: . _ ‘ i-v - • -‘
&Io a -‘ Vo ,ani(AX - - A 6iI -•.,... -
Toor FL ‘. fdt fl ()RJO r. Chairman, I move
Raeisekow kL 8p & . - To i ng(MO . • -
ith ‘S ngefrnd isu -
‘.‘ - . (MT. PLORIO asked and was given
I - n f - - pe —- to re ’Ise and extend his ye-
- - . , . .r. r • marks) . . . ..
Mk rma Oepbardt . nngsr, - , • ,, %f .‘•‘.
Addabbo Olbbom . • - . LILA • 1 W L J. 1 A • % AAU &LI AL , OU
-- • • . colleague, BEIUUXT BnDxi.L, has
Aiewide, Go i - - brougbt to our attention several ques-
tions that have been raised by service
AMeewu (TX) oreen .. ‘ r stu . station operators and other small bust-
u- ” - .- nesses. I would like to clarify the
5p e • &U tO h. Oeld - record with regard to these questions.
Ramli lo. - R Ichardson , • .
- uflu i ’ amen n,
• a ce which constitutes sectiom 22 of this
Bedeil !. Bo aM, . -‘ - .. -Roykel . i , bill, we encourage the recycling of
.. ‘used motor oil while, at the same time,
Je - ‘.‘ 4 mlnimbing the regulatory burden on
Joo tim- 8duse r the small generat ’ who contracts for
‘ ‘• , . Its proper disposal. The service station
- dealer’s obligation Is simply to Insure
Ion . - i s oii r . - •‘ : - that the people to whom the waste oil
Beaux KW.miyer - ‘.. Is given are properly licensed, and to
l (00) ‘ “ ° --- keep records of the transaction.
goea ,.• . , -. -. Some people have asked about waste
.a • Le’4 ne . Smith (LAJ. - oil that is retained by the generator
Colencei(TX ) • and which is burned on premises in a
Co commermal space heating unit.
OOZ tC • Studda - , The burning or blending of any haz-
- Cooper • •. Lundine - Swill ardous waste for the purpose of
energy recovery Is covered by section 6
D’Amowi - of H.R. 2867. ‘WithIn 2 years after en-
-. Mateul Torrl i nlu actinent, the Administrator of EPA Is
• U3J • iON required to promulgate standards reg-
MCGLb UdSU WaUng facilities which burn hazard.
Downry MCHUIh . - Vent. ous wastes. We also expect the EPA to
g ft • Volkiner . . - develop standards for commercially
• ..- mari et equipment like those space
•gj j Weber - heaters. : . - . -
E dsar )( O I ( Z ( -. Wheat . - -, If the iiser has equipment that
- -. Moodi WUliama (N’T’) meets those standards, and uses the
equipment according to directions, and
MUIPIS • wi , .- -‘• records how much waste oil is con-
Fiopto Idurtha’ WIN • . sunied and so forth, then there should
Foglielts iJateher Wolpe • be
P0 I Weal Wright • . - • -
• ••• .:- Wide. • The existing equipment could
- -. - -: Taim f remain hi use until those standards
Osydos OuSm’ • •. YlirOti -- - are Issued 2 or 3 years from now. Older
Oejdensoo , units would not have to be upgraded
• . •. - MOT V0T1N043;. • •. . — : or replaced until alter the new stand-
AuCo (n . , Gregg , . Obei i sar ards are set. We would expect the EPA
Baice • Hatcher ?-7 - to allow for an orderly trarulUon.
,-. . , -k,:.. Service station dealers also have In-
Rosen - Jelforda r’eiier - - quired about the recordkeeping re-
Dosez Raptur ‘ .Pick1e - - qutrements for solvents which they
. - . use. Solvents, of coulse, are the arche-
Clarke - .. Leath -‘. ‘ Simon • typical hazardous waste contaminant.
Clay , , Lehman (CA) Smith (PLi The committee recogr’Jzes, though,
• - owyy(WA I • that certain arrangements regarding
Marlener - ‘Thcu ( 5, solvent recycling may well provide the
MeCondlom , vu no i n ry level of public health and
7 , Miller (CAP • Wasman ‘ environmental protection while mini-
. -.. . .. pi1zix g adminlstraUve burden on the
• Montgomery -
- - October 81, 1982
generator. For Instance, many auto-
mobile repair facilities employ com-
mercial cleaning services that actually
retain title to the materials they use
and who remove and recycle used sol-
vent, so that the shopowners are not
flinctioning as generators In the usual
sense of the word. -
• 1 s,lah to thank the gentleman from
Iowa for his longstanding interest In
this legislation and for his help In
klentlfyrng those concerns which I.
have Just addressed. - - • -
• Mr. 000DLING. Mr. Chairman, I
rise in support of HR. 2867. the Bar.-
urdous Waste Control and Enforce-
ment Act of 1983, and the Breaux-For-
sythe amendment. -
This bill ‘will achieve something I
have advocated for some time—a
strong. Federal stand against landfill-
big hazardous wastes. Section 5 of
H.R. 2867 requires the Environmental
Protection Agency to restrict the land
disposal of hazardous wastes unless It
can be reasonably anticipated to be
protective of human health and envi-
ronment; It takes into contideration
the long-term uncertainties associated
with land disposal, the goal of manag-
big hazardous waste In an appropriate
manner In the first instance, and the
persistence, toxicity, mobility, and pro-
pensity to bloaccurnulate of hazardous
wastes and their toxic constituents.
Land disposal facilities will be re-
quired to meet design and duel liners,
leachate control systems, and ground-
water monitoring. RCRA clearly will
now make land disposal the manage.
ment practice of last resort. We have
the technology to treat our hazardous
wastes, but EPA regulations have fa-
vored land disposal, which may be
cheaper In the short term, but will be
far more expensive and environmen-
tally devastating in the long term.
Landfills are not the only land dis-
posal method. The Breaux-Forsythe
amendment will assure that interim
status surface Impoundment s that are
unlined, or that are not meeting
RCRA gound water monitoring or con-
tainment standards, will either be up-
grad d to meet the new facility stand.
ards, that Is, double liners, leachat,e
collection systems, and ground watrr
monitoring, or must close. EPA recent-
ly has estimated there are at least
8,000 active surface Impoundments
used for the storage and disposal of
hazardous wastes: 70 percent of these
Impoundments are unlined, and 39
percent have a high p t.ential to con-
taminate ground water. Compliance
with - a Clean Water Act NPDI
permit is not relevant to whether the
impoundment itself leaks. The Clean
Water Act regulates surface water dis-
charges, while RCRA regulates haz-
ardous wastes to protect the total en-
vironment. Compliance with the Clean
Water Act does not assure compliance
withRCR.A. r .s-t .-
Alternatives to lend disposal exist. I
know, because In York, Pa.. in my dis-
trict, Envirite Corp. operates a state-
44,-
-------
- November j ISSJ - WNGRESSION&L ECORD — liOU r.,: ... 119133
- t Y the policy of the AntltrtM Dlvfsboo. It Ibe aerk r d the aolnt on ,aa fol- u erit officers have wedflc *nth-
tattercfgesncemtethea,T seI_ lows; ; -.. ...:. .. .. tog &nd that the more law foroe-
!haL the ASSiEtolit Attoni y G fl F*l f tbu - - . ., authority Is expanded and given
‘trust Division Is fa Ung to esrry Out 1 ____
ia1 b Wiles of the offles to whith be 1esol That aerles Hayes. tilnols, , to other agencies, the mote HkPlthood
inied vtd confirmed. The conferees . d Is hereby, eIs e to the Coimnfttea no thme Is for problen s in the use of that
.giict the United Slates Department of Jim- EdLU2tlOn arid Libw and to the Committee authority.
lice and all other appropriate Federal agen- no SS i*1i Buathe . ..‘ . ,, Is concerned that
to Iorce the federal antitrust The z 1utbon was agreed to. - “nn 11(e) of B.R. 236 ’s Is hut an-
fiithfully and 50T0U 517. Including the O . A motion to r’ nsia r was laId on other ewnple of the uncoordjnato
hlbtilon no resale price Me nte ts - - - h--- oIea tJo of Jaw nofor fl Lu.
- ;-: ‘ -i -- - -. thority to the various Federal ag-
COMPAR.1BO, .- -.-. . -- -
The total new budget (oblIgaUo ) au H ZARDOU5 WASTE CONFItOL de s. Before we permit thIs proilfeyt-
thority for the fises.! year 1984 recommen j . .A FOftCEMENT AC!’ oi’ tian to continue, the Congr . and
O’ItVDIttee of Confeiengw Th SFEAXER pr t poy p opelicall7 the Cnmnitttee on the Ju-
____ ili&i _ .- , , should thke a doe look at
parisom to the fl l Ytar 1983 anioust . Rouse Resolution 274. whether it Is justifiable to each to.
the 1984 budget estimates, and the Ho ______
and Senate bills for 1984 folIo: xx i j the Chair declares the Rouse stance and, even If It Is justifiable toi
hew budget tobligezicol) : to the Committee of the Whole ROU 5 p tujar instance, whether an oznnl-
on the State of the Union for the fur
1983 283 ,7’ 9°g j ey• . bus, coordinated approach would siake
2 1 ST. - -- :‘—---:.: . ‘ -
(obligational) orit . _______ - the .
authorization, the committee has been
fisCal Year 1984 10.026.518.000 Accordingly the House resolved informed that the FBI has ass1 ed
House bW. fiseal rw tht the high priority to the kinds of cases that
198 ’ 1,718.177.0 10
, • _ , - , ,. Whole House on the State of the EPA abOut and that the
1284 1O.28 Union for the further consideration of De of Justice Is imawale of
Conferen agreaneni, the bill. H.R.. 2317, to sii ø ul the SOlid a -bcu.1ar need for nosh ______
ti ai y r 1js IO,ug . 0gsNo Waste Disposal Ast. to authorire m - Two , ago. there was an in-
Confeyesic agrmnmt . - - -j tjoi for the f .I pears 1184 stance where the FBI was slow In ew-
compared wlth - - - - througI 1986. and for other pwpnoes, ______
tJew budget (Obb U , fl - with the Mr. Bam san to the chair. tO In Wegal dun 1 g matter.
authonty. flgna_l yw - - The Clerk read the title of the bill. S result, F BI Director Webster
1983 — +356.927.000, The caAmlwj. Wizen the called a meeting In Washfngtc,n where
Budget estimates of w . _
___ he personally amigoed a high priority
dobUpilOflal) - ....• - - alittee of the Whole House artse on to future dumping matte The FBI
ty. 1 Isesi 7W 1984__ 3347Ø MOfl OCtObe1 3L 1983 Cti0fl hez committed Itself to working wftl
j, f g -: Was open tO - the EPA to provide law
1994 •3 7 • I j,, - j vi wiei when oee ry.
- _____
__________ - ‘The Clerk will report the second The granting of law enforcement au- -•
iadà im.sie.eoo of budget esitmales not
_ committee amendment recommended thority not only to EPA but also to
bi - by the Committee on the Jndj q. other Federal officials raises questions
w . - The Clerk read as followE of eWefeney and coordfnstg 1 .
hna & -- - - mi c ,ey questions Involves w1iet -
Josmn 0. Esxiy, - 33. uike out 1 z d ms sense for EPA officials to he
B iii ri J. Dwrm, through 12. page 14. - -
conducting searches, Seizures, and ar-
Roaa y Mr. E OREZ. Mr. Chairman, I m- primary function is to In-
Boa CARS, - move to strike the last word. - - vestigate dumping cases. U Is the job
1*3115 1 Wiurmii,
- (Mr. BUrnrF asked and was given th FBI and the U.S. marsha
Cwinies E. P” ’i af on to revise and PT?P1II his cost arrests. seareites, an fne
g L emen -‘ - - - not EPA. it Is inefficient to duplI
150) -. - Mr. RUuua . Mr. aI rm iI 110 law enforcement efforts and ath
Joe, I wszs P’i - .. tlon 1 .1(e) of the bill provides that any for these agencies. In addition, wh
S vzo 0. Coii, - officer or employee of the frvfron- EPA Officials e being tralnest to
so P O l l Q(th HO31SB. mentaj Protcctlo Agency Is author- what the FBI Is already S&sjgned
- , P*ij . Law . -‘ - - fred to carry firearms, execute and g , number of people 1n iga
- Tm Snvms, - - - -. - nts ons ami . - 4ng cawa Is reduced. ‘ThJ
towEL P. k.. enas. make arrests without warrant.. tion compounds the problem of melt I.
W*nse, B. Romi*z. -
0. HArron.s, .. and administer oaths. - -.
____ - The C imittee g 2 _____ dent use of time a-hen ome conalde
Eewmr F. Ho’ “ - - Uck tb provisions fr th that fr tiUent retraining in law
Dunn. K. Iteotryl. because we believe It to be an unwar- forcemnent techniques Is essential. -
D zs ‘ Zsntp 4 -n1ff l enftu . The coordination Quutlon lrnn1ve
Dame L.wl , -.. , . .t - -- - - - bt pased todependen EPA
To31 Eacz.em . ‘ - — ad1n str.tt th hive from the Dtm
- - 1Cm! C 6 n . - prØyj The Department If EPA Is granted these new po -
on the Part indicates that law enforl ement n- The Department Will be hem able to
- -, - - -- tbarfty should be Jda coordinate law enforerinent matters si
01400 - ‘ . ‘ ‘asuthas pomible In the Department of EPA assumes these tasks
Justice and specffjc fly 7’BL 17_It Is a matter of high DrioTtty In the
ELECTION AS MEMBER OF COM The Department believes there Is no Department to invest1ga waste re-
eg ON EDUCATION AND ncc 1 for extending these ,.otki m -i. moval e a EPA’s Independence may
LABOR AND AS A R OP rr t ct result In the Dep 1 eni and EPA -
COMMITflE - ON SMALL bUb!’ Agency, The Departm feels Strong . working on the saute case without
-- - ;, - - Is that the granting of these authort- either ag being aware of the no -
0N0 a! Ioulzf Mr. Speak- ties should be strictly lIsntt,d In osder them of the other. Coordinatiee be-
.tf 1ev a privileged resolution W 10 prot both dt and law en- tween the o a ncf , es ___
361) and ask for Its heutedlate f . ., uent officers. The Departmem What It Is trained to ds, Is the motel.
IrLII. .P.HOL - ,. - - Sees that it a nJ jj gg that law en. £aiive Law entor _ut -t - --- . - -
- ——- -• -—. ;.-.. - . - , — -
• — -
-------
:. • idi,1’ - b
n913 .iim j ij Ô GRESS1ONAL RECORD...I4bUSE I November 3 19&t
‘ ‘The db it receive Tth1 4ip . Za gve1aw i Byvctbg to this amez3dm t.
a nied to grant these law foi etg I2Te . search and aefrme 1 he deprlvwg A of the enicree-
• ZOT crIt authcrlUea to the A. authorUy. anthe 1ty to earry gum to ewni tcioio ry to
Any ou cern !PA has about being iMe each and every a. .., . to give each against deliberate criminal violations.
to mike an Immediate arrest ii add- and eay agency that has same That is not a signal that this Osagimi
night at a dumping site should be ve. f sDthartty , the authority to - uId send to the Amcrimn people. I
solved e y. A should by this point ewvy geaj - t ’ong y urge my oIleagues to defeat
aheady tune alerted ond arranged for and ache. . -. -. this amendment.
lurdIfl&t1O0 of their effort with the I&r. Cirairman. at tie
Depaitmeut. No question se delay ‘ ‘ my remarks I am including & list of
• houldboTaiicrt :..; The CHAmMi t. The tIme óf the thoselndivldualswhuareintheQiml •
Finally. there Is already i d Ifl O fr New J fMr. nil ) afoznement Division. It has a
• by which A ean ask Jndfre to d - Ev ana) tuna cai4rud . . . ‘ viery of tbefr training aird gW
nate pA off so deputy U .S. ou . We me t!kfng about people with
aha .ls In pmtinilar — The D %- was auowe to proceed for ior i anywhere from 12 to 27 years of crim1.
i t of Juetf is adively onnsi flig mL I .- .: . . . .. .: - us] investigatory and supervisory ex-
sach a ra ram foi &. This i’s . - perience; we me t 1kb g about profea.
___ — in the world ma you have coor ii - sionuis In the field of criminal Justice.
nated eLfort2 You a r e tPJklflg about a So we are not providing these ea
.COUflt3bIe 10 ? thSUZIng that the A need for training, very specific . - hanced enforcement powers to thom
othcIal is PToP ifs1DCd ind hIS an tug. The BI aa had very efflc who are not Qualifled. We are provid-
appropriate background to hniiL Is tr ining o.snr g with organi Sed eri , to thcne Individuals 11W I 11 I 1 Y
________________ - - - Th y should p• In the lead agancy. Of enfovclng the appropriately strong
Therefore. Mr. Cb2Ulflan. an You cannot have a police department. PrOVi lcfl3 that are In this law.
‘believe there is DO UT flt a vnln olice department. In every I would 5.5k far the support of this
theSC tlCS 1 U1 OW agency and department .1 Govern- body in this .m ent. - -
to nwVort the mIt *ee £ CDd & ment and expect to have same central. US. evmoxiiar Fsos ow Aumer
- ItZiklfl 5 thp, .I • .. ‘ -“ -. fred. epordlnnt d . tt. upon ( ‘ ‘ ai . Dn .j uiu
- - Mr. aODUfO Mr. ‘Co.&I7 ID. crime pro i m that txlst in . eeras rsn& Utica ‘_Q -
the gentleman yis • - dCPaIhaerIU nd -
Mr. m7(iH . I yield to the gentle. ci - • lNeadquartersw v .c
• man bum New Jersey. . o i arge my eolleaguea to CbiS1 N.Y. CitY PDIi N.Y in
gnL hpd r ri Im w of the I fliftt#4 mipport the jwiIr!(ary Atty. Gen. Offles. N.Y. ( eaml a 01
on the Judiciary. :.: - ____
_________ wstlgatlon 27 yana tohnt w-c -’I,
(Mr. RODUiO asked sad Was .. --‘: -. — SUnCIT OI7 t5LiO1 . ‘ - - .
permimion to revise )L PWRIO. M i. Chairman. I Assistant Chief: ra2 Bureau of .
- • • . to strike the - re WsILe number of t ation. Washington. D.C. Polies
• . Mr. RODINO. Mr. Chabinan, I want WOniZ . and I hi cppo tI. to the u. s. Interstate erm .‘- ‘ec u
I—.
to add my 5t .p ,uit to the stat nt of “ ‘ ‘t”ent . •. - 5 OliflinSi In ’g t and V Y
the gent an (sum ylew Jcrse7 (Mr. FLO O asked and was gtven ‘ Oe - i I. - .
“airman of the Subcommittee exu penimlon to revise and extend his re Atlanta Field Office: • - ---
Special Agent in iarge U.S. Tresswy
lore. The Committee on the .Tudlcl- marks.) - • Dept.. Bureau of Alcohol. Tobacco and Fire-
.y has long been concerned about the - Mr. PLORIO . fr. Chairman. I am • W i ou. D.C. Police Dept.. H
proliferation of law en1or erit convinced that because provisions f ,ears iive as
tlxnity which the ngimi crr this MU land dis xasi of tuna -
engaged In hr . esut years. I fully ardous waste and require safer math- Special Agent No. L U.S . Thasury D *.,
- agree with the gentienran that a mere OdS of Uea ent and recythnz. there Bureau of A hol. Tnba and Firearr
sensible approach is for the ewi-esit Will be a significantly greater IncentIve 13 years criminal IDvi.e ig nve experience.
lax enforcement agendea to coorth.. to dlspcne of toxic waste megaj]y. SPeCIPJ Agent N c. 2: US. Treasury Dept..
Bureau of Alcohol. Tbbaecc and Firearms I
nile In a better and more offident Since RCRA was amended In 1080 to
manner. I do not believe that adding make ft a crime (Or anyone to di ,ose No. 2: WashIngton. ne.
re people to the already extensive of h*radous waste In a way that - Pollee Dept.. DInl’al mv tigatlon Din.
list of Government personnel who are dangers human health, there has not sioo 22 years criminal hwestiutaye and as-
authorized to carry firearms arid make been a single Indictment under the peivtsory experience.
warmatless arreats Is In the bed inter. knowing pro is2on. ThIs Is true decpft ’ Special Agent No. 5 -V .& Marhie •
eats of ow c I rntr7 . The wtth the fact the the Oversight Subcommlt- Armed Services POlice Dept. Florida Dept.
the bearing testified that the Depart- tee has learned of numerous inst nr c of Law forcement. £2 ‘mrs criminal . -
________ vestlgaXive . p - -
meat and i eCffIcaU, the £ 51 base Li! mldnl&ht ‘ ‘““pth and Ot Chiago Field Oifrcs
a nil of f Involving barardous Special Agent In Charge: VS. Treasury
Ity. I pei Ind my .eolleagues that the - - - -. - -. Dept.. nw-mu-cs lmiic1. Tooaum and Th .
Department of Jucti e and the I TInced that The bsk Of ia- .srms 11 years criminal lnveatlgauve and .
tmve an excellent working re1atAoi a up suits, In terms of criminal prosecutions pervisory experience. -
and that both of them support the Ju - uiider CR.A . Is due to the lack of . Special Agent No.1: US. Treasury Dept.
diclary Committee nj. ee dmeat which quate inv,ictJg tiry g ty Swean of .
eI the Ms e ot anthmi- he.dequiale f iIng for fl crmnainal lgkn . ’ Deot . a
____ criminal vestigative eiper,es .
t Irma the bUL - - .. .. . - soufo — program. Dininz Special Agent No. 2: U.S. Dnig Thiicwee.
Mr. HUG . I t - aen marktw of this bill 10 lUll comzfl1tt C . eseot AdmlnhZti%tim 5 13 years crmmlna l in.
man for that contrlbtdion. And the Mr. Minicag and I - sponsored an ,earigauve and supervisory ezpe .
gentleman is aKenIiit -c y right . :. - -. which will i4n .h the eds1 *s Mc. 2: Washington flC
I think that an have i £0 look at f su far this vrcgram. Tha will Police D 10 years UtininaI rmt-
each mee and determine whether or allow ‘As criminal Investigators to the exper1eti . : L.
not there Is a need. There Is no ques- be jt.tJnn in each of uie I D r - g 1 ’ Denver FInd Ofteo -J -
(Ian but that certain p’’ t ’ of orga- flowerer. Increased fimsl lng for this 8P CiA1 Agent hi aIaITe U.S. snin _i
Revenue Service. Criminal Investigaticn D l-
nized crime have infiltrated this area. prc am will only be efficiently vi nc u years afminai lnvestIgaz i,e y e.
The FBI has a particular expertise. If the inveetigntAws are provided riencem i l —.- -
• - FBI should hi the d the same_law eofor .nt authority p,. VS. o—
y. Even ag and departseawit That 4 01 I .dies 1 a pea- j ru a’ 1 1 bo iiiiIvt and
. thIs enSo. 1 nt • --• _____
• •.,.•——.---- •-. ••,
-------
NouemberJ 198S
Philadelphia fleld OiTtce
Special Agent In Charge: N.Y. State Med.
Fraud Division. Federal Bureau of In-
ttcei 22 years Iminal Investigative
.ervisory experience.
Jal Agent No. 1: WashIngton. D.C.
Police Dept. 12 ysais nvestigatlve
experience.
Special Agent No. 2: Maryland Depart-
ment of Natural Resources, Po!iee Depart-
ment 12 years cilminal 1nvestIg tIve cZ4 -
Special Agent No. 2: U .S. Internal Reve-
glue Serilce. jfl tiga fl J)lvI.
lion; 13 years criminal Investigative ‘. er:-
Special Agent No. & Washlngtor’. D.C.
Police Dept.; 20 years criminal Investigative
and supervisory expenence.
Seattle Field Office:
Special Agent In Charge: VA Drug i-
forcement AdnilIL, US. Customs ServIce: 13
years cr mh% I investigative and miper’blIUTT
expenence.
Special Agent No. 1: U.S. Drug Enforce-
merit Admin.: 10 4 years a 4 mlTuLI Investiga-
tive experience.
Special Agent No. 2: U.S. Drug Enforce-
ment Adrnln.. U.S. Customs Service: 21
years erbr .ri ] invceugaiive and mzpervi ’y
experience.
Special Agent No.3: V.8. Fish and Wild-
life Service, California Dept. of Fish and
Game: 11 years es* v an I Investigative cape-
rlence _____
Mr. SAw ra it. Mr. Chairman. I
move to strike the requisite number of
words. and I rise In support of the
amendment. . -
(Mr. SAWY asked and was glv n
permission to revise and extend his ie-
— — ‘
AwxkiI ’L Mr. Chairman, this Is
.nother illustration of what we
- for the Commerce Department
la.st week. Goodness knows a-ho we
will have it for next week, but every.
one wants their own mini police de-
partment. all running around carrying
guns, TriSk rng warrantiess arrests, and
with no police training.
There Is not an agency In the Feder-
ii Government that does not have
some kind of enforcement problem on
their various laws. The Federal Com-
munications Commission, they are
dealing with radios or radio stations,
private or otherwise, there are not 11-
censed. I suppose they might want to
have their awn armed policemen
riding the circuit, with radio direction
finders, making arrests; the Federal
Trade Coinmi c io l . certainly In the
antitrust field, out with guns and
weaponry; the Interstate Commerce
Commission. on motorcyclea. rounding
up and arresUng Illegal truckers oper-
ating on the road without ICC certifi-
cates of convenience and necessity.
You name It.. the list Is endless. And
just eve ’body, as soon as they find
out the door Is open, why should they
hate to go to another agency to get ar-
rests made, to pull out guns and en-
force their own laws and their own
rules’ and regulations when they can
‘bemselves?
a you are going to have an end-
earn of agencies coming in bese
i ng their own armed police form.
they will prolifera2e througbout
the FederaJ Oovern &. -
Wow, that t done in any State
that I am aware of; ft as not been
done ep to now on any widespread
acale to the Federal Government.
- . I think the time ba.s come to say no.
we have trained police agencies, we
have the FB I, we have the U. S. Mar-
uttal ’k Office, and we have got trained
people In those areas ho are armed
and who are capab ’ of “ “ g arrests
and enforcing the law. . -
it strikes sue that- that baa always
been cur philosophy of government,
We are not a police state, and II we
start multiplying all u i the agencies
with their own police departments and
police forces, untrained and armed, I
think we are iikIng a severe mistake.
I urge the support of the Members for
the Judiciary ( nTnvnlttee amendment.
Mr. FISH. Mr. Chairman. I move to
strike the requisite number of words,
and I, too, rise In favor of the amend-
ment that comes out of our Commit-
tee on the Judiciary to strike this au-
thority. .. . .
I might add that the administration
opposes the Inclusion of law enforce.
ment authority In EPA. The Depart..
snent of Justice feels that the right to
carry firearms and make arrests with
or without warrants should be limited
In order to protect the rights of ow
c lttzens
The widespread prolIferation of law
enforcement responsibilities. which Is
encouraged by the language In the
bill, which the Judiciary Committee
seeks to strike, hi my judgment will In-
evitably result In a reduction In the
level of training and experience now
enjoyed by Federal law enforcement
off leers. The FBI Is perfectly capable
of fully Investigating the alleged com-
mission of crimes resulting from envi-
ronmental abuse.
Now, if the Environmental Protec-
tion AdminIstratIon requires addition-
al law enfor ent personnel and
there Is reason to believe that oper-
ational difficulties are being encoun-
tered, then it Is proper that the De-
partment of Justice designate EPA of-
ficials as special deputy U.S. Marshals
for a temporary period, with all the
powess such a & IgTa tII T .
piles. . . -
But I think It Is Important for this
body to understand that arrest author.
Ity granted to EPA personnel by the
language In HR. 2867 goes beyond
lctly environmental offenses and
could involve the power to arrest or to
Inflict deadly force whenever an EPA
official with arrest authority believes
1e has probable cause that a felony
has been, or Is being, committed.
Mr. Chan’man, this Is not the first
time this admInistration or prior ad-
ministrations have encoimt ed these
types of requests. They have
merous over the years from various
agencies of Government Inc permis-
sion to cain arms and to make ar-
r s. In order to grant auth reqii cts.
It has always been necessary to pro-
ride specific evidence which clearly
end cceiv 4 I’ifinhlj .
H 913
‘verity ci the need. The witnesses from
EPA who testified before the House
Judiciary Committee were unable to
provide us with examples which would
justify such a dangerous precedent,
and I urge. Mr. Chairman, support for
the pending amendment.
Mr. MOLINARI. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike the requisite number of
wda . and I rise In opposition to the
am.nnm xt.
(Mr. MOLINARI asked and was
given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. MOLV A1U. Mr. Chairman, If
ever there was an agency of the Feder-
al Government that should be granted
the power of arrest, It should be the
enforcement arm of the EPA. Now, I
have been one who has severely eriti-
cised EPA and Its edw ,. ieflt activi-
ties, and I would agree with the gen
tieman from New York (Mr. FisH) and
the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Bucarsi that U In all th’cumstanees
you had the opportunity to contact
the Ff1 and you were forewarned that
there was activity going an, ft would
be preferable. Indeed, I think that Is
what would happen If time permitted.
Unfortunately, you do not have the
luxury, In many cases, of being fore-
warned. Your enforcement off leers are
out there; they are ! ri k ng an Inquiry
hi an thvestigatlon they come upon a
dumping acthity’ they should be em-
powered to make an arrest . . they
should be empowered to protect them.
selves. And, Indeed, we have just
learned within the last few days that
EPA is expnnthrlg Its enforcement per-
sonn --
But If we are going to declare war en
those who are abusing the environ-
ment and Indeed causing damage to
the health and maybe causing the loss
of life, then we should be ready to pro.
ted those who are going to protect us.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. will
the gentleman yield? -.
Mr. MOLINARI. I yield to the gen-
tlernan from New Jersey.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, just to
point out the wisdom of what the gen-
tleman Is tlking about, I have, and .1
will put Into the Racoiw, reports front
various EPA Criminal Enforcement
iv1sIon field oL. iees. One report out
of Seattle strikes me as reflective of
the wisdom of the gentleman’s se-
mark . -.
‘A Inn tigater aithened a Isu .
Ing FCB liquids en the highway between
portland and Seattle. InveGtlgator unable to
stop truck or prevent contamination of so
miles of hlghsay before the truck was ulU-
gn&tely stopped by a sheriff who was able so
be obtained icr pwpoen of enforcing the
law.
D142O ’’
This Is the type of thing that we axe
trying to deal with. We know that
they are short- handed. We know that
these Investigatorl sie on the Scene,
but If they do not have the law en-
forcement authority, they are going to
have to aft and watth. In this Instance,
CONGRESSIONAL REWRD — HOUSE -
-------
H 9136 n: .? CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE
50 mIles of road being polluted with During cawvdllazmo of baardoiis
PCB bemuse th r do unt have the wade hauling operatlam. there w an
- laithorlty that we art trying in o amank a lieutenant of the Rock-
Side for them In this bIlL land Cuuutl SherlW s OThee
The gentleman is ohitely I n KenLuc (1972). and Oeorgl& ____
This amendment Is not helpfuL . 41976). EPA ecters were Soz
Mr. MOLI1 AEL thpnk the gentis- a ,.t Snd
.nan for his remarks, and I would lIke In South Carolina (1976 and 1979).
to point out that tue iist on EPA pesticide Inspector ana twice _____
of Incidents where. lithe EPA Invedi- thr ifev”
gative authorities had the ability in ‘• EPA Special Coun-
make arrests and had the 101 reae to the As- ______
prot themselves, many of these d$DO AttcaIiey General tar the
sbuses would have been averted Let Lend and XMIW*1 flesouzem Dlvidoc
us Last ft. we are talking about some moneerning OP e rat lormi camdrain
of the worst characters in this owe The of laW onfu .. .ent a horlty
try. We are Eniking about orgroiked he placer o teJ I em a na ‘ay.
mime. We are ..lking about slLu. ’ttost IO d*) in’ LIi.t iVfty LheL vi i i men-
tablj’ limit the AgeI ys fnd .nd t abikty
where we ore asking ir enforcement to enforce the a-Irilnai problsL s @1 (t m
officers to put their Jlve.s on e. esampie. wltz out
They are not going to do It In many sa-rert powera EFAS investigative stalf can
cases unless they have the ability to aet Oleveot erwoise heal vffy. mth
x -oteci themselves, . - . —-- -..4 . — a vehicle to
Mr. W!DEN. Mr. Orairman, will the Its manIt , -
gentleman yleldi - The memorandum ‘accompanying
Mr. MOLINARL I yield to the . that letter describes an incident that
t ivnan from Oregon. .. - -. strikes close to home. An EPA InvertJ.
Mr. WYDEN. J thank the gentleman gator witnessed a truck leaking PCB
br yielding. . ... — liquids on a higi way between Portland
Mr. c Irm n . I just wp to fev nd and Seattle. The EPA investigator was
the gentienians imrnenta. unable to stop the truck, or prevent
I would like to share with my cal. cantamlnatloit of 50 mIles of highway
leagues correspondence between t before the truck was stopped by a
EPA and the Justice Departe lt Sheriff ’s deputy, due to the aha of
which clearly demonstrates the oced law enf eat puwv
Sot section liCe) of this bill. , . -. - Mr. Chairman, sectIon 11(e) granting
In an April 1983 letter from EPA EPA criminal Investigators law en-
Associate 1 i1orcernent C’ on J , foicement wv would tv cCt the
O zm1nal Division, to the U .S. Dpazt ubety and operational probleam that
• t of Just ice, a request was made currently twist and strengthen hawd-
‘be provision of full law enforce. ous waste enf ,iveruent. ____
L authonty for EPA5 CrünIIlal jn. I urge the relection of the amend.
, tigatnrs. The request centered on ment seeking to delete this provision.
he dangers of the investigative proc. - M i. MOLINARL I th T1& the tentie-
ens and the need for alminal investi. n for Iris r it*.
gators to make arrests and execute M LENT. MY. Cha1r , will the
search warrants to facilitate enforce- e yield?
ment work, and to protect themselves Mi. .MOLIKARI. I Yield tO the gen-
from bod4y harm. The letter ti men from New YorL -
part Mr. LENT. I fhienk the gentleman
Iory v.
Without f izil law f I m 1 ithOYtty. Mr. Chauman. I woult also like t.
significant lixiuta aiU be placed on EPA’. ____
erlininni initiaUve. M IIEPQYL OUY. Identify with the gentleman s position
program will not be able fully to ensure the pnd the remarks that he has made in
safety of Its im-rstig,itlve staff, and of citi. Opposition to the amendment being of-
sen. that thooee to Imist EPA In pursuing bored l the gentleman from New
&lrgaUcn. of criminal misconduet... Jersey.
It I . my personal beliof that low ardcem. I the y hap I.eit point to
mcci POWns be pui d 101’ m’A ’S make here la the very dangerous types
criminal invesilga&cn lmmedntetz. - of activities that EPA InvesUgatora re
The letter also included 28 examples involved So. I bare a number of In-
of incidents or indications of vlolenee dances here. One Instance Is Where
which have occurred during environ, the primary target of aRCI A TSCA
mental criminal Investigations. The v ri traa in the Imd arranged
examples were taken been 150 tOT- for a fuebomblng of a former business.
aentiy active Investigation I will .1t.r*,sl Seattle.
describe a few. - - Portland area, and threatened to kill
In Pennsylvania, a landfill operator bualnear associates and dispose of re-
shot two policemen, one fatally’, mains In hawdous waste drums.
In another case, a Pennsylvania Another Instance, also arising out Of
State D t Inspect or ’S car was the Sp,tsh . field office, where 2 tar.
smashed, and his iamUy was threat. gets of a CWA Investigation bare
ened -•. , £n reemils La’ the illegal discharge
Sin potential withesses In a M’oyers of weapons, A third has made threats
landlIll prosecution—U .S. against Lan- against Government w1tr .
Zr ecelred death threats, or had The ( RATPMAP a’ al the
burgled and property d - from Wew Yort CMr. Mo-
a au) baa e ired. -
November 3. 1982
By Imammous moment , Mr Moire-
am was allowed to proceed ta’i oddi-
tonal minutes.)
Mr. EDGAR. Mr. Clmimaan . will the
geut .I s t. r yield?
Mr. MOLINARI. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Pennsylvania.
(Mr. EDGAR asked and was given
permtc dnn to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. EDGAR.! thai*
for y w .
Mr. Chairman, I would l&e to
mend the gentleman In the veil for
his comments. I tb-Ink the Issue Is fo-
cused on whether or not EPA should
have enforcement authority. I think It
has to be laid out that other agencies
of the Federal Government have this
authority for doing things that are. In
some instances, bar less Important to
the overall health and safety of the
community.
1 think It would be too difficult In
many of these macs to wait for uther
law enforcement agencies to come in.
The chairman mentioned the case of a
50-mile trick drive where pouI ta
were being spewed out. EPA has the
responsibility to clean up, but had no
enforcement po s to go and, in fact,
stop and arrest that person and to
secure a clean and efficient stoppage
of that particular dumping expermose,
Other gentlemen have meatlosed
the fact that oyg. 4 ’. l crime Is to-
volved. This Is not something that Is
done by good, commonsense Amen-
carts who are (tying to live wholesome
lives. This Illegal dumping that Is
fnklng place In many places In our
urban areas Is taking place by people
who do not want La be r tght aid
prosecu
The reomd has hem y poor of
prosecutiOns In this areas. I think if
we are expanding the number of thme
persons who can enforce the law, we
have to give them the aazthoz-z to do
that.’ -
So I ouminead the gentl n for
Mr. MOLINARL I thimk the gentle-
man for his suppost ’ . . -.
Mr. BREAUX. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. MOLINARI. I would be glad to
yield to the gentleman from Louisiana,
.1r. BREAUX. 5 th i* the gentle-
man for y1el g.
Mr. C airman, I commend the gen.-
tleman for I ris aim, and
potnt out that it is m’t macamman at
all In the Federal Oi x-wuent to have
agencies that are in charge of enfoyc-
ing rules and regulations also having
the authority tO go out and make ar-
rests of those who the,’ perceive to be
violating the standards that they
In charge of enforcing.
I cite, for example, under
mittee jurisdiction, the National
Marine Fisheries Service, wbieh baa
people who enforce the laws pertain-
ing to catching fish in offshore wa
They have the authority in
thom enforcement aetlom aid also to
-------
119137
could not quite amdexstaod its rels-
tionslup to the subject.
Mr. MOLINARL There was an
ildusi who was In charge of the New
Yoit State attorney generals at
White Plains. Re was in charge of the
organized crime strike force dealing
with toxlc .waste dumping. He was 5ub
Jected to so many threats that he per.
telved the threat to his life to he real.
and I believed It. to be so.
He left the country, and during the
period when he was out of the country
I talked to his mother very often. Re
was iiraid for his life b.’ ” of the
many threats.
‘fl. ’e a.-e m ege. ’uples of this
type, and we can make believe It does
not exist, but If we want to get the Job
done. It Is about time we declared war
on those who are going to abuse the
envfroxunent, as they have been doing.
and the only way we axe going to do it
Is by protecting the Individuals who go
out there to make the arrests.
Mr. KINDNESS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield further?
Mr. MOLINAR!. I am glad to yield
to the gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. KD DNESS. Mr. Chairman, I
am not under Landing how the provi.
sion In the bill would have kept the
gentleman from having to Dee to
Europe.
Mr. MOL1NARI. The question was
raised by one of the speakers that no
testimony came out that any people
were really threatened, and I was
merely citing that as an example of
cases where people have been in life-
threatening situations.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleznsn ycld?
Mr. MOLINARL I yield to the gen.
tieman from New Jersey.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I ap.
preciate the gentleman’s yielding In
order to give me the opportunity to
deal with the point that was raised, I
am sure, hi good faith, that sugge
that perhaps the authority we are pro.
riding those people in A Is being
given to people who are not deserving
of that authority, the linpilcatlon
being that somehow they were not
trained In Law en!orcemerit.
I have put In the Rccoan—._zad I
would Just again l1 this to the ge .
tninn ’ attention—a list of all the In.
divlduals in the Criminal Euforcement
Division. The experience they have Is
that Is extremely impressive. Here
we have the thief, smociated I orm ,j
with the New York City olice flepajt.
isent and the State attorney generals
office.
.ch and every thd ivldu*l Is more
than qualified by virtue of prior .
ployment as well as by police training.
So we are not giving law enforcement
authority to individuals who are not
up to the responsibility. It Is clear that
what we are doing Is giving 10 those
people who hare by virtue of their
prior training the . pihllity of using
that authority in the field, and thus In
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
November 3, 1983
make arrests U people are, Lu tact, do- Gf Justice, the Mw enforcement ugen-
lating their standards. . - eIsa. with more resources, not a prolit-
How much moie important It In eratlon of the law enforcement tune.
hIs case, when we are talking about tiona in eem’y agency and department
- T vi ga that affect the health and of Government. We cannot possibly
Ly of lives. have a omtralised system if we have a
.r. MOLD ARL I think the gentle- nurupolice department In every agency
IMan for his remarks. snd department. That Is what we are
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, will moving toward.
the gentleman yield? Mr. MOL ARL I understand the
Mr. MOLINAR!. I yield to the gen- gentleman’s point. I would Just like to
tieman from New .rersey. . answer that by mying that If we bad
Mr. FLORIO. I thank the gentleman the luxury In each and every case to
for yielding. that something us
Mr. Chairman. I Just a ’an’t to offer going on and we enuld call the F5I
one other piece of eviden.’ e of the i-a- have them ax the ne, It would
lidity of the point the ge’uleman has Zie - thing That is net the anal
Reports have come In from the field WOtid that Is out there.
offices Indicating that there offices are would like to conclude by just
currently unable to Insure protection giving my colleagues two examples of
of confidential informants In environ- why we should defeat this amend.
uerital Irxvesttgsiiom. As the gentle- g as r ___
man undoubtedly knows, these con! I. — O do
dentlal lnformant.s are the key to suc- not have any examples of why this is
cessf ul prosecutions of organized necessary. The man In charge of the
crime’s Involvement in illegal innp New York State Attorney General’s
White Plains Organized CrIme Task
Access to the U.S. Marshal Service Force on Toxic Waste Abuse was
for witness protection is never fo to flee to Europe because his
ate due to Internal D P I nIent own life was threatened by orginmed
tice authorization procedures. So, In ime. - . - . a
fact, we are undermining the capablll- Mr. KINDNESS. Mr. Chafrman. will
ty of the investigatory force to do the the gentleman yield on that point?
job we are telling them to do unless we Mr. MOLU ARL I yield to the gen-
provide them with enhanced responsi- tleniaii from Ohio.
bilities that this bill provides and Mr. KINDNESS. f thinfr the gentle..
which this amendment would strike. yielding. r
Hence, the striking of these authort- COUld the g ntI inan explain what
Lhatweprovidefortnthebilhls hejiuttold4z?
not In the interest of the ea The CHAINMAN. The time of the
‘of these agencies to do their in- gentleman from New York (Mr. Mo-
sugatory work. LUIARX) has again expired.
Mr. nuo i . Mr. Chairman, wn ,] (On request of Mr. FLORIO and by
the gentleman ye d’ IdeiDt wi ut , Mr. Moiixazx was
Mr. MOLINARL I hive a couple allowed to proceed for 3 addItional
more statements to make, but I would nunU .)
begladtoyieldtothegentlemanfrom -
.D1430
New Jersey.
Mr. HUG HES. I th i k the gentle. Mr MOLINARL Mr. Chairman, If
man for yielding the gentleman will let me continue. I
Mr. Chairman, let me say to my col- think I can clear up the genUemin s
league that I am sympathetic, If we question. -
give enforcement authority, then we 2O/2O” bid a segment about a year
should be protecting those who are en- or a year and a half ago where they
forcing our laws, There Is no question’ did a detailed investigation, a marvel-
about that. . - ous Job, where they traced those In -
But there Is more to the law enforce- Valved in taking toxic
ment component than just carrying a mixing them with heating oil, and sell-
weapon arid a badge and being able to Ing It as heating oil. During the course
make arrests. We are talking about of the fliTning of that segment, which
training. My colleague, the gentleman spread out over a period of $ or 9
from New Jersey (Mr. FLoaso) is talk- months, the producer and the director
Ing about protecting Informants and were threatened many t,Irn” - They
witnesses. That Is the province of the registered at different hotels wider
FBL That is the province of the U.S. aliases. They were constantly fol-
Marshals. .• jawed, their phones were tapped, they
We already have a centralized law were threatened, and they could not
enforcement component that does ‘wait until they showed the segment so
that. We cannot proliferate those the pi u1e would be off iw uie they
types of functions and expect to have were fearful of their own lives.
a centralIzed system of law enforce- - This is Just to give in example of
ment around the country. The answer the kind of people we are d...Iing with
ls,lfwedonothaveFBlegentstopro- here,
‘—‘t informants, whether It be via-a-via Mr. DNESS. Mr. Chairman,
dump sites or whether I L be drug nould the gent Lrcnari exp! ln the point
or whatever It be. t we about someone having 10 tra -eI to
3t to be providing the Department I irop lie “ - a .1P? PTtt lEd I
-------
119138
fact, we would be depriving them 01
the tools they are going to need.
Mr. MOLUIARI. Mr. Chifrmao. I
thank the genUeir.an from New Jersey
(Mr. F1.oluo). Re makes a good point.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Mo-
ux&aii has expired.
Mr. ECKART. Mr. Chairman. I
move to strike the requisite number of
words, and I rise In opposition to the
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, to pick up on the ze-
marks of the subcommittee chairman,
I think there has been an attempt to
create the strawman that what we are
doing is creating a secret police force
of people who are either In Irresponsi-
ble or who lack the background. tra1n
Ing. or expertise to deal with these
ImUes. - . . .
As the subcommittee chairman so
thoroughly reported, the i ndividuals
currently. In the Criminal Enforce.
nient Division of the EPA have numer•
ous years of criminal Investigatory ex-
-penence; for example. 13 years. is an
FBI agent; 16 years. US. Treasury,
Washington. D.C.. Police Department;
13 years. US. Treasury. Bureau 01 Al-
vohol, Tobacco and Firearms; 5 years.
criminal experience; 23 years. Wash-
ington, D.C.. and New York City
Police Department; 13 years, USDA.
The list goes on and on.
But of greater significance is the
threat that these gentlemen have to
deal with. It Is widely known that we
ire not dealing with a bunch of panty-
‘vaisted amateurs who view this mid.
ght dumping as their recreational
tivity.
What we are dealing with is a highly
profitable enterprise that has been in-
filtrated at the highest levels by orga-
nized crime and which exposes those
whose jobs are to protect both the .
vlronment and our citizenry from
criminal activities to very egregious
and serious threats.
Mr. SHAW. Mr. Chairman. will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. ECEART. L et me Just finish my
point, and I will be happy to yield. I
would like to go through this list first.
In Pennsylvania, a landfill operator
shoots two policemen, one fatally. In
Chicago. $ landIW operator runs his
bulldozer up against in Inspector. In
Rockland County. the sheriff”i office.
a lieutenant Is shot at. In Kentucky
and Georiga, inspectors are forced
away from the site at gunpoint. In
Ohio. one of our Inspectors Is told:
Gura with Jobs like yo s can get
shot.’ -
In Oregon, one of our Inspectors Is
threatened—a threat to cut him up
and stuff him Into a 55-gallon drum.
In Ca1ifornI arson was used against
an Inspector. In Oregon. a car Is found
with Its tires slashed.
Mr. Chairman, the list goes on and
on. Let me tell the Members what our
‘ “ ectors were armed wlth .35 mliii-
i cameras and half a dozen test
November?, 198?
hIr i ng.
I would be willing to accept an
amendment along those lines, but the
employment practices of this M ”-
h’atur and previous AdminIstrators
have precluded Individuals without
that experience from obtaining these
jobs originally. In fact, these we
highly desirable Jobs until the In-
stances of violence and personal harm
against our enforcement officers
became so commonplace.
Mi. Cliah,nr.n, I think the gentle-
man’s suggestion Is a grod one. I
would be willing to aecer t such an
ar. cridment. e sid 1 would vcte In favor
of such as amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. ECEART)
has expired.
(On request of Mr. and by
unanimous consent. Mr. ECKART was
allowed to proceed for 2 additional
minutes.)
Mr. HUGHIZ. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. ECKART. I sin happy to yield
to my friend, the gent . n from New
Jersey.
Mr. HUGK . Mr. Chairman, I
thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman. I want to say also
that I have e ”n4ned the credentials
of many of these enforcement officers,
and they do have excellent credentials.
But as the gentleman from Florida In-
dicated, there is noting In the legisla-
tion that would require that there be
any type of training before these mdi.
vlduals would be provided with a
weapon. aith arrest authority, and
with search and seizure authority.
I think, first of all, that any effort to
address the problems that. exist should
be in the context of a comprehensive
omnibus approach to It. not a piece-
meal approach as Is being advanced
today.
Moreover, I am w ,n.- wed when I
hear the suggestion that these Investi.
gatora would be Investigating orga-
nized crime. Is the gentleman sugge
big that the next thing we are going to
do Is give them wiretap authority? Is
that what the gentleman Is augg
tog?
Mr. EC1 ART. No. Mr. ChaIrman, 31
I may reclaim my time, I think the
gentleman knows full well that that Is
not within the scope and pustlew of
what we are considering here.
There Is nothing on the
suggests that the g th’mp
tion Is what we are asking for.
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield further?
Mr. ECKART. I am glad to yield
once again to the genUeman from New
Jersey.
Mr. HUGHES. Unfortunately, Mr.
Chairman, the longer I am around
here, the more! realize how little law
enforcement agents talk to one an-
other, and what we are seeing Is a pro.
ilferatbon of that. We cannot Insesu-
gate org” d mime imlesa we do
- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
Z snbi ft that we we sending tndiv - —even being -eons ld. il br original
lials out Into the field every single day
who are dealing with the most hard.
ened and heinous criminals, criminals
with long records and repeated of-
What we we saying to the
people who want to enforce the law Is
“Go out there unharmed, go out there
naked. Do not allow yourselves, with
the kind c i background and experl-
enee that we have documented so
thoroughly, the tools you need to do
the job.” - -.
All we have to do Is call the county
sherIff In a community In which these
dumps are located and them how
many times they have been called and
gotten there too late. The simple fact
of the matter Is that we cannot wait
for the U.S. marshal and we cannot
wait for the local sheriff to come
riding over the hill. We have t to
give to the people who are on the
frontline—yes. If we examine these re-
ports, the firing line—the tools to en-
force the existing laws. -
The Is not a phantom pollee force.
‘fliJ 5 nlnIm n, basic protection that
Is going to go to people who, Just In _____
these few offices ..lcme. have accumu-
lated almost 200 years of law .nforce-
nient experience. -
Mr. Chairman. I think the amend-
-ment runs the risk of exposing our im- _____
portant environmental enforcement
officers to Increased risks and Intimi-
dation. I think ft is not. only mishie.
votis, but I think It would lay at the
feet of Congrem a responsibility for at-
tacks that have grievously harmed and
frightened many individuals.
Mr. SIIAW. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman now yield?
Mr. ECKART. I am happy to yield
to my friend, the gentleman from
florids.
Mr. SHAW. Mr. ChaIrman, I thank
the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I think the gentle- ________
man has made a most persuasive argu-
ment in mtlng the credentials of many
of those who would have these arrest
powers. However, I would hasten to
point out that this Is not a require-
ment within the bill. The law enforce-
ment training Ia not a requirement,
and what I am concerned about is
sending somebody out In the field with
a gun and giving him arrest powers If
he has not been trained In that parsic-
War arm.
There Is nothing in the bill on that
point, and I would ask the gentleman
to point It out to me If I have misread
the bill. I do not see anything in the
bill that requires that law enforce-
ment training, and this Is what some
of us on the Judiciary Committee axe
so desperately conom ed about.
Mr. ECKART. Mr. Chatnnan. ft I
may reclaim my time, I would point
out to the gentleman, No. 1 that none
of these Individuals have km than 5
years’ experience, and, No. 2. the
hiring practices within the administra-
tin preclude ucme without that
46 ,-
-------
Noternber 3, 1988
bave, first of all, wiretap authority.
These people do not do these things m
—‘oad daylight. -.
‘fr. ECKART. Mr. Chsirinsn. let me
tim my time.
r. HIJGR . We have to have the
.. LITe capabilities of the law enforce-
ment Component. - - - -
t31440
Mr. ECKART. Let me r.rlnim my
• thne, if I may, Mr. Chairman.
I want to make absolutely clear that
J realize that raising the eeter of
wfretappmg Is something that may
sound good for the purpcs z of debate.
The fact Is that this Issue is not before
us at this time. Let us settle that once
and for all. -
Secnnd, I would say to both the gen-
tiernan from Florida and the gentie-
man from New Jersey that If the ques-
tion Is one of training and Insuring
that we have adequately experienced
Individuals. I would be happy to accept
an amendment, and I think others In
the committee would o1n me. That Is
not the Issue. - -
The Issue Is whether you want to
send people out on the firing line, ex-
posing them to bawds that Jeopard-
ize their health, safety, snd even lives.
In the enforcement of this program.
I think 11 you support the amend-
ment you are running that rIsk. I
would urge defeat of the amendment.
Mr. KINDNESS. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike the requisite number of
-. Chairman. our colleagues, those
who are on the floor engaging In
s debate and listening to it, know
very well that It is a repetition of the
debates that have cociarred before.
some recently and some o er a number
of years. where the same arguments
are presented every time. The same
horror stones are presented every
time. The people change, the faces
change, the names change, the partic-
ular incidents, but It is the same soit
of thirir, “This particular enuse Is so
Important that we must set up a sepa-
rate police force for It. a separate, un-
coordinated police force?’
The gentleman from New .Tersey,
whose amendment Is before us, has
been trying to get across the point
Quite properly that there must be a co-
ordinated ap?rca.ch to the investiga-
tions of organized crime. There must
be. In fact, the unusual tool of wire-
tapping available to such an investiga-
tion In order to be ef(ecUve In getting
at organized crime.
Now, you do not want the internal
Revenue Service and their agents get-
ting ready to make an arrest for
income tax evasion or criminal acts
under the Internal Revenue Code, the
people from the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency getting ready to make
an arrest for violations of the ha rd-
iiç waste law, and some other Federal
tcy getting ready to make an
St for thcir particular scope of the
or violation of It. and they all
.,..ne together ffl uncoordinated
‘ dRF SSfQNAi O ’-’ñdCi
fashlixi the same day c i’ the same
night sod start shooting at each other,
instead of ettlng the criminala—
right? That lain extreme expression
v i the u”e potential that we are
Attempting to create here, I suppose,
but ft Is kind of like that,
You cannot have the separate un-
coordinated police forces working at
these various Federal gurposes, all of
which have their Importance In public
priorities. .“ -
You esnoot stand here and ay hi
good faith that the enforcement of
the hazardous substance control Laws
are mote important than a lot of otiier
Federal laws Thereazeaictof or-
Itlea, “ . .
So let us not Just look at this as If
this was the only place In which there
was a need for law enforcement
powers. If you want to do an effective
job, U In good faith you really want
these laws to be properly enforced, let
us establish a procedure for the depu-
tizing of the EPA agents or officers on
a coordination basis that can be ban-
died through the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, through the Justice Dc-
5iartnient. and try to keep the thing
together so that there Is an effective
Federal law enforcement effort and
not a fragmented one.
I think that Is all that ‘we really are
seeking here and probably all that Is
being sought on both sides of the
issue. Let us be effect.ive at it,
I would like to suggest that if the ef-
forts that. are going on at getting some
language worked out could be success-
ful, that Is probably the best way It
could be dealt with: but I would hesi-
tate to agree that this Is the one and
only place where you can take one ad-
ditional step toward a greauy diversi-
fied Federal police activity. We have
done too much of It already.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike the requisite number of
words.
(Mr. DI]JGELL asked and was given
per” i irn to revise and extend his re-
soarks )
Mr. DLNGEl L. Mr. Chairman. I rise
- strong opposition to the amend-
ment. -
Mr. Chairman. ft has been stated to
us that this bill will create ‘n Ive ex-
tension of the number of agents
charged aith the respon .sibLli.y for en-
forcement of Federal law.! think that
we ought to analyse to see whether In
sct that peril exists.
Well, it 1$ like b thg pegrnnt. you
o only be a little bit pregnant nd
you can only have a little bit of pro!!!-
eratlon. - -
Let me read first who has the kind
a law enforr . t authorities that
we are seeking to give to EPA:
The Department of Agriculture.
food stamp Inspectors, tick Inspectors.
the Natkrnal Marine Fishery Service,
the Department of Labor. OSHA, the
NatMn i At ini pheric sod Oceanic
Av, , the Internal Levenue Service.
the Food and Drug idnilnlstratlon,
P’Iah and Wildlife Service enforcing en-
119139
dangered species isa a, and the Veter-
ans’ Administration. Those are some.
but not all of’ the agencies that hate
such authority.
how, let us look at a bat the problem
Is and why the problem exists. Our
committee has been concerned with
the enforcement of the law. We began
& succession of hearings. Who did we
find Is In the business of illegally
dumping In defiance of State laws and
In defiance of Federal statutes? Guess
who? Organized tme, the Coss
1 cstra- Why’ It Is an Immensely luera-
Live business and it Is a business that As
tailor made for those who osn uk in
and dump a load of hazardous wastes
In the meadows of New Jersey.
Now, what are these wastes? They
are carcinogens. They are mutagens.
They pollute the water. They risk the
health of the people In the area.
The hazardous waste problem Is
probably the largest single environ-
mental problem we have In this coun-
try. We have 15,000 known dumps.
some of which are .iI ,nfntctered by
persons who are known violators of
the law, who have cr4m4npJ recunis .
Let us look at the record of the
ni-iminal Investigators currently em-
ployed by the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency. None of them have less
than 5 years of experi with law
enforcement agencies that have exer-
cised law enforcement powers. We are
not talking about bumpkins. We are
talking about people who have law en-
forcement experience,
Now, why Is law enforcement au-
thority needed?. It Is needed for a
senes of lessons, and I would like to
give the history of these events.
In January of 1983, there was a
unanimous report of the Subcommit-
tee on Oversight and Investigation
that recommended this authority,
after an Investigation of the Involve-
ment of organized crIme In the hazard-
ous waste Industry.
In May of 1983, the Commerce Com-
mittee reported a bin.
In June of 1983. the Judiciary Corn-
mittee secured a sequential referral,
arid they held a hearing. The former
Assistant Attorney General of the
Land and Natural Resources Division,
Mr. James Moorman appeared to sup-
port these powers being gWen to EPA.
Later, administration’s recoenmenda•
tlon was that EPA should request en-
forcement authority and deputizatjon
of EPA’s law enforcement people as
ai ecIal U.S. marshals, That matter
languished from that tIme through a
series of subsequent correspondence
with the Department of Justice, the
Initial part of which took place In
July. The date of the letter Is 3uly 7,
and I will put It in the Rscoac at the
appropriate point .
The full letter tollowa
-------
-. TiIuwwi eL
- : - . - Feo AGanCT.
WasMngloo. D.C. !uZ 7 2*2.
Hon. Caaoi. F.. Deawms.
Auistanl Attorney Gewral, Land and Nate-
aol Resources Thvisioa. Degmrtseeot ‘
Jusftee, Washington, D.C.
Dr. a Mu. Dorants: The puraose of this
letter Is to request your maistance. and that
of the Justice Department, In deputizing as
Apeclal Doputy United States Msrsha.Is the
es’in’ilnal Investigators employed by the ). -
vironmental Protection Agency (EPA). X
,wrltlng at the request of the AdmIn1 aWr
of the rfronmenta1 Protecla in Agency.
In May of 1982, the EPA creased a Cried-
col l dorcement Division wfttun the Men-
- cy’s Office of Legs.! and Enforcement Qun-
ml and b n rw dheent ofa staff cf e-
ilenced criminal Investigators. This recnin.-
went drive followed extensive Internal prep-
srat.ons. Agency-wide training and the de.
velopmeifl of substantial policy and proce-
dures for criminal ease development.. The
of this oUme also followed receipt
of a January 1981 letter from former Attor-
ney Genera.! Benjamin Civiletti that con-
firmed EPA’s Independent authority to In-
veatigats aist refer environmental crimleal
eases. (A copy of thi. letter is enclosed Lw
sour consideration as Attachment A.)
By October. fIeld offices of the Criminal
1orcement Division had been created in
five cities acrom the country and staffed by
21 expenenoed Investig a tors. These of f
were Initiated as a part of an effort to
eosuie effective environmental criminal en-
forcement at the Federal level, and exist to
investigate and refer for prosecution signui-
emit eases of environmental “( enduct
under EPA ’s environmental statutes. -
Special Agents of EPA’s Criminal Ealeme-
Inent Division were elected from approxi-
matety 300 appIles nta and have a ____
‘ five years of pievious experience in a
Jar Federal or State law enforcement
rocy where they have exercised the full
rrsy of law enforcement powers, Including
the authority to make arrests, execute
es nxi mar wran ond eany tn
arms. (A review of the backgrounds of
EP.t’s Investigative aaft is enclosed as At-
tachment B.)
Supervisory agents in the Live field offices
have between 12 and 22 years of previous
experience as criminal thvestigators In law
enforcement agencies such as the U.S Drug
Eaforosment Administration, the Federal
Bureau of Investigation the Bureau of Al-
cobol. T& ° and Ftreartns the Internal
Revenue Ser.’ice and the U.S. Customs
Service. 6upervisory investigators at EPA
Headquarters have fmllar backgrounds Fi-
nally. EPA’s Investigators have been daisi-
lied as GS-IBU criminal investigatem. the
annie daasdica.tIon that is held by
investigators with the country’s major Fed.
‘ii las. enforcement agencies. -
Much has been eninnaplished onder ’A ’i
augmented criminal enforcement Init laUve.
During the first eight months of fIscal year
3983, the Agency, working in mejcewtkm
with the Department of Jed.lee. has already
filed more criminal eases (8) sod convicted
I more defendants (1P than In any recent
year. Twenty.iIve grand lury hwestigatiom
are now In program around the country. and
the Agency’s new Investigative staff baa
opened approxImately Ill) new eases. Of
this number, approximately one half In.
woke violations of the Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act and the Buperfund
law—reflecting the Agency’s present focus
on cases Involving the Illegal disposal of
-udous and toxic waste. The continued
thenesa of Ibis effort is. we believe. n
inIei t of Fedesal Mw enS oivv.mp ii
- xwt y inve st Igation widertakesi by
this Agency in the area of environmental
will involve extensive field in.
tlgaUve work Because of the type of per’
cons involved In Illegal waste disposal, and
be’ ” - vf the remote Uons in whieh en-
ek enlal criminal activity frequenUy
weurs, these investigations Inevitably In-
volve a & v of risk In several Investiga-
dons conducted by EPA’s Criminal Enforce-
nicot Division, Iiidlvldpal targeta have made
veiled or explicit threats concerning cooper-
attire wltr .esi ’ In a number of others, In-
vestlgatlon has disclosed past criminal re-
cords, or known evidence of violent behav.
br, by snbjeete of the inquiry. In one inves-
tigalion . a firearm was discharged by an em
ployte of the targetted during so
herwhe inclIne ‘mp”nr operation .4*-
to the company’s property. (a review of
incidents Indicating the risks associated
with envIronmental InvestIgations ,is en-
dosed as Attachment C.)
In aum, the risks odafod with environ.
mental irwert gr.tionii me the seine as those
encountered hi other more traditIonal areas
of federal InvestIgative work. Each of EPA’s
InvestIgatIve staff has extensive f.mlltsrity
with these types of risks from employment
prior to Joining the Agencr. -
The absence of law enforcement authority
also places operational constraints on day-
to-day InvestIgatIve activity that wIll Inevi.
tably limit the Agency’s Independent ability
to enforce the criminal provisions of Its. n-
vironmental statutes. Fer example, without
arrest powers. EPA’s Investigauve staff can
not prevent on’going illegal activity, such as
roadside dumping, or detain a ,eblc)e to
check Its manifests. Rin itRrly, EPAa Investi-
gative staff must enlist the support of an-
other law enforcement agency. (for exam-
ple. the U .S. Marshals), In order to execute
criminal search warrants, EPA baa received
excellent cooperation from the U.S. Mar-
ahals In search warrants executed to date by
the Criminal Enforcement Division. Nev-
ertheless, because such warrants can
extend over a period of several days. and
frequently e ir In remote areas, they can
make heavy resource demands that will
exceed the capabilitIes of local off mom of
outside law enforcement agencies; these Of-
f ices are. therefore, not always available
within the Umefrarne dictated by the Inves-
tigation or for the length of Lime necessary
to execute the warrant. (A review of oper-
ational difficulties encountered In environ-
‘mental investigations due to tbe lack of en-
I orcement powers n enclosed as Attachment
D.) -
The rl amociated with envlroemental
Investigations and the operational difficul-
ties encountered are generally not predict-
able In advance. As a result, these problems
mot be reliably addreesed In a Memoran-
dum of Vnderstandmg with another law en.
fore agmey. -
I also recognise, of cowie, that the J 1oe
Department has tradlUonally supported
statutory law enforcement powers for we-
Il d -Mw enfw ... , . ..,ent off lom outside o T
£he Justice Department only where clear
sod convincing evidence of the need—devel-
oped over a suitable period of time—Is avail-
able. Because some may feel that the eight
months of experience ci EPA’s Criminal En-
X . . .ent Disialon is an Inadequate basis on
which to consider a permanent statutory so-
lution, I am requesting your assistance In
pursuing, as an interim measure, the depu-
tation of Special Agents of EPA’s Criminal
Enforcement Division through the offices of
the United Stales Marshals Service. During
the period of the deputation, additional
alysh em be performed of the experience
of EPA’s criminal Inv Igalive staff in the
Seid. £ em then be reached on the
- November 2 1938
-need for statutory law cof,,.. _ . _ anI
for EPA’ . InvestIgative staff.
In coordinating with the Marshal’s Serv-
lee, we are asking that deputal Ion authorize
full law enforcement poweia—hicluduig the
authority to execute search warrants, make
arrests sod carry firearms—for Special
Agents of the EPA Criminal Enforcement
Division: and further that the authority
cover the period eonsldeied necemary for
the Justice Department to evaluate the
need far statutory law eafoi ent p ..
for EPA’s Investigators. This authority
would be exercised by EPA’s Investigators
during Investigations of U) violations of the
environmental statutes implemented by
U’4. and 121 vIolations of related Federal
criminal gannezons arising within the em-
t ol. or while pursuing, environmental In-
‘vestlgat lona.
Because of the limited number of EPA In-
stIgators, (23 total), and because of theIr
consIstently high level of experience as law
‘enforcement off iceri before Jn ng the
EPA, we are confident that deputation
would not unduly strain the resources of
the Marshals Service In monitoring the so-
UvItles of EPA’ . Investigators during this
period of deputation. Equally important,
EPA’s Investigators would be able to assume
responsibility for a variety of resource-in-
tensive functions, such as the execution of
extended criminal search warrants, that can
mow place significant d.” ” on the in-
sources of the Marshals Service .
I appreciate your assistance in this
matter, and am & Ihi . in assist, In any
wa,y l e an.
Sincerely vows.
O m,i i . , .iyM.Pezce.
Special Coiu isel to the Adm,nisfrgtorjbr
Er&(orcemevL
On September 22, 1983. slmost I
months, after the request was made by
EPA of the Department of Justice for
law enlorcement authority, no action
had been taken, no proper response by
the Department of Justice.
EPA wntea again and nays as 10 )-
lows:
A further compromise to the form of de-
putization for half the livid office or on an
agent by agent basis, depending on the
pending Investigation load, would not be an
acreptable solution. First, there Is no n cd
for additional experimentation regarding
the experience of our Investigative stall
without law enlorcement power, they have
operated in this manner since the field of-
fices were established last October and con-
tinue to encounter the kind of problems
that were detailed In my earlier letter to
Cami
The full text of which follows:
U.S. Envrsoxi . . ,
Pxo’rec’rro,, Aocacy.
Wcshln plan, D.C., Scptember 22, 1933,
Eon. MisT W*i, .,
Deputy 4srist n1 Attovoe Oewul, Zond
grid Naluvul Resources Thvi.noii, O&
Depavt,yient of Justice. Wo Jiington, D.
Dzs.x MAST: This will erve to confirm our
recent discussions on the issue of deputat.Ion
of the investigatIve staff Of EPA’S Criminal
Enforcement Division, arid In particular the
proposal raised within the Justice I)epart-
went deputize agents In only two of the
four main field offices within the Division,
The purpose of this proposal, as we under.
stand It. would be to allow for an eapemi.
mental period during which the experi
.1 agents acting as Special Deputy tJn2t
Slates Marshals could be compared In the
expefl of thom . 4 ing sithosit t
H 9140 ‘ ;- i’ ; - - cdNGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE
-------
- a you know, deputat1n was seen as an
I Lerini measure that would addresa the t in.
mediate problems being encountered In the
field while allowing maze tame to
The appTup jateress of statutory law ice-
ment powers for E’A’s tin estigative staff.
Staled alternatively, tise decision to pursue
deputation was ilselI a compromise in that
It would postpone the question of statutory
law enforcement poaess until the ex ’en-
wee of EPA ’s Investiga%I e staff could be
analysed ai grealer length,
A further compromise ti the farm of
deputation for half of the field offices, or on
an agent.b:’.agent basis depending on the
pending investigative load, would not be an
acceptable solution. First, there Is no need
for additicnal experimentation regarding
the e penence of ow’ resugatwe staff
wkhout law enforcement powers: they have
operated In this manner since the field of.
fices aeie established last October. and con-
thiue to encounter the typ of roblemz
that are detailed ti my serlier k i ter to
Carol Dinkins.
Soually iniportant. a dectilon to deputize
len than all investigators, or lesa than all
field offices. assumes distinctions between
tndh’ldual or field office caseloads that do
not exist Because the unit Is still nnall,
agents conduct Investig a t ions under all date
utes with no effort at spewali tIon Within
the staff. All conduct investigations in
which the need to execute search warrants
or two Intervene In ongoing pollution activi-
ty exists. All conduct liwestlgaticns In
‘ th the potential for inlftn en rIsk Is
nL Any effort to select agents or field
es that aould be the beneficiaries of
enforcement powers would necewanly
an arbitrary ce .
Deputation of ton than all investigators
would a-ease internal opertuonal difficul-
ties Dual investigative procedures aould be
reQuired, flexibility In Inter-fLeld office In-
vestigations would be reduced, and different
standards for performance evaluation of in-
dividual agent.s and field D l i ices would be se-
qiuie& - -
Eqtily unportsnt, deputation on a field
office basis sould anevnably result es ian-
equal enforcement of hazardous waste Laws
across the country, since offices without law
enforcement powers would be unable to
Vwsoe the more berious and aggratated’
forms of environmental misconduct that are
the reason for this unlt s ezastonse,
Fir,all , to state the obvzous, $ decision to
deputizt less than the entire Investigative
staff a. uid leave the remaining Investiga’
toys fac ng the same problems, and poten-
tial risks, that hare been documented in In-
vestigations conducted to date.
The commitment of the Land and Natural
Resources Di’ ision to the devek, . , ent of
an effectiie ens uonmenlal otminal enlosce ’ .
ment program has been demonstrated se-
peatediy In the past. Your support for
EPA’s efforts to secure deputation for Its In-
vestigators has also been Strong. For all the’
seasons stated above, I believe that our posi-
tion must remain the same, and that we
should continue to seek full law enforce-
ment powers, in the form of deputation, for
the entire imesUgative staLL
Sincerely yours, —
Coourwey M. Pesos,
Sprite! Coiaaar! for Eg/oyremeaL
ie CIIAlR fA , The time of the
iltiernan from Michigan has expired.
- - lI5o - -
R.emeruber, this 1ett r of September
22 Is written to ask why the July 7
c mz unuetipn of EPA to the Depart-
ment of Justice relative to deputisa-
tion of EPA officers to enrry out the
law had not been carried forward.
They are not waking for wedal au-
thority. They -are asking for the same
authority that tick Inspectors for the
Department of Agriculture have to
carry out the law.
The Department of Justice has t
even responded In a 4-month period.
We are told that the Department of
Justice will act promptly and expedi.
tiously. The other day the debate re-
vealed that the Department of Justice
had not resolved 50 percent of the
large number of suits that were filed
several years ago. This Is hardly the
kind of record that say good T end
from the Judiciary Committee, for
whom I have the most intense respect
and affection. can level either a proper
defense or an adequate claim that the
Department of Justice is carrying out
its proper and lawful responsibilItIes,
Let rue cite to the Rouse some situa-
tions that I think are 2mpOrtant , , In
the New York Times an article ap-
peared October 26 pointIng out that
the need SW] exists for law enforce-
ment authority for this kind of officer,
and points out that people have been
shot,, or shot at and that cars have
been burned and a number of other
unfortunate events directed at EPA
law enforcement Investigators are
taking plane. That article follows:
Iflon i lire Yost T . OcW0 ie. 1963 1
Vioicicr £crs Psowi’r Dsaatz Ovss Ouws
- eon EPA Acsazs
Pta ,, October 25—A Federal
agent and tao techiucans horn Atlanta
went to the backa oods of Alabama recently
to gather samples of soil and nater near a
business suspected of £legaUy dumptng
tine chemicals
Someone fared a revolver over their heads.
The men, sent by the Environ’n nt.al Pro-
leetmon Agency, dived behind stacks of
nasty, ooninr 55’gallgn drums When the
bullets stopped, the three fled, unhurt,
their work Incomplete.
That ((arch (7 lz denL a-as one *1.
dcaea violent or po’ n’1ally violent situa-
(tons to confront E,P.L agents once the
agency began its criminal investigation pro-
grain a year ago. As , .ord of the Incident
epread through the agencfl five cirminal
investigation field ohm, some of the 22
agents began en’rytng weapons for protec-
tion. according to one a ho asked not to be
Identified. In so doing, they were br. k ng
the las..
‘Whether the law should be eflanged is
vow being debated m Washington
The Raise of Representatives Is ached’
vied this week to begin Considering amend
to (he Resource Con ’vation said
R vu7 Act of WI6. wh h goeesi tbe
119141
of bawdous waste. One lau,.o ,i
Change, favored by many In Congress. aould
powers akin to those of United States
marshals to environmental investigators en-
forcing that iou. The agents aould be em.
powered to carry weapons, ev i aii 9WeJ
warsassa arid make arrests.
an isncisraat-tow wo SO esces
To really get at the big guys, a here
then’s political corruption and organized
mime” said a lawyer on the staff of a Rouse
subcommittee that deals with environmen-
tal laws. “you need full a’Inunal enforce-
goent powers”
Sot (be Reagan *dmtostxaticn Is less
eager to see pith powers given to EPA.
agents.
AU0rne General William French &nlth
Could use his adminssts-atwe authority to
grant the Ixn’estigators law-enforcement
powers without Congesslonal action, And he
could. In one action, do so with regard t all
the 16 envIronmental laws Congren would
*aave 1oar 4
But P. Henry flatlcht d. the Acting As-
sistant Attorney General for land and natu-
ral resources, said “The granting .01 the
poaer to carry a gun and make arrests is a
serious, significant step, and so It’s some-
thing the execultve branch as a whole needs
to make sure theme is enough Information
Michael Brown, the outgoing eriminsi en-
forreinent counsel for the E.P. A ., noted that
other Federal agents, such as thom for the
Federal Bureau of Invest igation and the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms,
are authorized to carry weapons, Re also
said that “tick thspectors for the Depart
ment of Agriculture were so authortied.
At the same time, however, he mid’ The
question of a criminal Investigation program
as any place but the F.B.L raises Govern.
mentaide issues People In the Federal Gos-
eninient get nervous about a little bunch of
ma -enforcement agents running around the
various agencies carrying guns,”
Those who favor the use of weapons cite
theyesjzng evidence of organized crime’s in-
volvemneru In the thegal disposal of teaje
wastes.
Law-enforcement powers are “desperately
needed” now. mid Representative Albert
Gore Jr., Democrat of Tennessee. “The
reason for this Is the extraordinary degree
(0 ahich illegal £ctlvitles are going on in the
hazardous aaate area, sad conbizacingly es-i.
dence of the Inu’olsemenz of orge-’ ’—
a-OS C5S I PSOILizI
Peter Beeson, aizoclate en1orcr e t cam-
ad for the environment agency, said It was
Impossible for agents to tackle cases lnvolv.
trig mobsters when they could not protect
themsel es with guns.
“Currently, we . e not equipped to Inves-
tigate the Involvement of organzze crime in
the hazardous waste Industry,” Mr. Beeson
said “That is the type of investigation that
would require Lull kw,egajoi nent £iaL i ,
ties,’
An hi tVtroTmientaj Protection
Agency document obtained froni Congres.
slona) sources details 12 violent or potentlal.
ly violent encounters that occurs-ed after
the agency begin criminal Invest igauoas,
The tat, titled “Risks Associated With linvi.
ronmental Izwestigauon ,’ includes these
Incidents,
An Informant in $ Chlcago. a hazardous
waste disposal place was warned that be
would be murdered If he continued to coop-
es-ate with the authorities.
In the Philadelphia asea, a 5wpre fri
hazardous waste In . tIo fired on
Easpecima , aesanited a state ati lis , ,- 4ce ,
November 3 1S&?
“ ‘CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE
Following dlecusoogis aith- say staff, I - (By listanirenim consent, Mr. Du.cgu,
remain of the opinion that EPA’s entire Is- - was allowed It) proceed los-b add ir-’onaj
- estigative staff should be Jeputtzed, and se- ut ,) -
“rate our earlier request at July 7. 1953 los’ Mr. DLNQELL, I would observe, Mr.
- assistance in pursuing these authorl. tha EPA has, first of all.
identified a number of very serious
probJems which have been reported In
the press.
-------
H 9142
released attack dogs i Giwerninent g’ ’
- - wtsfli thresteeed other cit Ic1a .
In the S tUe .a aa . .,es suapect of
Iliegal du r thig f retccnbed a baazdo m
waste site. -
Officials of the E2.L end the Justhe De-
partrnent eould rot dlacuu the lkted es-
wunteti S )u ir g the stisotizig I ncident In
- -
Let us talk a little further about the
record of EPA and the record of the
Department of Justice.
• In Chicago, a citizen informant had
his life threatened, arid he is informed
that these Is a contract on his life U
be persists in cooperating with the an-
thorities. -
• In Seatt.le. the primary targt of an
Investigation In the past has a renged
for the fire bombing of former bust-
• aesses, trafficked in narcoties. threat.-
ened to kill business associates and dis-
pose of the gc v ins in $ hazardous
waste -
In Beattle. two rgets of an Invest!-
gatioa have records for illegal dis-
charge of weapons. A third has made
threats against Government witnesses.
An EPA Investigator In Atlanta. Ga..
while performing routine sampling.
was discovered by a company employ-
ee who fired warning shots at the
technical personnel from a revolver.
Officers of EPA are shot at. -
The Department of Justice can
make no showing that they have done
anything about this.
Mr. RODINO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield? -
Mr. DINGELL. I yield to the gentle
man from New Jersey. -
Mr. RODINO. I th k the g tle-
uan for yielding.
I would like to state that the gentle-
man does make a case—
Mr. DING 1L. Then the gentleman
iouId withdraw his amendment.
Mr. RODINO Icontmnuing). Showing
that there are Instances where there is
ineed .
- What I am sal#Ing through ous
amendment Is that there ought not to
be this proliferation of Jaw enforce-
ment authorities. There ought to be
coordination between agencies. You
would agree that law enforcement oW-
cer should be Individuals who isv at
least trained in carrying out law en-
forcernent duties.
Mr. DINGELL. I thank the gentle-
man. and I will respond and I will say
yes. A has been eklng the Depart-
merit of Justice to deputize their
people. they have not received that de-
putmzation. EPA has done some other
things. EPA baa requested that U.S.
Marshals from the Department of Jus-
tice cooperate in these kinds of Investi-
gations. - - -
I will tell my good friend that by the
time the cooperation is available, the
basis for the tnvestigtlon may be en
shifted by the persons aho will be In-
vestigated, that there Is nothing to In-
vest igate, and .1 am saying that a
-najor enforcement case of this kind
y go down the drain by season of
time that ft takes to motivate and
.thltate the rather slothful people at
he Department of Justice who axe
the gentleman yield!
Mr. DINGELL. I yield to the gentle-
can from New Jersey.
Mr. RODINO. I thank the gentle-
man for yielding.
Would the gentleman agree that
there should fr a demonstration of
need, though, lit order to deputize
these investigators? ,
Mr. DINGELL. Well, let me go on
and read some of the other evidences.
Mr. RODINO. I ask the genth ’ i i if
be would respond to that.
Mr. DINGELL. Absolutely, and I am
mythg that we have Sound that there
Is need.
I am telling the gentleman that EPA
has had hat In band, and ft Is now
nearly 6 months. In early July EPA
went to the Department of Justice to
ask that people be deputized. The De-
partment of Justice has Ignored that
matter until this very date, In spite of
the hearings that were conducted by
the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Fi.omuo), chairman of the subcommlt-
tee.. . -
The CHAIRMAN. The thne of the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr.’ D x i-
has expired.
Mr. DINGELL Mr. Chairman. I ask
unanimous consent that I be permit-
ted to proceed for 8 additional min-
utes.
“The AIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Michigan’
Mr. KINDNESS. Mr. Chairman, me-
serving the right to object. and I do
not intend to object. I just wanted to
draw the attention of the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. DIwcm.L) to the
fact that I would like to have him
yield part of the time be might have
y.n ainIrt g .
M s. DINGELL. I will be delighted to
yield to anybody here U I am permit-
ted the time.
The AIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Dnecsi.xJ?
There was no objection.
(By unanimous consent. Mr. Dxwcm.L
was allowed to proceed for S additmnnal
Mr. DINOELL Let tn point out the
kind of good citizens we are dealing
with here, The target of a RCRA in-
vestigation firebombed a hazardous
waste disposal site, has a prior record
for resisting arrest and easeult on a
police officer. We are not talking
about EPA Investigative folks that
play patty cake. They are investigat-
ing coldhearted killers, not ladies’
bridge clubs. They ore Investigating
members of organized crime.
Mr. RODINO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield further?
Mr. DINGELL I yield again to the
gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. RODINO. I thank the gentle-
men for yielding
Of course. I agree wIth the gentle-
man. We all agree that there should
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD HOUSE
?1ouerabe, 3, 1982
supposed to interest themselves In the be law enforcement. What we are
protection of the public health. • merely stating is that this law enforce-
Mr. RODINO. Mr. Chairman, will merit ought to be predicated on need.
on the need to deputize these Individ-
azals to carry out these responsibilities.
Mr. DINGELL. Will the gentleman
explain why a request for deputizing
EPA officers to enforce the law has
riot been acted on for’ nearly 6 months
by the Department of Justice?
Mr. RODINO. I cannot answer that.
but I would agree with the gentleman
that we will help the genti e . i by
agreeing to—
Mr. DINGELL Oh, the gentleman
held hearings on this matter. The gen-
tleman has mde the suggestion at the
beginning ci that 6-month period that
these people ought to be deputized.
The Department of Justice has done
nothing, nothing, and we are riot talk-
ing about people that play patty cake.
We are not talking about ladies’ bridge
clubs. We are not talking about semi-
narians, but people that shoot big
black guns and firebomb other folks
businesses.
Mr. KINDNESS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. DINGELL I yield to the gentle-
man (rota Ohio.
Mr. K1NDN S. the gentle-
man for yielding.
I think there Is one other aspeot
that perhaps has not been touched on.
and I would like to ask the gentleman
Ins response to this: Is It not tzue that
in the case of organized mime, and the
sort of criminals that the gentleman is
referring to. you must have a coordi-
nated approach in case these are other
Investigations going on? IL Is desirable.
I take Ii, in the gentleman’s view, in
have that coordinated, so that the var-
ious violations of law that are being In-
vestigated would be dealt with togeth-
___ er?
Mr. DINGELL. I applaud coordina-
tion. I think it should be done. I detect.
no coordination, because I do not see
that the Department of Justice has
even cooperated the first time.
I yield further to the gentleman
front Ohio (Mr. Knrmizss).
Mr. KINDNESS. The gentleman
toucbes on a very good point, but per-
t iap5 sees It In a different light than I
do; and that Is. have we supplied the
Department of Justice with adequate
resources In order to be able me-
gpond to all these various fragmene
needs?.
i t t. DINOZIL II the eenueman
would permit, we know the Depart-
ment of Justice does not have ade-
Quate resources. That is one of the
reasons we are concerned, but we also
know they have not done the lob. EPA
cannot do the job because they do not
have the authority.
All we are asking Is EPA have the
same authority that tick inspectors at
____ the Department of Agriculture ha,e
right at this ImInnt.
Mr. DNE Mr. Chairman. will
the geut1. sn yield?
-------
November 3, 1983
Mr. DI7 OELL I yield further to tbe
genUernan from Ohio.
Mr. KINDN S. I thank the gentle-
n for again yielding.
:o cite another example of the prob.
..rn, we have task forces being formed
all over the country for the enforce-
inent of the drug laws and against or-
garnz,ed crime, 32 of them around the
country, for the very purpose of deal.
trig with this problem of coordinating.
Why do we Dot coordinate the func-
tlons to begin with?
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. D i ii.
.i.) has again expired.
(By unanimous consent. Mr. Drwcsu.
was allowed to proceed for 3 additional
minutes.)
Mr. DINGEIL I do not object to
that. I have no objection to coordina-
tion. I think It Is a splendid Idea, but
the problem is we have this hazardous
waste sItuation in hand.
Let me give the gentleman one ether
thing: people who are being Inves-
tigated right now for RCRA violations,
the first has a record for murder and
larceny: the second for sodomy and
I n iracy and extortion. -
Dm00
These are not people who play
patty-cake. They ire not Investig ting
ladies’ bridge clubs.
The health issue here with regard to
- hazardous waste Is one of the worst
—“iat we have and one of the worst
-blems we have in the country. We
e organized crime, which Is func-
. ning in stolen trucks to ferry this
.iufI to illegal dumping grounds. We
have people from EPA who are getting
shot at. We have them requesting au-
thority from the Department of Jus-
tice to deputize their people. We have
them reQuesting that the Department
of Justice Lake action. They are not.
We have two letters ‘from Mr. Ruck-
elshaus’ EPA. which I have included
with these remarkd, asking Depart-
ment of Justice cooperation and re-
ceiving nothing in return. -
Mr. KINDNESS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield!
Mr. DINGELL. I am glad to yield to
coy friend.
Mr. KINDNESS.! thank the gentle-
man for those illuminating remarks.
But, you know, let us suppose those
trucks to which the gentiemBn refers
that are stolen trucks and are hauling
waste In one dlrectlon.-.a couple of
years ago we beard the argument
about food stampe being hauled
around In similar fashion. Maybe they
are doing that on the return loads—let
us coordinate the efforts to get at-
both of those types of law breaking.
Mr. DINGELL. Let me Just point out
the gentleman argues In theory, and if
the Judiciary Committee can bring the
Department of Justice to move on this
‘ 1nk It will be a splendid thins and I
Id applaud his labor and I will
end to tLLm every cooperation.
must say that my patience, the pa-
nce of the committee of which I am
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE .
S member, with the Department of
Justice en Its record of ha enforce-
meat is now exhausted. About 50 per-
nent of the prosecutions that have
been referred involving cases of immi-
nent endangerment to the public
health—that Is not talking about
something that may mean somebody is
going to get poison Ivy or athlete’s
foot. that means a whole community is
endangered .from carcthog ns and
things of that klnxl—ha;e not been re-
aolved by the Department of Justice,
We have here o nized crime d.ump-
tnt illegalZ,y In every area, Includmg
the marshes of New J sey. We have a
situation where we ea’mot get th De-
partment of Justice within a 6-month
period to simply deputize EPL
Now, EPA again, I say, is not Investi-
gating Girl Scouts. They are Investi-
- ttng voId-hearted people who t e
flrebombs and big black gima.
I yield to my good friend.
1&r. KINDNESS. 3 thni k the gentle-
man for yiclding. -
I i ould Just urge then that the gen-
tleman very seriously consider some
language that will be offered, I under-
stand, which comes very close Jo get-
ting this kind of coordination and get-
ting the cooperation of the Depai .
ment of Justice that the gentleman Is
seeking. I think It would be highly
Mi-. DI1JGELL. Mr. Chairman, I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GORE. Mr. Chairman, I move to
strike the requisite number of words
and rise to speak against the amend-
ment.
The debate has been going on for
quite some time and I think by now
the need for law enforcement powers
for EPA’s criminal investigators, both
on operational grounds and safety
grounds, Is quite clear.
Back in July I Inserted Into the Cow-
GRZSSIONAI. Rrcoan a list of 24 episodes
Involving Investigators of hazardous
chemical dump sites that had been
threatened with violence In one way or
another by the targets of those Inves-
tigations.
I include those again for the infor-
mation of my colleagues.
The material referred to follows:
ee Iwincariows P Viotmer I V
Ewviso,non rn CRIMINAL IiiVzSrIcATlOiiS
‘Pennsylvania landfill operator shoot. two
policemen, one fatally (Criminal Enforce-
ment Division).
Pennsylvania Stats DEft Inspector’s cer
naah d family threatmed in Le4SWWTI
Pen isanla Cr maJ Enfos .en.t Dlvl-
Anon of house of witness against convict-
ed landfill operator, April 1979 (CrIminal
Enforcement Division).
£ Wt and 10 miles vehicle chase of Di]
contract inspector RCR.A) by landfill oper-
ators Crimrnal Enforcement Division).
Six poteesial witnesses In Moyer landfill
prosecution (U.S. v. Larugin) received death
threats, or had homes burgled and property
destroyed (Criminal Enforcement Division).
Phiaind ult State air pevior
fRrgon fli I nergrn 1 r) .
Discharge of a capon ovsi beans of Stais/
P 1ersl th ecvcm (R on Ill ezgency
-—, _f.’
119143
Arson of family residence to discourage
compeUllon I r County landfill buainon in
New Jersey (CruTunaI Enforement Dii ision,.
Iluent with shotgun on local police off i.
__ during surveillance of hazardous waste
hauling in Rockland County, New York
(Rocklarvd County Police).
Threats on rnvestagat8r with N YE. Orga-
sized Crime Task Force during hazardous
waste investigation (N.YS. Organized Crane
Task Force).
Assault on lieutenant, Rockiand County
Sheriff’s Office, during surveillance of haz-
ardous waste hauling (Ro iand County
SbertlVs Department).
In Kenzwty (1972) and Georgia (1976)
EPA Lns ctors were forced from sites at
g point ICi-’nin& EnIor ent Divis i
tLtania Field OLtite,).
In Jennings, Florida (1975) EPA employee
physically assaulted by trucking company
president Criminal Enforcement Division
(Atlanta Field Office)).
In (1981) and Florida (1961).
EPA Inspectors received verbal threats of
physical violence if they continued their
work (Criminal Enforcement Division (At-
lana Field Office)).
In South CRrolina (1976 and 1979) EPA
peafleide inspector was twice threatened at
knife point (Criminal Enbar” nL Division
(Atlanta Field Office)).
Is Ohio (1979), EPA bssp .aor verbally
threatened (‘guya with Joba like yours can
get shot”) during oil ,W investigation
(Criminal force it Division (Chiosgo
Field Office)).
Target of Oregon investigation baa threat-
ened to cut up and stuff disloyal employees
into 55 gallon drum Criminal forcement
Division (SeatLIe Field Office).
Targets of Washington investigation have
prior arrests for weapon offenses and/or
have made threats against potential wit-
nesses Criminal Enforcement Division (Se-
attle Field Office).
Target. of California investigation tarson
of landfill) has prior record for resislung
arrest and . u1t on police officer Crimuis..
Enforcement Division (Seattle Field 0 1 1 ice)
Targets of Alabama investigatlan habit-
ually possess and carry firearms Criminal
Division (AUant.a Field
Office).
Targets of RCR.A surveillance (truck driv-
ers) believed to carry weapons Criminal En.
foycen ent Division (Chlcagc Field Olfioci.
Evidence of organized crime Involvement
In waste disposal business in Cleveland,
Ohio Criminal Enforcement Division (Clii-
cego Field Office).
Evidence of use of stolen vehicles Is trans-
portation of hazardous waste in Cleveland,
Ohio Criminal En1m ent Thvlsio (Chi-
cago Field Office).
Target of Illinois RCR,A investigation nor-
inally seconipanied by two bodyguards
Criminal Enforcement Division (Chicago
Field Office).
Mr. GC)BE. Borne rimilse
have been referred to in the debate al-
ready. These examples constitute the
single strongest argument against the
pending amendment, threats wIth
ghotguns, death threats, EPA inspec-
tors forced from sites at gunpoL’it,
EPA Inspectors facing threats of phys-
ical violence, threatened at knifepoint
In two States, and the list goes on and
on.
There are many other cases where
investigators have been unable to stop
vehicles In the proc of illegally d-
posing of toxic chpmira k and have en-
countered lengthy delays in executing
-------
Wouember 3, 1982
119144
search warrants simply because they
do not bare law enforcement powers.
• Ibe argument to favor of the
• am ndrnen Is that you have to dem-
oustrate a need for them to have law
enforcement powe a . We have ‘ 4 i .
strafed a need fc ’ to have law
enforcement ww . AU over the
‘United States the need is clear.
We have also heard that L the Judi-
dal7 Committee ’s own bearings this
summer the former Assistant Attorney
•Geners]. one of the people easet
knowledgeable about hazardous wastes
In this coun y. James Moornian. test&-
tied In strung support of giving law em.
forcement powers to As m ’ul
Investigators and it was after that.
for fly requestedit
We have heard that since that time
- the Justice D artment has done abso-
lutely notlrng -
L et me Just qi e fr rd
was oent at the direction
of Mr. Ruckeishaus. It says
• The absence of law enforcement autborftp
places oOeTaUona mnazTa nts on day-to-day
vestlgaUve .etivlty that will Icevitably
l nlt the agency ’s Independent abfllty to en-
force tha nimInal ovia1nua al Its envhno-
men 1 -
• Re goesw . IwW not read the
entire ‘text. - . -
But stilL no .cthon has been token
by the Department of Justice. - -
And as recently as 1 month ago, at
the direction of Mr. Ruckelshaus. the
request was renewed once again, Let
me quote from this letter aigned by
Courtney M. Price, ecl.al counsel for
enforcement it EPA. He u sa. ‘1 be-
Ileve our pesitlon must remain the
annie. that we should continue to seek
fun law enforcement powers.
Still. no action Is forthcomk frem
the Department of Justice.
So the Lime baa come for us to act In
this Congress by giving EPA criminal
Investigators law enforcement powers
to get serious about stopping the U-
l l disposal of hazardous chemical
wastes, to equip them to deal with the
Involvement of organized crime In the
hazardous waste Industry. EP&’ a
catninal enforcement program must
create a rrallsth deterrent I n £a es
‘well as In “ “ - . - ‘ - .., - .
Let me point out. Mr. Cbalrman
this change would not sffect y
people—25 enforcement officers at
this point—and tt I a critical to note’
that every aingle one of them affected
has a ynininium of 5 years experience
with other law enforcement agencies
such as the FB I the Customs Serv ,
sod the Drug *“ “ ‘
tratlon. -
Mr. Chairman, If Members want to
protect our omntry against Illegal dis.
pomi of hazardous wastes. It they
a-ant the best sdmfriIstra tofl of the
laws pr hIb1tIng Irresponsible and II-
legal disposal of hazardous wastes.
they will certainly vote down this
nending amendment
‘Sr. aDO H . Mr. Chairman, will
gentleman yield? - - .
Ir. 001 IL I yield to gentleman.
Mr. HUGHF . Does the avntl
realise that Mr. Moorman left the .Tus-
*1cc Department to 1981? ‘That means
be has not been there In about 2 years.
Second. when ss ed the question.
and ! was t . Mr. Moorman s se-
son that there probably a
need for the firearms thing ” That
washistotairesponse. . -
1 57. OORE. For the wh4 ?
15 ?. BUGH . ‘The firearms
thlng - ‘ -.
Mr. OORE. Reclaiming my time, of
co u there Is a need for them to
have this authority and I am very ft.
fltai with Mr. Moorinan. A good
nnber of people left the Jngke Do.
is IIIL
But for the genUe” ’s icitu-mailon.
our committee, chaired by my col-
league from Mlchlgnri, baa had some
40 hearIngs on the dangers associated
with illegal dumping of hazardous
chemicals, and on several occasions
Mr. Moortnan ha.s testified at length
about the problems. -
I daresay there Is no one In the Jut.
51cc Department before cc wine who
has had more Involvement with the
day-to.da,y problems encountered by
the EPA and by other Oovernn ent In-
spectors hr d 1ir g ‘with the problems
associated with hazardous chemical
wastes, I think he stifi stands as She
leading expert on this problem.
If he Is not sufficient for the gentle.
man, I would otto Mr. Ruckeishaus
and his deputies who continually
crank out these letters a pitiful
fashion, week after week, month after
month, aekirig and p1c r1Ing for this
very authority which the Justice De-
partment contlntmliy refuses to give
the -
doe we to Jint. alt here end do noth-
ing In the face of that record?
Z o. ‘The time has come to act. These
people con use this authority. This au-
thority Is essential and the amend-
sendi must be doip tPd
rw en .
w- - * i wi m PT —
Mr. HUuzie . Mr. Chairman. I offer
a perfecting amendment to the Judlci-
ary Committee amendment.
The Clerk read as I ollou
Porte tag dmer to Iudrcterv
tItee amendment offered by Mr.
Rocunc Page 33. strike out 1 sad all that
follows down through - • taos ge 34 end
— . S.
fe) w Auvpoerrv.—(3)
The Attorney General ball. at the je Ii
of the A nIn,stor find on Ibe tisa i of a
of iired.l depothe euahfaed =
plopwa c i the vfronmenta1 Proted ion
Agency to serve as SpedaI I puty United
States Marshals Sn a,mInal Investigations
•wttb r &t to ,totaU w of the atoms)
ovMu of fib . - -
Mr. UVG . Mr. Chairman, I
think that this amen TI nt a ,d fremga
the concerns raised by any colleagues
from New Jersey and Michigan. It In
essence provides that the Attorney
General shall, and shall is mandatory.
at the request of the Admhds ator of
the & . ental Protection Agency,
and on a basis of the thawing of need.
deputize qualified employees of the
Environmental Protection Agency to
serve as special deputy U.S. n’i shal
In criminal Investigations with respect
to violations of the aisolnal provisions
ofth lsact. -
I think that addresses the concerns
raised by my colleague from Ohio and
others that we have only qualified in-
dividuals that serve as deputies.
1 thInk It addresses the questions
raised by my colleague from Michigan
who Indicates that the Attorney Gen’
eral ias not respond. d to the concerns
of the frvirnnm ’ntal Prot Inn
In deputiz1n . or otherwise pro-
viding support for those Investigations
where in fact there Is
I think It addresses the concerns
raised by must all of the Member’s who
have raised questions on the floor
about the procedures involved ,, about
the coordination Involved, because
under this particular seenario the Dc ’
partinent of .Timtiee would still
the lead agency.. - - -
t
Mr. DINOELL Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. HUO S. I wbuld be happy to
yield to the gentleman from Mictugan.
Mr. DINGELL. I tbe ik the gentle-
man for yielding. -
Mr. Chairman, eno the gentleman
tell me what the difference between
the aml .frv P11t be offers now and c x-
Ist inglaw is? • -
Mr. EUG . Well, the differences
Is that this Is now mandatory, this
says that the Attorney General shall.
Mr. DINGELL. ft Is not. ft Is
tory upon showing of need.
Mr. HUG . Upon the showing of
need.
Mr. DUqGELL. What ha showing of
need? _____
Mr• BU iiir . I would any to my col-
league that If In fact the Adnilnistia-
tor of the EPA has communicated to
the Attorney General that there in
specific Investigation underway which
requjres a special deputizatlon and
aubstantlates that with the nature of
the continuing investigation, present-
tog evidence of a Tisk to the safety of
the individuals pursuing the tnt . stLga-
tion or showing that In fact the groupa
have some connection to organized
crime as has been raised during this
debate, then under those cirmim.
stanem the Attorney General must
Mr. DINOEIL TI the gentleman
would yield further, can the gentle-
man tell me what this would do’
Slow, a letter a-u sent on July 7
from. EPA to the Department of ,Tus-
Uce requesting that they o appoint
officers of EPA as deputy , ‘chat
Subsequently In September on the
date that I have inilli,oled earlier, Sep-
tember . a further letter requestior
a response .to the first letter’ an
giving add1’ l facts s forwarded
to the Department of Justice by EPA.
CONG ’1 ESSIONAL ’ ItECORD H $IJSE
-------
Wovember 8, 1388 “ CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
There has been no response Mr. 2iuuut . Many people who are
either and there has been no action on Inspecting wage and hour and other
Ith er. - - violations do come In contact with or-
Now. In each Instance they set forth ganized crime officials. I might say to
..ause to sustain their request. They my colleague there are times when the
Vointed out the kind of folks they Civil Rights Conimissioners and their
have been dealing with, sodonusts, investigators come In contact with
murderers, persons who have been people who do not like them, where
charged with fire bombing, things of there Is confrontation between th
that. kind. People who operate With The CRAIRMAI The time of the
stolen trucks and folks who disoharge 5tflti Dan from New Jersey (Mr.
large black guns at EPA officers were RUCEi ) has expired.
the kind of folks they were after. .. (By m ntmous e ent , Mr. Hvaicsa
Now, Justice has done nothing. a’lowed to proceed for 2 additional
What will this amendment do to the wt ) -
situation In which we find ourselves! . 3Lr. HU I say to my colleague
What will the Department of Justice ..11 due respect the answer is not to
have to do’ A basis of cause has been Create a mini-police force In every
established by EPA. Notiung has Ieen agency and department of Govern-
done by Justice. - - ment , otherwise you would end w
Mr. HUGEES. Well, we did not have With hundreds of law enforcement
this procedure in place, I inight say to aaencies In all the egencies and de’
my colleague. This procedure has not partments and commissions of the
been in place. This Is a mandatory re- Government. And I would hope that
quirement that. upon a. showing of inY colleague would see the wisdom of
need by the Administrator, the Attor- Put & in place a structure that will
ney Gen raJ must deputize a address his concerns. -
agent - - ., , , , In this Instance the Attorney Goner.
Vnder present a. - ___ us mandated upon request and upon
•quired. . the showing of need to deputise.-
Mr. DINGELL. Who makes the f Mr. FISH. Mr. Chairman. ili . the
Ing as to need? , gentleman yield? ‘ “
Mr. HUGHES. I yield to my cot-
Mr. HUGEFS. Well, the Attorney league from New York.
General In the final analysis is going MY. 1ISu. 1 th n the gentleman for
to have to. -
yielding.
Mr. DINGELL The Attorney OCD T Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the nil-
‘ L Well, the Attorney General then nority of the Committee on the Judici-
as the authority to make a finding of , , I think this amendment addresses
.eed and 11 he finds there Is no need all of the questions that have been
he does not even have to respond tO raised as the gentleman Indicated In
the correspondence. And he has not presenting this amendment.
been responding to the Co iTespond- i very happy to accept It.
ence so far And our obleni Is we Mr. HUGHES. I thank my colleague
cannot even get the Department of froni New York. the distinguished
Justice to answer Its mail where fl ranking minority member of the full
forcement authority Is requested. Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. HUGHES. I must say to ray col- Mr. w. Mr. Chairman, will the
league (Mr. Du cn ,iJI am not going tO gentleman yield?
stand here and apologize for the Jus- )Li’, HUGHES. I yield to the gentle-
tire Deps.rtment. They do not answer man f - n
my mail, once in a while. But let me Mr. SHAW. j th i* the gentleman
lust say to you the answer is not to for yielding.
create another special police force I D Mr. Chairman. I would like to also
another agency Cf Government the congratulate the gentleman (Mr.
ansaer Is to try to Improve the niecha. Hucais) for a very fine amendment.
nism whereby the law enfoi iueM In listening to the debate, ft is perfect.
agencies respond to the legitimate ly obvious we all a ant the same thing,
needs and concerns of other agencies, everyone here on both sides of the
But the answer is not a further P l O ” original omendinem and now as to the
liferatlon of law enforcement because gentleman’s amendment. I think we
you are not going to get that coordina. have to at least assume that people in
finn. - Government are going to sometime act
Mr. NC)ELL. ‘Will tbe gitle wisely and perha thai Is a rule
tell me whether the tick Inspectors of ftther than the exception.
the Department of Agriculture have to would to the gentleman from
establish a showing of need In order to M ct gan (Mr. Dzwcsu In talking
carr • firearms to serve process? • about some of the problems he has
Mr. RUGI . Mr. Chairman. I have had with the Justice Department, that
not yielded to the gentleman any fur- the gentleman from Mlc ugan has also
ther. May I just recapture my time for In the past been known to be quite
a moment? . critIcal of the EPA,
I want to say to the gentleman that The EPA itself, assuming they are
iere are enforcement officers In the going to completely act responsibly I
aepartznent of Labor who can make think only allowing those who had law
he very same ease being made by the enforcement expenence Is certainly
EnvlrorunenW protection Agency, -. puttIng some amount 01 faith In the
Mr. DINGELL. And they have. - EPA. When we are taikilig about law
119145
enforcement, however, I think that
the Attorney General should definite’
be Involved at some particular
phase. I think this Is the middle
ground that we have all been search-
ing for. I would hope that we would all
enhance this amendment as at least a
good first step in getting what we all
want to get. And we all warn to do the
same thing and we all ought to accept
the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman (Mr. HuGusa) has expired.
(On request of Mr. R.omxo and by
unanimous consent, Mr. Hucuas was
2llowed to p cored for 3 additional
minutes.)
Mr. RODINO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. HUGHES. I would be happy to
yield to the chairman
Mr. RODINO. I thank the gentle-
man for yielding.
Mr. Chairman. first of all I want to
say that I support the gentleman’s
other amendment. I think It shows
again, that we are trying to be reason-
able and do that .which is In the best
,lnterest of law enforcement.
- I would like to point out for clarifi-
cation since the gentleman from -
Michigan (Mr. DzNcxu .) has seemed to
suggest that there Is a lack of coopera-
tion and a lack of coordination that
the Courtney Price who is counsel for
EPA. appeared before the Committee
on the Judiciary on June 7. At that
hearing she stated quite clearly in
answer to questions put to her by me
that the Department of Justice has
been very cooperative with the EPA.
Ma. Price was very enormously Im-
pressed by the spirit of cooperation
and the extent to which the two agen-
cies do share the same philosophy and
share the same position on important
policy Issues.
80 I think we would resolve this
question by accepting the gentleman’s
(Mr. Busurs) amendment.
Mr. DINGEIL Mr. Chairman. will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. HUGHES. I yield to the gentle-
man from Michigan.
- Mr DINGELL. I thank the gentle-
.n for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, would the gentleman
then tell us If this cooperation is so
splendid, why the Department of Jus-
tice does not answer their mail, 5
months in one Instance after they got
the first letler. and better than a
month since they got the .eonnd.
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, I was
not going to embarrass the gentleman,
but let me ask the gentleman has the
£PA always responded to the gentle-
man’s letters?
Mr DINGELL. EPA always re-
sponds Sometimes they do It without
pain and sometimes they do It with
considerable pain, but they always do
respond to the Cnmmltlee on Energy
and Comm we.
Mr. KINDNESS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
-------
‘ O) Boft
(TX) BeiQi
-,
-•. Bil
Bolt
____ •
o uti I •- Uort i
‘ iId
• - -
CriJa - Bub rd
O*ne. el Bu iby
P (5 Bi i
nlel
—
--
- ..
deli Oix Jenklne
Deftumi Jo (u wn
Dern - Jcm GICl
DeWo Jo (O K.)
D .’4” — J (fljj
-
De
Dewne flj -
Ortler Kftdee
- ,.
DE7pT -
Dp aui -
-
deirde (AL) 1&ntcs
Edwarde (CA) IAUI •.
4wde (OX) I .th
ez L .th
_____ i.h . (CA)
dZtL - 1 b as PL)
- fr -
R imUA) I
(Ui, Ia
Peighan - L e t i(C&)
Pemzo )m (FL)
Lloyd
P lorto La w
POTdCMfl LO eTY(CA)
sp I Luian
-
.
r ._ u eKay
-
kAI l ifl O
Otydo.
Orl ,1 Mutin (U.)
Oetu Mart n(NC)
iein am
0 bi . At.rU o
O( n Meteut
O4 rth - Mavrooha
ol
Oood1 Mecsnd1
Ocue McCI tpy
McOueth
McEn ih
ztnI McK n
0uoder McK
• (Ill) •1.P2..ut 7
• BiDf fl’
Bafl.8 M.WerCA)
Bam1ft M4Iez (OH)
M ’
j.euHW) dbi
(UT) Witdi.5
- -
____ _____
....- - -. ‘- •‘
Moody -
-.
Iloayu.on ICT)
MOITLWI% (W*J
Mwt -
M .
Hatcher
Pitchol.
Il i el ow
O•Bi • is.
Obey
•• 1 ••
Oweni..
Oxley
•
Patmin
Pc i
Poppez
.
Ray
Hitler
Robmoon
Rothno
Rost
Roth
Row
Rudd
Biwyer
Bhar
Hiiu way.
Ehueter
MkoT
caelton
th ?lJ
Ith (IA)
a (RH)
&wltli. Denny
ita. a t
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
November 8, 1988
m-woann TI.i t WIlliimi (Ob,
Otenflolm tidal) Wii.on
Tslentbw Wum
bursuon Vistdrr Jigt WIrth
VsndczgTltI WP
Btuinp Venlo W oU
S ...ta VolE r, Jolpc -
tft Vu no, Worthy
WhiTen Vv,uiti%
l ’allon Walker
Tiuke WatPJ WylW
W r r Tstue
We ber Tavon
Tbom.a (CA) Wri - few (FL)
1bomaa (GA) Wheit Young (NO)
Whzle (iw ZaDI i
1bIT lli Wbitley
WhflI .
‘ 01550 -
The CHAIRMAN. Four hundred
four Members have answered to their
names, a quorum Is present, and the
Committee will resume Its businem.
aenoenm yam
The CHAIRMAN. The pending busi-
ness Is the demand of the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. HUGHZS) for a
recorded vote.
Does the gentleman fz Weu,
Jersey insist upon a recorded vote?
Mr. HUGHES. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I
renew my demand far a recorded veto.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the
provisions of clause 2. rule TR T11 this
will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic
device, and there were—ayes 292. noes
125. not voting .16, as follows:
119146
Mr. HUGHES. I yield to the gentle-
man from Ohio. -
- Mr. KXNDNES& I thank the gentle-
man for yle1di . . - -
Mr. Chairman. I aimply want to ea-
pa-em my support for the gentlemans
(Mr. HucuXa) amended language.
The purposes all are seeking to onve
here I think would be served by this
approach md anyone but the least
reasonable would agree that this lithe
approach. .
- Mr. HU’ I thank the gentle-
man.
Mr. Chairman. I yield heck the b..l-
time. . , •
The CHAIBMAN. ‘The question lson
the perfecting amendment to the Judi-
ciary Committee amendment offered
by Mr. Hucggs. -. -
The question was ken end m a di-
vision (demanded by Mr. H roma)
there were—ayes 6, noes 9. ‘.
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman. I
demand a recorded vote, and pending
that. I make the polift of order that a
Quorum Is not 171cOdUt .
The - CHAIRMAN. vldent1y a
quorum Is not pienetfl. . -
The Chair announces that pursuant
to clause 2. rule .X.A.w, be will vacate
proceedings under the call when a
quorum of the committee appears.
Members will record their preseooe by
electronic device.
The call was token by e1e ’on1c
devise.’ . . -
:;,.:: cis o
The CHAIRMAN. A quorum of the
Committee of the Whole has not ap-
The Chair announces that a rnguIsr
quon call will now commence.
Members who have not already e
sponded under the noticed quorum
call will have a mmimum 01 15 mm-
ut to record their p-esence.
Pursuant to the proviuona of eloimi .
2. rule TTT the Chair armotances
that he will reduce to a nn n,mum of S
minutes the period of tame within
which a vote by electronic device, U or.
dered. will be taken an the pa.ndtqg
question following the quorum call.
Members will record their presence by
electronic device. - - - .. -
The call was taken by electronic
device, and the following Members re-
sponded to their - -
- lBdUNo.449 1
Addabbo
Aka
Annunrio
Anthony
A )e lr
Rodham
Banwd
Bartlete
Babb
Dmeolrv
Bruiu
BeiIU
Bl iley
Boebirut
Row
Broi a
BroomlIe ld
Bynybill
Barton (CA)
BurtOn (1)1)
Campbell
c arne y
Cbapn le
Cl&3,
Co4eman )
conable
nte
Deugt i lbt
Crane. ?hwp
Wozu. No. 4501
AYES-
Ranien (VT)
H n
Deub U.aITI hOn
Din, Eartnrtt
do li Osren Uitd,er
bei
Dixon B ig lu os
Diuiiem Bfter
Der4er HU la
Durtin Horton
Dyrnalip Bubbaid
Edw.vdi (AL) Bu
wurdi (CA) Hiwt
£dwdaiUK.) Buniee .-- -
Huuo - -
r thb- Hyde
treliod
Lusni (LA) Jaeibb
J rilo rdi
? sZlo Jenk i na-
- Joh i
S cene
P edIe, - Jone.(OK )
Plelda Jonci (TN)
P I po.
P o h e y KaaLen ’
Poieythe Kizen
Lamp -
X i
Geka i _____
—O Ilman Krs ,nu
Oingnch Iagnnuar.
Olu.e , j
-
Onsd m Leith
Ons ( )
Ova, Lehman (F Sâ
Uuartnl icaig (CA)
O ..4 ,. . . iR e ), (FL)
Bill(DeI pj
Bill IOU) 1lrU on
Ball,
Hilt a. Leefl
, I ___ . __ • _ 1 __ i
__ 3 5owU7 &)
Ackeimaa
BodeS
A ,4 .i .
Bni
D m 1 0 11
0ma
-&
._ .__l_. •
su
Akvan
Loderion
Berman -
Rothune
Br
- Bmenoet odd
Aiutrre, ( T X)
Duel
Brown (CA)
* OunZlO
Biaggi -
Blewn( )
£ wng
BBo
BleybU
Agolaman
Biliry
Burton (CA)
Aa m
Bochie?)
Burton (DO)
AuCude
.
Hires
Rodham
Doliod.
Baroa,d
-
Dmuue
Booby
Can,ey -
Caieer
e u
Honker
Ow
i
Bai
.- .
,C erv-
S
-------
.&l
Stangei
S&esh ol
8tok
eu
S imdo r
Ts
T ame
T*ylor
Thomas (CA)
Tho a ( j
a
Vander J.it
V ande,gr llI
Volkmer
Vs no,1
Walker
Watk i ns
Wpatwr
•Whi leliasas
WIuUe i
Whit taker ‘•
Wiilianm(IIT)
Wilbeass (OS)
Wilioc
Winn
Well
WOTt Y
Wng
W)lI 5
Yatas
Yow (As)
Tounj (Pb)
Younat SSO )
Novem?xr 3 1182 aJNG1ESS1ONALIECO1 D —HOUSE’•••’ If 9 U7
Pkt i ‘ r -- ‘ . - fl -. eondu 1ng hearings to look at th e
- i The Clerk announced the following
JT IOU Patti -. The bankruptcy law Is an Important
.attm l i la
Martin NC Porter this i’Jto - - - element of this Nations legal and f-
Martin WT Pnoo Mr MiChe] i -IthMr Ha nanelal system. tut It. of course, nia’
Mataul P r*td t d not be used by those whose sole put-
- , Mrs. B000S h nged her vote from pose is to avoid responsibility for the
- - Y ” O ’
McCain - Itatc , Mr. DIXON, . EOSTMAY Cleaflup of hazardous wasie.
Mi-. fl..ORIO. I thank my dtstin-
cCandl -aa,
• .-. and Mr. WILLiAMS of Montana for his Ieaderthlp In
• - need their votes from zio” to
Mc lUdre - this area, and I pledge my full support
Roberta So the perfecting amendment to the ‘br your committees hcartnas.
MeHush Robimast
• ‘-‘y rn ‘ Use a n ent There are currently In litigation
- agreed more than a dozen RCRA and Super-
ici uiiy iiogers - ‘The - t. c fund maca in which the defendant has
Rooten oq j found rt convenient to declare bank-
Mifler (OH) - nounced as aboi e recorded. ruptcy rather than cleanup the endan-
- The ChAIRMAN. Under the rule.
Minlab Rowland the Juthcuuy CO rUse germent he has created. There are sev-
Rodd -- . ‘ to strike svbse f&J eraL other similar situations where the
Re
Montgoasery not . Government has found It pointless to
Moody 8a ue • been amended in i entirety. pursue litigation. Who pays for the
cleanup of these sites? It is not the
Moore The Clerk will report the remaining bankrupt s estate—that Is divided
Moorhe.4 Scbeeler
Morrison (CT) Sdwuer Judiciary Committee amendments
wa The Clerk read as follows the secured creiuitesa. -
Judiciary CommIttee Ass nang the site is eventually
- 34 lane 13 (fl II cleaned up. the money will come from
&t , ier
N ichol s 8e- scnbe incr thereof (d) . L Superfund. which Is partly financed
Nielson 5 hz, ‘(R)’ aiid b ) 5 Tt in lieu thereof p g by the American taxpayer. It should
o Brten shuw ,. , . 36, line 10, si-ike out thY• and miert iii I u be kept in min& however, that Super.
0mw &ue ae r thereof “(1)”. Page 32. slIer “As” in Iliw 17 fund cannot pay for cacie than 175
Oieonar £ bnn and line 10. . sites—and there are 546 sites on !PA’s
Obr Simon
OI I ,i . - The CRAZRMAN. The question is on Prio1 ty list, ThUa, unless Superfund is
Ort Skem the reirinining Judiciary Committee reauthorized. the taxpayer will have
Owens Smith (PL) amen mnrttt - . to pay the bill for cleanup. And 11 no
Oust - Smith (tAt
bIC )Md STnlth The Judiciary nItLee amend- money Is a gilable, the hazardous
SMIth (NJ) meDia were agreed to waste dump will simply remain a
Smith. Mr. BVGHES. Mr. Chairman. danger to public health.
wo - . .i s mo-vt to st.nke the la.st word. My amendment simply requires that
AIboet a (7 () Mr. FLORIO. tr. ci airman. ajj before the a.ssets of a bankrupts
Alisander Fomler jiasi the gentleman yield? estate can be distributed, the property
AndeT Mr. EUGH . I yield to the gentle. must be decontaminated. This is a Ic-
£ rewsttiCa Puqua
Andrews (TX) øsyiins man gitimate. ftfl ne requiz enL.
awu% Oeldenson ttmaa Mr. PIjORIO. Mr. Chairman, It deserves your support.
•
Au -. Osphardi thank the gentleman for yielding.
ilamm Gibbons Perkins
- C - Mr. Chairman, as a result of conver-
Bedsil Orerit . ‘ Ranarl sations with the gentleman from the
Bhag Gregg Rachar m Judiciary Committee. I had intended
Sam - BsnuI to offer an amendment on bankruptcy
Ra t ior
Bonier an. dealing with the problem associated
an. i aoy s i with companies that are rrrnt1y
BOIL 0r1bas going Into bankruptcy to avoid their
Baum Howd
Brezuz Hoyer - obligations under RCRA and Super-
Brown (CA) Kenneilt Sl , fund for cleaning up toxic wastes.
oTo (COt KUdOS . SIo, . It Is my understanding that the Ju-
Bryant BO ’ d l clary Committee is wder
ByTon Waios S1aLt
‘Ctarke leland iowe having anme hearings en this topic
Coleman (MO) Lent S iirau and I just would like to confirm that
VolIum 0mT f - ‘
* W T wi - iT R*. PAISFITA
Mr. PANE’17A. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as followE
Amendment off ered by Mr. Pasm-rE Pa.ie
SI. after line 17. insert.: 8ectlon 7003 is fur.
ther amended bi- adding the following my
subsection at. the end themof
(c) iMSemIATI NOTICZ —Upon receipt of
InIOTUIaUOn that there as hazardous waste
at any site whJth baa presented an mini-
and substantial endangerment
human health rn the eT l%lrmment. the Ad-
manistrator shs’1 provide Immediate notice
to the appropriate local government agen-
CIU. In addition, tie Administrator shall us-
•
COOP S? Stilt Mr. HUcaI . Mr: Chairman. I
CoyTie Lavitas BtuddO
DAmour. Len. (LA) a u would say to the gentleman that I
Ocuuom Zai C ) IbMas have talked with the chairman of Lbs
full Judiciary Committee, the f onor.
Traabe
Ding,)) idadgm Veoto able Pxru Roozuco. and be would be
DOrgaS Marke t W s very happy to review the treatment in
Dam ney Marlene. Weber bankruptcy proceedings of risirne for
Dm7 5? Mzru WbOSL jJ reImbursement of ts for
Graxh W th
Ertart - Miluidil w Cleanup of hassrdouz wastm.
Erlenboin Miller ( CA) Wolpe The gentleman’s concerns go to the
E wns CU.) Molinirt WydOS heart of - j• p y Code—for
F loriD linUobsO Yatron
they L i with priorities of rialnig ,
-d (Ml) Mw-phi in fact, the dischargeablllty of various
gui le notice of auth odarigennent to be
promptly posted at the site whert the a-late
IS 1or L.ii”
Mr• PANEITA (during the TeadInig),
Mr. Chairman. I ask unan imous .
sent that the amendment be consid-
ered as read and printed In the
I zcoaa - -
A CHAIRMAN pro tempore z-.
Kitota). is there objection to the re-
quest of the gentleman from Calif or-
iiia?
There was no objection.
• OC)TD(O—I claims. They are very serious in their
-. e and would to be studied
Umaoz b1y. - -.
(Mr. PANETTA asked and was given
permindan to sevim and extend ha
mar .) ‘ -
Dameomtgg iowiy (Wa) m - - Re acaurca the gentleman and I can
Doad.g Lwolom Whnt assure the gentleman also that we
M
M I. • - .. is bomrd to ostmg wish hIm in
Mr. PAriz z A. Mr. Cba&uian, wiJ-
er thIs year, A officials In my con-
grrui n J dldnst e tot ormed that
-------
119148. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE .Novem&r t LW
Improper disposal of a wood preserus. Th absence f trag oomequences 4uthclzed States. utredmo de
ttve designated by A as a hazardous from the San Lorenzo Sigh School mine that an ediate threat
substance (PCP) had occurred ata . te ease depends largely upon factors on- public health exists pnor to fiea
adjacent to. and fncludlng, the related to requirements In Federal lion under this amendment in addl - ’-3
trounds of San Lorrnzo Valley Sigh baWdOus waste “ “ ronent statuLc tlon, the amendment ‘vould not ie ’ ,
School In Felton. Calif. An E PA t h- Presence of PCP In comparatively low Suite nntificat on of the public or lomi-.’,
nical assistance team CrAT removed cuncentratlons, relatively prompt re officials under circumstances—such an
sample of soil from the site pecUp.g inovtJ of the contaminated soil, and diposal of some substance which are
that a hazardous substance was in- relative Ii t ibillty of the disposal hronIeslly, but acutely v ’ or .
i t site to the local public. In an effort to disposal which Is Iniznedlately an&...
4 days later the presence of significant insure that the relative good fortune ‘operly cl d vp—which do
PCP concentrations in the soil. Under those In the Felton area Is not left pose an Immediate and unresolvedt
current statute, EPA was not required to chance in comparable drcum- threat to public health. Instead . notif1±
to Immediately notify j goy . stances. I am offering art amendment cation would be required only In thI
ments of the potential endangerment to H.R. 2867 WhiCh seeks to clarify the types of cases which would require an
posed by the disposal, despite re.iuirements of Feaoml statute re- amergen ’1 onse uder A.
that they bad str ’ojg reason an ‘ding EPA response to known
that a threat ‘to public health existed. hazardous waste disposal. .‘ I
Ultimately, EPA officials did Inform The amendment I am offering tod&y ‘- “ ‘
local government officials of their de- Is a simple one, and Is Intended In addition. flecessaz7 steps to Immeli
terminatIon 4 to 5 days after the jul amond current law to accotnpusii two that the public Is aware of the teat -
tial sample ba-sic tasks: First, . a disposal site poses to It axe not te-
EPA did not Initiate an emPt teniunation by the Administrator—the qriired by statute. %bls amendment ,-
Immediate notification of local would require, where appropriate, the
notify local government officials l x ii dais that Improperly disposed-of t - Administrator to take all neveesarY
mediately upon a determination that a ardous waste presents an mediate and appropriate action to notify an a t- I
public health danger exists. nor danger to public health and second, t - feCted population of -a threat t public. .r.
the agency required to do so. require that necessary and appropri- health, and specifically cites postti*i
Fortunately, EPA and local officials ate action—Including, where apprepri- notification at he dlsPomlsIte• s
were able to respond to the potential ate posting of notification at the aft.— ‘-. ..
endangerment the PCP posed before be taken to notify a populatiith While concern was at one time
public health was affected. The poten- y be affected by the edongertheht pressed that the amendment’s reqth*
tial endangerment posed by Improper , merit of “necessary” notifleatlcss ea-ji
disposal remained potential—not - ____ -. -‘ .• . tions by the Administrator would trig- ’
actual. No adverse health effects at Under current statute, EPA officials ger notification under ‘thcumstanom !
tributed to PCP disposal at S&fl lilT are not required to provide Immediate which, do not pose an, .Immediste
enzo were reported to EPA. although notification to iocai oil cials th the’ threat to public bealtb. mibsequcat
workers excavating the disposal site event of er disposal t b- drafts of this have, In on
vere exposed to PCP without skin or stanom regulated ooder RCR.A, ui- effort to accommodate those voricorns,.
fratory protection. Apparently, though some notification *t a kt more specifically defined the Athrinla-,•
ne of the San Lorenzo School’s stu- time Is required under CERCLA, the trators required response. While I be
.ents were affected by disposal at this S ond law. As a result, there lieve that the term ‘necessai-y -
open, unposted, disposal sIte. Years be i nstances In which EPA—having Itself sufficiently restrictive to avoid ?
from now, the San Lorenzo School made a deteruutriation that a bawd- fb 1
case will probably occupy a 11 otis substance exists and poses some staitom not poslz* an Immediate .L
altion comPared to Incidents of threat to public health—would not be threat to public health. I have drafted ‘
proper hazardous waste disposal which Immediately required to take t the amendment to further limit the
actually endangered and affected notify those most, likely to be affected DDtifICStIOU requirement to those re..i.
public health. Nevertheless, the case by that threat, :‘ sponses which could be reasonably cx- j
holds great significance both to the ThIS amendment seeks to address pected In an effort to Insure publle
public In the Felton area and for a on by awarenem of endangerment The,...
Congron concerned for protection Cf notification of local government off j . BtnCfldnres& requires the Attnii fra
public health. . .. dais that- pentlal ‘ gennent I cr to take .11 ‘y and *ppro -’
- In my view, the Importance of this exists as soon as the Administrator action hi response to a deter- .
‘case lies In its ability to illustrate cer- has made a deter,rd , th%I ‘ .e nilnatiofl of Immediate bawd, Ibm- i ’
tam critical shortcomings hi current endangerment exists, . , .. - . - , precluding a requirement fot response —
hazardous waste Tii n gement statute. Concern baa been expressed that tO. an i ’d ProPeriy
San Lorenzo case brings to light a this amendment constitutes a require- t , or to Improper disposal .
number of particularly troublesome merit for automatic notifliation in which does not, present an Immediate
questions r gardlng the EPA responsi- every Instance of alleged or actual un- ‘•‘ - - - .1. ‘.. t, . -& . ._ ‘ I
bilLy to Insine -protection of public proper hazardous waste disposal. Bow’ Clearly, there axe adverse Impacts’
health. Of particular concern to me In ever, automatic notification of local which may result from posting even .-
this matter Is that there Is no Federal government and the public without an linniedinfe danger caused by ha- ‘
requirement that notice at public i axd to the dremunganom in asc ii PrOPer dlspossl opert,y values can tu€ ‘
be&1.h endangerment be made availa- case neither btpnLlM by driven down by posting at a site, and
b)e to the public or posted at a dispas- amendment nor required. Instead, the premuxe on the government to buy out
al site. In this case, the company sp- amendment seeks to Insure that only property outside of an area which 15 L
parently responsible for the Improper In those cases where an Immediate. Immediately threatened can be lnT
disposal of the substance began exca- unresolved danger to public health Creased by posting or public notiflea.’-”
raison of the site without regard to exists, prompt, Reasonable notification tlon owever, this amendment would ,
the chemical’s hazardous nature, cx- of local officials and the public would prevent risking these adverse come- .
posing workers to PCP without protec- be required. . _ ‘ - . - .. quences unnecessaril, by restrlctlng:
Lion. In addition, I am concerned that The’ amendment does m it require the CIrcutistanees requiring notifies-:.
- EPA was not required by Federal public notification of potential has- tion, and providing the AdntInlstratca’..
p Immediately notify appropriate ards In cases where the nature of the latitude In determining the approprt
Lor local officials of the potential gubstaixe or the threat tO the public ate method of puhjicooiJfj Iton. -- -. . -.-
.nzormmfl. altboujti - jfw ii . the Adminle. This amendmeiit will clean l*
j.: . ‘ - - :. Dator rn Btate in the case of RCRA- I mproperly d1!o I.*t
-------
A ’ ,, .
ENFORCEMENT
SEc. 403. (a) Section 7003 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by adding the following new subsection afier subsection (b)
thereof:
“(c) I EMEDIATE No ’rIcE.—Upon receipt of mfortnation that there is
hazardous waste at any site which has presented an imminent and
H. R. 2867 —52
substantial endangerment to human health or the environment, the
Administrator shall provide immediate notice to the appropriate
local government agencies. In addition, the Administrator shall
require notice of such endangerment to be promptly posted at the
site where the waste is located.”.
(bNl) Subtitle G of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by
adding the following new section after section 7011:
“LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY
“Scc. 7012. The Attorney General of the United States shall, at
the request of the Administrator and on the basis of a showing of
need, deputize qualified employees of the Environmental Protection
Agency to serve as special deputy United States marshals in crimi-
nal investigations with respect to violations of the criminal provi-
sions of this Act.”.
(2) The table of contents for subtitle G of such Act is amended by
inserting the following ‘new item after the item relating to section
7011.
“Sec 7012 Law enforcement authority.”
(c) Section 4005 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by
inserting after the first sentence in subsection (a) the following:
“The prohibition contained in the preceding sentence shall be
enforceable under section 7002 against persons engaged in the act of
open dumping.”
(d)(1) Section 3008(aXl) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
to read as follows: “(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), when.
ever on the basis of any information the Administrator determines
that any person has violated or is in violation of any requirement of
this subtitle, the Administrator may issue an order assessing a civil
penalty for any past or current violation, requiring compliance
immediately or within a specified time period, or both, or the
Administrator may commence a civil action in the United States
district court in the district in which the violation occurred for
appropriate reLief, including a temporary or permanent
injunction.”.
(2) Section 3008(aX3’ of such Act is amended to read as follows:
“(3) Any order issued pursuant to this subsection may include a
suspension or revocation of any permit issued by the Administrator
or a State under this subtitle and shall state with reasonable
specificity the nature of the violation. Any penalty assessed in the
order shall not exceed £25,000 per day of noncompliance for each
violation of a requirement of this subtitle. In assessing such a
penalty, the Administrator shall take into account the seriousness of
the violation and any good faith efforts to comply with applicable
requirements.”.
(3) Section 3008(c) of such Act is amended to read as follows:
“(C) VIOLATION OF COMPLLANCE ORDERS.Llf a violator fails to take
corrective action within the time specified in a compliance order,
the Administrator may assess a civil penalty of not more than
$25,000 for each day of continued noncompliance with the order and
the Administrator may suspend or revoke any permit issued to the
violator (whether issued by the Administrator or the State).”.
(4) Section 2002 of such Act is amended by inserting the following
at the end thereof:
“(C) CRIMINAL INVT2rTGATION$.—Ifl carrying out the provisions of
this Act, the Administrator, and duly-designated agents and employ.
see of the Environmental Protection Agency, are authorized to
initiate and conduct investigations under the criminal orovisiong of
-------
H- l i - ‘?- 1 4S tA-2l2ott 4. U , .,t.o
H. I I. 2867—53
this Act, and to refer the results of these investigations to the
Attorney General for prosecution in appropriate cases.”.
(5) Section 7006(b) of such Act is amended by inserting the follow-
ing before the last sentence thereof: “Action of the Administrator
with respect to which review could have been obtained under this
subsection shall not be subject to judicial review in civil or criminal
proceedings for enforcement.”. I
CoaV. TLPIflhj l
SECTION 403—IMMEDIATE NOTICE
House bilL—The House bill requires that upon receipt of infor-
mation of an imminent hazard, EPA shall provide immediate
notice to the appropriate local government agencies, and post a
notice at the site.
It also requires the Attorney General, at EPA’s request, to depu-
tize qualified EPA employees to act as special marshals in RCRA
criminal investigations, clarifies EPA’s authority to assess civil
penalties administratively for past violations of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act, and authorizes duly designated employees of EPA to
conduct criminal investigations and to refer the results to the At-
torney General.
Senate amendrnent.—The Senate amendment does not contain a
similar provision.
Conference substitute.—The Conference substitute is the same as
in the House bill.
In July 1984, after lengthy review and consideration of the Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency’s request for special deputation for
120
the Agency’s criminal investigators, the Department of Justice ac-
knowledged the need by granting temporary deputation extending
until September 30, 1984. In September 1984, at the request of the
Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Justice ex-
tended the special deputation through June 30, 1985. The EPA Ad-
ministrator has demonstrated a need for law enforcement powers
for Agency’s criminal investigators. The special deputation should
be made permanent and a substantial criminal investigative capa-
bility is needed in each Region. This will lead to the more efficient
planning and development of existing and new criminal investiga-
tions.
-------
k i1-p q2r-l4
(
Section 11(c) Preservation of Other Rights.—Section 7002(f) of
RCRA was intended to preserve the rights of litigants under any
statute of common law notwithstanding the passage of RCRA. As
stated in the Committee report which accompanied RCRA:
Subsection (f) preserves any rights that a party to litiga-
tion would have under any other statutes or common law
to seek the enforcement of any standard or requirement
relating to the management of discarded materials. (H.
Rapt. No. 91—1491 page 69.)
However, since the p csage of RCRA, the Supreme Court
overlooked language virtually identical to Section 7002(f)
in Section 505(e) of the Clean Water Act and held that
Congress did not intend to preserve the federal common
law after passage of the Clean Water Act. See City of Mil-
waukee v. illinois 101 S. Ct. 1784 (1981). The Court held
that the language of Section 505(e) of the Clean Water Act,
which begins “Nothing in this section,” applied only to
Section 505 of the Act and therefore applied only to citizen
suits. (101 S. Ct. at 1798.) Therefore, the Committee has
amended Section 7002(f) of RCRA to read “Nothing in this
Act” in order to continue to preseve the complete rights of
litigants as intended by Congress. This amendment is sug-
gested by the Court as the appropriate manner to evidence
such Congressional. intent. Id. fn. 22.
Section 11(d) Litigation Authority.—Section 11(d) would amend
section 2002 by adding a new subsection directing the Administra-
tor of the Environmental Protection Agency to request the Justice
Department to file and represent the Environmental Protection
Agency in civil enforcement actions under RCRA. Once a referral
has been made by Administrator, the Attorney General is expected
to act promptly to initiate the civil litigation. If he does not inform
the Administrator that he will commence the litigation and repre-
sent the agency within 30 days after the referral is transmitted to
the Justice Department, and if he does not file the action within
150 days after the referral, the Administrator then has “exclusive
authority” to decide to commence the action and to represent him-
self in Federal district and appeals courts.
The term “exclusive authority” is not intended to provide an ad-
ditional defense for defendants in such litigation or to preclude the
involvement or support of United States Attorneys or the Justice
Department in cases handled by the Administrator, just as they do
under other laws providing for representation by non-Justice De-
partment lawyers in civil litigation. The term only relates to the
Administrator’s determination to litigate where the Justice Depart-
ment has failed to do so in a timely fashion. That failure can be in
the form of an actual declination within the above timefraznes or
silence within such timeframes. In either case, the Administrator
may initiate the litigation and be represented by his own attorneys.
Concerns have been raised that the time deadlines may not give
the Department of Justice adequate opportunity for it to consider
each case and provide notice of its intention to proceed with the
-------
50
action or to consider its relationship to possible or actual criminal
cases. In response, we point out that EPA and Justice Department
have adopted formal guidelines, called the “Quantico Guidelines,”
which govern the conduct of litigation and, specifically, provide for
early Justice Department involvement in the civil litigation case
development process. These guidelines provide for regular monthly
meetings between Justice Department and EPA attorneys and
technical staff to discuss cases targeted by EPA as likely candi-
dates for litigation and the adequacy of agency development of the
cases. So, under the present system, cases referred to Justice De-
partment should be technically and legally ready for filing when
referred. The Justice Department attorneys would have been active
participants in the development of these cases prior to actual refer-
ral by EPA. Such a process (which would not be affected by this
amendment) should help to resolve questions of whether criminal
cases should proceed before initiation, by referral, of a civil action.
According to a 1979 study by the Office of Management and
Budget, there are over 20 statutes authorizing over 27 departments
and agencies, other than the Justice Department, to initiate such
litigation. These include the Department of Energy Organization
Act, the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, the Powerplant and
Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978, the Federal Water Pollution Con-
trol Act, the Clean Air Act, and the Safe Drinking Water Act. In:
1977 the EPA and the Justice Department entered into a Memo-
randum of Understanding pursuant to the latter three laws. Like
this amendment, that memorandum established specific deadlines
for the Justice Department to act.
At about the same time, the Energy Department and the Depart-
ment of Justice entered into a Memorandum of Understandizig
whereby the Department of Energy lawyers initiate litigation in-
volving oil pricing and allocation violations without referral to the
Justice Department. The recent Federal Court decision requiring
Exxon to pay $1.6 billion in overcharges was in a case litigated by
the Department of Engery.
Earlier this month, the Oversight and Investigations Subcommit-
tee encountered a truly egregious example of how people were left
facing a serious health risk because the current system failed to op- I
erate in a timely manner. The case involved approximately 130
residents of the Mountain View Mobile Homes Estates trailer park
subdivision in Globe, Arizona. This residential area was situated di-
rectly on top of asbestos wastes generated by a milling facility.
State and federal health authorities, including the Centers for Dis-
ease Control, warned of the serious health risks created by direct
contact with asbestos, a known carcinogen, and exposure to air-
borne asbestos fibers.
On September 30, 1982, EPA referred the Mountain View case to
the Department of Justice for the purpose of filing an action for
injunctive relief under RCRA and the Superfund Act with the fol- 1
lowing statement:
the Agency has determined that there may be an im-
minent and substantial endangerment to the public health
or welfare or the environment because of an actual or
thre’atened release of hazardous substances from the site.
-------
51
Due to the nature and level of exposure to asbestos at the
Mountain View Mobile Home Estates site, I request that
this referral be the subject of prompt action. (emphasis
supplied)
Over 7 months after the referral, the Department of Justice had
not tiled this case. At the May 2 Subcommittee hearing, a senior
EPA official testified that the major problem was that the Justice
Department attorney assigned to the case was dealing with another
case, the Stringfellow case, and apparently was not able to devote
the time necessary to file the Mountain View case. One day after
the Committee ordered reported H.R. 2867, the Justice Department
finally initiated this litigation.
In a recent letter to the Committee, the Justice Department, in
opposing this provision, observed that often civil actions under this
law also involve civil actions under other laws administered by the
EPA. The Justice Department was concerned that the amendment
could result in prosecution under this law by EPA and prosecution
by the Justice Department under other laws. That is not the case.
As already noted, the EPA now has litigation authority under
three of the four laws cited by the Justice Department. Even under
the fourth, Justice can always authorize the EPA to litigate. Pre-
sumably, the two agencies would not act wastefully or inefficiently,
but would ensure that the entire litigation is handled by one
agency such as EPA. Nothing in the amendment precludes such ar-
rangements.
The Committee observes that litigation expertise is not the sole
province of the Justice Department. Many agencies have capable
and competent lawyers who have also developed this expertise. Pre-
sumably, EPA also has this expertise. EPA lawyers are most
knowledgeable about agency policies and technical requirements
which affect the enforcement of the laws that EPA administers.
Current budget constraints demand that we use this expertise coop-
eratively and efficiently. Granting this authority to the EPA does
not mean that there will he a rash of EPA litigation. The amend-
ment does not preclude or curtail Justice Department enforcement.
It merely provides a safety valve whereby the EPA can litigate
when the Justice Department, is unable or unwilling to do so. That
is a sound approach.
The committee expects that cases will be referred and filed expe-
ditiously and that a coordinated, cooperative litigation program is
essental to successful enforcement of RECRA. That is a sound ap-
proach.
Finally the committee emphasizes that this section does not
affect, in any way, the exclusive authority of the Department of
Justice to seek indictment of, and to prosecute violators of, crizni-
nal provisions of RCRA. -
Section 11(e) Criminal Investigation Authority.—As under other
environmental statutes, EPA has inherent authority under RCRA
to initiate and conduct investigations under the criminal provisions
of the statute and to refer the results of these investigations to the
Attorney General for prosecution in appropriate cases. To assure
the EPA employees do not meet with resistance from generators,
transporters or facilities in carrying out their investigative func-
9 O3
-------
52
tions under Section 3008 (d) and (e) (including the important new
criminal provisions added by this bill), the Committee wishes to
make this authority explicit under RCRA. Accordingly, the Com-
mittee has added a new provision which expressly authorizes the
Agency to conduct criminal investigations and to refer the results
of those investigations to the Department of Justice.
The Committee has also determined that in order for EPA to
adequately fulfill its law enforcement functions under RCRA, its
criminal investigators must be granted authority to carry firearms;
execute and serve warrants, summons and subpoenas; administer
oaths, make arrests without warrant for offenses against the I
United States committed in their presence and for felonies if they
have reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested
has committed or is committing such a felony. Without such au-
thority EPA’s criminal investigative effort will not be capable of
performing the job Congress has assigned.
This authority is not unique to the EPA. Many Federal employ-
ees (other than U.S. Marshals and agents of the Secret Service and
the FBI) have the power to make arrests, and others have the
power to carry firearms. For example, employees of the Secretary
of the Interior who maintain law and order in the National Park’
System are authorized to carry firearms and make arrests. Similar-
ly, employees of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service are
authorized make arrests. Persons investigating food stamp viola-
tions carry firearms and make arrests. H.R. 2867 is patterned after
those authorities.
RCRA now authorizes EPA inspections and provides for criminal
penalties. In May 1979, an Assistant Attorney General in the Jus-
tice Department testified:
EPA is in serious need of tough law enforcement investi-
gators; investigators with training comparable to that of
the IRS, the Customs agents, and the FBI. While a high
degree of specialized technical knowledge is also necessary
for these investigations, I believe that fundamental investi-
gative techniques and good investigative instincts are
equally or more important.
These investigators are needed not only to identify sites
and their contents and owners and operators and former
owners and operators, they are also needed to ferret out
the elements of organized crime that are alleged to be in-
volved in hazardous waste pollution. They must be willing
to deal with the entire range of civil and criminal prob-
lems, from the white-collar malfeasance committed by cor-
porate executives in the disposal of hazardous waste, to
the organized crime types who are involved with the mid-
night dumping of hazardous waste and toxic substances
into our rivers, our lakes, our wetlands, our sewers or any
other convenient location.
Congress appropriated funds in fiscal year 1982 for these crimi-
nal investigators. Last September, EPA established an Office of
Criminal Enforcement staffed by personnel who have received spe-
cialized training at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center
in Glynco, Georgia. Every current EPA investigator has a mini-
*4’3
-------
53
mum of five years of experience with other agencies, involving the
use of law enforcement powers.
The authority to carry firearms is needed to protect the investi-
gators who must operate in situations which could be life.threaten-
ing. The arrest authority is obviously needed for situations where
the investigator observes a violation and does not have time to call
another enforcement official, such as the FBI of a U.S. Marshall, to
make the arrest. Also, it would not be efficient or practical to have I
such officials accompany these investigators solely because the
EPA investigators lack arrest authority or the authority to carry
firearms. In fact, such an approach could delay or impede investi-
gations where such officials are not readily available.
ection 11(e) Open L’umping.—A Federal district court in Texas’
has recently issued an opinion concerning the open dumping prohi-
bition in Section 4005(a) of RCRA which holds that (1) open dump-
ing is not prohibited in a state until its solid waste plan is ap-
proved i y EPA, and (2) the open dumping prohibition. City of Gal-
Latin v. Cherokee County No. TY-81-107 CA (E.D. Tex., January 17,
1983).
This opinion misinterprets Section 4005(a). In enacting this provi-
sion, it was Congress’ intent that the open dumping prohibition go
into effect upon promulgation of EPA regulations under Section
1008(aX3) definding open dumping, and that the prohibition be de-
fined on the basis of those regulations. It was also Congress’ intent
that persons seeking to enforce the open dumping prohibition bring
4 R
-------
54
suit—not against the Federal government or the state—but against
persons engaged in the act of open dumping, and that Federal dis-’
trict courts be authorized to enjoin such persons directly. Aithoughi
the Committee believes that Congress’ intent is clear on the face of
the statute. In light of the City of (Jallatin decision, the Committee
is amending Section 4005(a) (and 7002(aXl)) to further emphasize
and clarif y its original intent.
Section 11(iX5) Violation of Compliance Orders.—The provision’
clarifies EPA’s authority to assess civil penalties administratively
for past violations of RCRA. The amendments authorize the Ad-
mini trator to issue compliance orders which assess a penalty for
past current violations, require compliance immediately or within
a specified time, or both. I
This provision in subsection 3008(c) for assesing penalties in corn-:
pliance orders supports the view that past misconduct is actionable,,
because the Agency can not know that a compliance order has’
been violated at the time of its issuance. However, subsection
3008(a). Orders imposing such penalties, therefore, are somewhat
vunerable to challenge based on the argument that it is unlikely
that Congress would authorize the imposition of penalties without
providing a dollar amount ceiling. Indeed, it is this conflict that
seemingly led to the addition of subsection 3008(g) in the 1980
amendments. This new amendment should remove all doubts as to
the Agency’s authority in this area.
Section 11(iX6) Criminal Provisions.
Section 3008(dXl)—Generator and Transporter Liability.—This:
provision clarifies the criminal liability of generators of hazardous
waste who knowingiy cause the waste to be transported to an un-i
permitted facility. Because the generator is in the best position to
know the nature of his waste material, the regulatory scheme -i
tabliahed by RCRA places a duty on the generator in the first in-i
stance to make arrangments to transport and dispose of his waste
properly. EPA’s ability to obtain criminal penalties against gener-
ators who knowingly cause the transportation of hazardous waste
to an unpermitted facility is essential to the regulatory scheme.
Section 3008(dX V—Interim Status Standard s.—T his provision
adds violations of interim status standards to those violations of in-
terim status standards to those violations of Subtitle C for which
criminal penalties are available. A large number of hazardous
waste management facilities currently operating under interim
status standards can present significant human health and envi-
ronmental problems.
Thus, EPA’s ability to obtain criminal penalties for such viola-
tions is essential to safeguard public health and the environment.
Although States are not required to have analogues to the Feder-
al interim status standards (i.e., they may require that all facilities
obtain permits before construction or operations), where states do
have such standards, violation of those standards would also be
subject to this subsection.
Section 3008 (dXS) and (dX4)—Omission of Material Information
Failure to File Required Information.—RCRA provides criminal
penalties for submitting false information in documents required to
be filed under the Act. However, the statute presently does not spe-
cifically address material omissions or the failure to file required
143
-------
55
reports. These actions could obviously cause grave harm to regula-
tory process. The conduct can be as serious in nature as falsifica-
tion of information submitted. These amendments are proposed to
clarify that criminal penalties are provided for this conduct.
Only “material” omissions, i.e. omissions which will have a tend-
ency to influence Agency action, are included, ensuring against the
application of this section to incidental or insignificant violations.
Similarly, the amendments provide criminal penalties only for a
knowing failure to file required material. Failure to file due to acci-
d2nt or mistake is not covered by this provision.
Finally, the amendments also clarify that fact that paragraph
(dX4) applies to records or other documents required by state regu-
lation in a State with an authorized RCRA program.
Section 8008(dXS)—Generator and Transporter Liability.—This
section would provide criminal penalties where hazardous waste is
knowingly transported or caused to be transported without a mani-
fest. Without this provision, criminal liability would not attach to
the unmanifested transportion of hazardous waste unless the waste
is subseqently delivered to an unpermitted facility, a violation of
Section 3008(dXl).
Section 8008(e)—Knowing Endangerment.—Section 3008(eX1XBXIi)
is deleted from the “Knowing Endangerment” provision in the stat-
ute because that paragraph is redundant once violations of interim
status standards are included in paragraph (dX2). Violations of
paragraph (dX2) are included in the “Knowing Endangerment” pro-
vision of the statute by paragraph (eX1XA).
In addition, this provision deletes that portion of the “Knowing I
Endangerment” provision which requires that the Government
prove that the defendant’s conduct demonstrated an “unjustifiable
and inexcusable disreg rd for human life” or an “extreme indiffer-
ence to human life.” The Committee believes that this element of
proof renders the “Knowing Endangerment” provision unnecessar-
ily restrictive and may well have contributed to the fact that since
its enactment in 1980, there has not been a single indictment
under this provision. The Committee notes that, as amended, the
“Knowing Endangerment” provision retains numerous safeguards
to prevent unwarranted prosecutions.
Finally, the increased maximum prison sentences for violations
of section 3008(e) and 3008(d) (1) and (2) reflect the Congress’ explic-
it intention that criminal violations of this Act should not be treat-
ed lightly. The Committee recignizes that as the implementation of
other provisions of this bill restrict land disposal of hazardous
wastes and req tire safer methods of handling and treatment, there
will be a significantly greater incentive to dispose of toxic waste il-
legally. These improved criminal provisions and enhanced penal-
ties, as well as the increased authorization for criminal investiga-
tors, are intended to provide EPA and the Department of Justice
with the necessary enforcement tools to combat increased criminal
activity in this area.
Section 11(iX9)—Judicial Reuiew.—Addition of this language to
Section 7006(b) would clarify that defendants in Federal enforce-
ment proceedings cannot challenge permit terms and conditions or
State program provisions if such provisions could have been chal-
lenged in the courts of appeals at the time the permit was issued.
-------
P 4s5&b -
20 “(c) IMMEDIATE NOTIcE.—Upon receipt of in.formation
21 that there is hazardous waste at any site which has presented
22 an imminent and substantial endangerment to human health
23 or the environment, the Administrator shall provide immedi-
24 ate notice to the appropriate local government agencies. In
25 addition, the Administrator shall require notice of such en-
HR 2867 RFS
9 3
-------
62
1 dangerment to be promptly posted at the site where the
2 waste is located.”.
3 (b) ATTORNEY’S FEES.—Section 7002(e) is amended by
4 striking out “to any party” and substituting in lieu thereof
5 “to the prevailing or substantially prevailing party” and in-
6 serting “or section 7006” after “this section”.
7 (c) PRESERVATION OF OTHER RrnHTS.—Section
8 7002(f) is amended by striking out “section” and substituting
9 “Act”.
10 (d) LAW ENFORCEMENT AuTH01UTY.—The Attorney
11 General shall, at the request of the Administrator and on the
12 basis of a showing of need, deputize qualified employees of
13 the Environmental Protection Agency to serve as special
14 deputy United States marshals in criminal investigations with
15 respect to violations of the criminal provisions of this Act.
-------
3 (1) OPEN DUMPiNG EI oRcEMENT.—(1) Section 4005
4 is amended by inserting after the first sentence in subsection
5 (a) the following: “The prohibition contained in the preceding
6 sentence shall be enforceable against persons engaged in the
7 act of open dumping under section 7002.”.
8 (2) Section 7002(a)(i.) is amended by inserting “prohibi-
9 tion,” after “requirement,”.
10 (g) MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS RELATING TO EN-
11 FORCEMENT.—(1) Section 2002 is amended by inserting the
12 following at the end thereof:
13 “(d) CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS.—In carrying out the
14 provisions of this Act, the Administrator, and duly-designated
15 agents and employees of the Environmental Protection
16 Agency, are authorized to initiate and conduct investigations
17 unde the criminal provisions of this Act, and to refer the
18 results of these investigations to the Attorney General for
19 prosecution in appropriate cases.”.
20 (2) Section 3008(a)(1) is amended to read as follows:
21 “(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), whenever on the
22 basis of any information the Administrator determines that
23 any person has violated or is in violation of any requirement
24 of this subtitle, the Administrator may issue an order: (A)
25 assessing a civil penalty for any past or current violation; (B)
HR 2867 RFS
4
4’
-------
65
1 requiring compliance immediately or within a specified time
2 period; or both, or the Administrator may commence a civil
3 action in the United States district court in the district in
4 which the violation occurred for appropriate relief, including
5 a temporary or permanent injunction.”.
6 (3) Section 3008(a)(3) is amended to read as follows:
7 “(3) Any order issued pursuant to this subsection may
8 include a suspension or revocation of any permit issued by
9 the Administrator or a State under this subtitle and shall
10 state with reasonable specificity the nature of the violation.
11 Any penalty assessed in the order shall not exceed $25,000
12 per day of noncompliance for each violation of a requirement
13 of this subtitle. In assessing such a penalty, the Administra-
14 tor shall take into account the seriousness of the violation
15 and any good faith efforts to comply with applicable
16 requirements.”.
17 (4) Section 3008(b) is amended by inserting “the person
18 or” before “persons”.
19 (5) Section 3008(c) is amended to read as follows:
20 “(c) VIOLATION OF COMPLIANCE ORDERS.—Jf a viola-
21 tor fails to take corrective action within the time specified in
22 a compliance order, the Administrator may assess a civil pen-
23 alty of not more than $25,000 for each day of continued non-
24 compliance with the order and the Administrator may sus-
HR 2867 RFS——5
43
-------
66
1 pend or revoke any permit issued to the violator (whether
2 issued by the Administrator or the State).”.
3 (6) Section 3008(d) is amended as follows:
4 (A) in paragraph (1)—
5 (i) insert after “knowingly transports” the
6 following: “ or causes to be transported”, and
7 (ii) strike out “section 3005 (or 3006 in the
8 - case of a State program)” and substitute “this
9 subtitle”;
10 (B) in paragraph (2)—
11 (i) strike out “either”;
12 (ii) strike out “section 3005 (or 3006 in the
13 case of a State program)” and substitute “this
14 subtitle”; and
15 (iii) strike out subparagraph (B) and
16 substitute:
17 “(B) in knowing violation of any material condi-
18 tion or requirement of such permit; or
19 “(C) in knowing violation of any material condi-
20 tion or requirement of any applicable interim status
21 regulations or standards;”; and
22 (C) strike out all after paragraph (2) and
23 substitute:
24 “(3) knowingly omits material information or
25 makes any false material statement or representation in
fiR 2867 RFS
-------
67
1 any application, label, manifest, record, report, permit
2 or other document filed, maintained, or used for pur-
3 poses of compliance with regulations promulgated by
4 the Administrator (or by a State in the case of an au-
5 thorized State program) under this subtitle;
6 “(4) knowingly generates, stores, treats, trans-
7 ports, disposes of, or otherwise handles any hazardous
8 waste (whether such activity took place before or takes
9 place after the date of the enactment of this paragraph)
10 and who knowingly destroys, alters, conceals or fails to
11 file any record, application, manifest, report, or other
12 document required to be maintained or filed for pur-
13 poses of compliance with regulations promulgated by
14 the Administrator (or by a State in the case of an au-
15 thorized State program) under this subtitle;
16 “(5) knowingly transports without a manifest, or
17 causes to be transported without a manifest, any haz-
18 ardous waste required by regulations promulgated
19 under this subtitle (or by a State in the case of a State
20 program authorized under this subtitle) to be accompa-
21 nied by a manifest; or
22 shall upon conviction, be subject to a fine of not more than
23 $50,000 for each day ofviolation, or imprisonment not to
24 exceed two years (five years in the case of a violation of
25 paragraph (1) or (2)), or both. If the conviction is for a viola-
HR 2867 RFS
-------
68
1 tion committed after a first conviction of such person under
2 this paragraph, the maximum punishment under the respec-
3 tive paragraph shall be doubled with respect to both fine and
4 imprisonment.”.
5 (7) Section 3008(e) is to read as follows:
6 “(e) KNOWING ENDANGERMENT.—Any person who
7 knowingly transports, treats, stores or disposes of any haz-
8 ardous waste identified or listed under this subtitle in viola-
9 tion of paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of subsection (d) of
10 this section who knows at that time that he thereby places
11 another person in imminent danger of death or serious bodily
12 injury, shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of not more
13 than $250,000 or imprisonment for not more than fifteen
14 years, or both. A defendant that is an organization shall,
15 upon conviction of violating this subsection, be subject to a
16 fine of not more than $1,000,000.”.
17 (8) Section 7006(b) is amended by inserting the follow-
18 ing before the last sentence thereof: “Action of the Athninis-
19 trator with respect to which review could have been obtained
20 under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review in
21 civil or criminal proceedings for enforcement.”.
-------
l” or i t ‘I
.-r24 Pi. _ 1 q , ATl rc :ki:t rrt 7
1 i ) (e) OPEN DUMPING ENFORCEMENT.—(1) Section
2 4005 is amended by inserting after the first sentence in sub-
3 section (a) the following: “The prohibition contained i the
4 preceding sentence shall be enforceable against persons en-
5 gaged in the act of open dumping under section 7002.”
6 (2) Section 7002 (a) (1) is amended by inserting “prohi-
7 bition, “after “requirement, ‘
8 (f) MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS RELATING TO
9 ENFORCEMENT.—(1) Section 2002 is amended by inserting
10 the following at the end thereof:
11 “(d) CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS.—ln carrying out
12 the provisions of this Act, the Administrator, and duly-desig-
13 nated agents and employees of the Environmental Protection
14 Agency, are authorized to initiate and conduct investigations
15 under the criminal provisions of this Act, and to refer the
16 results of these investigations to the Attorney General for
17 prosecution in appropriate cases.
18 (2) Section 3008(a) (1) is amended to read as follows:
19 “(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), whenever on the
20 basis of any information the Administrator determines that
21 any person has violated or is in violation of any requirement
22 of this subtitle, the Administrator may issue an order: (A)
23 assessing a civil penalty for any past or current violation;
24 (B) requiring compliance immediately or within a specified
25 time period; or both, or the Administrator may commence a
HR 2867 RH
443
-------
37
1 civil action in the United Stales district court in the district
2 in which the violation occurred for appropriate relief, includ-
3 ing a temporary or permanent injunction. ‘
4 (3) Section 3008(a) (3) is amended to read as follows:
5 “(3) Any order issued pursuant to this . subsection may
6 include a suspension or revocation of any permit issued by
7 the Administrator or a Slate under this subtitle and shall
8 state with reasonable specificity the nature of the violation.
9 Any penalty assessed in the order shall not exceed $25,000
10 per day of noncompliance for each violation of a requirement
11 of this subtitle. In assessing such a penalty, the Administra-
12 br shall take into account the seriousness of the violation
13 and any good faith efforts to comply with applicable
14 requirements. ‘
15 (4) Section 3008(b) is amended by inserting “the
16 person or” before “persons ‘
17 (5) Section 3008(c) is amended to read as follows:
18 “( c) VIOLATION OF COMPLIANCE ORDERs.—lf a vio-
19 lator fails to take corrective action within the time specified
20 in a compliance order, the Administrator may assess a civil
21 penalty of not more than $25,000 for each day of continued
22 noncompliance with the order and the Administrator may
23 suspend or revoke any permit issued to the violator (whether
24 issued by the Administrator or the State). “.
25 (6) Section 3008(d) is amended as follows:
HR 2867 RH
-------
I
38
1 (A) in paragraph W—
2 ‘i.) insert after “knowingly transports” the 4
3 following: “or causes to be transported’ and
4 (ii) strike out “section 3005 (or 3006 in the
5 case of a State program)” and substitute “this
6 subtitle”;
7 (B) in paragraph (2)—
8 (i) strike out “either”;
9 (ii) strike out “section 3005 (or 3006 in the
10 case of a Slate program)” and substitute “this
11 subtitle’ and
12 (iii) strike out subparagraph (B) and
13 substitute:
14 “(B) in knowing violation of any material con-
15 dition or requirement of such permit; or
16 “(C) in Knowing violation of any material con-
17 dition or requirement of any applicable interim status
18 regulations or standards;”; and
19 (C) strike out all after paragraph (2) and
20 substitute:
21 “(3) knowingly omits material information or
22 makes any false material statement or representation in
23 any application, label, manifest, record, report, permit
24 or other document filed, maintained, or used for pur-
25 poses of compliance with regulations promulgated by
HR 2867 RH
-------
39
1 the Administrator (or by a State in the case of an au-
thorized State program) under this subtitle; -
3 “(4) knowingly generates, stores, treats, trans-
4 ports, disposes of, or otherwise handles any hazardous
5 waste (whether such activity took place before or takes
6 place after the date of the enactment of this paragraph)
7 and who knowingly destroys, alters, conceals or fails to
8 file any record, application, manifest, rep9rt, or other
9 document required to be maintained or filed for pur-
10 poses of compliance with regulations promulgated by
11 the Administrator (or by a State in the case of an au-
12 thorized State program) under this subtitle; or
13 “(5) knowingly transports without a manifest, or
14 causes to be transported without a manifest, any haz-
15 ardous waste required by regulations promulgated
16 under this subtitle (or by a State in the case of a State
17 program authorized under this subtitle) to be accompa-
18 nied by a manifest;
19 shall upon conviction, be subject to a fine of not more than
20 $50,000 for each day of violation, or imprisonment not to
21 exceed two years (five years in the case of a violation of
22 paragraph (1) or (2)), or both. If the conviction is for a viola-
23 tion committed after a first conviction of such person under
24 this paragraph, the maximum punishment under the respec-
HR 2867 RH
-------
40
1 tive paragraph shall be doubled with respect to both fine and
2 imprisonment.”.
3 (7) Section 3008(e) is to read as follows:
4 “(e) KNOWING ENDANGERMENT.—Any person who
5 knowingly transports, treats, stores or disposes of any haz-
6 ardous waste identified or listed under this subtitle in viola-
7 lion of paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of subsection (d) of
8 this section who knows at that time that he thereby places
9 another person in imminent danger of death 6f or serious
10 bodily injury, shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of
11 not more than $250,000 or imprisonment for not more than
12 fifteen years, or both. A defendant that is an organization
13 shall, upon conviction of violating this subsection, be subject
14 to a fine of not more than $1,000,000. “.
15 (8) Section 7006(b) is amended by inserting the follow-
16 ing before the last sentence thereof: “Action of the Adminis-
17 trator with respect to which review could have been obtained
18 under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review in
19 civil or criminal proceedings for enforcement. ‘
20 FINDINGS AND OBJECTiVES OF SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
21 ACT
22 SEc. 12. (a) FJNDJNGS.—Section 1002(b) is amended
23 by—
24 (1) striking out paragraph (5) and substituting:
HR 2867 RH I
?iZ3
-------
4 por 7t4
J4 l peI7.i ‘-I , pAf .
33
1 (e) L.4w E.VFORCEMENT AuTHoRzr1 —W The C’on-
2 gress finds that—
3 (A) personnel of the Environmental Protection
4 Agency who are engaged in investigations of activity
5 which is criminal under the Solid Waste Disposal Act,
6 particularly criminal activity which is associated with
7 organized crime groups (‘such as the illegal disposal of
8 hazardous wasted, are unable to effectively investigate
9 such activity and enforce the cri?ninal sanctions con-
10 cerned without hating full law enforcement powers, in-
11 cluding the authority to make arrests and carry fire-
12 arms; and
13 (B) the iwes of such personnel are endangered in
14 situations where they are carrying out such investiga-
15 tions but are not authorized to carry firearms and
16 make arrests independently of other Federal, State. or
17 local law enforcement authorities.
18 ‘2) Any officer or employee of the Environmental Pro-
19 tect ion 4gency authorized by the Administrator to conduct
20 criminal investigations (to investigate, or supervise the inves-
21 tigalion of, any activity for which a criminal penalty is pro-
22 vided , ) under the Solid Waste Disposal Act is hereby author-
23 ized, in the enforcement of such Act, to—
24 (1) carry firearms;
HR 2867 RH 44
-------
34
1 (2) execute and serve warrants, summons an
2 subpenas, issued under the authority of the United
3 States;
4 (3) make arrests without war-rant for offenses
5 against the United States committed in their presence;
6 (4) make ar-rests without warrant foT felonies cog-
7 nizable under the laws of the •Uniied States if they
8 have reasonable grounds to believe that the person to he
9 arrested has committed or is committing such a felony;
10 and
II (5 .) administer oaths for the purposes of taking a
12 sworn statement.
3 (‘ge) OPEN DUMPING ENFORCEMENT.—(1) Section’
4 4005 is amended by inserting after the first sentence in sub-
5 section (a) the following: “The prohibition contained in the
6 preceding sentence shall be enforceable against persons en-
7 gaged in the act of open dumping under section 7002.”
8 (2) Section 7002(a) (1) is amended by inserting “proM-
9 bit ion, “ after ‘requirement, ‘
-------
10 (7 ) 11IISCELLANEOUS AMENDME.VTS RELATING TO
11 E.vFoRcE vENr.—W Section 2002 is amended by inserting
12 the following at the end thereof.
13 ‘Yd) cRIMiNAL 1NVESTIG.4TIONS.—Zn carr nng out
14 the provisions of this Act, the Administrator, and duly-desig-
15 naled agents and employees of the Environmental Protection
16 Agency, are authorized to initiate and conduct investigations
17 under th criminal provisions of this Act, and to refer th
18 results of these investigations to the Attorney General for
19 prosecution in appropriate cases.
20 (2) Section 3008(a) (1) is amended to read as follows:
21 “(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), whenever on the
22 basis of any information the Administrator determines thut
23 any person has violated or is in violation of any requirein n1
24 of this subtitle, the Admini 1rator may issue an order: ( 4)
25 assessing a civil penalty for any past or cur-rent violation;
‘43
-------
1 (B) requiring compliance immediately or within a specified
2 time period; or both, or the Administrator may commence a
3 civil action in the United Slates district court in the district
4 in which the violation occurred for appropriate relief, includ-
5 in9 a temporary orperinanent injunction. “.
6 (3) Section 3008(a) (3) is amended to read as follows:
7 “(3.) Any order issued pursuant to this subsection may
8 include a suspension or revocation of any permit issued by
9 the Administrator or a State under this subtitle and shall
10 stale with reasonable specificity the nature of the violation.
11 Any penally assessed in the order shall not exceed $25,000
12 per day of noncompliance for each violation of a requirement
13 of this subtitle. In assessing such a penalty, the Administra-
14 br shall take into account the seriousness of the violation
15 and any good faith efforts to comply with applicabi
16 requzrement .
17 (4) Section 3008(b) is amended by inserting ‘?he
18 person or”before “person3’
19 (5) Section 3008(c) is amended to read as follo’cs:
20 “ c ) VIOLATiON OF COMPLIANCE ORDERs.—lf a vio-
21 lator fails to take corrective action within the time specified
22 in a compliance order, the Administrator may assess a civil
23 penally of not more than $25,000 for each day of continued
24 noncompliance with the order and the Administrator may
43
-------
38
1 suspend or revoke any permit issued to the violator (whether
2 issued by the Administrator or the State). “.
3 (6) Section 3008(d) is amended as follows:
4 (A) in paragraph (1)—
5 (1) insert after “knowingly transports” the
6 following: “or causes to be transported”, and
7 c’iO strike out “section 3005 (or 3006 in the
8 case of a State program)” and substitute “this
9 siebtille”
10 (B) in paragraph (2)—
11 ‘i) strike out “either’
12 (‘ii) strike out “section 3005 (or 3006 in the
13 case of a State program)” and substitute “this
14 subtitle”, and
15 ‘iii) strike out subparagraph (B) and
16 substitute.
17 “(B) in violation of any material condi1io or
18 quirement of such permit; or
19 “(C) in violation of any material condition or re-
20 quirement of any applicable interim status regulations
21 or standards;’ and
22 (C’,) strike out all after paragraph (2) and
23 substitute:
“3.) knowingly omits material information 07’
makes any false material statement or representation
-------
39 -
1 in any application, label, manifest, record, report,
2 permit or other document filed, maintained, or used for
3 purposes of compliance with regulations promulgated
4 by the Administrator (or by a State in the case of an
5 authorized State program) under this subtitle;
6 “(4) knowingly generates, stores, treats, trans-
7 ports, disposes of, or otherwise handles any hazardous
8 waste (whether such act i i(y took place before or takes
9 place after the date of the enactment of this paragraph)
10 and who knowingly destroys, alters, conceals or fails to
11 file any record, application, manifest, report, or other
12 document required to be maintained or filed for pur-
13 poses of compliance with regulations promulgated by
14 the Administrator (or by a State in the case of an au-
15 thori:ed State program) under this subtitle; or
16 “(5) knowingly transports wjthoul a manifest, or
17 causes to be transported without a manifest, any ha:-
18 ardous waste required by regul”ztions pro mulgaled
19 under this subtitle (or by a State n the case of a State
20 program authorized under this subtitle) to be accompa.
21 nied by a manifest;
2_ shall upon conviction, be subject to a fine of not more than
23 $50,000 for each day of violation, or imprisonment not to
24 exceed Iwo years (‘fiie years in the case of a viola1ion of pura-
5 graph (1) or (2)), or both. If the conviction is for a violation
VO3
-------
40
1 committed after a first conviction of such person under this
2 paragraph, the maximum punishment under the respective
3 paragraph shall be doubled with respect to both fine and
4 imprisonment. ‘
5 (7) Section 3008(e) is to read as follows:
6 “e) KNOWING ENDANGERMENT.—Any person who
7 knowingly lranspors. treats, stores or disposes of any ha:-
8 ardous waste iderdified or listed under this subtitle in viola-
9 lion of paragraph (1), ‘2,), (‘4.), or (5) of subsection (d) of
10 this section who knows at that time that he thereby places
11 another person in imminent danger of death of serious bodily
12 injury, shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of not more
13 than $250,000 or imprisonment for not more than fifteen
14 years, or both. A defendant that is an organi:ation shall,
15 upon conviction of violating this subsection, be subject to a
16 fine of not more than $1,000,000. ‘
17 (8) Section 7006(’b.) is amended by inserting the follow-
IS ing before the last sentence thereof: “Action of the Admi.’iis-
19 trator with respec! to which rev iew could hare been obtained
20 under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review in
21 civil or criminal proceedings for enforcement. ‘
*4’B
-------
8 - p 31
9 (b) ATTORNEY’S FEES.—Section 7002(e) of such Act is
10 amended by striking out “to any party” and substituting in
11 lieu thereof “to the prevailing or substantially prevailing
12 party” and inserting “or section 7006” after “this section”.
13 (c) PRESERVATION OF OTHER RrnHTS.—Section
14 7002(f) of such Act is amended by striking out “section” and
15 substituting “Act”.
16 (d) CIvIL ACTIONS.—Section 2002 of such Act is
17 amended by adding the following new subsection at the end
18 thereof:
19 “(c) Civii AcTI0N5.—(1) The Administrator shall re-
20 quest the Attorney General to file and represent the Admin-
21 istrator in, any civil action which the Administrator is au-
22 thorized to bring under this Act. If the Attorney General
23 does not—
24 “(A) notify the Administrator within thirty days
25 after the date on which such request is transmitted
HR 2867 III
-------
32
1 that he will commence such action and represent the
2 Administrator, and
3 “(B) file such civil action within one hundred and
4 fifty days after the date of transmittal of such request,
5 the Administrator shall, except as provided in paragraph (2),
6 have the exclusive authority to commence and conduct the
7 litigation of such action, and any appeal of such action, in his
8 own name. For such purposes, the Administrator shall be
9 represented by one or more attorneys of the Environmental
10 Protection Agency designated by the Administrator.
11 “(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply in the case of actions
12 before the United States Supreme Court. The provisions of
13 this subsection shall apply notwithstanding any other provi-
14 sion of law.”.
15 (e) LAW ENFORCEMENT AuTH0RITY.—(1) The Con-
16 gress finds that—
17 (A) personnel of the Environmental Protection
18 Agency who are engaged in investigations of activity
19 which is criminal under the Solid Waste Disposal Act,
20 particulary criminal activity which is associated with
21 organized crime groups (such as the illegal disposal of
22 hazardous waste), are unable to effectively investigate
23 such activity and enforce the criminal sanctions con-
24 cerned without having full law enforcement powers, in-
HR 2867 IH
4 b3
-------
33
1 eluding the authority to make arrests and carry fire-
2 arms; and
3 (B) the lives of such personnel are endangered in
4 situations where they are carrying out such investiga-
5 tions but are not authorized to carry firearms and
6 make arrests independently of other Federal, State, or
7 local law enforcement authorities.
8 (2) Any officer or employee of the Environmental Pro-
9 tection Agency authorized by the Administrator to conduct
10 criminal investigations (to investigate, or supervise the inves-
11 tigation of, any activity for which a criminal penalty is pro-
12 vided) under the Solid Waste Disposal Act is hereby author-
13 ized, in the enforcement of such Act, to—
14 (A) carry firearms;
15 (B) execute and serve warrants, summons, and
16 subpoenas, issued under the authority of the United
17 States;
18 (C) make arrests without warrant for offenses
19 against the United States committed in their presence;
20 (B) make arrests without warrant for felonies cog-
21 nizable under the laws of the United States if they
22 have reasonable grounds to believe that the person to
23 be arrested has committed or is committing such a
24 felony; and
HR 2867 IH
-------
34
1 (E) administer oaths for the purposes of taking a
2 sworn statement.
-------
l Ffl.toCti
18 (g) OPEN Dtm tPINa ENF0ECEMENT.—(1) Section 4005
19 of such Act is amended by inserting after the first sentence in
20 subsection (a) the following: “The prohibition contained in
21 the preceding sentence shall be enforceable against persons
22 engaged in the act of open dumping under section 7002.”.
23 (2) Section 7002(a)(1) of such Act is amended by insert-
24 ing “prohibition,” after “requirement,”.
HR 2867 I I I
$3
-------
36
1 (i) MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS RELATING TO EN-
2 FORCEMENT.—(1) Section 2002 of such Act is amended by
3 inserting the following at the end thereof:
4 “(c) CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS.—In carrying out the
5 provisions of this Act, the Administrator, and duly-designated
6 agents and employees of the Environmental Protection
7 Agency, are authorized to initiate and conduct investigations
8 under the criminal provisions of this Act, and to refer the
9 results of these investigations to the Attorney General for
10 prosecution in appropriate cases.”.
11 (2) Section 3008(a)(1) is amended to read as follows:
12 “(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), whenever on the
13 basis of any information the Administrator determines that
14 any person has violated or is in violation of any requirement
15 of this subtitle, the Administrator may issue an order: (A)
16 assessing a civil penalty for any past or current violation; (B)
17 requiring compliance immediately or within a specified time
18 period; or both, or the Administrator may commence a civil
19 action in the United States district court in the district in
20 which the violation occurred for appropriate relief, including
21 a temporary or permanent injunction.”.
22 (3) Section 3008(a)(3) is amended to read as follows:
23 “(3) Any order issued pursuant to this subsection may
24 include a suspension or revocation of any permit issued by
25 the Administrator or a State under this subtitle and shall
HR 2867 111
-------
37
1 state with reasonable specificity the nature of the violation.
2 Any penalty assessed in the order shall not exceed $25,000
3 per day of noncompliance for each violation of a requirement
4 of this subtitle. In assessing such a penalty, the Administra-
5 tor shall take into account the seriousness of the violation
6 and any good faith efforts to comply with applicable require-
7 ments.”.
8 (4) Section 3008(b) is amended by inserting “the person
- 9 or” before “persons”.
10 (5) Section 3008(c) is amended to read as follows:
11 “(c) VIOLATION OF COMPLIANCE ORDERS.—If a viola-
12 tor fails to take corrective action within the time specified in
13 a compliance order, the Administrator may assess a civil pen-
14 alty of not more than $25,000 for each day of continued non-
15 compliance with the order and the Administrator may sus-
16 pend or revoke any permit issued to the violator (whether
17 issued by the Administrator or the State).”.
18 (6) Section 3008(d) is amended as follows:
19 (A) in paragraph (1) insert after “knowingly trans-
20 ports” the following: “or causes to be transported”;
21 (B) in paragraph (2) strike out “either” and strike
22 out subparagraph (B) and substitute:
23 “(B) in violation of any material condition or re-
24 quirement of such permit; or
HR 2867 III
‘44
-------
38
1 “(0) in violation of any material condition or re-
2 quirement of any applicable interim status regulations
3 or standards;”; and -
4 (0) strike out all after paragraph (2) and substi-
5 tute:
6 “(3) knowingly omits material information or
7 makes any false material statement or representation in
8 any application, label, manifest, record, report, permit
9 or other document filed, maintained, or used for pur-
10 poses of compliance with regulations promulgated by
11 the Administrator (or by a State in the case of an au-
12 thorized State program) under this subtitle;
13 “(4) knowingly generates, stores, treats, trans-
14 ports, disposes of, or otherwise handles any hazardous
15 waste (whether such activity took place before or takes
16 place after the date of the enactment of this paragraph)
17 and who knowingly destroys, alters, conceals or fails to
18 file any record, application, manifest, report, or other
19 document required to be maintained or filed for pur-
20 poses of compliance with regulations promulgated by
21 the Administrator (or by a State in the case of an au-
22 thorized State program) under this subtitle; or
23 “(5) knowingly transports without a manifest, or
24 causes to be transported without a manifest, any haz-
25 ardous waste required by regulations promulgated
HR 2867 IH
‘ .4 (42 )
-------
39
1 under this subtitle (or by a State in the case of a State
2 program authorized under this subtitle) to be accompa-
3 nied by a manifest;
4 shall upon conviction, be subject to a fine of not more than
5 $50,000 for each day of violation, or imprisonment not to
6 exceed two years, or both. If the conviction is for a violation
7 committed after a first conviction of such person under this
8 paragraph, the maximum punishment under the respective
9 paragraph shall be doubled with respect to both fine and im-
10 prisonment.”.
11 (7) Section 3008(e) is amended to read as follows:
12 “(e) KNOWING ENDANGERMENT.—Any person who
13 knowingly transports, treats, stores, or disposes of any haz-
14 ardous waste identified or listed under this subtitle—
15 “(1)(A) in violation of paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4),
16 or (5) of subsection (d) of this section, or
17 “(B) having applied for a permit under section
18 3005 or 3006, and knowingly has failed to include in
19 his application material information required under reg-
20 ulations promulgated by the Administrator,
21 who knows at that time that he thereby places another
22 person in imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury,
23 and”.
HR 2867 IH
-------
40
1 (8) Section 3008(e) is amended by striking out “2
2 years” and substituting “5 years” and by striking out “5
3 years” and substituting “10 years”.
4 (9) Section 7006 (b) of such Act is amended by inserting
5 the following before the last sentence thereof: “Action of the
6 Administrator with respect to which review could have been
7 obtained under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial
8 review in civil or criminal proceedings for enforcement.”.
463
-------
wIthin 68 months. EPA’s sta mandate
Is to prohiolt the land dlsposaj of these
wastes unlem it finds that one or more
methods of disposal will not harm pubUc
health or the environment U EPA falls to
meet either of Its first two deadlines and If
there Is no treatment capacity, then the
wastes that have not been reviewed would
have to be sent to land disposal facilities
that aie double-lined and have leachate col.
lection systems, U EPA falls to meet Its
final deadline, then all unrevlewed wastes
mould be banned from land disposal, unless
the generator qualifies for a limited van-
mice.
&OOIlfOLm
HR. 2867 closes a number of regulatory
loopholes which have allowed the disposal
of significant quantities of hazardous waste
to remain uncontrolled. Among these loop-
holes is the “small generator” exemption
which permits the disposal of ‘up to one
metric ton a month (per generator) Into so-
called sanitary landfilLs or into aewera—dis-
posal practices which obviously are not pro-
tective of human health oi- the environ-
ment. The legislation requires regulation of
generators who produce more than 100 kilo-
grams (220 poi nds) each month. These gen-
erators will be required to send their han.-
ardous wastes to an appropriate disposal or
treatment facility.
Another major loophole which is ad.
dressed by this legislation concerns the use
of hazardous wastes as fueL Currently, some
of the most dangerous wastes, such as PCB .,
and dioxin. are blended into used oil or
other fuel and burned in residential boilers
which are not capable of destroying the
toxic component of these aastea. This pr-ac-
tIce. which has become increasingly preva-
lent, particuiarly in the Northeast. creates a
substantial risk to those citizens whose
health Is most vulnerable, especially the eld-
erly, young children and persons with respi.
ralory messes, Under the legislation, EPA
must issue regulations that would allow
burning of hazardous wastes only under dr.
cwnstances that would not harm public
health,
‘yoac wfr
HR. 2867 contains a number of provisio
designed to promote compliance with the
bills regulatory safeguards by increasing
Civil and criminal penalties for violators. Por
example, placing another person in danger
of death or serious bodily injury by Wegal
disposal or management of hazardous waste
carries a maximum 15 year prison sentence
and a 1250,000 fine. A corporation could be
lined $1 million, -
In addition, citizens would be provided the
right to sue responsible parties and compel
them to clean up hazardous waste sites.
Congress has recognized that leaving all en-
forceinent responsibility to PA and the
states has not been satisfactoq, in light of
the widespread non-compliance by hazard-
ous waste fsdllities, Citizen involvement, In-
cluding lawsuits to force abatement of
public health dangers, Is designed to law-
suits, to force abatement of public health
dangers, Is designed to complement the gov-
ernments enforcement efforts and encour-
age greater compliance by the regulated
community,
GSOUNDWAm COMMI5SIIN
KR. 2887 also establishes a 19-member
National Groundwater Commission to inves-
tigate and report on causes of groundwater
contamInation and to recommend a national
utjategy for addressing threats to the Na-
tion’s freshwater aquifers.
I A ZiIU UWDCscXOiTWD UTURA iZ TAJIAS
HR. 2867 establishes a comprehensive
regulatory program to prevent leaks from
underground storage tanks. There are more
than 2 million underground tanks hi the
United States which contain hazardous sub-
stances or gasoline. An estimated 100.000
are pI-esently leaking (potentially contain-
mating groundwater) and another 350,000
are expected to leak in the next fIve years.
H.R. 2867 mandates the use of leak detec-
tion systems, the development of new tank
standards which will protect against corro-
sion, as well as many other safeguards,
Mr. EDGAR. Mr. Speaker, will the
Sentleman yield? -
Mr. FLORIO. I yield to the gentle-
sean from Pennsylvania,
Mr. EDGAR. I thank the gentleman
for yielding,
Mr. Speaker, I would Just lIke to
commend the gentleman on the legis-
lation and point out that the legisla-
tion does include the establishment of
a National Groundwater Cornn’rmle-
slon. which the gentleman and I have
worked on, and I want to congratulate
him for his efforts.
Mr. FLORIO. I thank the gentle-
man, P
Mr. Speaker. I reserve the baMnce of
my time,
Cl 2140
Mr, BROYHILL. Mr. Speaker, I
yield myself 5 mInutes,
I rise In support of H.R. 2867, I be-
lieve It Is an Important environmental
measure which Is deserving of passage
this year, -.
My understanding of this measure is
that It Incorporates a number of com-
promises on Important Issues such as
small Quantity generators, PCS’s and
underground storage tanks, -
The Language adopted on small
quantity generatq Is virtually identi-
cal to Ihat Otan ageem en?, reached by
the .b 1swess and envIronmental corn-
uiurufy Wils .iyear. It provides for a
workable ftg gatory program for small
quantity geaerators of between 100k
kilogrthns ‘and 1,000 kilograms of haz,
ardous waste per month. Appropriate-
ly, ti js program Is restricted 1.0 that
universe of generators —then Is no
regulation below 100 kilograms per
month. In my opinion, regulation of
these small generato should not, go
below 100 kilograms per month, I be-
lieve the conferees did weU in adopting
this commonsense compromise.
Further, the conferees agreed to
drop a House provision which would
have required the listing of PCB’s
under RCRA. I advocated and com-
pletely support this approach, PCB’a
are already regulated under the Toxic
Substances Control Act and EPA is In
the process now of reviewlng’whether
or not supplemental regulation Is ap-
propriate under RCRA. It Is clear that
PCB ’s are now, and will continue to
be, carefully monitored and that a
mandatory listing procedure Is Inap-
propriate. -
Further, the conferees adopted a
compromise underground storage tank
proposal, It appears that this proposal
is a commoriaense compromise be-
tween the House and Senate versiong
of the tank regulatory program which
will provide a minimum amount of Wa.
ruption to the regulated community.
In light of this sensible compromise
provlslo , I can support HR. 2867 and
look forward to the President signing
It Into law this year.
Mr. Speaker. I yield 5 mInutes to the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Lmiy3,
the ranking minority member of the
subconunlttee who has worked so hard
and effectively with respect to this
program.
Mr. LENT: Mr. Speaker. I rise in
support of the conference report on
HR. 2867—the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984, This Is a
carefully crafted compromise bill
which has resulted from many years
of hard work by both Members and
staff. I want to particularly commend
the chairman of the full committee on
Energy and Commerce, the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. DINcn.zj, the
gent’eman from New Jersey (Mr.
FL0RI0J. the gentleman from North
Carolina (Mr. Bitoyxzu.]. the gentle-
man from Ohio (Mr. ECKART). and the
lentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Rirrm].
In my opinion, this conference
report represents a fair compromise
between the provisions of HR. 2867
and S. 757—Its Senate companion
measure, In most Instances the differ-
ences between the two bulls have been
split almost equally—resulting ifl an
Important new environmental statute,
The Hazardous and Solid Waste En-
forcement Act of 1984 represents a
dramatic new shift in our national
policy about hazardous waste disposal.
After this measure Is enacted, small
quantity generators of hazardous
waste who are now able to generate
2,209 kilograms or 1 ton of hazardous
waste a month will have to dispose of
their waste In a properly permitted fa-
cthty rather than In an unregulated
dump,
Following enactment, the EPA will
be on a strict timetable for reviewing
and banrung hazardous waste from
land disposal. Some of the most toxic
chemicals will be banned by statute
unless EPA determines that Is not nec-
essary to protect human health and
the environment. These chemicals in-
clude arsenic, cyanide, and dioxins,
For too many years In this country,
we have permitted the practice of
dumping hazardous wastes in the land
to go virtually unchecked, Even now
that the EPA Is requiring landfills to
be lined, I do not feel confident that
these liners wlU remain secure In the
long term, Therefore, I believe it Is ap-
propriate for the Congress to Inter-
vene at this time and to establish a
new policy which calls for a review of
known hazardous wastes and a deter-
minatIon whether these wastes are ap-
propriate for land disposal.
We simply cannot afford to allow
these dangerous and persistent cherni-
C oF hcl ,4-rE4 4 23
1’- ’17 _ OcZ3 ( ‘C../
-------
S 13820
tional constituents, EPA’s regulations
did not allow the Agency todo so. This
has resulted In some wastes which are
still hazardous being exempted from
the hazardous wastes lists and, conse-
quently. from all RCRA regulation.
Under the Agency’s present regula-
tions. tà be a hazardous waste, a waste
must exhibit a characteristic of haz-
ardous wastes or be listcd by name.
None of tile characteristics of hazard-
ous v.astes promulgated so far—ignit-
ability, corroslvlty, reactivity, or ex-
traction procedure—identifies wastes
on the basis of organic toxicity. Fur-
thermore. EPA’S listing process has
been virtually stalled for sevcral years.
This bill will direct EPA to consider
criteria, const tuents, or other factors,
In addition to those for which a waste
was listed, vilien evaluating petitIons
to delist or exclude from zegulation a
hazardous waste generated at a pal’-
tlculsr facility.
EPA Is to consider additonal hazard-
ous constituents and criteria when de-
ciding v,hether to delist a waste, The
threshold test is that EPA have infor-
mation reasonably Indicating that
presence of additional constituents
could cause the waste to still be fizz-
ardous. EPA Is specifically empov:ercd
to obtain inforraztion from the peti-
tioner relevant to this reasonable basis
determination. The bill thus provides
that the initial petition must be as-
conipanicd by information adequate to
evaluate the petiton. This includes in-
formation necessary in determining
whether there Is a reasonable basis to
bclieve the waste coutd still be hazard-
ous. Examples of information that can
appropriately be requested In an ini-
tial application are data dn constitu-
ents used as raw matciials, catalysts,
solvents, or ingredients Lu the process
generating the waste.
Once EPA obtains this data, the
Agency must determine—based on the
in.formatlon In the petition and on
other relevant information available
to the Agency—such as Industry stud-
ies data or data from similar peti-
tions—whether the waste reasonably
could be hazardous. If EPA makes this
finding, the Agency may then proceed
to request that the petitioner submit
more comprehensive Information on
the waste, such as chemical analyses.
After receiving this date, EPA then
will determine whether the waste is
hazardous under the criteria for list-
ing in section 001 of RCRA. as imple-
mented by EPA’s regulations.
The Administrator Is directed to
Identify or list those hazardous wastes
which shall be subject to subtitle C
provIsions solely because of the pres-
ence of constituents such as carcino-
gens or teratogens at levels that will
endanger human health.
BURNING ASS 8LENOING
Currently. EPA exempts facilities
that. burn hazardous wastes for the
primary purpose of energy recovery.
EPA has estimated that 10 or 15 mil-
lion metric tons of hazardous wastes
are burned each year In boilers; over
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
one-half of all hazardous wastes gener-
ated are burned in facilities not now
regulated un&.r RCRA. EPA has ac-
knowledged that burning hazardous
wastes for energy recovery Is similar to
Incinerating them and “could pose a
parallel or greater risk of environmen-
tal dispersal of hazardous waste con-
stituents and products of Incomplete
combustion.”
Fuel blending Is one of several areas
where EPA’s failure to promulgate
regulations has led to direct threats to
human health and the environment.
Hazardous wastes have b en blended
with heating oil and sold to unsuspect-
ing customers who burn them under
conditions which may not protect
human health or the environment.
The potential impact of this loop-
hole is even more significant as more
and more wastes may be burned In
boilers, cement kilns, or other heat re-
covery units to avoid RCRA regulation
and treatment costs.
Therefore, we require that within a
year, EPA must be notiried by facili-
ties which blend hazardous wastes to
produce fuel or which distribute.
market or burn hazardous wastes or
blended fuel for energy recovery.
Within 2 ycam EPA must set stand-
ards for transporters of such fuel and
for facilities which burn such fuel ade-
quate to protect human health and
the environment. Labeling of such fuel
which contains hazardous wastes is re-
quired. A limited statutory exemption
is allowed for petroleum coke and.
with respect to the labeling require-
ment, for onsite petroleum refinery
operations. A regulatory exemption Is
authorized for facilities which burn de
minimis quantities of hazardous
wastes in fuel.
MANDATORY IUSPECTIO S AND (EDERAL
PACIUTIES
Current law does not mandate that
facilities that treat, store, or dispose of
hazardous wastes be regularly inspect-
ed. Although officers, employees, and
representatives of the States and EPA
are authorized by section 3007(a) of
RCRA to enter and inspect any facili-
ties where hazardous wastes are han-
dled, too few Inspections are being
conducted to effectively monitor com-
pliance with RCRA and applicable reg-
ulations. Inspections that do occur are
conducted under widely varying State-
formulated criteria regarding the
qualifications of Inspectors and the
scope of the Inspection.
The bill will establish a program re-
quiring Inspection at least once every 2
years for treatment, storage, and dis-
posal facilities. EPA will complete a
study to evaluate feasibility of using
private Inspectors to supplement Fed-
eral or State inspectors. EPA must
also begin a program to perform thor-
ough inspections of Federal treatment,
storage, and disposal facilities on an
annual basis. Authorized States may
also Inspect Federal facilities. EPA
must Initiate inspections at each State
or local treatment, storage, or disposal
facility,
October 5, 1984
All Federal agencies must conduct
and update a detailed Inventory of
hazardous waste facilities for submit-
tal to EPA. If agencies do not respond,
EPA will complete the inventory.
FCD AZ. EIFORCEMCNT
RCRA provides criminal penalties
for transporting waste to an unpermit-
ted facility and for submitting false In-
formatIon in documents required to be
filed under the act. However, the stat-
ute presently does not specifically ad-
dress the criminal liability of genera-
tors of hazardous waste who knowing-
ly cause the waste to be transported to
an unpermitted facility. It also does
not address material omissions or the
failure to file required reports. Simi-
larly, where hazardous waste is know-
ingly transported without a manifest,
there would be no criminal liability
unless the waste’ is subsequently deliv-
ered to an unpermitted facility. Al-
though most facilities are operating
under interim status permits, there Is
currently no criminal liability for
knowing violations of such require-
ments. Portions of the knowing er.dan-
germent provisions are redundant and
unnecessarily restrictive.
Criminal penalties are provided In
H.R. 2867 for knowingly causing waste
to be transported to an unpermitted
facility; for knowingly transporting or
causing waste to be transported with-
out a manifest; where knowing omis-
sions or false statements are made;
and where interim status requirements
are violated. MaxImum criminal penal-
ties are increased and redundant pro-
visions In the knowing endangerment
section are removed. By specifically
adding criminal liability for .caushig
wastes to be transported to an unper-
mitted facility or without a manifest,
there is no intent to affect the applica-
tion of title 18. UnIted States Code,
section 2 to all provisions of RCRA.
PORT 0? HAZARDOUS WASTS
Current regulations allow hazardous
wastes to be exported from the United
States with minimal notice to receiv-
ing countries. There is currently no re-
quirement that receiving countries be
fully apprised of the nature of the
shipment nor a requirement that they
consent to receipt of the shipment.
Within 12 months after enactment
of U.R. 2867 no person shall export
hazardous wastes unless notice of
Intent to export and details of the
shipment are provided to EPA. the re-
ceiving country has been notified by
the State Department and has con-
sented to receive such hazardous
wastes, and a copy of the receiving
country’s written consent is attached
to the manifest accompanying each
shipment.
Where there exists an International
agreement between the United States
and the receivIng country establishing
notice and export procedures for the
handling of hazardous wastes, notice,
and consent for each shipment shall
not be required.
-------
• October 6, 198S
This amendment has been recom-
mended by the Governor of Missouri.
It has been recommended by the Na-
tiorial Governors’ Conference and
again It has been accepted In commit.-
tee on the Senate side.
I urge my colleagues to benefit from
the experience that we had In Missou-
ri and to make these tools that I offer
In this amendment clearly available so
that they can be used, If necessary. In
other parts of the country In the
future.
Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption at
my amendment.
POEIT OP O2D
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentle-
man from New Jersey (Mr. PLoiuo)
insist on his point of order?
Mr. PLORIO. Yes, I do. Mr. Chair-
man.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
will state It.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. I
would just say on my point of order
that this amendment attempts to
amend a portion of the Comprehen-
sive vironmental Response, Corn-
pensation. and Liability Act Super-
fund, which is not before this commit-
tee and, accordingly, is not germane.
On the merits of the proposal. I
would just say that the gentleman is
attempting to expand the scope of Sn-
perfund. That may very well be desir-
able, but It should be desirable at the
appropriate time when we are dealing
with that.
I would represent to the gentleman
that my committee will be undertak-
fig hearings in the immediate future
to propose legislation to reauthorize
Superfund next year, so It may very
well be that we can accommodate
some of the gentleman’s needs; but It
Is not appropriate at this porn?..
Mr. Chairman. I insist upon my
pen n of order.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentle-
man from Missouri (Mr. Sxtz.rox)
desire to be heard on the point of
order?
Mr. SKELTON. I certainly do, Mr.
Chairman.
The fact that sectIon 10 deals with
the Superfund In and of Itself opens
the door. . —
My colleague, the gentleman from
New Jersey, has indicated his view
that tb ’s money in the Superfund was
intended for cleanup alone and that
my amendment takes it beyond that
purpose or that we should limit it to
just that purpose.
I would remind my colleague that
the very title of the Superfimd law
Is the Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation. and Liability
Act of 1980.
Section 101, paragraph 23. which I
seek to amend. clearly provides far
compensation es a result of actions
taken by the Administrator or the
President to protect the health and
welfare of our citizens. That is the
!ntrai Purpose of the Superfund. to
sotect people. AU too often we forget
uirha& that entalk, The people in a con-
taminated community have property.
They have jobs and their families to
support. In some eases they own busi-
nesses that provide jobs and provide
an economy for the area.
I submit that a temporary relocation
can cause the death of aiocal econo-
my as quickly as dioxin can cause the
death of a population. -
I would like to point out that this Is
not an entitlement, but it Is rather a
useful tool which the Administrator
can use If it Is appropriate.
We do not direct him to take these
actions, but merely make It clear that
they are there in case he needs them.
Now, I also submit to the chairman
that sectIon 10 Is far more sweeping In
Its effect on the Superfund than my
amendment Is. The previous section,
aectlon 10, changes the amount of the
State’s contribution for State-owned
aites from 50 percent to 10 percent, be-
cause In some cases they cannot afford
the expense.
All my amendment would.Io Is to
clarify that the Administrator can in
his discretion in those rare Instances
where such action Is appropriate to
take actions himself to help the resi-
dents of a contaminated area.
The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Baaiqaiw).
The Chair Is prepared to nile.
Section 10 of this bill does amend
subsection 104(c)(3) of the Superfund
law. Public Law 96-510, but only in a
very narrow respect regarding State
contributions and reimbursements
from the fund. The bill does net so
comprehensively amend the Super-
fund law as to permit luther amend-
ments to the law which are unrelated
to the specific changes contained in
the bill.
The amendment from the gentleman
from MIssouri relates to eligibility for
certain community relocation assist-
ance for the Superfund and Is not re-
lated to he issue contained In the bill.
The Chair sustains the point of
order.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman. I
move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, this Is a terribly ha-
portent amendment and the Chair has
made Its ruling and, of course, I abide
by the ruling.
The chairman of the subcommittee,
the gentleman from New Jersey. was
kind enough to point out that next
year his subcommittee would be deal-
ing with this Superfund Issue.
in my opinion, Mr. Chairman, time
is of the essence. I would urge, because
the Senate committee has included
the same Skelton amendment In Its
bill on the Senate side in the form of a
Danforth-Eagleton amendment, and
the germaneness out of the scope
ruling Is not applicable on the Senate
side, that when this item comes to con-
ference that this body, this subeom-
inittee and this chairman, could look
favorably upon this Issue, because in
my opinion, time Is of the essence.
I do appreciate the attitude of the
gentleman from New Jersey and his
offer to take this up next year; but for
H 8165
many, Mr. Chairman, should this man-
made tragedy trlke, It would be too
late, I would certainly urge the sub-
committee chairman to do so.
Mr. PLORIO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. SKELTON. I yield to the gentle-
man.
Mr. PLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I ap-
preciate the gentleman’s comments,
and rest assured that as we go to con-
ference, we will certainly take Into ac-
count the merit of what It Is the other
body has done and we will look at It
with close scrutiny, because I sin sen-
sitive to the problems the gentleman
has raised and certainly we will give
his views appropriate consideration In
the course of our conference.
0 1630
Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Chairman.
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SKELTON. I yield to the gentle-
man from Missouri.
Mr. GEPHARDT. I thank the gen-
tieman for yielding. -
I want to commend my colleague
from Missouri for having attempted to
make this amendment. Having a dis-
‘lct in Missouri where dioxin is prob-
ably found In the second greatest
quantities in Missouri, I am well aware
of the problems that are presented to
residents. I sin also aware of the prob-
lems we have had with the state of the
present law and superfund and In
other areas In trying to get aid and
relief to these people. I believe this
amendmçnt Is very Important. I appre-
ciate the chairman’s comments that
be will consider these matters as we go
Into conference.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there further
amendments to section 10’
If not, the Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
rnPoRC ’T
Szc. ii. (a) butiwner HAZARD.—Sectlon
t003 (a) Is amended—
(1) by InsertIng ‘past or present” after
“evidence that the”;
(1) by utrlkzng out ‘.10 ImmedIately re-
strain any person” and substituting the fol-
lowing: “against any person (Including any
past or present generator, past or present
transporter, or past or present owner o’ op-
erator of a treatment, storage, or disposal
facility) who has contributed or who Is”:
(3) by striking out “to stop” and subsutut.
kig ‘to restrain such person from”; and
(4) by strIking out “or to take such other
action as may be necessary” and substltut.
ing ‘, to order such person to take such
other action as may be necensary, or both”.
(b) ArrolurrY’s P s.—SecLion 7002(e) Is
amended by strIking out “to any part ’ and
mibatituting In Ueu thereof “10 the prevail.
big or substantially prevailing party” and
Inserting “or section 7006” aSter “this see-
lion”.
(C) Pi esrnvariox or 0mm Riciers —Sec-
tIon 7002(f) h amended by striking Out “Sec.
tlon” and sustltuting “Act”.
(4) Cmvii. Ac’rxo,is —SectIon 2002 is
amended by sd&ng the following new sub.
secUon at the end thereof:
“(C) CiviL £crzoNs.—( 1) The Admlmstra.
tar shall request the Attorney General to
file, and represent the Administrator in. any
: CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
44;3
-------
H 8166
civil action which the Admlnlstzatord.s Lu.
thorlzed to bring under this Act, If t3 e At-
torney Oeneral does not—
“(A) notify the Administrator within
thirty days after the date on which such re
quest Is transmitted that he wIU commence
such action and represent the Administra-
tor, and
“(B) file such civil action within one bun.
dred and fifty days after the date of tans.
mittal of such request.
the Administrator shall, except as provided
In paragraph (2), have the exclusive author-
ity to commence and conduct the litigation
of such action, and any appeal of such
action, In his own name. For such purposes,
the Mn InI tra1or shall be represented by
one or more attorneys of the environmental
Protection Agency designated by the Ad-
ministrator.
“(2) aragraph (1) shall not apply In the
case of actious before the United States Su-
preme Court, The provisions of this subsec-
tion shall apply notwithstanding any other
provision of law.”,
Cc) Law Envoac miT Auvaoury.—(1)
The Congress finds that—
(A) personnel of the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency who are engaged in investi-
gations of activity which Is criminal under
the Solid Waste Disposal Act, ‘particularly
criminal actlvny which Is associated with or-
ganized crime groupe (such as the Illegal dis’
posal of hazardous waste), are unable to ef-
fectively Investigate such activity and en
force the criminal sanctions concerned with.
out having full law enforcement powers, in-
cluding the authority to make arrests and
carry firearms; and
(B) the lives of such personnel are endan-
gered In situations where they are cerrying
out such Investigations but are not author-
ed to carry firearms and make arrests In-
dependently of other Federal. State, or local
law enforcement authorities.
(2) Any officer or employee of the Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency authorized by
the AdmInistrator to conduct criminal loves-
Ugations (to investigate, or supervise the in.
vestlgation of, any activity for which a
criminal penalty is provided) under the
Solid Waste Disposal Act Is hereby author-
Ised, in the enforcement of such Act, to—
(1) eari firearms;
(2) execute and serve warrants, summons
and subpenaa, issued under the authonty of
the United States:
(3) make arrests without warrant for of-
fenses against the United States committed
Iii their presence:
(4) make arrests without warrant for felo-
nies cognizable under the laws of the United
States ii they have reasonable grounds to
believe that the person to be arrested has
committed or Is committIng such a felony;
and
(5) thrlnlster oaths for the purposes of
taking a sworn statement.
- (f) Crri i Bvns.—(1) Section 7002(aXi)
is amended by Inserting “(A)” after “(1)”
and by inserting the following at the end
thereof:
‘-(B) against any person. Including the
United States and any other governmental
Instrumentality or agency, to the extent
permitted by the eleventh amendment to
the Constitution and including any past or
present generator, past or present trans-
porter, or past or present owner or operator
of a treatment, storage or disposal facility
who has contributed or who is contributing
to the past or present handling storage.
treatment, transportation, or disposal of
any solid or hazardous waste which may
present an Imminent and substantial endan-
germent to health or the environment: or”
(2) Section 7002 (bX 1) is amended by strik-
ing out all after “alleged violator” ,down
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
through “; or” and substituting “inferred to
in subsection (ax 1); or”
(3) Section 7002(a) is amended by striking
out ‘to enforce such regulation or order, or
to order the Administrator to perform such
Act or duty as the case may be” and substi-
biting “to enforce the permit, standard, reg-
ulation. condition, requirement, prohibition,
or order, referred to in paragraph (1XA). to
hnmedlatel3, restrain any person contribut-
ing to the endangerment referred to in
paragraph (1XE), to order such person to
take such other action as may be necemary.
or both, or to order the administrator to
perform the act or duty referred to in para-
graph (2). as the case may be, and to apply
any appropriate civil penalties under section
3008(a) and (g),
(4) Section 7002(b) Ia amended by adding
the following at the end thereof: “No action
may be commenced under subsection
(aX1XE) If the Administrator has com-
menced, and is diligently prosecuting, an
action under section 1003, or If the State
baa brought an action under this section, to
Immediately restrain any person contribut-
ing to the endangerment referred to In sub-
section (LX1XB). No action may be com-
menced under subsection (aX1XE) by any
person (‘Dther than a State or local govern-
ment) with respect to the siting of a hazard-
ous waste treatment, storage, or disposal I a-
Ity.”.
(g) Oran DuxPoso ENYonc rr.—(I) Sec-
tion 4005 Is amended by Inserting after the
first sentence in subsection (a) the follow-
Inn: “The prohibition contained In the pre-
ceding sentence shall be enforceable against
persona engaged in the act of open dumping
under section 7002.”
(2) SectIon 7002CaXl) Is amended by In-
serting “prohibition,” after “requirement,”.
(h) MzscxLulrsous Aansinssm-rs Rwvncc
vo ExroacxxxaT.—(1) Section 2002 Is
amended by inserting the following at the
end thereof:
“(d) Cnr nfAL IJITInTIGATIONS.—ID CarrY-
ing out the provisions of this Act, the Ad-
ministrator, and duly-designated agents sod
employees of the Environment,al Protection
Agency. are authorized to Initiate and con-
duct Investigations under the criminal provi-
sions of this Act, and to refer the results of
these investigations to the Attorney Gener-
al for prosecution in appropriate cases.”.
(2 Section 3008(aXl) is amended to read
as follows: “(1) Except as provided In para-
graph (2). whenever on the basis of any in-
formation the #.iimInt trator determines
that soy person has violated or is in viola-
tion of any requirement of this subtitle, the
Administrator may issue an order (A) as-
sessng a civil penalty for any past or cur-
rent violation: (B) requiring compliance Im-
mediately or within a specified time period;
or both, or the Administrator may com-
mence a civil action In the United States dis-
trict court in the district In which the viola-
tion ccurred for appropriate relief. includ-
ing a temporary or permanent Injunctlon”.
‘(3) Section 3008(a)(3) Is amended to read
as follows:
“(3) Any order issued pursuant to this
subsection may include a suspension or rev-
ocation of any permit issued by the Admin-
istrator or a State under thIs subtitle and
shall state with reasonable specificity the
nature of the violation. Any penalty as-
sessed in the order shall not exceed $25,000
per day of noncompliance for each violation
of a requirement of this subtitle. In assess-
ing such a penalty, the Administrator shall
take Into account the seriousness of the vio-
lation and any good faith efforts to comply
with applicable requirements.”.
(4) Section 3008(b) is amended by Insert-
ing “the person or” before “persons”.
October 6, 1988
(5) Section 3008(c) Is amended to read as
follows: -
“(c) Vioi,arsox or Coxpuajicz ORDERS—If
a violator falls to take corrective action
within the time specified In a compliance
order, the Administrator may assess a civil
penalty of not more than $25,000 for each
day of continued noncompliance WIth the
order and the Administrator may suspend
or revoke any permit Issued to the violator
(whether Issued by the Administrator or the
State),”. -
(6 Section 3008(d) Is amended as follows:
(A) in paragraph (1)—
(I) Insert after “knowingly transports” the
following; “or causes to be transported”, and
(II) strIke out “section 3005 (or 3006 in the
case of a State program)” and substitute
“this subtitle”;
(B) in paragraph (2)—
(I) strike out “either”;
(II) strike out “section 3005 (or 3006 in the
case of a State program)” and substitute
“this subtitle”; and
(ill) strike out subparagraph (B) and sub-
stitute:
“(B) In violation of any material condition
or requirement of such permit; or
“(C) In violation of any material condition
or requirement of any applicable interim
status regulations or standards;”; and
(C) strike out all after paragraph (2) and
substitute:
“(3) knowingly omIts material Information
or makes any false material statement or
representation In any application, label,
manliest, record, report, permit or other
document filed, maintained, or used for pur-
poses of compliance with regulations pro-
mulgated by the Administrator (or by a
State in the case of an authorized State pro-
gram) under thIs subtitle;
“(4) knowingly generates, stores, treats,
transports, disposes of, or otherwise handles
any hazardous waste (whether such activity
took place before or takes place alter the
date of the enactment of this paragraph)
and who knowingly destroys, alters, con-
ceals or falls to file any record, application,
manliest, report, or other document re-
quired to be maintained or filed for pur-
poses of compliance with regulations pro-
mulgated by the Administrator (or by a
State in the ease of an authorized State pro-
gram) under this subtitle; or
“(5) knowingly transports without a mani-
fest, or causes to be transported without a
manliest, any hazardous waste required by
- regulations promulgated under this subtitle
(or by a State in the case of a State Pro-
gram authorized under this subtitle) to be
accompanied by a manliest
shall upon conviction, be subject to a fine of
not more than $50,000 for each day of viola-
tion, or imprisonment not to exceed tao
years (five years In the case of a violation of
paragraph (1) or (2)), or both. If the convic-
tion is for a violation committed alter a first
conviction of such person under this para-
graph, the maximum Punishment under the
respective paragraph shall be doubled with
respect to both find and Imprisonment.”.
(‘1) SectIon 3008e is to read as folloas:
“Ce) XISOWWG EmAaczasixwr—Any person
who knowingly transports, treats, stores or
disposes of any hazardous waste Identified
or listed under this subtitle In violation of
paragraph U), (2), (3), or (5) of subsection
Cd) of this section who knows at that time
that he thereby places another person in
Imminent danger of death or serious bodily
Injury, shall, upon conviction, be subject to
a fine of not more than 8250.000 or Impris-
onment for not more than fifteen years. or
both. A defendant that is an organization
shall, upon conviction of violating this sub-
-------
Q tober 6,1983 ONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
section. be subject to a fine.! not mole tl at
11.000000.”.
(8) SectIon ?006(b) h amended by Insert-
ing the following betore the last sen4ence
therof: “Action of the AdmlnIstrs tor with
respect to which review could have been ob-
tained under this subsection shall not be
subject to judicial review In civil or eriminol
‘ooeed1ngs for enforeement”.
Mr. FLORIO (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman. I ask unanimous con-
sent that sectIon 11 be considered os
lead and printed in the Racoiw.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey?
There was no objection.
susicusy co vrzz axssn y
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk wlfl
report the first Judiciary Committee
amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Committee smendme *: Page 32. strIke
seit lInes 1 through 24.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman. I move to
r1ke the last word.
I would like to ask the gentleman
from New Jersey If It Is his intention
to rise very shortly?
Mr. PLORIO. Mr. aIrinab. wtfl
the gentleman yield?
Mr. LENT. I yield to the gentleman
from New Jersey.
Mr. FLORIO. It Is my Intention to
enter Into a brief colloquy with the
gentleman from New York In response
to his question and then to rise.
Mr. LENT. Can the gentleman ex-
plain some of the reasons behind the
additional amendment to section 7003?
(Mr. FLORIO asked and was given
rmlssion to revise and extend his re-
irks.)
Mr. FLORIO. As you know. section
v003 together with Its sister, provision.
section 106 of CERCLA, are among
the most Important weapons in the
Agency’s hazardous waste enforce-
ment arsenal. There have been a
number of Federal courts which have
not fully understood the breadth of
these provIsIons—particularly their
applicability to Inactive facwties and
nonnegligent - generators—and have
Issued decisions suggesting that they
are to be read more narrowly than
Congress intended. The purpose of the
amendments to sectIon ‘1003 Is to clari-
fy our intent in this regard.
Because of the confusion that has
surrounded the interpretation of sec-
tion 7003 (and aectior 108 of
CERCLA). I thInk It Is Important to
reiterate that these provisions are to
be liberally construed to effectuate
their broad remedial purpose, and to
be Implemented by the courts and
EPA in a manner which will assure
rapid and effective compliance.
This latter concept Is particularly
critical for the successful Implementa-
tion of EPA’s administrative order au-
thority under sectIons 7003 and 106.
Indeed. Congress has expressly de-
signed those provisions so that orders
can be issued quickly and enforced ef-
- ‘ively.
example. Congress has never In-
.d that EPA provide lengthy ad-
minlatrative hearings before Issuing
these orders. In most cases, EPA gives
i opportunity for consultation prior
to an en! oreemerit action, and, in cases
where there Is need for prompt action
to abate an emergency—as opposed to
more long-term remedial action, It
may be appropriate to dispense even
with those procedures.
SinillArly, It has always been our
hitent that EPA be able to effectively
enforce orders under sections 7003 and
106. Orders issued under these provi-
sions should not be subject to judicial
review except in an EPA action to en-
force them. Allowing preenforcement
review of these orders will seriously
undermine the Agency’s ability to
obtain prompt compliance and slow
cleanup efforts—the primary goals of
both provisions.
In addition, where these orders are
reviewed In an enforcement action.
they should be reviewed based on the
record devrloped by the Agency and
under an ‘arbitrary and capricious
standard. Requiring de novo review in
a district court would almost Inevita-
bly delay compliance. Furthermore, it
would subject EPA decislonmaking to
a standard of review which we believe
is to stringent given the Important
health and environmental objectives
to be achieved by these provisions.
We trust that EPA will increasingly
rely on the powerful enforcement
tools that Congress has given It In sec-
tion 7003 and section 106. The amend-
ments added to sectIon 7003 by H.R.
2887 should assist hi that effort.
• Mr. PHILIP N. CRANE. Mr. Chair-
man, in recent years, Americans have
become increasingly frustrated and an-
gered by the improper disposal of haz-
ardous wastes. Each new media horror
story brings court suits, protests, and
calls for restrictive legislation. While
these news accounts have been very ef-
fective in arousing public interest and
concern, they have not provided
Americans with the Information they
need to find practical solutions to our
hazardous waste disposal problems.
Without that information, we may
find ourselves saddled with new laws
and regulations that will not protect
Americans from hazardous wastes and
that could wreck our economy.
The Federal bureaucracy defines
hazardous waste as discarded material
that may pose a substantial threat or
potential hazard to human health or
the environment when improperly
handled. These wastes may be toxic.
reactive, combustible, corrosive, or in-
fectious, and they vary widely in the
degree to which they are dangerous to
our health. In fact, almost every small
business, school, or hospital in the
United States produces wastes that
can be classified as hazard,pus—rang-
ing from service station rag k to used
hypodermics or bandages. However.
the problem associated with the dis-
posal of truly dangerous materials has
grown significantly In recent years.
Old, leaky landfills, illegal dumping.
and accidental spills have created a
118167’
number of severe environmental prob-
lem areas around the country. The
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
now estimates that there are at least
14,000 sites nationwide that can be la-
beled as “potentially dangerous.”
These sites pose fire hazards, threaten
ground water resources, or emit nox-
ious fumes. -
I believe that a healthy environment
Is essential to the present and future
well-being of our people, and to sus-
tainable national growth. Unfortu-
nately, I do not believe that the Feder-
al regulatory process Is capable of
dealing with the threat posed by inad-
equate hazardous waste disposal. AU
too often, the Federal regulation of a
problem Is counterproductive—causing
more harm than it prevents. This is es-
pecially true in the case of hazardous
waste regulation.
Since 1976. the primary Federal law
governing the disposal of hazardous
wastes has been the Resource Conser-
vation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The
EPA regulations needed to implement
this extraordinarily complicated law
were not put In place until May 1980.
Now, In 1983. the Congress is consider-
ing HR. 2867, a bill intended to
reauthorize and amend RCRA. Before
it was amended on the House floor,
H.R. 2867 would have forced hundreds
of tiiousands of email businesses to
comply with EPA hazardous waste reg-
ulations—at an average cost of $3,000
each year. As it stands now, the bill
delays the Implementation of new reg-
ulations for a few months and might
reduce the costs to small business. The
rest of HR 2867 Is more a regulatory
blueprint than It is a legialative docu-
ment.
HR. 2867 Is a bad bill and it will
make worse law. It is a bill entangled
In the technical details of hazardous
waste regulation—it Is not a bill that
would set clear, effective standards to
protect Americans from those wastes.
Thee hazardous waste problem is too
large and too complex for a compara-
tive handful of Federal regulators to
handle. Congress and the EPA have
failed to develop an effective, nation-
wide waste disposal control program.
Instead, we have put in a place an
enormously complicated, costly, and
Inefficient bundle of redtape.
A Federal hazardous waste Control
program cannot be effective. Hazard-
ous waste problems vary from State to
State and region to region. The indus-
tries in Illinois are different from
those in Maine. and the hazardous
wastes they produce are not the same.
At the same time, air, soil, and water
conditions vary dramatically from area
to area. These environmental condi-
tions play an important role in deter-
mining which technologies can be used
safely to dispose of hazardous wastes
Clearly, the responsibility for hazard-
ous waste regulation must be placed
where It belongs_at the State and
local level.
4’;
-------
118168
èurrent Federal waste disposal re’g’u-
latlons require business to use certain.
approved technologies. These technol-
ogies are often Ineffective and costly.
They cost Jobs without solving prob-
lems. State and local laws that set
clear standards for environmental
quality will encourage the develop-
ment of realistic, Innovative, and cost-
effective waste disposal technologies.
The case for decentr -1i ing hazardous
waste regulation Is clear and compel-
ling. State and local control will help
insure a cleaner environment and a
healthy, growing economy.
While the laws governing hazardous
waste disposal and treatment should
set clear standards for environmental
quality, they should also be adminis-
tered at the lowest possible level of
government. Citizens ought to be able
to take their complaints to a local offi-
cial—they should not be compelled to
wander through the bureaucratic mess
In Washington, D.C. Then, If compa-
nies or individuals break the law, they
can justly be subjected to the harshest
possible penalties for endangering peo-
ples’ lives and property. If the respon-
sibiflty for hazardous waste regula-
tions Is clearly defined, State agencies
and the Federal Government can no
longer pass the buck back and forth—
as they have at the Antioch landfill in
my own district. Instead of hiding
behind meaningless questions of juris-
diction, they will have to buckle down
and work to solve the very real hazard-
ous waste problems that plague our
Nation.
Every American desires a clean and
healthy environment, but that goal
cannot be met by a cumbersome and
costly Federal hazardous waste pro-
gram. As we look for solutions to this
problem. Congress must remember
that our aim should be to clean up
waste, not to create a hazardous waste
bureaucracy. We must protect the en-
vironment, but in doing so. we must
not destroy the American economy.
Returning waste regulation to State
and local governments would be a
giant step in the right dlrection.•
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I move
that the Committee do now rise.
The motion-was agreed to.
Accordingly the Committee rose;
and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Muwrw) having assumed the chair,
Mr. BA1u iw, Chairman of the Com-
mittee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union, reported that that
Committee, having had under consid-
eration the bill (H.R. 2867) to amend
the Solid Waste Disposal Act to au-
thorize appropriations for the fiscal
years 1984 through 1986, and for other
purposes, had come to no resolution
thereon,
OEN ERAL LEAVE
Mr. LENT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unani-
mous consent that all Members may
have S legIslative days in which to
revise and extend their remarks, and
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
Include extraneous material, on the
legislation Just under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is
there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New York?
There was no objection.
AMTRAK ULPROVEMENT ACT OF
1983
The SPEA pro tempore. Pursu-
ant to House Resolution 320 and rule
I1. the Chair declares the House
In the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the con
sideratlon of the bill, H,R. 3648.
vm coi rrn or vnz wuoLs
Accordingly the House resolved
Itself into the ,Commlttee of the
Whole House on the State of the
Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 3648) to improve the cost effec-
tiveness of the National Railroad Pas-
senger Corporation, to authorize ap-
propriations for such Corporation for
the fIscal year ending September 30,
1984, and for other purposes, with Mr.
Bzini In the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the
rule, the first reading of the bill Is dis-
pensed with.
Under the rule, the gentleman from
New Jersey, Mr. FLoiuo, will be recog-
nized for 30 mInutes, and the gentle-
man from New York. Mr. LENT, will be
recognized for 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Fr oiuo).
(Mr. FWRIO asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, the
Rouse Is now considering HR. 3648,
the Amtrak Improvement Act of 1983.
This Is an important piece of legisla-
tion designed to improve Amtrak’s op.
erations.
This bill reauthorizes Amtrak at
$730 million for fiscal year 1984 and
makes changes designed to Improve
the cost effectiveness of Amtrak’s
system. The bill . anticipates that all
routes in Amtrak’s basic system wouhi
continue to be operated.
Of particular Importance, the legis-
lation also deals with the problem of
Amtrak’s debt to the Federal Govern-
ment as a result of loan guarantees
Issued in the early 1970’s. When
Amtrak was first established, it W8 5
expected that Amtrak would one day
be profitable and Congress provided
loan guarantees to Amtrak Instead of
grants for its capital expenses. Howev-
er. It soon became clear that Amtrak
would not become profitable and Con-
gress decided Instead to use direct
grants for Amtrak’s capital expenses.
In the meantime, Amtrak had accuinu-
lated a significant debt to the Federal
Government—close to $1 billion—as a
resulc of these loan guarantees,
Originally, this loan was serviced by
direct appropriations to Amtrak for
the purpose. But this amounted to the
Federal Government paying itself. In
1981, Congress decided to defer repay-
‘Oètober 6 1981
ment untIl October 1, 1983. The ad-
ministration could have administra-
tively extended this date to avoid a de
fault, particularly In light of the fact
that this legislation sought to avoid
default by extending the existing de-
ferral of Amtrak’s obligation to pay in-
terest until October 1, 1984. Unfortu-
nately, the administration preferred
seeing Amtrak In default rather than
wait for passage of this legislation. It
Is now crucial that this default be
cured, so as to prevent serious ramifi-
cations in the future. I will be offering
an amendment later to do this.
In addition, the bill deals with a
number of other Important rail
Issues—for example, the recent Su-
preme Court decision striking down
the legislative veto provisions which
will affect the sale of Conrail to the
private sector. Because of the impor-
tance of careful oversight of any sale,
the bill would require specific legisla-
tion before Conrail could be sold.
Indeed, the Department of Transpor.
teflon has said, given the complexity
of the transaction, that legislation will
be required In any event. Also, to Im-
prove Congress ability to evaluate a
proposed sale, the bill reauthorizes the
U.S. Railway Association, which serves
as an unbiased source of information
on Conrail.
I should note that the bill as report-
ed represents a compromise between
the majority and minority on our com-
mittee, with one exception. We have
agreed to disagree on how to deal with
the sale of Conrail. I expect I will have
more to say on this later on.
I also expect that there may be an
amendment dealing with the boxcar
deregulation decision of the ICC. I
want to make clear t this point my
strong opposition to this special inter-
est amendment, an opposition which is
shared by the administration.
This Is a good bill and I urge its pas-
sage.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, I yield
myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. LENT asked and was given per-
mission to revise and extend his re-
marks-)
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in
support of H.R. 3648, the Amtrak Im-
provement Act of 1983. This is an im-
portant piece of rail legislation,
The bill reauthorizes Amtrak for 1
year at a level of $730 million. This
funding will enable Amtrak to contin-
ue to operate service on its existing
system and to undertake capital proj-
ect .c.
Section 108 of HR. 3648 would re-
quire Amtrak to cover 55 percent of its
operating costs with revenues, com-
mencing in fiscal year 1984. Currently,
Amtrak is required to meet 50 percent
of Its operating COSt-S With revenues
Amtrak met this statutory goal in
fIscal year 1982 and was confident it
could improve on it in the future. This
provision will encourage Amtrak tc.
become more cost efficient and reduce
Its dependence on Federal subi,idies.
42 3
-------
October 81., 19&t Wi u1sUL S ..‘ . ?ZtLJ — a
EXTENDING IRATION DATE rule xiiI , the Chair declares the “sends a signal” to the effect that the
OF EXPORT-IMPORT BANK Rouse In the Committee of the Whole Congress believes the Justice Depart-
ACT OF 1945 • . •- . - Rouse on the State of the Union for ment has been dilatory and lackadaLsl-
Mr. NEAL Mr. Speaker. I ask the further ‘ç9nslderatlon of the bill. cal In Its enforcement of hazardo us
mous consent to take from the Speak- H. ” 86’ . .:‘,‘ , waste litigation, and that transfer ‘of
table the Senate Joint resolution , ..: OF TRZ WEOLE th litigating authority to A would
Res. 189) extendIng the expira- ‘ Accordingly ‘the Rouse resolved result in better enforcement of the
date of the Export-Import Bank Itself into the Committee of the solid and hazardous waste disposal
...vi of 1945, and ask for Its Immediate Whole Rouse on the State of the laws. -
consideration In the House. Union for the further consideration of The merits of centralizing litigating
The Clerk read the title of the the bill (H.R. 2867) to amend the Solid authority are based primarily on the
&nate joint resohitlon. ‘ . Waste Disposal Act to authorize ap- advantages to be gained by uniformity
The SPEA R pro tempore. propriatlons for the fiscal years 1984 of the Government’s position. The Ad-
there objection to the request of the through 1986. and for other purposes, mfnLctrator of the Environmental Pro-
gentleman from North Carolina? . with Mr. Bweiuw In the chair. -. tection Agency, William Ruckeishaus.
Mr. LEACH of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, The Clerk read the title of the bilL In his Senate confirmation hearings
reserving the right to object, I do o -The CHAIRMAN. When the Corn- testified that:
simply to ask the chaIrman of the sub- mlttee of the Whole rose on Thursday,
- I think for purposes of orderly administra-
committee (Mr. Ns&L) to explain the October 6, sectIon 11 was considered as sian of Justice, there has to be someplace
resolution ‘to the Members of the having been read and open to amend- where, you lodge that final authority. U yo.
- -. ,.- .. . . .i - .. . - uient at any point. Pending was the don’ you get different branches of goveri.-
‘Mr. NEAL r Speakei , will tne first committee amendment recom- ment. - - going into court a.sklng for differ-
gentleman yleld? -- -- , - mended by the CommIttee on the Ju- ent interpretations of common statutes that
Mr. LEACH of Iowa. I yield to the diclarY. -. - - - apply acrciA the board and you really have
gentleman.- - . ‘ - Mr. H ’UG . Mr. Chsirw 3n, - -
Mr. NEAL Mr. Speaker, this move to strike the requisite number of Mr. Ruekeishaus wrote to Chairman
simple extension of the Export-Import words. . ‘- RoDino expressing his strong support
Bank’s authority until November 18. (Mr. HUGHES asked and was given for the committee’s action In recom-
As the gentleman knows, the resu- permission to revise and extend his re- mending the deletion of sectIon 11(d).
thorizatlon of the Exlznbank and marks.) . .. .. In that letter Mr. Ruckeishaus stated:
amendments to the Export-Import’ Mr. HUGHES. MT. Chairmari sec I commend and express my strong support
Bank Act are contained In the p lIon 11(d) of the bill, as reported by for the Subcommittee’s unanimous action of
legislation. When no resolution was the Committee on Energy and Corn- Tuesday. June 7th. recommending that See-
reached on that legislation by the Sep- merce, provides for specific time- tion 11(d) be deleted from R.R. 2867.
teniber 30 expIration date for the frames within which the Attorney . ., ‘, -. . ..,‘ . -
Bank. last month we passed a simple - General must act upon the request of uring my tenule ‘at the Department of
extension of the Bank’s authority the Administrator of the Environmen- Justice. In which I served as both Assistant
from September 30 to october , tal Protection Agency to file and rep- Attorney General for the Civil Division and
Thus, the Eximbank’s authority would resent the .Adrninlntrator in a civil Deputy Attorney General, I held the view,
expire as of midnight tonight. The action. If the Administrator of the which I still hold today, that the effective
- “utlon before the House today ex- EPA requests the Attorney General to Implementation and enforcement of our
ds the authority once again until act, and the Attorney General does civil and criminal statutes Is gi’eatly benefit-
targeted adjournment date, No- not notify the Administrator wIthin 30 ed by centralized and coordinated litigation
by the Department of Justice of all matters
ember 18, to allow for additional time days of his or her Intention to repre- which the Uzilted States is a party. As I
for the two Houses to work their w ” sent the Administrator and file such said In my confirmation hearing before the
on the broader Exini legislation. - ciVil action wIthin 150 days after the Senate Committee on I nvironment and
Mr. LEACH of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I, transmittal of the request, the Admln- Public Works on May 4th, “for purposes of
appreciate the explanation of the gen- Istrator will then have the exclusive orderly administration of Justice, there has
• Ileman from North Carolina and based authority to commence and conduct to be some place where you lodge that final
on It. the minority has no objection litigation, except in the U.S. Supreme authority.” . -
and we would hope that It goes Court. - . . - ‘I am firmly committed, as I know the Dc-
- ,, - - The Committee on the Judiciary partment or Justice is committed, to prepar-
Mr. Speaker, withdraw struck this provision from the bill In Ing and initiating litigation under our haz-
ardous waste statutes as promptly as possi-
lion of objection. , , Its markup and I urge my colleagues to ble. I strongly urge the Judiciary Commit-
The SPEAKER pro ternpore. Is support our action.’ The committee tee to follow the recommen tation and lead
there objection to the request of the strongly believes that such a transfer of the Subcommittee, and move to delete
gentleman from North Carolina? -. , IS unwarranted and unnecessary, - Section 11(d) from the bill during mark-up
There was no objèction.. . All of the witnesses who testified at of •H.R. 2867 on June 14th,
The Clerk read the Senate joint y o- the hearing, including both the I)e- - ‘ Sincerely, . .-- —- ‘- - - . -. -
olutlöh, as follows: ;. - , , . partment of Justice and the EPA, op- I - - WILLIAM I?. RUCX SRATJS.
-. . . R . - posed Inclusion of section 11(d) In the - The Department of Justice and the
- bill, It Is significant that EPA Is not Environmental Protection Agency
_Resolved by the Senate and House ‘ requesting this authority and, In fact, have engaged In cooperative efforts on
resentatives af the United Stales of .4 menca
In Congress assembled, That section 8 of the opposes the transfer.’ , --; - envIronmental pollution cases, Includ-
Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 Is amended The opposition was based on three Ing entering Into a memorandum bf
by striking out “October 31, 1983” and in. different arguments. The first argu- understanding with regard to clean
serting In lieu thereof “November lB. 1983”. meat Is that the effective implernenta air, clean water, and safe drinking
The Senate Joint resolu Ion was o lion and enforcement of civil and water cases. There Is no reason to
dered to be read a third time, was read criminal statutes Is greatly enhanced modify this flexible working arrange-
the third time, and passed.’ and a by centralized and coordinated litiga- inent by the inflexible terms in the
motion to reconsider was laId on the lion -by the Department of Justice bill. Both the Assistant Attorney Gea.
table. ,. - -- - ,.. ‘ - over all matters In which the’ United -‘oral for Land and Natural Resources
v51(,, , •. , - . 5tates Is a party. Second, the arbitrary Division In the Carter administration
deadlines which the language In sub- and the current holder of that posi-
HAZARDOUS WASTE CONTROL - sectIon 11(d) requIres are unworkable tion have indicated that the coopera-
AND ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 1983 and unrealistic In the context of day- tive working arrangement between the
“he SPEAKER pro tempore. Pur- to-day operation of litigatIon, The EPA and the Justice Department Is
at to House Resolution 274 and third argument Is that the amendment working effectively. Setting the prece.
44s
-------
118890-
dent of eroding the central iftlgat ing
authority of the Department of Sen.
In this case, where t is clearly not
cary or desired by the EPA or the
Lment, 4s clearly unwarranted
an overall governmental consist-
rncy perspective. The working ar-
rangement between the two agencies is
described as excel1ent” by both par-
es. 01 the V2 referrals rceeived under
RCRA, the Department bad tiled on
as of June 1983; Ibe Agency had
withdrawn five cases and the Justice
Department Is currently discussing
with the Agency the withdrawal of
threemore. - ‘ ‘ -
All of the witnesses who t stIf1ed on
this provislonagreed that, even were
the committee to be of a mind to
transfer iltigating authority from the
Department to the Agency. freezing
Into statutory tanguage specific dead-
lines unwarranted, unaioict.able , and
unrealistic. Cases under RCR.A are ex-
tremely complex. They often involve
hundreds of potential defendants and
numerous related cbinz lJnder the
strict scheme provided hi section 11(d
the Department would be forced t
choose between making hasty prosecu-
tonal decisions, without adequate faa-
thai and Doilcy underpinnings, or
- having . its authority to litigate
stripped from It. Additionally, many of
the cases filed under RCRA also In-
volve dahns Involved under C CL&
the Safe Drinking Water Act, the
‘ Water Act, the River .and
Act, the Clean Air Act, and the
ibst .ances Q,i*rol Act. Being
. . rIIy forced to snake a decision
with regard to prosecution of certain
cases Involving claims under any com-
bination of these acts because one of
the is under RCRA unduly
compromises the prosecutorial discre-
Lion and judgment of the btlgators Li i
the Department of Just
There Is a further pmblem which Ja
raised insofar as the potential for
criminal proceedings under RCRA and
related acts. The Committee on
Energy and Commerce ‘emphaslzes
that this section does not affect In any
way the exclusive authority of the De-
partment of Justice to seek lndictznert
of. and to prosecute violators of, crimi-
• nal provisions of RCRA.” (H. Rept. 98-
198. part 1, p. SI) However, It Is quite
clear that the deadlines Imposed by
section 11(d) could interfere with par.
allel criminal proceedings under
RCRA and related act.s. In a drourn-
stance controlled by this irovislon. the
Department would be forced to choose
between initiating a civil action while
* criminal Investigation or prosecution
Is proceeding or waiting to commence
the civil action until completion of time
criminal action. The latter choice
would result in the Department losing
Its authority to prosecute dvii claims.
Ti’ ‘id and Natural Rescorces Dlvi-
sea that It baa little control
C timing of investigation or
Lion of a1m ni1 cases and that
m .. A cases hare a much higher pri-
only and shoUld not be threatened by
simultaneous civil suit&-
Actions flied onder RCRA also In-
volve clain *s involving other environ-
mental protection statutes. The trig-
gering mechanism under RCRA pro-
vtded for hi sectIon 11(d) for transfer
of llt atlng authority wonid affect
cases involving all those other acts.
Since the section only provides for
transfer of RCR.A litigating authority.
RCRA claims -would have to be
brought lndependirntt,v by A or con-
soildaLed with a related action which
would continue to be prosecuted by
the Department of Justice. This is ob-
vjoanly a wasteful ai! uation which In-
solves duplicative efforts In litigation
resources in the same case.
There was no testimony at our bear-
thg to Indicate that the Justice Dc-
partrncnt has been dilatory or lacka-
daisical In the prosecutlofi of environ-
mental cases. Assistant Attorney Gen-
era! Dink ens testified that.— -
)llective management at such wastes l a
top environmental prIority of the .A&nlnls-
tratlon, and effective enforcement of er-
*mmrdous waste statotes is The htghe
priority of the Justice Department’. Land
mid Natural Resources Division. . ..
-. ‘ftc testimony showed that the Dc-
Dartnient Is actively ptnvumg these
cases and has dedicated the aeomsary
ZeSOUTCes to them. - - :1 -
Former Assistant Attorney Qeneral
Teloorman testified that the transfer of
litigating authority contemplated In
the bill Is the -wrong xignal at the
wrong t1me Mr. Moornian went ontO
saytlmt— ,, . - .
Iwle have wltrieased an astonishing two
years of mIsmanagement at EPA in whldm
th enfarcement of the hizardous waste dis-
posal iaws sutteied greatly - - - I bye nnt
beard anp suggeS oss -and I believe no one
uId fairly suggest that the Departmcnl of
Justice s in agy y responsible for the
5ftL tMin nt A. , - -
I nrge my colleagues to i ort the
committee amendment. -
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman. will the
gentleman ylel - .- - “ -
Mr. HUGHES, I am happy to yield
to my colleag , the gentleman from
New lark. — . . . - -. -
Mr. LENT. -1 lhank the gentleman
for yte ldwg-.:w ‘ - - - - .
Mr. Chalrui m. ‘I want to Identify
myself with The gentleman’s (Mr.
liuGnEs) remarks. I would like to ask
the gentleman one question... i’ - - -
I under nd that the current pro-
posal includes appellate litigation as
wefl as original Jurisdiction litigation
in which the role of the Solicitor Gen-
eral will be compromised. • ... i -
Can the gentleman elaborate on
that? .r’ L:’. ‘.‘ - 1 ’ -
Mr. HUGHES. I think the gentle-
man I . correct. The way I read the leg-
Islatitm It would ciclude not oust origi-
nal jurisdiction but also appellate iii-
i-Isdicllecz, with the exception of claims
before the Qipreme Court at The
Ontted 81a ’Ica. -. ;- . .I...,_ ’_.
Mr. LZN ’r. So It is conceivable that
the Government would have two law-
October 31, 1983
ers. ‘ rne on each side of an Issue,’
during litigation on appeal.
Mr. HUGHES. The gentleman Is ab-
solutely correct.
Mr LENT. I thank the gentleman, -
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, I yield
back the balance of my time. -.
Mr. SAWYER. Mr. Chainnan 1
move to strike the requisite number of
-words. and 1 rise in support of the
amemknent of the Committee on the
Judiciary. - -
(Mr. SAWYER asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks,) - . . - -
Mr. WYER. Mr. Chairman. I rise In
support of the amendment by the
Committee on the Judiciary. Section
11(d) was ei en opposed by Bill
Ruckeishaus during his confirmation
hearings, who stated v ’y flatly that It
was a bad idea to give litigating an-
thorils to his prospective department.
Mr. James Moormnan. Assistant At-
lorney General In the Carter aciminis-
tration, appeared before the Subcom-
mittee on Monopolies and Commercial
Law of the Committee on the Judici-
ary and also said. In effect, that It was
the wrong idea being advanced at the
wrong Lime. IL represents an oveiyeac-
lion ho the events of last fall in that
Agency. -
The Lands Division of tim Justice
Department has a very ontataisding
record in the handling of these cases
In liugation. And of 70 eases which
have been referred to Justice, 63 ac-
tions have been filed for enforcemenL
- , D1800 ::.‘
So there is no a’rong to be corrected,
And as Bert Lance used to say, “When
It ain’t broke, don’t fix iL” And It Is
working very satisfactorily, there is no
excuse or no real rea , m for a dupl a-
Lion of the litigation purposes and
abilities of the Justice Department by
duplicating It In an ageny that has,
goodness kn s. enough to do without
handling Its own legal work. . --
- Also, the events of last fall would be
compounded by allowing the agency to
totallyhandle Its own litigation to the
exclusion of the Justice Department,
eliminating an oversight ability and an
investiqative look by a different de-
partment, the Justice Department,
For those and other reasons, I think,
as did the Judiciary Committee as a
whole, that 11(d) Is Improper s i
should be removed from the bill.
I urge support of the Judiciary Com-
mittee amendment. ,, -. -
I yield back the balance of my Lime,
Mr. GORE. Mr. Chairman, I move to
Ltrike the requisite number of words.
(Mr. GORE asked and was given per-
mission to revise and extend his re
marks.) -
Mr. GORE. Mr. Chairman. I rise in
opposition to this amendment.
We have before us the reauThozlza.
tlon of the Resource conservation and
Recovery Act. And aa’Members know,
this is one of the key pieces of legisla-
- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — }IOUS
•463- ’
-------
October 11, 19 S - -
tion In dealing with the problems of
hazardous chemical waste disposal.
It was passed in 1976 and then up-
dated in 1980. And It was crafted to
rlth the Increasingly apparent
or a national strategy for the
itlon and disposal of dangerous
.‘dous wastes, to devise realistic
standards that could be met and
derstood by generators and enforce ’
ment officials alike. -
The Energy and Commerce Commit.
tee has wrestled long and hard with
this law that is referred to as RCRA.
In an effort to craft the fairest and
most effective set of changes possthle,
we have held numerous hearings and
collected testimony from a broad
range of sources, from those who gen-
erate waste to those with the task of
oversight, to those citizens who must
live with the waste. . . -
The changes which were made In
the bill were In no way arbitrary or ex-
cessive. We have before us In this law
a good law and all that we have done
Is try to make It work better.
Time and again we have beard
horror stories of poilutlon and con.
tainiriatlon that never should have oc-
curred If the law was working the way
we Intended It to work when It was
first put into place.
Today I want to address partlcu]arly
some elements of the bill which I feel
are absolutely essential to Its success-
ful Implementation, that Is, the
strengthening of the enforcement sec-
tions of the law, and the measure ii-
J ’ng EPA to litigate civil cases If the
e Department does not act in %
fashion. •
,ardlng the litigation provision,
ction 11(d). that Is under discussion
at this moment, I cannot stress
enough how Important It to adopt
changes necessary for the Govern-
ment to expeditkwsly respond to these
cases which Involve endangerment to
the public health and the environ.
ment. The Department of Justice will
remain the lead agency on litigation,
but this provision creates a safety
valve in the system which gives EPA
the authority to go ahead and act to
protect the public health and safety if
the Justice Department fails to do so
In a timely fashion. And It has tailed
todosolnat lmelyfashlOfl. -
The legislation gives the Justice De•
partment 150 days to file a case alter
its referral from EPA, Is that not long
enough? We may hear some suggest
that the 150-day limit and the 30-day
notification requirement are triad-
equate time for the Justice Depart-
ment to evaluate and prepare Its case
for filing. - - ‘.- ‘.
These concerns are simply not aip-
ported by the facta
First, several other major environ-
mental statutes, the Clean Air Act, the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act
and the Safe Drinking Water Act, give
EPA litigation authority U the Depart-
Justice does not act In a reason-
me and the two agencies them-
have agreed, in * 1977 memO-
randum of iñderstandlng, that 150
days Is the proper standard for a rea-
sonable time. “ -, • ‘-
- Are we going to take the position
that hazardous chemical waste Is
simply less important and less of a
threat to the public health than those
threats posed In these other areas of
legislation? I would certainly hope not.
Yet U you voted foT this amendment,
that would be the position you would
be takIng, ft seems to me. So I hope
the Members will oppose the amend-
Inent. - . -. ..,- -i : : .
Second, as the committee report
notes, EPA and the Justice Depart.-
ment have adopted formal guidelines,
called the Quantico Guidelines, which
govern the conduct of litigation and,
specifically. provide for early Justice
Department Involvement In the civil
litigation case development process.
So under the present system cases
referred to the Justice Department
should be technically and legally
ready for filing at the time when they
are referred. -, - - . - ‘.-: —.
Now, let me underscore that point.
What we are talking about Is not 150
days alter the time the JusUce Depart-
ment first sets eyes on the case. We
are talking about 150 days after the
justlce Department has already been
fully involved In the development of
the case, before it Is technically re-
lerred to the Justice Department.
Now the Justice Department attor-
neys would have been active pa,rticl ’
pants in the development of these
cases prior to the actual referral by
EPA. ‘ -
Third, looking back historically to
1980. a year when the enforcement
system was beginning to work effec-
tively, we see that all of the RCRA
hd&ardous waste cases referred and
filed by the Justice Department that
year. approximately 91. percent, were
filed wIthin 150 days. -
The CRAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Tennessee CM I ’. GoRE)
has expired. “i
(By unanimous consent, Mr. Oosz
was allowed to proceed for 2 addItional
minutes.) ‘ . - .
Mr. GORE. ‘The deadline which we
are asking for, which I believe Is per-
fectly reasonable and consistent with
similar deadlines under other statutes,
will spur the Department of Justice to
devote the time, rnergy, and resources
necessary to proceed expeditiously
with these Important cases to protect
the environment and the public
health.’ , • .
Let me give my colleagues an exam-
VIe of one case which demonstrates
the need for this provision, In 1973, In
Cllobe, Arts,, a trailer park was built
right on top of milling site absolutely
full of asbestos. The man who sold the
trailer lots and moved In these faint-
lies, coincidentally, also owned the as-
bestos mill. It seems he neglected to
mention the asbestos to the foIk,s that
he sold the Iota to when they settled
j , We S I ] know from the shipyard
cases arid from other evidence what
118891
the-terrible evid&nce is regarding the
relationship between the exposure to.
asbestos and cases of cancer and otherS
lung diseases. , -
Well, the topsoil gradually eroded -
and the asbestos began to fill the air.
The trailers were contaminated, and
the children were playing right In the
asbestos. The health experts from the
Arizona Health Services. NIOSH, and
the Centers for Disease Control, all
warned of the serious health dangers
from continued exposure to the asbes-
To make a long story short, after the
State took temporary soil capping
measures in 1980. and after delay by
EPA, due to maladministration by top
EDA officials, the enforcement case
was finally referred to the Depart-
ment of Justice in September 1982.
for the purpose of filing an action for
•lnjunctlve relief under RCRA and Su-
perfund as an Imminent arid substan-
tial endangermeRt to the public health
or environment.
The EPA transmittal Ietter.specifl-
cally requested that the referral be
the subject of prompt action—and it
was underlined—due to the nature and
level of exposure to asbestos at the
Mountain View Mobile Home Estates
site.
Yet, the Department -of Justice
failed to file the lawsuit for over 7
months and until after congressional
scrutiny of the situation. The author-
izing committee has conducted an ex-
t,en.sive investigation of the enforce•
ment of our hazardous waste laws and
believes section 11(d) will be the safety
valve In the current litigation system
necessary to avoid any more cases like
Globe, Arlz.
This provision Is necessary and es-
sential and I urge rejection of the
pending amendment. -•
Mr. FISH. Mr. Chairman, I move to
strike the requisIte number of words
and I rise In support of the amend-
ment: - “ -
Mr. Chairman, the Rouse Judiciary
Committee in its consideration of this
legislation heard from witnesses from
the D partznent of Justice and EPA.
And I,thlnk It Is %mportant that both
representatives of Justice and EPA op-
posed the transfer language In section
11(d). ,.. • -‘I
In fact, 00 wItness who appeared
before the Subcommittee on Monopo-
lies and Commercial Law favored the
language in this section that this
amendment would strike, Including
James Moorman, former Assistant At-
torney General for the Lands Division
durmg the Carter administration. In
his words. It was the “wrong legisla. -
tion at the wrong time:’ -
The person you would think who
would have a great Interest in this, the
Administrator of EPA. Mr. Ruckels-
haus, In his confirmation hearings said
It was a bad idea to shift this litigation
authority.
• -C.ONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOU E
4473
-------
Ii 8892
CONGRESSiONAL RECORD — HOUSE
• .‘- ..‘.. .. •- (1 1610-. . .‘i. . ‘ - -stances re Involved. These complex-
Now. 11(d). contrary to what we COUnsel ft Pinst restrictive aiid In-
have heard, Is simply t flexible review periods. -.
ave Government expeditiously . Mr. Chairman. for the reason that
pond. . - there Is no compelling need to change
You heard that 150 days Is plenty of the system that Is working well, then
time to prepare a case. The facts are it Is not nec ary to have 11(d) In
that In 11(d). the deadline, the ffr order to have Government respond cx.
deadline, Is 30 days, In which the Jus- peditlously, and for the other reasons
.tlce Department would have to evalu- I have spelled out, I think section
ate often very complex cases. The re- 11(d) Is unwarranted and unnecessary,
Quirement that a case be filed within and the amendment toitrike should
• 150 days, In fact, might very well prej- be adopted. .r • ‘. - .
udlce effective settlement. - Mr. SIKOREKI. Mr. Chairman. I
-. Now, what if we did allow EPA to move to strike the requisite number of
bring ‘Its own cases? The resources of words, ... .‘ . . - -.
the litigation arm of our Federal Oov- (My, SIKORSEI asked and was
erriment, the Department of Justice, given permission to revise and extend
Its U.S. attorneys acr the country, his remarks.) “. - -
would not be available, requiring EPA - M i -. SIKORSKI. Mr. Chairman,, I
to develop at considerable unnecessary would like to add my remarks to those
additional public expense, duplicative si my disthiguLshed colleagues In op.
‘litigation of resources. - -
Mr. Chairman, there Is a standard position to the amendment.
which our Judiciary Committee unanl- The Judiciary Committee, In repre-
mously felt should be applied; namely, senting the views of the Justice De-
that transfers of litigation authority rtme lt In opposing sectIon 11(d)
to an executive agency should occur have attempted to portray this provi.
only If there Is compelling evidence sion as something unique, something
that the job Is not being done proper- which will undermine some existing
•system of centralized litigation au-
Quite the reverse Is true here today. thority. It Is understandable that the
The fact Is that the Lands Division Justice Department would like to have
record has been very good with respect total control over all governmental
to RCRA cases. Of the ‘TO cases re— litigation. Of course, the first objective
ferred to Justice by EPA. 63 of these of any bureaucracy Is to Increase and
have been filed protect its turf, and the Department
• ‘ ow, Mr. Chairman, we have been of Justice Is no exception. The Issue
d that there are precedents In the here Is not protection of bureaucratic
leral Water Pollution Control Act turf but protection of the health arid
d the Clean Air Act, the Safe Drink- safety of Americans living on or near
uag Water Act, where EPA has author- hazardous waste dump sites.
4ty. . .. ... - - . . In considering this provision, two im-
Now, I think I will take a minute of, portent points should be kept in mind:
the committee’s ttine Just to analyze First, legislation giving Federal agen-
this statement. The facts are that no des limited litigation authority is not
other provision in law Is as Inflexible unique. According to a 1979 study by
or is restrictive as those provisions the Office of Management and
contained In the bill before you. HR. Budget, there are over 20 statutes
2867.. authorizing over 27 departments arid
The Clean Air Act, the Clean Water agencies other than the Justice De-
Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, con- partment to initiate such litigation,
Lain reasonable time provisions. They These Include the Department of
do not provide automatic transfer of Energy Organization Act, the Energy
litigation authority, as does the mesa- Policy and Conservation Act, and
ure before you, regardless of what you three specific environmental laws al-
have been told. • ready administered -by EPA—the Fed-
Cases under the Clean Water Act, eral Water Pollution Control Act, the
th Clean Air Act ci cctera, involve Clean Air Act, and the Safe Drinking
ascertainment of determinable stand- Watet Act, • . - -. , -...
ards. Programs are In place to deter- Second, sectIon 11(d) does not strip
mine whether standards have been the Department of Justice of litigation
met and whether enforcement action authority. It merely provides a safety
Is necessary. - • - . -- - valve In the current system to protect
The programs utilize discreet aclen- the public health and safety when the
LUte methods. One or a few parties are Department of Justice bureaucracy
Involved, It. Is, therefore, easier to falls to act in a timely manner. So that
make a determination as to whether Members further understand the real
litigation should be Instituted. • need for this, I would like to remind
In contrast, the measure before us my colleagues of the details of one
requires ascertaining whether “linini- recent case, the Mountain View Mobile
nent and substantial endangerment” Is Home Estates case In Globe, Ariz., al.
present. Standards of proof are amor- ready referred to -by the gentleman
us. Evidence, accordingly, takes a from Tennessee. ..--, • - ‘ -
r time to develop. There are no In that case, about ‘130 resIdents
.ied standards of what Is a viola- were living directly on top of an asbes-
n. There are usually multiple par. los dump site, Several Federal arid
tles involved, varied and different sub- 61ate authorities warned of the sen.
e
- . - . - t• , • - —
October 81, /983
ous health risks created by direct con-
tact with a known carcinogen.
the Agency has determined that
there may be an Imminent and substantial
endangerment to the public health or wel-
fare or the environment because of an
actual or threatened release of hazaj’dous
substances from the site. Due to the nature
and level of exposure to asbestos at the
Mountain View Mobile Rome Estates site. In
Its referral, EPA requested that this referral
be the subject of prompt action,
-, There was no action taken In re-
sponse to this request for over 7
months after the referral. Why? Be-
cause the attorney n . .slgned to the
G’obe case was busy ‘% ,ith other work
end either did not have time or was
simply unwilling to do the filing.
Meanwhile, residents remained ex-
posed to a known carcinogen.
This inaction Is unconslonable and
can hardly be called a beneficial
aspect of a centralized litigation
system—It Is no Isolated Instance In
fact. IL Is a too common pitfall. Ii we
continue this system and, therefore,
allow these kinds of cases to go Un-
filed, we will seriously jeopardize the
health and safety of the American
public. • - •, -
The amendment proposed by the
gentleman from New Jersey Is an at-
tempt to block a provision of HR.
2867 whIch specifically addresses this
problem. This provision gives EPA the
ability to litigate cases on Its own once
the Justice Department lies had ample
time to prosecute, but has failed to do
so. What can be more simple, proper, -
lust? EPA must have the authority to
step In and take effective action when
the Justice Department falls to. The
people of this country—the people in
your district—cannot be expected to
sit around, waiting for the attorneys
over at Justice to clear their desks
long enough .to file a prelIminary In-
junction, while good Americans live in
hazardous waste amid are exposed to
hazardous materials affecting their
organs and blood. Americans deserve
the quickest, most effective relief the
system can provide, amid that Is what
section 11(d) of H.ft. 2867 does,
iurge ray co1Iea ues to vote against
the amendment and, therefore, pre-
serve the public’s interest. -
Mr. 1 1OR1O. Mr Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. SIKORSI-a. I yield to the gen-
tleman from New Jersey.
(Mr. FLORIO asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re.
marks.) - -
Mr. 110R 10. Mr. Chairman. I rise
In strong oppostlon to the amendment.
The litigation authority for EPA
cont Ained In HR. 2867 Is necessary to
Insure rapId relief in situations which
threaten public health and safety. The
provision Is not an attempt to Inter-
fere with the authority of the Depart.
meat of Justice. The provision grants
limited authority br the Administra-
tor to commence litigation of hazard-
otis waste cases wizen the Attorney
-------
October31 1 1983 -. - -. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE•
General hIls to act In a timely timely manner cii these hazardous
manner. - waste cases, this provision will In no
I stress the limited nature of this way affect the Department’s current
rislon. When the Administrator litigation authority. Instead, I believe
‘s a determination that a vIolation ft will create the leverage within the
RCRA has occurred, one which present system -to Insure that lmpor.
dose a substantial threat to the tent cases are prosecuted expeditious-
.. .ith and safety of the public. he ly to protect public health and safety.
shall first request the Justice Depart- Granting authority to an agency to
ment to file, and represent the EPA In, litigate cases Is not unusual. Other
a civil action against the offenden major environmental statutes—the
Only U the Department 01 Justice Clear Air Act, the Federal Water Pol-
falls to act within a specified period of lutlon Control Act and the Safe Drink-
time will the Administrator have au- Ing Water Act- -pyovioi the Adnthiis-
thorlty to commence and conduct liti- of EPA with authority to htl-
gatlon In his ann name, using EPA gate If the Attorney General does not
staff lawyers. Moreover, fri any case notify the Agency ‘within a reason-
that moves to the Supreme Court, the able time” that he will represeat the
Attorney Oeneral would take over nd Agency. £ 1977 memorandum of un-
represent the Government, . ‘ derstancung between DOJ and EPA In-
Why Is the committee so concerned terprets “reasonable time” to be 150
with timely P.ctlob? -, ‘ days after referral by EPA, the same
A few months e.go, the Oversight penod of time established In BR.
and Investigations Subcommittee en- 2867. In essence, U.R. 2867 codIfies the
countered a truly egregious example memorandum of understanding for
of how people were left facing a sell- the implementation of RCRA.
ous health risk because the current The language In this bill fnsures
system failed to operate In a timely that full power to litigate resides first
manner. The case Involved approxi- ‘ nd foremost with the Justice Depart-
mat.ely 130 resIdents of the Mountain merit. Only in cases where Justice falls
View Mobile Homes tates Trailer to act Is the Administrator granted the
Park Subdivision In Globe. Ariz. This authonty to carry out litigation on his
residential area was situated directly own. All we are doing is providing one
on top of asbestos wastes generated by more way to protect the public health
a milling facility. State and Federal arid safety by enabling timely prosecu-
health authorities, including the Ccii- tion of those cases which must go to
ters for Disease Control, warned of the btigatlo . .1 • ‘
serious health risks created by direCt In ttn -un ry the provision to grant
coz tact with asbestos, a kTlOWfl CSZ EPA litigation authority If the Depart.-
‘n, and expo re to aliborfl merit of Justice falls to act within a
fibers. - - specified period of time is an Impor-
September 30, 1982, EPA ‘c- tant safeguard for the public. It has
.i the Globe case to the Depart- been considered carefully by the Corn.
merit of Justice for the purpose of nilttee on iergy and Commerce and
filing an iction for Injunctive relief iiecessary - ‘ . :.. -
wider RCRA and Superfund. More my colleagues to vote against
than 7 months after the referral, the the amendment to strike.
Department of Justice still had not • HUGH . i . Chairman, will
filedthecase.Atahear ingonMay2. thegentlemanyleid?. - . . -
1983. a senior EPA official testified Mr. SIKORSICL I yield to gentle-
that the major problem was that the man from New jerseY,
JusUce Department attorney assigned Mr. HUGHES. I thank the gentle-
to the case was oc pled with another for yIe1dIng. - .. - .
case, the Stringfellow case, and appar- Mr. Chairman, where would the gen-
ently was not able to devote the time Uernan draw the Line? We have literal-
necessary to file the Globe case, One ly hundreds and hundreas of statutes
day after the Committee on Energy that grant various enforcement an-
and Commerce reported B.R. 2887, the thority under the hundreds of pro-
Justice Department finally Initiated grams that azist at the Federal leveL
litigation In the Globe case. Under cir- Would the gentleman grant transfer
cumstazices such as these. EPA should authority to each one of those agen-
have the authority provided by this des? ‘.-.‘.‘ - . -
bill to proceed and take the action nec- Mr. SIKORSKL Obviously, In this
essary to protect the public health and Instance, we had repeated testimony,
safety. I-.-’ ‘.‘ - . witness upon witness, explaining not
Civil litigation Is not regarded as the some hypothetical threats but direct
most expedient of legal remedies. On threats to the health and safety of In-
the other hand, hazardous waste sites dividual Americans that were left Un-
often present an immediate and con- responded to because cases of over-
tinuing danger to human health’’ ‘id worked lawyers or undermotivated
safety. If the Government Is to prot ’ lawyers In the Department of Justice
the citizens of the country from suLi were not responded to. . —
serious dangers In an effective and es- . Mr. HUGH If the gentleman will
pedltious manner, I L must provide a yield, I can say to the gentleman that
a ” net mechanism within the en- lamsynipathetictothat. : “
ent process which w111 Insure The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
action on Important cases. If gentlemaq from Minnesota (Mr. Si-
)epartmeni of JusUce act4 In a aoasgiUias expired. , •.. -
H 8893
(On request of Mr. Hucx and by
unanimous consent, Mr. SzKoasxi was
allowed to proceed for 3 addit onaI
minutes,) .‘. . .. -
. . . , i-: —_______ .. - --
0 1620 .
Mr. HUGHES. I get frustrated at
times because the Justice Department
cannot reach criminal prosecutions,
even with the Speedy Trial Act, be-
cause of lack of resources. Is not the
answer to provide the resources that
are needed by the litigating authority,
the Department of Justice? Is that not
really the answer, tnsteaó of trying to
Create a whole new litigating agency
within etch of these agencies and de-
partments throughout our Govern-
ment?
Mr. SIICORSKI. The gentleman Is
accurate to the extend that new re-
sources or resources back np to the
previous level are needed In the De-
partment of Justice as well as in EPA,
but let us not conduct ourselves under
some mistaken impression that The
EPA Is not Involved in enforcement,
does not have a whole host of attor-
neys who are familiar with and can
prosecute just as easily and just as
well and more forthrightly and
quicker than the Department of Jus-
tice. - - . -.
What we are talking about here Is.
again, something not unique. It Is not
strange, It Is not Inappropriate. It Is
fair and proper and something that I
obviously support.
Mr. HUGHES. If the gentleman will
yield further, the EPA, the gentleman
has correctly advised us, has In three
specific Instances been given that type
of transfer authority, but does the
gentleman understand that has never
been utilized by the EPA?
Mr. SIKORSKI. I understand It has
not been utilized. I still appreciate
that it Is a necessary safety valve in
the process, and what we are talking
about here Is just such a E.afety valve,
The Globe, Arlz., ‘case and severaJ
other cases have come to our atten-
tion.
Mr. DINGEIL Mr. Chairman, viW
the gentleman yield? . -
Mr. SIKORSICI. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Michigan for a clarifica-
tion on the point of the gentleman
from New Jersey. -
Mr. DINGELL. I thank the gentle-
man for yielding. - . - - - -
Mr. Chairman. I think It Is about
time we understood and saw this thing
In perspective.. - -
The Department of Agricluture has
this authority. The Department of
Labor has this authority. The Depart-
ment of Health and Human Services
has this authority. The Department at
the Treasury has this authority. EPA
has this authority in connection with
- not one, but three other statutes, the
Safe Drinking Water Act, the Federal
Clean Air Act and the Federal Water
Pollution Control As,.
.443
-------
October 31, 1983
118894
In each Instance It was given for
good reason. There Is nothing sacred
about the right of the Department of
Justice to litigate these questions. All
I can observe is that after a long
period of restful tranquility and deep
repose, the Department of Justice now
awakes In a remarkably evil humor.
I say give legislative authority to an
agency which will litigate these ques-
tions. which can be monitored, and
Which will not hide behind a smoke-
screen of lawyer-like statements about
why these iltigations cannot be corn-
rnenced, when they cannot commence
a suit, as they did in the case of Globe,
.Ariz., where children weve playing
amidst of piles of asbestos, a danger-
ous carcinogen, because the lawyer as-
signed in the Department of Justice
was too busy with other matters.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Si.
KoasKi) has again expired. -
.40n request of Mr. FLoaxo and by
unanimous consent, Mr. SIKOESKI was
allowed to proceed for 2 additIonal
minutes.) . ,. . . . . - -
Mr. SIKORSKI. Mr. Chairman. I
would just like to comment on the
chairman’s point In response to the
gentleman from New Jersey.
if the authority is there and unused,
perhaps that Is a spur that Is neces-
sary to get the Department of Justice
to act quicker and respond to 4.he
health and safety hazards of people.
Maybe if we give the EPA just this au-
thority in this instance they will act
‘ i lcker. , . -
(r. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, will
e gentleman yield?
Mr. SIKORSKL I yield to the gen-
tleman from New Jersey. -
Mr. FLORIO. I thank the gentlemanç
for yielding. -
Mr. Chairman. I just want to rein-
force the point that has been made al-
ready that this Is a limited authority
that we are providing to EPA. I would
suggest that this area is of sufficient
importance tO have that residual limit
of authority on the part of EPA.
What we are talking about, and I
would concede the point made by the
gentleman from New Jersey, Is that it
would be nice If we have more re-
sources. We do not, at the Department
of Justice, and in the Interim, while we’
are waiting for thosc budget priorities
to change, we are faced with situations
In context with this statute where we
have individuals exposed to imminent
and substantial hazards to people’s
health and the environment and no
one has either the resources or the
will to go forward In those situations.
What we are saying Is that there
should be this residual authority that,
under those circumstances -of iinmi-
Dent hazard to people’s health, there
should be the capabLlity of going for-
ward. I think that Is the key thrust of
What we are doing. We are not talking
‘I a radical departure of existing
ye are saying there should be this
ual authority to address lxnmi-
cONGRESSIONAL RECORD— HOUSE
nent :p ems that are Impacting
upon individuals.
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield further4o rae?
Mr. SIKORSKI. Certainly. I yield to
the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. HUGHES. I thank the gentle-
man for yielding. . -
Mr. Chairman. I do not understand
really how, by transferring the author-
ity to the EPA. which does not want
the authority, when we acknowledge
we have a lack of resources, we have
accomplished anything, because we
are going to bare t have support per.
sozmel, fiat at alL
It Is the Department of Justice that
Is the major 1ft g Hng authority,
Every agency that has some enforce-
ment authority has lawyers. Are we
going to transfer to them litigating au-
thority In each Instance? They all
think their programs axe just as Ira-
portent, .
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield’ • -
Mr. SIKORSKI. I yield to the geñ-
Ileman from Michigan. -# ‘; - . - -
Mr. DINGELL. I thank the gentle-
man for yielding. , ,: .....
Mr. Chairman, the answer is we are
not transferring litigating authority
from the Department of Justice. We
are just seeing to it that EPA has the
authority to act where the Depart-
ment of Justice refuses to do so. -
Mr. KINDNESS. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike the requisite number of
words. :: .
(Mr. KINDNESS asked and was
given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. KINDNESS. Mr. Chairman.
others snore erudite and studious and
persuasive have addressed the subject
before us this afternoon, but I would
just like to add a comment or two on a
practical level in support of the
amendment to strike section 11(b).
I think that we have heard enough
of the argument that there are other
agencies and departments given simi-
lar litigating authority, and I think we
have heard enough of the argument
that EPA has similar authority under
other statutes passed by the Congress.
Let us assume for a moment that It
is just barely’ possible that the Con-
gress made a mistake In each of a
number of other Instances. What we
need to determine is not whether what
was done In the past is controlling but,
rather, was it right. Without going
into the question of whether it was
right, let us look at just this circum-
stance.- ‘ . - • - , -
Would it be right to create one more
circumstance In which the EPA would
be authorized to conduct Its own Utiga-
tion In these matters! EPA has indi-
cated. as has been argued here, that It
does not seek to have that authority.
It has lots of other things to do. As
lang as the Congress goes in the direc-
tion in which it has been going In
recent years, creating such authority
and depriving the Department of Jus-
tice of sufficient resourcea within the
total budget framework to carr .on Its
job, we are going to have to do this In
numerous cases. We are going to bleed
a bit here and bleed a bit there, and
sooner or later we are not going to
have any degree of coordination in the
litigating function of the Federal Gov-
ernrnent. We have llt le enough now.
There are priorities that need to be
established by the Department of Jus-
tice In carrying out. Its litigating work.
Certainly it sounds difficult, ridiculous
even, to contemplate a situation such
as that described in Arizona where the
7-month delay occurred with asbestos
conditions creating hazards for people
living right on it. It does not sound to
me as though that was a case In which
It was a priority judgment that said
this case Is not worthy of attentiorr it
was just a case in which there were -
not sufficient resources in the Depart-
ment of Jusuce to do the job.
Why do we not address the problem
correctly and directly and provide the
resources for the Department of Jus-
Uce.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield? - -
Mr. KINDNESS. I yield to the gen-
tleman from New York. -
Mr. LENT. I thank the gentleman
for yielding. - -
Mr. Chairman, I wanted to just
point out to the gentleman and to our -
colleagues that many of these cases
that we are talking about that might
come up under the RCRA legislation
Involve multiple claIms where, In addi-
tion to triggering RCRA. we have the
Clean Air Act. we have the Clean
Water Act, the Toxic Substances Con-
trol Act, and only the Department of
Justice can really act as the coordina-
tor so as to consolidate these causes of
action. -
In addition, there are sit ,iations
where they are related criminal ac-
tions which only Justice can bring, so
it seems to me that It serves no useful
purpose to carve out the RCRA legis-
lation and give EPA litigation authori-
ty in civil matters In that one instance.
Mr. KINDNESS. The gentleman has
made an excellent point and made it
well, and it was the next one I Intend-
ed to cover, as a matter of fact. -:
Coordination of litigating authority
L the Department of Justice is most
Important. The Criminal aspect of.
these cases is an important tool In
dealing with the civil actions. Some-
times there are settlement negotia-
tions that can be affected by the
threat of the coordinated approach of
civil and civil actions. The most effec-
tive way for the laws of the United
Staffs to be carried out is In a coordj-
ng( eJfashIon. , , ‘t , -
- ‘ -. - o : -
In some cases there may indeed be
Internal Revenue Code violation possi-
bilities. The question of organized
crime Involvement In dealing with haz-
ardous substances has been raised In
connection with this argument. There
-------
are various other Federal laws that
may be Involved. EPA does not happen
- ‘ e the enforcement authority In
tng with some of the others. Let us
•eate more confusion. -.
Chairman, this amendment to
. e section 411(d) should be agreed
to. . -
The CHAIRMAN. The question Is on
the Judiciary Committee amendment
The question was taken, and on a di-
vision (demanded by Mr. Evc )
there were—ayes B. noes 7.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman. I
demand a recorde I vote, and pending
that. I make the point of order that a
quorum Is not pre eut. .. . .
The CHAIRMAN. - - Evident]j a
quorum Is not present . . ,p- -:
The Chair announces that pursuant
to clause 2, rule XXIII, he will vacate
proceedings under the call when a
quorum of the Committee appears.
Members will record their presence
by electronic device
The call was taken by electronic
device. . ..- iar. . -.
01650
The CHAIRMAN pro tetnpore.(Mr.
HucxA3r). A quorum of the Commit.-
tee of the Whole has not appeared.
The Chair announces that a regular
quorum call will now commence. .. -
Members who have not already re-
sponded under the noticed quorum
call will have a minimum of 15 mm-
to record their presence. The call
e taken by electronic device.
suant to the provzsions of clause
.ie XXIII, the Chair announces
snai he will reduce to a minimum of 5
minutes the period of time within
which a vote by electronic device, If or-
dered. will be taken on the pending
question following the quorum call.
Members will record their presence by
electronic device.
The call was taken by electronic
device, and the following Members re-
sponded to their names: -
- ..:: - CR011 No. 4333 ,. . -.
— S.
Ackerman . Craig
Addabbo - Bor .ki - , Crane. Daniel
Akika . Biucher - Crane. Philip
Alboxta Breaur Crockett -.
Alexander Befit . Daniel
Ailderson Brooks Dannrmryer.
Andrews (NC) Broomfield Disci ile
Andrews(TX Brown (CO) ub
Annunelo Broyhill
Anthony Bryant Delluts. -
Applegit. Burtoc Derrick
Archer ‘Byron DeWU,e
Aspin - - CinipbeU - Dickins o n
AuCoin - Camey . Dinsek -. -. - -
Bidham - (>JWr . DiAoo,
Banwd - CosT .. - -
Barnes Chandler Dow
Bartlett Chappcli , -
Bai.etnan - Chipple - D,eler . . -
Bede l l Chancy - Dunosis’
Beilenson Clinger. ‘ Diliblo
Bennett Costa Dwycr ...
Hereuler CoelAs — DymaIIV
Berman Cole nan (MO) Dyson .
Bethune - Coleman (TX) WlJ
Bevili Collins Stkafl
- - Conable $dgsr ‘
Come - wards (AL)
Conysra Edaards (CA)
Cooper • Edxarde(OE)
Courter!’ •bn oo
drelc -,;, cvi. LJ •- Roger.
1enb orn T1phwk l
Stan. ( IA) - Livingston. P at siik oWskj
rvan.(n .) L iopd -. ‘-Roth - -
F .sce l l -, ,, miller - - Ibouken ia
P az is Long (LA) Rowland
Pe lghas : - (MD ) Roybal
Ferraro .- Loft.’’ . Rudd
Fledler - LoI’eTY (CA) Rueso
Plel - Lujan . - -- Sabo
FIsh ‘‘;, ,uken - -
IJpp . . ____ Sawyer
- -‘ LU . :t’
Pogileus MacE J..’ ‘&hneldeg .‘ ‘.‘
P ley - ‘ Iy SChrOeder “.
Pbed (TN) “ ‘ig sn - &hulse
Forayths - Schumer
Marriott - Selberiang
PP nk Martin (fl) sensenbrenner
Planklin MartIn (NC) Shannon
P,ezwd Martin (NYJ &serp
P’jqua . Msoe s . Aimw ‘- -
Osydos Mansd - - - Shelby ‘ -
Oejdamon Martouha
ow - Ma u - -.. Sb r
Oephardt Ig .
Gibbo n s - McC oakey - £ iijand.r
0 0m m McCo uum
Olngr lth . McCwviy
-Olicksoan MeEwen 4 - - elton
Gonzalez McOraib £lauety —
Ooadllng McHugh - Sad h ( IA)
Ogee McKernan Smith (NE
Orsdison MeiCinney iib (N.H
McNally Aixith. Denny
Green Silos - Smith, Robert
Ouutn l Michel “
Ounder.on Mlkuis ‘ RoPdes ’
Rail (IN) Miller (OH) Solomon
Rail (OH) Muncie Spenee
Ball. Ralph MuniCh .. “Spract “
Hall. Sam olina,t - St O.vvnaIn
Hamilton Moliohsn . . Stagger.
Bamnier.chmldi Montgoine,y Starigeland
Rants Moody , Sienholso
Hansen ( ID) oese - -
Hansen fir) Moothezd
Haz -tui Morrlaon(CT Siudds
Harnson Morrison (WA) Slump
Harthelt . 8ud ul at
lime tins -. Murphy . .I - Swift .
Hayes .. Murtha Synar -
Relner Myers _ Talino -
Hel lel - Hatcher -
Huiblower - ‘Heel :-. .... Taylor
Nelson - - Tbomu (0*)
UMU3 -. . Nichols Tones
ifolt ‘ - NIelson Tomcelii
HopkIns - . Towns
Horton . - O ’Brien i Trailer -
Howard Oaks, . Udall
Hoyer . •. .,Obe, Valentine
Buckaby Olin “ Vanderjakt
Hughes ,- Oitic Vandergrtll
Bunter . - Ot tlng er Vento
Hutlo , Owens Vo lkmer
Ride ‘ Ozley Waigren -
Ireland - r Packard Walker ‘ -
• Panetia - Watkins - - -
Jenkins Pashayan Weber
Johnson . ‘ - • . ss• : . . -
Jones (NC) Pease Whe*i
tones (OK) .Penn i WhlUe y -
Jones (TN) • Perkins Whltcaker - - -
Kaslcb -, - .:Ptvl .
K s sIenmeler - Portej Williams (M l’)
Karen • Price Williams (OR)
Kennelly ‘ Pinsell - - wilso n -
• . - . Q t ull len - Wlcn
adnon Rahall Wtrth
Rog o v ek Rangel ‘Wise -
Koller’ Ratehford ‘‘S’ Wolf -
Keetmayer -. Ray - - Wolpe
Kramer - Regula - . Wortley
la.Faiae, .. Reid - WllghI
Iegomaedno ltlchudsofl ‘ Wyden -
lentee ... Ridge ‘ • — Wylie
Leach . Jilnaido - Yams
Lehman (FL) - Itllt.er - - Yatron
lane ‘ , — Roberts ,. Young (AK)
Robinson ‘Young PL)
l evine • : Rodino . Young (MO)
belts. . . , _____
Local Roamer .
,aI 017O0 i..i.f’!-1;-
l’he CHAIRMAN ‘pro tempore.
Three hundred seventy-eight Members
have - answered to their names, a
H 8895
quorum Is present, and the Committee
- will resume It.s business. - •, . ..
- - “ R5CORD COT!
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
pending business is the demand of the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. DIN-
cEu.) for a recorded vote
‘A recorded vote was ordered.
01710 - : -
- PARLIA 1TARY U (QVIRY
Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman. I
have a parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
gentleman will state It.
Mr. WAT.IcrR. Mr. Chairman, could
the Cnalr clarify as to just exactly
what the amendment Is that we are
vo t ing on, where we are proceduraUy’
The CHAIRMAN. We are voting on
the first Judiciary Committee amend-
ment, page 32. It strikes the civil
action section of sectIon 11. -
Mr. W! T rR. Mr. Chairman, did I
understand the Chair to say that the
amendment we are about to vote on
strikes the civil ection of the bill, Is
that correct? -
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
civil action section of section 11.
- Mr. WALKER. I thank the Chair.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
Chair will aditse Members that this Is
a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic
device, and there were—ayes 215, noes
165. not voting 53, as follows:
C ctobe? 81, 1988 - CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE - -
tHoU No. 434]
•AYES—2 1 5 -
Akaka EdeazdICA Johs.on
Annunslo Edearos OKI Jones (NC)
Archer Dnerson ,. Jones (OK)
Badhani Ddre lch - Kasleb
Bartlett Dlenborn Kasienmeler
Baternan Evans (U .) Risen
Bennett Pane . Klndnees
Bereuter Feighan ICramer
Be dl Ferraro , Lar sjce
Bliley Field. Ign io s
Boehiert FIsh lehman (FL.)
Borakj Flippo - - Lent
Boucher - Foley - lewis (CA)
Brilt Ford (TN) Lewis (FL)
Brooks - Forsythe tJpinxkI
Eroocnlield Franklin Livingston
Broyhili Ptey ,sel Lloyd
Burton (IN) Fuqua - Leeffler
Byron Oek ss Lou
campbell Gingrich Lowery(CA) -
Carney - - - OLickman Luiin
Co_zr Oradisoci Lej ,gyeii
Chandler Orsosm Mark
ChappeU Ouarinl MacKay
Chappie . Ounderson Marriott
Cheney Bali. Ralph Marun (U.)
Clinger Hall. Sam Martin (NC)
coats Bunznersch,n_jdt Martin (NY ).
Conable ‘ Race Ma, oll
Conyen Hansen ( ) McCat
Craig Hansen (UT) MeCollum
Crane. Daniel Harrison McC rdy
Crane. Philip Biztnett MeDid
Crockett HawkIns - MeEwen
Daniel Hayes McKe,nan -
Dannemeyct Relner McKinney
Dssehle HelLel Michel
Daub Bightower Millet tORI -
Sc Ia Oarza HIler Mjne ia
Derrick Bulls , Molloh sn
DeWIne Bolt - ‘ Moore
DickInson Hopkins ‘ “ Moorhead
Dixon fluekaby - , Morrison (WA)
Dreler Hughes -. . Myers
Duncan Runitr “ , Nichols
Dymsily Butte “ ‘ Nielson
Dyson - - Hyde ‘- O’Brien ,
Edwardo (AL) - Ireland -. Obey
-------
118896
(X)NGRESSTONAL RECORD - HOUSE -.
- . 5 . . . -.; The Qerk innounced the following
Owet - OU aLLco .. . .•.
Oilep “ Sawy - —. Otump ‘ - “ . i :.—i.t
On this vote: •. -.
- & u Ornar ... -. Mr. Miller of Ufomis for, with Mr.
a . &hu r - ‘ j
- erI1br Dw • Mr. BLthskla for, with Mr. Lowry of Wash
Quwea Bhuaeal Vender Ington against.
$1 iuit . Vander 1fI Mrs. Ro” for, with Me. Kaptur
Ranad •-‘- Walk- Sg lDjj ’ - -.
Ra t’ . 8lita . ,.. We1 • .• -
- Skr ‘. WhIuep . . - So the Judiciary Committee amend-
RUJds J iIb Omi WitLUUcr utent was agreed to. i..... - . -
: r ‘ m result of the vote
Robtnaan . Ra f .. 000UCSd as above gecorded.. ..
Rcd o . . owe . Wet -t ier .-. - . - • . . •. : .
: - ‘ w - .. ..• . .• .., . . . - .-..
Beset-a - -‘, - -
__ ___ - “°°‘ ‘t”’ Mr. PWRIO. Mr. Chairman, I move
Baenkowakl SpatS . Toig JeOt . __ . -
Beth • . ——
“. .. ... .. - (Mr. PLORIO asked and was given
.‘4 110 _ 1 c-’, - ; permlmáoc to revise and extend biare-
‘ - i i .j . J • • marks) . ..
• Mk rmae - Oeph e,dt , V buari rr . • , . ,
bbaa . .. . . Z £ L ’.J. L. OU
5 - - • - - - colleague, Uzaxizv BEDm.L. has
Aiezamirr • brought to our attention several ques-
*nd On tfll tions that have been raised by service
A,tdu’eua ci t- - • . station operators and other smsfl busi-
• thaj • Baii n ‘Ib ecaIorø -. flosses. I would like to clarify the
— Oall ... record with regard to these questions.
Bamfitoc - Rkhardaon , ,
BAt- k - ...•. tinder w Mikulski amendment,
• ‘ which constitutes sectlco 22 of this
Bedell • Rewind, -. flo,bal :‘t. bill, we encourage the recycling of
.,.; .iised motor oil while, at the same time,
,Jr-iikk- Sr heua - ntn t ing the regulatory burden on
...•‘ lea. irm- : :. the small gerieratm who contraet.s for
Boland Kennefly - &ler ,. its proper disposal. The service station
- - , ,, .. dealer’k obligation is simply to insure
lank- Bo lter . . . .‘ r that the pe le to whom the waste oil
lue Katatuer ‘. is given are properly licensed, and to
•% (COt Lei””o . Sik erUi •
Skelton - -
, .• e’ -’to • Some people have asked about waste
smm L&t - oil that is retained by the generator
: . and which is burned on premises in a
Coliliw - COmmercIal space heating unit.
Canto •‘ i á sw -. The burning or blending of any ban-
Coo ’ Lund&ae . Swill ..rdous waste for the purpose of
• ,. , , energy recovery is corered by sectinn S
- ai&runer - t - of H,R. 2367. Withln 2 years after en-
DeUu a. Mat aW ,. TonicelU actment, the Administrator of A is
Vtn&dl . , Ma Toule. 3 required to promulgate standards reg-
..- ulating facilities which burn hazard-
Down Mc8ucb - - otis wastes, We also expect the EPA to
Purbis , ;• IdeNufty Volimer .;. develop standards for Commercially
Dwyer .. -. marketed equipment like those space
Eden . “‘ MUthh Weber - heatem, -, .
rear - Moilniol ‘ Wheat . -. If the ‘user has equipment that
• Williams (NT) meets those standards, and uses the
EmzwflAl it(C’i ’) IfOHI equipment according to directions, and
r’te ier . Mur phy -. WLrth :- - records how much waste oil is con.
Ftono Idurthe:. W I s e . -: sumned and so forth, then there should
P u s uetta W il hT , • stat be any problem, .
r - . - , The existing equipment could
Prose • liewik - - Ysta remain in use uiitil those s thrth
Oak.’ ,. . - -. are Issued 2 or 3 years from now. Older
Oejden sea Olete ZiblOdJ - units would not have to be upgraded
• -. , NOT VOTING—SI •. \,.J - or replaced until after the new stand-
AuCoin - - osea co r . ards are set. We would expect the EPA
— , 5 ’
Beta - Rauber PvT6 ., ,.. t allow for n orderly t H.j -
- Service station dealers also have In-
Bosco •. J ffØ , - quired about the recordkeeptng re-
Boeer Eaplur -Fickle - quirementa for solvents which they
- ,use. Solvents, of coulse, are the arche.
Clarke - . L .th •. - s - typ l hazardous waste contaminant.
CI - Lehmaa cAI Smith Efl.I The committee recognizes, though,
Leluid 50 1am ,. . that certain arrangements regarding
-- tw t’iA .1 - solvent recycling may weil provide the
-r M ndIwi • Vuos ov i es eMy level of public health and
- , Miller (CA), - Waxma environmental protection while mini-
aiaiü administrative burden on the
Orat- . Monte asey -
October 81, 1988
generator. For instance, many auto-
mobile repair facilities employ com-
mercial cleaning services that actually
retain title to the materials they use
and who remove and recycle used sol-
vent, so that the shopowners are not
functioning as generators In the usual
sense of the word.
- .1 wish to thank the genUeman from
Iowa for his longstanding interest in
this legislation and for his help In
ldentifying those concerns which I
have just addressed. -. .- -
• Mr. 000DLING. Mr. Chairman. I
rise in support of H.R. 2867. the Haz-
ardous Waste Control and Enforce-
ment Act of 1983, and the Bi -eaux-For-
sythe amendment. . . -
This bill wil1 achieve something I
have advocated for some time—a
.rong. Federal stand against landfill-
ktg hazardous wastes. Section 5 of
H.R. 2867 requIres the Environmental
Protection Agency to restrict the land
disposal of hazardous wastes unless It
can be reasonably anticipated to be
protective of human health and envi-
ronment; it takes Into contideratlon
the long-term uncertainties associated
with land disposal, the goal of manag-
ing hazardous waste in an appropriate
manner in the first instance, and the
persistence, toxicity, mobility, and pro-
pensity to bloaccumulate of hazardous
wastes and their toxic constituents.
Land disposal facilities will be re-
quired to meet design and duel liners,
leachate control systems, and ground-
water monitoring. RCRA clearly will
now make land disposal the manage-
ment practice of last resort. We have
the technology to treat our hazardous
wastes, but EPA regulations have fa-
vored land disposal, which may be
cheaper In the short term, but will be
far more expensive and environmen-
tally devastating in the long term,
Landfills are not the only land dis-
posal method. The Breaux-Forsythe
amendment will assure that interim
status surface Impoundments that are
unlined, or that are not meeting
RCRA gound water monitoring or con-
talnrnent standards, will, either be up-
gradçd to meet the new facility stand-
ards, that Is, double liners, leachate
collection systems, and ground water
monitoring, or must close. EPA recent-
ly has estimated there are at least
8,000 active surface impoundments
used for the storage and disposal of
hazardous wastes; 70 percent of these
Impoundments are unlined, and 39
percent have a high potential to con-
taminate ground water. Compliance
with a Clean Water Act NPD
permit Is not relevant to whether the
impoundment $tself leaks. The Clean
Water Act regulates surface water dis-
charges, while RCRA regulates haz-
ardous wastes to protect the total en-
vironment. Compliance with the Clean
Water Act does not assure compliance
with RCRA. ..‘- -- -.
Alternatives to land disposal exist. I
know, because In York. Pa., In my dis-
trict, Envim-ite Corp. operates a state-
-------
lioveinber 1 ,1982 -- CONGRESSIONAL DRD1OLT .. - . 1(9133
their the oIiey of the *a*3tri$t D l v i im. it a treof the . 1vfi’ ’. fol- 1 1 .—---4’t Dffit IS base edf ft e1n -
a matter of race mn m to the ifetees lows — :.:. that
sL the Assistant Attorney General lOf the _____
trust Division is failing -j •• 81 - - DwI t authority is expanded and given
ineibwUes of the cities bids lThflC lL to other agencies. the more tIfr Ith
,dnted ‘ nd canlinned. The conferees . d is b ebi. detlet to the Cr nfluILtee en these Is for probloru in the use of that.
._juct the United States Departnient of Jia- dU &IOfl sod Ls a d to the niIUes authOrity.
tlee and all other appropriate Federal agen- Siii*11 Budne . . - .. - Th mmlttee Is concerned that
she to cat one the federal ant u t is-v. ‘The resolution was agreed 10. 1 n 11(e) *2 BR. 86’J is ut an.
faithfully and VIRO?OUBli, tnClUdlDg £ motion to usi r was laid 00 other . wi pte of the uncoordinated
hlbllisn en r ie prier maIn1a ? thet i- . - -: .-- - o1ffera±lan of law en! or er*t aaa-
- tONP ENCE TTA1I—W& ‘ c: : :_- • - - thorlty to the various Federal agen-
• - - c0MPAR ISO Ius -- • - -•“ - ______
he total new budget (obilgatiocall en- - 8ZARDOVS WASTE CONTHOL des- Before we erm*t this WnlIfera-
thority for the fis i year 1984 pernmmend- .&I2D FOHC 2tIENT ACT OP 1*83 tiOfi 20 conUnUe. the CongT , aed
Sd by the “ ttee of Conference. i’tl si ’ _- apecUically the Cnnimlttee us the Ju-
_____ dL4-., , ould Is.ke $ clore look at
r1scoa to the f l year 1983 . mnent .
the 1984 budget eaUmate5. and the House zt to House Resolution 274. axid TUlo whether ft Is justifiable In each In-
end Senate bills for 1854 foliow. - UI l I - the Chair declares the House stance and, even if It Is justifiable in a
New budget ( fgof 4 ’$3) i,.. In the Conunlttee of the Whole House wt ett er an omit!-
authority. gjacaj - on the State of the Union for the fur- bus. coordinated wauld make
• J2a3 - *1&312 .TIM98 ther t ’ ’ of ‘ _____ -
Budget 01 - - . asT. - - - — - —. -. - - Aa to the merita of this part1cu
(obligational) authority. L .
fiscal rear 1934 - ‘10.026.314.000 Accordingly the Bouse authorization, the committee has been
informed that the FBI has 4g ed
BO bilL tn vent itoeli Into the Committee high priority to the kinds of cases that
1ss 4.714.477, 860 _____
- BenMe bill. fenal , : - - Whole House on the State of the u ..t tise
____________ j oo Union for the fwther consideration *2 Depa th t. of Justice is unaware of
Corifereun $5 ? - the bill. HR. 67, to the Solid *orticuiar need tot aisthnol-
• fi.ca lyear l S$4 1L49L983$9 Waste Th osaI Lut to authurise - ther-
fvici air . -. tI - . - JlatlDnS for the fiscal 7 5 513 984 stance wi em tise r az was aiow In te.
campased Ettb • - ‘ - tough 1986 aud for other wending to an illegal matter.
Nevi budgtoblI UoMfl • - with the Mr. BaRXAUD In the chair. As res’i L, p Webster
authority, fiscal year - - - The Clerk read the title *2 the bilL
___________ called a meeting In Washington where
3983 *254.927.000
Budget estimates of new . The CHAiRMAN. When the Corn- be personally assigned a high prlo ity
(ohUe 1IDasl) anth I - - •• - . mittee of the Whole House arote on to future dumping matters. The FBI
ty. fiscal year 1984. . +473.347,800 MDfld&3’, OCIObeY 31. 1983, Ie
bill, f i 5mi - - was 005520 IW55dI0 at - the EPA to provide law enfm ent
19*4 +3.781,1*0 10 - - w --& UI1i -
Iste hm “ • -‘ The Clerk will report the second D e3 when nee sy.
14 - +59.3 .0OO u)mntittee amendment recommended The granting of law enforcement au-
iidts 12511 15.500 budget V— ’ not
b - - - br the Committee on the thority not only to EPA but also to
other Federal of ftclals raises ipiestlous
_______ - The Clerk read as fdllowsc - - e Iciency and coordination. The el.
- BuL - t . , - j fr Ij 1ttes P e u’ oucations Involves whether
Joan’s D. ESILY. - $3, strike out line 1 and all that buoy makes sense for EPA Officials to be
BwaanJ. DwTse. - - - -
Romn r i. - Ir. avo s. sir. Ciiali-mazi. i conducting searches, selzwm, and at-
Boa CAZL - - move to strike the last wordS Their Imary function Ii to In-
JAIIU L W 1 m . (Mr HIJ( asked and was given vestigale dumping cases. It, Is the Job
of the FBI and the U.S. marshals 10
Osossa OBaun. - -
CiABmca E (rn 10 revIse and his to- arresta. aeaithea. and acl es.
• miSts.) - - - not EPL it Is 4n fflc1ent to dupileshe
- 1 10) . - Mr. ili M L C -fruiao . law enfure ea1t foils and trnbth,g
Joca . - .- tion 11(e) of the bill provides that soy for these agencies. Ir a addition, while
Bu.v io 0. CosTs, - officer or employee of the Environ-
Xanaqevs ow the Inot of 1 S t Boost mental ProtecUon Agency Is auth EPA offIcials ose being trained to do
- Pam ‘ -“ “ .: - - ise to carry rearms. emte what the FBI is already assigned to
Tse8 s. - - - -- - _______ - do.the Ofpeoplelnv’ 1g nj
- - 10wmiP Wsii.ui.i , - penis . mate noivsts wtbnut wamnt. - . . 4ztz cases is reduced. ‘This often-
- -. WARJLn B RUbNAO . and administer oaths. - tion compounds the problem of Inef I I-
- Miax 0. Rarrusa. -
• Amca s .. .-esi . - _ - dent use of time when use considers
Ea zaT F. ff - struck th provisions Oh . that frequent retraining In law en-
- DANII . . Isoum. - . - because we believe It to be an imwar- .forcemeflt tachxilquea Is essential. -
- - - - Dnoni —---- . ‘ - gnntcui py 1If y t4 of The uiordlnatlou au 1 ”n Involves
Dais Bu . - — *utbor tty. -- -- . I1
• Too Eswmes.__ r .. The a In2stritboo opoo th have hma the Deoos t of Jentlea
• Joma C. 8r tw . . - ‘flit I) p fl of J Jc If PA Is granted these new po . .
Newaoeva on (St Fa t tthe&iiak indicates that law enforcement i,,- The Department - -S ” be l able to
- - • - • • - -• ttiartty should be umsolldated COOtdlfli.te law enforcement matters as -
- -. - a 1400 - r - - - ‘ ‘ u p 4h In the Department of EPA assimies these tasks thdep dent.
Justice and speotheafly In the PBI. 17- fiB ImZtttT of 211811 pfloTtt7 In the
U.ECTION AS 7A ILBER OF COM me Department t*ueves tiwre Department to Investigate waste se-
Mi iiZS ON EDUCATION 1 Vno tp los extending these authorl- moval cases. EPA ’s independence may
LABOR AND AS V M R Of ’ - tt e Pm 1 .oc’Jus result hi the De , ’ rtru55t and EPA -
COMM1TI EE - ON SMALL Agency. The Department feels strong- working on the anme case without
- • • - the of snth eith as of —
of klsmm ) y flpeak. - be 1St1y VI n1t A In order 01 U 0tl . ot1 be.
tier a privileged resolu ’ W. io rot both 01t e and law en- tween the 0 $L - itiili1 _
*1) and ask for Its tmrn.dtetc fwu6u55i officera. The Department what it is trained to do, Is the most of-
____ - .. - Scale that It b i g that law en. £a 1w la enf--- - - -
-------
—- - • — ‘r. - - 1 .
H 913 i ThTh 4i’ ’1i Th GRESSIONAL RECÔRD— HbUSE’ 1 i Novembcr J 198S
- :,7 u t receive ai 1á loo give law - ywtlng for this endn
gejd ol a need to grant these law for awt arre . omzth and aeiswe I be pr1v1ng EPA of the tnfcree-
awforomn t vat ftles to the WL anthuñty. aaUi 1ty to rry g om to 1 tcois n& eaasry to proi
conceTu EPA has about being able ro every a ., , to give esab againd deliberate crimbol vlolatãom.
• to make no e a&e wed at - very agency that baa en- 11ro1 is not a signal that this
night at a dumping site ihroM to to- fgn..-.. ..u’? snthnrft , the authoiijy to - nId send to the me n people. I
solved eodly. EPA should by this potat eniy spnT - to search strongly urge my Dlicagues to defeat
afre..dy hue alerted and erranged tar and sebe: - -. . this amendment.
too dtnaUcu of their effort with the - • Mr. Chairman, at the of
DeparUaezd W a questlen or de 141* ‘ y remarks I sin Including a list of
olIOU :. - -• •. ‘ ‘ The CRAIR! . The tlme’of th these Individuals who are in the Crimi-
PInafly. t e ahesdy a p eediae g.iit .qy n • om New Jasey (Mt. ual } iforuement Division. I i has *
by which EPA ron ask J ’r 50 dsiI Hi,i. ) b :• .• - “ y of their tr I%II1g
nate EPA .f h so deputy US. —_ g g We me talking about p.”p t with
____ in partimalar The D t- al3ow j . anywhere from 12 to 27 yeaii of criml-
•Jn lt OI.3%atICO is $dIVCIY noflsid 1ng roinuliroj - .. - :- °‘ and mIPCTVisOiT ex-
sueb a i,r*rum tar KPL This ozom’ - - _____ , C ab’, perience: we me t ik$ g about profes-
J W U 5 51ZO to the world con you have any coonlJ- slonals In the fIeld of criminal Justice.
ft nated effort? You are talking about a & We are not providing these en-
countable for insuring that ‘ — — for ali’tJng. ves’y esinc train. honeed enforcement Pu tO thom
official IS praperly tisIned tag. The F B I baa had very .eif Ic who are not qualified. We are provld-
appropriate background to kw With to these Individuals the ‘ T ” V
nofoi eat . Hti - - - ‘ The.y should r, n fn the lead agency, of enforcing the app opriately strong
Therefore, Mr. Chafrain. ° ° You cannot have a pollee departm nt,, provisions that are In this law.
believe there Is no urgent need for a Ynlnspollce department, In every I would ask for the support of this
these a tles.I urge my enlicaguro agency mid depailinent of Govern, body In opposIng this .ieot -
to m pport the a . lttee amend ment and expect to have some central. J ,vaPpoTsenoa Anmer
striking thpn , .. .,. ‘ ,.• S.,-. • fred. U, y&iIn te i afM ( TT AL EIOco T bw,w . •.
MT. BODINO &. 11Xfl crime oh ri that 1 ig in e - 0. isict
the gentleman ile - - of 5 i ,nd . -
Mr. HUuia I yield to the gentle- ci it Is as ‘nple as that. - • I1cadquartem W ’ø D.C
roan born Ige, Jersey, the d gtta , Mrg my c iex N.Y. City Police D .. N.Y. is
g IiehPA halr,npj .0! the t, ,init1 JiirHr4 1 y Cnn f i. . Atty. Gen. Oflice. N.Y. ( nml u of
on the Judiciary. - - ...,. . -. -, -. v tigauon r yena estelzai - - w
and m pe y exp - -••.
(Mr. RODINO asked and was given
paiiilmian 10 revIse and ex• Mi ’ PLORIO. Mi’,. iJrman. I Aasistant Chief: dersI Buye.u of hiia-
- - i -.. . • . - to strike the requisite number of jget o, Washington. D.C. False ..
.Mr. RODINO. Mr. Ctalrman . I want aorda. and 1 z In to the US. interstate erse
- to add my aszp ,rt to the Itat t of • ‘. -
- the gentleman (Tom New Jessey. the (Mr. FLORID asked and was given °‘ - ‘
slrman of the -Subcommittee -en permission tO revise and extend his ic- F e d Offt •--- . -
Special Agent in aree U . s. Tresawy
Lure. The Committee on the .TudlcI- - Dept.. Bureau at Ajoohol. Tobacco and Flie-
.y has long been concerned about the - Mr. PLORTO di. Chairman. I am , o.c. Police Dept.: 1*
, rgliferat1on of tow enforcement an- convinced that because provisions of
- t 1ty wh the om been fl inOd dizpoml Of - -
engaged In In uece pears. I fully ardom waste and require safer meth- Spenal Agent No. L 0.8. Tha y D .,
-- agree wfth the gentleman that a mace ode of a nt and recycling, there Bu e u of £ OI. TDba and Fhenrn
sensible approach is for the current win be a aignificently v’eater Incentive 15 5r3 imInal 1nv g’tivt experience.
aw enforcement agencies to dispese of toxic waste Illegally. SPe Ill Agent Na. 7. US. easun, Deal..
Bureau of A bn1. lWwece and Flresiwz I
rate In a better Since RCRA was amended In 1980 to aiminsi Invmi.igasive experi
manner. I do not believe ft pjdjng make ft a mime for anyone to diepese Sp Ag o. 3 Washington, D.C.
more penpie to the already extensive of bamrdoua waste In a way that no- Police Dept.. CrkelnpJ investigatIon D lv i-
lid of Government personnel who aie dazi ers human health, there has not i mimi i in im
- authorized to cony firearms and make been a single Indictment under the pervisory experlecoc. - ‘-1
urranliess arrests is In the bed Inter- kx owtng pro 1slofl, This Is true dP pitP Special Agent No. t-US. Marine O
of ‘ mtry , The withemes the tact the the Oversight Eu mmU - Armed Senrkse Police DepL Florida Dew.
the hearing tmtjfled that the Depart. tee has learned of numerous n 5tan of Law Enforcement. 12 years criminal to-:
ment. and specifically j ’ j j Of itddn(ght duni 1ng and ot mimi- V5t1UIIV i ’-
______ Cb i mgoPLeldOLfi0e -
made toxic wade cases a spii - 4 .i prkw. nal involving bawdous Special Agent In Charge: U.S. Treasury
fty. I gnmlnd my .collengues that the --Waste,. -: - De . of Alcohol. Tobaen and Fee-
Department of Jurtfre and the I - TInced that The ask -of ye- .azm 11 y In t g j a ro-
imve an excellent working rehUf hip gulls, in terms of ur -Irnlria] prosecutions peiviaory experlecee. -‘
and that both of them support I-he Ju-’ under R A. Is due to the lack of ado- Special Agent No.1: U.S. Treasury Dept..
dlclary committee a,n ment which WI tp 1nvP gD.tIII ’y aw2 r1ty , Bureau of £ h I ‘7n 4
*lM the Mw orennent Ofj cei . dequate fnv vtg for She er ” - ’ ”-’ b PSII DrpL 5% pens
_____ criminal investigatIve expeneme
tim from the bilL --- -. .- . . i-a .-i .-- f—- ’ Pr urm. Dusini — Special Agent No. a us. Unag Enforce-
Mr. HU I - I thank the gentle- markup of this bill hr lull committee, meat Aitmlnisti ’atlcet 2 5 years criminal in-
roan for that contribution. *nd the Mi. M&Dlc and 1 ,onsormI an , gigeuve and supervboyy erperleixe.
gentleman is K ntiite y right . . - amV 11P1it which will dOithi . the eciai agent Ito. k Waahthgtco D C.
I think that an have t to look at I — ’-’ lea this program. This will Jce D 10% yesur criminal invcet .
each mm and determine whether or flow EPA’a criminal Investigators to tire eaperIe - ‘—:
not there Is a need. There is no quco. be In each of the 1* i’i fl Denver Witd Oesen -J -
tins but that certain . q, .t of orga- However. increased fimifing for this Special Agent in Ciuarge U.S. latercel
______ Revenue Service. Criminal Investigation Di.
-- nlzed mime have infiltrated this aiea i4ram Will only be efficiently ren_t vidon’ II years criminal Inuestlutlue eu..
- The FBI has a particular expertise. If the Inv&lg ”s ate provided with -
FBI should i’ 1 ” the hed the some_law ea1or asdb ghy w4 I *g O. 1 V.8, O—&.. -
7. vesy ag”y and d ioituui ..I4 . Jkd a1 g .rw4 p . a ’.t in’cet miue a .
has some enfor _t - j.’, ‘- -- omy . ’i—m - : M/. - - -
-------
Nouernber. 1983
Philadelphia T’ield Offtes
Special Agent In Charge: N.Y. State Med
-. ‘ Fi aud Division. Federal Bureau @1 Ia-
tion 22 rein frnin l lnv tJgiUve
ervisory experience.
, lal Agent No. 1: Washington. D.C.
1-ulice Dept. 12 yeais alminal Invastigatlve
experience. -
Special Agent No. t Maryland Depart-
merit of Natural Resources. PoliCe Depart-
ment 12 years erh .I,ist lnvP Igtiyt TJ Li#
Special Agent No. 2: VS. Internal Reve-
nue Service. Criminal Investigation I)IvI•
lion; 1$ years es -lninaJ lnvestigaLive leper;.
Special Agent o. & Washington. D.C.
Police Dept.; 20 years criminal Investigative
and supervisory experience.
Seattle Field Office: -
Special Agent to Charge: US. Drug .
foreement Admin., US. Customs Service; 13
peaii er ” Investigative end mipernse
experience.
Special Agent No. 1: U.S. Drug Enforce.
went Admin.; 10S4 years ciut in I Investiga .
live experience. -
Special Agent Wo. 2: U.S. Drug Enforce.
merit Admin.. V .& Customs Service; 21
years aiminal tovesugative arid nrperviscey
experience.
Special Agent No. 3: U.S. Wish and Wild.
life SeMce, California Dept. of Fish and
Game: 11 years aiminal Investigative expe-
flence. ____
Mr. SAw rtac. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike the requisite number of
words, and I rise in support of the
amendment.
(Mr. SAW 12tt asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his to-
Awxa . Mr. is
.nother Illustration of what we
for the Commerce Department
. week. Goodness knows who we
will have It for next week, but every-
one wants their own mini police de-
partment. all running around carrying
guns. yns.k Ing warrantless arrests, and
with no police training. ., -
There Is not an agency In the Feder-
*1 Government that does not have
some kind of enforcement problem on
their various laws. The Federal Corn-
niunicatlons Commission, they are
dealing with radios or radio t fJn 5 ,
private or otherwise, there ate not li-
censed. I suppose they might want to
have their awn aimed pol1c
riding the circuit, with radio direction
finders, making arrests; the Federal
Tradi Commiccion. certainly In the
antitrust field, out with guns and
weaponry; the Interstate Commerce
Commission. on motorcycles, tounding
up and arresting Illegal truckers oper-
ating on the road without ICC certifi-
cates of convenience and necessity.
You name ft. the list Is endless. And
just everybody, as soon as they find
out the door is open, why should they
have to go to another agency to get ar-
rests made, to pull out guns and en-
force their own laws and their own
rules’ and regulations when they can
‘ ‘ “iemselves?
o you are going to have an end-
earn of agencies coming In here
ig their own armed pollee forces,
iey will proliferate throughout
iU derS1 OO ’erU &. -
Mow. that not done In any Stale
that I am aware of; It has not been
done op to now on soy widespread
ansle hi the Federal Government.
- I think the time baa come to say no,
we have trained police agencies, we
have the FBI. we have the U.S. Mar-
shal’s Office, and we have got trained
people In th areas ‘ho are armed
and who are apab of ‘ g arresta
.nd enforcing the law.
It atrikes me that. that has aiwa o
been our p nlcesipby of government.
We are not a police state, and If we
start multiplying all of the agencies
with their own pollee departments and
police forces, untrained and armed, I
think we are , nablng a severe mistake.
I urge the support of the Members for
the Judiciary Ownrrdttee amendment.
Mr. FISH. Mr. Chairman, I move to
strike the requisite number of words.
and I, too, rise in favor of the amend-
ment that comes out of ow Commit-
tee on the Judiciary to strike this au-
thority. .. - . -1
I might add that the administration
opposes the Inclusion of law enforce-
ment authority In EPA. The Depart
i r t f Justice feels that the right to
carry firearms and make arrests with
or without warrants should be limited
In order to protest the rights of ow’
citizens. •
The widespread proliferation of law
enforcement responsibilities, which Is
encouraged by the language In the
bill, which the Judiciary Onurnittee
seeks to strike, hi my judgment will In-
evitably result In a reduction in the
level of training and experience now
enjoyed by Federal law enforcement
officers, The FBI is perfectly capable
of fully Investigating the alleged com-
mission of crimes resulting from envi-
ronmental abuse.
Now, If the Environmental Protco-
tion Administration requires addition-
al law enforcement persmlnPl and
there Is reason to believe that oper-
ational difficulties are being encoun-
tered, then ft Is proper that the De-
partment of Justice designate EPA of.
ficlals as special deputy U.S. Marshals
for a temporary period, with all the
&rwc L powers such a d 1g” ’o ” he-
plies. . . -
But I think It Is important for this
body to wnderstand that amst author-
ity granted to EPA personnel by the
language In H.R. 2867 goes beyond
strictly environmental offenses and
could Involve the power to arrest or to
Inflict deadly force whenever an EPA
official with arrest authority believes
e has probable cause that a fethny
has been, or Is being. committed.
Mr. Chairman, this Is not the first
time this administration or prior ad-
ministrations have encoirnicied these
types of requests. They have been nu-
merous over the years from various
agencies of Government for permis-
sion *0 toSTV arms and to make ar-
r a. In order to grant stich _____
It has always been necesg r y pro.
bride specific evidence which clearly
and monv4 ’ingiy demonstasies the so-
.119135
‘verity of the need. The witnesses from
EPA who testified before the Eouse
Judiciary Committee were unable to
provide us with examples which would
justify such a dangerous precedent,
sod I urge, Mr. Chairman, support for
the pending amendment.
Mr. MOLINABL Mr. Chairman. I
move to strike the requisite number of
W iids . and I rise in opposition to the
amendment.
(Mr. MOLINARI asked and was
liven permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. MOLI}ARL Mr. Chairman, If
ever there was an agency of the Feder-
al Government that should be granted
the power of arrest. It should be the
enforcement arm of the EPA. Now, I
have been one who baa severely anti-
cized EPA and its enforcement activi-
ties, and I would agree with the gen-
tleman from New York (Mr. Fisa) and
the gentleman front New Jersey (Mr.
Buonss that if in all circumstances
you had the opportunity to contact
the FBI and you were forewarned that
there was activity going en. ft would
be preferable. Indeed, I think that Is
what would happen If time permitted.
Vofortunately. you do not have the
luxury, In many cases, of being fore-
warned. Your enforcement officers are
out there; they are making an Inquiry
In an Investigation. they come upon a
dumping actlvit)r, they should be em-
powered to make an arrest, they
should be empowered to protect them-
selves. And, indeed, we have just
learned within the last few days that
EPA Is expanding Its enforcement per-
-.
But If we a e goIng to declare war on
those who are abusing the envnwn-
ment and Indeed causing damage to
the health and maybe causing the mom
of life, then we should be ready to pro-
tect those who are going to protect us.
Mr. FIL)RID. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. MOLINARL I yield to the gen-
tleman from New Jersey.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. just to
point out the wisdom of what the gen-
tleman Is tAlkirig about. I have, and I
will put Into the RxcoRD, reports front
various EPA Criminal Enforcement
Division field ataeen. One report out
of SeatUe strikes me as reflective of
the wisdom of the gentleman’s te-
iad . - - -
EPA tovestititci’ wtthessed a
ing FCB liquids en the highway between
Portland and Seattle. Investigator unable to
stop trick or prevent contamination of 50
miles of lilghaay before the truck was ulU-
mately stopped y a sheriff who was able to
be obtained for purpores of enforcing p e
law.
D1420 - -
This Is the type of thing that we are
trying to deal with. We know that
they are abort -handed. We know that
these Investigators are on the s p ,
but If they do not have the law en-
forcement authority, they are going to
have to alt and walsh in this Instance,
ONGRESSONAL REWRD — HOUSE :
-------
119136 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—.HOUSE -. -
50 miles of road being polluted wish Dw’leg gw1lkcee of a
PCB beea e ( be i ont have wade hauling opesaUon. there w an
luthority that we ore taylz* to o . W a liestenont of the Ro-
wide for them In this bilL land Cu’ wLj Shertzri OUlee
The gentleman Is absolutely In Kent (19?2), and Oeorgia ____
This aniendinent knot helpfuL 41976L EPA etmi were Sazved
Mr. MOLINAR.L I thgytk ( b gp”l . fr ittm V 11O Snd
.nan for his remarks, and I would like In South C zoUna (1976 and 19791,
to point out tint tie list Is an EPA pestleide hapector was twise _____
of Incidents whets. If the EPA lnveStl- *h IL L 11O .P” 4 ”- :
gative authorities had the ability to Y 7. 19B3, EPA’S SpeCial Cuim-
make arrests and had the wenpom to ‘es I 1 ’’ V! f to the As- ______
protect themselves. many of these mdanee Attorney Oeneral for the
sbuses would have been averted. jg( land and Natural flesoarem Divinac
us Lace It, we are tailth vmcernlxig opesatloiwi a1u
of the worst characters in this . ouo- The aL. of ‘ esIw.. . .r .nt bort
try. We are balking about org,uis he OPCmI 1 & Iin
alme. We are tlklng about stu ’Uona $Od 5 5 I cy aigati ,e . Mty that will thevi-
where we are asking our enforcement (ably limit the Igericy ’s ind pendent abibty
to enform the aizilnal ‘ovlskns ci tin so-
officers to put their lives on the line.
They are not gomg to do 11 . In many arrest powers, *‘s Investigative slat! son
esses unless they have the ability to ant prevent mwob megal vtty. so
jiroteci themselves, - . r vehIcle to
Mr. WIDEN. Mr. a aIrman. will the
gentleman yield2 ‘ . The memorandum a . . p sny 1ng
Mr. MOLINARL I yield to the oe m- that letter describes an Incident that
,leman from Oregon. . etTtkes close to home. An EPA Investl.
Mr. WYDEN. j th. .nk the gentl.’na i gator wtln ed a fruck leaking PCS
for yielding. •.. - liquids on a highway between Portland
Mr. C} irrn I j g emind and Seattle. The EPA Investigator was
the gentleman’S rl mrnenta. - unable to stop the (flick, CT P 1vvca It
I would like to share with my esI amtamlxmtlon of 10 mIles of highway
leagues correspondence between before the truck was stopped by a
EPA and the Justtce Depsrta ient Sheriff’s deputy, due to the of
which clearly demonstrates the *med law enf . t vwvz .
for sectIon 11(e) of this bill. ._.- - alT1U5fl, sectIon 11(e ) ventIng
In an AprIl 1983 letter from EPA’S EPA criminal Investigators law en-
ciate iorcen.ent cxisei, (orcement po,-vrs would w. t the
Criminal Division. to the U .S. Dpsz afety and operatIonal problems that
nt of Justice, g quest made Tently twist and strengthen hazard-
be provision of full law enforce. OtiS waste enforcement.
I authority for EPA’s criminal in- I uiwe the selection of the amend-
Ligators. The request centered aiei3t seeking to delete this provision.
dangers of the InvesUgatlve proc. - Mr. MOLINARL I thank the enUe
ess and (be sired for u-fmirisl bivesti- for 5 5 5 5 .
gators to make arrests and execute LENi’. Mr. Chsir , win the
search warrants to facilitate ep.fo fefltifeiSsi yield?
meat work, and to protect themselves ML MOLINARL I yield to the gen-
from bodily harm. The letter stated u from New York.
- . Mr. I lT.. .1 thank the gentleman
f o s ’y4 .bIi . .g -
Vltb full law %he L VOTIt)T . Mr. Clwmisn, I would siso like to
significant limits will be placed on A1 ____
criminal nltlatlve. More Importantly, the Identity with the gentleman’s position
program will not be I g y and the remarks that he has made In
safety of Its Investigative staff, and of clii. opposition to the amendment being of-
sen. that choose to smut IPA In parsideg ered by the gentleman from New
allegation. of ertinhul misconduct..: Jersey.
It I. my persomi belief that law m itch .. ,j fhIi* the 7 point to
soent a.ers “ ‘ Os puresed for ‘Aa make is t y ges types
u• al InvesL’ga&om ediateig of activities that EPA investigators bee
The letter also Included 26 ezaznples involved In. 1 have a number of to-
of incidents or indications of vlolezme stances here. One Instance Is where
which have occurred during environ- the p ry target of a ECg .A TSCA
mental criminal investigations. The v çtIgpHI has hi the pad arranged
examples e taken from 150 our- f fr’e h4ng of a formes’ busmnesa,
nnUy active tovestlgatlo eases . I will trISII in narcotles In the Seattle-
describe a few. Portland area, and threatened to kill
In Penjisylvanla. a landfill operator buslnom associates and dispose of so-
shot two policemen, one fatally maim In hazardous waste drums.
In another case, a Pennsylvania Another Instance, also arising out of
State D l impecior car was the Seattle field off Ice, where 2 tar-
emashed. and his family was threat- gets of a CWA Investigation have
., , reem’ds fm the Illegal discharge
Lix potential witnesses in a M’oyem of weapons. A third has made threats
landfill prosecut ion—U.S. against Lan- against Government witn s.
- - eceived death threats, c i had The C TP5JA The of the
imes burgled sod p,opettl dç. ge” -’.’ frmn New Yost (Mr. ko-
has ex :- . : -
November 3, 1988
IBy Ienanimova consent, Mr. Moses-
ass was allowed to pruored Zwhsddl-
t nal minutes.)
Mr. flDGA Mr. Chairman, will the
gen a yield?
Mr. MOLINARI. I yield to the gem-
Uenian from Pennsylvania,
(Mr. EDGAR asked and was given
pe’vn1a tnn to revise and extend his re
marks.) -
Mr. EDGAR. I tiiai*
for y g .
Mr. Chafr , I would % e to oem-
mend the gentleman In the well for
his comments. I think the Issue is to-
onsed on whether or not EPA should
have enforcement authority. I think It
has to be laid out that other agencies
of the Federal Government have this
authority for doing things that are, In
some instances. far less important to
the overall health and solely of the
community.
I think it would be too difficult In
many of these eases to wait tar eshor
law enforcement agencies to come In.
The chairman mentioned the ease of a
50-mile truck drive where puU” - ’
were being Spewed out. EPA has the
responsibility to clean up. but bad no
enforcement powers to go and, in fact.
atop and arrest that person and to
secure a clean and efficient stoppage
of that particular drnnplng experience.
Other gentlemen have mentioned
the fact that organ1 crime is to-
volved. This Is not something that is
done by good, ocmm nse Ameri-
cans who are trying to live wholesome
lives. This Illegal dumping that is
taking place In many places In our
urban arena Is taking place by people
who do oat want to to i 1gtit of
presew
The recced has born y poor of
prosecutions In this areas, I think If
we are expanding the menber of those
persons who can enforce the law, we
have to give them the aajtbwtt to de
th .
So! e- isvim d the gentl n far his
Mr. MOLINARL I thank the gen
man for his supped. . . -
Mr. BREAUX. Mr. Chairman. win
the gentleman yield?
Mr. MOLINARI. I would be glad to
yield to the gentleman from Louisiana,
Mr. BREAUX. 1 th the gentle-
man foe yIe1d
Mr. Chairman, I commend the gem- -
tipynan for his tatemen1. also, sod
point out that it is - uncommon at
all In the Federal Ouwc .uwent to have
agencies that are In charge of enforc-
ing rules and regulations also having
the authority to go out seid snake ar-
rests of those who they perceive to be
ablating the standards that they e
In charge of enforCing.
I cite, Sm example, der ma’ com-
mittee Jurisdiction, the National
Marine Fisheries Service, which has
people who ant m oe the laws pertain-
big to catching fish In offshore wa .
They base the authority to make
thme enforcement actiem ss also to
-------
D1430
Mr. MOLD AI L Mr. Chairman, If
the gentleman will let me continue. I
ti” i can clear up the gtleman’s
question.
‘ 2O/2O” bad a segment about a year
or a year and a half ago where they
did a detailed investigation. a marvel-
ous job, where they traced those hi-
valved t k1r g toxic
mixing them with heating oil, and sell-
ing It as heating oil. During the course
of the filming of that .egmez&. which
spread out over a period of 8 or 9
months, the producer and the director
were threatened many tIynp They
registered it different hotels snider
aliases. They weic constantly tel-
lowed, their phones were tapped, they
were threatened, and $Iiey could not
-waft until they showed the gTnP!’t so
the ps we would be off lw in they
were feirf Ui of their own lives.
- This is just to give an example of
the kind of people we are ai. hi’ g with
Mr. JDNESS. Mr. Chairman.
isId the gent II! S2 explain the point
about someone havIng *0 ravel to
He i 4 . I
H 9137
amid iiot quite imderstand Its rela-
tionship to the subject.
I a ,, MOLINARL There us an bidi-
vidual who was In charge of the New
York State attorney general’s at
White Plains. He i 5 in charge of the
organized crime strike force dealing
with toxic-waste dumping. He was sub-
jected to so many threats that he per-
ceived the threat to his life to he real.
and I believed It to be so.
He left the country, and during the
period when he was out of the country
I talked to his mother very often. Re
was f7sid for his life ‘ -“ of the
many threats,
t e are ma cv examples of this
type, and we can make believe It does
not exist, but If we want to get the job
done It Is about tune we declared war
on those who are going to abuse the
environment, as they have been doing.
and the only way we are going to do ft
Is by protecting the Individuals who go
out there to make the arrests.
Mr. DNESS. Mr. Chairman. will
the gentleman yield further?
Mr. MOLINARI. I am glad to yield
to the gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. DNESS. Mr. Chairman, I
am not understanding how the provi-
sion in the bill would have kept the
gentleman from having to flee to
Europe.
Mr. MOLINARI. The question us
raised by one of the speakers that no
testimony ca ine out that any people
were really threatened, and I was
merely citing that as an example of
ca.ses where people have been to life-
threatening situations.
Mr. PWRIO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mi. MOLI1 ARL I yield to the gen-
tienian from New Jeaey.
Mr. RIO. Mr. Chairman, I ap-
predate the gentleman’s yielding in
order to give me the opportunity to
deal with the point that was raised. I
am sure, in good faith, that suggested
that perhaps the authority we aze pro-
viding those people In A Is being
given to people who are not deserving
of that authority, the Impiieatian
being that somehow they were not
trained In law cut or enl.
I have put In the Rscoa —.nd I
would just again coil this to the gen-
tlrrnnn ’$ aUenUan—a list of all the in-
dividuals hi the Criminal } nforcement
Division. The experience they have Is
one that Is extremely Impressive. Here
we have the thief. associated formerly
with the New York City Police Depart-
ment and the State attorney general’s
office.
th and every individual is more
than qualified by virtue of prior -
ploysnent as well as by pollee training.
So we are not giving law enforcement
authority to Individuals who are not
up to the responsibility. It Is clear that
what we are doing Is giving to those
people who base by virtue of their
prior aini the ce hllity of using
that autjzarfty in the field, and thus in
November 8, 1988
CONGRLSSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE ‘
.soake arrests If people art, in fact vio Justice, the law esdorcement seen-
lating their standards. - ciea with mare sesources not a proflf.
-. How much mose important It is hi oration of the law onforonnent tune-
this ease, when we are talking about *1cm is c -y agency and department
that affect the health and of Government. We cannot possibly
ty of lives. - have a omtrallzed system If we have a
i.MOLINARL I thank the gentle. minipolice department in every agency
.in for his remarks. and department. That I i what we are
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, will moving toward.
the gentleman yield? Mr. MOLINARL I underatand the
Mr. MOLINARI. I yield to the gen- gentleman’s point. I would just like to
tleman from New Jersey. - answer that by saying that If we bad
- Mr. FLORZO. I thank the gentleman the luxury In each and every es.ie to
for yielding. - that something was
Mr. Chairman, I just want to offer ca and we could call the FBI
one other piece of eviden’.e of the “i.’ and have them ax the scene. It would
lidity of the point the ge’Uieman baa mint That is sot the .l
made. - world that is out there. ‘ -
Reports have coma In from the field I would like to conclude by just
offices Indicating that there offices are ui oniieagues two examples of
currently unable to Insure protection why we should defeat this amend-
of confidential Informants In environ-
mental investigations. As the elted That we do
man undoubtedly knows, these confi- not have any examples of why this Is
dentlal Informants are the key tO SUC necessary. The man hi charge of the
cesaf ul prosecutions of organized New York State Attorney General’s
crime’s Involvement In Illegal dump- i’iains OrganIzes Crime Task
Force on Toxic Waste Abuse was
Access to the U.S. Marshal Service m- his
for witness protection is ne er immedi- own life was threatened by urganned
ate due to Internal Department of JUS alme. - - 1•
tice authorization procedures. So, in Mr. l)2q . Mr. Chah’man. will
fact, we are undermining the capabili- the gentleman yield on that point?
ty of the Investigatory force to do the Mr. MOLINARL
job we are telling them to do unless we tk from Ohio. -
provide them with enhanced respond- Mr. KINDN . .
bilitles that this bill provides and ______
-which this amendment would fke. fbi ’ yielding.
Hence, the striking of these authorl- Q)uld the gPntlPvfl2n explain what
- that we provide for In the bill Is tiC JUSt tOld us? -.
y not In the Interest of the . The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
/ of these agencies to do their gentleman from New York (Mr. Mo-
tIgatory work. 1.D *R1) Ms again expired.
Mr. HUGH. Z. Mr. Cti.airman . win (On request of Mr. FLORIO and by
the genUeman yield? - cmntmous i i t Mr. If oz.nsazz us
Mr. MOLDfARL I have a couple allowed to proceed for $ addItional
more statements to make, but I would minutes.) - -
be glad to yield to the gentleman from
New Jersey.
Mr. EUOKES. I th ,i k the gentle-
man for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, let me say to my col-
league that I am sympathetic. If we
give enforcement authority, then we
should be protecting those who are en-,
forcing our laws. There Is no question
about that. ‘ -
But there Is more to the law enforce-
ment component than Just carrying a
weapon and a badge and being able to
make arrests. We ai s talking about
training. My colleague, the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. FwP o) Is talk-
lag about protecting Informants and
witnesses. That Is the province of the
FBL That Is the province of the U .S.
Marshals.
We already have a centralized law
enforcement component that does
that. We cannot proliferate those
types of functions and expect to have
a centralized system of law enforce-
ment around the country. The answer
Is, If we do not have FBI agents to pro-
‘-‘t informants, whether It be via-a-via
- ñuinp sites or whether I L be drug
., or whatever It be. then we
to be providing the Department
4’
-------
H 9138 - CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE November 8, 1988
fact, we would be depriving them of SI u ift thai we are sending lndMd- -even being considered lc’r esiginal
the tools thea’ are going to need. gals out Into the field every single day hiring. -
Mr. MOLLNARL Mr. Dusirman. I Who sie dealing with the most hard. I would be willing to aesept an
thank the gentlen-.an from New Jersey ened and heinous criminals, rIminAl . amendment along those lines, but the
(Mr. Fi.oiuo). He makes a good point, with long secordi and repeated of- employment practices of this Adminis-
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the f ” What we are mying to the ator and previous Administrators
gentleman from New York (Mr. Mo- people Who want to enforce the law k have precluded individuals without
LU(AAII has expired. -‘Oo out there unharmed, go out there that experience from obtaining these
- Mr. ECKART. Mr. Chairman. i naked. Do not allow yourselves, with jobs originally. In fact, these were
move to strike the requisite number j the kind of b ground and expert- highly desirable jobs until the in-
Words, and I rise in opposition to the enee that we hive documented so stances of violence and personal harm
amendment. thoroughly, the tools you need to do against our enforcement officers
Mr. Chairman, to pick up on the te- the job.N. - , .. became so commonplace.
marks of the subcommittee chairman, All we have to do Ii call the county Mi. Chah,nr 5 n. I think the gentle.
I think there has been an attempt to sheriff In a community In which these man’s suggestion is a grid one. I
create the strawman that what we dumps are loosted and ask them how would be willing to aecer such an
doing Is creating a secret police force many times they have been called and in cnthncnt. sud I would vcta in favor
of people who are either in hp si. gotten these too late. The simple fact of such as amendment.
ble or who lack the background, train- of the matter is that we cannot wait The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
tog, or expertise to deal with these for the U.S. marshal and we cannot gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ecx*rr)
lames. -.. • :. . Walt for the local sheriff to come baa expired.
As the subcommittee chairman so riding over the hill. We have t to (On - ‘equest of Mr. By az , and by
thoroughb’ seported, the individuils Silt ID the people wito are on the unanimous consent. Mr. Ecx .ut’r was
- currently. in the Criminal Enforce. frontline—yes, if we examine these re- allowed to proceed for 2 additional
ment Division of the EPA have numer Ports. the firing line—the tools to en- minutes.)
ous years of criminal estlgat - . force the existing Jaws.. ..,. Mr. m.lo . Mr. Chairman, will
— perience; for example. 13 years, as an The Is not a phantom police force. the gentleman yield?
FBI agent: 16 years. U.S. Treaswy, This is “ I” 1 ”um. basic protection that Mr. ECKART. I sin happy to yield
Washington, D.C., Police Department: Is going to go to people who, just In to my friend, the gentfriii n froni New
13 years, U.S. Treasury, Bureau of Al- these few offices alone, have accumu- j y,
cohol, Tobacco and Firearms: 5 years, lated almost 200 yeers of Bw aDforoe. Mr. HUG . Mr. Chairman. I
criminal experience; 23 years, Wash- went experlenee. - . “ thank the gentleman for yielding.
lngton, D.C.. and New York City Mr. Chairman. I think the amend- Mr. Chairman. I want to my also
Police Department: 13 years, USDA. ment runs the risk of exposing our mi- that I have eT mfned the credentials
The list goes on and on. - - portant environmental enforcement of many of these enforcement officers,
But of greater significance Is the officers to Increased risks and intimi- and they do have excellent credentials.
threat that these gentlemen have to dation. I think It Is not only Tnl ti1e . But as the gentleman from florida in.
dealw lth.It lsw ldelyknownthatwe vous,but lthlnk ltwouldlayatthe dicated,theretsnotlnglnthelegisla-
-. are not dealing with a bunch of panty feet of Congress a responsibility for at- tion that would require that there be
vaisted amateurs who view this m id. tacks that have grievously harmed and any type of traLning before these mdi-
gin dumping as their recreational frightened many individuals. viduals would be provided with a
tivity. - Mr. SHAW. Mr. Chairman, will the weapon, with arrest authority, md
What we are dealing with Is a highly gentleman now yield? - with search and seizure authority.
profitable enterprise that has been an- Mr. ECXART. I am happy to yield I think, first 0! all, that any effort to
filtrated at the highest levels by orga- to my friend, the gentleman from address the problems that exist should
nized crime and which exposes those florida. ‘ be In the context of a comprehensive
whose jobs are to protect both the en- Mr. SHAW. Mr. Chairman, I thank omnibus approach to It. not a piece-
vlronment and our citizenry from the gentleman for yielding, meal approach as Is being advanced
criminal activities to very egregious Mr. Chairman, I think the gentle. today.
and serious threata. / man has made a most persuasive argu- Moreover. I am concerned when I
Mr. SHAW. Mr. Chairman. will the ment In citing the credentials of many hes s ’ the suggestion that these investl-
gentleman yield? - . of those who would have these arrest gatOrs WoUld be investigating ora-
Mr. ECKART. Let me just finish my powers. However, I would hasten to Dined crime. Is the gentleman sugge-
point, and I will be happy to yield. I point out that this Is not a require- Ing that the nest thing we are going so
would like to go through this list first. ment within the bill. The law enforce. do Is give them wiretap authority? I i
- In Pennsylvania. a landfill operator mont training is not a requirement, that what the gentleman Is sugge
shoots two policemen, one fatally. In and what I am concerned about is Ing?
Chicago. £ landfill operator sims his sending somebody out In the field with Mr. ECKART. No. Mr. Chairman. If
bulldozer up against an Inspector. In a gun and giving him arrest powers If I may reclaim my time, I think tue
Rockland County, the sheriff”i office, he has not been trained in that partac- gentleman kiowa full ,IeI I that that Is
a lieutenant Is shot at. In Kentucky War area, not within the scope and purview of
and Qeoriga, Inspectors are forced There Is nothing In the bill on that what we mit considering here.
a iay from the site at gunpoint. In point, and I would ask the gentleman There Is nothing on the record that
Ohio. one of our inspectors is told: to point It out to me ill have misread suggests that the gent l.,i ans lugges.
‘Guyi with jobs like yours can get the bill. I do not see anything In the tlon Is what we sit asking for.
sh Ot.” - - bill that requires that law enforce- Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, will
In Oregon, one of our Inspectors is went training, and this is what some the gentleman yield further?
threatened—a threat to cut him up, of us on the Judiciary ConimlItee axe ‘Mr. ECK&RT. I am glad to yield
and stuff him into a 55-gallon drum, so desperately concer about ,. once again to the gentleman from New
In California, arson was used against Mr. ECKART. Mr. Chairman, If I Jersey.
an Inspector. In Oregon, a car is found may reclaim my time, I would point Mr. HUGHES. Unfortunately, Mr.
with its tires slashed. -. - - out to the gentleman, No.1, that none Chairman, the longer I am around
Mr. Chairman, the list goes on and of these individuals h ave less than 5 here, the more I realize how little law
on. Let me tell the Members what our years’ experience, and, JJo. 2, the enforcement agents talk to one an
“ “ectors were armed wlth .35 mUll- hiring practices within the administra- other, and what we axe seeing is a pro-
‘r cameras and half a dozen test Uon geeclude someone without that Uleratlofl of that. We cannot tn l-
- be ound aud from gale org 4 uime unless we do
43
-------
Nouember 1 l,1P83
- tave, first of all. wiretap authority.
These people do not do these things to
broad daylight -.
tr. ECICART. Mr. Chainnan, let me
urn my time.
r. BUGHE . We have to have the
- .. tlre capabilities of the law enforce-
merit component -.
t 11440 -
Mr. ECRART. Let me y 1 im y
Urne, if! may, Mr. Chairman.
I want to make absolutely dear that
I reabze that raising the specter of
wiretapping Is omethmg that may
sound good for the purpesus of debate.
The fact Is that this imue Is not before
us at this time. Let us settle that once
and for all.
Second, I would say to both the gen-
tleman from Florida and the gentle-
man from New Jersey that If the ques-
tion Is one of training and insuring
that we have adequately experienced
Individuals, I would be happy to accept
an amendment, and I think others in
the committee would join me. That
not the Issue. . -
The Issue Is whether you want to
send people out on the firing line, ex-
posing them to hazards that jeopard-
ha their health, safety. snd even lives,
IT the enforcement of this program.
I think If you support the amend-
ment you are running that rIsk, I
would urge defeat of the amendment.
Mr. KINDNESS. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike the requisite number of
— Chairman. our colleagues, those
who are on the floor engaging in
s debate and listening to it, know
y well that It Is a repetition of the
debates that have orz urred before,
some recently and some over a number
of years. where the same argwnents
are presented every time. The same
horror stories are presented every
time. The people change, the faces
change, the names change, the partic-
ular incidents, but It is the same sort
of thinr, “This particular cause is .0
bnportazit that we must set up a sepa-
rate police force for It, a separate, im-
coordinated police force.”
The gentleman from New Jersey.
whose amendment is before us. has
been trying to get across the poizg
quite properly that there must be a co-
ordinated ap 1 roach to the Investiga-
tions of organized crime. There must
be. in fact, the unusual tool of wire-
tapping available to such an Investiga-
tion In order to be effective In getting
at organized crime.
Now, you do not want the Internal
Revenue Service and their agents get-
ting ready to make an arrest for
income tax evasion es criminal ads
under the Internal Revenue Code, the
people from the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency getting ready to make
sri arrest for violations of the hazard-
s waste law, and some other Federal
ey getting ready to make an
at for their particular pe of the
or violation of It, and they all
fle together In an uncoordinated
fashion on the same day or the same
night and start shooting at each other,
Instead of getting the criminals—
right? ¶%at lsin extreme expression
of the ultb s1 potential that we are
Tattempting to create here, I suppose,
but it Is kind of like that.
You cannot have the separate on-
coordinated police forces working at
these various Federal gurposes, all of
which have their Importance in public
priorities, -. . . -
You cannot stand here and say In
good filth that the en! orcemeut of
the hazardous substance control Jaws
are mare important than a lot of ut r
Federal laws. Them are a of ps..ar-
Itlea . ‘ -
So let us not just look at this as If
this was the only place in which there
was a need for Jaw enforcement
powers. If you want to do an effective
job, U In good faith you really want
these laws to be properly enforced, let
us establish a procedure for the depu-
tizing of the EPA agents or officers on
a coordination basis that can be ban-
died through the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, through the Justice De.
partment, and try to beep the thing
together so that them Is an effective
Federal law enforcement effort and’
not a fragmented one, - - - -
I think that Is all that we really are
seeking here and probably all that is
being sought on both aides ci the
Issue. Let us be effective at It,
I would like to suggest that If the ef-
forts that, are going on at getting some
language worked out could be success-
ful, that Is probably the best way It
could be dealt with: but I would lies!-
tate to agree that this Is the one and
only place where you can take one ad
ditional step toward a greatly diversi-
fied Federal police activity. W€ have
done too much of It already.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike the requisite number of
words.
(Mr. DINOELL asked arid was given
permi i dam to revise and extend his re-
marks.) -
Mr. DINGELI Mv, Chairman, vise
In strong opposition to the amend-
ment.
Mr. Chairman, ft has been stated 10
us that this bill u-Ill create “ - Ive ex-
tension of the number of agents
charged with the responsibility for en-
forcement of Federal law. I think that
we ought to analyse to see whether In
tact that peril exists.
Well, it is like being pregnant. pon
me only be a little bit pregnant and
you em only have a little bit of prolif-
eration, .
Let me read first who has the kind
at liw enfor i ,i t suthord that
wamaeeklngtogtvetoEPA
The Department of Agriculture,
food stamp inspectors, tick inspectors.
the National Marine’ Fishery Service,
the Department of Labor-. OSHA. the
Nalinnil At?nnipherle and Oce
Aa y. the Intcrual Bewsuse Servise.
the Feed arid Drug AdwinigtnU
Fish and Wildlife ServIce enfondng on-
119139
dangered species Iaas. and the Veter-
aria’ Administration. Those are some.
but not all of’ the agencies that have
such authority.
Now. let us look at u bat the problem
Is and why the problem exists. Our
committee has been concerned with
the enforcement of the law. We began
a succession of hearings. Who did we
find Is In the business of Illegally
dumping In defiance of State laws and
to defiance of Federal statutes? Guess
who’ Organized alma, the Cosa
?4ostra. Why? It Is an immensely lucia-
tare business and it Is a business that is
tailor made for those who can sneak in
and dump a load of hazardous wastes
In the meadows of New Jersey.
Now, what are these wastes? They
are carcinogens. They are mutagens.
They pollute the water. They risk the
health of the people in the area.
The hazardous waste problem Is
probably the largest single environ-
mental problem we have In this coun-
try. We have 15.000 biown dumps,
some of which are , drnIntctered by
persons who are known violators of
the law, who have ci1min J records,
Let us lock at the record of the
criminal Investigators currently em-
ployed by the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency. None of them have less
than 5 years of experience With law
enforcement agencies that have exer-
cised law enforcement powers. We are
not talking about bumpkins. We are
talking about people who have law en-
forcement experience.
Now, why Is Law enforcement au-
thority needed?. IL La needed for a
series of reasons, arid I would like to
give the history of these events.
In January of 1983. there was a
unanimous report of the Subcornmlt.
tee on Oversight and Investigation
that recommended this authority,
after an investigation of the Involve-
ment of organized crime in the hazard-
ours waste tndInstI7
In May of 1983, the Commerce Com-
mittee reported a bill.
In June of 1983. the Judiciary Com-
mittee secured a sequential referral,
and they held a hewing. The former
Assistant Attorney General of the
Land and Natural Resources Division.
Mr. James Moorman appeared to sup-
port these powers being given EPA,
Later, administration’s recommenda-
tion was that EPA should request en-
forcement authority and deputazatlon
of EPA s law enforcement people as
si eeIa1 U .S. marshals. That matter
languished from that time through a
series of subsequent correspondence
with the Department of Justice, the
Initial part of which took place In
July. The date of the letter is July 7,
and Iwill put It In the Racoan at the
uate point .
The full letter toI s
-‘k oREs ior AI OR1Y— ’hdU E
43
-------
119140 -
PIOTseSIOw Acescv.
WasMngtos. D.C.. Jtdp ?. ZU&
Ron. Caaoi. E. Drewivi. -
Asnstan( AUome , Gewral. 1.4 ,4 aM Nctw-
m l Eeaoarom Dtvlasoa. Department of
J. alwe. Washington. UC.
Ds.ia MU. Dncaiits The pt o.e of this
letter Is to request your assistance, and that
of the Justice Department. in deputizing as
peelai Deputy United States Macahab the
amn 1nal investigators employed by the En-
trironinental Protection Agency (EPA). I —
.,wrlung at the yequest of the Admlnlatza&ce
of the EnvIronmental Protecu n Agmey.
In May of 1932. the EPA crented a Otmi.
nil Enforcement Division within the ligen.
ny ’s Office of Legal and Enforcement atm-
ml and bomo reeruitmerd ofa daft of .
ileneed criminal Investigators. This Tecnthk
.ment drive followed extensive Internal prep.
stations. Agency.wtde training and the de.
velopinent of substasitlal policy and piece-
durea for criminal ease development. The
of this oU aim followed reoet
of a January 1981 letter from former Altar-
ney General Benjamin Civiletti that con-
firmed EPA ’s Independent authority to In-
vest lgaie and refer environmental cr 1nal
eases (A copy of this letter Is enclosed for
your consideration as Attachment £1
By October. fIeld offices of the Criminal
iforcement Division had been created .th
five cities ia’ms the comitTy and staffed by
21 experienced Investigators. These nffws
were Initiated as $ part of an effort to
ensure effective environmental criminal en-
forcement at the Federal level, and exist to
hivectigate and refer for prosecution sigrilfi-
sent eases of environmental nilscnnduct
under EPA’. environmental statutes, -
Special Agents of EPA’s Criminal Enter ,.-
inent Division were selected from approxi-
mately 300 applk ni.v and have a “urn
fIve years of previous experience In a
jot Federal or Btate law enforcement
ncy where they have exercised the full
.rray of law enforcement powers, Including
the authority to make arrests, execute
om ninsn and esny fu
arms. (A review of the backgrounds of
EP.k’s Investigative siafI *8 w1, d
tachment B)
Supervisory agents In the live l eld offices
hare between 12 and 22 years of previous
experience as criminal thvestigators In law
enforcement agencies such as the U.S. Drug
Enforcement AdznInlstraUon the Federal
Bureau of lnvestlgauon the Bureau olAl-
cob ol. ToK F and Fzrcartes the Internal
Revenue Service; and the U .S. Customs
Service. Supervisory Investigators at EPA
Beadquartem have similar backgrounds. Fi-
nally. EPA ’. investigators have been elassi-
tied as GS-ISU criminal Invcstlgatoes. the
ctasstlicatlon that *8 heLd by
Investigators with the country’s major Fed-
eral laa enforcement agencies.
Much has been accomplished nider fl’A ’a
augmented criminal enforcement Initiative.
During the first eight months of fiscal year
1983. the Agency, working in jnnctlon
with the Department of Jmi .lce, has already
filed more criminal seam (9) and convw$ed
more defendants (19) than In any recent
year. Twenty-five grand July kwestlgati
ate now In progress around the country, and
the Agency a new inveatigathe stall baa
opened appios—ilely Ito fl eases. Of
this number, approximately one half In-
volve violations of the Resource Conserve-
tiozi and Recovery Act and the Superlund
law—reflecting the Agency’, present focus
on cases InvolvIng the Illegal d.ispo ,al of
wdoua and toxic waste. The contInued
Uvezims of thIs albert Is, we believe, hi
Interest a! FedemI Mw enforw wjmt
sally.
n t every thve,tig*tlon undertakes by
this Agency in the area of environmental
aIsccnth will involve extensive field in-
emtlgatlve work. Because of the type of per-
ions Involved In Illegal waste disposal, and
“ of the remote locations In atich en-
eb eninl criminal activity frequently
ocewa, these Investigation, inevitably In-
volve a degree of risk. In severs] lnvestiga-
Uons conducted by EPA. Criminal Enforce-
mcc l Division. bdIvl4pal targets have made
veiled or explicit threats concerning moper-
aLive wtts , In a number of others, In-
ve ,tlgatlon has disclosed past aimlnal ye-
cords, or thown evidence of violent behav-
ior. by subjecti of the inquiry. In one inirea-
tlga.tion, a firearm was discharged by an em-
ployee of the tar etted peny during an
herwim voutme fflpTh f oi,eratlon edja-
cent to the company’s property. (a review of
incidents Indicating the risks associated
with environmental Investigations ,is on-
dosed as Attachment C.) . -
In sum. the risks assodafe4 with environ-
mental In t gationa me th. nine as those
encountered In other moie traditional areas
of federal investigative work. Each of EPA’s
investigative staff has extensive f .muIi. . ’lty
with these type, of risks from employment
prior to joining the Agency,.
The absence of law enforcement authority
also places operational constraints on day-
to-day investigative activity that will inevi-
tably limit the Agency’s Independent ability
to enforce the criminal previsions of its, n-
vtronmentsl statutes. For example, without
arrest powers, EPA’s Investigative staff san
not prevent on-going illegal activIty, such as
roadside dumping, or detain a vehicle to
check It. manifests. sumiI. ly. EPA’s investi-
gative staff must enlist the support of an-
other law enforcement agency, Uce exam-
ple the U.& Marshals), In order to execute
criminal search warrants. EPA baa received
excellent cooperation from the U.S. Mar-
shals In search warrants executed to date by
the Criminal Enforcement Division. Nev-
ertheless, because such warrants can
extend over a period of several days, and
*cquontly emit in remote areas, they can
make heavy resource demands thatleIll
exceed the capabilities of local offices of
outside law enforcement agencies: these of-
f ices are. therefore. not always available
within the timetranie dictated by the Inves-
tigation or for the length of time necessary
to execute the warrant. (A review of oper-
ational difficulties encountered In environ-
mental Investigations due to the lack of en-
forcesnent powers Is enclosed as
D.)
The r aamciated with environmental
Investigations and the operational difficul-
ties encountered are generally not predict-
able In advance. As $ Imult, these problems
cannot be reliably addremed In a Memoran-
dum of Understanding with another law en-
farr,. . ,., t agency -
I also recognise, of comae, that the J 1ee
Department has traditionally supported
statutory law enforcement powers for ape-
‘—d -law offices outside 01
Abe Justice Department only where deer
and convIncing ec1dei of the need—devel-
oped over a suitable period of time—Is avail-
able. Because some may ftel that the eight
- months of experience of EPA’s Criminal En-
I —..-ent Division is an badeconte basis on
which to consider a permanent statutory so-
lution. I am requesting your assistance In
pursuing, as an Interim measure, the depu-
tation of Special Agents of EPA’s Criminal
Enforcement Division through the offices of
the United States Marshals Service. During
the period of the deputation, additional
em be performed c i the expeneme
of EPA’S criminal fliv IgatIve staff In tie
A —‘ em then be rr. -h t on tie
November .t 198S
.aned for statutory law
for SPAS Investigative stalL
In coordinating with the Marstisi’s Serv-
Ice. we are askIng that deputation suthoi’Ixe
lull law enforcement powers—including the
suUtorit3r to execute search warrants, make
arrests and carry firearms—for Special
‘Agents of the EPA Criminal Enforcement
Division: and further that the authority
cover the period considered neomasry for
the Justice Department to evaluate the
seed far statutory law enforcement .
for EPA’a Investigators. This authority
would be exercised by EPA’. investigators
dining investigations of (1) violatIons of the
environmental statutes implemented by
EP.4. and tli violations c i related Pe sl
islinhn& provasoni arising within the corn-
t of. or while pursuing, environmental In-
-vestlgat jona.
Because of the limited number of EPA [ n
westigitors, 23 total), and because of their
consistently high level of experience as law
enforcement off beta before j”‘” ( the
SPA, we are confident that deputation
would not unduly strain the resources of
the Marshals Service in monitoring the as-
tivIties of EPA’s Investigators during this
period of deputation, Equally important.
SPA’s Investigators would be able to assume
responsibility for a variety of rmource’in-
tensive functions, such as the execution of
extended criminal search warrants, that can
now place significant dw’.” on the m
sources of the Marshals Service.
I appreciate your amistance In this
matter, and am av iI. to sanst In any
waylsan. , - -
- Sincerely yowa,
M. Fence,
Special Covnzd te the 4dmtnut intcr for
Er&fomwment
On September 22. 1983. almost I
months, after the request wan made by
EPA of the Department of Justice for
law enforcement authority, no action
had been taken, no proper response by
the Department ol Justice.
EPA writes again *nd says as fol-
lows:
A further compromise Si the fomi of do.
putizatlon for half the field office or on an
agent by agent basis, depending on the
pending Investigation load, would not be on
acceptable solution. First, these Is no oced
for additional experimentation regarding
the experience of ow’ Investigative staff
without law enforcement power, they have
operated In this manner since the field of-
fices were established last October and con-
tinue to encounter the kind of problems
that were detailed In my earlier terser to
Cand Di . -
The full text of which follows:
U.S. Envnao ,. yan.
Paorxrriow Accacy. -
Washington, D.C. September 22. 2983.
Hon. Maxy
Deputy ds,uiant jgs,,.,,. , Ororruf, Lang
sad NationS Rezoig,vrs Thvsswc. L iE
Department of Juatwe, Wcsjiingiou, D.C
Dx i i Maay: This will serve to confirm ow’
recent discussions on the Issue of deputation
of the Investigative staff of EPA’S Criminal
Enforcement Division, and In particular the
proposal raised within the Justice Depart-
ment deputize agents In only two of thc
four main field offices within the Division,
The purpose of this proposal, as we under-
stand it, would be to allow for an expei-l-
mental period during which the experi
of agents acting as cial Deputy United
Btates Marshals could be compared In the
of w 41 ’ without t
-
cdNGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE
-------
November 3, 1983
A OU know. deputatirm was seen a. an
interim measure that would addresa the isa-
mediate problems being encountered in the
field while allowing same time to
the vppr , niateness of statutory law enftsee-
nient powers for E°Ag investigative staff.
Stated alternatively, the decisIon to pursue
deputation was Itself a onnprocijse in that
St would postpone the qUesLion of statULOr)
law enforcement powers unill the exen-
enec of £1-A’s Invesugatiie ataJf could be
owa] e ed at greater length.
A fuithe r compromise in me form of
deputation for half of the field offices, or on
Sri agent-b:t .agent basis depending on the
pending investigative load, would not be an
acceptable solution. First, there Is no need
for additional experimentatIon regarding
• the experience of em’ investigative ttaff
without law enforcement powers, they have
operated In this manner since the field of.
flees were established last October, and con-
tinue to encounter the types of problems
that are detailed be my earlier letter to
Carol Dinklns. -
Equally important, a dedaten t o deputize
less than all Investigators. or less than all
field offices, assumes distinctions between
bedlridual or field office os.celoads that do
not exist. Because the unit Is still email.
agents conduct InvestigaUons under all stat-
utes with no ef tort at spenaliration within
the staff. All conduct investigations In
which’ the need to execute search warrants
or two intervene In ongoing POllUtion ag,lvI-
ty exists. All conduct Investigations in
cli the potential for Ini1oTvs c fl rIsk Is
•nt. Any effort to eslect agents or field
es that would be the beneficiaries of
enforcement powers would necomrdy
-— an arbitrary me.
Deputation of ‘ than all investigators
- would ercate internal operational dill icul-
ties. Dual investigative procedures would be
requfred. flexibility In inter-field office In-
vestigations would be reduced, and different
• standards for performance evaluation of in-
dividual agents and field o f ices would be te
u Ired. - - -
Xqus,lly tinpoi’tazit. deputation ow a field
office basis would Inevitably result be ira-
equal enforcement of hazardous waste Jaws
across the country, since offices without law
enforcement powers would be unable to
pwme the more inrious and aggravated’
fonna of environmental misconduct that are
the reason for ibis wilt’s existence.
Fir.all . to state the obvious, a deddow to
deputize less than the entue liweaugauve
staff w , uld leave the remaining Investiga-
tors !ac ng the same problems, and poten-
- hal risks, that have been documented In in’
vestigations conducted to date.
- The ooanrnltment of the land and Natural
Resourees Dii ision to the de t of
an effectrie erwlronmen&al &n f .i
ment program has been demonstrated se-
peatedly In the past. !our support for
EPA’s efforts to secure deputation for Its In’
vestigatora has also been strong. For all the’
iwasons suited above, I believe that our posi-
tion must remain the same, and that we
should continue to seek full law enforce.
ment powers, in the form of deputation, Ira’
the entire uncstigatwe stalL,
Sineerel,y yours, —
Coourwr I L. Pesos,
Sprrf of Couasel/orZg/oreesaeaL
he CHAIRMAN, The time of the
Ueman from Midilgan baa expired,
V1450 -
Remember, this lett!r of Septomber
22 Is written to ask why the July 7
ommunicatiun eu EPA to the De ,art.
Inent of Juab e relative to deput-
Lion of EPA officers to carry out the
law had not been carried forward,
They are not nakmg for Wedal au-
thority. They sre asking for the same
authority that tick inspectors for the
Department of AgricUltUre have to
carry out the law.
The Department of J ustice has t
even responded in a 4-month pea’aod.
We are told that the Department of
Justice will act promptly arid expedi-
tiously. The other day the debate re
wealed that the Department of Jus j e
had not resolved 50 percent of the
large number of suits that were filed
several years ago. This Is hardly the
kind of record that my good 1r end
from the Judiciary Committee, fol’
whom I have the most intense respect
and affection, can level either a proper
defense or an adequate daim that the
Department of Justice Is carrying out
Its proper and lawful responsibilities.
Let me cite to the House some aitua-
tioris thai. I think are Important. In
the New York Times an article ap-
peared October 26 pointing out that
the need still exists for law enforce-
merit authority for this kind of officer,
and points out that people have been
shot, or shot at and that cars have
been burned and a number of other
unfortunate events directed at EPA
law enforcement investigators are
taking place. That article follows:
IFrees tbe Slew Yo,t T mes, Octo ’ li. 15631
Vionirir £crs Psowpr Dsa*sz Ovse Outs
iO EPA AWTS
Oes.aawo. Pi*., October 25.— ra1
agent and two tethnicans from Atlanta
went to the bac&woods of Alabama recently
to gather samples of sod and water near a
bt1 in suspected of fli. 5 DIIy dumping
toxic chemicals
Someone fired a revolver over their beads.
The men, sent by the Environm.nt.al Pro-
tection Agency, dIved behind stacks at
rusty, ooning 55-gallon drums. When the
bullets stopped, the three fled, unhurt,
their work incomplete.
That Mardi 17 dent was owe of a
doses violent or potPnti ily violent sites’
lions to confront E.P.A. agents once the
agency began its criminal Investigation pro.
graze a year ago. As word of the Incident
wrcad through the agency’s five cirnilnal
investigation field office, some of the 22
agents began ea lng wespone for proton’
tin, according to one who asked not to be
Identified. In so doing, they were breaking
thelaa.
‘Whether the law should be Changed St
now’ being debated In Wsshln tcri.
The Braise 01 EepiesenzaiAves Is eched.
ofed this week to begin considering amend
to the Resource Csniervatksa arid
Rmavce’y Ant of 1576, which g the
119141
wu.tl Of baasrdoes waste. One prwo
Change, favored by many In Congress. would
give Powers akin to those of United States
niarah ls to environmental Investigators en-
forcing that law The agents would be an-
powered to carry weapons. execsize search
warams arid make arre ,
apresicismanow P0 BOtASU
“To really get at the big guys, where
there’s political corruption and organized
niume,” said a lawyer on the staff of a House
subcommittee that deals with environmen•
tal laws, “you need full amwilnal enforce-
went p n”
But the Reagan Sdminstratlon Is Ian
er to see n i powers given to E.P.A
agents,
At&arne General William French BuIth
could use his administrative authority so
grant the investigators law.enforcernent
powers without Congesslonal action, And he
could. In one action, do so with regard to all
the 16 environmental laws Congress would
ve to - “i”’.’l
But F. henry Havltht 2d. the Acting As-
sistani Attorney General for land and natu-
ral resources, said “The granting f the
power to carry a gun and make arrests is a
serious, sign ifloant step, and so It’s some-
thing the ezecultve branch as a whole needs
to make sure there Is enough information
shout” -
Michael Brown, the out olng erimbial en.
foiceinent counsel for the E.P.A., noted that
other Federal agents, such as these for the
Federal Bureau of Investigation and the
Bureau of Alcohol. Tobacco and Firearms.
are authorIzed to carry weapons, lie also
said that “tick Inspectors” for ‘the Depart-
ment of Agriculture were so authorized
At the same time, however, he said’ “The
question of a criminal investigation program
at any place but the F.B.I raises Govern.
menta ide issues People In the Federal Gov-
ernment get nervous about a little bunch of
law-enforcement agents running around the
various agencies carrying guns.”
Those who favor the use of weapons cite
Increasing evidence of ot-ganised crime’s ni
volvemerit In the illegal disposal of WJ,rc
wastes.
Law.enforcement powel’s ate “desperately
needed now, said Representative Albert
Gore Jr., Democrat of Tennessee, “The
reason for this Is the extraordinary degree
to which Illegal activities are going on in the
hazardous waste area, and oonvizicingly evi-
dence of the Invohement of orgrnl’ d
SOS CASE a paoa ns
Peter Beeson. associate enforcement coun-
sel for the environment agency, said it a-as
Impossible for agents to tackle cases tnvolv-
trig mobsters when they mull not protect
themsehes with guns.
“Currently, we are not equipped to inves-
tigate the Involvement of organized crime In
the hazardous waste Industry,” Mr. Beeson
said ‘That is the type of Investigation that
would require frail law !oieesnent authori-
ties.”
An biterusi svIrorunentaj Protection
Agency document obtained from Congres-
sional sources details 12 violent or potential-
ly violent encounters that occurred after
the agency began crIminal iin’eztigaUons,
The lot, titled ‘Risks £t ti1(ed With ivl-
ronmental Investigations,” includes these
incidents. -
An informant Ins Chicago-area hazardous
waste disposal place was warned that he
would be murdered if he continued to coop-
erate with the authorities.
In the Phihee hIs ores, e mopect In a
basardous waste In *,UOn fired on gate
bopectmi a ’” a male air gir , .- 1or .
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE -
Following discuedons with- my gaff, I (By tn thnOt consent, Mr. Du’car ,L
leinain of the opinion that EPA’s entire hi- - allowed to proceed tarS addiuonal
vestigatf,e staff should be deputized, arid ie - -
- ‘ rate our earlier request of July ‘ 1,1013 for idz. DINGELL. I would obeerve, Mr.
- anistance In pursuing these authorl- C nUIan. that EPA has, first of all,
ldeiitthed a number of very serious
problems which have been reported In
the press,
-------
H 9142
released attack do on Oovemment . r
wert 1ly thimtened other off Ic s .
In the &aLUe areaa pe susponad of
Illegal d pi w Ii,ebosabed a bawdow
wsstesltc. -
Officials of the EPA. and the Justlee D.-
partment would sot diacuu the Ikted en-
counter.. the shooting incident in
Atabtm& . -
Let us talk a little further about the
ve rd of EPA and the r ITd of the
Department of Justice.
• In Chiesgo, a citizen informant bad
his life threatened, end he Is informed
that these Is a contract on his life if
be persists In cooperating with the an-
thoritles ,
• In Seattle. the primary tergi of an
nvest1gat.km In the past has navenged
for the fire bombing of former buss-
nesses. trafficked In narcoties, threat-
ened to kill business associates and dis-
pose of the r m.nina In a ttazardoia
waste_ -
in Seattle. two rgets of an investi-
gation have records for illegal dis-
charge of weapons. A third has made
threats against Oovernxnent witnesses.
An EPA Investigator In Atlanta, Ga ..
while performing routine sampling.
was discovered by a company employ-
ee who fired warning shots at the
teeimicai personnel from a revolver.
Officers of EPA are shot at.
The Department of Justice ean
make no showing that they have done
anything about this. - - -
Mr. RODINO. Mr Cha1rma , will
the gentleman yield? -
Mr. DINOELL I yield to the gentle-
man from New Jersey.
Mr. RODINO. I thank the gentle-
jflRfl for yielding. -
I would like to state that the gentle-
man does make a case—j- -
Mr. DtNCELL Then the gentleman
should withdraw his amendment.
Mr. RODINO Icontinuingi. Showing
that there are Instances where there Is
aneed .
- What I am sa, ng through o
amendment Is that there ought not to
be this proliferation of Jaw enforce-
ment authorities. There ought to be
coordination between agencies. You
would agree that law enforcement ojfI-
ocr should be individuals who are at
least trained In carrying out law en-
forcement duties.
- Mr. DINGELL. I thank the gentle-
man. and I will respond and I will say
yes. EPA has been addng the Depart-
ment of Justice to deputize their
people. they have not received that de-
putization. EPA has done some other
things EPA has requested that ILS.
Marshals from the Department of Jus-
tice cooperate In these kinds of Investi-
gations. • -
I will tell my good friend that by the
time the cooperation Is available, the
basis for the lnvestlgtlon may be so
shifted by the persons who will be in-
vestigated, that there is nothing to In-
vestigate, and I am saying that a
major enforcement case of this kind
ty go down the drain by reason of
time that It takes to motivate u
.thlLate the rather slothful people it
e Department of Justice who are
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —- HOUSE
supposed to interest themselves In the
protestlon of the public health.
Mr. RODINO. Mr. Chairman. will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. DINGELL. I yield to the genUe
wan from New Jersey.
Mr. RODINO. I thank the gentle.
man for yielding.
Would the gentleman agree that
these should .be a demonstration of
need, though, fri order to deputize
these investigators? -
Mr. DINGELL Well, let me go on
and read some of the other evidences.
Mr. RODINO. I ask the gentleman If
he would respond to that.
Mr. DINGELL. Absolutely, and tire
saying that we have found that there
lanced. -
I am telling the gentleman that EPA
has had hat In hand, and It Is now
nearLy 6 months. In early July EPA
went to the Department of Justice to
ask that people be deputized. The De-
partment of Justice has ignored that
matter until this very date, In spite of
the hearings that were conducted by
the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Fi.oaso), chairman of the eubcommlt-
toe. - . -
The CHAmMAN. The thr e of the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dra-
um.L) has expired.
Mr. DINGEL.L. Mr. Chairman. I ask
smaninious consent that I be permit-
ted to proceed for 3 additional min-
utes. - . -
The AIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Michigan?
Mr. DNESS. Mr. Chairman, re-
serving the right to object, and I do
not Intend to object, I just wanted to
draw the attention of the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. Dawcv .L) to the
fact that I would like to have him
yield part of the time he might have
1ima ln1ng .
Mr. DINGELL I will be delighted to
yield to anybody here if I am permit-
ted the time.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. DzxcE.I)?
There was no objection.
(By unanimous consent, Mr. Dzwczu.
was allowed to proceed I or 3 additinnal
+TnItCs. )
Mr. DINGEIL Let tis point out the
kind of good citizens we are dealing
with here. The target of a RCRA In-
vestigation flrebombed a hazardous
waste disposal site, has a prior record
for resisting arrest and assault am a
police officer. We are not talking
obout EPA investigative folks that
play patty cake. They are Investigat-
ing coldhearted killers. not ladies-
bridge clubs They are Investigating
members of organized crfme.
Mr. RODI1JO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield further?
Mr. DINGELL I yield ignin to the
gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. RODINO. 1 thank the gentle.
man for yt.M ig
.0! course. I agree with the gentle.
man. We all agree that there should
Wouember:, i98S
be law enforcement. What we ire
merely stating Is that this law enforce-
ment ought to be predIcated en need.
on the need to deputize these Individ-
uals to carry out these responsibilities.
Mr. DINGILL. Will the gentlemen
explain why a request for deputizing
EPA officers to enforce the law has
not been acted on for nearly 6
by the Department of Justice?
Mr. RODINO. I cannot answer that.
but I would agree with the gentleman
that we will help the gentJ tnsn by
agreeing to—
Mr. DINGELL. Oh,, the gentleman
held hearings on this matter. The gen-
tleman has erade the suggestion at the
beginning of that 6-month period that
these people ought to be deputized.
The Department of Justice has done
nothing, nothing, and we are not talk-
ing about people that play patty cake.
We are not talking about ladies’ bridge
clubs. We are not talking about semi-
narians, but people that shoot big
black guns and firebomb other folks’
businesses.
Mr. KINDNESS. Mr. Chairman. will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. DINGELL. I yield to the gentle-
man from Ohio. s
Mr. KINDNESS. I Th nk the gentle-
man I or yielding.
I think there is one other aspect
that perhaps has not been touched on.
and I would like to ask the gentleman
his response to this: Is It not true that
In the case of organized crime, and the
sort of criminals that the gentleman is
referring to, you must have a coordi-
nated approach In case there are other
Investigations going on? Ii. is desirable.
I take It, hi the gentlemanz view. to
have that coordinated, so that the var-
ious violations of law that are being in-
vestigated would be dealt with togeth-
er?
Mr. DINGELL I applaud coordina-
tion. I think It should be done. I detect
no coordination, because I do not see
that the Department of Justice has
even cooperated the first time.
I yield further to the gentleman
from Ohio (Mr. Ki anso6.
- Mr. KINDNESS. The gentleman
touches am a very good point, but pa’-
haps sees It In a different light than I
do: and that Li. have we supplied the
Department of Justice with adequate
resources In order to be able to re-
spond to all these various fragmented
needs?.
Mr. D1Wu L I! the gentlemen
would permit, we know the Depart-
ment of JustIce does not have ade-
quate resources. That Is one of the
.reasons we are concerned. but we also
know they have not done the job. EPA
cannot do the job because they do not
have the authority.
All we are asking Is EPA have the
same authority that tick Inspectors at
the Department of Agriculture im e
right it this Instant
Mr. KINDN Mr Cbab wm
the gent løman yleld?
‘4;
-------
Nouember 3 1983
Mr. DINO 2L I yield further to the
rnUeman from Ohio.
Mr. KINDNESS. I thank the gentle-
n for again yielding.
:o cite another example of the prob-
m, we have task forces being formed
all over the country for the enforce-
ment of the drug laws and against or-
ganised crime. 12 of them around the
country, for the very purpose of deal.
tog with this problem of coordinating.
Why do we not coordinate the tune.
tions to begin with?
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. D xx-
J_) has again expired.
(By unanimous consent, Mr. Diwcsu.
was allowed to proceed for 3 additional
minutes.)
Mr. DING L. I do not object to
that; I have no objection to coordina-
tion. I think It Is a splendid Idea, but
the problem Is we have this hazardous
waste s!tuation In hand.
Let me give the gentleman one other
thing: Two people who arc being inves-
tigated right now for RCRA violations.
the first has a record for murder and
larceny; the second for sodomy and
in piracy and extortion.
01500 —
These are not people who play
patty-cake. They are not nvestlg itng
ladies’ bridge clubs.
The health Issue here with regard to
- hazardous waste Is one of the worst
‘ 1 aL we have and one of the worst
‘blenis we have in the country. We
e organized crime, which Is func-
,nlng In stolen trucks to ferry this
uff to illegal dumping grounds. We
have people from EPA who are gewng
shot at. We have them lequesting au-
thority from the Department of Jus-
tice to deputize their people. We have
them reQuesting that the Department
of Justice take action. They are not.
We have two letters’from Mr. Ruck-
elshaus’ EPA. which I have included
with these remarkd, asking Depart-
ment of Justice cooperation and re-
ceiving nothing in return.
Mr. KINDNESS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. DINOELL. I am glad to yield to
my friend.
Mr. KINDNESS. 1 thank the gentle-
man for those Illuminating remarks.
But, you know, let us suppose those
trucks to which the gentleman refers
that are stolen trucks and are hauling
waste in one dlrectlon—4 couple of
years ago we heard the argument
about food stamps being hauled
around in similar fashion. Maybe they
are doing that on the return loads—let
us coordinate the efforts to get at ’
both of those types of law breaking.
Mr. DINGELL. Let me just point out
the gentleman argues in theory, and If
the Judiciary Committee can bring the
Department of Justice to move on this
ilnk It will be a splendid thing and I
Id applaud i da labor and I will
end to him cooperation.
must y that my patience, the -
ice of the (,nmTnittee of which I am
* Th . mher. , with the Department of
Justice ha record of law enforce-
Is now exhausted. About 50 per-
cent of the prosecutions that have
been referred involving cases of immi-
nent endangerment to the public
health—that Is not talking about
something that may mean somebody is
going to get poison Ivy or athlete’s
foot, that means a whole community Is
endangered ..from carcinogens £nd
things of that kind—hate not been re-
-*olved by the Department of Justice.
We have here organized crime dump-
Ing illegally In every area, including
the marshes of New .J sey. We have a
situation where we minot get the De-
partment of Justice within a 6-month
period to simply deputize EPL
Now, EPA again, I say. Is not investi-
gating Girl Scouto They are Investi.
tthg eold•hearted people who i e
rebombs and big black guns.
I yield to my good friend.
Mr. KINDNESS. th nk the gentle-
man for yiclding. -
I s ould Just urge then that the gen-
tleman very seriously consider some
language that will be offered. I under-
stand, which comes very closeJ o get-
ting this kind of coordination and get-
ting the cooperation of the Depai-
nient of Justice that the gentleman Is
seeking. I think It would be highly
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, I
yield back the balance of my time. -
Mr. GORE. Mr. Chairman, I move to
strike the requisite number of words
and rise to speak against the amend-
ment. - -
The debate has been going on for
quite some time and I think by now
the need Lor law enforcement powers
for EPA’s criminal investigators, both
on operational grounds and onfety
grounds, Is Quite clear. -
Back in July 1 Inserted Into the Cole-
CamSIONM. Racoan a list of 24 episodes
Involving Investigators of hazardous
chemical dump sites that had been
threatened with violence In one way Or
another by the targets of those Inves-
tigations.
I Include those again for the Infor-
mation of my coileagues.
The material referred to foflowE -
as !wasca ’nows or Vioz.anca m
ERONMENTAL Caiiasaj. 111V551’IGATIONs
‘Pennsylvania landfill opecaLor shoots beD
pol1 en, one fatally (Criminal Enforee-
esent Division).
Pennsylvania State DEft Inspector’s car
___ family threatened In 1 a4sWwn.
Pm.. .,l—nia (Criminal Enfm -nt D lvi-
Arson of house of witness against convict-
ed landfill operator, April 1979 (Criminal
Enforcement Division).
ufl and 10 miles vehicle chase of D
contract inspector (RCRA) by b .ndfffl spar-
Stars (Criminal Enforcement Division).
Six potential wisnessea In Moyer landfill
prosecution (U.S. V. Ianigan) received death
threats, or had homes burgled and property
destroyed (Criminal Enforcement Division).
Poysicil assault tsi State .fr visr
w m Dnergan
Discharge of ucipon over beads of State/
P leal etoi, J ergeacy
- ...-—,. ,-S.. .
119143
Arson of family residence discourage
competition Icw County landfill businco in
New Jersey (Criminal Enforement Division).
Threat with shotgun on local police of Ii-
em’ during surveillance of -hazardous waste
hauling In Rockiand County. 1kw York
(R.ockland County Police).
Threats on investigat& with W.Y.S. Orga-
nized Crime Task Force during hazardous
waste tnvesugauon (N.Y.S. Oxasrused Crane
Task Force).
Assault on lieutenant. Rockland County
Sheriff’s Office, during surveillance of haz-
ardous waste hauling (Roddind County
Sheriff’s Department).
In Kentucky (1912) and Georgia (1916)
EPA £n ctom were forced from sites at
rim point iCr; uinal EnIcr ent Division
LtJanta FIeld O iicea).
In Jennings, FlorIda (1975) EPA employee
physically assaulted by trucking company
president (Criminal Enforcement Di%lslon
(Atlanta Field Office)).
f *lah wna (1981) and Florida (061).
EPA Inspectors received verbal threats of
physical violence if they continued their
work (Criminal forcenient Division (At-
lanta Field Office)).
In South Carolina (1976 and 1979) EPA
pesticide inspector was twice threatened at
knife point (Criminal Difozi ’ inpnL Division
(Atlanta Field Office)).
In Ohio (1979), EPA b c&or verbally
threatened rguys with Jobs like yours can
get shot”) during oil wW investigation
(Criminal Enforcement Division (Chicago
Field Office)).
Target of Oregon Investigation baa threat.
ened to cut up and stuff disloyal employees
into 55 gallon drum Criminal fozcemenI
Division (Seattle Field Office).
Targets of Washington Investigation have
prior arrests for weapon offenses and/or
have made threat.s against potential wit-
nesses Criminal Enforcement Division (Se-
attic Field Office).
Target of California Investigation (arson
of landfill) has prior record for resisiung
sevest and . uIt on police officer Crimina
Enforcement Division (Seattle Field Olfice.
Targets of Alabama lnvesugaUon habit-
tinily possess and carry fireaTms Criminal
Division (Atlanta Field
Office).
Targets of RCRA surveillance (truck driv-
ers) believed to wry weapons Criminal En-
foroement Division (Chicago Field Office).
Evidence of organized crime involvement
In waste disposal business In Cleveland,
Ohio Criminal Enforcement Division (Chi-
cago Field Office).
Evidence of use of stolen vehicles is trans-
portation of hazardous u-sate In Cleveland,
Ohio Criminal En! oreat Division c-
cago Field Office),
Target of Illinois RCRA investigation nor-
mally ..ccompe.nled by two bodyguards
Criminal Enforcement Division (Chicago
Field Office).
Mr. GORE. Some elmila , examples
‘e been referred 10 In the debate al-
ready. These examples constitute the
single strongest argument agan g the
pending amendment. threats with
shotguns, death threats, EPA Inspee-
tors forced from sites at gunpoint,
EPA Inspectors facing threats of phys-
ical violence, threatened at knifepoint
in two States, and the list goes on and
on. -. -
There are many other cues where
Investigators have been unable to stop
vehicles hi the wocesa of illegally dx.
posing of toxic che,rnr sk and have en-
countered lengthy delays in executing
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE.
-------
ouemberS, .1982
46 3
H9L44 : .
coN G ESSIONAUREcoRD—Hc USE
search warrants simply because they
Mr. BUGHF . Does the and on a basis of the showing of need.
do not ha’re law erdos ent powers.
realise that Mr. Moorrnan left the Jiss- deputize qualified employees of the
Ito argument in avor of the
lice Depaflment in 1981! That mesxm Environmental Protection Agency to
• amendment is that you have to dem-
be has not been there In about 2 years. serve as special deputy U.S. marshals
onstrate a need for them to have law
Second. ‘when asked the uesUon. In criminal Investigations with respect
enforcement powers. We have ‘4 ” .-
atrated a need to? them to have law
and ! vu Mr. Moonnans se- to violations of the criminal provisions
yes that there probably is a of this act.
enforcement All over the
need for the firearms thlng. That I think that addresses the concerns
United States the need is clear.
was his total response. raised by my colleague from Ohio and
We have also heard that at the Judi-
Mr. 00HZ. For the v ? others that we have only qualified in-
ry Committees own bearings this
Mr. RUO . Ibe firearms diwlduals that serve as deputies.
summer the former Assistant Attorney
0eneral, one .f the people most
knowledgeable about hazardous wastes
In this counDy. James Moorman. testI
fled In strong support of giving law on-
forcement powers to EPAs erimiimi
Investigators and it us after that t
‘A formally requested ft.
“We have heard that since that time
the Justice Department has done abso-
lutely nothlr g- - ..
Let me Just uste from o of
letters that ‘was sent it the direction
thIng ‘ - - I think It addresses the questions
Mr. UOR .E. Reclaiming my e . raised by my colleague from Michigan
course lhvrv is a need for them tø wh d cates that the Attorney Gen-
have this authority and I am very f i.- era] ; as not respon&id to the concerns
‘ ‘ I ’ with Mr. Moorman. A goad of the 1 tironm nta1 Protection
bomber of people left the Justice Dø- 1gesxy in deputizln or othersise pro-
p itineflt to 188L • • ‘viding support for those Investigations
But for the ge ” ’s Information. where In tact there Is some fl
cur enmm ttee. chaired by m 001 I think It addresses the concerns
league from Michigan, has had some raised by most all of the Members who
40 hearIngs on the dangers ft rleId have raised questions on the floor
with Illegal d ”i 1n of hazardous about the procedures Involved, about
chemicals, and on several occasions the coordination involved, because
of Mr. Ruckeishaus. It, says:
The absence of law enforcement a athorftg
places opersuonal osnstvalnts on day to-day
Investigative activity thai. will inevitably
limit the agencya independent abnity to en-
Mr. Moorman has testified at length im this particular scenario the De
about the problems. - . tt of Justice would still r. akn
I daresay there Ii no or In the Jus . - a--
tine Department before or since who
h.- more . .‘ - 0 IMP •
force the. a-iminal eov s1oce of lie cnv1i -
om
- Re goes en. I will not read the
entire text. •
BUt Still, 00 aetlOfl h 55 beefl taken
by the Department of Justice. -
And as recently as I month ago, it
the direction of Mr. Ruckelsbaus, the
request was renewed once again. Let
me quote from this letter s1gn . d by
Courtney U. Price, opeciBi COUflS el for
enforcement at EPA. He ‘ be
Ileve our ‘osttion must cmaln the
same, that we should continue to seek
full law enforcement powers.
S
the Department of Justine.
So the time has come for us to act in
this Congress by giving EPA criminal
Investigators law enforcement powers
to get serious about stopping the 41-
- lags) disposal of baiardous chemical
wastes, to equip them to deal with the
Involvement of organized crime In the
• hazardous waste Industry. EPXa
otiminal enlorounent program must
create a yf . )l ik ’ deterrent in lact as
‘well as in ,sem. . - , - .‘ - -
Let me point out, Mr. Chairman,
- people— .28 enforcement officers at
this point--and It Is critical to note
that every single onto! them affected
has a ,,dnimum of 5 years’ experience
with other law enforcement agencies
such as the PBL the Customs Service,
and the Drug Enfos went A ”
tration. .
Mr. Chairman, if Members Wa .nt to
protect our country against Illegal d l i-
poml of hazardous wastes. if they
Want the best admhdstThtIOfl of the
laws prohibiting irresponsible and Ii-
legal disposal of hazardous wastes,
they will certainly vote down this
nending amenthnent
It. BUGHE Mr. Chairman. ‘wifi
gentleman yleM? - -
It. OOHLI yield to gentleman.
day4o .day problems encountered by Mr DING L Mr. Chairman. will
the EPA and by other Oovemu ent the gentleman yield?
apectora in -‘ing -with 1130 problems Mr. HUGHES. I wbuid be happy to
associated with hazardous chemical yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
wastes. I think he still stands as the Mr. DINGELL. tli ti-
leading expert on this problem. man for y4 Id1ng -
It be l not sufficient for the gentle- Mr. ChaITnt O. Ih er Ueman
man, I would cite Mr. Ruckeisbaus tell me what the difference between
the ñm,i t be offers now and .
ict in a pitiful . -
fashion, week after week, month “ Mr. HUGH . Well, the differences
month. askfrig and plmi1lng for Is that this Is now mandatory, this
very authority which the Justice D: says that the Attorney Genera] shall.
partesent continually refuses to give Mr DINGELL. It is not. ft is
th - of-I.
Lie we ba JUSt elt bert *04 do 00th Mr. HUG . Upon the showing of
log in the face of that reerud?
lb. ‘The time has come to act. These need.
people can use this authority. This an- Mr. DINOELL. What Is a showing of
need?
tho y is essential and the m lii. sm.arszm. t would say tomy l-
m be
, -— league that If in fact the Administra-
toT of the EPA has cu ’ ’.”Icmted to
the Attorney General that there is a
Mr. HU( I1J S. Mr. specific Investigation underway which
a perfecting a n,eig requires a special deputientlon and
-y Committee amendment. - - substantiates that with the nature of
The Clerk read is follows: - - the continuing Investigation. present-
be tog evidence of a risk to the safety of
amendment of fernd by the Individuals pursuing the In . , tstlga .
Recess: Page 33. strIke out 1 and n that tion or showina that In fact the croupa
follcvedownthroughllnel2oapsge)4wd have some connection to organized
1” ’ ‘‘-• . crime as has been raised during this
I*W AVi O5flY.-..43) debate, then *mder those circum-
MtliTbey G _mi shall. at the rsqu
01 the Adnun1unt tend on ito t*ale a deputim-
W li4 01 weed.l deputto qualified
Phoywa of the i ivfroamentsl protection Mr. DINGELL. I ! the gentleman
Agency to serve se Spe al Deputy United would yield further, can the gentle- -
States Mazshslz In -*minai Investlgatamw man tell me what this would do?
,wlth to wloleUs 01 the ‘niminal 3bow. a letter was sent on July 7
of (kM Sd. - - - IrOm .EPA to the Department ot Jus-
Mr. RUG . Mr. Chairman. I Uce requesting that they do appoint
think thai. this amendment addresses officers of EPA as deputy msj h
the concerns raised by my colleagues - Subsequently In September on the
from New Jersey and It In date that! have Indiented earlier, Sep-
essence provides that the Attorney tectbeT , a further letler requ. s iw
General shall, and shall is mandatory, a g tmas .W the ! letter sod
at the i nest of the Adsnimatrator of giving .AitIEIfmal lasts sos forwarded
the Ei ments1 Protection Agency, to the Department of Justice by E PA.
-------
1 eie has been no response to
either and there has been no action on
‘tther. - . -
Now, In each Instance they set forth
.ause to sustain their request. They
o1nted out the kind of folks they
have been dealing with, sodomists,
murderers, persons who have been
charged with the bombing, things of
that kind. People who operate with
atolen trucks and folks who discharge
large black guns at EPA officers were
the kind of folks they were after. -
flow. Justice has done nothing.
What will this amendment do to the -
situation In which we find ourselves 1
What will the Department of Justice
have to do’ A basis of cause has been
established by EPA. Nothing has been
done by Justice. - -
Mr. HUG . Well, we did not have
this procedure In place, I might y to
my colleague. This procedure has not
been In place. This Is a mandatory re-
quirement that upon a showing of
need by the Administrator, the Attor-
ney General must deputize a special
agenL . . . -
Under pre t law that is not 1w-
-qufred.
Mr. DINGELL. Who makes the find-
Ing as to need’
Mr. HUGHES. Well, the Attorney
General In the final analysis is going
to have to. -
Mr. DINQELL The Attorney Oener-
L Well, the Attorney General then
as the authority to make a finding of
.eed and If he finds there Is no need
does not even have to respond to
the correspondence. And tie has not
been responding to the correspond-
ence so tar. And our problem is we
cannot even get the Department of
Justice to answer Its mall where en.
forcement authority Is requested.
Mr. HUGHES. I must say to my col-
•league (Mr. Du cn.i.)’I am not going to
stand here and apologize for the Jus-
tice Department. They do not answer
y mail, once in a while. But let me
J say to you the answer is not to
create another special police force In
another agency of Government; the
answer Is to try to Improve the mecha-
nism whereby the law enforcement
agencies respond to the legitimate
needs and concerns of other agencies.
But the answer Is not a further pro-
liferatlosi of law enforcement because
you are not going to get that coordina-
Mr. DINO L UI gentleman
tell me whether the tick Inspectors of
the Department of Agriculture have to
establish a showing of need In order to
carry firearms to serve process? • -
Mr. HUGI . Mr. Chairman. I have
not yielded to the gentleman any fur-
ther. May I just recapture my time for
a moment?
I want to my to the gentleman that
iere are enforcement officers In the
epartiuent of Labor who can make
ie very same case b e g niade by the
nironmental Protection Agency.
— Mr. DZN FLL And they have.
Mr. Many people who are
Inspecting wage snd hour and other
violations do come hi contact with or-
ganized crime officials. I might say to
my colleague there are times when the
Civil Rights Commissioners end their
Investigators come in contact with
people who do not like them, where
there Is confrontation between th
The CHAIRMAN.’The time of the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Hucma) has expired.
tEy m Yth, Ous consent, Mr. Bunnas
was allowed * proceed for 2 additiOnal
m inutes.)
Mr. HUG I say to my colleague
to all due respect the answer Is not to
create a mini-police force In every
agency and department of Govern-
ment, otherwise you would end up
with hundreds of law enforcement
agencies hi all the agencies and de-
partment,s and commissions of the
Government. And I would hope that
my colleague would see the wisdom of
putting in place a structure that will
address his concerns. -
In this Instance the Attorney Gener-
al is mandated upon request and upon
the showing of need to deputize.-
Mr. FISH. Mr. Chairman, will, the
gentleman yield? - ‘
Mr. HUGHES. I yield to my col-
league from New York. -
Mr. FISH.! thank the gentleman for
yielding. - - -
Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the ml-
nority of the Cmiimittee on the Judici-
ary, I think this amendment addresses
all of the questions that have been
raised as the gentleman Indicated In
presenting this amendment.
I am very happy to accept It.
Mr. RI7G . I thank my colleague
from New York, the distinguished
ranking minority member of the full
Committee on the Judiclarj.
Mr. SHAW. Mr. Chairman, wfll the
gentleman yield?
Mr. HUGHES. I yield to the gentle-.
man from Florida.’
Mr. SEAW. I fh * the gentleman
for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to also
congratulate the gentleman (Mr.
Rucnss) for a very fine amendment.
In listening to the debate, It is perfect-
ly obvious we all want the same thing.
everyone here on both sides of the
original mnendment and now as to the
gentleman’s amendment, I think we
have to at least assume that people In
Government are g’ ing to sometime act
wisely and peitapa that. is a nile
rather than the exception.
I would say to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Diwamu.) In talking
about some of the problems he has
had with the Justice Department, that
the gentleman from M1c ugan has also
In the past. been known to be quite
critical of the EPA. -
The EPA itself, assuming they are
going to completely act responsibly I
think only allowing those who had law
enforcement experience Is certainly
putting some amount of faith In the
A. When we ai-e talking about law
H 9145
forcenient, however. I Think that
the Attorney General sheuld definite-
ty be Involved at some particular
phase. I think this Is the middle
groimd that we have all been search-
ing for. I would hope that we would all
enhance this amendment as at least a
good first step in getting what we all
want to get. And we all want to do the
same thing and we all ought to accept
the amendment. ‘ -
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman (Mr. HUGEES) has expired.
(On request of Mr. RoDnuO and by
unanimous cc,nsent, Mr. Rucirss was
allowed to p oeeed for 3 addItional
minutes)
Mr. RODINO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. HUGHES. I would be happy to
yield to the chairman.
Mr. RODINO. I thank the gentle-
man for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, first of all I want to
say that I support the gentleman’s
other amendment. I think It shows
gkin , that we are trying to be reason-
able and do that.whlch is In the best
,Interest of law enforcemenL
- I would like to point out for clarifi-
cation since the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Diwcsu.) has seemed to
suggest that there Is a lack of coopera-
tion and a lack of coordination that
the Courtney Price who Is counsel for
-EPA, appeared before the Committee
on the Judiciary on June 7. At that
hearing she stated quite clearly in
answer to questions put to her by rue
that the Department of Justice has
been very cooperative with the EPA.
Ms. Price was very enormously mi-
pressed by the spIrit of cooperation
and the extent to which the two agen-
cies do share the same philosophy and
share the same position on Important
policy Issues. -
So I think we would resolve this
question by accepting the gentleman’s
(Mr. Hvcmm) amendment.
Mr. ‘DDqGELL Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. HUGHES. I yield to the gentle-
man from Michigan.
Mr. DINGELL. I thank the gentle-
man for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, would the gentleman
then tell us If this cooperation Is so
splendid, why the Department of Jus-
tice does not answer their mall. 5
months in one Instance after they got
the first letter, and better stoni *
month since they got the second.
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, I was
not going to embarrass the gentleinnn
but let me ask the gentleman has the
EPA always responded to the gentle-
man’s letters?
Mr. DINOELL EPA always re-
sponds. Sometimes they do It without
pain and sometimes they do It wIth
considerable pain, but they always do
respond to the Committee on Energy
and
Mr. KINDNESS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield? -
Rovember 1981 : “ CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
443
-------
•
— O aw i
a .•
r O) flefiel 3I I (CT)
- U tc l Mom it (WAs
--
-
—. 1l IA • Mw i -
ap .. Ual& My s .
Coub
.
-. , - How- t (Ic o l.
Cm l i - flub id w.el.o
O. . T nlel - HueUbV flo as
Oeiw. PhSID flutI s OB, .
- -, --. -
Dsnlil 1 utio
— - de- O y -.
Duch le Ir e i Olli
ub - . - - -.
- ., OUu
deli Gum- 3e k lz&i . .. .. Owes. -.
Deftum, Ozky
- Jm(1lC ) Pact uM
Jo (O K)
D—fr ’ Pims
Dick. ja itw- • PIihay.
fluid.
- Kuatu .me Patte,uoa
D Ka e . Pe uu
DoTgLn .
Downey Zm afly Pepp
Dieter Kuldee
D i- K th .
- - -
Darer - fl wr’
Dyinally Eo,t -
-
IaPa i -
F4wir (Al.) 1*aflos • R ah aU
Edwuj* CAJ Lu - Raniel
F4mr (OX) i i - ___
Igath Ray
______ L.h... . (CA)
Ddrvd. - I hmea L) Re id
_- - .
Rm UAi .- -
fl lU
Pucell Levine EobesU
Robinun
Peighun . — LeEta(CA) Rodeio
Igea (FL) Roe
P )e 1ã ines
- Laoyu
- - __
r or1o I U.A) Ro
Pogi Ua LeU Roe
Poid ( Ml) £oaryy (CAl Rcyml
Veec rTl ( I Lejan
P’neier Lungran-
- M S us ie
M ac f lay . Sawyer
Madigan Gd.aefer
• -. Ma*uy - __
Garde. MaIT LL . -lm
Ga3J... Mute. (fl i Sr mer
Ga as Mum. NC) £e erlh
Mane UYJ S —
MarUne. Shuji
Naiad
- Miereule. w
oi •• ..
Ooo Me D ahurter
Ocue MeCloekey S1koi
0 -
Me S
MeUmtb eIM I
itn l McKernan 1th U
Ouuder McK &tPi ( I L )
Raflmfl iI i 4 . tha )
Mine
Mull, *&MR -- nlth. Denny
flail. Miller (CA) Ith. Rd.oet
Ugoeliten Miller (OH) B en
Muouneradnn M te ‘ .
Muisru ( I Nrn . •
- (UT) i1 1fl .
a__. __ -
H 9148 ...- -. . -. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
November .9 1988
Mr. HUGHES. I yield to the gentle-
man from Ohio.
— Mr. KD(DN S. I thank the gentle-
man lot y1eldIR
Mr. Chairman. I simply want to en-
preas my support for the genUeona ’s
(Mr. IluGirsa) amended Iaagimge.
The purposes au are seeking to a w
here I think would be served by Ibis
Ipproach and anyone but the lessL
reasonable would agree that this is the
approaeh. . -
- Mr. B rrsi I thsn& the gentle-
man.
Mr. Chairman. I yicld heck the hal-
an c eolm time. - . . ‘S
-‘-: - t31520
The CRAmMAN. The question i con
the perfecting amendment to the Judi-
clary Committee amendment offered
by Mr. Hucnss.
The question was token and on * di-
vision (demanded by Mr. Etronas)
there were—ayes 6. noes 6.
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman. I
demand a recorded vote, and pending
that. I make the poiflt of order that s
quorum knot pre ent .
The- CHAIRMAN. v1dent3y $
quorum : pg . -
The Chair announem that pursuant
to clause 2. nile he will vacate
proceedings under the call when a
quorum of the committee appears.
Members will record their presence by
electronic device. -
The call was token by eleelronfc
dev i ce.
The CHAIRMAN. A quorum of the
Committee of the Whole has not ap-
The Chair announ that a reguisr
quorum call will now co moe. e.
Members who have not already re-
sponded under the noticed quorum
call will have a mmirnum of 15 mm-
utea to record their pl-esence...
Pursuant to the provmons of dame
2. nile Tl1 the Chair armMinees
that he will reduce to a minimum of S
minutes the period of time wIt.bhi
which a vote by electronic device, If or.
dered. will be taken an the p r rlir g
question following the quorum call.
Members will record their presence hy
electronic device. ., ... -
The call was taken by electronic
device, and the following Members re-
sponded to their v mpw - -
tRoll No. 44 5]
Ackei-m.a BideS - _____
__ ___ -
____ - 0, e n s r
Aireender Ber n
ADdereon Betbssr •
Ardere. (1 ) flevUl e-vwn (CA)
A,.rn.n1 fl ggj ( ) -
— BRoaMu -
Burten (CA)
AzpD% Both] 5t Builno ( D I )
AuCoin . Beien
B,.mnuid Ba Gurney -
- sea Ron loT Corner -.
Bonier
Ms ws “ ‘ -
I I w--
S
ow nc T,saMr WilitMa (Old
Otenholm VdalI Wliioo
w
u.ue. . Vande, .Iagt WIrth
v,.iaviu w-
Vento Wail
Vo e.er Wilpe
Vunesoe,idi Woitl.y
Waigre. . Wngt .t
Walker Wydec
WaLklm Wylie
W r Tate.
Weøer
Theme. (CA) Wesr - T.w (i’L)
Thomau (GA) Wheat Young (NO)
Terre. Wh’td .WM Zablo
Tomoeuj Whiftey u
w ’--
‘ 01550
The CHAIRMAN. Pow hundred
four Members have answered to their
names, a quorum Is present, and the
Committee will resume Its busineus.
iecomm vom
The CHAIRMAN. The pending busi-
ness is the demand of the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. HuG ) for a
recorded vote.
Does the gentleman froen Wee,
Jersey Insist upon a recorded vote!
Mr. HUGHES. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I
renew my demand for a recorded vow.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the
provisions of clause 2. rule X fll this
will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic
device, and there were—ayes 292, noes
125. not voting 16. as follows:
tROLL No. 4303
- *TES_
Bonn Ran (VT)
Addabio Th—i’i. ilark in
MaLl I l i ub
Annun Boils ‘ N.i-tneu
Anthony de li Dare. Hitcher
A Iegrte flde
hei
nadnie. Dixon Bag luos’er
Banned Dirnue er
Bartlett Dialer Hul ls
Bale.
Brdenmnn Durbio floflno
Bennett Dymally Rubtard
Bmaeter Edasm ( Al .) Hu by
Edwde (CA) Bie.tsr
Bct ) iu.e - Edeards (OH) Renter
BevIU Boeteoc Butt.
DU ir - TJ l nll.L - - Ry de
Bailey - Mudrd.h Irdaid
BoehIe, £rn (IA) Ja
Boluid Pi I l Jeflorth
Douthe, - P. 1 10 Jenkins-
- Joh .
Jima Co
Bm a t er - Jonu 0K) -
BroomIIeld Fields Jones (TM)
flipler
- fluid.
Butte. (flU Vol,7 Kuten
campbell FoTlytbu Kazen
came, Plank -
DaT -
GaLe.
• —Oilman Kramer -
D .rn - Ouwr$ch Iagoee.r
Clay Q1I-& .. . 5
0 A sr -
Date O ug l
Colemsa (FE) Oradnen t4tth
Dasbie OT Imm ‘‘.—‘. (CA)
Dint. Gisy Lehman Pi
A uii (CA)
Oi .. Vundrram Lewis FL)
Couglihu Rail (I X) Lagth. (
Courier Bail (OR) L1rU e.
gall, Mel UosrC
Dens Dardet Ball, Su
Dane l ’bII _ .i.i* Lull
CroniMl Rn a im) Leneiy
443
-------
November 3 1S V
(Ua Picble
4 art ln(NC) Porier
M&rtln ( NY) Pvlea
M&(aul Prftcl d -
Ma Pw
_ - .
McCol n Ratelilard
lIeCandl Ray
VcC1uuk y Hee
MaCothm Reid
Mcl R l e
Mei ’ee Robe rta
McHugh i%obue.cm
SleXenian R -s
UcK. ni e
McNuILy Rogera
Rosientow l
Miller (OH) R b
Mineta Rouke a
Mln lah Rowland
Ubd ie II Redd --
MooLgootery S.bo
Moody Sa age
Moore Sawyer
Moorheed & Ior
Moniaon(Crl Bthrtier
Morr2eon (WA) 2J 4.e
Halebar -.
Slithol a
Mieleon
OBrien * £hu iway
Obenear S .ki —
Obey Simon
Olin 8 i n y
Orth Hkcm
Oweiw Smith (PU
Oz ley Smith UM
— °ackard Smith (NEI
Rmith (NJ)
bep Smith.
F’ ‘ WO E—125
1bo ta Pbvd l)
Ale andar Powkr
r. .
Lobiewa ( -
Andrewa (TX) Osyitm
Awtn Oe$rnaam
Ai - O hudI
Bamee Gibbon.
Bate aa - 001w
BedeU Oteen
Blagi l Graga
- HamU01n __
Ref iel
Bor
Boaoo Howard
Bleaux Royce
Brown (CA) Rennefly
Browo ( CO Kildee
Byron £ eF ’i ioe
Clarke Laland
Coleman (MO) Lent
cooper Lev i ne
Coyne Levital
D Arnoum Long (LA)
Lo i
Dlckinms Lii&en
Dt k a
Dingell Madigen
Doreen Martey
Doe nay Marlene,
MarU
McGrath
Ectart - Mikuliki
Erlenboru Miller (CA)
E ej s ( XL) Molinait
Florto MoUob a
gllrtle M ____
‘ ()C) MurpI
OT VOTDJQ—N
Raid
ICSTT (WA) Ra*
WbM a
EDNGRESSIONA1 REWRD —
EOu ’
-
&
-eol - ‘Ytie Clerk announced the Solioa-tng
-. DIII- ‘ - . -
---
thIs
s ieni io m it t iiiciiti tar witi itt Bance against.
..
• - Mis. B000S r he.nged her vote from
3
Mr. DIXON, Mr. KOSTMATER.
• .‘. and Mr. WILLIAMS of Montana,
- l ’M1 Sed thOu votes from ‘Do” to
a’— - “$y ’ - -
Taylor - So the etthg amendment to the
ThommCA)
ThO IfGIJ ‘ ‘Y ,1?flI fl Ddmeflt — •
-, awead to. - -
The result of
V alenc rp’ -
- nounced as above recorded.
Vandeigylif - The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule.
Vo lk m er the Judicu.ry Committee
Vumnovali to strike 5 1i 1 )Qfl 11CC) fallS aDd
w i,,n.
Walkir ‘v on. the s ecUon bas
WIIkkII been amended in I entirety. -
Wesier The Clerk will report the remaining
Wene
WtUI,IIn. Judiciary Committee amendments:
The Clerk read as follows:
Whit taker ‘ Judiciary Committee amendments- Page
W, liazn. - 54. line 13, strIke OUt “ (iT’ led I C?t hi
Williaen (OMP
thereof “(di ”. Page 25. • 3, strIke out
- “(g) and .. ,.
Well • 36. line 10, strike out
Wortley -- thereof “(I )”. Page 35. afler ‘ n ’ In ln 17
Wngst • and line 10. lne,jt •
Wylie -.
Yale, - The CHAIRMAN, me question is ..
Young AK the remnIn Ing Judiciary Committee
Young p’s. amen ooitz - .
Young
The Judiciary Cnrnmlt&ee amend-
- - ments were agreeci
- “ Mr. HIYGEES. Mr. Chairman.
- move to strike the last word.
Murtha Mr. FLORIO. Mr. chairman, WIll
Neal the gentleman yield?
)loeek Mr. HUGI . I yield to the Ienue.
i-
Patmae Mr. FLORID. Mr.
I L 911
eondu ghe ngatolooi at e
I I
The banlaiiptcy law Is iii Important
element of this Nation’s legal and fi-
nanelal system, tnt It, of course, may
not be used by those whose sole pur.
pose is to avoid responsibility for the
Cleanup of hazardous waste.
Mr. FLORIO. I thank my dlstln.
gutshed colleague for his leadership In
this area, and I pledge my full support
br pour committee’s hearIngs.
There sie currently In litigation
mare than a dozen RCRA and Super-
fund eases in which the defendant has
found it convenient to declare bank-
ruptc- rather than cleanup the endan.
germent he has created. There are sev.
eu-al other similar situations where the
Government has found It pointiesa to
pursue litigation. Who pays for the
cleanup of these sites’ It is not the
bankrupts estate—that is divided
Ue secured aeditors.
£ rnnIng the site Is eventually
cleaned up. the money will come from
Superfund, which Is partly financed
by the American tax my’er. It should
be kept in enin,1 however, that Super
fund sannot poy for moie than 175
sites—and there are 546 sItes on fl’A
priority list, Thus, unlem Super-fund is
Y SuthoriZed , the taxpayer will have
to pay the bill for cleanup. And If no
money Is avmlable, the hazardous
waste dump will simply remain a
danger to public health.
My aiXi iId1fl flt simply requires that
before the assets of a bankrupt’s
estate can be distributed, the property
must be decontaminated. This Is a I c-
gftimate, ecmm ee requirement,
It deserves your support.
Penny thank the gentleman for yielding.
Pertina
Mr. Chairman, as a result of conver-
Rangel satlons with the gentleman from the
Richar o Judiciary Committee, I had Intended
IT NI. PUIT!TA
Mr. PANETrA. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment.
The Clerk read
tolloer
to offer an amendment on ban uptcy
Rater
Roe dealing with the problem associated
with compaiijes that are currently
RoIb going into bankruptcy to avoid their
,.bljga, j under RCRA and Super-
fund for cleaning up toxic wastes,
5ikceaki - - It Is my understanding that the Ju-
diciary Committee erumidering
Roowe having some hearl’igs on this topic
and I just would like to conflrm that
at 00y in - -
Smct
Mr. EUGH . Mu-: Chairman. I
would say to the gentleman that I
have talk.,4 with the ehairman of the
full Judiciary the Honor-
Tra
able PLILZ Rogirpo, and be would be
very happy to review the eatment in
bankruptcy proceedings of riniTne for
WbX
the Turs R I ts ior
Cleanup of hazardous wp .gt ,
Wolpe The gentleman’s concerm go to the
h
rt of the Bankruptcy Code-for
they deal with priorities of elnhua and,
In fact, the dischargeablflty of various
.clafms. They are
serious In
as
xnen tent offered by Mr Paxa ’ra. Page
31. after line I’I. hiseTt “Section 7003 Is fur-
ther amended by adding the following new
suhaecUon at the end thaw!:
“ IMMEDZAT I No icz.—Upon receipt of
that there Ii hazardous wast
at any site which has presented an Immi.
giant and aubstantis.l endangerment go
1i iu health or the emiromuiegit, the Ad.
ministrator shall provide frnmediate notice
to the appropriate local government agen-
cigi. In addition, the Administrator shall re-
QIjj7f 5Ot1 of auth endangerrne to be
prompt. y posted at the site where the waste
located.
Mr. PANETIA (during the 1 ding),
Mr. Chairman. I sak unanimous -
sent that the amendment be consid-
eu-ed as read and printed In the
kxcoan. - - - . -
The CHAIRMAN pro teinpore (Mr.
Cuaz . Is there objection to the te-
quest of the gentleman from Calif or-
lila’ -
There was no objection.
iA asked
very
aa± e and woijjd to be
and was given
revise and
• - - Re assures the gentleman and I
pami un to
extend his ue-
msitai” -
san
assure the gentleman also that
Mr. PAIezTsL Mr. Chairman, eniij.
we
- -.. to Lerward to ting with him to
or this year, !PA officials In my con-
Innai dM214 wer-e Infor med that
uses
44;3
-------
119148. . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—IiOUSE
Improper dlspeml of a wood p . , . Th eba c of tragic w Aequen *Uthoiized StAtes, iequhed .b de -
live designated by EPA as a hazardous from the San Lorenso Eigh School mine thai. an baa t Lineal th
substance (PC ?) had occurred at. a te ease depends largely cn factors un- public health exists prior to
‘adjacent to, and Including, the related to requirements In Federal lion imder this amendment in addl .’.
p’ounds of San Lorerizo Valley Sigh hazardous waste ‘ n geinent statute t on. the amendment ‘would not i.
&hool In Teflon, ( llf. An EPA toch- Presence of PCP In comparatively low -qulie notification af thepubilcer local -f l
nlcal sistance team (TAT) removed a concentrations. relatively prompt 1w- officials under cIrcumstances—such as
wnple of soil from the site suspecting naoval of the contaminated soil. and diposal of some substances which are.
that a hazardous substance j . relative Inaccessibility of the dispomi ebansically. but %aza or
volvct i. orstory analysis site to the local public. In an effort to disposal which Is Immediately and.
4 days later the presence of significant insure that the relative good fortune properlj d. ned vp—which do
r PC? concentrations In the soiL Under those In the Felton area Is not left pose an Immediate and unresolved.
current statute. EPA not to chance in comparable drthrm- threat to public health. Ins ¬lfl .?S
- to immediately noWy local govern- stances. I am offering an amendment cation would be required m g i in
ments of the potential endangerment to HR. 2867 which seeks to elarif the types of cases which would require in
posed by the disposal, despite the f. ae4uirements of FeOcral statute ye- emergen .i anm r çA j
that they ztro g reason t ‘ding EPA re onae to known dm- amonm aourm&n 4 ,j
that a threat to public health existed. hazardous waste disposal. •“• -•-
- Ultimately, EPA off Iciab did The amendment I am offering today ____
local government officials of their do- Is & simple one, and Is Intended to lit addition. nec 17 steps to
terminatIon 4 to 5 days alter the Ii . amend current Law that the public Is aware of the treat 1.
tial sample had b ta , Rowe e basic tasks de a disposal site poses to It are not iw
EPA did not initiate an attempt t termination bY the Administrator—the ‘ h1i amen meot 5fi
Immediate notification of local - , would require, where appropriate. the
notify local government officials lflt ci als that improperly disposed-of Administrator to take all zecesaarY .
anethately upon a determination that a
public health danger exists, nor was WISLC presentS an Immediate and appropriate action.to notify an aI
the agency , . danger to public healtb and second, to - POP ilation of a threat topublIc,. c
require that necessary and appropri— health, and specthcally cites pool
Pbrtunately, EPA and local officials ate action—Including, where appropri- notification at the dI cas1sIte as:
were able to respond to the potential ate posting of notification at the silo— E% b tthit -
endangerment the PC? posed before be ta en to notify a popuIatt whIch While concern was at one tine
public health was affected. The poten- may be affected by the endangenncht, premed that the amen ment’8 requl
tial endangerment posed by improper or _______ - ment of “necessarY’ notification so-.
disposal remained potential—not - ____ . - ..- .. lions by the Administrator would trig--
actual. No adverse health effects at Under current statute. EPA officials ger notification under ‘drcumstauom
Iributed to PC? disposal at 8 10 tOT are not required to provide immediate which • do not pose in .1
euzo were reported to EPA. although noWjcation to local officials t threat to public Mattis. :
workers excavating the disposal site event of Im er pqmi drafts of this f h ,ent have, Sn an’
“ere exposed to PC? without skin or stances regulated umler aa .&, si- effort to accommodate those eoncerns..
ifratcry protection. Apparently, though some notification at a later more specifically defined the Adh -,;
ne of the San Lorenzo SchooFa stu- time is required under CERCLA. the trator’s required response While I be--rn
ents were affected by disposal at thiS Superfund law. As a result, there m ! lieve that the term ‘necessarY’ Ic’-
pen, unposted, disposal site. Years be Instances In which EPA—having sufficiently restrictive to avold
from now, the San L.orcnzo School made a delamination that a bawd- 1. Qfl& 4 Y JfI ’ I — - -
case will probably occupy tRill otis substance exists and poses some stances not P I 5 an Immediate
sition compared to Incidents of im- threat to public health—would not be threat to public health. I have drafted
proper hazardous waste disposal which Immedilately required to take steps to the amendment to further limit the
actually endangered and affected notify those most likely to be affected itotificatlon requirement to those T -i
public health. Nevertheless, the ease by that - . . sponses which could be reasonably or- -;
holds great sigrtlIican e both to the This amendment seeks to address pected In an effort Sn Insure publie
public In the Felton area and for a SItUation by requiring Immediate W1T fl Of The...
Congrem concerned for protection of notification of local government off I. amendment requires the flTnlnk a
-- dais that- potential . .ndiingennent mr to take all ‘ re1w c ry and sppro
- In my view, the Importance of This exists as soon as the Administrator priate’ action In ‘espouSe to a deter- .j
case lies In Its ability to illustrate cer- has made a. determination that such , t1 n of Immediate hazard, .thus
lain eritical shortcomings In current endangerment exists, -. - - - — precluding a requirement far response :
hazardous waste n in n gement statute. Concern hu been expressed that 10, $0 11 t bzzaTd propeziy
The San Lorenro case brings to light a this am ent constitutes a Tequila- cleaned up. or in Improper disposal r
number of particularly troublesome ment for automatic notification j does riot present’an immediate i
questions regarding the EPA responsi- every Instance of alleged or actual in- ‘ ‘ - - - ‘:- t” -
bUlly to insure -protection of public proper hazardous waste disposal. How- Clearly, there are adverse Impact
health, Of particular concern to me In ever, automatic notification of local which may result from posting even:.
this matter is that there is no Federal government and the public without ill Immediate danger us.id by
requirement that notice c i public regard to the cheimiatanom — prover dlspossi property values canb
.lth endangerment be made avails- ease Is neither Int ,’ ’ by drlve down by posting a. site, and - ,
b}e to the public or posted at a dapos- amendment nor required, Instead, the pressure on the government to buy out-
al site. In this ease, the company ap- amendment seeks to Insure timt oniy property outside of an area which lg’
parently responsible for the Improper In those cases where an immediate, immediately threatened can be ln-D
disposal of the substance began ems- unresolved danger to public health ereased by posting or public notlfIes
ration of the site without regard to s . prompt, reasonable notification tion, however, this amendment would”
the chemical’s hazardous nature, ex- of local officials and tire public would prevent risking these adverse conse,...-
posing workers to PCP without protec- be iequfred. .. -. -. — i.• - qUeflees Unnecessarily by rtrIct1ngT
lion. In addition. I am concerned that The amendment does mit require - the circumstances requiring notifies- - -
- - EPA was not required by Federal public notification of potential has- tion. and providing the AdmInlstrslcc.
o Immediately notify appropriate ards In cases wheie the nature of the latitude in detexmlnlng the appmprt , j
or local officials of the potential SU t.n e or the threat Lb the public ate method of PUbIEflOftfICIXJesL
although -totifwp tvR . TPI ITI unsubstantiated, the Arimini. . Th1s,smendm vW . . m dean D ’
J -.. - . — .: , -- . irstat’ ne ______ In the o f R A. huproperLy dpose*4d . arardoi
-r-
-------
F
-‘ : - “ -U. .
Nou rnber 3 , 7983 CONGRESSIONAL .R.ECORD — HOUSE . - l H 1i
‘waste, nor ‘wIn It ever seqube mitiga- b aA h* the loflowbw nea se Jw ol - ___
Lion or compensatfou of iojii y jf. d . . - - • . ip MOLINA Rl
fered by those affected by Improperly - - sewam thg Mr. irmau. I ask
sposed-of hazardous ‘ wl.$te. There i4. Cal 1tx oIT.—The Admlnbb . is nt that the aynpyulm.nt
e other, far more comprehensive tor shafl, not later than 15 months after the alder as read and
drovisions both In RCR.& and ea ment the Raasrdom Waste Cco vl - - .
- CERCLA WhICh ve those functions. ____
and ifornement Act of lOU. submit a I a
Rowever. as the San L renzo ca has -- md j t Qfl tO the leqU Of thC
snide clear to me. there are no prorl- gentleman from New Yost?
sbus In either of these landmark haz- subWle by mamo of the exciuslon for mix- - There was no Obje’ tMlfl . ..
• ardous substance atutes which would toi Of . •
require—as this amendment would— that pam_through a sewer system to a pub- _____
i mmediate notIflcat3on of local offi. licly ewn, ,d eatmest works. Sash r iset
- dais and the public that a public shall Include the tppe& she and number c i hiS xemar J
g yaxor which di rosr of such su ’-’m • - 3’ -.
danger exi,s. In cases comparable to typesasi rznsw tim . — - : “
San Loren’n Nigh’s the additional the t .rl— . - lip. MOLTNARL Mr. Chaisman. -
time and cl rifleation provided by this fi of generator., wostes . primary purpose of the Resource
amendment could mean the difference n es servstion awi i ecov ct unãer sub . ’
between Injury and a healthy life, os tj Federal Jaw St ft 5U1 5110fl 5 hi, a C, Is “c ic-to-grave”
between a public health disaster and a manner sufficient to geofa binoan he 1tb wu ee. &as
viable, healthy enmmunity. I COO1 Smi ‘- at,w, the a effective 1&rd..
mend this amendmosfl - to my eel- St ______
IS months after submittIng the report sped. ‘waste Oversight is emuntlal In ote-
leagues for their support. __ tied In subsecUon (a). the Mmlnlstrator Iiiz human health and the envfree.
Mr. Chairman. I have discussed . h revise ezisting regulations and prom i. ment. Tot, a significant. loopb
with both the chairman of the sub. pors to RCRA which .placce ‘the
committee and also the riiiking minor- y oei avsn authesi. besith and environment of ow NaU-
Ity member. I believe this amendment tyl as ere ne _ary to emure that sub. ‘In ipardy Under the 1ardo y
is accept.ab’le to both sides. - ld Jf . or listed under tisa waste regulstom ’ wgmmn . *11 henaxd-, .c
- Mr. FLORIO. Mr. airman, UI 3001 whIch pam through a sewer system to
the gentleman yte :- • - a publicly owned eatment works br pie. ____
Mr. PANETTA. I yield to the Q teIY e.inlrulled to protect b beaith licly owned treatment wosti
and the environment. - - from Federal r u1atl n. Indeed, az
roan from New .1 7 - - (c) l owr ci. WMTtwA1 Lsammz .— bnwdous waste generator may
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. L hafrman, The Adothistzat shall. withIn 36 montto pose of vIrtus1l any ‘waste n
amendment simply requires that when after ‘ac*ment Of the Riraideos Waste provided that the aewertmon is
the 4dministratop determines that a Cc.uzol sod siforomnmg act Of 1683. connected to a publicly Owned teat.
release of hazardous waste poses a submit a z ’sport to Con esu conearnbng ment plant. This zmqunl(fjed f. r4ncI,
danger to public health, notice be wastewater lagoons at publicly owned Invites abuse. Generators can me the • ‘-
van to the affected population. ‘flI ment works sod their effect en groundwater cheapest metbod to dispose of t
Quality. Such report shall lnclude
simple, comm onsense req un ent. number and she of cacti ls Wastes—sinwi, d” p4t* . 1t down the . .
a something that should be claire - the types and quantities of wade con- sewer. -‘. - 14
ady. We are simply requiring It 10 he tamed in such Jago • • “ - - - This exemption does not refer to an±-:
cL dard operating Procedure. - “(3 the extent to which such waste bm Insignificant quantity of ‘ wactos . The. k
Mr. Chairman, this a uendment baa been or may be released from such lagooss ou ci T buo3eg
been reviewed by the majority and, I and cont -smi tml ai ’oundwatgr and - - - clu hith eurrnot2p .
suspect, by the minority. Providing “(41 avaIlable altsrnath,ea for Federal definition and aeg-.-
notice to the affected population Is C S enntrOUIflZ such ftleU -• - ulation pose substantial hazards. OTA
highly desirable, and the amendment i Admininrator may utili ze the authoit- t -iet that wastes current ly
Is acceptable. 41 ty of sectIons 3007 and 3013 for the pur o .e ted from RCR,A probably total.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, Cf completing such
“(dl *PVLflZfl mi Or Sncrrov $0 10(a) ass several million tons pee pear.. .t -
gentleman yie d 8ee! 3007. Th PIOVbIOflI Of section The situation is grave whosi we eon-
Mr. PAN 1TL I yield to the gentle. ioo sn io amiaji apply to so l id m’ di* alder the state of uur Natlcm’, cewage’
man from New Yost. - • - .: • materials In dflT flP SeN ILe to the i zz cities strare
1hz. LENT. ML rairman. I thank same extent sad In the same manner as structural problems In theji- sewage.
the gentleman for yielding. .- . ..- -. arch prorlsiozn apply to hassrdous waste. ’. tesns as New YOT City. 1trstafle
I would also say that posting ci tli (hi Arcummezier zo Sacrioss 3007 aa largely In the 19th century, and ex-’
3O1o.—aj Section 3007 1. Im?u4 d by
notification at the disposal ide to ____ new “ —‘çu ’ at u táided as the population grew, tim -
notify the affected pOpulation end thereon ,• • New Tart City pipes and bnmeJa
appropliate action to take. I support Ap,ucaryow so Aouo cc ThssoLvTo built to receive both sewage and storm
the gentleman’s amendment. - - • - su Doicsanc &wssa—The proyl- water. During the heavy ralnf m ose
Mr. PANI?ITL Mr. Chairman, I alse Of this section shall apply to mild os pipes overflow. -possibly spilling -ff
thank both the gentleman from New dlmolved materials In meztAc sewage to wastes. .; .•,.
Jersey and the genLleman from New the same extent and In the 5 5 f £ rv 4 t artide published by the
- rch preslocew apply to bawdous waste. N York Times discussed the wirb.
( ) 30101. sn nded Lay . ‘ 1 ’ w the ________
The C IAIRMAJ( following new subsection at the end thereof: lems exper1eneed by New Tort City
question is on the amendment offered “Cc) APPLICATION cc DISSOLVen and Boston, problems typical for aver
by the gentleman from California (Mr. Marm . iw Do zsimc &waCE.—The provi. ZOO coastal cities, In Boston, for exam.
PA)rrfl ). -.- • • son of thia section shall apply to solid or db. - pie, when the volume Is too great for
The amendment was to. • mived I*&eTUIs lii mi c sevs tO the pipeline Detwork, the overflow dia.’
awawDsxsT OrPesra BY rca. woLiwam - some extent sad in the nema manner a. chirges through mote than 100 out -
Mr. MOLINARI. Mr Chairman, i arCh Provisions apply to hazardous wmi • ’ , •, faUs along the IIVCra and harbor lrout .
Cc) Tsaas c i ’ COPIZNZI. ThO table of con- -
offer an amendment. - aue suirtjtie , mis amonta n about 6 bU]ton gallons
The Clerk read as foflow fins at the end annually of raw sewage which feeds ‘
‘n 5ndme ,,t offered by Mr. Mom.esazc - - - out through the combined sewer out.’.
4O.afttrIl • - - - - aills Into the ws.temyz. As many at’
aimwi the table Of ‘ .t i of B.&. 3061 p%azta ganeradnE much of tliz*,;
. lie. (a) Dosmauc erw,jw.—aubutle to Insert the foUo tng new Item fiat ‘ sewage ase allowed to dump hamydoss
I the Solid Waste Dtspomj Act is om - ft i iatb ’ w to section 15 - material Into the pipes. dmlug OVos’ i
-------
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN S I7LEMEN ’IS
SEC. 404. Section 7003 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by adding the following new subsection after subsection (C) thereof: I
“Cd) Puuue PARTICIPATION IN S rruMEins.—Whenever the
United States or the Administrator proposes to covenant not to sue I
or to forbear from suit or to settle any claim arising under this I
section, notice, and opportunity for a public meeting in the affected
area, and a reasonable opportunity to comment on the proposed I
settlement prior to its final entry shall be afforded to the public. The
decision of. the United States or the Administrator to enter into or
not to enter into such Consent Decree, covenant or agreement shall
not constitute a final agency action subject to judicial review under
this Act or the Administrative Procedure Act.”.
(CUp.
IN SE.I1 LEM TS
pAwrIciPAT1ON
SECTION 404 _PUBL1C
bill._N0 p Senate amefldme t requires EPA to
\
amendment._T d comment prior to nteriflg into a set-
provide for public notice sue in any imminent hazard action
or a covenant not
under Section i003. A decision whether o settle is not subject to
tiernent
judicial review. rnhe Conference 5 bstitute is the same as
Conferefl subs titute .
the Senate amendment.
“S
-------
5 Ii ( P? •J? - ,
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN SEVFLEMENTS
This amendment, adding a new subsection to section 7003, builds
upon existing practice in judicial settlements and extends the re-
quirement for public participation in settlements to administrative
settlements such as those issued in the form of administrative
orders. The Department of Justice and the EPA are required to
publish notice of the government’s intention to settle any claim it 1
may have under section 7003, provide an opportunity for a publici
60
meeting in the affected area, provide a reasonable opportunity fori
public comment and withhold final consent to any such agreement
or settlement until such time as the requirements of this section
have been met.
Currently, the regulations of the Department of Justice require
the Attorney General or his designee to publish notice of the gov-
ernment’s intention to enter into a consent decree in any suit to
enjoin the discharge of pollutants. This procedure has been imple-
mented by lodging consent decree with district courts for thirty (30)
days while notification of their lodging is given to the public by
publication in the Federal Register. The consent decree is available
to the public upon request and the Department of Justice with-I
holds its final consent to the decree until such time as comments
are received from any interested person. In the event comments!
are received, the Department of Justice files such comments withi
the court. The Department reserves the right to withdraw or with-i
hold its consent to the proposed judgment if the comments, views!
and allegations concerning the judgment disclose facts for consider-
ation which indicate that the proposed judgment is inappropriate,
improper or inadequate.
These procedures have been a useful vehicle for receiving public
comment in the past. By filing such comments with the court, to-
gether with its written responses to the comments, the Department
has supplied the basis for subsequent judicial hearings on the pro-
priety of the entry of specific consent decrees.
The process established pursuant to these amendments is meant
to be flexible. For example, less than thrity (30) days for review!
and comment may be appropriate in, for example, emergency situa-I
tions where clean up should proceed earlier. Informal public meet-i
ings, as opposed to formal public hearings, are required. -
In providing public notice under this section, EPA and the De- 1
partment should use public notice measures such as local newspa-
pers and radio that will effectively reach the affected community.!
Such notice should supplement publication of notice in the Federal!
Register.
These amendments do not establish new substantive rights to
obtain review or to make the government’s exercise of its prosecu-
tonal discretion in deciding whether to enter into a consent decree,
covenant not to sue or other agreement subject to judicial review
under the Administrative Procedure Act or under the Solid Waste
Disposal Act. However, the terms of the agreement are reviewable,
to assure that they are fair and adequate and are not unlawful, un-
reasonable, or against public policy.
In some cases, actions under section 7003 of the Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act can also be undertaken pursuant to section 106 of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liabil-
ity Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-510)(CERCLA). The government
should not bypass this provision by taking all future actions pursu-
ant to section 106 of CERCLA. To the extent that section 106 ac-
tions could have been pursued under section 7003 it is intended
that such actions should be subject to the requirements of this pro- I
vision.
491
-------
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN SETTLEMENTS
SEC. 20. Section 7003 of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act is amended by adding the following new subsection:
67
“(c) Whenever the United States or the Administrator
proposes to covenant not to sue or to forbear from suit or to
settle any claim arüing under this section, notice, and op.
portunity for a public meeting in the affected area, and
reasonable opportunity to comment on the proposed
ment prior to its final entry shall be afforded to the
The decision of the United States or the Administrator
enter into or not to enter into such Consent Decree,
enani or agreement shall not constitute a final
action subject to judicial review under this Act or the Au
ministrative Procedure Act. ‘
-------
S? ? (flcp0m7 1 r’i) 3
5 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 1N SETTLEMENTS
6 SEC. 20. Section 7003 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
7 is amended by adding the following new subsection:
8 “(c) Whenever the United States or the Administrator
9 proposes to covenant not to sue or to forbear from suit or to
10 settle any claim arising under this section, notice, and oppor-
11 tunity for a public meeting in the affected area, and a reason-
12 able opportunity to comment on the proposed settlement prior
13 to its final entry shall be afforded to the public. The decision
14 of the United States or the Administrator to enter into or not
15 to enter into such Consent Decree, covenant or agreement
16 shall not constitute a final agency action subject to judicial
17 review under this Act or the Administrative Procedure Act. ‘
4 /cc’
-------
S 17 ’ J - i i 1’• r
INTERIM CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE INJECTION
SEc. 405. (a) Subtitle G of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by adding the following new section at the end thereof:
“INTERIM CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE INJECTION
“SEC. 7010. (a) UNDERGROUND SOURCE OF DRINKING WATER—NO
hazardous waste may be disposed of by underground injection—
“(1) into a formation which contains within one-quarter mile
of the well used for such underground injection) an under.
ground source of drinking water; or
“(2) above such a formation.
The prohibitions established under this section shall take effect 6
months after the enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 except in the case of any State in which
identical or more stringent prohibitions are in effect before such
date under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
“(b) ACTIONS UNDER CERCLA.—Subsection (a) shall not apply to
the injection of contaminated ground water into the aquifer from
which it was withdrawn, if—
“(1) such injection is—
“(A) a response action taken under section 104 or 106 of
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensa-
tion and Liability Act of 1980, or
“(B) part of corrective action r& uired under this title
intended to clean up such contamination;
“(2) such contaminated ground water is treated to substan-
tially reduce hazardous constituents prior to such injection; and
“(3) such response action or corrective action will, upon com-
pletion, be sufficient to protect human health and the envi-
ronment.
“(c) &rvoRcEr1 r.—In addition to enforcement under sections
7002 and 7003 of this Act, the prohibitions established under para-
H. R. 2867—54
graphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a) shall be enforceable under the
Safe Drinking Water Act in any State—
“(1) which has adopted identical or more stringent prohibi-
tions under part C of the Safe Drinking Water Act and which
has assumed primary enforcement responsibility under that Act
for enforcement of such prohibitions; or
“(2) in which the Administrator has adopted identical or more
stringent prohibitions under the Safe Drinking Water Act and
is exercising primary enforcement responsibility under that Act
for enforcement of such prohibitions. .
“(d) The terms ‘primary enforcement responsibility, ‘under-
ground source of drinking water’, ‘formation’ and ‘well’ have the
same meanings as provided in regulations of the Administrator
under the Safe Drinking Water Act. The term ‘Safe Drinking Water
Act’ means title XIV of the Public Health Service Act.”.
(b) TABLE OF C0NTENTs.—The table of contents for such subtitle G
is amended by inserting the following new item at the end thereof:
“Sec 7010 Interim control of hazardous waste injection.”.
-------
p 110
SECTI9N 405—INTERIM CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE INJECTION
House bill.—The House bill bans underground injection into or
above a formation which contains, within ¼ mile of the injection
wells, an underground source of drinking water, with a variance
where it can be demonstrated that the waste will not migrate into
drinking water sources or otherwise endanger them. This provision
is to be enforced under Subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
(often referred to as RCRA) except in States with underground in-
jection control (UIC) primacy under the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA) or in States where EPA has prescribed a UIC program (in
which case it will be enforced under the SDWA).
Senate amendment.—The Senate amendment bans injection into
or above a fbrmation which contain, within /2 mile of the injec-
tion well, an underground source of drinking water. The ban does
not apply if the injection is part of a federally supervised cleanup
action under the Solid Waste Disposal Act or under the Compre-
hensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
of 1980 (CERCLA).
Conference substitute. —The conference substitute bans under-
ground injection into or above a formation which contains, within
¼ mile of the injection well, an underground source of drinking
water. This provision is to be enforced under RCRA except in
States with underground injection control (UIC) primacy under the
SDWA, where such UIC programs contains provisions no less strin-
gent than this section, or in States where EPA has prescribed a
UIC program in which case it will be enforced under the SDWA.
The ban does not apply if the injection is part of a federally super-
vised cleanup action under the Solid Waste Disposal Act or under
CERCLA and if such cleanup action, when completed, will be suffi-
cient to protect human health and the environment.
-------
gric, .
H 1
DITZRTh( CONTROL OP HAZARDOUS WASTE INJECT ION
Ssc.t(a) New S oN 7010.—Subtitle G is amended by adding the following new /
“DITERIM CONTROL OP HAZARDOUS WASTE INJECTION
“Sec. 7010. (a) UrmenceouwD SouRce o, Demaz! o WATER.—NO hazardous waste
way be disposed of by underground injection—
“(1) into a formation which contains (within one quarter mile of the well used
for such underground injection) an underground source of drinking water or
“(2) above such a formation.
The prohibition established under paragraph (2) shall not apply if the person inject-
ing such hazardous waste establishes to the satisfaction of the Adminiatrator, or the
State in the case of a State which has assumed prunarj enforcement responsibility
under the Safe Drinking Water Act (title XIV of the Public Health Service Act) for
enforcement of such prohibition, that the injection will not cause hazardous waste
to migrate into drinking water sources or otherwise endanger drinking water
sources. The prohibitions established under this subsection shall take effect six
months after the enactment of this section except in the case of any State in which
identical prohibtions are in effect before such date under the Safe Drinking Water
Act.
“(b) ENV0RcEMENT.—Except as provided in subsection (c), the prohibitions estab-
lished under subsection (a) shall be enforced by the Mminiatrator under section
3008 and 7003 of this Act and shall be treated (for purposes of section 7002) as re-
quirements which have become effective pursuant to this Act.
“(C) S ,z DItu xxriiG WA KR Acr.—The prohibitions established under paragraphs
(1) and (2) of subsection (a) shall be enforceable only under the Safe Drinking Water
ActinanyState—
“(1) which has adopted identical prohibtions under part C of the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act and which has assumed primary enforcement responsibility
under that Act for enforcement of such prohibitions; and
“(2) in which the Administrator has adopted identical prohibitions under the
Safe Drinking Water Act and is exercising primary enforcement responsibility
under that Act for enforcement of such prohibitions.
“(d) The terms ‘primar enforcement responsibility’. ‘underground source of
drinking water’, ‘formation and ‘well’ have the same laanirga as provided in regu-
lations of the Administrator under the Safe Drinking Water Act”.
(b) TARLE oP CoNTm rrs.—The table of contents for such subtitle G is amended by
inserting the following new item at the end thereof:
“Sec. 7010. Interim control of hazardous waste iniection.”.
Section 4. Interim control of underground injection
Section 4 establishes an interim program of regulation of under-
ground injection of hazardous waste. This provision is similar to
one included in last year’s bill, H.R. 6307, that was adopted by the
House. .
Underground injection is the process of forcing liquid into a well.
Because underground injection, if improperly done, can lead to con-
tnrnination of underground sources of drinking water, the Safe
Drinking Water Act requires that EPA develop minimum require-
ments for State programs controlling underground injection (Sec-
tion 1421). If a State does not incorporate these requirements into
its program, EPA is required to establish a satisfactory under-
ground injection control program for that State (Section 1422).
Under the schedule established by the Safe Drinking Water Act
Act, EPA was directed to promulgate the requirements within 360
days of the Act’s enactment on December 16, 1974. In fact, these
requirements were not even proposed until 1976 and were then re-
proposed in 1979 as a result of adverse comments from States and
affected industries. (See 41 FR 36730, August 31, 1976, and 44 FR
23738 April 20, 1979). The requirements were not finally promul-
gated until June, 1980. (See 45 FR 42473, June 24, 1980).
Even this delay was apparently not sufficient to enable the
Agency to carry out the statutory mandate fully. Instead, EPA an-
nounced when the requirements were promulgated that it would
defer the promulgation of minimum requirements for injection of
I / i c -
-------
29
hazardous waste above formations containing an underground
source of drinking water within one-quarter mile of the well.
In testimony before a joint hearing of the Subcommittee on
Health and the Environment and the Subcommittee on Transporta-
tion and Commerce on August 22, 1980, EPA officials stated that
the reason for the delay was to allow rides governing injection of
hazardous waste to be coordinated with h ardous waste disposal
regulations scheduled to be promulgated pursuant to the RCRA.
The Agency testified that the deferred regulations would be issued
in the fall of 1980. Yet, almost three years later, no action has been
taken by the Agency. The result is that injection of hazardous
waste above underground sources of drinking water is essentially
not regulated on an ongoing basis by Federal law.
Injection of hazardous waste directly into underground sources of
drinking water (“maintaining”), is also inadequately regulated.
EPA’s 1980 regulations required that State programs include a ban
on such injection. But only nine States have actually assumed re-
sponsibility for enforcing this ban. While the Safe Drinking Water
Act obligates EPA to establish and enforce this ban in States that
have not assumed responsibility, EPA has not yet done so. Thus
the ban on mainlining has not, for the most part, gone into effect.
The Agency’s failure to carry out the Safe Drinking Water Act’s
requirements is of grave concern to the Committee. Underground
injection of hazardous waste is at least as dangerous to drinking
water sources. So long as injection is not regulated, the potential
exists for endangerment of drinking water supplies through this
practice.
EPA has not even succeeded in ascertsaining the extent of under-
ground injection of hazardous waste. A study contracted by EPA in
1979 estimated that there may be as many as 7500 wells injecting
hazardous waste into or above drinking water sources. A more
recent survey for EPA states that a greater volume of waste is dis-
posed of through injection than through landfi]iing. The Committee
has received testimony that there are known hazardous waste in-
jection sites in several States.
The Committee has therefore provided for immediate regulation
of underground injection of hazardous waste above or into under-
ground sources of drinking water under RCRA. However, it does
not in any way relieve EPA of its responsibility to regulate pursu-
ant to the Safe Drinking Water Act.
- Section 4 prohibits injection of hazardous waste into under-
ground sources of drinking water effective six months after enact-:
ment. Violations will be enforceable under the criminal and civil
penalty and citizen suit provisions of the RCRA. In States which
assume responsibility for carrying out the prohibition on such in-
jection required by EPA in its 1980 regulations, and in States in
which EPA promulgates a program for carrying out the prohibi-
tion, this provision will not be effective, and the ban on such injec-
tion will be enforceable only pursuant to the provisions of the Safe
‘45 FR 42485.86 (June 24. t980) For the sake of clarity, such injection will be referred to as
injection above underground sources of drinking water Injection Into a formation containing an’
underground source of drinking water within one-quarter mile of the well will be referred to as
injection into underground sources of drinking water. “Underground source of drinking water”
Includes future sources of drinking water as well as those currently used for that purpose.
-------
30
Drinking Water Act. Thus the Committee proposal provides for
regulations under RCRA during the transition period until the
State or EPA commences enforcement under the Safe Drinking
Water Act.
The Committee’s proposal also prohibits injection of hazardous
waste above underground sources of drinking water. A very narrow
exception is provided for operators who can demonstrate that such
injection will not threaten underground sources of drinking water
either through migration of the waste into sources, or by other
means (e.g. by promoting the migration of saline or other unpota-
ble fluids into drinking water). Because of the difficulty of predict-
ing the fate of injected fluids, the Committee emphasizes that this
exception should be interpreted narrowly, and that the burden of
establishing the basis for the exception should rest on the operator.
This prohibition likewise will be enforceable under RCRA. It will
remain in effect until EPA carries out its responsibility under the
Safe Drinking Water Act to establish minimum requirements for
State programs regulating injection of hazardous waste, and until
either States assume responsibility for carrying out these require-
ments or EPA establishes a program for direct enforcement.
The Committee intends, during reauthorization of the Safe
Drinking Water Act, to examine whether the requirements of that
Act are adequate, and whether the regulatory course being fol-
lowed by EPA is indeed protecting underground sources of drinking
water, and to consider alternatives that will assure that under-
ground sources of drinking water are protected for this and future
generations.
-------
qpcri
SI_c ,.S
Ban on certain wells
A new subsection (e) is added to section 3004 to prohibit the dis-
posal of hazardous waste by underground injection into or above
any formation which contains, within one-half mile of the well
used for such underground injection, an underground source of
drinking water. The one-half mile distance refers to the distance
between the aquifer and the injection well, not the distance be-
24
tween the injection well and a withdrawal source. An “under-
ground source of drinking water” means actual drinking water
sources as well as high quality aquifers such as those containing
water with less than 10,000 milligrams per liter of dissolved solids.
-------
Hr - 1 ’j q• - “ -‘ - p r
4 INTERIM CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE INJECTION
5 SEC. 4. (a) NEW SECTION 7010.—Subtitle G is amend-
6 ed by adding the following new section at the end thereof:
7 “INTERIM CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE INJECTION
8 “SEC. 7010. (a) UNDERGROUND SOURCE OF DRINKING
9 WATER.—NO hazardous waste may be disposed of by under-
10 ground injection—
11 “(1) into a formation which contains (within one-
12 quarter mile of the well used for such underground in-
13 jection) an underground source of drinking water; or
14 “(2) above such a formation.
15 The prohibition established under paragraph (2) shall not
16 apply if the person injecting such hazardous waste establishes
17 to the satisfaction of the Administrator, or the State in the
18 case of a State which has assumed primary enforcement re-
19 sponsibiity under the Safe Drinking Water Act (title XIV of
20 the Public Health Service Act) for enforcement of such prohi-
21 bition, that the injection will not cause hazardous waste to
22 migrate into drinking water sources or otherwise endanger
23 drinking water sources. The prohibitions established under
24 this subsection shall take effect six months after the enact-
25 ment of this section except in the case of any State in which
-------
- 1 identical prohibitions are in effect before such date under the
2 Safe Drinking Water Act.
3 “(b) E oRcEMENT.—Except as provided in subsection
4 (c), the prohibitions established under subsection (a) shall be
5 enforced by the Administrator under section 3008 and 7003
6 of this Act and shall be treated (for purposes of section 7002)
7 as requirements which have become effective pursuant to this
8 Act.
9 “(c) S u ’E DRINKING WATER ACT.—The prohibitions
10 established under paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a)’
11 shall be enforceable only under the Safe Drinking Water Act
12 in any State—
13 “(1) which has adopted identical prohibitions
14 under part C of the Safe Drinking Water Act and
15 which has assumed primary enforcement responsibility
16 under that Act for enforcement of such prohibitions;
17 and
18 “(2) in which the Administrator has adopted iden- I
19 tical prohibitions under the Safe Drinking Water Act
20 and is exercising primary enforcement responsibility
21 under that Act for enforcement of such prohibitions.
22 “(d) The terms ‘primary enforcement responsibility’,
23 ‘underground source of drinking water’, ‘formation’ and ‘well’
24 have the same meanings as provided in regulations of the
25 Administrator under the Safe Drinking Water Act.”.
1 (b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents for
2 such subtitle G is amended by inserting the following new
3 item at the end thereof:
“Sec. 7010. Interim control of hazardous waste injection.”.
14r
-------
i 1 t. é I 1J w .a4u
12 INTERIM CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE INJECTION
13 SEc. 4. (a) YEW SEcTIoN 7010.—Subtitle G is
14 amended by adding the following new section at the end
15 thereof:
16 ‘?NTERIM CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE INJECTION
17 “SEC. 7010. (a) UNDERGROUND SOURCE or DR;x,v-
18 iNC WATER.—.\o hazardous waste may be disposed of by
19 underground injection—
20 “(1) into a formation which contains (within one-
21 quarter mile of the well used for such .underground in-
22 jection) an underground source of drinking water, or
23 - “(‘2) above such a formation.
24 The prohibition established under pa7agraph ‘2k) shall o1
25 apply if the person injecting such ha:ardous waste establishes
HR 2867 RH——2
-------
10
1 to the satisfaction of the Administrator, or the State in the
2 case of a Stale which has assumed primary enforcement re-
3 sponsibility under the Safe Drinking Water Act (title XIV
4 of the Public Health Service Act) for enforcement of -such
5 prohibition, that the injection will not cause hazardous waste
6 to migrate into drinking waler sources or otherwise endanger
7 drinking water sources. The prohibitions established under
8 this subsection shall take effect six months after the enact-
9 ment of this section except in the case of any Stale in which
10 identical prohibitions are in effect before such date under the
11 Safe Drinking Waler .4 ci.
12 “rb) ENFORCEMENT.—EXCep I as provided in szthsec-
13 lion (cj.), the prohibitions established under subsection (a)
14 shall be enforced by the Administrator under section 3008
15 and 7003 of this .4c1 and shall be treated (for purposes o/
16 section 7002) as requirements which have become effective
17 pursuant to this Act. -
18 “c) SAFE DRLVx1.vG W4TER ACT.—The prohibitions
19 established under paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a)
20 shall be enforceable only under the Safe Drinking Water .4c1
21 in any Slate—
22 “(1) which has adopted identical prohihilion.
23 under part C of the Safe Drinking Water .4ct and
24 which has assumed primary enforcement responsibility
HR 2S67 RH
-------
11
I under that Act for enforcement of such prohibitions;
2 and
3 “(‘2,) in which the Administrator has adopted iden-
4 tical prohibitions under the Safe Drinking Water Act
5 and is exercising primary enforcement responsibility
6 under that Act for enforcement of such prohibitions.
7 “(d) The terms ‘,vrimary enforcement responsibility’,
8 ‘underground source of drinking water’, ‘formation’ and
9 ‘well’haue the same meanings as provided in regulations of
10 the Administrator under the Safe Drinking Water Act. ‘
11 (b) T.4BLE OF CONTE.vTs.—The table of contents for
12 such subtitle G is amended by inserting the following ew
13 item at the end thereof:
“Sec. 7010. Interim control of ha:ardoi,j wa.ste injection.
46s
-------
‘ ? ( J p Lfl.1
10 (e) BAN ON CERTAIN WELL ,S.—Ef(eCtiVC one hun-
11 dred and eighty days after the enactment of the Solid Waste
12 Disposal Act Amendments of 1984, no hazardous waste
13 may be disposed of by underground injection into or above
14 any formation which contains, within one-half mile of the
15 well used for such underground injection, an underground
1 source of drinking water. This subsection 8ha11 not apply to
2 the injection of contaminated ground water into the aquifer
3 from which ii was withdrawn, if such injection is a re-
4 sponse action taken under section 704 or 706 of the Corn-
5 prehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Li-
6 ability Act of 1980 or part of corrective action required
7 under this title intended to clean up such contamination and
8 such contaminated ground water is treated to substantially
9 reduce hazardous constituents prior to such injection. ‘
6<-
-------
Ac
14 “INTERIM CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE INJECTION
15 “SEc. 7010. (a) No hazardous waste may be disposed of
16 by underground injection—
17 “(1) into a formation which contains (within one
18 quarter mile of the well used for such underground in-
19 jection) an underground source of drinking water; or
20 “(2) above such a formation.
21 The prohibition established under paragraph (2) shall not
22 apply if the person injecting such hazardous waste establishes
23 to the satisfaction of the Administrator, or the State in the
24 case of a State which has assumed primary enforcement re-
25 sponsibility under the Safe Drinking Water Act (title XIV of
HR 2867 IH
6s
-------
9
1 the Public Health Service Act) for enforcement of such prohi-
2 bition, that the injection will not cause hazardous waste to
3 migrate into drinking water sources or otherwise endanger
4 drinking water sources. The prohibitions established under
5 this subsection shall take effect six months after the enact-
6 ment of this section except in the case of any State in which
7 identical prohibitions are in effect before such date under the
8 Safe Drinking Water Act.
9 “(b) Except as provided in subsection (c), the prohibi-
10 Lions established under subsection (a) shall be enforced by the
11 Administrator under section 3008 and 7008 of this Act and
12 shall be treated (for purposes of section 7002) as require-
13 ments which have become effective pursuant to this Act.
14 “(c) The prohibitions established under paragraphs (1)
15 and (2) of subsection (a) shall be enforceable only under the
16 Safe Drinking Water Act in any State—
17 “(1) which has adopted identical prohibitions
18 under part 0 of the Safe Drinking Water Act and
19 which has assumed primary enforcement responsibility
20 under that Act for enforcement of such prohibitions;
21 and
22 “(2) in which the Administrator has adopted iden-
23 tical prohibitions under the Safe Drinking Water Act
24 and is exercising primary enforcement responsibility
25 under that Act for enforcement of such prohibitions.
HR 2867 ffl——2
-------
10
1 “(d) The terms “primary enforcement responsibility”,
2 “underground source of drinking water”, ‘formation’ and
3 “well” have the same meanings as provided in regulations of
4 the Administrator under the Safe Drinking Water Act.”.
5 (b) The table of contents for such subtitle G is amended
6 by inserting the following new item at the end thereof:
“Sec. 7010. Interim control of hazardous waste injection.”.
-------
July 25, 1984
gated under paragraph (1) of this subsec .
tion.”
d.
Aiwezx’r No. 3409
(Purpose: To clarify application of require.
ment to conduct ground water monitor-
ing)
Proposed by Mr. CI AFEE (for hlnself
and Senators BexisaN, SLsrFogD. R rrtioi.ra,
and MITCHELL).
On page 86, line 18. strike the quotation
marks and final period, and after l;ne 18
Insert the following
“This subsection shall not be construed to
affect other exemptions or waivers from
such standards provided in regulations in
effect on the date of enactm nt of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1934 or
as may be protided In revt,ions to those req.
ulation.s. to the extent con.sstent with this
subsection. The Admirlstrator Is authorized
on a case-by-we basis to exempt from
ground eater monitoring requlrements
under this section (in ”Iu’ ng subsection (1 ))
any engineered stnicture nlth the Admin-
Isteator finds does not receive or contain
liQuid wa.ste (nor waste containing free liq-
uids), is d2siimeci and operated to exclude
liquid from precipitation or other runoff.
utilizes multiple leak detection systems
within the outer layer of containment, and
prov Ues for cor.t.nutng operation and main-
tenance of these leak detection systems
during the operating period, closure, and
the period required for post-closure mont.
toring and for hich the AdmInistrator con-
cludes on the basis of such findinirs that
there is a reasonable certainty hazardous
constituents v.111 not m grate beyond the
outer ia)er of contaimnent prior to the end
of the period required for post-closure moni-
toring.”
Ar ax rrr No. 3409
(Purpose: To clarify scope of new section
3004(e) ban on cer.am a ells)
Proposed by Mr. CHAF E (for himself
and Senators STAFFORD. Rurooii’a and
MITCKEL IJ.
REINJECTION OF TREATED GrOWTh WATD1
On page 44, line 23. after “v.itcr,” insert
the follov.rng: “This subsecl on shall not
apply to the injection of eontainirated
ground sater into the aquifer from a hfch it
was v Ithdi’awn, if such injection Is a re-
sponse action taken under section 104 or 106
of the Comprehensive Environmental Re.
sponse, CompensatIon and LIe bilily Act of
1930 or part of corrective action required
under this title intended to clean up such
contamination and such contaminated
ground water is treated to substantially
reduce hazardous constituents prior to such
injection.”.
AENaM No. 3409
(Purpose: To clarify authority of AthEinis.
trator to modify applic’ation of cc ’t In re-
quirements to some mining anstes)
Proposed by Mr. CRAFEE (far hiniseif
and Senators SIMPsoi and RANE LPH)
IS!F.1NC WSSTE AME?ThMCNT
On page 48. beginn!i.g on line 18 through
line 2 on p’tge 49. strike the sentence foil3w-
ins “the en’. ironment.”.
At the end of S. 757, add (lie fol;oaing
new aection:
“S c. . Section 3004 of the Solid V.’asle
Dispcsal .Acr is an’,endrd Lv adding at the
end tirrreof ci fol2ov.’ng nets suc ction:
‘1 ) If anlid waste I o’n the ex’rartion.
benvfic’ation or proeessing of o.es a:ia nun-
erala, Ineluding phosphate ru:k and over-
bu:.leii from the mining of uran uni ore, is
aubiect to regulation under this subtitle, the
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
Administrator is authorIzed to modify the
requirements of subsections b), (f)(1)
(other than the requirement for ground
water monitoring), and (g), in the case of
lnndf ills or surface imp9undrnents receiving
su2h solid v.aste. to take into account the
special characteristics of such wastes, the
practi ’al difficultues associated aith imple-
menta: oa of such requirements, and site-
specific characteristics, th luding but not
lir,thed to the climate, geology. h )’drology
and soil chemistry at the sIte, so long as
such modtf ed requtrements assure protec-
tion of human health and the environ-
ment.’.”
AMrNnMzs No. 3409
(Purpose: To assure that the Solid Waste
Disposal Act Amendments of 1i84 do not
affect, modify, or amend the Uranhun
Mill TaIlings Rsdia (ion Control Act of
l9 8, as amended)
Proposed by Mr. CBAFEE (for himself
and Senator SIMFS0N).
Amend S. 757 by adding the following new
section:
“URASIItIM MILL TAILINGS
- Nothing In the Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act Amendments of 1984 sball be con-
s:r ed to affect, modify, or a.’nend the Ura-
nium Mill Tailinqs Radiation Control Act of
1978, as amended.”,
AMs u No. 3409
IPurpose: To establish minimum technologi-
cal requirements for existing surface las-
poundinents)
Proposed by Mr. CI-IAFEE tfor himself
and Senatars BENTSgN. STAFFoRD. RAN OLPM.
and Mirciszu.).
On p ae 49. after line 19, Insert the fol-
lowing:
( C XI) ,S t’tlon 3005e) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act is amei ded by Inserting “(1)’
after “Interim Siatus, “, by rede ignet’,ng
paragrsphs (1). (2), and (3) as subpara.
graphs (A), (B), and (C), aid by adding the
foliow1n new parag’aph:
“(2XA) Except as pro ided in subpara-
grach (C). each surface inipouidnent in ex-
ist,mc ’e on the date of enactment of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of
1984 and Qualifying for the authorization to
operate under paragraph (1) of this subsec-
tion, which—
“Ci) does not have at least one liner, for
which there Is no evidence that such liner Is
leasing, or
“(ii) is located in an area of vuLnerable hy-
drogeoogy as defined In subparagraph (G)
or as detei nined by criteria or gsi dance for
the acceptable location of facilIties issued in
accordance with section 3004.f),
Sh,tli not receive, store, or treat hazardous
waste after the d.te four years after such
d4e of enactment. unless such surface tin-
poundment is in compliance w’th the re-
quirenient.s of seciton 3004(f) which would
apply to such irnpoundc ent if it were new.
For the p irposes of clause ri) of this subpar-
ag:sgh, th term “liner” means a liner
nie’ting tne iequi:ements of regulations for
n ”w surface Iirpoundit:n ,ta In effect as of
such date of enactment, and that the sur-
face inapoundnierit Is in compliance with
generally aupiicable ground water monitor-
L1 requireuneiito for iacili!ies with permits
uilLer subsection id of thus secuon.
“(B) The Athninistrator (or the State. in
the case o a State wIth an authorized pro-
grain), alter notice and opportunity for
eonimer t. niav uyioc ,tfy the req iirerncms of
sLbparagraph (A) br any surface Impound-
ment If, not lattr than 24 mor, hs after the
date of enactment of tile Solid Waste Dis-
possl Act Amendments of 1984, the owner
S 9173
or operator demonstrates that such surface
impoundments is located, designed and op.
crated so as to assure that there will be no
migration of any hazardous constilunnt Into
ground wzter or surface water at an time
dur ng the period haiardous w.cle reuna,’is
in such surface impoundment. lAithun 12
months ater the receipt of es ude ice submit.
ted umler this subparagraph and riot later
than 36 months after such date of enact-
ment. the Administrator (Or, II ep ropriaie,
the State’ ahall advise such owner or op ’ra-
tar as to whether and, if so, han’ the re-
quirements of subparagraph (A) shall be
modified and applied to such surface Im-
poundment,
“(C) Subparagraph (A) of this parsgraph
shall not appl to any surf a e impour, . ment
which (I) contains treated waste water
during the secondary or tertiary phase of an
aggreszive biological treatment fatality sub-
ject to a permit issued under section (02 of
the Clean Water Act (or which holds such
treated waste water after treatn eni, anJ
prior to discharge), (I I) Is in complaiice with
generally applicable ground water monitor-
hug requirements for facilities wIth permIts
under subsection Cc) of this section, and (iii)
Is part of a facility in compliance with see-
(ion 3fl1(b)2) of the Clean Water Act, or. In
the case of a facility for which no eilluent
guidelines required under section 304. o (2)
of (lie Clean Water Act are in effect and no
permit under section 402iaX1) o ssah Act
implementIng section 3Olib)(2) of such Act
has been Issued, is part of a faci’ity in com-
pliance with a p”rmit under section 402 of
the Clean Water Act which is achiesung sig-
nificant degradation of (asic pollutants and
hazardous con,tituents contained in the un-
treated wa te stream and which ha.s identi-
fied those toxic pollutants and hmu.ardo,is
constituents in the untreated waste st earn
to the appropriate penaitting authonty.
The Administrator shall study aid report to
the Congress on the number, range of size,
construction, likelihood of hs ’ar,1,,us con-
stituents migrating into ground S ater. and
potential threAt to human health and the
environment of existing surface impound-
ments excluded by this subparagraph from
the requirements of subparagraph (A). Such
report shall address the need, feazlbility,
and estimated costs of subjecting su,h exist-
ing surface unpoundmer,ts to the require-
ments of subparagraph (A). In the case of
any existing suiface Impoundment or class
of surface impoundments from which the
Administrator (or the State, in the case of a
State with an authorized program) deter-
mines hazardous const tuents are lutely to
migrate into ground water, the Adininistra.
(or (or, II appropriate the State) is author-
ized to impose such requirernen as may be
n.icessary to protect human hcsith aim the
ens ironmcnt. including the requirements of
section 3004ff) which would appiy t such
Impoundments if they were new.
“(D) The owner or operator of any surface
impoundment potentially subject to sub-
paragraph (A) of thia paragra ih who his
reason to bt!ieve that on the basis of sub-
paragraph (Aiti) or (ii) or s’ibparagra,n (C)
such surface impoundment is not required
to comply w’th the requ remcnts of sub-
paragraph (Al shall apply to the Adxn’ii’ .
trator (or the Slate, in the ease of a Stale
with an authorized prcgran,) not later than
24 months after the date of cnattmeu ,t of
the Solid V,’aste Disposal Act Amer r,i.mnta
of 1984 fur a determi’ Eiun of the apn ica.
bility of subparagraph (Am to sucri -si:rfr”e
Irnpoundnicnt. Such owner or oper u,:j- s ’u,’l
pro ide esidenee pertinent to su• ui ecu i ’n.
Including evidence as to COrfl,’..4’1 ’e ¶s’tli
ground water monitoring requirentu ,t and
all rea.sonably ascertainable es idt’nr ” on
-------
July 25, 1284
a precondition to land disposal. For wastes
with a high organic content. incineration
should be required in lieu of land disposal.
ai:u ii cinerator residues with small amounts
of Inorganic hazardous wastes may be land
disposed v. ithout further treatment.
Determinations for treatment require.
inents prior to land disposal do not have to
be on a aste-by.waste basis The Adminis-
trator is not required to ait for the sched-
ule established under paragraphs (4), (5),
and (6) of new section 3004(b) to make de.
terminations for wastes with similar con-
stituents. The Administrator may make •ge-
neric” determinations of appropriate levels
or methods of treatment for similar wastes.
CERTAIN LAND DISPOSAL PRACTICES
• Mr. JOHNSTON. My question con-
cerns the scope of paragraph (7) of the
land.disposal provisions as modified by
amendment 2798. For example, the
drycleaning industry has developed
new treatment technology and tech-
niques which reduce the perchloroeth-
ylene content of Its wastes be1o 28
percent. Preliminary testing Indicates
that leachate from such wastes con-
tains very little perc. Would paragraph
(7) be applicable to this type of treat-
ment?
• Mr. CHAFEE. Yes; one objective of
amended paragraph (7) is to give EPA
the discretion to authorize the land
disposal of wastes which have been
treated. The focus of the amended lan-
guage is the protection of health and
the environment by diminishing toxic-
ity of wastes or reducing migration of
hazardous constituents In wastes.
Thus, if wastes treated as you describe
are of low toxicity or if leachate from
them contains safe levels of hazardous
constituents. EPA may. In its discre-
tion, promulgate regulations specify-
ing the cirurnstances in hich land
disposal is authorized. In considering
such questions. EPA bill almost as-
suredly take into account whether vast
quantities or only small amounts of
such astes are generated. I would an-
ticipate that EPA will promptly deter-
mine whether such wastes meet the
criteria In paragraph (7) and then pro-
mulgate the necessary regulations
within the specified time. In making
this determination. EPA will certainly
use the best information available to it
at the time.s
AMENDMENT TO CLARITY APPLICATION OF RE-
QUIREMENT TO COtIDYCT GROUND WATER MON-
ITORING
This amendment will provide an incentive
for the de elopment of safer and more pro-
tecti ’e land disposal methods for hazardous
aaste. It would do so b) giting the Adminis-
trator of EPA the authority, under certain
limited circumstances, to exempt facilities
from the groundwater monitoring require.
ment now included in S 757.
The requirement for groundwater moni-
toring at conventional landfills, surface Im-
poundments. and other treatment. Storage
or disposal facilites as set forth in the Bill.
is retain. This amendment would authorize
waiver of these requirements only when
EPA can find that they are unnecessary. In
order to make this finding, the Administra-
tor aould hate to conclude that the facility
would, in essence, be designed to incorpo-
rate the functional equivalent of ground.
water monitoring within Its self.contained
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
structure. EPA could not make such a find-
ing for a conventional land disposal facility.
A facility which could qualify for the ex-
emption under this amendment must first
of all be an engineered structure which re-
ceises only waste that is in solid form. such
as contaminated soil or debris, or has been
solidified. A facility accepting liquid naste.
or taste containing free liquids, would be
disqualified from further consideration for
the exemption A qualifying structure siould
also have to be engineered to hase Inner
and outer layers of containment enclosing
the taste.
The facility would also have to meet an
additional series of stringent protective
standards. It must be designed and operated
to keep out water from precipitation or run-
of f. This means that the Intrinsic engineer-
ing of the structure must keep eater away
from the waste. A conventional clay or syn-
thetic cap would not be good enough. The
facility would also have to Incorporate inter-
nal leak detection and leachate collection
systems. These systems, which would be
built into the structure at each internal con-
ta(ninent layer .aould provide the functional
equivalent of grounciwater monitoring. In
the unlikely event that any leachate did
form, the detection systems would signal
the operator before any leachate reached
the outer layer of containment,
An example of such a structure could be
an above grade concrete bunker or vault
within hlch waste would be placed, totally
surrounded by multiple liners, and which
would include Internal leak detection sys-
tems above, between, and below the Internal
liners. An abose grade bunker can be de-
signed so that rainfall ould run off the
structure aaay from the a.ste. This would
be In contrast to traditional below grade
landfills where the rainwater can penetrate
through the surface above the waste and
move down through the waste, carrying
leachate to groundwater.
Finally, the Administrator could not
exempt any structure unless he was reason-
ably certain that no hazardous constituents
from the facility would get out of the struc-
ture and reach ground, groundwater, or sur-
face water In other words, he would have to
be sure, under reasonably foreseeable cir-
cumstances, that the structure would safely
contain the waste arid its constituents.
Thus, the amendment does not give the
EPA Administrator unbridled discretion to
ignore the basic intent of the Bill. II does
give him the authority to exempt ground-
water monitoring when he finds that such
monitoring would be uzuiecessary or redun-
dant. It also gives the hazardous waste dis-
posal industry an incentive to design facili-
ties which are inherently safer and more
protective.
AMENDMENT To CLARIFY SCOPE OF NEW SECTION
3004 IL l SAN ON CERTAIN WELLS
New Section 3004(e) as added by S. 757
would preclude the injection of ground
ater contaminated with hazardous taste
into or above formations containing under-
ground sourres of drinking water esen
where such injection is part of a clean-up
action under the Comprehensive Environ-
mental Response. Compensation and Liabil-
ity Act of 1980 (CERCLA) or RCRA. This
amendment till clarify the intent of that
provision and give EPA the discretion to
allow the use of Class IV wells in certain
limited circumstances to conduct clean-up
operations
The injection of hazardous waste into or
above drinking water sources is an Inherent-
ly dangerous disposal practice that poses an
unacceptable risk to human health and the
environment. This amendment does not
alter the intent that such injection facilities
S 9179
be properly clo ed in short ordcr and that
new facilities not be allowed in the future.
While we seek to establish a complete pro
hibition on such injection as a disposal tec’h-
nique. we recognize the potential salue of
such injection practices as an integral part
of some clcan-up actions at hazardous aa.;te
sites. The pumping, treatment and re-inj e
tion of already contaminated water may b-
the preferred removal or remedial tech
nique to assure adequate clean-up in a cost
effective manner. We do not intend to bar
such Injections when they are erisironmen-
tally beneficial and conducted solely s.c a
means of clean-up, rather than a.c a form of
initial disposal. The prohibition. therefore.
is not intended to extend to those situations
sshere injection into or abose drinking
water sources is used as a method to clean-
up contaminated aquitiers at hazardous
aste sites and the clean-up plan has been
approsed under the procedures established
under this Act or under the Comprehensise
Ens ironmental Response. Compensation
and Liability Act.
AMENDMENT TO CLARITY AUTHORITY 0? ADMIN-
ISTRATOR TO MODIFY APPLICATION OF CER-
TAiN REQUIREMENTS TO SOME MINING
WASTES
This amendment would modify and
expand a prosislon of Section 8(a) of S. 757.
as reported, concerning the authqrity of the
Administrator of EPA to modify certain re-
quirements that might become applicable to
some mining astes under Subtitle C of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act.
The amendment provides that, if certain
mining a sates become subject to regulation
as hazardous aastes. the Administrator of
EPA has the authority to modify the re-
quiremeiits of new subsections (b). (flU),
and (g) of section 3004 regarding land dis-
posal limitations, minimum technological
requIrements for new landfills and surface
impoundments (other than the groundwater
monitoring requirement), and correctise
action for releases of hazardous waste, as
they apply to landfills and surface Impound-
ments receiving such mining wastes, to take
into account the special characteristics (e g
high-volume, low-toxicity) of the mining
aastes. the practical difficulties associated
with the implementation of such require-
ments, and various site-specific factors. The
modified requirements would continue to be
subject to and must satisfy the law’s under-
lying requirement and ultimate standard
that RCRA regulations assure protection of
human health and the environment. Practi-
cal or economic considerations can only be
used to select among alternatise require-
ments ahich assure protection of human
health and the environment.
The purpose of this amendment is simply
to assure that If the Administrator of EPA
decides to regulate mining wastes under
Subtitle C. he is not limited to the regula-
tory framework or standards that are desel.
oped under section 3004(b). (f 1). and (g)
for hazardous chemical wastes. The Com-
mittee Report (at p. 28-29) includes a de-
scription of some mining wastes and some of
the reasons it may be inappropriate to sub-
ject them to the same requirements ahich
apply to other types of waste.
Retention of the requirement that protec.
tion of human health and the ens Ironment
be assured is not intended to ins oke a spe-
cific technical standard of containment,
such as a “no migration” standard Such an
Interpretation aould In fact Completely
frustrate the purpose of the amendment. In
this context the phrase Is used in a broad.
os er-arching, nontechnical sense. ahich can
only be translated into technical standards
-------
August 4, 198 ?
if we are serious about solving the
problems caused by illegal transport-
ers.
Again, referring to our subcomniit-
e hearing, the chairman of the Ne
, ork State Senate Select Committee
on Crime, brought out a typical exam-
pie of the interstate nature of hazard-
ous waste transportation. A load of a-
chemical known as MEK or methyl
ethyl keytone began a trip from New
Jersey, to a West Virginia disposal site.
according to the shipping manifest, re-
quired under Federal and State law,
That truck mysteriously wound up in
a Long Island parking lot, where it
overturned with the hatch covers
opened, in the middle of the night.
The chemical polluted Long Island’s
aquifer, the sole source of drinking
water for nearly 3 million people. For
those of you unfamiliar with the geog-
z’aphy of the Northeast it was neces-
sary to go approxImately 50 miles east
from New Jersey, crossing three
bridges to reach Long Island, and that
same trip would have to be repeated,
to get back on the road to West Viz--
ginia,
This Is only one example, of mci-
dent ,s uncovered during our investiga-
tions, which covered Baltimore, Chica-
go, and the New York metropollta,n
area, and it underscores the need for
continued Federal involvemexit,
No enforcement mechs-nLcm Is per-
‘ct. however, the EPA and DOT have
t of work to do, to improve the cur-
. fl situation, I hope our amendment
‘ill emphasize—what I see as a need
-- [ or greater supervision over transport-
ers of hazardous wasr.e .
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairz n. will
the gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. COLLINS. I yield to the gentle-
man from New Jersey.
Mr. F ’LORIO. Mr. Chairman, the
gentlewoman’s study which is author-
ized here is very lmnpoz-tant. It is some-
thing that we have discussed.
Mr. Chairman, I support it and I
urge support for the amendment,
Mrs. COLLINS. I thank the gentle-
mar
Mr. LENT, Mr. Chairman, will the
gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. COLLINS. I yield to the gentle-
man from New York.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, I thank
the gentlewoma.ri for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, we have no objection
and accept the amendment
Mrs. COLLINS. I thank the gentle-
man.
The CHAIRMAN. The question Is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
woman from Illinois (Mrs. CowNs).
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHA1RM.AJ I, Are there further
endmeriLs to section 3’ — —
it t. FL.CRIO. Mi-. Chairman, I have
rurther amendments to section 3.
Mr. CHAIRMAN. The Clerk wi U
read section 4.
The Clerk read as follows:
INTERIM CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
INJECTION
Sac, 4. (a) Na’ii SECTIoN 7010.—Subtitle-.G
is amended by adding the following new sec.
tion at the end thereof:
‘INTERIM CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
INJECTION
“Sac. 7010. (a) UNDEROROUN Sovacz or
DRINKiNG WATER—NO hazardous waste may
be disposed of by underground injection—
‘(1) into a formation which cor.tains
(within one-quarter mile of the well used for
such underground mject lofl) an under-
ground source of drinking waLer or -
12) above such a formation.
The prohibition established under para-
graph (2) shall not apply if the person in-
jecting such hazardous waste establishes to
the satisfaction of the Administrator, or the
State in the case Of a State which has as-
sumed primar ’ enforcement responsibility
under the Safe Drinking Water Act (title
XIV of the Public Health Service Act) for
enforcement of such prohibition, that the
Injection will not cause hazai’dous waste to
migrate into drinking water sources or oth-
erwise endanger drinking water sources,
The prohibitions established under this sub-
section shall take effect six months alter
the enactment of this section except in the
case of any State in which identical prohibi-
tions are in effect before such date under
the Sale Drinking Water Act.
“(b) Ein’oRc INT._Except as provided in
subsection (C), the prohibitions established
under subsection (a) shall be enforced by
the Adznzmstrator under section 3008 and
7003 of this Act and snail be treated (for
purposes of section 7002) as requirements
which have become effective pursuant to
this Act.
“Cc) SAP’s DRnncxrrc WA Acr.—The pro-
hibitions established under parlLgraphs (1)
and (2) of subsection (a) shall be enforce-
able only under the Sale Drinking Water
ACt in any State—
“U) which has adopted indentlcai prohibi-
tions under part C of the Safe Drinking
Water Act arid which has assumed primary
enforcement responsibility under that Act
for enforcement of such prohibitions: and
“(2) in which the Administrator has
adopted Identical prohibitions under the
Sale Drinking Water Act and is exercising
primary enforcement responsibility under
that tt for enforcement of such prohibi-
tions,
“Cd) The terms ‘primary enforcement re-
sponsibility’, ‘underground source of drink-
trig water’, ‘formation and ‘veil’ have the
same meanings as provided in regulations of
the Administrator under the Safe Drinking
Water Act.”,
(B) T ztg or CoNrnrrs.—The table of con-
tents for such subtitle Cl is amended by,in-
serting the following new item at the end
thereof:
“Sec. 7010. Interim control of hazardous
waste injection.”.
Mr. FLORIO (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
sent that section 4 be considered as
read and printed in the Racoan.
The CHAIRM_AN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey?
There was no objection.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I move
that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly the Committee rose;
and the Speaker having resumed the
chair, Mr. BARNARD, Chairman of the
Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union, reported that that
H 5535
Committee, having had under consid-
eration the bill (H.R. 2867) to amend
the Solid Waste Disposal Act to an-
thorize appropriations for the fiscal
years 1984 through 1986, and for other
purposes, had come to no resolution
thereon,
APPOINTMENT AS MEMBERS OF
DELEGATION TO A’ I’TEND CON-
FERENCE OF INTERPARLIA-
MENTARY UNION IN SEOUL
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
The SPEAKER. Pursuant to the
provisions of 22 U.S.C. 276A—i. as
amended by Public Law 95-45, the
Chair appoint. as members of the del-
egation to attend the Conference of
the Interparliamentary Union to be
held in Seoul, Republic of Korea on
October 4 through Octooer 12. 1983,
the following Members on the part of
the House: -
Mr. Psppzn of Florida, chairman;
Mr. HAMXLTQN of Indiana, vice chair-
man, —
Mr. E wxrns of California;
Mrs. BOGGS of Louisiana:
Mr. LzvrrAs of Georgia;
Mr. H. .i.i. of Ohio;
Mr. SMZTSr of Florida;
Mr. PRITCHARD of Washington,
Mr. Ilytis of flhinois
Mr. MCGRATH of New Yorlc
Mr. BATEM.AR of Virginia; and
Mr. BOERLntT of New York.
ADDITION OF NAME
MEMBER AS COSPONSOR
H.R. 1758
Mr CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unam.
mous consent that ray name be added
as a cosponsor to H.R, 1758.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Missouri?
There was no objection.
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
(Mr. EDGAR asked and was given
perm.ission to.,address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend hIs
remarks.)
Mr. EDGAR. Mr. Speaker, on
Monday, August 1, 1983, 1 was una ’oi-
dably absent when the Housc was con-
sidering H.R. 1646. the Railroad Re
tiremerit Solvency Act of 1983. Had I
been present, I would have voted in
favor of this important legislation,
which averts a drastic benefit cut by
means of a compromise between rail
labor and management to insure the
solvency of railroad retirement,
H.R, 1646 is crucial for preserving
the retirement benefits of many senior
citizens and the future benefits of rail-
road employees: I would have joined
the vast majority of my colleagues iii
Voting for it.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
OF
TO
-------
to o7 S4 s (
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — IOUSE &pleraber 8, 1982
public comment, publish and submit to the
Congress a report listing those hazardous
wastes for which one or more types of land
disposal may not be protective of human
health and the environment based upon the
toiilclty. mobility, persistence and ability of
the waste to bioaceumulate The report
shall also identify hazardous wastes for
which there exists one or more technologi.
eallv feasible means of treatment, recovery,
or disposal (including incineration, neutral.
ization, fixation, chemi j destruction, or
any other means of thermal, chemical.
physical, or biological treatment, recovery,
or disposal) other than land d!sposal which
will protect human health and the environ.
inent. The report shall include an assess-
ment of the cogs of such other means of
treatment, recovery, or disposal. The report
shall also include an assessment of other
hazardous wastes which are unsuitable for
other means of waste treatment or disposa’.
The report under this subsection shall be
modified and supplemented from time to
time at Ler it initial publication as new In-
formation becomes available,
‘(e) RtsliucTloxs oie Lsuto DISPOSAL....NOt
later t.han 9 months after the date on which
the report is required to be published under
subsection Cd). and from time to tune there.
after, the AdmjjiJst r shall promulgate
regulatio respecting those hazardous
wastes for which land disposal may not be
protective of hWTIaZI health and the envl.
ronment based upon the toxicity, mobility,
perslstenc , and ability of the waste to
bioaccumulate Such regulations shall con-
tain effective dates that take into account
the Administrators best estimate of the
amount of time necessary to install nation.
wide sufficient capacIty 01 alternative treat-
ment, reco ery or disposal methoda identi-
fied pursuant to section d. After any effec-
the date such prohibition shall not apply
when it can be demonstrated on a case-by.
case basis that capacity for such alternative
means of disposition is not reasonably avail.
able. Factors to be Considered in determu .
ing reasonable availability shall include, but
shall not be limited to, geographic proxljn.
Ity and the nature of panicujai’ wastes. For
purposes of such regWatio the Adznt is.
trator shall—
“(11 consider the ability of land disposal
facilities to contain hazardous waste s over
time;
“(2) consider alternative treatn%ent aseth.
ads:
“(3 examine the actions taken by State
goverflmen v.ith regard to such controls,
and
“(4) review all halogenated orga
wastes. ‘.
Sec. 6. (a) N0TICE....41) SectIon 3010 of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by i .
serting the foflos ,ng after the first sentence
thereof. ..Nc, later than twelve months
after the date of the enactment of this sen
tence—
‘Ci the owner or operator of any facility
which produces a fuel (Al from an) hazard.
Otis waste Identified or listed Under section
3001. (B) from such hazardo waste identi-
fied or listed Under Section 3001 and any
other material. (C) from Used oil, or CD)
from used oil and any Other mate aI
“(2) the owner or Operator of any facility
which burns for Purposes of energ 1 recov-
ery any fuel produced as provided in p .
graph (1) or any fuel which others- coi’.
tains used oil or any hazardous a a.s identi.
tied or listed Under section 3001; and
“(3) any person who distributes or mar-
kets any fuel a hich is produced as provided
in paragraph (1 or any fuel which Other.
wise contains used oil or any hazardous
waste identified or listed Under section 3001
H6758 -
esa Identification, or applying knowledge of mendations respecting whether or not exist-
the characteristica of the waste based upon big law applicable to such mixtures are ade-
materials or processes used, or generic test- quat to protect human health and the en-
tog for an industry where waste streams of vironznent from the hazards associated with
generato within the industry have the such wastes Not later than six months after
same or similar characteristica. the date of the enactment or this section,
“(iii) labeling requiremen prior to waste the Administrator shall submit to Congress
shipments ma) be modified so that such re- a notice setting forth the progress made on
quiremen may be satisfied on the basis of the report required Under this section.
information obtained through testing, or
process identification or applying know’l. )MZP.RDOUS WASTE INJIC ’rioN; IJQUIDs U I
edge of the charac (eristj of the waste
LANDFILLS
based upon materials or Processes used, or Sec. 5. SectIon 3004 of the Solid Waste
generic testing for an industry where waste Disposal Act is amended by inserting “Ca) l ii
streams of generators within the Lndugr GENEasL,....” after “3004.” and by adding the
have the same or Etr flar charartcnstt ‘ following at the end thereof:
“B In the case of standards under r “tb) Uaz*jtp u 5 WASTE INJEc ’FIoN._(l)
Ibm 3003. provide that transportation re- t’ i n months after the enactment of
quiremen for smaller quantities of hazard- the Resource Conservation and Recovery
otis wastes may vary from those applicable Act Reau(horimtion Act of 1982. the dispos.
to hazardous waste generated in excess of al of hazard u., waste by injection through
one thou ind kiJograzn during any calen. a class lv well Into an underground source
dar month, and of drinking water Is prohibited, Twelve
“CC) in the case of standards Under section months after the date of enactment of the
3004. provide that storage requiremen Resource Conservation and Recovery
shall be modified to allow on.size waste stor. Reauthor tion Act of 1982, disposal of
age for up to 180 days without the require. haz5j’do waste by injection through a
ment of a permit, class IV well which Is above an undergro
source of drinking water is prohibited until
The varIane as specified In subparagrap such practices are regulated b- State pro-
(A. (B), and (C) shall apply to all hazardous grams or by the Administration pursuant to
waste generat during any calendar month section 1422 of the Safe Drinking Water
in a Quantity of less than one thousand kilo- Act. In those States that have not undertali.
grams unless the Administrator demon- en a lznlnlstrative responsibility for the tin-
strates that other standards are necessary derground injection program with regard to
to protect human health and the environ, injection into an underground source of
ment. In addition. the Administrator iS dl’ drinking water by January 1. 1983. the Ad-
rected to examine the requirements lii ministi-ator shall assume such responsibility
effect under section sooa and, in coopers- at that time. For purposes of this subsec-
tion with the Secretary of Trsnsportatio tion. the terms ‘underground source of
modify regulatio in effect on the date of drinking water’ and ‘cl s IV well’ shall have
the enactment of this paragraph to the the same meaning as pro%ided in regulatio
• extent appropriate to conform such require- of the Adjnjnistrator under the Safe Drink-
ments to the scale of the operations in. lngWaterAc
Voived The actions of (he Administrator “(2) Nothing In paragraph (1) shall affect
under this paragraph shall be treated as a any well which injects fluids;
flondiscretion ’y duty for Purposes of see- “(A) which are brought to the surface In
tion ‘1002. eonne(’tijon with conventional oil or natural
“(3) The Administrator may promulgate gas production•
regulatio under this subtitle which estab- which are brought to the surface in
lished special standards for, or exempt from connection with the Withdrawal of natural
regulation, hazardous wastes which are gen-
erated by any generator in a Quantity l from undergro storage reservoirs:
“(C) which are brought to the surface in
than one hundred kilograms during any Calrn connection with the production of geopres.
endar month.
“(4) Nothing in this subsection shall be sured methane;
construed to affect or impair the validity of “(D) for enhanced recovery of oil or natu.
regulatio of the AdmInjgra p promwg
ed prior to the date of the enactment of the “(E) for storage of hydrocarbons which
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act are liquid or gases at standard temperature
Reauthorimtion Act of 1982 wIth respect, to and pressure.
hazardous waste generated by genersto of “ Nothing in paragraph (1) shall affect
less than one thousand kilogra per anY well which injects fluids for extraction
of nilnerais or energy, including, but not
month of hazardous waste, except that after limited to:
the date eighteen months after such date of
enactment, such prior regulatio shall not “(A) mining of sulfur by the 1’ rasch proc.
apply to hazardous waste generat,e j by gen-
“(B) solution mining of minerals;
erators which genera more than minimal “(C) in’situ combustion of fossil fuel; and
Quantities (one hundred kllogra or lesal “CD) recovery of geothermal energy to
of hazardous waste per month.”, [ , , oduee electric power.
HAZAIWOO5 WASTE MIXED WITH DOMESTW “Cc) LIQUIDS ii, LAND?IU3. —NOt later than
SEWAGE One Year after the enactment of the Re-
Sec. 4 The Administrator of the Environ. source Consen’ation and Recovery Act
mental Protection Agency shall, not later Reauthorimtion Act of 1982, the Adminis.
than one year after the date of the enact.. trator shall promulgate final regulatio
nient of this Act, submIt a report to the which minimize the disposal of liquid haz’
Congress concerning hazardous wastes iden. ardous waste, and free liquids contained In
tified or listed under sectIon 3001 of the hazardous w’aste, In landfi Pending pro-
Solid Waste Disposal Act which are cx- mulgation of such regulatio , the Admin .
eluded from regulation pursuant to subtitle trator shall maintain the current require.
C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act under ments In regulstio under this section re-
reguia(io exempting ml ictw’es of domestic specting the disposal in landfills of liquid
sewage and other wastes that pass through hazardous waste and free Uquids contained
a sewer system to a publicly owned treat. in hazardous waste,
nient works for treatment, Such report shall “Cd) L.urp Dispos Repoara —The Adnsi.n.
specify the types and Quantities of such has. Istrator shall, not later than one Year after
Rrdous wastes which are exempted pursuant the date of the enactment of this subsee.
to such regulatio and shall include recoin. Lion, and after notice and opport U n ity for
-------
.f . 3c37 ó s
22 HAZARDOUS WASTE INJECTI0Zq; LIQUIDS IN LANDFILLS
23 SEC. 5. Section 3004 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
24 is amended by inserting “(a) iN GENERAL.—” after
25 “3004. “and by adding the following at the end thereof:
1 “(b) HAZARDOUS WASTE INJECT 1ON.—(1) Six
2 months after the enactment of the Resource Conservation and
3 Recovery Act Reauthorization Act of 1982, the disposal of
4 hazardous waste by injection through a class IV well into an
5 underground source of drinking water is prohibited. Six
6 months after such date of enactment, disposal of hazardous
7 waste by injection through a class IV well which is above an
8 underground source of drinking water is prohibited until
9 such practices are regulated by State programs or by the Ad-
10 ministrator pursuant to section 1422 of the Safe Drinking
11 Water Act. For purposes of this subsection, the terms ‘under-
12 ground source of drinking water’ and ‘class IV well’ shall
13 have the same meaning as provided in regulations of the Ad-
14 ministrator under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
15 “(2) Nothing in paragraph (1) shall affect any well
16 which injects fluids:
17 “(A) which are brought to the surface in connec-
18 tion with conventional oil or natural gas production;
19 “(B) for enhanced recovery of oil or natural gas;
20 or
21 “(C) for storage of hydrocarbons which are liquid
22 at standard temperature and pressure.
4 oc
-------
23 “(3) Nothing in paragraph (1) shall affect any well
24 which injects fluids for extraction of minerals or energy, in-
25 cluding, but not limited to:
1 “(A) mining of sulfur by the Frasch process;
2 “(B) solution mining of minerals;
3 “(C) in-situ combustion of fossil fuel; and 6 p. 2
4 “(D) recovery of geothermal energy to produce
5 electric power.
-------
N 7-c7o 7J Co & 7 t
In Section 5(a) the Committee also seeks to clarify and reaffirm
its intent that the Administrator protect public health and the en-
vironment from improper hazardous waste disposal practices, includ-
ing those that endanger underground sources of drinking water. In -
particular, the Committee has found compelling evidence that under-
ground injection of hazardous waste above and into underground
sources of drinking water may seriously threaten current and potential
drinking water supplies, and that this practice must be prohibited
expeditiously to protect public health and the environment. According
to the GAO thousands of municipal water supply systems already
fail to meet Federal drinking water quality Standards (CED 82—43).
Regulation of this practice by the Administrator is currently re-
quired under RCRA, as well as under the Safe Drinking Water Act
(P.L. 95—253). Current EPA regulations expressly authorize con-
tinued injection of hazardous waste directly into or above presently-
used and potentially useable underground sources of drinking water.
It is the Committee’s intention that iniection of hazardous waste
directly into USDWs be absolutely prohibited. and that injection of
hazardous wastes above a USDW also be prohibited until State UIC
programs or EPA regulations under the Safe Drinking Water Act
strictly controlling variances from the latter prohibition are finally I
promulgated.
•The Administrator or a State which has assumed primacy for the
drinking water program may grant a limited variance from the pro- I
hibition on injection of hazardous wastes above a USDW where the
person seeking the variance affirmatively demonstrates, based on data I
collected following a thorough and comprehensive scientific and
hydrogeological investigation of the aquifer, its recharge zone and the
surrounding areas, that underground injection of hazardous waste
above and underground source of drinking water will not endanger
public health or the environment. Under no conditions may a variance
be granted for direct injection into an underground source of drinking
water, an activity which the Committee intends to prohibit entirely.
In authorizing the Administrator to grant a limited variance, how-
ever, the Committee wishes to clarify that the burden placed on the
variance-seeker is an intentionally heavy one. consistent with the over-
riding intent of RCRA to protect public health and the environment.
To receive a variance, the applicant must prove that underground in-
jection of hazardous waste above the under iround source of drinking
water in question will not endanger puh’ic health or the environment.
The Committee intends that the “will not endanger public health or
the environment” standard for a varianca be given the meaning ac-
corded under RCRA. Under this stands rd any reasonable possibility
of migration of hazardous waste constituents from an injection well
into an underground source of drinking water would constitute “en-
dangerment”, regardless of whethar actutl contamination of the aqui-
fer has taken place. Unless the variance-seeker can prove that the pub-
lic health or environment will not be endangered by the proposed
injection, a variance may not be granted by the Administrator or the
primacy State.
The Committee wishes to stress that it seeks to protect USDWs
not only for current use but also for potential future use as drinkin
water sources. This may include water sources which presently excee
minimum intake water quality requirements or maximum contaminant
levels, or which are not presently accessible for use as a drinking water
source. The Committee intends that the definitions of “underground
source of drinking water” and “class IV well” be the same as that
contained in EPA’s underground injection control regulations, 40
CFR 146.03, 146.05, respectively, except that for the purposes of this
Section the Committee intends that no underground source of drink-
ing water be exempted from the prohibitinns or restrictions on under-
ground injection of hazardous wastes.
-------
September 8, 1982
Ised to make grants to local gover en au-
thorities to constrijc demonstration y
cling Intermediate processing centers. Such
grants may also be used for the acquLsItio 0
of lands necessary for such cente notwith.
Standing subsection (a)(2)(A).
“(2) Grants under this Subsection may be
made only to a local gorermnen unit which
demonstrates a successful past experience in
multimateriaj curbside source separatIon
progran at the municipal level. Grants
Under this subsection may be made only to a
local gote,nmen unit which has approve(j,
and expressed its intention to carry out, a
plan for a recycling intermediate processing
center ahith_
“A) Is part of a COUflty.wide recycling
program thRt includes curbside collection of
recyclable material and central processing
at the intermediate processing centei-
“(B) projects commencement of operation
of the center not later than October 1983;
and
“(C) projects the processing at such center
of an annual total of not less than 21.000
tons of recyclable material a (thus 3 years
after commencement of operatio
“(3) No grant may be made under this
Subsection to the local go ernxfl of any
political subdivision having a population of
less than 175.000 or greater than 225.000.
Not more than $900,000 of the funds made
available under subsection (aX3yc may be
Used to make grants under this Subsection,
“(4) Section 8004 shall not apply to any
grants made pursuant to this Subsectioiaj’,
Mr. FLOIUC , (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the amendment in the
nature of a substitute be considered as
read and printed in the RECOan.
The CHAIRMMJ Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey?
There was no objection,
(Mr. FLORIO asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chatnnaxs, I
would at the out,et Publicly express
my appreciation to au who have been
involved In fashioning this compro-
mise proposal.
The substitute makes several techni-
cal and substantive changes to H.R.
6307:
Regarding small generato , the bill
explicitly modifies the administrative
and managerial requIrem for these
generato prior to the actual disposal
or tr.eatment of the wastes. However,
when wastes are taken to be treated or
disposed of, the wastes must go to a
Proper hazardou.s waste facility, and
not a Sanitary landfill or municipal
dump. For example, the maximum
storage period for smaller generators
is extended to 180 days from 90. This
means that t :e ’ generator5 would
Only be required to dispose of their
wastes twice a year. but that it be done
Properly.
Section 4 of the substitute iricorpo-
rates the Public Works Corrunittee
amendment on the disposal of hazard.
ous wastes into sewer systems.
Section 5 makes a number of techni-
cal changes to the undergro injec-
tion prohibitions, and incorporates a
requirement to Impose restrictions on
the land disposal of certain hazardous
wastes as may be necessary to protect
7
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
human health and the environnjent.
This latter amendment embodies the
approach of the LaFalee amendment,
and is a much needed addition to the
bill.
SectIon 6 Is amended to require that
only hazardous wastes listed or Identi-
fied Under the regulatlo will be con-
sidered for controls when burned In
boilers. This section also requires that
12 months posteriactme and the
Agency will concurrently publish a no-
tification requirement for those who
burn, blend, or distribute fuels con-
taining hazardous wastes, and that
such fuels be labeled so that consum-
ers are aware of the hazardous waste
content of any fuels they may be
buying.
Section 7 Is amended to clarify that
permits can be Issued prior to the com-
pletion or required actions on the con-
dition that compliance schedules and
financial assw ances for such actions
are specified in the permit,
Section 9 incorporates the Public
Works and Energy and Commerce
Committee anlendinents to the Na-
tional Groundwater Comzniss lop
Section ii requires the Agency to
promulgate standards for hazardous
waste recycling practices as necessary
to protect public health and the envi-
ronment.
Section iz emphasizes that in the
solid waste planning process, adequate
provision should be given to both re-
source recovery and recycling technol-
ogies. and that these decision, remain
at the local level. -
AMENDMENT OPrFpZ BY sot. GRAMM TO In S
AMEZ4DMEYT IN InS NATURE OP A SCBSTlTutg
O7FERZo BY MR. PL0RIO
Mr. GRAMM. Mr. Speaker, I offer
an amendment to the amendment In
the nature of a Substitute
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Gw.rri to the
amendment in the nature of a substitute of.
fered by Mr. Pi.oiuo: Page 3. strike out line
22 and all that follows dowzi through line 16
on page 7 and substitute:
The AdmIn trator shall, not later than
three years after the date of the enactment
of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Reauthorj j 0 Act of 1982, complete a
Study and submit a report to the Congre
Concerning whether the pro sions of regu-
lations promulgat under this Act respect-
ing hazardous wa. te generated by small gen-
err ors in quantities of 1.000 kilograms or
less per calendar month should be modified
with respect to any class or category of haz-
ardous waste.
“(2) The study required under this section
shall thclude
‘(A) A profile of the generators hazard.
cas a sates, and aaste m,,.-sagemen practices
st ,t .ject to such provisions:
8i an asse ment of the hazmrcjs assocl.
,ated with z icb aastt’s h.nd practices, and
“(C) an analysis of the regulatory alterna.
tives to the exemption of such wastes from
the standards under this subtitle, including
an analysis of the cost-efgectiven oZ such
alternativeL
“(3) At Intervals of not more than one
year, and not more than two years, after the
date of the enactment of the Resource Con.
servation and Recos cry Reauthori tion Act
of 1982, the Administrator shall subm it an
H 6761
Interim report to the Congress settl forth
a detailed statement of the Status of the
study required under this subsection.”,
Mr. GRAMM (during the reading),
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
Sent that the amendment be Consid-
ered as read and printed In the
RECORD.
The CHAIRMAN Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Texas?
There was no objection,
(By unanimous consent, Mr. Gn.qsng
was allowed to proce for an addi-
tional 5 minutes.)
The CHAIRM &J , The gentlem
from Texas (Mr. GasssM) is recogni
for a total of 10 minutes,
Mr. GRAMM. Mr. Chairman, I
would like first to begin by talking
about how RCRA works today, about
the cutoff in terms of the size of the
generator.
I would like to talk about the restric-
tions Lmposed on the small generator
under existing law and under existing
regulatio issued by the Environmen.
tal Protection Agency,
I would like to talk about the rnoun-
tam of paperwork that they are cur-
rently exempt from under existing
regulatio at EPA.
I woul j like to talk about the confu-
sion that exists Concerning scientific
data and Its evaluation concerning the
small generato , and I would like to
argue for an amendment that sets up a
Study to get the facts before we begin
the legislative process,
Currently under RCRA, we Impose a
mountain of regulatjo and redtape,
and I believe rightly so, on those gen-
erators that produce more than 1.000
kilogranis of hazardous waste a
month. There are about 75.000 of
those generato and, accorcting to
EPA, they generate about 99 percent
of all the hazardous waste generat
In the country.
Small generato that generate less
than 1,000 k1iogra , 5 per month are
not burdened with the restrictions im-
posed under RCRA in terms of full re-
porting. it does not follow, however.
that they do not face restrictions in
the way that they dispose of hazas’d.
Os wastes.
The existence of Small and large
generators, according to EPA, basical-
ly breaks down as follows:
Those that generate more than 1,000
kI1ogra a month make up about 9
percent of the total generator 5 nation-
wide and they generate about 99 per-
cent of the waste, Those that generate
less than 1.000 k1]ogra per m:nth
compose abnut 91 percent of the gen-
erators and they generate about 1 per-
cent of the Waste.
Small generators are not exempt
from regulatio 5 Under existing pro-
cedures at EPA, they must determine
if the waste they generate is classified
as hazardous under RCRA, If the
waste Is so classified they then must
dispose of it either at an authorized
hazardous waste management facility
-------
,46 1l” -’- ,‘l,Qt Sl6NE
TITLE V—PROVISIONS RELATING TO SEVERAL SUBTITLES
OF THE SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL ACT
USE OF RECOVERED MATERIALS BY FEDERAL AGENCIES
SEC. 501. (a) Section 6002 of’ the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by adding the following new subsections after subsection
g) thereof—
“(h) DEFINITION—AS used in this section, in the case of paper
products, the term ‘recovered materials’ includes—
11) postconsumer materials such as—
“(A) paper, paperboard, and fibrous wastes from retail
stores, office buildings, homes, and so forth, after they have
passed through their end-usage as a consumer item. includ-
ing: used corrugated boxes; old newspapers; old magazines;
mixed waste paper; tabulating cards; and used cordage; and
“(B) all paper, paperboard, and fibrous wastes that enter
and are collected from municipal solid waste, and
“(2) manufacturing, forest residues, and other wastes such
as—
“(A) dry paper and paperboard waste generated after
completion of the papermaking process (that is, those man-
ufacturing operations up to and including the cutting and
trimming of the paper machine reel into smaller rolls or
rough sheets) including: envelope cuttings, bindery trim-
mings, and other paper and paperboard waste, resulting
from printing, cutting, forming, ahd other converting oper-
ations; bag, box, and carton manufacturing wastes; and butt
rolls, mill wrappers, and rejected unused stock; and
“(B) finished paper and paperboard from obsolete inven-
tories of paper and paperboard manufacturers, merchants,
wholesalers, dealers, printers, converters, or others;
“(C) fibrous byproducts of harvesting, manufacturing,
extractive, or Wood-cutting processes, flax, straw, linters,
bagasse, slash, and other forest residues;
-------
H. R. 2867—55
“(D) wastes generated by the conversion of goods made
from fibrous material (that is, waste rope from cordage
manufacture, textile mill waste, and cuttings); and
“(E) fibers recovered from waste water which otherwise
would enter the waste stream.
“(1) PROCUREMENT PROGRAM.—(1) Within one year after the date
of publication of applicable guidelines under subsection (e), each
procuring agency shall develop an affirmative procurement program
which will assure that items composed of recovered materials will be
purchased to the maximum extent practicable and which is consist-
ent with applicable provisions of Federal procurement law.
“(2) Each affirmative procurement program required under this
subsection shall, at a minimum, contain—
“(A) a recovered materials preference program;
“(B) an agency promotion program to promote the preference
program adopted under subparagraph (A);
“(C) a program fo r requiring estimates of the total percentage
of recovered material utilized in the performance of a contract;
certification of minimum recovered material content actually
utilized, where appropriate; and reasonable verification proce-
dures for estimates and certifications; and
“(D) annual review and monitoring of the effectiveness of an
agency’s affirmative procurement program.
In the case of paper, the recovered materials preference program
required under subparagraph (A) shall provide for the maximum
use of the post cohsumer recovered materials referred to in subsec-
tion (hKl).
“(3) in developing the preference program, the following options
shall be considered for adoption:
“(A) Case-by-Case Policy Development: Subject to the limita-
tions of subsection (cXl) (A) through (C), a policy of awarding
contracts to the vendor offering an item composed of the highest
percentage of recovered materials practicable (and in the case of
paper, the highest percentage of the post consumer recovered
materials referred to in subsection (hXl)). Subject to such limita-
tions, agencies may make an award to a vendor offering items
with less than the maximum recovered materials content.
“(B) Minimum Content Standards: Minimum recovered mate-
rials content specifications which are set in such a way as to
assure that the recovered materials content (and in the case of
paper, the content of post consumer materials referred to in
subsection (hXl)) required is the maximum available without
jeopardizing the intended end use of the item, or violating the
limitations of subsection (cXl) (A) through (C).
Procuring agencies shall adopt one of the options set forth in
subparagraphs (A) and (B) or a substantially equivalent alternative,
for inclusion in the affirmative procurement program.”.
(b) Section 6002(e) of the Solid Waste D sposa1 Act is amended
by—
(1) adding the following after “section” in paragraph (1): “,
and in the case of paper, provide for maximizing the use of post
consumer recovered materials referred to in subsection (hXl)”;
and
(2) striking out “for at least three product categories” and all
that follows down through “1982” and substituting “for paper
within one hundred and eighty days after the enactment of the
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, and for three
-------
6 - ,“ G
H. R. 2867—56
additional product categories (including tires) by October 1,
1985”.
(C) Section 6002(cXl) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by inserting after “highest percentage of recovered materials practi-
cable” the following: “(and in the case of paper, the highest
percentage of the poetconsumer recovered materials referred to in
subsection (hXl) practicable)”.
(d) Section 6002(g) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by—
(1) striking out “the policy expressed in” and substituting
“the requirements of”; and
(2) by inserting before the period at the end thereof the
following: “, and to, every two years beginning in 1984, report to
the Congress on actions taken by Federal agencies and the
progress made in the implementation of this section, including
agency compliance with subsection (d)”.
(e) Section 6002(dX 1) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by striking out “five years after the date of enactment of this Act”
and substituting “eighteen months after the date of enactment of
the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984”.
(0(1) Section 4001 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by
section 301 of this Act, is further amended by inserting “, including
those needs created by thorough implementation of section 6002(h),”
after “adequate provision shall be given to the present and reason-
ably anticipated future needs ”.
(2) Section 1006(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by
adding the following new paragraph after paragraph (2) thereof (as
added by section 102 of this Act):
“(3) Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, in developing
solid waste plans, it is the intention of this Act that in determining
the size of a waste-to-energy facility, adequate provisions shall be
given to the present and reasonably anticipated future needs, in-
cluding those needs created by thorough implementation of section
6002(h), of the recycling and resource recovery interests within the
area encompassed by the solid waste plan.”.
-------
Hr’ ?, LOh’F 17 . - Pt , p 1 1 - t
121
SECTION 50 1—USE OF RECOVERED MATERIALS By FEDERAL AGENCIES
House b ilL—The House bill amends section 6002(d)(1) to require
all Federal agencies that have responsibility for drafting or review-
ing specifications for procurement items, to review and revise their
standards and specifications that serve to exclude recovered mate-
rials or otherwise limit the use of recovered materials, within 18
months of enactment.
Senate amendment.—The Senate amendment contains a similar
provision.
Conference substitute. —The conference substitute adopts the
House bill.
The influence which the Federal government can exert through
its purchasing power to stimulate demand of and use of recovered
materials should be exercised more vigorously.
To assure the fullest participation by procuring agencies, the
Conferees wish to resolve any ambiguity with respect to Section
6002’s coverage of the Department of Transportation, in particular,
the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The FHWA is a
“procuring agency” under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, and is
therefore fully responsible for implementing guidelines and other
requirements of section 6002. It is the intent of Congress that both
FHWA’s direct procurement and indirect Federal-aid programs
(Federal Highway Trust Fund) be covered by the requirements of
Section 6002 as amended by this Act. Indirect purchases by the
Federal Aviation Administration and the Urban Mass Transit Ad-
ministration are also covered under Section 6002 in the same
manner as is the FHWA. Coverage of the FHWA’s direct and indi-
rect procurement activities under this amendment extends to the
review of procurement specifications pursuant to Section 6002(d), as
amended, in addition to the affirmative procurement program re-
quired under this section.
Subsection (bX2) requires the EPA to issue a procurement guide-
line for “tires” by October 1, 1985. The term “tires” refers to the
use of rubber recovered from scrap tires for use in asphalt materi-
als for road construction and maintenance. This is in line with ex-
isting Federal policy as established by the Surface Transportation
Act of 1982. It also includes the use of retreaded tires. Both EPA
and the Department of Energy have recognized retreading of tires
as an effective means of resource recovery and reducing waste.
Other promising uses of scrap tires, such as the State of New Jer-
sey’s innovative use of scrap times for artificial reef construction,
should be investigated by the EPA and the affected procuring agen-
cies.
In obtaining certification of the percentage of postconsumer ma-
terials and the percentage of manufacturing forest residues and
other wastes, it is the intent of Section 6002 as amended by this
Act that vendors supply the procuring agency with a statement
from the mill indicating the percentages used by the mill in pro-
ducing the paper and their sources of raw material.
The Defense Acquisition Regulatory Council (DAR Council) and
the Civilian Agency Acquisition Council (CAA Council) shall be re-
sponsible for incorporating the necessary provisions into the Feder-
-------
122
a! Acquisition Regulations setting procedural guidelines to carry
out the purposes of this section.
It is the intent of this provision to grant both the affected procur-
ing agencies and the EPA flexibility in structuring guidelines and
in structuring an affirmative procurement program in compliance
with this Act.
This provision requires a recovered materials certification and
verification program only where appropriate. The EPA and the af-
fected procuring agencies should exercise their discretion in good
faith and not in a manner that would circumvent the overall
intent of Section 6002 to procure items composed of the highest
percentage of recovered materials practicable consistent with main-
taining a satisfactory level of competition.
Finally, section 1004 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act specifically
names the Government Printing Office (GPO) under its definition
of “Federal Agency.” Since the Joint Committee on Printing (JCP),
by law, is responsible for drafting and reviewing specifications for
procurement of paper by the GPO, the goals of PL 98—181 and of
this bill can be fulfilled by a thorough review of procurement speci-
fications by the Joint Committee on Printing. Specifically, certain
specifications, such as brightness and speck count, may serve to
preclude recycled paper, thus limiting full and open competition.
The JCP should review these standards within 18 months of enact-
ment, and a relaxation of these standards should serve to increase
the competition for GPO bids without jeopardizing the intended
end use of the item.
372/
-------
‘/ -/‘fl’
Section 23. Use of recovered materiaLs by Federal agencies
Almost seven years passed since the Congress enacted Section
6002 which mandated that, within two years after the date of en-
actment (October 21, 1976), each Federal procurement agency
shall procure items composed of the highest percentage of recov-
consistent with maintaining a satisfac-
70
The Committee’s 1976 report in support of the Resource Conser-
vation and Recovery Act makes it plain that expeditious compli-
ance by all Federal agencies with Section 6002 would contribute
significantly to the alleviation of the solid waste disposal problem
confronting this nation. The report demonstrated that “the amount
of discarded materials to be disposed of has grown to approximate-
ly 4 billion tons per year”, with “an annual increase of 8 percent
anticipated through the next decade.” (H. Rapt. 94-1491, pg. 3) The
report went on to state:
The most widespread method of disposal is to landfill the
discarded materials. However, land has become a scarce
resource in the Nation’s major metropolitan areas. Many
of our cities will be out of landfill capacity within 5 years.
Some are already seeking new disposal sites outside their
corporate limits.
The Committee’s report expressed similar concern “with the con-
sumption of this Nation’s domestic raw materials and the potential
for future material shortages”. The report notes:
Already an increasing portion of our balance of trade
deficit is caused by the need to import raw materials. Are
there ways to reclaim for reuse those resources now dis-
posed of and thereby reduce the need for virgin raw mate-
nals?
Expedited maximum Federal procurement of items produced
from recovered materials was one of the answers to this question.
In this regard, the Committee’s 1976 report stated:
If either resources recovery or source separation is to be
used as a strategy for reducing the volume of waste which
must be disposed of, adequate markets for the recovered
materials must be established.. . The Committee believes
that the use of Federal purchasing power to provide this
stimulus represents a constructive use of government
power which has potential for motivating other levels of
government and private industry to use greater amounts
of recovered materials.
Incredibly, however, almost nothing has been done to fulfill the
requirements of the Congressional mandate contained in Section
6002. The law specifically required the Environmental Protection
Agency to develop guidelines for the procuring agencies to follow
for not less than five product categories by September of 1982. Yet,
despite explicit timetables in the law, EPA just produced the first
guideline in January of 1983. The Office of Federal Procurement
Policy, which was directed to implement he policy expressed in Sec-
tion 6002, has likewise been almost totally unresponsive. It has
failed to encourage or require procuring agencies to make good
faith efforts to purchase recycled materials to the maximum extent
practicable.
Section 24 established new mandatory deadlines within which
EPA must produce no less than five product juidelines for all pro-
curing agencies to follow. The schedule specifically calls for a recy-
cled paper guideline within 180 days for enactment and for guide-
-------
71
line on recycled discarded tires by October 1, 1985. In order to pro-
vide the Agency a firm starting point from which to initiate aper
guideline, difmitions of “recycled paper” and of “wastepaper’ are
provided. States such as Maryland, California and Oregon are al-
ready operating successful recycled paper procurement programs.
Maryland reports that “recycled paper has generally been less ex-
pensive than virgin paper” and that its program is proceeding suc-
cessfully “without loss of quality”.
Also, a paving material composed of recycled shredded tires and
asphalt has repeatedly been successfully tested by the Federal
Highway Administration and is currently utilized by several states.
The Committee notes the recently enacted Surface Transportation
Assistance Act (Public Law 97-424) allows states to receive a 5 per-
cent increase in the Federal-aid share for highway projects using
substantial amounts of recycled rubber or other recycled materials.
Thus, given the substantial body of information and precedents
for use of the two materials, EPA should not fail to meet these
new, extended statutory deadlines.
In a departure from existing law under Section 6002, the bill sets
forth minimum requirements that a procuring agency must include
in its affirmative procurement program in order to comply with
Section 6002. The most s gnificant of these requirements is that—
for a product for which EPA has issued a guideline—a procuring
agency can choose one of two listed “affirmative materials prefer-
ence programs” or a substantially equivalent combination thereof.
Previously, the burden had been on EPA to recommend procure-
ment preference programs. Now the responsibility rests with the
procuring agency with EPA providing guidance.
In addition, each procuring agency must make it known that it
solicits bids for products containing recovered materials and have a
verification program for ensuring that products purchased do con-
tain recovered materials.
Section 6002 also calls for all appropriate Federal agencies to
review specifications for procurement and to eliminate any exclu-
sion of recovered materials and any requirement that items be
manufactured from virgin materials. Recognizing the failure of
agencies to comply with this requirement, the bill directs such
review and elimination of specifications to be completed within 18
months of enactment of this Act.
Finally, the bill continues the requirement that the Office of Fed-
eral Procurement Policy coordinated and oversee the implementa-
tion of this section and report to the Congress on the progress
under this section, but now on a biennial rather than annual basis.
The office is specifically directed now to include in its report the
status of procuring agency progress in reviewing and eliminating
specifications that discriminate against recycled materials.
-------
GENCIES
21 USE OF RECOVERED MATERIALS BY FEDERAL s amen ed\
22 SEc. 28. (a) DEFINITIONS._Section 6002 d thereof—
23 by adding the following new subsections at the en in the case
24 “(Ii) DEFINITION.—As used in this section,
25 of paper products, the term ‘recovered materials’ includes—
87
1 “(1) postconsumer materials such as—
2 “(A) paper, paperboard, and fibrous wastes
3 from retail stores, office buildings, homes, and so
4 forth, after they have passed through their end-
5 usage as a consumer item, including: used corru-
6 gated boxes, old newspapers; old magazines;
7 mixed waste paper; tabulating cards; and used
8 cordage; and
9 “(B) all paper, paperboard, and fibrous
10 wastes that enter and are collected from munici-
11 pal solid waste; and
12 “(2) manufacturing, forest residues, and other
13 wastes such as— - .
14 “(A) dry paper and paperboard waste gener-
15 ated after completion of the papermaking process
16 (that is, those manufacturing operations up to and
17 including the cutting and trimming of the paper
18 machine reel into smaller rolls or rough sheets)
19 including: envelope cuttings, bindery trimmings,
20 and other paper and paperboard waste, resulting
21 from printing, cutting, forming, and other convert-
22 ing operations; bag, box, and carton manufactur-
23 ing wastes; and butt rolls, mill wrappers, and re-j
24 jected unused stock; and
-------
88
1 “(B) finished paper and paperboard from ob-
2 solete inventories of paper and paperboard manu-
3 facturers, merchants, wholesalers, dealers, print-
4 ers, converters, or others;
5 “(C) fibrous byproducts of harvesting, manu-
6 facturing, extractive, or wood-cutting processes,
7 flax, straw, linters, bagasse, slash, and other
8 forest residues;
9 “(D) wastes generated by the conversion of
10 goods made from fibrous material (that is, waste
11 rope from cordage manufacture, textile mill waste,
12 and cuttings); and
13 “(E) fibers recovered from waste water
14 which otherwise would enter the waste stream.
15 “(i) PROCUREMENT PE0GBAM.—(1) Within one year
16 after the date of publication of applicable guidelines under
17 subsection (e), each procuring agency shall develop an affirm-
18 ative procurement program which will assure that items com-J
19 posed of recovered materials will be purchased to the maxi-
20 mum extent practicable and which is consistent with applica-
21 ble provisions of Federal procurement law.
22 “(2) Each affirmative procurement program required
23 under this subsection shall, at a minimum, contain—
24 “(A) a recovered materials preference program;
-------
89
1 “(13) an agency promotion program to promote thc
2 preference program adopted under subparagraph (A);
3 “(C) a program for requiring estimates of the tota
4 percentage of recovered material utilized in the per-
5 formance of a contract; certification of minimum recov-
6 ered material content actually utilized, where appropri-
7 ate; and reasonable verification procedures for esti-
8 mates and certifications; and
9 “CD) annual review and monitoring of the effec-
10 tiveness of an agency’s affirmative procurement
11 program.
12 In the case of paper, the recovered materials preference pro-
13 gram required under subparagraph (A) shall provide for the
14 maximum use of the post consumer recovered materials re-
15 ferred to in subsection (h)(1).
16 “(3) In developing the preference program, the follow-
17 ing options shall be considered for adoption:
18 “(A) Case-by-Case Policy Development: Subject
19 to the limitations of subsection (c)(1) (A) through (C), a
20 policy of awarding contracts to the vendor offering an
21 item composed of the highest percentage of recovered
22 materials practicable (and in the case of paper, the
23 highest percentage of the post consumer recovered ma-
24 terials referred to in subsection (h)(1)). Subject to such
25 limitations, agencies may make an award to a vendor
-------
91
1 tional product categories (including tires) by October 1,
2 1985”.
3 (c) REQUIREMENTS.—Section 6002(c)(1) is amended by
4 inserting after “highest percentage of recovered materials
5 practicable” the following: “(and in the case of paper, the
6 highest percentage of the post consumer recovered materials
7 referred to in subsection (h)(1) practicable)”.
8 (d) OFFICE OF FEDERAL PROCUREMENT PoLIcY.—
9 Section 600 2 (g) is amended by—
10 (1) striking out “the policy expressed in” and sub-
11 stituting “the requirements of”; and
12 (2) by inserting before the period at the end there-
13 of the following: “, and to, every two years beginning
14 in 1984, report to the Congress on actions taken by
15 Federal agencies and the progress made in the imple-
16 mentation of this section, including agency compliance
.17 with subsection (d)”.
18 (e) SPECIFICATIONS.—Section 6002(d)(1) is amended
19 by striking out “five years after the date of enactment of this
20 Act” and substituting “eighteen months after the date of the
21 enactment of the Hazardous Waste Control and Enforcement
22 Act of 1983”.
23 (f) SIZE OF CERTAIN FACILIPIES.—(1) Section 4001,
24 as amended by section 11 of this Act, is further amended by
25 inserting “, including those needs created by thorough imple-
-------
92
1 mentation of section 6002(h),” after “adequate provision
2 shall be given to the present and reasonably anticipated
3 future needs”.
4 (2) Section 1006(b) is amended by inserting “U)” after
5 “(b) INTEGRATION WITH OTHER ACTS.—” and by adding
6 the following new paragraph at the end thereof:
7 “(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in de-
8 veloping solid waste plans, it is the intention of this Act that
9 in determining the size of a waste-to-energy facility, ade-
10 quate provisions shall be given to the present and reasonably
11 anticipated future needs, including those needs created by
12 thorough implementation of section 6002(h), of the recycling
13 and resource recovery interests within the area encompassed
14 by the solid waste plan.”.
-------
ç7c , p -
USE OF RECOVERED MATERIALS BY FEDERAL AGENCIES
SEC. 22. (a) Section 6002 of the Solid Waste Dispos-
al Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the following
new subsections:
“(7i) DEFZNJTION.—As used in this section, in the
case of paper products, the term ‘recovered materials’ in-
cludes—
“(1) post consumer materials such as—
“(A) paper, pap rboard, and fibrous wastes
from retail stores, office buildings, homes, and
similar establishments, after they have passed
through their end-usage as a consumer item, in-
cluding (but not limited to) used corrugated boxes,
newspapers, magazine, mixed wastepaper, tabulat-
ing card s, and used cordage; and
“(B) all paper, paperboard, and fibrous
wastes which enter and are collected from munici-
pal solid waste; and
“(2) manufacturing wastes, forest residues, and
other wastes such as—
HR 2867 EAS
52 ’/
-------
69
“(A) dry paper and paperboard waste gener-
ated after completion of the papermaking process
(that is, those manufacturing operations up to and
including the culling and trimming of the paper
machine reel into smaller rolls or rought sheets)
including—
“(i) envelope cuttings, bindery trim-
mings, and other paper and paperboard
waste, resulting from printing, cutting, form-
ing, and other converting operations;
“(ii) bag, box, and carton manufactur-
ing wastes; and
“(iii) butt rolls, mill wrappers, and re-
jected unused stock;
“(B) finished paper and paperboard from ob-
solete inventories of paper and paperboard man U-
facturers, merchants, wholesalers, dealers, print-
ers, converters, or others;
“(C) fibrous byproducts of harvesting, manu-
facturing, extractive, or wood-cutting processes,
flax, straw, linters, bagasse, slash, and other
forest residues;
“(D) wastes generated by the conversion of
goods made from fibrous material (that is, waste
HR 2867 LAS
-------
70
rope from cordage manufacture, textile mill waste,
and cuttings); and
“(E) fibers recovered from waste waler
which otherwise would enter the waste stream.
“(i) PROCUREMENT PR0GRAM.—(1) Within one year
after the date of publication of applicable guidelines under
subsection (e), each procuring agency shall develop an af-
firmative procurement program which will assure that items
composed of recovered materials will be purchased to the
maximum extent practicable, consistent with applicable pro-
visions of Federal procurement law.
“(2) Each affirmative procurement program required
under this subsection shall, at a minimum, contain—
“(A) a recovered materials preference pro-
gram;
“(B) an agency promotion program to pro-
mote the preference program adopted under sub-
paragraph (A);
“(C) a program for requiring (i) estimates of
the total percentage of recovered material utilized
• in the performance of a contract, (ii) certification
of minimum recovered material content actually
utilized, where appropriate, and (iii) reasonable
verification procedures for estimates and certifica-
tions; and
HR 2867 EAS
-------
71
“(D) annual review and monitoring of the
effectiveness of an agency’s affirmative procure.
ment program.
in the case of paper, the recovered materials preference pro-
gram required under subparagraph (A) shall provide for the
maximum use of the post consumer recovered materials re-
ferred to in subsection (lz)(l).
“(3) in developing the preference program, the follow-
ing options shall be considered for adoption:
“(A) CASE-B Y-CASE POLiCY DEVELOPMENT. —
Subject to the limitations of subparagraphs (A)
through (C) of subsection (c)(1), a polic j may be estab-
lished for awarding contracts to the vendor offering an
item composed of the highest percentage of recovered
materials practicable (and in the case of paper, the
highest percentage of the post consumer recovered mate-
rials referred to in subsection (h)(1)). Subject to such
limitations, agencies may make an award to a vendor
offei ing items with less than the maximum recovered
materials content.
“(B) MINIMUM CONTENT STANDARDS.—Mini-
mum recovered materials content specifications may be
8et in such a way as to assure that the recovered mate-
rials content (and in the case of paper, the content of
post consumer materials referred to in subsection
HR 2867 LAS
-------
72
(h)(1)) required is the maximum available without
jeopardizing the intended end use of the item, or viola 1-
ing the limitations of subparagraphs (A) through (C)
of subsection (c) (1).
Procuring agencies shall adopt one of the options set forth
in 8ub’para9raphs (A) and (B), or a substantially equivalent
alternative, for inclusion in the affirmative procurement pro-
gram.”
(b) Section 6002(c) (1) of such Act is amended by in-
serting after “highest percentage of recovered materials prac-
tica,ble” the following: “(and in the case of paper, the high-
est percentage of the post consumer recovered materials re-
ferred to in subsection (h)(1) practicable) ‘
(c) Section 6002 (d) (1) of such Act is amended by
striking out “five years after the date of enactment of this
Act” and inserting in lieu thereof “eighteen months after the
date of the enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
Amendment of 1984 “
(d) Section 6002(e) of such Act is amended—
(1) in paragraph (1), by inserting after “section”
the following: ‘ and in the case of paper, provide for
maximizing the use of post consumer recovered materi-
als referred to in subsection (h)(1) “; and
(2) in the matter following paragraph (2), by
striking out “for at least three product categories” and
HR 2867 EAS
-------
73
all that follows through “1982 “, and inserting in lieu
the reof “for paper within one hundred and eighty days
after the date of the enactment of the Solid Waste Di9-
posal Act Amendments of 1984, and for three addition-
al product categories (including tires) by October 1,
1985”.
(e) Section 6002(g) of such Act is amended—
(1) by striking out “the policy expressed in” and
inserting in lieu thereof “the requirements of’ and
(2) by inserting before the period at the end there-
of the following: ‘ and to report to the Congress every
two years, beginning in 1984, on actions taken by
Federal agencies and the progress made in the imple-
mentation of this section, including agency compliance
with subsection (d)”.
(f)(1) Section 4003(d) of such Act (as added by section
21(b) of this Act) is amended by inserting “, including
those needs created by thorough implementation of section
6002(h),” after “adequate provision shall be given to the
present and reasonably anticipated future needs”.
1 Section 1006(b) of such Act is amended by inserting
2 \ 1)” after “(b) INTEGRATION WITH OTHER ACTS . ‘and
3 by adding the following new paragraph at the end thereof:
4 “(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in de-
5 veloping solid waste plans, it is the intention of this Act that
HR 2867 EAS
-------
74
1 in determining the size of a waste-to-energy facility, adequate
2 provvsions shall be given to the present and reasonably antici-
3 paled future needs, including those needs created by thorough
4 implementation of section 6002 (h), of the recycling and re-
5 source recovery interests within the area encompassed by the
6 801711 waste plan. ‘
-------
7 USE OF RECOVERED MATERIALS BY FEDERAL AGENCIES
8 SEC. 23. (a) DEFINITIONS.—(’l) Section 1004 is
9 amended by adding the following new’ items at the end there-
10 of:
11 “40.) The term ‘recycled paper’ means paper or paper
12 products which contain substantial amounts of wastepaper
13 fibers.
14 “(41) The term ‘wastepaper’ means post consumer, con-
15 t erti ig and printing papcr wastes. The term vost consumer’
16 wa 1e means paper generated by business a’?d con. ur. er
] 7 after it ha scri. ed its intended end use, including: used cur-
18 rugated boxes, old newspaper, and used copy paper computer
19 printout and used tabulating cards. The term ‘converting and
20 printing wastepaper’ means paper waste generated after the
21 completion of the papermaking process, including: ent’elope
22 cuttings, bindery trimmings, printing wastes, cutting ard
23 other con t-erting wastes, butt rolls, mill wrappers. and reject-
24 ed unused stock. The term ‘wastepaper’ does not include fi-
25 brous waste generated during the manufacturing process
HR 2S6 RH
-------
54
1 (‘such as fibers recovered from waste waler or trimming of a
2 paper machine roll into smaller rolls or rough sheets) or fi-
3 brous byproducts of harvesting, extra dive or woodcutling
4 processes. ‘
5 (2) Section 1004(1 9) is amended by adding the follow.
6 in 9 at the end thereof: “in the case of paper, the term ‘recov-
7 ered material’ means only ‘wastepaper’ as defined in this
8 section. ‘
9 ( ‘b,) PROCUREMENT PROGR.lMs.—Section 6002 i
10 amended by adding the following new subsection at the end
11 thereof:
12 “Ci) PROCUREME? ’T PROGRAM.—W Within one year
13 after the date of publication of applicable guidelines under
14 subsection (e), each procuring agency shall develop an at.
15 firmative procurement program which will assure that items
16 composed of recovered materials will be purchased to the
17 maximum extent practicable and which is consistei l with op.
18 plicable provisions of Federal procurement law.
19 “(2) Each affirmative procuremeni program required
20 under this subsection shall, at a minimum, contain—
21 “(A) a recovered materials preference program:
22 “(B) an agency promotion program to promote thc
23 preference program adopted under subparagraph (A);
24 “(C’) a program for requiring estimates of the
25 total percentage of recovered material utilized in the
HR 2867 RH
ic — , , I
-------
56
I Procuring agencies shall adopt one of the options set forth in
2 subparagraphs (A) and (B) or a substantially equivalent
3 combination thereof, for inclusion in the affirmative procure-
4 mentprogram.”
5 (c) GUJDELINEs.—Section 6002’&) is amended by
6 striking out “including paper” and all that follows down
7 through “1982” and substituting: “including recycled paper,
8 one hundred and eighty days after enactment of the Hazard-
9 ous Waste Control and Enforcement Act of 1983, and for
10 two additional product categories, including tires, b
11 October 1. 1985. “
12 ‘d,) OFFICE OF FEDERAL PROCUREMENT POLICY.—
13 Section 6002(g) is amended by—
14 (1) striking out “the policy expressed in” and
15 substituting “the requirements of’ and
16 (2) by inserting before the period at the end 11ere-
17 of the following: ‘ and to, every two year be ’inniiig
18 in 1984, report to the congress on actions taken by
19 Federal agencies and the progress made in the irn pie-
20 mentation of this section, including agency compliance
21 with subsection
22 (se,) SPECIFIcATIONS.—SeCti on 6002(d) (1) is amended
23 by striking out “five years after the date of enactment of thi.
24 Act” and substituting “eighteen mont?.s after the date of the
HR 2867 RH
50f
-------
33
1 performance of a contract; certification of minimum re.
2 covered material content actually utilized, where appro-
3 priate; and reasonable verification procedures for esti-
4 mates and certifications ; and -
5 “(D) annual review and monitoring of the effec-
6 tiveness of an agency s affirmative procurement
7 program.
8 “(3) Zn developing (he preference program, the following
9 options shall be considered for adoption:
10 “(A) Case-by-Case Policy Development: Subject
1] W the limitations of subsection ‘c,)(l) (‘A) through (C),
12 a policy of awarding contracts to the vendor offering an
13 item composed of the highest percentage of recovered
14 materials practicable. Subject to such linziiations,
15 agencies may make an award to a vendor offering
16 items with less than the maximum recovered materials
17 content.
18 “(B) Minimum Content Standards: Minimum re•
19 covered materials content specifications which are set
20 in such a way as to assure that the recovered materials
21 content required is the maximum available without
22 jeopardizing the intended end use of the item, or violat-
23 ing the limitations of subsection (‘c.)i’l) t’. .-I) throu ’h
24 ((2
I enactment of (he Hazardous Waste Control and Enforcement
2 Act of 1983
-------
r i-% i- 4 7 1 Q p cz-
10 USE OF RECOVERED MATERIALS BY FEDERAL AGENCIES
11 SEC. 24. (a) DEFINITIONS.—(1) Section 1004 of the
12 Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by adding the following
13 new items at the end thereof:
14 “(40) The term ‘recycled paper’ means paper or paper
15 products which contain substantial amounts of wastepaper
16 fibers.
17 “(41) The term ‘wastepaper’ means post consumer, con-
18 verting and printing paper wastes. The term ‘post consumer’
19 waste means paper generated by business and consumers
20 after it has served its intended end use, including: used corru-
21 gated boxes, old newspaper, and used copy paper computer
22 printout and used tabulating cards. The term ‘converting and
23 printing wastepaper’ means paper waste generated after the
24 completion of the papermaking process, including: envelope
25 cuttings, bindery trimmings, printing wastes, cutting and
HR 2867 IH
-------
53
1 other converting wastes, butt rolls, mill wrappers, and reject-
2 ed unused stock. The term ‘wastepaper’ does not include fi-
3 brous waste generated during the manufacturing process
4 (such as fibers recovered from waste water or trimming of a
5 paper machine roll into smaller rolls or rough sheets) or fi-
6 brous byproducts of harvesting, extractive or woodcutting
7 processes.”.
8 (2) Section 1004(19) of such Act is amended by adding
9 the following at the end thereof: “In the case of paper, the
10 term ‘recovered material’ means only ‘wastepaper’ as defined
11 in this section.”.
12 (b) PROCUREMENT PROGRAMs.—Section 6002 of the
13 Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by adding the following
14 new subsection at the end thereof:
15 “(Ii) PROCUREMENT PEOGRAM.—(1) Each procuring
16 agency shall develop an affirmative procurement program
17 which will assure that items composed of recovered materials
18 will be purchased to the maximum extent practicable and
19 which is consistent with applicable provisions of Federal pro-
20 curement law.
21 “(2) Each affirmative procurement program required
22 under this subsection shall, at a minimum, contain—
23 “(A) a recovered materials preference program;
24 “(B) an agency promotion program to promote the
25 preference program adopted under subparagraph (A);
HR 2867 IH
-------
54
1 “(0) a program for requiring estimates of the total
2 percentage of recovered., material utilized in the per-
3 formance of a contract; certification of minimum recov-
4 ered material content actually utilized, where appropri-
5 ate; and reasonable verification procedures for esti-
6 mates and certifications; and
7 “(D) annual review and monitoring of the effec-
8 tiveness of an agency’s affirmative procurement pro-
9. gram.
10 “(3) In developing the preference program, the follow-
11 ing options shall be considered for adoption:
12 “(A) Case-by-Case Policy Development: Subject
13 to the limitations of subsection (c)(1) (A) through (C), a
14 policy of awarding contracts to the vendor offering an
15 item composed of the highest percentage of recovered
- 16 materials practicable. Subject to such limitations, agen-
17 cies may make an award to a vendor offering items
18 with less than the maximum recovered materials con-
19 tent.
20 “(B) Minimum Content Standards: Minimum re-
21 covered materials content specifications which are set
22 in such a way as to assure that the recovered materials
23 content required is the maximum available without
24 jeopardizing the intended end use of the item, or vio-
HR 2867 IH
-------
55
1 lating the limitations of subsection (c)(1) (A) through
2 (0). -
3 Procuring agencies shall adopt one of the options set forth in
4 subparagraphs (A) and (B) or a substantially equivalent corn-
5 bination thereof, for inclusion in the affirmative procurement
6 program.”.
7 (c) GuIDELINEs.—Section 6002(e) of such Act is
8 amended by striking out “including paper” and all that fol-
9 lows down through “1982” and substituting: “including re-
10 cycled paper, 180 days after enactment of the Hazardous
11 Waste Control and Enforcement Act of 1983, and for two
12 additional product categories, including tires, by October 1,
13 1985.”
14 (d) OFFICE OF FEDERAL PROCUREMENT PoLICY—
15 Section 6002(g) of such Act is amended by—
16 (1) striking out “the policy expressed in” and sub-
17 stituting “the requirements of”; and
18 (2) by inserting before the period at the end there-
19 of the following: “, and to biannually report to the
20 Congress on actions taken by Federal agencies and the
21 progress made in the implementation of this section, in-
22 cuding agency compliance with subsection (d)”.
23 (e) SPECIFICATIONs.—Section 6002(d)(1) of such Act is
24 amended by striking out “five years after the date of enact-
25 ment of this Act” and substituting “eighteen months after the
HR 2867 IH
.cT,i /
-------
56
1 date of the enactment of the Hazardous Waste Control and
2 Enforcement Act of 1983”.
-------
S 9188
to accompany permit applications Is
not Intended to delay—and should not
deIay ihe pelmitting process. But it
will provide EPA and ATSDR with
more complete information on health
effects posed by landfills and surface
impoundments,
The amendn ent provIdes that when-
ever. In the judgment of-the Adminis-
trator of EPA. the Administrator of
ATSDR, or the State In the case of a
State with an authorized program, a
landfill or surface impoundment poses
a substantial potential risk to human
health due to releases of hazardous
subst,ances, the magnitude of contami-
nation with hazardous substances
which may be from a release, or the
magnitude of the population exposed,
the Admini .trator of ATSDR shall
conduct a health assessment. Finally.
the amendment provides that any
member of the public may submit evi-
dence of releases or exposure to haz-
ardous substance from a landfill or
surface impoundment regarding the
risks or health effects associated with
the release or exposure.
It is my expectation that with pas-
sage of this amendment residents of
West Coviria, CA, will seek a health as-
sessment of the potential risk to
human health posed by the lar dfill
operating In their community, Recent
releases of methane gas and vinyl clor-
ide from the site itself, ground water
contamination at a monitoring well
outside the landfill and transportation
spills strongly suggest that a health
assessment is warranted.
Mr. President, our amendment re-
sponds to two very serious needs—the
Immediate need to assess the potential
effects hazardous waste sites may be
having on the health of the American
people and to take appropriate follow-
up action, and second, to compile a
eomprehen jve body of con ;‘stently
gathered information from a large
number of sites to understand better
the overall nature and extent of the
problem posed by hazardous waste fa-
cilities. It merits support, I urge my
colleagues to approve the adoption of
the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
there further debate on the amend-
ment? If not, the question is on agree-
ing to the amendment of the Senator
from New Hampshire,
The amendment (No. 3410) was
agreed to.
Mr. CRANSTON. Mr. Preside-nt, I
move to reconsider the vote by hi h
the amendment as agreed to.
Mr. HUMPHREY. I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to h3’ o ,i the table s ’.s
agreed to.
AMENDMENT N C) 34 ii
Ma-. CRANSTON. Mr. President. i
send an amendment to the desk and
ask for its immediate conskt-rat Ion.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendment will be stated.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from California (Mr. CasN.
Broal proposes an amendment numbered
3411.
Mr. CRANSTON. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that further
reading of the amendment be dis-
pensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, With-
out objection, it Is so ordered.
The amendment Is as follows:
On page 40. line 3. strike the word “dis-
solved”.
Mr. CRANSTON. Mr. President, S.
757 as reported by the Senate Environ.
anent and Public Worl:s Committee
contemplates that certain hazardous
v. asteg would henceforth be prohibited
from land disposal. The bill further
contains a list of hazardous wastes the
Administrator of EPA must review and
consider for land disposal prohibition.
The list is based on the experience of
the State of California. California has
conducted a rulemaking procedure and
begun Implementing restrict ions on
these hazardous wastes at tl;e sped-
lied concentration levels. One of the
prohibitions invol es liquid harardous
hastes continuing certain “dissoh;ed’
metals. But by specifying “dlssDl ’ed”
metals. California has unintent tonally
created a major loophole in Its law. By
tracking California law, the committee
bill perpetuates this loophole. My
amendment would close It.
California intended certain metals
be removed from liquid hazardous
waste and disposed of as solids in a
secure landfill. The ban was or:ginally
limited to “d’ssohed” metals on the
theory that suspended metals would
not migrate as quickl , as ‘dis olved”
metals do. But since the ban is on “dis-
solved” metals and not on metals in
Suspension in otherwise liquid form.
operators can continue to dispose of
heavy metals in landfills by precipitat-
ing the metals and putting them into
suspension. This Is accompI shed by
raising the pH by adding lime or some
other alkaline substance.
In retrospect the California prohibi-
tion has several deficiencies. First, en-
forcement is a problem. I’m told there
is no good field test for determining
the difference between dissolved and
suspended metals. Thus, there is no
viable way to determine Whether a
speeific liquid going into an impound-
ment Consists of “d!ssolved” metals or
metal& In suspension. Second, there is
no ban on codisposing suspended
metals with wastes that have a p11 of
2.1 or more. This disposal of such an
a-idic waste with suspended metals
will redissolve the metals a: d allow
them to migrate ea. ily, especially at
the ve,rv high concentrations specified
In the bill. Third. complete precipita-
tion is verb n’f !cult to achieve outside
a scientific laboratory setting, Dis-
sohed metals likely will be the lIqu:d
residue. Thus, some of these metals
may still find their way to ground
Water.
The solution to the problem Is
Straightforward and simple—delete
the word “dissolved’ from the bIll.
July 25, 1.9X4
This ill permit a ban on landfill dis-
posal of liquid wastes contain r.g cer-
tom highly toxic m tals in speeifa”d
concentrations whether in dissolved or
suspended form, I urge my coll a us
in joining me In correcting tins dc’f a-
ciency in the bill. I ask for adopt ioi of
my amendment.
Mr. CH WEE. Mr. President, the
amendment Is accep(ab!e to this ride
It Is a fine one. I commend th Sena-
tor for it.
Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Pa- ident. the
amendment is acceptable.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, The
question is on agreeing to the amend-
ment of the Senator from California.
The amendment (No. 3411 as
agreed to.
Mr. MITCHELL Mr. PresIdent, I
move to reconsider the vote by which
the amendment was agreed to.
Mr. CRANSTON. I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table v as
agreed to.
Mr. CRANSTON. Mr. President, I
thank the distinguished har.diers of
the bill vi’ry much for their coopera-
tion on both amendments,
AML?4DMENTNO. 3412
I Purpose. To add a provision regarding the’
use of rec cied materials by Federal a ’n
des)
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I have
a series of amenthnent submitted by
Scnators. The first is an amendment
on b”half of Senator KAsEN. I send it
to the de’sk and ask for its im i ediate
ronsicel-ation,
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendment wall be stated.
The legislative clerk read as follo .s:
The Sena:c r from P.hode Island rl , , r
for Mr. proposes an
aa.’endment numbered 3412.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I a.sk
unanimous consent that further read-
ing of the amendment be dispensed
with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, It is so ordered.
The aniendnient Is as follows:
Redesignat ’ see.tior.s 22 through 29 as sre-
Lions 23 through 30, and inseyt after secuorm
21 the follc rn ne’w section:
USF OF Per OVESED M ’E!tIAI,$ BY FEDER’d.
AGF.NC!ES
Sec. 22 (a) S . ’ctioi 6002 of the Suad
Waste Dispo ai Act Is amended by adding at
the end Lhe:eof the following new sub-
tions.
‘(h) DzFzr lrrropz.—As used in this section
in the ca,e of paper products, lice te rn ‘ri’-
cot erej matcr aIs’ Inalu& s—
‘(1) post c ’3nsumcr materlNis such a,—
‘(A, paper. papeaboard. and fibr, ,
v .astes from retail stores, offm e buiid:r. ‘
hoy’ s, and simIlar estp.ohth 1 rcm ’ts. a: e’r
thea 1 ’a’e passe’i through then m d
as a ccn4umer itt -it.. includi. g (but r: : I;”
ed to used corni ,ated boses. nc’
msgtz’p lps, mu,cd wa. tepa;eer, La’, i’ “c
cards and used coida c. and
‘ (1 ’ Si: paper, paoerbcard. and Iiuiu,s
Waste —s i’ich enter and are colIec ’tid fr
flhitnit’cpal sohd asie. ai.d
“(2) maictifactuijog sactes, lore’s! rp ,.
dues, and or ‘icr aas’ s such as—
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
July 25, 1984
•‘(A) dry paper and paperboard waste gen-
erated after completion of the papermaking
process (that is, those manufacturing oper-
a i . ,x ’.s up tO and including the cutting and
trimming of the paper machine reel into
smaller rolls or rough sheets) Including —.
“Ci) envelope cuttings, bindery trimmings,
and other paper and paperboard waste, re-
sultir.g from printing, cutting, forming, and
other converting operations;
“(ii) bag, box, and carton manufacturing
wastes, and
(xii) butt rolls, mill wrappers, and reject-
ed unused stock;
“(B) finished paper and paperboard from
obsolete in entories of paper and paper-
board manufacturers, merchants, a holesal-
era, dealers, printers, converters, or others:
“(C) fibrous byproducto of harvesting,
manufacturing, extractive, or wood-cutting
processes, flax, straw, linters, bagasse, slash,
and other forest residues,
“CD) wastes generated by the conversion
oC goods made from fbrous materiel (that
is, waste rope from cordage manufacture,
textile mill waste, and cuttings); and
“CE) fibers recotered from waste water
which otherwise would enter the waste
stream.
“(I) PROCURCMENT PROGRAi ’4,—(1) Within
one year after the date of publication of ap-
plicable guidelines under subsection Ce),
each procuring agency shall develop an af-
fix mauve procurement program which will
assure that items composed of recotered
mari-rials will be purchased to the maxi-
mum extent practicable, consistent with ap-
plicable provisions of Federal procurement
law,
“(2) Each affirmative procurement pro-
gram required under this subsection shall,
at a minimum, contain—
‘(A) a recovered materials preference pro-
gram:
“(B I an agency promotion program to pro-
mote the preference program adopted under
subparagraph (Al
“(C) a program for requiring (I) estimates
of the total percentage of recovered materi-
al utilized In the performance of a contract,
(ii ) certification of n mnimum recovered ma-
terial content actually utilized, where ap-
propriate, and (iii) reasonable verilication
procedures for estimates and certifications:
and
“(D) annual review and monitoring of the
effectiveness of an agency’s affirmative pro-
curement program.
In the case of paper, the recovered materi-
als preference program required under sub-
paragraph (A) shall provide for the maxi-
mum use of the post consumer recovered
materials referred to in subsection (h)(1).
“(3) In developing the preference pro-
gram, the following options shall be consid-
ered for adoption:
“(A) Case-by-case policy development,—
Subject to the limitatmon,s of subparagraphs
(A) through (C) of subsection (c’)(i), a policy
may be established for awarding contracts
to the ‘.endor offering an Item composed of
the highest percentage of recovered mate i-
a 14 practicable (ana in the case of paper, the
highest percentage of the post consumer re-
co ered materials referred to In subsection
(h)(1)). Subject to such limitations, agencies
may make an award to a vendor offering
iteiiis with less than the maximum reco-
ered materials content,
“(B) Minimum content standards —Mini-
mum recovered materials content specifica-
tions may be set In such a way as to assure
that the recovered materials content (and In
the case of paper, the content of post con-
sumer materials referred to in subsection
(11)1 1)) required is the maximum available
without jeopard ing the intended end use
of the item, or violating the limitations of
subparagraphs (A) through (C) of subsec-
tion (c)(1),
Prâcuring agencies shall adopt one of the
options set forth in subparagrapbs (A) and
(B). or a substantially equivalent alterna-
the, for inclusion in the affirmative pro-
curement program.”,
(b) Section 6002(c)(t) of such Act is
amended by inserting after “highest per-
centage of recovered materials practicable”
the following: ‘(and in the case of paper,
the highest percentage of the post con-
sumer recovered materials referred to in
subsection (h)(1) practicable)”.
Cc) Section 6002(d)U) of such Act is
amended by striking out “five years after
the date of enactment of this Act” and in-
serting in lieu thereof “18 montlu after the
date ol the enactment of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act Amendments of 1984”.
(d) Section 6002(e) of such Act is amend-
ed—
1 in paragraph (1), by inserting after
“section” the following: “, and in the case of
paper, provide for maximizing the use of
post consumer recovered materials referred
to in subsection (h)(1)”, and
(2) in the matter following paragraph (2),
by striking out “for at least three product
categories” and all that follows through
“1982”, and inserting in lieu thereof “for
paper within 180 days after the date of the
enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
Amendments of 1984, and for three addi-
tional product categories (including tires) by
October 1. 1984”.
Ce) Section 600 (g) of such Act Is amend-
ed-
(1) by striking out “the policy expressed
In” and inserting in lieu thereof “the re-
quirements of”; and
(2) by inserting before the period at the
end thereof the following. “, and to report
to the Congress every two years, beginning
in 1984. on actions taken by Federal agen-
cies and the progress made In the mrnplemen-
tation of this section. Including agency com-
pliance with subsection Cd)”,
( (hi) Section 4003(d) of Such Act (as
added by section 21tb of this Act) is amend-
ed b) inserting “, Including those needs cre
sled by thorough Implementation of section
6002(h),” after ‘adequate provxsion shall be
given to the present and reasonably natici-
pated future needs”.
(2) Section 1006mb) of such Act is amended
by Inserting “(1)” after “b) Integration
With Other Acts.—” and by adding the fol.
lowing new paragraph at the end thereof:
“(2) Notwithstanding any other provision
01 law, iii developing solid waste plans, it is
the intention of this Act that in determin.
Ins the size of a waste-to-energy facility,
adequate provisions shall be gi en to the
present and reasonably anticipated future
needs, including those needs created by
thorough implementation 01 section
6002th), of the recycling and resource recov-
ery interests within the area encompassed
by the solid waste plan.”.
Mr. KASTEN. Mr. President, the
amendment I am offering today en-
courages the Federal Government to
use recycled paper. Each year the Fed.
eral Government consumes 472.065
tons of paper. Yet it does not have a
program to encourage the use of recy-
cled paper.
Increasing the use of recycled mate-
rials is a wise use of our resources. Not
only do we reduce the consumption of
raw materials, but recycling reduces
energy consumption and the volume
of solid waste that must be disposed
of.
S 9189
I am concerned that we use our nat-
ural resources well, The Federal Gov-
ernment should lead the way in using
our financial and natural resources
well.
Ail too often we see materials that
can be economically recycled used for
other purposes. For example, approxi-
mately 65 percent of the volume of
municipal waste is paper. Instead of
converting this material Into a new
consumer item. It has become a part
of our solid waste problem.
In other cases, paper is burned as a
heat source In electrical generation.
While this alternative may be better
than simply putting paper in a land-
full, it is still not the highest and best
use of wastepaper as a resource.
The amendment I am offering today
is very simple, It does not add to the
cost of Government. Bids of potential
paper suppliers are currently evaluat-
ed on the basis of two criteria: (1)
Does the paper meet the required
specification, and (2) price. This
amendment simply adds a third crite-
ria. That Is that preference be given to
the paper which contains the highest
percentage of recycled material. Most
simply stated this means that of sub.
stantially equal low bids meeting prod.
uct specification the paper which conS
tains the highest percentage of recy-
cled materials would be selected,
In developing this amendment, I
have worked closely with the paper In-
dustry, conservation groups, and my
colleagues in the Senate, Senator MA-
THIAS and I have communicated sever-
al times on this issue. As vice chair-
man of the Joint Committee on Print-
ing he is especially concerned about
any changes in Federal policies for
purchasing paper. Senator MATHIAS
and I have entered into a colloquy on
this amendment which I would like in-
cluded in the RECORD at this time,
Mr. MATHIAS. Mr. President, as
vice chairman of the Joint Committee
on Printing with oversight responsibil-
ity for the Nation’s printer and paper
procurer, the Go ernrnent Printing
Office, I have a duty to ensure that
the paper products purchased by GPO
are of the highest quality for the
money. The Joint Committee on Print-
ing has the statutory responsibility to
fix the standards of paper for the vari-
ety of needs of the Federal Govern-
ment, For this reason, I take more
than a passing interest in the pending
amendment by my colleague from
Wisconsin (Mr. KASTEN).
Mr. President, I wish to make it
clear that the amendment being of-
fered by the Senator from Wisconsin
simply adds a third criterion to the
current guidelines for Federal paper
procurement, This amendm?nt does
not change existing JCP specifications
nor the requirement that low’ price
prevail before a paper products con-
tract Is awarded,
Mr KASTEN. The Senator from
Maryland (Mr. MATHIAS] is correct,
Under my amendment, all paper prod.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
J-o/
-------
S 9190
ucts purchased by the Federal Govern-
ment must continue to meet JCP spec-
ifications, and, most importantly,
lowest price continues to be the deter.
mining factor in awarding these con-
tracts. My amendment simply adds an-
other criterion to JCP and GPO paper
products contract decisions, namely
that priority consideration be given to
recycled paper.
The amendment proposes several op-
tions for buying recycled paper prod-
ucts. Each Federal agency authorized
by law to procure paper pioducts from
commercial paper suppliers may pro-
ceed on a case-by-case basis or it may
prescribe a minimum-content standard
for all purchases or it may develop an.
other plan consistent with congres-
sional intent and EPA guidelines,
Mr. MATHIAS. Are we to under-
stand, for example, that if GSA estab-
lishes a 25-percent-minimum-content
standard for “post consumer waste
product” and one supplier can meet
that requirement at a cost of $20 per
given amount and another supplier
can offer the same amount of virgin
paper for $15, then GSA Is obligated
to buy the virgin paper?
Mr. KASTEN. The Senator is cor-
rect, Tnis amendment only adds a
third criterion to Federal paper prod-
uct purchases. All other things being
equal, this amendment states that re
cycled paper will be purchased by the
Federal Government, The purpose of
this amendment Is to send a message
that the Federal Government supports
and encourages efforts to recycle
paper,
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President I also
ask unanisnons consent there be added
the following cosponsors to the
Kasten amendment: Senators Pm.z.,
SARBANES. and DECONCINI.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. CHAFEE, Mr. President. I urge
and move passage of the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
there further debate? If not, the ques-
tion Is on agreeing to the amendment
of the Senator-from Wisconsin.
The amendment (No. 3412) was
agreed to.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. Pesident, I move
to reconsider the vote by which the
amendment was agreed to.
Mr. MITCHELL. I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to.
AMENDMENT NO. 3413
(Purpose: To amend the Ilsting/delistlng
modifications provision of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act)
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I now
send to the desk an amendment on
behalf of Senator SPECTER and ask for
Its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendment will be stated.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Rhode Island (Mr.
CRAnE). for Mr. SpEcTra, proposes an
amendment numbered 3413.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President. I ask
unanimous consent that further read-
ing of the amendment be dispensed
with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
SEC. N. LISTi%G,DELlsr, ,c MODIFICATIONS
On page 50. lIne 23, insert “information
that provides” immediately before “a rea-
sonable basis”.
On page 51. line 3. Immediately after
“hearing.” add the following new sentence:
“To the maximum extent practicable the
Administrator shall publish in the Federal
Register a proposal to grant or deny such a
petition within twelve months alter receiv.
Ing a complete application to exclude a
waste generate at a particular facility from
being regulated as a hazardous waste and
shall grant or deny such a petition within
twenty.four months after receiving a com-
plete applicatjon ,”.
On page 51. line 3, strike “hearing” and
insert in lieu thereof ‘comment”.
On page 51, line 6, insert “, after notice
and opportunity for public comment,” im-
mediately after “shall”,
• Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, the
amendment provides that when re-
viewing a petition to exclude a waste
generated at a particular facility from
being regulated as a hazardous waste,
the Administrator should consider fac-
tors or constituents not originally con.
sidered in the decision to list the waste
Initially only If he has information
that provides a reasonable basis to be-
lieve that such factors could cause It
to be listed.
It also provides that to the maxi-
mum extent possible EPA shall pub-
lish their proposal to deny or to grant
the petition within 12 months after re-
ceiving the application and shall grant
or deny the petition within 24 months,
In addition, it provides for public
comment rather than hearing, and
provides for EPA amendment of the
basis for lifting the amendment only
after public comment.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, this
amendment on behalf of Senator Spzc-
‘ast deals with setting time limits, to
the maximum extent possible, on EPA
consideration of listing and delisting
petitions. It also provides for a public
comment and provides for the clarif y-
ing the basis on which factors not or-
ginally considered In the decision to
list can be considered in the decision
whether to delist,
Mr. President, I move passage of the
amendment,
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
there further debate on the amend-
ment? If not, the question is on agree-
ing to the amendment of the Senator
from Pennsylvania.
The amendment (No. 3413) was
agreed to.
Mr. MITCHELL Mr. President, I
move to reconsider the vote by which
the amendment was agreed to.
Mr. CHAFEE. I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to.
July 25, 1984
AMENDMENT NO. 3414
(Purpose: To provide that funding for reme
dial action for a release at a facility owned
by a State or political subdivision but op.
erated privately shall be the same s.c fund-
ing for remedial action for a relea,st’ at a
pri ately owned facility)
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, on
behalf of Senator LUGAR, for himself
and Mr. BRADLEY, I send an amend.
ment to the desk and ask for its imme-
diate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendment, will be stated.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Rhode Island (Mr.
CHAFEEI. on behalf of Mr. LUGAR and Mr.
BRADLEY, proposes an amendment numbered
3414.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that further read-
ing of the amendment be dispensed
with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it Isso ordered.
The amendment Is as follows:
At the end of the bill add the foIlo ing
new section:
FUNDING OP REMEDIAL ACTION AT FACILITY
OWNED ay A STATE OR POLITICAL SUSDIVI’
51011 BUT OPERATED PRIVATELY
SEC. 30. Section 104(c)(3) of the Compre-
hensive En ironmental Response. Compen-
sation, and Liability Act of 1980 Is amend-
ed—U) by amending section 104(c)3) to
read: -
“(ii) 50 per centum (or such greater
amount as the President may determine ap-
propriate, taking Into account the degree of
responsibility of the State or political subdi-
vision for the release) of the capital, future
operation, and future maintenance costs of
the response action relating to a release at a
facility, primarily used for treatment. stor-
age. or disposal, that was owned and operat-
ed by the State or a political subdi ision
thereof at the time of any disposal of haz-
ardous substances in such facility. For the
purpose of subparagraph (c)(ii) of this para-
graph. the term “facility” does not Include
nacigabie waters or the beds underlying
those waters.”, and
(2) by adding at the end thereof the 101.
lowing: “In the case of any State which has
paid, at any time alter the date of the en-
actznent of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
Amendments of 1983, in excess of 10 percent
of the costs of remedial action at a facility
owned but not operated by 8uch State or by
a political subdivision thereof, the President
shall use money In the Fund to pros ide re-
ixnbursement to such State for the anwurit
of such excess.”,
Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise to
offer an amendment to provide for a
more equitable State and local share
requirement, for the cleanup of has.
ardous-waste facilities which are
owned but not operated by a State or
local political subdivision, My amend-
ment would add the words “and oper-
ated” after the word “owned” In sec-
tion 104(c)(3)(C) of the 1980 Super-
fund law. Under my amendment, only
those facilities which are operated as
well as owned by a State or by one of
its political subdivisions would be sub-
Ject to the special 50-percent mini-
mum’share requilement for a Super-
fund cleanup. Sires like the Seymour
site, which are owned but not operated
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
3- .,),
-------
S 9192
but not operated by a State or by one
of its political subdivisions. Only the
10-percent cost-sharing requirement
would apply in such a case, While I be-
lieve that State cost sharing is desira-
ble, a hea ier burden should fall on
the State only when it or one of Its po-
litical subdi isioris actually operates a
site v. here hazardous waste was Stored,
I believe that my amendment would
make the cost-sharing provisions of
the Superfund law more equitable,
The Seymour problem arose at a time
prior to the recognition of the need
for strongor hazardous-waste regula.
ticn. Neither the State of Indiana nor
the city of Seymour had any special
responsibility for supervising its man-
agement merely because it happened
to be locata’d within an industrial park
on land h ased to the facility’s owners
by the Aviation Board of the city of
Seymour, To impose a 50-percent cost-
sharing requirement In this case could
interfere with the expeditious cleanup
of the SCR site and with the cleanup
of other sites In Indiana In a rational
and expeditious manner,
The PRESIDING OFFICER, Is
there further debate on the amend-
hieiiL?
The question is on agreeing to the
amendment,
The amendment (No. 3414) was
agreed to.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I move
to reconsider the vote by which the
amendment w’as agreed to.
Mr, MITCHELL. I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to,
A7. NDMra-r NO. 5415
(Purpose: To delay the e(fectit’e date of cer-
taui stfltutory dead tries applicable to hal-
ogenated organic compound aestes if the
Administrator fails to promuiga certain
regulations)
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President. on
behalf of Senator JOHNSTON, I send an
amendment to the desk and ask for its
immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, The
amendment will be stated.
The legislative clerk read as foUow’s:
The Senator from Rhode Island. for Sena-
tor Jonrisroy. proposes an amendment
numbered 3415.
Mr. CHAFES. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that reading of the
amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFF1CER, With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows.
On page 43. line 12 strike ‘If” a ’d ulscrt
in lieu thereof “Except as pro%Ided in para-
graph (10), If’:
Or. page c3. line 20. insert “and paragraph
(101” Immethate!) after ‘This paragraph
and
On psge 43. follo ’ie g line 22, Insert the
fo!io mg ripa paregraph,
“(10) 11 the Administrator fails to promul.
gale rc u!ations tinder paragraph (Li ;th
respect to non-liquid hs,zard3us aaste; conS
taming ha1o enated organic compounds in
total concentration greater than or equal to
1.000 mg.’kg h) the date thirty.two months
after the enactment of the Solid Waste Dis.
posal Act Amendments of 1984, effective
twenty-four months after such date, and
until the Administrator promulgates such
regulations under paragraph (ii. such
wastes from the refurbishment of textiles
and apparel containing halogenated organic
compounds in total concentration less than
28.000 mg/kg may be disposed of in a land-
fill or surface impoundment only if such fa-
cility is in compliance with the require-
ment.s of section 3004(f) of this Act, All
other such wastes shall be subject to the
prouslons of paragraph (9),”,
Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, I
have been contacted by a number of
drycleaners who have expressed con-
siderable concerns about S. 757. This
Industry has always used recycling and
has recently developed new technolo-
gy and techniques to reduce the haz-
ardous constituents of its w-astes. Fur-
ther, the Laundry Cleaning Council
has been actively pursuing additional
recycling measures, Since drycieaners
have made and are making sincere ef-
forts to reduce any hazarci presented
by their wastes, they should be enti-
tled to additional time to comply with
the bill’s land disposal provisions if,
and only if, EPA fails to promulgate
regulations f a timely manner. Ac.
cordingly, I am offering an amend-
ment which would give dryeleaners ad.
dltional compliance time if EPA does
not act, and if the wastes in question
are i’educed below 2.8 percent in perc
content. In such circumstances, my
amendment would give drycleaners 24
months beyond the period specified
for promulation of regijlat ns before
they would have to ship their wastes
to a facility which meets the require.
ments of section 300 4Cf),
Mr. CHAFES. Let me ask the Sena.
tor from Louisiana about his amend.
ment. Is it his intention to provide
that if the Administrator fails to take
action within the prescribed period of
time, that wastes Irom drycleaning fa-
cilities which are reduced to concen-
trations of less then 28,000 mg/kg may
continue to be di posed of under cur-
rent methods for a period of 24
months?
Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes, that is the
intent of the amendment Reductions
to 28.000 kg/mg would continue to
qualify for current disposal methods,
At the end of the 24 month period
these and all other halogeriated organ-
Ic compounds for which the Adrnip,is.
trator has not acted must go to an up-
graded facility.
Mr. CHAFES, I thank the Senator
for his e’cpler.ation, and hic amend.
nient is aceep able to me,
Mr. President, I urge adoptio’i of the
amenoment.
The PRESIDING OFFiCER. Is
there further debate on the amend-
ment?
The questIon I on agreeing to the
amendment.
The amendment (No, 3415) was
agreed to.
Mr. CHAFES. Mr. President, I mm e
to reconsider the Vote by which the
amendment was agreed to.
Mr. MITCHELL. I move to lay that
motion on the table.
JzzIy 25, 1!JS.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to.
DLFPWELL tWiLL flOW
Mr. flENTSEN, Mr. Presmdr’n’.
should like to seek clarif:cation of ilic.
intent of section 5(b) of this bill with
regard to the use of deepwell injection
in disposing of hazardous wastes from
the distin u,shed Senator from Rhode
Island. In section 5(b) of the bill. limi.
tations on the use of certain ca. scs of
land disposal facilitics—specif c’aI l
landfills and surface impoundments—
can occur, if the EPA Admirnattator
fails to determine whether such dis
posal facilities will be protectite of
human health and the environment
for certain hazardous wastes by the
specified deadlines in the bill.
The terms “landfills” and “surface
impoundments” for the purposes of
section 5(b) are not defined, but it ap-
pears from the provisions of this sec-
tion that disposal of hazardous wastes
In class I injection wells would not be
prohibited if EPA should fail to act by
the specified deadlines, Is this correct?
Mr. CHAFES, The interpretation of
my colleague from the State of Texas
regarding section 5(b) of this blll Is
correct. Under this section, land dis.
posal methods for certain hazardous
wastes, other than landfills or surface
impoundments are not prohibited if
EPA should fail to act by the specified
deadlines. Properly permitted class I
Injection wells would be allowed to
continue receiving hazardous wastes if
EPA does not act within the specified
time.
Mr. BENTSEN. I thank my col-
league for clarification of this matter.
Mr. DECONCINI. Mr. President, the
amendment sponsored by Senator
KAs’rEN and myself requires the EPA
to establish procurement guidelines
for Federal agencies In the acquisition
of recycled materials, when economi.
cally feasible, That section not only
relates to paper products but tires as
well. I Interpret the provision to in-
clude scrap and retreaded tires. I be.
lieve for clarification sake, we should
Inciude language in the conference
report further defining the term
‘tires” and additional language giving
guidance to the Defense Acquis 1 tion
Regulatory Council and the Ci ilian
Agency Acquisition Council in cari’ .
Ing out the purposes of this section
When this legisla’Lion goes to confer .
ence co’rnnittee, will the chatrn ii
Support tue inclus,or 1 of lan u e on
scrap and retreaaej tires and a ’o.’n•
panyin interpretive lar, uage on : re,’
asphalt materials for road eor. .iuc.
tion aid maintenance?
Mr. CH.- FEE. I beliet e the prr t urm-
mei t section on the procurc ’iri.’nt c i
reclcled materials Is quite exp:ic t in
its inclusion of tires. Howe er I ‘ec
that we should further def;ne w
the Congre Intended to iflelLut’ in
this pro%islon and will suppoit !a:i.
guage in the conference report on the
deteIop of a preference program
Including scrap and retreaded tires.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
Sc/
-------
July 25, 1984
This section buIlds on existing law and
redirects the Administrator of EPA.
ft r eCOsultation with the Adxninls-
trator of General Services, the Secre-
— tary of Commerce, and the Public
Printer, to establish guidelines for the
use of all Federal procuring agencies
in the cost-effective acquisition of re-
cycled materials. Certainly, the agen-
cies should consider the use of those
materials and combinations of materi-
als like asphalt and rubber for road
construction purposes. If the Senator
ouid like additional clarification in
the conference report, I will be happy
to work out appropriate language.
Mr. DECONCINI. I thank the chair-
man. I think clarification is necessary,
arid I hope he will work with me and
my staff on the proper language.
COMMUNITY RELOCATTON
Mr. DANFORTH. Mr. President, the
Committee on Environment and
Public Works saw fit to include In this
bill, at the request of the Senators
from Missouri, an amendment to the
Comprehensive Environmental Re-
sponse, Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980. This amendment cIar fIes
the Environmental Protection Agen-
cy’s authority and flexibility in deal-
ing wiLli siluations such as that pre-
sented by dioxin contamination in
Missouri.
Specifically, the amendment pro-
vides that the Agency can move Imme-
diately to permanently relocate the
residents of a contaminated site If
such a step is found to be cost-effec-
tue or may be necessary to ‘protect
health or welfare. For example, In
some cases It may make more sense—
economically and socially—to buy up
and seal off a highly contaminated
residential area Immediately, rather
than locate the residents indefinitely
In temporary housing during a pro-
tracted, possibly impractical cleanup.
The amendment also gives the
Agency the authority to pay the inter-
est and principal on business debt
during a period of temporary reloca-
tion. Temporary relocation Is Intended
1,0 protect the residents of a contami-
nated area, but when a community is
evacuated, businesses are cut oil from
their customers. Their income abrupt-
ly ceases, while their obligations con-
tinue unabated. Thus, they are not
protected but are harmed. This
- amendment seeks to hold them harm-
less with respect to business debt only.
There is no intent to make up for lost
income.
To cite but one example of the need
for this authority, the Quail Run
Mobile Home Park in Franklin
County. MO. was found to be containi-
nated with dioxin at levels up to 1.000
times the amount deemed acceptable
In a residential area, The families
living at the trailer park were offered
temporary relocation, But the owners
of the park, who were in no way re-
sponsbile for the contamination of the
soil, then found themselves with no
way to meet their financial obliga-
tions, This amendment provides the
• CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
Agency with a way to hold such people
harmless with respect to business
debt, and business debt alone, until
the situation is resolved.
Our amendment also gives the
Agency specific authority to provide
special assistance to Individuals unable
to work as a result of such an evacua-
tion, In effect, the same sistance
would be available as is already avail-
able in natural disasters—unemploy-
ment and reemployment assistance,
food stamps, and grants to meet neces-
sary expenses or serious needs not cov-
ered by other aid programs. As under
the Disaster Relief Act, this assistance
would be provided by Federal agencies
with appropriate programs and exper-
the, using money from the Superfund.
and not directly by the Environmental
Protection Agency.
Mr. President, I would like to ex-
press the appreciation of the Senators
from Missouri for the committee’s
consideration of this matter. However,
I must note that similar legislation ap-
proved by the other body does not
contain comparable language, and I
fear that this provision, so important
to our State, might get overlooked in
the process of seeking a compromise,
Can the distinguished manager of the
bill offer me any assurances in this
regard?
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, the
Senator from Missouri has my assur-
ance that the provision he refers to
will not be overlooked in Conference
Committee, He has worked long and
hard with the members of our commit-
tee to craft this important amend-
ment,
The situation presented by dioxin
contamination in Missouri established
the need for the amendment. Howev-
er, It should be recognized that the
provision is of interest not just to resi-
dents of that State. The interests of
all citizens are served by this amend-
ment, and I am confident that our col-
leagues in the House will agree.
Mr, SARBANES. Mr. President, I
should like to engage the managers of
this legislation In a brief dialog regard-
ing the recovery of used motor oil and
lubricants, There is a discrepancy be-
tween the House-passed version of this
legislation and the bill which Is before
us today,
Mr. CHAFEE. We would be happy to
respond to the Senator’s questions.
Mr, SARBA.NES. Section 27 of H.R.
2867 encourages the recovery of waste
oil. It recognizes the fact that waste
oil Is profitably collected and recycled
and provides a simple means by which
service stations and other small busi-
nesses can continue to recover waste
oil with minimum regulatory burden
and at the same time protect the envi-
ronment,
In my home State of Maryland, the
service station operators several years
ago agreed to join the State govern-
ment in promoting proper disposal and
recycling of waste oil. The service sta-
tions serve as collection centers for
anyone wishing to dispose of waste oil.
S 9193
In turn, there are commercial collec-
tors who pick up the accumulated
waste oil and pay the dealers for it.
The oil then goes to commercial rere-
finers or reprocessors.
We are very pleased with the way
this program has run, arid I know simi-
lar efforts to encourage waste oil recy-
cling are underway in many other
States.
My colleague from Maryland. Repre-
sentative BARBARA MIXULSICS, added
language to HR. 2876 which takes
into account the special nature of
waste oil collection, Her amendment
provides that service stations and
other collection points for waste oil
shall be required only to keep track of
how much waste oil they take In, how
much Is picked up for recycIi; , and
how much is used on premises. Of
course, this applies only if the waste
oil generator can show, as required In
N.H. 2867, that he turns the material
over only to licensed and regulated
collectors or haulers who are responsi-
ble for Its proper disposition in a
manner consistent with protection of
human health and the envIronment.
This provision was accepted by voice
vote in committee and Includod with-
out objection In the bill as It was ap-
proved by the House.
Have the managers of this legisla-
tion here in the Senate considered the
Mikulski amendment? I am concerned,
because we do not seem to have any
comparable provision In the legislation
that Is before us.
Mr. CHAFEE. We are familiar with
the Mikuiski amendment. It respre-
sents a careful effort to balance the
stringent environmental protection re-
quirements of this legislation against
the practical experience of businesses
that are already en agcd In successful-
ly recycling material that other ise
would be harming the environment.
While there lia e been some isolated
problems, in general the waste oil in-
dustry has demonstrated how a poten-
tially hazardous substance can be
safely collected and profitably recy-
cled Into new, useful products. We do
not want to upset an industry that al-
ready is doing voluntarily hat we
now are requiring others to do,
Mr. SARBANES. Can we assume
then, that the Senate conferees on
this legislation will be able to accept
the basic principles of the Mikulski
amendment?
Mr. CHAPEE. As the Senator Is
aware, there are often a number of dif-
ferent approaches, different but equal-
ly effective means to an end. Each
such approach has strengths and
weaknesses. The amendment the Sen-
ator refers to represents one approach
to the problem. After further analysis,
It may turn out to be the best ap-
proach, At this time, however, I would
prefer to address the issue in Confer-
ence Committee. The problem clearly
warrants a legislative solution; and I
am confident that, in consultation
with our House colleagues, my col-
3— ’,’
-------
- ) cOwroelnWC A!LT3es iIflITL—(1J Section
(b) is amended b Insetting r.fter “3005”
following “(or In dLf)irig Cr revoking
.ny permit which Ii deemed to have been
lesued under section 3012(d X l ))”.
(2) The third sentence of section 3008(b)
k amended by inserting titer ‘ hamrdous
waste ” the following ‘ (and to enforce per.
- colts deemed to bate been heued wider see
tion 3012(dXl)).
Mr. FLORIO (during the Tending).
dr. Chairman. I ask unanimous con-
sent that section 22 be considered as
gead end printed In the
Ibe CRAIRM.AN pro tempote . Ta
there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New Jersey?
There was no objection.
The Chairman pm ternpoie. Are
there any amendments to sectIon 22?
If not, the Clest will reed.
The Clerk read as foflowr
was OF 5 T ILATWALS IT F AL
t . 23. (a) D -i , . ,-rwW!.—(1 ) SectIon 1004
h amended by adding the following new
Items at the end thereat
“(40) The term ‘ re., .. d paper’
paper or paper produ s which contain .
.anL i ImOunt S of wastepaper fihesa,
“(41) The term .stepaper means wt
consumer, converting and printing paper
wastes. The term pcst consumer’ waste
means paper generated by business and con•
gwners after It has served Its intended end
ase. includtng used corrugated boxes, o d
a’spaper, and used copy paper computer
‘out and used tabulaflng earde. The
‘umverung and pnnttng wastepaper’
s paper waste generat.ed after the n.
Ion of the papermaking process, Inelud.
g envelope cuttings. bindery trlmrntngs .
printing wastes. eutiing and other vert-
big wastes. butt voUs , mill wrne , ,eri , and ie
jeeted unused stock, The term ‘wastepaper’
does not Include fibrous waste generated
during the manufacturing process (such as
fibers recovered from 31 5W water or (run.
mlng of a paper machine roll Into small rolls
or rough sheets) or 1 brous byproducts of
harvesting. extiaethe or woodcuttlng proc.
(2) SectIon 1004(19) amended by adding
the following at the end thereof: “In the
ease of paper, the term ‘recovered material’
means only wastepaper’ as defined to th
section.”. -
(hi Paocvsmser Pso 6002
k amended by . t4dtng th following w
subsection at the end thereof:
“ Ui) Psocviu snrr Paoclt*x —(1) WItTitri
one year alter the date of publication of ap.
plicable gwddllnes under subsection (C).
each procuring agency shall develop an at-
tfrmazlve procurement program which will
asewe that Items unnpased of
materials wlfl be purchased to the coa.xl
mum extent practicable and which Is con’
sistent with appllimbio provisions of P dersJ
proei ement law.
“U I Each affirmative procurement pm’
gram required wider th r”’—ei” ’ shall.
at a minimum, contain—
“LA) a reco ered matenali preference pro-
“(B) anbgeacy promotion program to pro-
‘-the preference program adopted under
‘sgraph CM;
I a program fes’ ,eaulrtng of
— p remtase of ren,vered mateslal
ted in the fwmanrr of a imet
uficatlon of minimum recovered material
WntLDT . rt...flF utilized, where appvopnaze
and eveennible verification proasdinco fm
D) annual ecetew and monitoring of the
effectiveness of an agency. afftrmataee pro-
omss u
“ I3) in developing the preference pro-
gram, the following optians shall io
ered for adoptiom
“CA) ae-br-C s.e Pollee Develop n ’nL !
Subject to the linitatlons of subsection
( C XI) (A) through (C) a p l1cy of awarding
omtraets to the dor offering an
composed of tie highest percontage of
recovered mateilais prsM hiP . Subject to
such limitations, agencies may make an
award to a vendor ‘ouerzng items with km
thin the maxhema re materials -
(B) Nlzthnum Content St det . ISm I-
mum rfgos cd materials contest -elflcs .
thins which are set In such a way as to
assure that the recovered materials content
required Is the ,,i Imum av’- 1 I’-’ without
jeopardizing the intended me of the
Item, or violating the limitations of suhsec.
tion (c)(1) (A) through (C). Procuring agen-
des shall adopt one of the options set forth
in subparagraphs (A) and (B) or a sobala,n-
tisIly equivalent blnatIcxi thereof, for
Indusion hi the affirmative prenu nesit
progvam ’. -
(C) Gon iv ,xsu.—&etlon 600 e) Is amend-
ed by striking out “including paper” a 4 all
that follows down through 1P82” inll
stttuthig incloding paper, one’
hundred and eighty thys alter enactment of
the Uazzrdow Waste Control and ilorce-
mc cl Act of 1583, and for too additional
product categories. k 4 . hng tires, by O ”
berl. 1985.”,
(d) Orrica ne Faurass. Paocvrxuarr
Poucv.—Sectlcn 6O02 g Is amended by—
Cli striking out “the policy expressed In”
and substituting “the reçulreinents or; and
(2) by Inserting before the penod at the
end thereof the loliowtng —‘ and to, ewery
two years beginning in 1984. report to the
Congress on actions liken by Federal agen-
das and the progress made In the supleinen-
tation of this section, Including agency com-
pliance with subsection Cd)”.
(e) Siwzncsrxora —Section 6002(d)(1) Is
amended by striking out “five years after
the date of enactment of this Act” end sub.
stihiting “eighteen months after the date of
the enaet t of the Hazardous Waste Con ’
trot and Eaicrce t h.ct of 1983”.
Mr. FLORIO (during the reading).
Mr, Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
-sent that aa’ t1nn 23 be considered as
read and printed In the R an.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is
there obj 1om to the request of the
gentlemen from New Jersey?
There was no objection. ‘-
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are
there any amendments to section 23?
5 T orrmm aT ma, wyane
Mr. wXDEN. Mr. Chairmen, I offer
en amen ent.
The Clerk read as foUowE -
Amendment offered by Mr. Wrnur Page
53, lIne 8, strike out “(17’ and all that fol-
lows down through line S en page 14 and
substitese: “SectIon 8002 Ia amended by
sdding the following new subsections at the
end thereof- -
“ (hI Dssex xos.-M used in this section,
hi the ease of paper products. the term Th
covered materials’ Includes—
“(1) postconsumer matrials such as—’
- ‘1*) paper, gsper xd, snd fIbrous
wades from entail stores, office buildings,
homes. ate., alter they have pew through
theIr end-usage as a consumer Item, Includ’
wed emTulaLed boxes, old nea .pers,
old mage’Ir Pa mlaed waste psoen t .huii.I,
- . ‘ and used omsiag sad
119159
B) all paper, paperboard, and fibrous
wastes that enter arid axe collected from
municipal solid waste, and
3) manulactirring, forest residees, end
other wastes such as—
“(A) thy paper and paperboard waste yen.
seated after completIon at the papermating
pruc. . (i.e., those manufacturing o-
ations up to and Including the cuttIng and
irhiming of the paper m hirie reel Into
anall rolls or rough sheets) Including: cave-
lope cuttings, bindery trmn ngs . and other
paper and paperboard waste, resulting from
prlnJng, cutting. forming, and other eon-
yen ng operations: tog, box, and tor1
mar .ctin’thg wastes, and butt roth. ‘mill
wrappers, and rejected unused stock: and
“tB) finished paper and paperboard from
obsolete Inventories of paper and paper’-
bonrd manufacturers, merchants. wholesal.
em. dealers. printers, converters, 07
CC) fibrous by-producto of harveatceg
manufacturing, extractive, or wood-cutting
processes, flax, straw. linters. bagasse. slash,
and other forest reslduer
“CD) wastes generated by the w ,i. lOfl
of goods made from lThrons material (La.
waste rope from dage maaufa e, ha-
tile mill waste and cutting
“CE) fibers recovered from waste water
which otherwise would eater the easte
Page 54. strIke oct lInes I through IL
Page 54. lIce 12. strike out “(h I” and sub’
stitule “ C D”,
Page 55, alter lIne 7, Isiseet “In the case c i
paper, the recovered materials preference
program required under subparagraph (A)
shall provide for the n.. 1 .num use of the
post consumer r d materials referred
tom subsection (hXl).”.
Page 65, line 14, before the period Iswert
“(and In the case of paper, the highest per-
centage of the post consumer recovered ma-
terials ref red to In ‘ ‘ -“ ' (bxnr
Page 55. line 21. alter “content” Imeit
“‘(end In the case of paper, the content of
post consume? materials referred to in sub-
section (h)Cl)).
Page 56, line 3, strIke out comb!nation
thereof” and substitute “alternative”.
Page 56. sthke out lIne 5 and all that fol-
lows down through line 11 aud substitute’.
(b) 8002(e)
amended by—
(1) addIng the following after “section” In
paragraph (1k”, to the case of paper,
provide (or maximizing the use of post coil-
stimes’ recovered materials referred to in
subsection ( bX1l”, and
(2) strIking out “for at least three product
categories” and all that follows down
through “1982” and substituting ‘br paper
wIthin 180 days after’ the enactment of the
Hazardous Waste Control and Eaforteinent
Act of 1983. and for three additional prod-
Uct asiegorles (Including thea) by Ocl I,
1911”.
Cc) P .zauieen ’re.—.SecUen 00021 C X I) h
amended by Inserting after “highest per-
cexitage of recovered materials pr ”” -” ”e”
th following: “(and In the ease of paper,
the highest percentage of the post omv.an-
e recô ce-ed materials referred to In subeeo’
ioa (h)(1) pr-actlrabler,
Mr. WYDEN (dining the rendIng),
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the amen l n nt be c’ ” ” t-
- - _
The CRA AW pro tempera. Is
there objection to the r i t of the
gen’l ’ ’ i freen thegool
There was en
November 1S8 . r. ‘- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.- iióUsi
-------
ff9160.
(Mr. WYDEN asked and was given
permIssion to revise and extend his go-
marks.)
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. Dislrman. the
amendment I now offer Is to section 23
of this bill, entitled “Use of Recovered
Materials by Federal Agencies.” -
6e tion 23 reauthorizes sectlon
6002—first enacted in 1976—of RCRA.
calling for Federal procurement of
- Items containing recovered materials
to the maximum extent practicable,
consistent with applicable provisions
of Federal procurement law
The Intent of sectIon 23, and more
generally section 6002 is really ulte
straightforward. It is tO provi a
stea4y , reliable maitet for inanufat.
t uvn of Items composed of ivi .-ut.ered
- materials. It Is premised on the belief
that If someone can build a better
mousetrap, and do so at the least cost
the Federal procurement
ould give a preference to that prod-
uct by virtue of the external benefits
1t produces, namely, the reduction hi
• our NatIon’s 69 billion solid waste dia-
posaltab.
The pending amendment makes sev-
oral changes to sectIon 23.
• First and foremost, It replaces the
definition of “wastepaper” for the pus-
poses of Federal procurement of recy-
cled paper with a two.part definition
used by the General Services MynIr(r. .
tration In the 1970’s. The GSA defini-
tion appears more acceptable and
more f rnIIi , to all the parties con-
cerned over the Federal procurement
qf recycled paper.
The GSA two-part definition lecog-
sea the difference between posteon-
umer recovered materials—the mate.
ials headed for our Nation’s land-
fills—and the pulp and paper industry
manufacturing wastes and forest resi-
dues which are often used in the pa-
permaking process as standard prac-
tice or have alternative uses If they
are not recovered for the papermaking
Though paper con and Is made with
both types of recovered materials. it Is
the Intent of RCRA. of sectIon 23. and
of this amendment to frnl,e the
use of the post-consumer recovered
materials with respect to procurement
of recycled paper and paper products.
The other significant rhange to sec-
tIon 23 In this amendment Is a result
of discussions between my office and
the EPA. It concerns the deadline for
producing the recovered materials
product guidelines that procuring
agencies are to follow. The
amendment called far EPA to produce
three guidelines, including one for
paper, 180 days after enactment and
an additional two guidelines, Includ ing
tires, by October 1, 1985.
My pending amendment now re-
Oulres that the EPA produce only the
paper guideline wIthin 180 days of en.
actment and an additional three prod-
uct guidelines, Including tires, by Oc-
—‘ ‘1.1985.
light of the many deadlines he-
on A bill. I believe
this Is a reasonable compromise. I also
fl to my colleagues’ attention that
mder the existing RCRA provisions of
section 6002 0 paper guideline was
originally to have been produced In
198L EPA had produced a very thor-
ougti draft paper guideline In July of
1981 whIch can serve as an excellent
basis for the guideline due 180 days
after enactment, Also. EPA baa re-
vived their papef guideline develop-
meat effort and currently has an em-
-ployee working fu]l.tlme on the devel-
opment of the guideline. Thus, I am
convinced a final guideline con be pro-
dueetl within the timetable set forth In
the s meudment, and 1 will be follow-
ing tite process closely to Insure that
the deadline Is In fact met
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. WIDEN. I yield to the gentle-
man from New Jersey.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. I fully
support my colleague’s amendment to
section 23. Section 6002—which sec-
tion 23 reauthorIzes—has lain dormant
for too long. Section 23 ‘will get the
Federal procurement of Items contain-
ing recovered materials back on track.
The Federal Government 1roct re-
merit process must lead the way In en-
hancing markets for products that not
only meet applicable specifications.
but also provide the external benefit
of using discarded materials that
would otherwise wind up In our Na--
tion’s landfills, When the Nation
apends $9 billion annually on solid
waste disposal, we must leave no atone
unturned In our effort to reduce the
solid waste stream through resource
recovery. -
The changes the gentleman from
proposed with respect to the
timetable for EPA development of the
product guidelines Is reasonable, and
then I Sully expect the final paper
guideline to be developed and finalized
with the schedule set forth In section
23. - . - - . -
Mr. WTD (. I just want to thank
the gentleman for his help In develop-
ing the amendment. -
I also would like to thank the gentle-
man from New York who has also
been a great help. -
Mr. LENT Mr. Dialrman. will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. WYDEN. I yield to the gentle-
man from New York..- . -
Mr. LENT. I thank the gentleman
for yielding. . -
I want to go on rveoid as being hi
aupport of the gentleman’s amend-
ment It conforms the statute and will
be very helpful.
Mr. WYDEN. I thank the gentleman
nd le1d back the h l nr-e of my time.
- Mr. HAWKINS. Mr. Cbathnan. I
move to strike the requisite number of
words. - -
Mr. Chairman, I would like to
engage In a colloquy on the Wyden
amendment
As some Members may biow, I have
strong reservations about an
p4.r 4!n It to this bill that was adopt.
NouemberS, 1.983
hi subcommittee. That amendment
was authored by the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Wyxiziq) and deals with
Government purchases of paper prod-
ucts containing recovered materials.
specifically postconzumer waste fibers.
It Is now a part of the bill as section
23, The amendment now being offered
by Mr. WYDEN to his own committee
amendment Is an Improvement. How-
ever, this floor amendment does not
by any means solve all of the prob-
8ince, as chairman of the Joint Com-
mittee on Printing, I ant personally
called upon to authorize Lie purchase
of all the printing paper -procured by
the Government Printing Office for
Itself and other Federal agencies. I am
worried about the possible effects this
amendment may have on the prices we
have to pay far paper.
When I expresed my reservations to
the Energy and Commerce Committee
earlier, the gentleman from Oregon
responded to me with a written de-
scription of the amendment our 1inlng
what be Intends the amendment will
do. That description assured me that
art affirmative Federal program to pro-
cure paper con ’ 1 ’w recovered mate-
rials, as defined In the amendment,
would In no way Interfere th current
statutes and procedures that require
that If the paper meets stipulated per-
formance standards, the lowest bid
price will be accepted. In other words.
the lowest cost to the Government will
remain the primary and controlling
factor In buying paper, With consider-
ations of recovered postconsumer
waste fiber content In paper a second-
ary matter.
I ‘would like to ask the gentleman
who authored the amendment if he
will assure me that this remains as hIs
interpretation? Because without auth
assurances, I fear that the prices the
Government pays for paper may rise
substantially due to a lack of adequate
competition.
Mr. wwEN . Mr. Chairman. wm the
gentleman yield ?
Mr. HAWKINS. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Oregon,
(Mr. WYDEN asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his I c-
marks.)
Mr. WYDEN. I thank the gentleman
for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, let me Just commend
the gentleman for his graciousn & In
t ndIing jn s1tI! t r.,-
In developing an affirmatIve pro-
curement program for the purchase of
Items composed of recovered materi-
als. section 23 of the bill specifies two
options for a procuring agency to
Cho s . In addition, an agency may
choose a substantially egwvalent al-
ternative.
- Under the ease-bycase policy devel-
opnient option, unreasonable cost to
the Government Is Indeed a control-
ling factor. As far as the Ouvvruwent
Printing Office procurement of print.-
Ing paper Is concerned, the recycled
- ( ONGRESSIONAL RECORD —.HOUSE -
-------
November 8. 1988
fiber content. speclflenily the posteo .
sumer waste fiber content, would In en-
be the tie-breaking criterion for
‘qually priced low bids.
.der the minimum content stand-
.s option, however, & procuring
agency can specify a minimum recov-
ered materials content percentage
which all acceptable bids must comply
with. In other words, the lowest cost
bid a-Ill stifi be accepted as long as the
bid meets the minimum content stand-
ard. With respect to paper, the GPO
could, for Instance, require any accept-
able bid to contain no less than 30 per-
cent post-consumer waste, fiber con-
tent and then select the lowest cost
bid among all qualifying bids.
I hope this explanation of the Intent
of sectIon 23 Is satisfactory to the
chairman of the Joint Committee on
Printing.__
Mr. IlAwiuriS, Your explawttlon Is
clear, however, It does indicate that In-
stances may occur when the Govern-
ment could be paying snore money for
paper In order to encourage the use of
recovered materials, I must respectful-
ly state to the gentleman from Oregon
that the Joint Committee on Printing
Is precluded by statute from accepting
other than the lowest priced bid for
printing papers for the Government,.
Certainly In the case of tie bids, the
Joint Committee will give fall consid-
eration to recovered material content
if that content can be verif ied,
“tie CHAiRMAN pro tempore, The
‘Ion Is on the amendment offered
ie gentlem from Oregon (Mr.
iIEN).
he amendment was agreed to.
- £he CHAIRM Jj pro teznpore, The
Clerk will read,
The Clerk read as follows:
AKD*?oJly Ui 5PL-flO 5 —
Sm. 24. Section 3007 Is amended by insert-
ing the following new ubsec tion at the end
thereof:
Cd) MAJIDATOIIY IiISpxc ’riosqs ,...(l) The Ad-
ministrator (or the State In the case of a
State having an authorized hazardous waste
program under this subtitle) shall -
mence a program to thoroughly inspect
every facility for the treatment, storage, or
disposal of hazardous waste for which a
permit Is required under section 3005 no less
often than every two ye r as to Its compli.
ance with this subtitle (and the -regulztiojw
promulgated under this subtitle), Such in-
spections shall commence not later than
twel e months after the enactment of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendrnezits of
3983 The Administrator shall, after notice
and opportunity Ice public commence, pro-
mulgate regulaz,ions governing the mini-
mum frequency and manner of such inspee-
lions, Including the manner in which re-
cords of auth Inspections shall be main-
tamed and the manner in which reports of
Such Inspections shall be fUed. The Athnln .
lTat t may distinguish between el. es and
Categories of facilities commensurate with
the rii j posed by each class or category,
‘(21 Not later than Aix months after the
enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Aes
- “dments of 1983. the Administrator
to the Congress a report on the
(.al for tn cta mj of hazardous waste
fleflt , storage, or disposal facilities by
ve’Tnnent 3 inspector, as a supple-
to tnspecsJo conducted by officers,
employees, er Iep1esen af ,, of the 1-
ronmenhsi ?rCaection Agency ar States
having authorized hazardous waste pro-
grams or operaling under a cooperative
agreement with the Administratci’, Sueh
report shall be prepared In cooperation with
the States. insurance companies offering en.
vlronmental Impairment Insurance, and in-
dependent companies providing Inspection
sertlees, and other ssith groups as appropri-
ate. Such report shall contain recommends-
l ions on provisions and requr ’ vi ’nt . far a
program of private thspe t&on. to supple-
ment goveznmen jJ hmp. -tliw . . ”
Mr. 1’LORIO (during the reading).
r. Chairman. I ask unanimous that
section 24 be considered as read and
yirlnted In the Ras:oan,
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is
there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New Jersey?
There was no objection.
axes untv IT . aaT
Mr. ECKART. Mr. Chairman. I offer
an amendment. - -
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. E .aan page
58, aSter lIne 14. in egt
aDSQVACT Of emT* iw aao
Sm. 24A. (a) Subtitle 0 Is amen4d by
adding the following arw -“ ‘ at the aiiA
thereof.
‘ Q5ACT D I Czat&ni GVIDC .n, Ian
‘Sse. 4010. (a) Srvny.—The Administrator
shall conduct a study of the extent to which
the guidelines and criteria under this Act
(other than guidelin and crlter.a for facili-
ties to hieh subtitle C applies) which are
applicable to soLid waste management and
disposal facilities, including, but not linuted
to landfills and surface Impoundments, are
adequate to protect human health and the
environment from groundwater IDntamma-
lion. Such ita y 5h 5,fl Lnd A a detailed as-
sesnnent of the degree to which the criteria
tinder section 1008(a) and the aitena under
section 4004 regarding monitoring, preven-
tion of contazninatio and remedial action
are adequate to protect groundwater and
shall also include recommendation with re-
sped to any additional enforcement au-
thorities which the Administrator, In con-
sultation with the Attorney General, deems
necessary for such purpeses,
‘(b Rn’ORT.... .NOL later than 38 months
- after the date of the enactment of the Haz-
ardous Waste Control and Enforcement Act
of 1933, the Admjni trator thafl submit a
z oit to the Cong e s setting forth the re-
Suits of the study required under this sec-
tion. together with any rec’ mmendations
made by the Administrator on the basis of
such study.
“Ce) RIIvt toims or Gommnrr.s ann Cans.
Iia.—Followj submi.csion of the report re-
qulind widm’ euhsrctIon (hi, the Admlnlstr,-
tar shall v1ae the guidelines and criteria
referred to hi subsectjon (a) to the extent
necessary to insure that such guidelines and
criteria are adequate to protect human
health and the environment from ground
water contamina ’
(bi The table of contents foe such subtitle
D Is amended by adding tt e following new
Item at the end thereof.
‘eec. 4010. Adequacy of Certain Ouldelines,
and Criteria”.
And make the necessary conforming
in the table of contents,
Mr. KART Cdtn’tng the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
nL that the amendment be consid-
H 9161
ared as read and printed In the
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is
there objection to the request of the
gentieman from Ohio?
There was no objection,
(Mr. ECKART asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marts.)
Mr. ECKART. Mr. Chairman, today
I am offering an amendment to the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act which a-Ill push EPA Into deter-
mining whether Its own guidelines and
aiteria for landfills and impound-
ments regulated under zubtjtle 0 aie
adequate to protect human health and
the environment from groundwater
contam l nat Ion.
As I participated In hearings on the
reauthorization of RCRA and the Safe
Drinking Water Act, I became con-
vinced that Instances of groundwater
contanilnat Ion are widespread and
that many impoundments are still not
adequately regulated under our’ envl-
lOnmental Statutes,
Consider the findings of EPA’s still-
linrelated surface lmpoimiiment as-
sessment studT there are over 181,000
surface Impoundments In the United
States. Many of the Impoundments
are located In areas where there Is a
strong chance of groundwater eon-
tamination—55 percent of all sites are
located In areas a-here there is a p0-
tent a! drinking water source within 1
mile and two-thirds of these sites do
not have liners.
It Is not wonder that we are starting
to see evidence of contamination in
our drinking water supplies through-
out the Nation—.. . . ut EPA study
showed cont.aznlxiat lon In 29 percent of
the drinking water supplies In cities of
over 10,000 people,
This House has taken a strong posi-
tion against the land disposal of haz-
ardous wastes, recognizing that we
cannot protect grotmdwater as long as
we continue to store hazardous mAt f-
als In the ground, We must also recog-
nize, however, that a waste can con-
taminate water supplies even though
It hasn’t been officially listed as haz-
ardous under RCR.A.
Indeed, In Chairman PLouo’s sub-
co nrnittee we learned that over 75
percent of the waste streams from the
production of compounds that have
been Identified as carcinogens by
Zp&’, own Carcinogen Asseasm nt
Group, and over 50 percent of the
waste streams from the productlcn of
pesticides have not been listed as lisa-
ardous wastes under present ha Rrd.
oils waste regulations,
We can pr EPA to take action on
Ilstu*. but while the agency moves at
a snail’s pace to list new waste streams
as hazardous, many substances contin-
ue to be put In Impoundments, per-
fectly legally, where they may con-
laminate our drinking water supplies.
The landftflg ond surface impoimd.
ments conta ining these not-yet-lir”iI
substances fall into a no man’s land of
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
2 ’ ’ 4’S £ c)r1o I) AvT 76A. (b
TECHNICAL AND CLERICAL AMENDMENTS
SEC. 502. (a) Section 3007(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by inserting the following after the word “information”:
“(including records, reports. or information obtained by representa-
tives of the Environmental Protection Agency)”.
(b) Section 2006(1) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by
striking out “detail” and substituting “detailed”.
(c) Section 4005(a) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by
inserting a closing parenthetical mark before the period at the end
thereof.
(d) The second paragraph (2) in section 4008(d) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act is redesignated as paragraph (3).
(e) Section 4008 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by
redesignating the second subsection (f) (entitled “Assistance to Mu-
nicipalities for Energy and Materials Conservation and Recovery
Planning Activities”) as subsection (g).
(0 Section 8004(c) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by
inserting “(1)” immediately after “Coa’r SI*.RING.—”.
H. R. 2867—57
(gXl) Section 3012 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act entitled “Re-
strictions on Recycled Oil,” is renumbered as section 3014 and
inserted after section 3013.
(2) The item in the table of contents of such Act relating to 3012 of
the Solid Waste Disposal Act and entitled “Restrictions on Recycled
Oil,” is renumbered as 3014 and inserted after the item relating to
section 3013.
(h) Subsection (1,) of section 4003 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act,
entitled “Energy and Matenals Conservation and Recovery Feasibil-
ity Planning and Assistance” is redesignated as subsection (c) of
such section 4003.
-------
p YLZ_-
SECTION 502—TECHNICAL AND CLERICAL AMENDMENTS
House bilL—The House bill contains several technical and cleri-
cal corrections to various sections of the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
These relate to incorrect section, subsection, and paragraph desig-
nations, spelling errors, and punctuation. The House bill redesig-
nates section 3012 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act entitled “Re-
strictions on Recycled Oil” as 3012A. Also included in the House
bill is an amendment to section 3007(b) to correct an omission
made in section 12(b)(4) of Public Law 26-482 which amended that
provision to insert a parenthetical phrase but did not indicate
where in the provision the phrase was to be inserted.
Senate amendment.—Section 28(a) of the Senate amendment re-
designates section 3012 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (entitled
“Restrictions on Recycled Oil”) as section 3014. Section 28(b) of the
Senate amendment redesignated subsection (b) of section 4003 of
that Act (entitled “Energy and Materials Conservation and Recov-
ery Feasibility Planning and Assistance”) as subsection (c) of sec-
tion 4003.
Conference substitute.—The conference substitute adopts the
technical and clerical corrections made by the House bill, except
with respect to the redesignation of section 3012 entitled “Restric-
tions on Recycled Oil” as 3012A. Instead the conferees agreed to
section 28(a) of the Senate amendment regarding the redesignation
of that section as section 3014. The conferees also adopted section
28(b) of the Senate amendment redesignating subsection (b) of sec-
tion 4003 entitled “Energy and Materials Conservation and Recov-
123
ery Feasibility Planning and Assistance” as subsection (c) of section
-------
c ’f pi ‘i1-i Pl
69
TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS
This amendment makes two technical corrections to the Act as
amended in 1980 and one correction to the Comprehensive Envi-
ronmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
(CERCLA).
The first tv o corrections redesignate a section and a subsection
that were improperly identified in the 1980 amendments to the
Act. The third correction makes it clear that CERCLA’s tax sunset
provision was not intended to apply to taxes for the Post Closure
Liability Trust Fund under that Act.
H ‘ “- “ ‘ ‘
Section 25. Clerical corrections
This provision corrects e ht cleñcal errors con ined in Public\
Law 96—482 and Public Law 96—463.
CLERICAL CORRECTIONS
Sec. 25. (a) SECTION 3007(b).—Section 3001(b) is amended by inserting the follow.
in after the word “information”: lincluding records, reports, or information ob-
tamed by representatives of the Environmental Protection Agency)”.
(b) SECTION 2006.—Section 2006(1) is amended by striking out “detail” and substi.
tutinz “detailed”.
(C) Bcr1ON 4005(a)—Section 4005(a) is amended by inserting a closing parentheti-
sel mark before the period at the end thereof.
(d) SECTION 4008(d).—The second paragraph (2) in section 4008(d) is redesignated
as paragraph (8).
(a) SECTIoN 8004(c).—Section 8004(c) is amended by inserting “(1)” immediately
atWr “Coat Sharing.—”.
-------
. i
106
1 CLERICAL CORRECTIONS
2 SEc. 33. (a) SECTION 3007(b).—Section 3007(b) is
3 amended by inserting the following after the word “informa-
4 tion” : “(including records, reports, or information obtained
5 by representatives of the Environmental Protection
6 Agency)”.
7 (b) SECTION 2006.—Section 2006(1) is amended by
8 striking out “detail” and substituting “detailed”.
9 (c) SEcTIoN 4005(a).—Section 4005(a) is amended by
10 inserting a closing parenthetical mark before the period at the
11 end thereof.
12 (d) SECTION 4008(d).—The second paragraph (2) in
13 section 4008(d) is redesignated as paragraph (3).
14 (e) SECTION 8004(c).—Section 8004(c) is amended by
15 inserting “(1)” immediately after “OosT Sa&i ING.—”.
Passed the House of Representatives November 3,
1983.
Attest: BENJAMIN J. GUTI [ RIE,
Clerk.
-------
,Aç. L: , -35
81
TECHNICAL CORRECTiONS
SEC. 28. (a) Section 8012 of the Solid Waste Dispos-
al Act, entitled “Restrictions on Recycled Oil,” shall be re-
designated as section 3014 of such Act, together with all ref-
erences thereto, and relocated after section 3013 of such Act.
(b) Subsection (b) of section 4003 of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act, entitled “Discretionary Plan Provisions Re-
kiting to Recycled Oil,” shall be redesignated as subsection
(c) of such section, together with all references thereto.
(c) Section 303 of Public Law 96—510, 94 Stat. 2808,
is amended by inserting after “conferred by this Act” the
phrase “(other than under section 4681 of the Internal Rev-
enue Code”). Section 232(c) of such public law is amended
by inserting after “223”the phrase “(other than section
223(c)(2)(D)) ‘
<‘ 1
-------
-‘
15 CLERICAL CORRECTIONS
16 SEc. 2.5. (a) SECTION 3007 ( b).—Section 3007(b) is
17 amended by i’iserling the followin!1 after (he word “info ’rnri.
18 lion”: “(including records, reports, or information obtained
19 by representatives of the Environmental Protection
20 Agency)”.
21 (b) SEcTIo v 2006.—Section 2006(1) is amended by
22 striking out “detail” and substituting “detailed”.
23 (c,) SECTiON 40054z).—Section 4 005(’a) is a7nended by
24 inserting a closing parenthetical mark before the period at (he
25 end thereof.
59
1 (d) SECTION 4008 ’d, .—The second paragraph (2) in
2 section 4008W ) is redesignated as paragraph ‘3,).
3 (e) SEcTIo 1 v 8004(c).—Section 8004(c) is amended by
4 inserting “(1)” immediately after “CosT SHARiNG.— ‘
0
-------
?-2’4J
3 TECHNiCAL CORRECTiONS
4 SEc. 27. (a) Section 3012 of the Solid Waste Disposal
5 Act, entitled “Restrictions on Recycled Oil, “shall be redesig-
6 nated as section 3014 of such Act, together with all references
7 thereto, and relocated after section 3013 of such Act.
8 (b) Subsection (b) of section 4003 of the Solid Waste
9 Disposal Act, entitled “Discretionary Plan Provisions Relat-
10 ing to Recycled Oil,” shall be redesignated as subsection (c)
11 of such section, together with all references thereto.
12 (c) Section 303 of Public Law 96—510, 94 Stat. 2808,
13 is amended by inserting after “conferred by this Act” the
14 phrase “(other than under section 4681 of the Internal Reve-
15 nue Code ‘9. Section 232(c) of such publi law is amended by
16 inserting after “223” the phrase “(other than section
17 223(c)(2)(D)) “
-------
l ’- 1)5
3 CLERICAL CORRECTIONS
4 SEC. 25. (a) Section 3012 of the Solid Waste Disposal
5 Act (relating to hazardous waste inventory) is redesignated
6 as section 3012A. The item relating to such section 3012 is
7 redesignated as 3012A.
8 (b) Section 3007(b) of such Act is amended by inserting
9 the following after the word “information” : “(including
10 records, reports, or information obtained by representatives
11 of the Environmental Protection Agency)”.
12 (c) Section 2006(1) of such Act is amended by striking
13 out “detail” and substituting “detailed”.
14 (d) Section 4003 of such Act is amended by redes-
15 ignating the second subsection (b), relating to energy and ma-
16 terials conservation and recovery feasibility planning and as-
17 sistance, as subsection (c).
18 (e) Section 4005(a) of such Act is amended by inserting
19 a closing parenthetical mark before the period at the end
20 thereof.
21 (0 The second paragraph (2) in section 4008 of such Act
22 is redesignated as paragraph (3).
23 (g) The second subsection (f) in section 4008 of such Act
24 is redesignated as subsection (g).
HR 2867 III
-------
57
1 (h) Section 8004(c) of such Act is amended by inserting
2 “(1)” immediately after “COST SHARING.—”. -
0
HR 2867 IH
-------
- 4 , OL4- - ) i ,&)1 L6 Mc- 1) p —
TITLE VI—UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS
UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK REGULATION
Scc. 601. (a) The Soiia Waste Disposal Act is amended by adding
the following new subtitle after subtitle H:
“Subtitle I—Regulation of Underground Storage Tanks
“DEFINITIONS AND EXEMPTIONS
“SEC. 9001. For the purposes of this subtitle—
“U) The term ‘underground storage tank’ means any one or
combination of tanks (including underground pipes connected
thereto) which is used to contain an accumulation of regulated
substances, and the volume of which (including the volume of
the underground pipes connected thereto) is 10 per centum or
more beneath the surface of the ground. Such term does not
include any—
“(A) farm or residential tank of 1,100 gallons or less
capacity used for storing motor fuel for noncommercial
purposes,
“(B) tank used for storing heating oil for consumptive use
- on the premises where stored,
“(C) septic tank.
11 (D) pipeline facility (including gathering lines) regulated
under—
“Ci) the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1968 (49
U.S.C. App. 1671, et seq.),
“(ii) the Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Act of 1979
(49 U.S.C. App. 2001, et seq.), or
“(iii) which is an intrastate pipeline facility regulated
under State laws comparable to the provisions of law
referred to in clause (i) or -cii) of this subparagraph,
“(E) surface impoundment, pit, pond, or lagoon,
“(F) storm water or waste water collection system,
“(G) flow-through process tank,
“(H) liquid trap or associated gathering lines directly
related to oil or gas production and gathering operations, or
“(I) storage tank situated in an underground area (such
as a basement, cellar, mineworking, drift, shaft, or tunnel)
if the storage tank is situated upon or above the surface of
the floor.
-------
H. R. 2867—58
The term ‘underground storage tank’ shall not include any
pipes connected to any tank which is described in subpara-
graphs (A) through (I).
“(2) The term ‘regulated substance’ means—
“(A) any substance defined in section 101(14) of the Com-
prehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980 (but not including any substance
re uIated as a hazardous waste under subtitle C), and
‘(B) petroleum, including crude oil or any fraction there-
of which is liquid at standard conditions of temperature and
pressure (60 degrees Fahrenheit and 14.7 pounds per square
inch absolute).
“(3) The term ‘owner’ means—
“(A) in the case of an underground storage tank in use on
the date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984, or brought into use after that date,
any person who owns an underground storage tank used for
the storage, use, or dispensing of regulated sustances, and
“(B) in the case of any underground storage tank in use
before the date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984, but no longer in use on the
date of enactment of such Amendments, any person who
owned such tank immediately before the discontinuation of
its use.
“(4) The term ‘operator’ means any person in control of, or
having responsibility for, the daily operation of the under-
ground storage tank.
“(5) The term ‘release’ means any spilling, leaking, emitting,
discharging, escaping, leaching, or disposing from an under-
ground storage tank into ground water, surface water or subsur-
face soils.
“(6) The term ‘person’ has the same meaning as provided in
section 1004(15), except that such term includes a consortium, a
joint venture, and a commercial entity, and the United States
Government.
“(7) The term ‘nonoperational storage tank’ means any under-
ground storage tank in which regulated substances will not be
deposited or from which regulated substances will not be dis-
pensed after the date of the enactment of the Hazardous and
Solid Waste Amendments of 1984.
“NOTIFICATION
“Sac. 9002. (a) UNDERGROUND STORAGE T ixs.—(1) Within 18
months after the date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984, each owner of an underground storage
tank shall notify the State or local agency or department designated
pursuant to subsection (bXl) of the existence of such tank, specifying
the age, size, type, location, and uses of such tank.
“(2XA) For each underground storage tank taken out of operation
after January 1, 1974, the owner of such tank shall, within eighteen
months after the date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984, notify the State or local agency, or
department designated pursuant to subsection (bXl) of the existence
of such tanks (unless the owner knows the tank subsequently was
removed from the ground). The owner of a tank taken out of
operation on or before January 1, 1974, shall not be required to
notify the State or local agency under this subsection.
“(B) Notice under subparagraph (A) shall speci1 , to the extent
knawn tzi ihø
-------
H. R. 2867—59
“(i) the date the tank was taken out of operation,
“(ii) the age of the tank on the date taken out of operation,
“(iii) the size, type and location of the tank, and
“(iv) the type and quantity of substances left stored in such
tank on the date taken out of operation.
“(3) Any owner which brings into use an underground storage
tank after the initial notification period specified under paragraph
(1), shall notify the designated State or local agency or department
within thirty days of the existence of such tank, specifying the age,
size, type, location and uses of such tank.
“(4) Paragraphs (1) through (3) of this subsection shall not apply to
tanks for which notice was given pursuant to section 103(c) of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liabil-
ity Act of 1980.
“(5) Beginning thirty days after the Administrator prescribes the
form of notice pursuant to subsection (bX2) and for eighteen months
ther,after, any person who deposits regulated substances in an
underground storage tank shall reasonably notify the owner or
operator of such tank of the owner’s notification requirements
pursuant to this subsection.
“(6) Beginning thirty days after the Administrator issues new
tank performance standards pursuant to section 9003(e) of this
subtitle, any person who sells a tank intended to be used as an
underground storage tank shall notify the purchaser of such tank of
the owner’s notification requirements pursuant to this subsection.
“(b) AGENCY DESIGNArIoN.—(1) Within one hundred and eighty
days after the enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amend-
ments of 1984, the Governors of each State shall designate the
appropriate State agency or department or local agencies or depart-
ments to receive the notifications under subsection (a) (1), (2), or (3).
“(2) Within twelve months after the date of enactment of the
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, the Administra-
tor, in consultation with State and local officials designated pursu-
ant to subsection (bXl), and after notice and opportunity for public
comment, shall prescribe the form of the notice and the information
to be included in the notificatkns under subsection (a) (1), (2), or (3).
In prescribing the form of such notice, the Administrator shall take
into account the effect on small businesses and other owners and
operators.
“RELEASE DETECTION, PREVENTION, AND CORRECTION REGULATIONS
“SEC. 9003. (a) REGULATIONS.—The Administrator, after notice and
opportunity for public comment, and at least three months before
the effective dates specified in subsection (f), shall promulgate re-
lease detection, prevention, and correctiori .regulations applicable to
all owners and operators of underground storage tanks, as may be
necessary to protect human health and the environment.
“(b) DIsTINcTIoNs IN REGULATIONS.—In promulgating regulations
under this section, the Administrator may distinguish between
types, classes, and ages of underground storage tanks. In making
such distinctions, the Administrator may take into consideration
factors, including, but not limited to: location of the tanks, soil and
climate conditions, uses of the tanks, history of mAintenance, age of
the tanks, current industry recommended practices, national con-
sensus codes, hydrogeology, water table, size of the thnkR , quantity
of regulated substances periodically deposited in or dispensed from “ /
-------
H. R. 2867—60
the tank, the technical capability of the owners and operators, and
the compatibility of the regulated substance and the materials of
which the tank is fabricated.
“Cc) REQUIREMENTS.—The regulations promulgated pursuant to
this section shall include, but need not be limited to, the following
requirements respecting all underground storage tanks—
“(1) requirements for maintaining a leak detection system, an
inventory control system together with tank testing, or a com-
parable system or method designed to identify releases in a
manner consistent with the protection of human health and the
environment;
“(2) requirements for maintaining records of any monitoring
or leak detection system or inventory control system or tank
testing or comparable system;
“(3) requirements for reporting of releases and corrective
action taken in response to a release from an underground
storage tank;
“(4) requirement. for taking corrective action in response to a
relea_ e from an underground storage tank; and
“(5) requirements for the closure of tanks to prevent future
releases of regulated substances into the environment.
“(d) FINANCIAL RESPONsIB IU ’Ty.—(l) As he deems necessary or
desirable, the Administrator shall promulgate regulations contain-
ing requirements for maintaining evidence of financial responsibil-
ity as he deems necessary and desirable for taking corrective action
and compensating third parties for bodily injury and property
damage caused by sudden and nonsudden accidental releases arising
from operating an underground storage tank.
“(2) Financial responsibility required by this subsection may be
established in accordance with regulations promulgated by the
Administrator by any one, or any combination, of the following:
insurance, guarantee, surety bond, Letter of credit, or qualification
as a self-insurer. In promulgating requirements under this subsec-
tion, the Administrator is authorized to specify policy or other
contractual terms, conditions, or defenses which are necessary or
are unacceptable in establishing such evidence of financial responsi-
bility in order to effectuate the purposes of this subtitle.
“(3) In any case where the owner or operator is in bankruptcy,
reorganization, or arrangement pursuant to the Federal Bankruptcy
Code or where with reasonable diligence jurisdiction in any State
court of the Federal Courts cannot be obtained over an owner or
operator likely to be solvent at the time of judgment, any claun
arising from conduct for which evidence of financial responsibility
must be provided under this subsection may be asserted directly
against the guarantor providing such evidence of financial responsi-
bility. In the case of any action pursuant to this paragraph such
guarantor shall be entitled to invoke all rights and defenses which
would have been available to the owner or operator if any action
had been brought against the owner or ope ithr by the claimant and
which would have been available to the guarantor if an action had
been brought against the guarantor by the owner or operator.
“(4) The total liability of any guarantor shall be limited to the
aggregate amount which the guarantor has provided as evidence of
financial responsibility to the owner or operator under this section.
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to limit any other
State or Federal statutory, contractual or common law liability of a
guarantor to its owner or operator including, but not limited to, the
-------
H. R. 2867—61
liability of such guarantor for bad faith either in negotiating or in
failing to negotiate the settlement of any claim. Nothing in this
subsection shall be construed to diminish the Liability of any person
under section 107 or 111 of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 or other
applicable law.
“(5) For the purpose of this subsection, the term ‘guarantor’
means any person, other than the owner or operator, who provides
evidence of financial responsibility for an owner or operator under
this subsection.
“(e) NEW TANK PERFORMANCE STANDARDS—The Administrator
shall, not later than three months prior to the effective date speci-
fied in subsection (f), issue performance standards for underground
storage tanks brought into use on or after the effective date of such
standards. The performance standards for new underground storage
tanks shall include, but need not be limited to, design, Construction,
installation, release detection, and compatibility standards.
“(f) EFFECrIVE DArEs.—(1) Regulations issued pursuant to subsec-
tion (c) and (d) of this section. and standards issued pursuant to
subsection (e) of this sect Ion, for underground storage tanks contain-
ing regulated substances defined in section 9001(2XB) (petroleum,
including crude oil or any fraction thereof which is liquid at stand-
ard conditions of temperature and pressure) shall be effective not
later than thirty months after the date of enactment of the Hazard-
ous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984.
“(2) Standards issued pursuant to subsection (e) of this section
(entitled ‘New Tank Performance Standards’) for underground
storage tanks containing regulated substances defined in section
900 1(2XA) shall be effective not later than thirty-six months after
the date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amend-
ments of 1984.
‘ 3) Regulations issued pursuant to subsection (c) of this section
entitled ‘Requirements’) and standards issued pursuant to subsec-
tion td) of this section (entitled ‘Financial Responsibility’) for un-
derground storage tanks containing regulated substances defined in
section 9001(2) (A) shall be effective not later than forty-eight months
after the date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984.
“(g) INTERIM PR0H!BrrIoN.—(1) Until the effective date of the
standards promulgated by the Administrator under subsection (e)
and after one hundred and eighty days after the date of the enact-
ment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, no
person may install an underground storage tank for the purpose of
storing regulated substances unless such tank (whether of single or
double wall construction)—
“(A) will prevent releases due to corrosion or structural fail-
ure for the operational life of the tank;
“(B) is cathodically protected against corrosion, constructed of
noncorrosive material, steel clad with a noncorrosive material,
or designed in a manner to prevent the release or threatened
release of any stored substance; and ‘ -
“(C) the material used in the construction or lining of the
tank is compatible with the substance to be stored.
“(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), if soil tests conducted in
accordance with ASTM Standard G57-78. or another standard ap-
proved by the Administrator, show that soil resistivity in an instal-
lation location is 12,000 ohm/cm or more (unless a more stringent
-------
H. R. 2867—62
standard is prescribed by the Administrator by rule), a storage tank
without corrosion protection may be installed in that location
during the period referred to in paragraph (1).
“APPROVAL OF STATE PROGRAMS
“SEc. 9004. (a) ELEMEN’TS OF STATE Paocwi.—Beginning 30
months after the date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984, any State may, submit an underground
storage tank release detection, prevention, and correction program
for review and approval by the Administrator. The program may
cover tanks used to store regulated substances referred to in
9001(2) (A) or (B) or both. A State program may be approved by the
Administrator under this section only if the State demonstrates that
the State program includes the following requirements and
standards and provides for adequate enforcement of compliance with
such requirements and standards—
“(1) requirements for maintaining a leak detection system, an
inventory control system together with tank testing, or a com-
parable system or method designed to identify releases in a
manner consistent with the protection of human health and the
environment;
“(2) requirements for maintaining records of any monitoring
or leak detection system or inventory control system or tank
testing system;
“(3) requirements for reporting of any releases and corrective
action taken in response to a release from an underground
storage tank;
“(4) requirements for taking corrective action in response to a
release from an underground storage tank;
“5) requirements for the closure of tanks to prevent future
releases of regulated substances into the environment;
“(6) requirements for maintaining evidence of financial re-
sponsibility for taking corrective action and compensating third
parties for bodiiy injury and property damage caused by sudden
and nonsudden accidental releases arising from operating an
underground storage tank;
“(7) standards of performance for new underground storage
tanks ; and
“(8) requirements—
“(A) for notifying the appropriate State agency or depart-
ment (or local agency or department) designated according
to section 9002(bXl) of the existence of any operational or
non-operational underground storage tank; and
“(B) for providing the information required on the form
issued pursuant to section 90fl2(b)(2).
“(b) FEDERAL SmNDARD8.—(l) A State program submitted under
this section may be approved only if the requirements under para-
graphs (1) through (7) of subsection (a) are no less stringent than the
corresponding requirements standards promulgated by the Adminis-
trator pursuant to section 9003(a).
“(2XA) A State program may be approved without regard to
whether or not the requirements referred to in paragraphs (1). (2),
(3), and (5) of subsection (a) are less stringent than the corresponding
standards under section 9003(a) during the one-year period com-
mencing on the date of promulgation of regulations under section
-------
H. R. 2867—63
9003(a) if State regulatory action but no State legislative action is
rec uired in order to adopt a State program.
‘(B) If such State Legislative action is required, the State program
may be approved without regard to whether or not the requirements
referred to in paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (5) of subsection (a) are less
stringent than the corresponding standards under section 9003(a)
during the two-year period commencing on the date of promulgation
of regulations under section 9003(a) (and during an additional one-
year period after such legislative action if regulations are required
to be promulgated by the State pursuant to such legislative action).
“(c) FINANCIAL REsP0N5IBIUTY.—(1) Corrective action and compen-
sation programs financed by fees on tank owners and operators and
administered by State or Local agencies or departments may be
submitted for approval under subsection (aX6) as evidence of finan-
cial responsibility.
“(2) Financial responsibility required by this subsection may be
established in accordance with regulations promulgated by the Ad..
mini trator by any one, or any combination, of the following: insur-
ance, guarantee, surety bond, letter of credit, or qualification as a
self-insurer. In promulgating requirements under this subsection,
the Administrator is authorized to specify policy or other contrac-
tual terms, conditions, or defenses which are necessary or are
unacceptable in establishing such evidence of financial responsibil-
ity in order to effectuate the purposes of this subtitle.
“(3) In any case where the owner or operator is in bankruptcy,
reorganization, or arrangement pursuant to the Federal Bankruptcy
Code or where with reasonable diligence jurisdiction in any State
court of the Federal courts cannot be obtained over an owner or
operator likely to be solvent at the time of judgment, any claim
arising from conduct for which evidence of financial responsibility
must be provided under this subsection may be asserted directly
against the guarantor providing such evidence of financial responsi-
bility. En the case of any action pursuant to this paragraph such
guarantor shall be entitled to invoke all rights and defenses which
would have been available to the owner or operator if any action
had been brought against the owner or operator by the claimant and
which would I-ave been available to the guarantor if an action had
been brought against the guarantor by the owner or operator.
“(4) The total liability of any guarantor shall be limited to the
aggregate amount which the guarantor has provided as evidence of
financial responsibility to the owner or operator under this section.
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to limit any other
State or Federal statutory, contractual or common law liability of a
guarantor to its owner or operator including, but not limited to, the
liability of such guarantor for bad faith either in negotiating or in
failing to negotiate the settlement of any claim. Nothing in this
subsection shall be construed to diminish the liability of any person
under section 10’T or 111 of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 or other applica-
ble law.
“(5) For the purpose of this subsection, the term ‘guarantor’
means any person, other than the owner or operator, who provides
evidence of financial responsibility for an owner or operator under
this subsection.
“(d) EPA DrrERwNA’rION.—(l) Within one hundred and eighty
days of the date of receipt of a proposed State program, the Adnilnis-
trator shall, after notice and opportunity for public comment, make
-------
H. R. 2867—64
a determination whether the State’s program complies with the
provisions of this section and provides for adequate enforcement of
compliance with the requirements and standards adopted pursuant
to this section.
“(2) If the Administrator determines that a State program com-
plies with the provisions of this section and provides for adequate
enforcement of compliance with the requirements and standards
adopted pursuant to this section, he shall approve the State program
in lieu of the Federal program and the State shall have primary
enforcement responsibility with respect to requirements of its
program.
“(e) WmwaAwAL 0? AumoRIz.vr loN.—Whenever the Administra-
tor determines after public hearing that a State is not administering
and enforcing a program authorized under this subtitle in accord-
ance with the provisions of this section, he shall so notify the State.
If appropriate action is not taken within a reasonable time, not to
exceed one hundred and twenty days after such notification, the
Administrator shall withdraw approval of such program and rees-
tablish the Federal program pursuant to this subtitle.
“INSPECrIONS, MONITORING, AND T) TING
“Sec. 9005. (a) FURNISHING INPORMATION.—For the purposes of
developing or assisting in the development of any regulation, con-
ducting any study, or enforcing the provisions of this subtitle, any
owner or operator of an underground storage tank (or any tank
subject to study under section 9009 that is used for storing regulated
substances) shall, upon request of any officer, employee or repre-
sentative of the Environmental Protection Agency, duly designated
by the Administrator, or upon request of any duly designated off’i-
cer, employee, or representative of a State with an approved pro-
gram, furnish information relating to such thnkq , their associated
equipment, their contents, conduct monitoring or testing, and
permit such officer at all reasonable times to have access to, and to
copy all records relating to such tanks. For the purposes of develop-
ing or assisting in the development of any regulation, conducting
any study, or enforcing the provisions of this subtitle, such officers,
employees, or representatives are authorized—
“(1) to enter at reasonable times any establishment or other
place where an underground storage tank is located;
“(2) to inspect and obtain samples from any person of any
re ulated substances contained in such tank; and
‘(3) to conduct monitoring or testing of the thnk , associated
equipment, contents, or surrounding soils, air, surface water or
ground water.
Each such inspection shall be commenced and completed with rea-
sonable promptness.
“(b) Coi mDz n.&uTY.—(1) Any recordi,ieports, or information
obtained from any persons under this section shall be available to
the public, except that upon a showing satisfactory to the Adminiji-
trator (or the State, as the case may be) by any person that records,
reports, or information, or a particular part thereof, to which the
Administrator (or the State, as the case may be) or any officer,
employee, or representative thereof has access under this section if
made public, would divulge information entitled to protection under
section 1905 of title 18 of the United States Code, such information
or particular portion thereof shall be considered confidential in
-------
H. R. 2867—65
accordance with the purposes of that section. except that such
record, report, document, or information may be disclosed to other
officers, employees, or authorized representatives of the United
States concerned with carrying out this Act, or when relevent in any
proceeding under this Act.
“(2) Any person not subject to the provisions of section 1905 of
title 18 of the United States Code who knowingly and willfully
divulges or discloses any information entitled to protection under
this subsection shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of not
more than $5,000 or to imprisonment not to exceed one year, or
both.
“(3) In submitting data under this subtitle, a person required to
provide such data may—
“(A) designate the data which such person believes is entitled
to protection under this subsection, and
“(B) submit such designated data separately from other data
submitted under this subtitle.
A designation under this paragraph shall be made in writing and in
such rnan ier as the Administrator may prescribe.
“(4) Notwithstanding any limitation contained in this section or
any other provision of law, all information reported to, or otherwise
obtained, by the Administrator (or any representative of the Admin-
istrator) under this Act shall be made available, upon written
request of any duly authorized committee of the Congress, to such
committee (including records, reports, or information obtained by
representatives of the Evironmental Protection Agency).
“FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT
“SEC. 9006. (a) COMPLIANCE ORDi as.—(1) Except as provided in
paragraph (2), whenever on the basis of any information, the Admin-
istrator determines that any person is in violation of any
requirement of this subtitle, the Administrator may issue an order
requiring compliance within a reasonable specified time period or
the Administrator may commence a civil action in the United States
district court in which the violation occurred for appropriate relief,
including a temporary or permanent injunction.
“(2) In the case of a violation of any requirement of this ubtitle
where such violation occurs in a State with a program approved
under section 9004, the Administrator shall give notice to the State
in which such violation has occurred prior to issuing an order or
commencing a civil action under this section.
“(3) If a violator fails to comply with an order under this subsec-
tion within the time specified in the order, he shall be liable for a
civil penalty of not more than $25,000 for each day of continued
noncompliance.
“(b) PROCEDURE—Any order issued under this section shall
become final unless, no later than thirty_ days after the order is
served, the person or persons named therein request a public hear-
ing. Upon such request the Administrator shall promptly conduct a
public hearing. In connection with any proceeding under this section
the Administrator may issue subpoenas for the attendance and
testimony of witnesses and the production of relevant papers, books,
and documents, and may promulgate rules for discovery procedures.
“(C) CoNTENrs o OIWE1I.—Any order issued under this section
shall state with reasonable specificity the nature of the violation,
specify a reasonable time for compliance, and asa ss a penalty, if
-------
H. R. 2867—66
any, which the Administrator determines is reasonable taking into
account the seriousness of the violation and any good faith efforts to
comply with the applicable requirements.
“(d) CiviL PEN LvFs.—(1) Any owner who knowingly fails to
notify or submits false information pursuant to section 9002(a) shall
be subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $10,000 for each tank for
which notification is not given or false information is submitted.
“(2) Any owner or operator of an underground storage tank who
fails to comply with—
“(A) any requirement or standard promulgated by the Admin-
istrator under section 9003;
“(B) any requirement or standard of a State program ap-
proved pursuant to section 9004; or
“(C) the provisions of section 9003(g) (entitled ‘Interim
Prohibition’)
shall be subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $10,000 for each tank
for each day of violation,
“FEDERAL FACILITIES
“SEc. 9007. (a) APPLICATION OF SurrrrLE.—Each department,
agency, and instrumentality of the executive, legislative, and judi-
cial branches of the Federal Government having jurisdiction over
any underground storage tank shall be subject to and comply with
all Federal, State, interstate, and local requirements, applicable to
such tank, both substantive and procedural, in the same manner,
and to the same extent, as any other person is subject to such
requirements, including payment of reasonable service charges. Nei-
ther the United States, nor any agent, employee, or officer thereof,
shall be immune or exempt from any process or sanction of any
State or Federal court with respect to the enforcement of any such
injunctive relief.
“(b) PRESIDENTIAL EXEMPTION.—The President may exempt any
underground storage tanks of any department, agency, or instru-
mentality in the executive branch from compliance with such a
requirement if he determines it to be in the paramount interest of
the United States to do so. No such exemption hall be granted due
to lack of appropriation unless the President shall have specifically
requested such appropriation as a part of the budgetary process and
the Congress shall have failed to make available such requested
appropriations. Any exemption shall be for a period not in excess of
one year, but additional exemptions may be granted for periods not
to exceed one year upon the President’s making a new determina-
tion. The President shall report each January to the Congress all
exemptions from the requirements of this section granted during the
preceding calendar year, together with his reason for granting each
such exemption.
“STATE AUTHORITY
“SEC. 9008. Nothing in this subtitle shall preclude or deny any
right of any State or political subdivision thereof to adopt or enforce
any regulation, requirement or standard of performance respecting
underground storage tanks that is more stringent than a regulation,
requirement, or standard of performance in effect under this
subtitle.
-------
H. R. 2867—67
“STUDY OF UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS
“Sgc. 9009. (a) PL-rROLEUM TANIC5.—Not later than twelve months
after the date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984, the Administrator shall complete a study of
underground storage tanks used for the storage of regulated sub-
stances defined in section 9001(2XB).
“(b) Orinx TANKS.—NOt later than thirty-six months after the
date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments
of 1984, the Administrator shall complete a study of all other
underground storage tanks.
“(c) ELEMENTS OF STUDIES—The studies under subsections (a) and
(b) shall include an assessment of the ages, types (including methods
of manufacture, coatings, protection systems, the compatibility of
the construction materials and the installation methods) and loca-
tions (including the climate of the locations) of such tanks; soil
conditions, water tables, and the hydrogeology of tank locations; the
relationship between the foregoing factors and the likelihood of
releases from underground storage tanks; the effectiveness and costs
of inventory systems, tank testing, and leak detection systems; and
such other factors as the Administrator deems appropriate.
“(d) FARM AND HRArINc OIL TANxs.—Not later than thirty-six
months after the date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984, the Administrator shall conduct a
study regarding the tanks referred to in section 9001(1) (A) and (B).
Such study shall include estimates of the number and location of
such tanks and an analysis of the extent to which there may be
releases or threatened releases from such tanks into the environ-
ment.
“(e) REPORTS.—UpOn completion of the studies authorized by this
section. the Administrator shall submit reports to the President and
to the Congress containing the results of the studies and recommen-
dations respecting whether or not such tanks should be subject to
the preceding provisions of this subtitle.
“(f) REIMBURSEMENT.—( 1) If any owner or operator (excepting an
agency, department, or instrumentality of the United States Gov-
ernment, a State or a political subdivision thereof) shall incur costs,
including the loss of business opportunity, due to the closure or
interruption of operation of an underground storage tank solely for
the purpose of conducting studies authorized by this section, the
Administrator shall provide such person fair and equitable reim-
bursement for such costs.
“(2) All claims for reimbursement shall be filed with the Adminis-
trator not later than ninety days after the closure or interruption
which gives rise to the claim.
“(3) Reimbursements made under this section shall be from funds
appropriated by the Congress pursuant to- the authorization con-
tained in section 2007(g).
“(4) For purposes of judicial review, a determination by the Ad-
ministrator under this subsection shall be considered final agency
action.
“AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS
“SEC. 9010. For authorization of appropriations to carry out this
subtitle, see section 2007(g).”.
“If
-------
H. R. 2867—68
(I)) The table of contents of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by inserting the following after the items relating to
subtitle H:
“Subtitle I—Regulation of Underground Storage Tanks
“Sec. 9001 Definitions.
‘Sec. 9002. Notification.
“Sec. 9003. Release detection, prevention, and correction regulations.
“Sec. 9004 Approval of State programs.
‘Sec. 9005 Inspections, monitoring, and testing
“Sec. 9006. Federal enforcement.
“Sec. 9007. Federal facilities.
“Sec. 9008 State authonty.
“Sec. 9009. Study of underground storage tanks.
“Sec 9010. Authorization of appropriations.”.
-------
1+ p -l r r -r., I
SECTION 601—UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS
House bilL—The House bill directs the Administrator to promul-
gate by March 1, 1985, final permitting standards for underground
tanks containing hazardous wastes that cannot be entered for in-
spection.
Senate amendinent.—The Senate amendment establishes a com-
prehensive regulatory program under the Safe Drinking Water Act
for undergound storage tanks containing regulated substances. The
key elements of this program are as follows:
(1) Notification and certification
Within 18 months, owners of underground storage tanks shall
notify the appropriate State or local agency of the existence of the
tanks, of tanks taken out of operation, and of tanks brought into
use. Within 12 months of enactment, the Administrator is directed
to design the notification form to be used by tank owners. Distribu-
tors of regulated substances and tank sellers shall inform owners
and operators of the obligation to notify.
Three types of tanks are exempt from this notification require-
ment: those which have already made notification under the provi-
sions of CERCLA, those which are in use but have been taken out
of the ground, and those which were taken out of operation before
January 1, 1974.
(2) Release detection, prevention and correction regulations
The Administrator is directed to promulgate underground stor-
age tank regulations for owners and operators storing or dispens-
ing regulated substances. These regulations must be sufficient to
protect human health and the environment, and must include the
following elements: a monitoring system to identify releases; stand-
ards for the performance of new tanks; record keeping on the moni-
toring systems; corrective action in response to releases; reporting
of releases; corrective action; and requirements for taking tanks
out of operation.
Regulations for tanks containing petroleum must be promulgated
within 30 months. There is no specified deadline for promulgation
of regulations of other regulated substances.
Until the effective date of the regulations being promulgated,
and after 90 days beyond the enactment of this title, no person
may install an underground storage tank unless it is installed and
brought into accordance with enforced national consensus codes.
The Senate amendment also provides the Administrator with the
discretion to require that tank owners and operators maintain in-
surance or other proof of financial responsibility sufficient to
assure that corrective action for releases, as well as compensation
to third parties for bodily injury and property damage. In the alter-
native, the Administrator may recognize self-insurance pools and
state programs based on fees and charges that finance a response
authority as possible approaches to fulfill the requirements of this
section.
-------
124
(3) Approual of State programs
Thirty months after enactment, any State may submit to the Ad-
ministrator a proposed program for underground storage tank re-
lease detection, prevention and correction for his review. The State
program must include the components of the Federal program, pro-
vide for adequate enforcement of compliance, and have perform-
ance standards for new tanks that are no less stringent than Feder-
al standards.
Within 180 days, the Administrator shall determine whether the
State program includes the requirements of the Federal program.
If it does, the Administrator shall approve the State program and
permit the State to have primary enforcement responsibility for
regulating underground storage tanks containing regulated sub-
stances. States may submit programs covering only tanks which
contain petroleum substances, only tanks which contain hazardous
substances, or programs covering both.
If the Administrator determines that a State with an approved
tank program is not administering it properly, he shall notify the
State. If appropriate State actions are not made within 90 days, he
shall withdraw authorization of the State program.
(4) Inspections, monüoring and testing
At the request of the appropriate State or Federal agency, any
owner or operator of an underground storage tank used for storing
hazardous substances shall furnish information relating to his
tanks, allow access to records related to such tanks, and conduct
monitoring and testing when required. The appropriate officials
are authorized to enter establishments containing underground
storage tanks and to inspect and obtain samples.
(5) Federal enforcement
If the Administrator determines that any person is in violation
of any provision, he may issue a compliance order, or the U.S. Gov-
ernment may commence a civil action in U.S. district courts for ap-
propriate relief, including a temporary or permanent injunction. If
a violation occurs in a State with an approved underground storage
tank program, the Administrator shall give notice to the State
prior- to taking any enforcement actions. If a violator fails to
comply with enforcement directives within the time period speci-
fied in an order, he shall be liable for a civil penalty not to exceed
$25,000 for each day of continued noncompliance. Orders become
final within 30 days unless the persons charged request a public
hearing.
Any owner or oj.erator who knowingly fails to notify State or
Federal authorities, or submits false information about his tanks,
shall be subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $10,000 per tank.
Any owner or operator who installs or begins using an under-
ground storage tank for storing hazardous substances without com-
plying with the regulations regarding the use of such tanks shall
be subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $10,000 per tank for each
day of violation.
-------
125
(6) Federal facilities
Each Federal agency having underground storage tanks contain-
ing hazardous substances shall be subject to and comply with all
Federal, State, interstate, and local requirements for such tanks.
Neither the United States nor any Federal employee shall be
immune or exempt from any process or sanction of any Federal
court in regard to underground storage tank requirements. The
President may exempt underground storage tanks owned by any
Federal agency from compliance with Federal requirements if he
determines it to be in the paramount interest of the United States
to do so. No exemption shall be granted because of lack of appro-
priated funds unless the President shall have specifically requested
such appropriations as part of the budgetary process, and the Con-
gress shall have failed to make available such requested appropria-
tion. An exemption shall not exceed one year unless the President
makes a new determination.
(7) State authority
Nothing in this Title shall preclude or deny any State or local
authority from adopting underground storage tank requirements
that are more stringent than the Federal rules.
(8) Key definitions
“Regulated substance” means all substances designated under
CERCLA [ Sec. 101(4)] not including hazardous wastes listed or iden-
tified under Subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act and petrole-
um products that are a liquid at standard temperature and pres-
sure.
“Underground storage tank” means the underground tank and
connecting underground pipes which are used to contain an accu-
mulation of regulated substances and which are substantially or to-
tally beneath the surface of the ground, but not including above
ground storage tanks which are in compliance with national con-
sensus codes and for which 90% or more of the tank volume is
above ground, farm or residential non-commercial tanks of less
than 1,100 gallons of motor fuel, heating oil tanks used on the
premises, residential septic tanks, pipelines regulated under the
Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act or the Hazardous Liquid Pipeline
Act, surface impoundments, pits, ponds, lagoons, storm water and
waste water collection systems, or flow through process tanks.
(9) Studies
Within 36 months of enactment of this title, the Administrator
shall complete a study of the following excluded tanks: farm or res-
idential tanks of 1,100 gallons or less for storLng motor fuel for non-
commercial purposes, and tanks used for storing heating oil for
consumptive use on the premises. The study will include estimates
of the number and location of these tanks and an analysis of the
extent to which they are or may some day be leaking. On comple-
tion of this study, the Administrator shall submit a report to the
President and Congress on whether these excluded tanks should be
subject to regulation.
-------
126
Within 12 months of enactment the EPA Administrator shall
complete a study of the underground storage tanks containing pe-
troleum. Within 36 months of enactment the Administrator shall
complete a study of all other underground storage tanks containing
substances regulated.
If any owner or operator of an underground storage tank con-
taining regulated substances (except for the Federal Government)
incurs costs or loss of business opportunity because of the studies
authorized by this provision the Administrator shall provide fair
reimbursement. The funds for such reimbursement will be appro-
priated by the Congress.
Conference substituge.—The Conference substitute adopts the
House bill with respect to underground storage tanks containing
hazardous wastes and the Senate amendment with the following
principal modifications:
1. The definition of underground storage tanks includes under-
ground piping connected to above ground tanks provided the total
volume that is below the surface exceeds 10 percent and excludes
all septic tanks, oil and/or gas producing facility traps, tanks in
basements, mines or underground rooms and intrastate pipelines
regulated by state pipeline safety statutes comparable to the Haz-
ardous Liquid Pipeline Act of 1979 or the Natural Gas Pipeline
Safety Act of 1968.
2. Following enactment, the installation of bare steel tanks, i.e.
those which provide little or no protection against corrosion, will
be prohibited until the Administrator promulgates regulations es-
tablishing the conditions for installation. Bare steel tanks may be
installed (pending promulgation of EPA regulations) only where
properly conducted soil tests show resistivity at 12,000 ohms/cm or
more. This provision replaces the provision in the Ser’ate amend-
ment which prohibits installation of bare steel tanks except in
states that enforce a national consensus code.
3. The reference to “technical and managerial capabilities” of
tank owners as factor to be considered by the Administrator in de-
veloping regulation is modified to exclude reference to “managerial
capabilities”.
4. The regulatory program promulgated by the Administrator
must include leak detection systems, inventory control systems (to-
gether with periodic tank testing) or comparable systems or
method of detecting releases consistent with protection of human
health and the environment.
5. The Administrator is directed to promulgate regulations on
tank closure which will prevent releases of regulated substances
into the environment.
6. The Administrator is directed to promulgate new tank . tand-
ards and program regulations for all petroleum tanks within 30
months after enactment, new tank standards for the remaining
regulated substances within 36 months and program regulations
for the remaining regulated substances within 48 months.
7. With the exception of financial responsibility requirements,
the components of an authorized state’s regulatory program con-
cerning underground storage tanks may be no less stringent than
the program promulgated by the Administrator. Recognizing that
some states may have regulatory programs in effect when the fed-
-------
127
era! regulations are issued, and to mitigate the disincentive for
states to develop programs rapidly under a “no less stringent”
standard, the conference substitute allows states (with programs
that are in effect) three years to come into compliance with this
subsection.
8. The Administrator, in consultation with the states, is directed
to develop a notification form for operational and non-operational
tanks. To gain authorization, States must have a system for notifi-
cation and tank inventory.
9. Following notification by the Administrator to a state that
such state is not properly administering an authorized program,
such State would be allowed 120 (rather than 90) days to come into
compliance before responsibility for the program reverts to the Ad.
ministrator.
10. The entire provision concerning underground storage tanks
will constitute a new Subtitle of the Solid Waste Disposal Act; Sec-
tion 3008 will not be applicable to regulated substances. The civil
penalty provisions contained in the Senate amendment will be ap-
plicable to violations involving storage tanks containing regulated
substances.
Although the modifications of the Senate amendment are largely
self-explanatory, a number of clarifications and explanations are
warranted.
First, the deletion of the word “managerial” from the phrase
“technical and managerial capabilities” as one of the factors to be
considered by the Administrator in developing a regulatory pro-
gram should not be construed as preventing any consideration of
the particular needs or circumstances facing small businesses. The
deletion of the word “managerial” is simply intended to ensure
that EPA’s regulations not be subject to varying standards based
on limitations of managerial skills. However, the Conferees expect
that the Administrator, in developing a regulatory program affect-
ing small businesses, to promulgate regulations which, where ap-
propriate, build on existing management practices.
Second, with respect to methods or systems of detecting releases
of regulated substances, EPA is to be afforded broad discretion in
determining which methods or systems are necessary in order to
protect human health and the environment. In this regard, the
Conferees believe that while sophisticated methods of inventory
control may be adequate to determine whether a tank is leaking,
exclusive reliance on a “dipstick” method of inventory control
(even with periodic tank testing) will not be sufficiently reliable to
detect slow leaks.
Third, the Conference substitute provides that the applicable pro-
visions of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, including Sections 7002
and 7003 may be used to enforce Title I and specifically excludes
application of Section 3008 to Subtitle 1.
Fourth, the Conferees recognize that the Administrator is cur-
rently proceeding with rule making to regulate the disposal and
storage of listed and identified hazardous waste in underground
storage tanks. Enactment of Subtitle I is not intended to delay such
rule making. However, the Conferees expect the underground tank
regulations under Subtitle C to be revised to reflect, where appro-
(“I
-------
128
priate, the requirements and prohibitions promulgated under Sub-
title I.
Finally the Conferees are aware that there are appoximately two
million underground tanks in the country in which gasoline and
other hazardous substances are stored. Approximately 85 percent
of these tanks are made of steel with no corrosion protection. Pe-
troleum industry experts estimate that as many as 75,000 to
100,000 underground tanks are leaking and that 350,000 may devel-
op leaks within the next five years.
Although it is difficult to determine the precise source of ground-
water contamination, underground storage tanks are considered
the source or probable source of a substantial number of ground-
water contamination cases. One state (Michigan) that has carefully
monitored groundwater contamination has concluded that storage
tanks are the leading cause of groundwater contamination (39 per.
cent of 441 known incidents). Other states such as Alabama, Cali-
fornia, Florida, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina,
Ohio, Maine, Montana, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Wisconsin
have also experienced severe groundwater contamination caused by
leaking underground storage tanks and most of these states have
requested greater Federal involvement, including regulation, to
help resolve this growing environmental problem. Because half the
population of the United States depends on groundwater as a
source of drinking water, the conferees believe this problem has
become one of national significance and requires Federal legisla-
tion.
-------
c ?c .
UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS CONTAiNING OTHER
THAN HAZARDOUS WASTE
SEC. 45. (a) The Safe Drinking Water Act (title XIV
of the Public Health Service Act) is amended by adding a
new’part F as follows:
“PART F—REGULATION OF UNDERGROUND STORAGE
TANKS CONTAINiNG SUBSTANCES OTHER THAN
HAZARDOUS WASTE
“DEFINiTiONS
“SEC. 1451. For the purposes of this part, the term—
“(1) ‘Administrator’ means the Administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency;
“(2) ‘regulated substance’ means (A) any sub-
stance defined in section 101(14) of Public Law 96—
510, the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (but not in-
cluding substances regulated as hazardous wastes
under the Solid Waste Disposal Act), and (B) petrole-
um, including crude oil or any fraction thereof which
is liquid at standard conditions of temperature and
HR 2867 EAS
-------
105
pressure (60 degrees Fahrenheit and 14.7 pounds per
square inch absolute);
“(3) ‘owner’ means (A) in the case of an under-
ground storage tank in use on the dale of enactment of
this part or brought into use after that date, any person
who owns an underground storage tank used for the
sibrage, use, or dispensing of regulated suslances, and
(B) in the case of any underground storage lank previ-
ously in use but not longer in use on the date of enact-
ment of this part, any person who owned such tank im-
mediately prior to discontinuation of use;
“(4) ‘operator’ means any person in control of or
having responsibility for the daily opera /ion of the un-
derground storage tank for the storage, use, or dispens-
ing of regulated substances;
“(5) ‘person’ means an individual, firm, corpora-
tion, association, partnership, trust, consortium, joint
venture, commercial entity, United Slates Government,
State, municipality, commission, political subdivision
of a State, or any interstate body;
“(6) ‘release’ means any actual spilling, leaking,
emitting, dLscharging, escaping, leaching, or disposing
from an undergroud storage tank into gound waler,
surface water or subsurface soils;
HR 2867 EAS : O (
-------
106
(7) ‘underground storage lank’ means any lank,
including underground pipes connected thereto, which
is used to contain an accumulation of regulated sub-
stances and which is substantially or totally beneath
the surface of the ground. This term does not include
(i) above ground storage tanks which are in compliance
with national consensus codes and for which 90 per
centum or more of the tank volume is above the ground
surface, (ii) farm or residential underground storage
tanks of one thousand one hundred gallons or less Ca-
pacity used for storing motor fuel for noncommercial
purposes, (iii) underground storage tanks used for stor-
ing heating oil for consumptive use on the premises
where stored, (iv) septic tanks, (v) pipeline facilities
regulated under the Natural Gas Pipeline Safely Act
of 1968, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1671, et seq.) or the
Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Act of 1978, as amended
(40 U.S.C. 2001, et seq.), (vi) surface impoundments.
pits, ponds or lagoons (vii) storm water and waste
water collection systems, or (viii) flow-through process
tanks;
“(8) ‘nonoperational underground storage tank’
means any tank which has been used for the storage,
use, or dispensing of regulated substances which will
not have regulated substances deposited or dispensed
HR 2867 EAS
-------
107
from the storage tank after the dale of enactment of this
part;
“(9) ‘national consensus code’ means any safety
or fire standard or modification thereof which has been
adopted and promulgated by a nationally recognized
standards-producing organization, including National
Fire Protection Association Standard Number 30,
“Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code,” and
Western Fire Chiefs Association Uniform Fire Code
Article Number 79, “Flammable and Combustible Liq-
u ds”
“NOTIFiCATION AND CERTIFICATION
“SEC. 1452. (a)(1) UNDERGROUND STORAGE
TANKS.—Within eighteen months of the date of enactment
of this part, any owner of an underground storage tank
shall notify the State or local agency or department desig-
nated pursuant to subsection (b)(1) of the existence of such
tank, specifying the age, size, type, location, and uses of
such tank.
“(2) NONOPERAT!ON UNDERGROUND STORAGE
TANKS.—FOr any underground storage tank taken out of
operation after January 1, 1974, the owner of such tank
shall, within eighteen months of the date of enactment of
this part, notify the State or local agency, or department
designated pursuant to subsection (b)(1) of the existence of
such tanks (unless the owner knows the tank subsequently
HR 2867 EAS
0/
-------
108
was removed from the ground). Notice under this subsection
shall specify to the extent known the date the lank was
taken out of operation, the age on the date taken out of oper-
ation, the size, type and location of the tank, and the type
and quantity of substances left stored in such tank on the
date taken out of operation. This subsection shall not apply
to tanks for which notice was given pursuant to section
103(c) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980.
“(3) Any owner which brings into use an underground
storage tank after the initial notification under subsection
(a)(1), shall notify the designated State or local agency or
department within thirty days of the existence of such lank,
specifying the age, size, type, location and uses of such
tank.
“(4) Beginning thirty days after the Administrator
prescribes the form of notice pursuant to subsection (b)(2)
and for eighteen months thereafter, any person who deposits
regulated substances in an underground storage lank shall
reasonably notify the owner or operator of such tank of the
owner notification requirements pursuant to this
subsection. -
“(5) Beginning thirty days after the Administrator
issues new tank performance standards pursuant to section
1453(d) of this part, any person who sells a tank intended
HR 2867 EAS
-------
109
to be used for the storage, use, or dispensing of regulated
3ubStances shall notify the purchaser of such tank of the
owner’s notification requirements pursuant to this subsec-
tion.
“(b)(1) Within one hundred and eighty days of enact-
ment of this part, the Governors of each State shall desig-
nate the appropriate State agency or department or local
agencies or departments to receive the notifications under
subsection (a) (1), (2), or (3).
“(2) Within twelve months of enactment of this part,
the Administrator in consultation with Stale and local off i-
cials designated pursuant to subsection (b)(1), and after
notice and opportunity for public comment, shall prescribe
the form of the notice and the information to be included in
the notifications under subsection (a) (1), (2), or (3). in is-
suing the form of such notice, the Administrator shall take
into account the effect on small businesses and other owners
and operators.
“RELEASE DETECTiON, PRE VENTION, AND CORRECTiON
REGULATIONS
“SEc. 1453. (a) The Administrator, after notice and
opportunity for public comment, shall promulgate release de-
tection, prevention, and correction regulations applicable to
all owners and operators of underground storage tanks used
for storing regulated substances, as may be necessary to pro-
tect human health and the environment.
HR 2867 EAS
-------
110
d (1 ) In issuing regulations under this section, the Ad-
ministrator may distinguish between types, classes, and ages
of underground storage tanks. In making such distinctions,
the Administrator may take into consideration the following
factors, including, but not limited to: location of the tanks,
soil and climate conditions, uses of the tanks, history of
maintenance, age of the tanks, current industry recommend-
ed practices, national consensus codes, hydrogeology, waler
table, size of the tanks, quantity of regulated substances pe-
riodically deposited in or dispensed from the tank, the tech-
nical and managerial capability of the owners and opera-
tors, and the compatibility of the regulated substance and
the materiaLs of which the underground storage tank is fab-
rica ted.
“(c) The regulations promulgated pursuant to this sec-
tion shall include, but need not be limited to, the following
requirements respecting all underground storage tanks—
“(1) maintaining a leak detection system or
maintaining a comparable system or methods or inven-
tory control system and performing tank testing de-
signed to identify releases;
“(2) maintaining records of any monitoring or
leak detection system or inventory control system or
tank testing or comparable system;
HR 2867 LAS
-------
111
“(3) reporting of any releases and corrective
action taken in response to a release from an under-
ground storage tank;
“(4) taking corrective action in response to a re-
lease from an underground storage tank;
“(5) taking underground storage tanks out of op-
era/ion.
“(d) The Administrator shall promulgate regulations
for maintaining evidence of financial responsibility as he
deems necessary and desirable for taking corrective action
and compensating third parties for bodily injury and prop-
erty damage caused by sudden and nonsudden accidental re-
leases arising from operating an underground storage tank.
“(e) The Administrator shall issue performance stand-
ards for underground storage tanks brought into use on or
after the effective date of such standards. The performance
standards for new underground storage tanks shall include,
but need not be limited to, design, construction, installation,
notification, compatibility and release detection standards.
“(f) Regulations £9sued pursuant to subsection (c) of
this section and standards issued pursuant to subsection (d)
of this section for underground storage tanks containing reg-
tlated substances defined in section 1451(2) (B) (petroleum,
including crude oil or any fraction thereof which is liquid at
standard conditions of temperature and pressure) shall be
HR 28G7 EAS
-------
112
effective not later than thirty months after the date of enact-
ment of this part.
“(g) Until the effective date of the standards promul-
gated by the Administrator under subsection (d) of this sec-
tion, and after ninety days of enactment of this part, no
person shall install an underground storage tank for the
purpose of storing regulated substances unless such tank is
installed and brought into use in accordance with an en-
forced national consensus code(s). Not later than six months
after the date of enactment of this part, the Administrator
shall report to the Senate and the House of Representatives
of the United States his views on the national consensus
code(s).
“APPROVAL OF STATE PROGRAMS
“SEc. 1454. (a) Any State may thirty months after
the date of enactment submit an underground storage tank
release detection, prevention, and correction program for
review and approval by the Administrator. The State must
demonstrate that the State program includes the following
elements and provides for adequate enforcement of compli-
ance with such requirements—
“(1) maintaining a leak detection system or in-
ventory control system and performing tank testing de-
signed to identify releases;
HR 2867 EAS
-------
113
“(2) maintaining records of any monitoring or
leak detection system or inventory control system or
tank testing syslem,
“(3) reporting of any releases and corrective
action taken in response to a release from an under-
ground storage tank;
“(4) standards of performance for new under-
ground strorage tanks;
“(5) taking corrective action in response to a re-
lease from an underground storage tank;
“(6) taking underground storage tanks out of op-
eration; and
“(7) maintaining evidence of financial responsi-
bility for taking corrective action and compensating
third parties for bodily injury and property damage
caused by sudden and nonsudden accidental releases
arising from operating an underground storage tank.
“(b) A State ‘s new tank standards submitted for ap-
proval under subsection (a)(4) shall be no less stringent
than the performance standards promulgated by the Admin-
istrator pursuant to section 1453(c).
“(c) Corrective action and compensation programs fi-
nanced by fees on tank owners and operators and adrninis-
tered by State or local agencies or departments may be sub-
KR 2867 EAS 8
-------
114
milled for approval under subsection (a)(7) as evidence of
financial responsibility.
“(d)(1) Within one hundred and eighty days of the
&zle of receipt of a proposed State program, the Administra-
tor shall, after notice and opportunity for public comment,
make a determination whether the State ‘s program includes
the requirements identified in subsection (a) and provides
for adequate enforcement of compliance with such require-
ments.
“(2) if the Admini lrator determines that a State pro-
gram includes the requirements identified in subsection (a)
and provides for adequate enforcement of compliance with
such requirements, he shall approL’e the State program in
lieu of the Federal program and the Stale shall have pri-
mary enforcement responsibility with respect to require-
ments related to control of underground storage tanks used
to store regulated substances.
“(3) Any Stale may submit and the Administrator
shall approve an underground storage tank release, detec-
tion, prevention, and correction program for underground
storage tanks containing regulated substances defined in sec-
tion 1451(2) (B) (petroleum, including crude oil or any frac-
tion thereof which is liquid at standard conditions of tem-
perature and pressure) but does not include tanks contain-
ing other regulated substances, if the Administrator, after
HR 2867 EAtS
-------
115
notice and opportunity for public comment, makes a deter-
mination that (lie State’s program includes the requirements
identified in 8ubsection (a) and provides for adequate en-
forcement of compliance with such requirements. if a State
program shall be approved under this subsection, the State
program shall be in lieu of a Federal program for under.
ground storage tanks containing regulated substances de-
fined in section 1451(2)(B) and the State shall have pri-
mary enforcement responsibility with regard to such tanks.
“(e) Whenever the Administrator determines after
public hearing that a State is not administering and enforc-
ing a program authorized under this part in accordance
with the requirements of this section, he shall so notify the
State, and, if appropriate action is not taken within a rea-
sonable time, not to exceed ninety days, the Administrator
shall withdraw authorization of such program and reestab-
lish enforcement of Federal regulations pursuant to this
part.
“INSPECTIONS, MONITORING, AND TESTING
“Sqf. 1455. (a) For (he purposes of developing or as-
sisting in the development of any regulation, conducting any
study, or enforcing the provisions of this part, any owner or
operator of an underground storage tank or any tank subject
to study under section 1459 that is used for storing regulat-
ed substances shall, upon request of any officer, employee or
representative of the Environmental Protection Agency,
HR 2867 LAS
-------
116
duly designaled by the Administrator, or upon request of
any duly designated officer, employee, or representative of a
Slate with an approved program, furnish information relat-
ing to such tanks, their associated equipment, their contents,
conduct monitoring or testing, and permit such officer at all
reasonable times to have access to, and to copy all records
relating to such tanks. For the purposes of developing or as-
sisting in the development of any regulation, conducting any
study, or enforcing the provisions of this part, such officers,
employees, or representatives are authorized—
“(1) 10 enter at reasonable times any establish-
ment or other place where an underground storage lank
is located;
“(2) to inspect and obtain samples from any
person of any such regulated substances and conduct
monitoring or testing of the tanks, associated equip-
ment, contents, or surrounding soils, air, surface water
or ground water. Each such inspection shall be com-
menced and completed with reasonable promptness.
“(b)(1) Any records, reports, or information obtained
from any persons under this section shall be available to the
public, except that upon a showing satisfactory to the Ad-
ministrator (or the Stale, as the case may be) by any person
that records, reports, or information, or a particular part
thereof, to which the Administrator (or the State, as the case
HR 2867 EAS
-------
117
may be) or any officer, employee, or representative thereof
has access under this section if made public, would divulge
information entitled to protection under section 1905 of title
18 of the United States Code, such information or particu-
lar portion thereof shall be considered confidential in ac-
cordance with the purposes of that section, except that such
record, report, document, or information may be disclosed to
other officers, employees, or authorized representatives of the
United States concerned with carrying out this Act, or
when relevent in any proceeding under this Act.
“(?) Any person not subject to the provisions of section
1905 of title 18 of the United States Code who knowingly
and willfully divulges or discloses any information entitled
to protection under this subsection shall, upon conviction, be
subject to a fine of not more than $5,000 or to imprison-
ment not to exceed one year, or both.
“(3) In submitting data under this Act, a person re-
quired to provide such data may—
“(A) designate the data which such person be-
lieves 3 entitled to protection under this subsection,
and
“(B) submit such designated data separately from
other data submitted under this Act.
HR 2867 EAS
(oci
-------
118
A designation under this paragraph shall be made in writ-
ing and in such manner as the Administrator may pre-
scribe.
“(4) Notwithstanding any limitation contained in this
section or any other provision of law, all information report-
ed to, or otherwise obtained, by the Administrator (or any
representative of the Administrator) under this Act shall be
made available, upon written request of any duly authorized
committee of the Congress, to such committee (including
records, reports, or information obtained by representatives
of the Evironmental Protection Agency).
“FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT
“SEc. 1456. (a)(1) Except as provided in paragraph
(2), whenever on the basis of any information, the Adminis-
trator determines that any person is in violation of any re-
quirement of this part, the Administrator may issue an
order requiring compliance within a reasonable specified
time period or the Administrator may commence a civil
action in the United States district court in which the viola-
tion occurred for appropriate relief, including a temporary
or permanent injunction.
“(2) In the case of a violation of any requirement of
this part where such violation occtLrs in a State with a pro-
gram approved under section 1454, the Administrator shall
give notice to the State in which such violation has occurred
HR 2867 EAS
-------
119
prior to issuing an order or commencing a civil action
under this section.
“(3) If such violator fails to comply with the order
within the time specified in the order, he shall be liable for
a civil penalty of not more than $25,000 for each day of
continued noncompliance.
“( b) Any order shall become final unless, no later than
thirty days after the order is served, the person or persons
named therein request a public hearing. Upon such request
the Administrator shall promptly conduct a public hearing.
in connection with any proceeding under this section the
Administrator may issue subpoenas for the attendance and
testimony of witnesses and the production of relevant
papers, books, and documents, and may promulgate rules
for discovery procedures.
“(c) Any order issued under this section shall state
with reasonable specificity the nature of the violation, speci-
fy a reasonable time for compliance, and assess a penalty, if
any, which the Administrator determines is reasonable
taking into account the seriousness of the violation and any
good faith efforts to comply with the applicable require-
ments.
“(d) Any owner who knowingly fails to notify or sub-
mits false information pursuant to section 1452(a) to a
State or local agency or department designated pursuant to
HR 2867 EAS
-------
120
section 1452 (b) (1) shall be subject to a civil penalty not to
exceed $10,000 for each tank for which notification is not
given or false information is submitted.
“(e) Any owner or o perator of an underground storage
lank used for storing a regulated substance who fails to
comply with the release detection, prevention, and correction
regulations as promulgated by the Administrator or a State
program approved pursuant to section 1454, shall be subject
to a civil penalty not to exceed $10,000 for each tank for
each day of violation.
“(f) Any owner or operator of an underground storage
tank used for storing regulated substances who fails to
comply with the provisions of section 1453(g) shall be sub-
ject to a civil penalty not to exceed $10,000 for each tank
and for each day of violation.
“FEDERAL FACiLITIES
“SEC. 1457. Each department, agency, and instru-
mentality of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches
of the Federal Government having jurisdiction over any un-
derground storage tank as defined in section 1451(7) and
used for the purpose of storing regulated substances as de-
fined in section 1451(2), shall be subject to and comply
with all Federal, Slate, interstate, and local requirements,
both substantive and procedural in the same manner, and to
the same extent, as any person is subject to such require-
ments, including payment of reasonable service charges.
HR 2867 EAS
( ,;of
-------
121
Neither the United States, nor any agent, employee, or off i-
cer thereof, shall be immune or exempt from any process or
sanction of any State or Federal court with respect to the
enforcement of any such injunctive relief. The President
may exempt from any process or sanction of any State or
Federal court with respect to the enforcement of any such
injunctive relief. The President may exempt any under-
ground storage tanks of any department, agency, or instru-
mentality in the executive branch from compliance with
such a requirement if he determines it to be in the para-
mount interest of the United States to do so. No such ex-
emption shall be granted due to lack of appropriation unless
the President shall have specifically requested such appro-
priation as a part of the budgetary process and the Congress
shall have failed to make available such requested appro-
priations. Any exemption shall be for a period not in excess
of one year, but additional exemptions may be granted for
periods not to exceed one year upon the President ‘s making
a new determination. The President shall report each Janu-
ary to the Congress all exemptions from the requirements of
this section granted during the preceding calendar year, to-
gether with his reason for granting each such exemption.
“STATE AUTHORITY
“SEc. 1458. Nothing in this part shall preclude or
deny any right of any Stale or political subdivision thereof
to adopt or enforce any regulation, requirement or standard
HR 2867 EAS
-------
122
of performance respecting underground storage tanks that is
more stringent than a regulation, requirement, or standard
of performance in effect under this part.
“STUDY OF UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS
“SEc. 1459. (a) Not later than twelve months after the
date of enactment of this part, the Administrator shall com-
plete a study of underground storage tanks used for the stor-
age of regulated substances defined in section 1451(2)(B).
Not later than thirty-six months after the date of enactment,
the Administrator shall complete a study of all other under-
ground storage tanks. Such study shall include an assess-
ment of the ages, types (including methods of manufacture,
coatings, protection systems, the compatibility of the con-
struction materials and the installation methods) and loca-
tions (including the climate of the locations) of such tanks;
soil conditions, water tables, and the hydrogeology of tank
locations; the relationship between the foregoing factors and
the likelihood of releases from underground storage tanks;
the effectiveness and costs of inventory systems, tank test-
ing, and leak detection systems; and such other factors as
the Administrator deems appropriate.
“(b) Not later than thirty-six months after the date of
enactment of this part, the Administrator shall conduct a
study regarding the underground storage tanks exempted in
section 1451(7) (ii) and (iii). Such study shall include esti-
mates of ihe number and location of such tanks and an
HR 2867 EAS
-------
123
analysis of the extent to which there may be releases or
threatened releases from such tanks into the environment.
“(c) Upon completion of the studies authorized by this
section, the Administrator shall submit reports to the Presi-
dent and to the Congress containing the results of the stud-
ies and recommendations respecting whether or not such
tanks should be subject to the preceding provisions of this
part.
“(d)(1) If any owner or operator (excepting an agency,
department, or instrumentality of the United States Gov-
ernment, a State or a political subdivision thereof) shall
incur costs, including the loss of business opportunity, due
to the closure or interruption of operation of an underground
storage tank solely for the purpose of conducting studies au-
thorized by this section, the Administrator shall provide
such person fair and equitable reimbursement for such costs.
“(2) All claims for reimbursement shall be filed with
the Administrator not later than ninety days after the clo-
sure or interruption which gives rise to the claim.
“(3) Reimbursements made under this section shall be
from fund8 appropriated by the Congress pursuant to the
authorization contained in section 14 60(a) of this part.
“(4) For purposes of judicial review, a determination
by the Administrator under this subsection shall be consid-
ered final agency action.
HR 2867 EAS
-------
124
“AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATiONS
“SEC. 1460. (a) There are authorized to be appropri-
ated to the Administrator for the purpose of carrying out the
provisions of this part, $10,000,000 for each of the fiscal
years ending September 30, 1985, 1986, 1987, and 1988.
“(b) There is authorized to be appropriated
$25, 000,000 for each of the fiscal years ending September
30, 1985, 1986, 1987, and 1988 to be used to make grants
to the Stales for purposes of assisting the Stales in the im-
plementation of approved State underground storage tank
release detection, prevention, and correction programs. ‘
(b) Section 1448(’a)(l) of the Safe Drinking Water
Act is amended by inserting after the words “any regulation
for State underground injection control programs under sec-
lion 1421,”the following: “any regulation for underground
storage tanks under section 1453 ‘
Amend the title so as to read: “An Act to amend the
Solid Waste Disposal Act to authorize funds for fiscal years
1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, and 1989, and for other pur-
poses.”.
Attest:
Secretary.
HR 2867 LAS
( /
-------
October ,J 194
Compliance, and have performance stand’
ardi for new tanks that are no 1cm strIngent
han Federal standards.
WithIn 180 days, the AdministratOr shall
‘letarmine whether the State program in.
:Iudes the requirements of lit. Federal pro’
gram. If It does, the Administrator shall ap
prove the State prosram and permit the
State to have primary enforcement respon-
sIbIlIty for rerjlaUns underground storage
tanks Ofllaifliflg regulated substances.
States may submit programs covering only
tanks which contain petroleum substances,
only tanks which contain hazardous sub.
stances, or programs covering both.
U the Administrator determines that S
State with an approved tank program Is not
adminUteritig it properly. be shall notify
the Slate. If appropriate State actions are
not made within 00 days. he shall withdraw
authorization of the State program.
f4 Irupeelionr. monitoring and fesling
At the request of the appropriate State or
Federal agency, any owner or operator of an
underground storage lank used for storing
hazardous substances shall furnish Lnlorina.
‘4 lion relating to his tanks, allow arcesa to
records related to such tanks, and conduct
monitoring and testing when required. The
appropriate officials are authorized to en er
establishments containing underground
storage tanks and to inspect and obv,sin sam.
plea.
IS) Federal enJorveinent
U the Administrator determines that any
person is in violation of any provision, he
j may issue a compliance order, or the U.S.
Government may commence a civil action in
U.S. district courts for appropriate relief. in-
eluding a temporary or permanent tnjune.
lion. U a violation oceurs In a State with an
approved underground storage tank pro’
gram, the AdmmLstrator shall give notice to
‘he State prior to taking any enforcement
lions. If a violator faLLs to comply with en
icement dflectives within the time period
perilled in an order, he shall be liable for a
ilvtl penalty not to exceed 123.000 for each
day of continued noncompliance. Orders
become final wIthin 30 days uniece the per.
sons charged request a public hearing.
Any owner or operator who knowingly
fails to notify State or Federal autho?lties.
or submits false Information about his
tanks, shall be subject to a civil penalty not
to exceed 110.000 per tank. Any owner or
operator who installs or begins using an un-
derground storage tank for storing hazard-
ous substances without complying with the
regulations regarding the use of such tanks
shall be subject to a civfl penalty not to
exceed $10,000 per tank for each day of yb.
lallon,
(1) Federal facilities
Each Federal agency having underground
storage tanks containing hazardous sub.
stances shall be subject to and comply with
‘ all Federal. State. interstate, and local ie
I quirements for such tanks,
j Neither the Uulte4 Stares nor any Federal
\),j/ employee shall be 1 .une or exempt from
I. any process or sanction of any Federal court
‘ In regard to underground storage tank te.
“ quircmenta. The President may exempt un-
derg7ound storage tanks owned by any Fed.
eral agency from compliance with Federal
requirements If he determines It to be in the
paramount Interest of the United Stales to
do so. No exemption shall be granted be.
cause of lack of appropriated funds unlesa
the President shall have specifically re-
quested such appropriations as part of the
budgetary procese. and the Congrees shall
ve faded to make available such request-
appropriation. An exemption shall not
coed one year unless the President makes
ew determination.
CONGRESSIONAL RRD—HO 1111139
II I Stat. agt*a, ’Up
Nothing In this TItle siteS preclude liO for installation. flare steel tanks may
mulgales regulations satablhhtag the ce .
deny any Stale 00 local authority fyn be I n stalled (Pi ttidIng PlO IilSItion Of A
adopting u rmand storage tank requb- reViJatlOns) only where property uct.e
merits that are more stringent than the Peu . soil tests show resistMty at 13.000 ohni
eral rules. 0? more. This provision replaces the provi-
sion In the Senate amendment which p .
iii Key definitions hiblia in tallaUoii of bare steel tanks except
“Regulated subutailce” means .11 ‘ — in states that enforce a national amtsenm s
stances designated under C CLA ,
101(4 I not Including baz.ardous wastes 3. The reference to “techniosj and mans-
Hated or identified under Subtitle C 01 the gerial capabilities” of tank owners as factor
Solid Waste Disposal Act and petroleum to be considered by the Admlitjstzsto, In de-
p ducts that are a Uquld at standard tern- veloping regulation is modified to exclude
perature and pressure, reference to “ “gerial capabWiJes ’.
“Underground storage tank” means the 4. The regulatory program promulgated
underground tank and connecting under, by the Administrator must include leak do.
ground pipes which are used to contain an tection shtetns. inventory control systems
accumulation of regulated substances and (together with periodic tank testing or
which are substantially or totally beneath comparable systems or method of detecting
the surface of the ground, but not Including consistent witit protection of
7
above ground storage tanks which 1 50 in human health and the environment,
Compliance with national consensus 5. The Admlnlstator is directid to prociul.
and for which 90% or more of the tank gat, regulations on tank clceuse which will
volunie.ts above ground. farm or residential prevent releases of regulated substances
non.commerctal tanks of 1cm than 1,100 sal’ into the environment.
Ions of maCor fueL heatIng oil tanks used on •. m. Administrator is directed to pro.
the premises, residential septic tariks, pipe. muigata new tank standards and program
lines regulated under the Natural Oss PiPe. regulations for all petroleum tanks within
line Safety Ac ’. or the Hazardous Liquid 30 months after enactment,, new tank stand.
Pipeline Act, surface imopund iienta. pits. ardi for the remaining regulated substances
ponds, lagoona. storm watar and waste water wIthin 35 months and program zegulatiens
collection systems. OF fl 1brUII PTOCCU for the re nDtg regulated substances
tanks. 1
• ‘ ‘.. within 4$ months.
IL ’ Studies t. With the exception of financial reapon.
WithIn 36 mon4k of .ehwt .nt of this sibility requirements, the components of an
title, the Administrator aliaS complete a authorized states regulatory program con-
study of the following excluded lankn f cerrtlng underground storage tanks may be
or residential tanks of 1,100 gallons or 1cm 00 I stringent thAn the program Pyomul.
for storing motor fuel for noncommercial Sated by the Administrator. Recognatng
purposes, and tanks used for storing heating that some states may have regulatory pro’
oil for consumptive use on the premises, grams in effect when the federal regulatiosa
The study will Include estimates of the are Issued, and to mitigate the disincentive
number and location of these tanks and an for states to develop programs rapidly under
analysis of the extent to which they are or a “no lees stringent” standard, the confer-
may some day be leaking. On completion of oe substitute allows states (with programs
this study, the Administrator shall submit a in effect) three years to came into
report to the President and Congrcm on with this subsection.
whether these excluded tanks should be 3. The A ”In”trator. in consultation with
subject to regulation. e states . Is directed to develop a noWIca.
WIthin 12 months of enactmi’nt the EPA a form for operational and non-oper-
Administrator sh I compl ,ete a study of the .onal lanka. To gain authorization, Stares
underground storage, tanks containing pe- must have a system for notification arid
troleum. Within 36 modths of enactment tank inventory.
the ,,Admlnlatzalor shall somplete a study of 9. FoUowIng ri U uic i by the Admlnls-
all other underground storage tanks con- traror to a state that such state h not prop..
taming substanom regulated. erly admizusterUtg in authorized program,
If any owner, or operator of an under- such State would be allowed 120 (rather
ground storage reg j t,4 t a 90) days to come Into compliance
substances (except for the Federal Govern- before responsibWty for the program re-
merit) incurs costs or loss of buatnom oppor. verts to the AdminIsLratOT.
tunity because of the studies authorized by 0. The entire provision concerning under.
this provision the Administrator shall pro. g-,und storage tanks will constitute a new
Tide fair reimbursement. The funds for such titIe of the Solid Waste Disposal Act:
reimbursement will be appropriated by the —tion 3008 wIll not be applicable to regu-
Congrem. Li ad substances. The civil penalty provi.
Conference-roksfitvta—The Conference s -, contained lii the Senate amendment
substitute adopts the House bill with re- a i be applicable to violations Involving
spect to underground storage tanks contaIn. a -:rage tanks containing regulated sub.
ing hazardous’ wastes and the Senate stances.
amendment with the following Princ1Palj /ilthough the modifications of the Senate
modlflcationa amendment are largely sell-explanatory, a
• I. The definition of underground number of clarifications and eplanatlons
tanks Includes underground piping connect- are warranted,
ed to above ground tanks provided the total First, the deletIon of the word “manageri.
volume that is below the surface exceeds 10 ii” from the phrase “technical and manage.
percent and excludes all septic tanks. oil r:al capabilities” as one of the factors to be
and/or gas producing facility tzacs. lanka In considered by the Administrator in develop.
basements, mines or underground room ins a regulatory program should not be con-
and Intrastate pipelines regulated by state strued as preventing any consideration of
pipeline safety statutes compe.rable to th. the particular needs or circumstances facing
Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Act of 1070 or small businesses. The deletion of the word
the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1961. “managerial” Is simply intended to ensure
2 Following enactment, the installation at that EPA’s regulations not be subject to
bare steel tanks. I., those which provide varying standards based on lImitatIons of
little or no protection against corrosion, will managerial skills. However, the Conferees
be prohibited until the AdminlsUaIor pro- expect the Administrator, in developing a
-------
H 1114$-7
pIV I s eeUng Ufl*U to
as. to ‘oosuIgaLe regulafloos which where
S proprtaLe. bs ld on ez&.Un Msnqge nt
Eecoo with r ed to thods or spa.
t a of detecting reissam ed regulated i
gances. ‘A 10 be at fo ed be
lion In detennlntog vhlth methods or a .
teas are n. ery to os er so protect
human health and the environment. In sois
regard. tha Conferees believe that while =
lsUeshed meth of kwetnory eoov
mar be adequate to detero ne whether &
tank Is 3e uig. eaclusise reliance ena dlp .
etlek” method of Inventory eo ol (evet
with periodic tank testing) will not be outS.
Uy reliable to detect low leska.
Third. the Conferenec Uute p. IId .
that the applanbie provlalorv of the BoUd
W&.te Dic sal Act. Irwiuding Secilons 7X3
and 7003 m 7 be used to enforce Title I sod
specifically excludes application of
3001 to Stahutle L
Fourth. the Conferees r he t the
MrnlnlaaaLor cunentlj pr r with
rulemaking to regulate the and
arags of Ibeed end Idenilfled bmmrdoas
to usderevound gorge ta
ment of &&bctt.to I ic not to de J
n b r’ .—’ ’g . However. the Conferees
aspect Uto ucdergroimd lank
i tmder Subutto C to be revised to r ect.
where appropriate, the re remergs and
prohibitIons promulgated u y k1c L
PirmiJy the Conferees are mre that
there tee appo . Lly two mlfli . tader.
imd lanka In the en ry to whwh r —
lIne and other h ma mae
stored. A rowiseatdJ pa of tham
tanks are da of ateci w b en
protection. Potivic Indos 7 a U esti.
- mate that as mans as 15.100 to 111.001 en.
gr und tacks are icakiag that
300.000 map develop leaks wttksn neat
fJ L
Altbo i k is to es ie the
pre e amas of groundwater con ion.
Lion. underground storage tanks are esnstd-
aed the probable moses of
stan I mi er 01 givtmdweaer . . *.
— One mate (M prn)
c. ’e1a y onitored grota ’ esi asl-
toLmn baa lof tl stm ’ege .s are
the leading cause of ground on ml.
nation I t of 441
.ber st as m h as j(l.h
Fislids. Nevads. New Jemey, 11ev Yo .
ttorth Carnitas. Ohio. Maine. Hoot
Feru trerth. Abode thand d W ndn
be ahe erirnced severe . . 1woter
enntamlnatlon cat by ‘ 4i (
pound storage tanks and 01 th
slates he reque g er tl i l to.
wi en U. indtwithg regulation, to twip iv.
sot,, t coving amiien ta3 ,
Became hail the po dolloa of the
States do ds on p wa en $ anues
01 dnn& water. the oniferam btheve t
probtom has become — - of
canoe and requires Federal legislation.
CT!OW i v i-L TO enoc& ow
es.... ww O EAZ DOVI V
Wosse b .—Ifo provision.
— —qL—Tha Samla
meol adds anew s’ — 3438 In Fart C 01
the sate Drinking Water - to i tUre Ibm .
by June 15.1314 (ale). & alab Ike as
ihal] nwfl# and submit to Congram an Is.
vsatar’y of aS wells which lnjct ttaaa ee
/ersane ‘“le-Th Oewi
rk 1 . Is the e the Seimle — d
I , aneept the J 3*. Jil l . to
10 I mastla alter r—ta arwi
the amer is ‘ r to She be
w.’—I t.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
0001101 t0l— iptIC T vwva 1hZ or
*XTAIT L&IDliU.$
Roast toU-N. proved ’s.
kaati enendaieaL—Tbe Mi tlII Un&o, Is
ecte4 to ennduct detailed. escapreliervive
studies of methods to extend the useful life
of unitary landfIlls and to better uae sites
In which IWed or closed lsndflhls are locat.
Coitfe’enee ubofttvto. The t1evence
batiint. adopts the Senate amendment
with a ificatlon that the Agency is not
required I. duplicate studies that have i i.
dy been w .,JSCtO&
UCTIOJ tSs— ’UAIIV11 L TAH. SS
Ro ust 0 1 U.—No provisions.’
SeenLi a - L—Tbe Senate amend.
men! Includes $ prOVisIon Ic assure that the
Solid Waste Disposal Act Ameodmenla of
1314 do sot affect, modify. or amend Lb.
Uranium Mill Tiiiiitga Radiat Ion Control
& of 117L as amended (UMTRCAI.
Coal ercacc suhthin2e.—The Conference
enbeUtute Is the same as the Senate s.mend.
L. N•LhIeg In this section shall be
deemed to prethade or to require the ten.
don of esisUng regula.uons promW ted
_under UMTUC
S O5 TI — T AL UU a
ooa accw p
Iloue 0(3.—The House 051 establIshes-a
)la&lonal Groundwater The
duties of the Commission are to evatoate
the QUalIty of the nation’s gioendwater .
identity the amr and enent 01 ground.
water contamination. a Lbs need to e a
poltey to protect groundwater. am the
adequacy of . i Jng de.rds Lor ground.
anler quality under gate and federal law
and assam the effort of gate, locaL and fed.
em] agencies protecting and preserving the
qualltp of the nations froth wsiei &qi I if era
The Commission Is to be composed o I li
mambero. ln”ullng 10 membow of Con.
prose, and nine othase representing at.tz.
local. iclr.istlf is. t, .A.ee.ry aud eevlronmern
The Cowiruledon Is directed to gubmlti
report to Congress contj 1 Jng its ‘ “ ‘
and uaaoni. together with III. r ar
meodat1oe a tot issiala IIoa”aod .Am.rntrs
lIve actiarI*McJi It onaad .rs s ropnaLe.
Senate nihendmeal-Th. I fl-
mont does n. ãodt*ra similar pro aion.
CavtlP’riioe ea ute —The conference
siibetnut. adopts the House provision. to
carrying out Its resDansibDItlea the Con! a’
am direct:t e Com,. I on to Its a!.
on the qua llty’g! the oa on’s ground
____ water. The problems with the quality of the
groundwater mrpp(y are becoming Iscreas.
ingly wparent U the satent of oun ’- ”
ti ’ s by the euleting and abandoned bawd.
cm waste facilities becomes known. It Is cx
_____ pected that the C iasion will be sensitive
to the desIrability a! not disturbing existing
water rief L
TIAL 57
loam blL-? proanhe
Sewers arerw . —The Senate .
mont directs the Admintnrator to r t to
the (no km then every too rum).
th q .iiL ‘ s _ of has.
ar waste 5 wind_. tx ed. stased and
d 01. tes with lhos d pee.
puns shell raam to
of
Cbn veam esbeh *-Tha meheence
svbetitase does km a prowl-
. The r ’aow km a pro.
____ to ‘ v j1 data eonser the ‘ -
the and tp of kmardoas vndi p.r d .
of 01 sod to
eneb ens Tgeles kms. t s to’
is — to am
to the km noel km be s’ — as a
!c6er S. 138J
formal report to Congye The ad,rn lg .
hats expected to continue this Program and
to seek more accurate dst$ than h is been
allabee in the past.
r esV*T1Op or o users
Rouse MU—The House bill clarif irs that
‘sactseent of section 7003U) of the Re.
source Conservation and Recovery Act In
1170 was intended to preserve the ii hts of
litigants under atty statute or common law
notwnhst.anding the enactment of RCRA.
Senate sueadmenL—The Senate attend.
moot does not contain a similar provisarn.
Con/cream nbaithil&—The Conference
sebetitote Is the same as thi Senate amend.
monL Failure to adr t the House amend.
merit does ant preclude the use of common
law prmnd$es by the Federal courts In In.
terpretcog the prvvonon Inch as section
7003 of SCRA.
‘ V 5 CO$. .priigj .
Wow.. bl —The Home bill provides that.
In the context of deteniwung (lie ippiicab(l.
l of a wwiver ftou the that
sort ice knpowi nent& receiving haxardous
wastes mast be lined. the teen h rdcm
nenatitvr r* ” not bietuóe those h ayd.
cm coewtltuenu which the owner or opera-
tor demot ateates will not migrate Into
gsoimdwater or serf ace water In COrn t .-
lions which may adversely affect human
bea1t and the environment.
Senate cmendmenL—No pro ,toon
Conkre’rce robstilote.—l’be coo feretee
bst4bie .kms the Umee pruvtebn.
,CIA2. .&.
House b —Tbe House OW c” -’-” — so
amendments to section
LeveLs amdmen.L—The Senate emend.
men! revises section 7004 to. (11 allow
review a! regulations In United States Court
01 Appeals for circuits In wInch (be pet r on
cv ronde.s or Irsrraacls b....n. — aIurh is di-
rectly affected by such legutatiore. 121 to
extend the period withIn which a petition
may be Sled from 9010 190 da3ra. (3) tO es
tablIsh a undoes selection procedure to do-
ter ne in which court a ,eguituon Is to be
reviewed when petitioce have been t to
mere than one court, and (4) to make imeor
addit si o trca
C n.fri’edre idob tate—The Coclereice
gobstanle is the mew the House bill
-- -. aCTtOus,SOPVV1tJCLAW CS-St,
Route ba—The House bill contains no
comparable provision.
Senate amevdaenL—The Senate amend.
meni contains a revision to PL 16-610
( CLA.) which will allow the continued
collectIon of taxes for the Pogt’Cloaure U.
ability Fund under C CLA.
Conference tubs fttutr. —The eonference
sibstitote oivtts the Senate amen nerit,
5 fD T TO “ -‘ ITa 5i_js 5g
Motie baiL—The House toll amends
CIRCI.A to reduce (from I I to to pei t, a
sate ’s share 01 the of desmip U the
sie was wtod. km not operated, by the
Slate or pofitissi subdtvwha, The House inj
also prowikm a a he espezwi ne tr .
curled by a Slate for reoe al Iecww .
(owen Jariu17 1, 1Pm. and mba’ 11,,
1110.
cm i i esrunme See ‘ menas to
c
Conk saistitm -The me neoce
s tasne no aatondnmaza to
Ply corkmeratlin of the H bill and the
8e e l fee
13Le 01 — Senate i t:
Jon a
Jansa J. ftoeto,
-------
third within 55 months and the final third
within 66 months. EPA’s statutory maridato
Is to prohiolt the land disposal of these
wastes unless it finds that one or more
methods of disposal will not harm publlc
health or the environment, 11 EPA fails to
meet either of it. first two deadlines and if
there is no treatment capacity, then the
wastes that have not been reviewed would
have to be sent to land disposal facilities
that are double-lined and have leachat.e cal-
Irction system.. If EPA falls to meet its
Sinai deadline, then all unrevlewed wastes
would be banned from land disposal, unless
the generator qualifies tori limited vari-
ance.
wo
HR. 2867 closes a number of regulatory
loopholes which have allowed the disposal
of sigmiurant quantities of hazardous waste
to remain uncontrolled. Among these loop-
holes is the small generator” exemption
which permits the disposal of ‘up to one
metric ton a month (per generator) into so-
called sanitary landfills or into sewers—dis-
posal practices which obviously are not pro-
tective of human health or the environ-
ment. The legislation requires regulation of
generators who produce more than 100 kilo-
grains (220 pounds) each month. These gen-
erators wtU be required to send their haz-
ardous wastes to an approonate disposal or
treatment facility,
Mother major loophole which is ad-
dressed by this legislation concerns the use
of hazardous wastes as fueL Currently, some
of the most dangerous wastes, such as PCB.
and dioxin. are blended into used oil or
other fuel and burned in residential boilers
which are not capable of destroying the
toxic component of these wastes. This prac-
tice, which has become increasingly preva
lent., particularly in the Northeast. creates a
substantial risk to those citizens whose
health is most vulnerable, especially the eld-
erly. young children and persons with respi-
ratory Illnesses, Under the legislation, EPA
must issue regulations that would allow
burning of hazardous wastes only under cir-
cumstances that would not harm public
health,
airrogczxvrr -
R.R. 2867 contains a number of p ovlsIons
designed to promote compliance with the
bill’s regulatory safeguards by increasing
Civil and criminal penalties for violators. Por
example, placing another person in danger
of death or serious bodily injury by Wegal
disposal or management of hazardous waste
carries a maximum 15 year prison sentence
and a $250,000 fine. A corporation could be
fined $1 million,
In addition, citizens would be provided the
right to sue responsible parties and compel
theni to clean up hazardous waste sites,
Congress has recognized that leaving all en-
forcement responsibility to 5PA and the
states has not been satis(actoW in light of
the widespread non-compliance by hazard-
us waste facilities, Citizen Involvement, in-
cluding lawsuits, to force abatement of
public health dangers, is designed to law-
suits, to force abatement of public health
dangers, is designed to complement the gov-
ernments enforcement efforts and encour-
age greater compliance by the regulated
community,
GSOUWDWATnI CoM xssrrn
R.R. 2867 also establishes a 19-member
National Groundwater Commission to inves-
tigate and report on causes of groundwater
contamination and to recommend a ns.Uonal
strategy for addressing threats to the Na-
tion’s freshwater aquifers.
IZAZINO UNDmGROPWD 8TORAGS TAI!XS
BR. 3867 establishes a comprehensive
regulatory program to prevent leaks from
Underground storage tanks. There are more
than 3 million underground tanks in the
United State. which contain hazardous sub-
stances or gasoline. An estimated 100.000
are presenUy leaking potentially contam-
inating groundwater) and another 350,000
are expected to leak in the next five years.
ER, 2867 mandates the use of leak detec-
tion systems, the development of new tank
standards which will protect against corro-
sion, as well as many other safeguards,
Mr. EDGAR. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield? -
Mr. FLORIO. .1 yIeld to the gentle-
man from Pennsylvania.
Mr. EDGAR, I thank the gentleman
for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I would Just like -to
commend the gentleman on the legis-
lation and point out that the legisla-
tion does include the establishment of
a National Groundwater Commmle.
sion. which the gentleman and I have
worked on, and I want to congratulate
him for his efforts.
Mr. FLORIO. I thank the gentle-
man,
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of
my tIme.
0 2140
Mr. BROYHrLL Mr. Speaker, I
yield myself 5 minutes.
I rise in support of HR. 2867, I be-
lieve it is an important environmental
measure which Is deserving of passage
this year, , -
My understanding of this measure is
that it Incorporates a number of com-
promises on Important issues such as
small quantity generators, PCB’s and
underground storage tanks.
- The language adopted on small
quantity generatq Is virtually identi-
cal to that ot-an a zeement, reached by
the .b siness and environmental corn-
mun tiiis ..rear, It provides for a
workgble ??g iZatory program for small
quantIty generators of between 100,
kilogrthns ‘afld 1,000 kilograms of has-
ardo zs waste per month. Appropriate-
ly, this program is restricted to that
universe of generators—there is no
regulation below 100 kilograms per
month, In my opinion, regulation of
these small generators should not, go
below 100 kIlograms per month. I be-
lleve the conferees did well in adopting
this cominonsense compromise.
Further, the conferees agreed to
drop a House provision which would
have required the listing of PCB’s
under RCRA. I advocated and com-
pletely support this approach. PCB’a
are already regulated under the Doxlc
Substances Control Act and EPA Is in
the process now of reviewtng’whether
or not supplemental regulation Is ap-
propriate under RCRA. It Is clear that
PCB’s are now, and will continue to
be. carefully monitored -and that a
mandatory listing procedure Is Inap-
propriate, -
Further, the conferees adopted a
compromise underground storage tank
proposal, It appears that this proposal
Is a cornnionsense compromise be-
tween the House and Senate versiong
of the tank regulatory program which
will provide a minimum amount of dis-
ruption to the regulated community.
In light of this sensible compromise
provision, I can 8upport H.R, 2867 and
look forward to the President signing
ft Into law this year.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Lzxrl,
the ranking minority member of the
subcommittee who has worked so hard
and effectively with respect to this
program, (
Mr. LENT: Mr. Speaker. I rise In
support of the conference report on
HR. 2867—the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984. ThIS is a
carefully crafted compromise bill
which has resulted from many years
of hard work by both Members and
staff. I want to particularly commend I
the chairman of the full committee on
Energy and Commerce, the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. DINGELLJ, the
genqeman from New Jersey (Mr.
FLoalo] , the gentleman from North
Carolina (Mr. BROYH!LLJ. the gentle-I
man from Ohio (Mr. ECKART], and the!
lentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
RIs’rm].
In my opinion, this conference
report represents a fair compromise
between the provisions of H.R. 2867
and S. 757—its Senate companion
measure. In most Instances the differ-
ences between the two bills have been
split almost equally—resulting in an
Important new environmental statute,
The Hazardous and Solid Waste En-
forcement Act of 1984 represent.s a
dramatic new shift in our national
policy about hazardous waste disposal.
After this measure Is enacted, small
quantity generators of hazardous
waste who are now able to generate
2,209 kilograms or 1 ton of hazardous
wa .sle a month will have to dispose of
their waste in a properly permitted Ia-
duty rather than In an unregulated
dump-
Following enactment, the EPA will
be on a strict timetable for reviewing
and banning hazardous waste from
land disposal. Some of the most toxic
chemicals will be banned by statute
unless EPA determines that is not nec-
essary to protect human health and
the environment. These chemicals In.’
dude arsenic, cyanide, and diox ins.
For too many years in this country,.
we have permitted the practice of
dumping hazardous wastes in the land
to go virtually unchecked, Even now
that the EPA is requiring landfills to
be lined. I do not feel confident that
these liners will remain secure In the
long term, Therefore, I believe it is ap-
propriate for the Congress to inter.
vene at this time and to establish a
new policy which calls for a review of
known hazardous wastes and a deter.
mination whether these wastes are ap-
propriate for land disposal.
We simply cannot afford to allow
these dangerous and persistent chemi.
( mJ’ i eJ c
CokJC 1i ,i
i-41r11!7_-
-------
1-4 iiI -l3
cals to continue to pollute our drink-
ing water suppU s—EPA mu.st act
quickly to evaluate them and ban
them where necessary.
Surface impoundments, which are
filled with liquid hazardous wastes, are
also appropriately regulated in this
measure. These facilities which are
generally unlined and located within a
one-quarter mile of underground
sources of drinking water, are required
to be double lined and have leak detec-
tion In.stalied. Several narrow exemp-
tions are provided, but on the whole.
KR. 2867 will result Lu these impound-
ments being appropriately safeguard-
ed.
Dioxin emissions from resource re-
covery facilities are abs addressed In
this legislation. EPA I., directed to
aubmit a report describing the current
data arid information on d.ioxins from
resource recovery facilities, any signif-
icant risks to human health posed by
these emissions and operating prac-
tices appropriate for controLling these
emissions. Based on this report, £PA
may publish advisories on guidelines
regarding the control of dioin emLs-
aloes from resource recovery facilities.
I strongly endorse this provision be-
cause there Is a resource recovery f a.
duty on Long Island which was forced
to close by public pressure over dioxin
emissions. If EPA had dioxin emission
regulations In place, this closing could
have been avoided. I will, therefore.
work to assure that EPA prepare this
dioxin report and guidelines in a
timely fashion so that my facility
might be reopened and closings in
other parts of the country cai be
avoided.
One other Important provision In
HR. 2867 should be mentioned—and
that is the new regulatory program for
underground storage tanks. Most Qf us
here today are aware of the large
number of these tanks which are leak-
ing and polluting our precious ground
waler supplies. It is Lmportdnt thai,
these tanks be regulated. I believe that
KR. 2867 does this in an evenhanded
way which will result in Increased en-
vironmental protection and a minimal
amount of disruption to the regulated
community.
In sum. Mr. Speaker. I wholeheart-
edly support H.R. 2867 and urge Its ex-
peditious passage today,
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Speaker. I yield 4
minutes to the chairman of the’ full
committee, the gentleman from Z4zchi.
gan(Mr.Dzi ciu.].
(Mr. DINGELL asked and was 1ven
permission to revise arid extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I thank
my distinguished friend, the gentle.
man from New Jersey, the able chair-
man of the subcommittee.
Mr. Speaker. I rise In strong support
of this conference report. We have
worked over this legislation over a
long number of months, and! am con-
fident. that it will lead this Nation for-
ward in its absolutely essential task of
controlling hazardous waste arid pro-
testing the public health and safety (Mr. ECKART asked and was giveaj
and the envfroom , permisslcm to revise and extend his re- I
I would like to take just a minute to’ marks.)
commend some of my colleagues who Mr. ECKART. M Speaker, in I
have worked extremely bard, often March 1983. dw4jig subcenmittee I
with dlffi’culty and adversity, to come markup of B.R. 2887, 1 offered an
up with a reasonable and workable ai endment—4JOflg wlt. my friend!
bill. I would like to commend the gen. and distinguished colleague, Jtx
tleman from New Jersey (Mr. ftoarol. FLoiuo—to prohibit land dispc al of
the ‘subcommittee chairman, as well as the Calif ornia list waates—tl t is, I
,the gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. those with heavy concen atlons of a r-
tfncui.sivz1, the gentleman from Len- aenic, cyanide, lead. merCW7, PCB’s, et
islana ( Mr. TAV!7,eJ. the gentleman cetera. My amendment also required
from Ohio (‘Mr. Ecxaarl. the gentle- EPA to conduct a waste-by-waste
man from Mississippi (Mr. Dowriyl. revlew ”of all the ‘ema rijng listed and
and the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Identified hazardous wastes and to
Sxz i.svl. I want also to commend our allow continued land disposal of these
minority members starting with my wastes only under circumstances that
good friend and ranking member, the will be protective of human health
- gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. and the envtronment Under my
BR0mmLI. the ranking member of the arnentiment, EPA’s failure to review a
subcommittee, the gentleman from waste would mean that, by statue.
New York (Mr. L rrJ. and the gentle, that the waste would be prohibited
man from Pennsylvania (Mr.,.RIi-rnal, from any form of land disposaL
Section 4201 this legislatlodla a pro. Mr. Speaker, with some modifica-
vision whioti states that poihing lions, this provision is contained in the
this action shall aff .t or ehange the . .flnal version of H.R. 2887.
Uranium MW TaIIInâ Act, and In dia. By enacting this provision, s-c well as
cusslng the matter, t ie onferees the other safeguards In this bill, Con-
agreed to accept the pTovisi ’ gresa will’ be sending a clear and unam-
The s’ection was added at the behest biguoua message to the regulated com-
of the Senato$”froni Wypmlng (Mr. munlty and the iv1ronmental Protec-
Su rsozcl, and I want to commendhlm thin Agency reliance on land disposal I
for his accommodation with respect to of hazardous waste has resulted In an I
the agreement, not only on the statu. unacceptable risk to human health
tory language but also on the state- and the environment, Consequently,
merit of managers. what we agreed to the Congress intends that through the
In the conference committee was that vigorous Implementation of the objec-
the statement. of managers would con- lives of this act, land disposal will be
stitute, for purposes of legislative his- eliminated for many wastes and mini.
tory, the sole explanation. For the mlzed for all others, and that ad-
benefit of my colleagues, I would like vanced treatment, recycling, inciner.
to quote that statement at this polnL ation, and other hazardous-waste-con- I
House bill—No provisions. .,. trol technologies should quickly re-
Senate antendxnrnt.—The place land disposaL In other words,
merit includes a provision to ensure . band disposal should be used only as a
Solid Waste Dupoasi #.cs ai.mendnlentu last resort and only under conditions j
1984 do not affect, modify, or amend i a which are fully protective of human
Urs.Mum Mill Tailings diatton Control health and the environment,
Act of 1978. as amended (U 1TECA). In addition, the enactment of this I
Conference subslltute.—The Conference bill constitutes a recognition that the I
substitute Is tl (sanie as the Senate amend- successful implementation of the 1984 I
ment. Nothing In this ecction shalt be amendments will require an Improved
deemed to preclude or to require the revi-
sion of existing regulations promulgated working relationship between the i-
under UMThCA. - VirOnmeflial Protection Agency and
the States. Congress, in my opimozi,
I think this resolution of the matter regards the development of a viable
is entirely acceptable, and deeply ap’ yeer j , tate partnership to be one of
predate the cooperation of the other the hIghest priorities of this legisla-
body and, particularly, of i,he sponsor lion and expects the Agency to devote
of the amendment, the Senator from much greater effort to assisting States
Wyoming. • . in achieving authorization of their
The majority and minority staffs of ECRA programs.
both this body and of the other body ptj nfly, I would like to mention that
have worked bong and hard on this, 2887 amends RCRA by adding a
and they had invaluable support, as new title—Regulation of Underground
we always do. from the Office of Legts. Storage Tanks. There are more than 2
latlve Counsel, million undqrground tanks In the I
Again, I think this is a superb piece United States which contain hazard.
of legislation, crafted with a great dee.i otis substances or gasoline. An estin -iaL.
of care, and I urge my colleagues to ed 100,000 ate presently leaking......
Support It. potentially contaminating ground
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Speaker, I yIeld 4 water—and another 350,000 are cx.
minutes to the gentleman from Ohio pected to leak in the next 3 years.
(Mr. ECs.ART). a very valuable member Since half the population of this cousi.
of the subcommittee who Played a try depends on ground water as Its
very significant role In the conference. wirce of drinking water, a contamina..
-------
1- j flIL-)’- -/
tion threat of this magnitude must be
addressed. Consequenity, H.R. 2867
mandates the use of leak deteetio. or
comparable systems, the development
of new tank standards which will pro-
tect against corrosion, as well as many
other safeguards. implementation of
these safeguards during the next
decade and removal of leaking tanks
will, in my view, go a long way toward
preserving America’s most precious
natural resource, Its freshwater
aquifers.
Finally. I would like to mention that
the statement of managers states that
exclusive reliance on the use of dip-
sticks as a method of inventory control
Is not likely to be a good indicator of
whether a tank has a slow leak. While
that is entirely true, it should be
itated that IPA should not be pre-
Cluded from reviewing mechanical In-
ventory control systems. Some of
these systems, If they are backed up
with sophistIcated computer technolo-
gy, may prove to be a reliable method
of detecting leaks and EPA should cx-
imlne these types of systems.
0 2150
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Speaker, I yield I
minute to the gentleman from Calif or-
ala (Mr. Toimasi.
Mr. TORR! . Mr. Speaker. I would
like to thank the genUeman for yield-
Ing. I wish to thank the distinguished
subcommittee chairman as well as the
other members of the conference com-
mittee for their support of language
requiring that health-assessment stud-
ies be conducted at operating landfills.
As the gentleman knows, for nearly 3
months 18 famIlies remain evacuated
from their homes because of danger-
ous gases escaping from the BKK
landfill located In my district. I would
like to ask whether a health.assess-
ment study will be conducted at the
BKK facüity before any other facility
In the Nation.
Mr. FLORIO. Yes; I wish to assure
the gentleman from California that I
am aware of the serious situation oc-
curring at the BKK landfill in West
Covina and believe that a health-as.
sessment study should be conducted at
that facility Immediately and before
any other study.
Mr. TORRES. I thank the gentle.
man very much.
• Mr. RIrI . Mr. Speaker. I rise in
support of HR. 867 and urge Its ex..
peditious passage by the House today.
I have a particular lnteres In thu
bill because it will include a flrst.time
regulatory program for underground
storage tanks. I believe everyone here
today Is familiar with the alarming
numbers of underground storage tanks
which are leaking nationwide.
This provision as important to me be-
cause of several Lncldent.s which have
cecurred in my district where drinking
water suppLies have been contaminat-
ed with ga.soiirie. In one instance, I L
has been determined that leaking tin.
derground storage tanks are the cause
of the problem. In the other case, no
one has yet been able to pin down the
source of the contamination.
The tank regulatory program is veryi
similar to the one contained In H.R.I
4985, a measure I Introduced earlierl
thIs year In response to this emerging
national environmental problem. How.
ever, my bill Included another provi-
sion which I consider essential to cbs
the loophole which now exists for pe-
troleuxn base,d spills and leaks. ThSV
provision ended the petroleum exc1u
sion which exists In Superfund now
and which precludes EPA action when
the contamination Is petroleum basedi
Removing the petroleum exciusioni
would enable EPA to spend Superfundl
dollars to clean up a petroleum-based
situation even when the source of the
contamination is not known. If the re-
sponsible parties could be located,
EPA could then pursue the responsi-
ble parties for reimbursement. Thus,:
In situations like that In my district,:
where EPA is now precluded from:
acting, cleanup of dangerous gasoline
contaminatloir could begin.
I believe thIs is an essential ele ment
of a comprehensive petroleum4eak
program, however, It was not within I
the scope of this conference. But I
plan to continue to fight to ensure its I
inclusion in any Superfund bill
is enacted next year.
There are any number of other pro-:
vIsions in this bill which deserve par-
ticular mention, but I will only name a:
few. .. ‘.
Most Importantly, H.R. 2867 In-
cludes a new national policy that land
disposal of hazardous waste should be
a method of last resort. In this meas-
ure we have put the EPA on a ached-
We for determining .whlch hazardous I
wastes should D c ba ned from one or I
more msttjods ot land disposdi. This Is
extreraiely LmpQçtant In ilgih of the
dlscouragi.ug- news .we are receiving
about the long ,erm integrity of land-
disposal !hcthtiee. -
Further, there is a ban on the injec-
tion of tuardous wastes into under-
ground sources of drinking water, and
a ban of bulk liquids into landfills.
Both of these are environmentally
unsafe practices which are appropri’
ately restricted by the terms of H.R.
2867.
For all of these reasons. I am i
strong supporter of HR. 2867 and
hope that we can quickly send It to
the Senate for passage today.s
Mr. LENT. Mr. Speaker, we have no -
further requests for time. •,
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Speaker. I yield
back the balance of my LIme. ‘and I
move the previous question on the
conference report.
The previous question was ordered.
The conference report was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
-------
S 13812 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
ing supplier progTams) are amended by poundments. In particular, I endorse
sulking out “January 1. 1985.” each place It the compromise on mining wastes
appears and inserting in lieu thereof “Janu- worked out by the conferees. The stat-
1. 1988.”. utory language and the statement of
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With- managers make it very clear that the
out objection, the motion is agreed to. conferees do not intend for this
amendment to in any way diminish
HAZARDOUS AND SOLID WASTE the scope of the so-called “Bevill
AMENDMENTS Amendment” that was adopted In
1980. This language clearly reflects
Mr. BAKER. Madam President, I the intention of the House and Senate
submit a report of the committee of conferees with regard to this provi-
conference on H.R. 2867 and ask for sion. and leaves no room for ambigui-
its immediate consideration. ty.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The The Senate conferees, and this Sena-
report will be stated. tor In particular, have made consider-
The Assistant Legislative clerk read able concessions to get a bill. Although
as follows: I am dissatisfied with many provisions
The ccmmittee of conference on the dis- of this bill, I believe that it is the best
agreeing votes of the two houses on the we are going to get and so I will sup-
amendments of the Senate to the bill (H R.
2867) to amend the Solid Vaste Disposal port its passage.
Act to authorize appropriations for the Jdr. DF.NTON . Madam President,
fiscal years 1985 through 1988. and for the disposal of hazardous waste is a Se-
other purposcs. having met, after full and rious national issue. I feel that we as
free conference, have agreed to recommend legislators have a responsibility to pro-
and do recommend to their respective vide all Americans the maximum envi-
Houses this report, signed by all of the con- ronmental protection allowed by In-
terees. sisting that environmental laws are en-
The PRESIDING OFFICER.. With- forced. Clarification of our laws will
out objection, the Senate will proceed help companies, who deal with hazard-
to the consideration of the conference ous waste, comply with the letter of
report. the law.
(The conference report will be print- I wish to commend the distinguished
ed in the House proceedings. chairman of the Subcommittee on En-
M J .M.MS...Madam PrCsident. I vironmental Pollution for his efforts
rise in somewhat reluctant support of to fashion a reasonable compromise in
the conference report on the “Hazard- the RCRA Conference Committee
ous and Solid Waste Amendments of report. I was particularly pleased to
1984.” see that, in section 215(j) dealing with
About the most that I can say in existing surface impoundments, the
favor of this bill is t1i It f not as ‘bad conferees kept the Senate exemption
as It could have been in several key re- for Impoundments that are part of a
spects. and that a few provisions may secondary or tertiary wastewater
make a positive contribution to the treatment system. This measure
proper management of hazardous strengthens existing laws to ensure in-
waste. creased protection for both public
The fundamental problem with this health and the environment.
bill is that it attempts to write detailed Further, I wis’h to make a point of
regulations into the law. It is instruc- clarification for the record. In my dis-
five to compare the original 28 page cussions with the subcommittee chair-
version of S. 757 as introduced with man and the staff of the Committee
the voluminous, extraordinarily corn- Environment and Public Works, I
plex bill that we have before us today, Ihave been assured that the exemption
Can any Member of this body explain un section 215(jX4) to the requirement
why it is necessary to’require EPA to n section 215(j)(1) has a foundation in
list halogenated dibenzofurans as haz- jexisting regulations. The exemption In
ardous wastes within the next 15 paragraph (4) allows the EPA Admin-
months? Or why the lower liner of a istrator to modify the requirements of
hazardous waste disposal facility paragraph (1) if the owner demon.
should have a permeability of 1 X 1O’ strates that a:
centimeter per second? Or why see- Surface impoundment is located, designed,
ondary waste-water treatment ponds and operated so as to assure that there will
employing biological treatment should be no migration of any hazardous constitu-
be retrofitted If they have a retention ent into ground or surface water at any
time in excess of 5 days? Or why steel future time.
underground tanks can no longer be The phra.ce “any future time” is not
used in soils with a resistivity of 12,000 intended to present a legal bar to the
Ohms? I submit that making these consideration of petitions for exemp-
kinds of technical Judgements is the tion from the requirements of para.
function of EPA. not the Congress. graph (1), For example, an equaliza-
These particular regulations may be tion basin that, collects wastewater
workable, even appropriate, but writ- prior to biological treatment could reaP
ing regulations is not our job. sonably be considered for an exemp-
Nevertheless. I am pleased that Lion under paragraph (4) If It were
- some necessary modifications In the built in natural clay with a compacted
House and Senate bills were made clay liner that would prevent migra-
with regard to small quantity genera- Lion of hazardous constituents for 150
tors, EPA deadlines, and surface I ars. A period of 150 years clearly
I&t,?1 -
,j . Ai-i. (—kl ,__. ,_,
- October 5, 1984
falls within the def in ‘any
future time” in a legal Interpretation,
However, given the engineering and
technological considerations in tile
design and construction of any surface
impoundment. 150 years may not nec-
essarily be considered within “any
future time.” Indeed. 150 years is
longer than the design life of synthet-
ic liners used for,
No engineer will certify that a sur-
face impoundment, regardless of how
it is constructed and with what materi-
al it is constructed, wilJ not leak for
any future time if “any future time” Is
given a strict legal definition.
Mr DURENBERGER . Mada
President, I wonder if I might direct
the attention of the distinguished
manager of the conference report to a
particular portion of the manager’s
language on Underground storage
tanks. I refer specifically to the follow-
ing sentence which describes the
second modification to the Senate bill
made by the conferees:
In this regard, the conferees believe that
whiie sophisticated methods of inventory
controi may be adequate to determine
whether a tank is leaking, exclusive reliance
on a “dipstick” method of inventory control
(even with periodic tank testing) aill not be
sufficient to detect slow ieaks.
Does the Senator from Rhode Island
find that reference.
Mr. CHAFEE. Yes, the Senator from
Minnesota correctly states the Ian.
guage of the conference report.
Mr. DURENBERGER. Would the
Senator from Rhode Island assure this
senator that the specific sentence
which I have read does not imply that
an automatic gauging system or other
electronic detection system is a mini-
mum requirement under the statutory
language reported by the conference,
Mr. CHAFEE. The Senator from
Minnesota states the Intent of the,
conference correctly. e do not intend
thj entence to be interpreted as a re-
quiremenr. xor automaalc gauging . aim
discussion of the conferees foc’iiied on
the way that data collected by me-
Ajm aI d vires I c analyzed ancr not.
on the characteristics of the iiie-
chanical devices . ‘
Mr. SIMPSON : Madam President, I
do support ft ”conferenee report on
the “Hazardous and Solid Va,ste
Amendments of 1984,” and I richly
commend the conference chairman.
my fine friend Senator JOHN Cu.irss.
who served with patience and real
skill.
By that act I do not pretend to be
wholly satisfied with the work of the
conference committee. Yet, in order to
forge a compromise—the essential act
of legislating—with the House it was
necessary to drop certain provisions
from the Senate bill that I feel very
strongly about and that I Indeed still
hope and expect to see enacted in tile
future. We also accepted certain provi-
sions of the House bill about whiclt I
have reservations, In general the bill
lurches ponderously In the direction of
(c cLey J,o . 12 C c .i? (/;cw*
-------
October 5, 1984
IMMINENT HAZARD AND CITIZEN SUITS
Section 7003 of RCRA currently au-
thorizes suit to Lnaznediately restrain
any person contributing to handling.
storage, treatment, transportation, or
disposal of any solid waste or hazard-
ous waste that may present an immi-
nent and substantial endangerment to
health or the environment. Though
the issue of inactive waste sites is not
addressed explicity in section ‘1003. the
Congress, most courts and every ad-
ministration which has administered
the act has contrueci the section to
apply to such sites. Notwithstaztding
an opinion for the U.S. Court of Ap-
peals for the Third Circuit and several
district court decisions upholding the
Government’s position, some courts
have ruled to the contrary. The ad-
ministration testified that clarifying
language amending section 7003 would
be helpful.
This bill will amend section 7003 to
affirm that which is already provided
for under existing law. It will clarify
that .section 7003 authorizes suits con-
cerned with Inactive sites which may
present an imminent and substantial
endangerment.
Although section ‘1003 of RCRA au-
thorizes the Administrator to sue to
abate an endangerment whenever the
past or present handling, storage,
treatment, transportation, or disposal
of any solid or hazardous waste may
present on imminent and substantial
endangerment to health or the envi-
ronment, we now know from the Su-
perfund experience that the number
of potential problem sites exceeds the
Government’s ability to take action
each time such action is warranted.
The problem is primarily one of mad-
equate resources.
Therefore, H.R. 2867 will authorize
citizens to bring suit against those who
have, contributed or are contributing
to a situation which may present an
imminent and substantial endanger-
ment to health or the environment. To
prevent such suits from intefering
with Government enforcement ac-
tions, a number of conditions are
placed on the authority to bring such
suits.
SUETITI.E D IMPROVi.MENTS
Even with the phaseout of the small
quantity generator exemption, sizable
amounts of hazardous materials from
such generators, household wastes.
and illegal dumping are disposed of in
municipal landfills. Current criteria
for sanitary landfills are inadequate to
deal with these facts. In addition,
there is a need to provide for better
implementation of the open dumping
ban and upgraded criteria for sanitary
landfills.
As a result of this bill. EPA must
revise criteria for sanitary landfills
and for determining which practices
constitute open dumping, taking into
Iccount potential for such facilities re-
eIving hazardous waste in household
wastes or from illegal dumping.
WiLhin 42 months, State i must estab-
lish and enforce a permit piogram or
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
other system to assure that sanitary
landfills which may receive hazardous
wastes comply with upgraded criteria.
If States do not. adopt such a program,
EPA shall use the enforcement au-
thority in sections 3007 and 3008 to en-
force the ban on open dumps.
AIR EMISSIONS FROM LAND DISPOSAL FACILITIES
Studies of hazardous waste surface
impoundments and landfills report
that significant quantities of hazard-
ous constituents in the wastes may be
emitted into the air. Proposals to regu-
late emissions from hazardous waste
facilities have been published on sev-
eral occasions since passage of RCRA
in 1976. Final regulations have never
been issued. The Agency also has au
thority to regulate emissions of haz-
ardous air pollutants under the Clean
Air Act, but its performance under
that Act has been appallingly slow,
A provision of H.R. 2867 requires
EPA to promulgate regulations for the
monitoring and control of air emis-
sions from hazardous waste facilities
as may be necessary to protect human
health and the environment.
GROUND WATER MONITORING
Cui rent EPA regulations allow waste
piles, landfills, and surface impound-
ments that satisfy certain conditions
to,, claim an exemption from the
ground water monitoring requirements
that are designed to detect any re-
leases of hazardous constituents from
the facilities. The conditions for ex-
emptions. on their face, do not meet
subtitle C’s basic requirement of pro-
tecting human health and the environ-
ment. There is evidence, for example.
that a leak could occur even from a
double-lined disposal facility, and that
hazardous constituents can migiate
into ground water even if the facility
is located entirely above the seasonal
high water table. Similarly, if an in-
spectioli shows a liner is cracked, the
owner or operator is required only to
repair the crack, not to detect arid
clean up any releases that may have
occurred before the crack was discov-
ered
The bill will require that the act’s
ground water monitoring requirements
be completed with whether or not a
facility is located entirely above the
seasonal high water table, the facility
has two liners and a leachate collec-
tion system, or the facility’s liner—or
liners—are periodically inspected. This
section has the effect of nullifying sev
eral portions of EPA’s regulations, It
does not make any changes to the
Agency’s regulations concerning
ground water monitoiing standards
other than deleting the indicated cx-
en ptions.
WASTE MINIMIZATION
Current laws cmph:tsize the need to
pioperly treat, store, and dispose of
hazardous wastes. While this contin.
ues to be a piimary clement of RCRA
and other pollution control laws, addi•
tional emphasis must be directed
toward first, minimizing the genera-
tion of hazardous wastes and second.
S 13821
utilizing the best treatment, storage.
and disposal techniques for each
waste,
A statement of national policy will
be added to the act as well as a re-
quirement that hazardous waste gen-
.erators certify that they have pro-
grams to reduce the amount and toxic-
ity of their waste and that they are
using methods to minimize the threat
that their wastes pose to human
health and the environment.
DEFINITION OF KEATING OIL 1$ UNDERGROUND
STORAGE TANK PROVISION
The underground storage tanks that
are covered by ti lls bill do not include
underground storage tanks used for
storing heating oil for consumptive
use on the premises where stored.
There are many different grades of
heating oil used, including No. 2, No, 4,
and No. 6. The particular type of heat-
ing oil used generally depends upon
the type and size of the furnace in
which It is burned, The reference to
heating oil cited above includes all of
these grades of heating oil, so long as
the tank is used for storing such heat-
ing oil for eonsumpti e use on the
premises where stored.
OTHER ISSUES
Several other issues have been con-
sidered in the course of developing
H.R. 2867 and merit comment, These
include the issues of permitting of
mobile treatment units; the distinction
between oi site and of fsite facilities;
dim ect action provisions of Superfund;
and heakh asscssments.
PERMITTING OF MOBILE TREATMENT UNITS
The EPA. in order to fulfill its legis-
lative mandate, should continually be
looking at innovative, advanced -tech-
nological methods to effectively and
safely treat and handle hazardous
wastes. Legislative and regulatory ini-
tiatives are necessary to discourage
the use of landfills and land disposal
genem’ally as a disposal option of first
resort.
For many waste generators, the
availability of mobil treatment units
would make proper waste handling
and treatment economically feasible
and remove the growing financial in.
centive for cutting corners or for mid-
night dumping, Clearly, the long-term
tightening of EPA’s current small gen-
erators exemption will mean a signifi-
cant increase in the nunibcr of regu-
lated facilities which could handle
their wastes more safely and effective-
ly through use of mobile treatment
technology—either through a circuit
rider approach where the unit periodi-
cally visited a facility—or where a unit
periodically visited a satellite treat-
ment area where waste from several
firms was aggregated and stored pcrid-
Ing treatment.
EPA currently has legislative au-
thority to develop a permit procedure
for mobile treatment units, however,
current permit regulations, as promul-
gated, have stymied the development
of MTU technology. I hate reviewed
the work completed in September 1983
i • 0?4 .
-------
S 13822
by• EPA’s RCRA Permit Advisory
Committee and believe the I’ 1 ’FU
pcrmit, procedure outlined therein,
merits further consideration by the
Agency.
DISTINCTION 8FTWFE ONSITE AND OPFSITC
PACILITIES
According to Ihe National Survey, 84
percent of those who generate hazard-
ous astes ship their wastes offszte for
treatment, storage, or disposal. That
fact seems to support the notion that
our regulatory effort should be fo-
cused on these offeite facilities. Some
people allege that the cffsite treat-
ment and disposal industry has, In
fact, been subject to much greater
scrutiny, regulatory control, and en-
forcement than those who generate
hazardous wastes and manage thou
Inhouse or onsite. If this Is true, it is
without justification. Onsite facilities
should be regulated at least as vigor-
ously as of fs te facilities.
Although offsite facilities manage a
significant amount of hazardous
wastes, they represent a small portion
of the total volume. Using EPA’s num-
hers, which are conservative. 96 per-
cent of the hazardous waste disposed
of is disposed Cf onsite. That is 96 per-
cent by Volume.
Offsite facilities are providing a serv-
ice to small businesses and to house-
holds generating hazardous wastes.
Why should we devote a dispropor-
tionate amount of our enforcement
effort to ofisite facilities? The issue is
not just one of fairness but it Is also
one of safety. Let’s focus on the piob-
leni. We shoL ild continue to scrutinize,
regulate, and enforce against offsite
operators but we should also be focus-
ing on the high volume private sites
that are behind the company fense.
There is no reason to assume that in-
house operations are i-un any better
than the offsite commercial fac1hit es,
With history as our guide, we must
not let any facility that is managing
hazardous waste escape our regulatory
and enforccnient efforts.
DIRECT ACTION IN CERCLA
I am a strong supporter of the direct
action pros Isions of the bill, dealing
with financial responsibility. This ap-
proach to financial responsibility
should be applied to each environmen-
tal statute as the opportunity to
amend those statutes becomes avail-
able. Thus, while the conferees deleted
this provision as applied to the Com-
prehensive Environmental Response.
Compensation and Liability Act
(CERCLAJ, it was deleted only be-
cause all CERCLA amendments to this
bvlll were deleted. A similar amend-
inent sliold be added to CERCLA and
title III of the Outer Continental
Shelf Lands Act at the earliest appro-
priate time.
HEALTH ASSESSMENTS
The bill requires that ownei-s and
operators of landfills and surface im-
poundments submit exposure informa-
tion with their permit, applications.
Submission of exposure information
should not be considered when deter-
mining the completcncs.s or adequacy
of a part B permit application. It is an
independent requirement of this act,
enforceable as any other violation of a
repoi (ir ,g requirement,
CONCLUSION
Madam President, the need for
action is rarely as clear as it is today.
We have a law that was designed to
assure the PCOPiC of this Nation that
the generat:on, handling, stoi age,
treatment, transportation, and dispos-
al of hazardous wastes in this country
is regulated and controlled In a
manner that protects both human
health and the environment, Unfortu-
nately, the regulatory program Is rid-
dled wilh loopholes and, as such, the
assurances we sought when we first
passed RCRA In 1976 are still empty
promises,
We cannot afford to delay any
longer. Even if out of sight is out of
mind for some, we must not be so fool-
ish as to believe that the status quo Is
goad enough. We must do as much as
we can to assure the public that haz-
ardous wastes are being handled in a
safe manr.er and that steps will be
taken to reduce the amount and
danger of those hazardous wastes that
are generated in the future.
The amendments that we are consid-
ering today are designed to do that.
They will tianslate the promises of
1976 into action. They recognize new
areas of promise and pursue them. For
these reasons, H.R. 2367 deserves your
Support and your vote ef approval.
Macjam President, I want to take
this opportunity to thank all of the
dedicated, hard-working people at
EPA and on our staff who have
worked ith us and helped us to craft
this major envlrcjnlnental bill. With-
out the as ustance of EPA Assistant
Administrator Lee Thomas and his
staff, Environment and Public Works
Committee counsel Steve Shimberg,
Phil Cummings, Kathy Cudhipp, Jon
Jewett, staff members Charlene Stur-
bitts, Bill Fay, Jimmie Powell, and Li
Batrett-Brown. we could not have
achieved today’s accomplishment. En-
actment of the first major pollution
control law since 1980 Is an event that
should not go Unnoticed and -the im-
portance of today’s action should not
be minimized.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Madam Presi-
dent, I rise in strong suppoi-t of H.R.
2867, the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984, and urge Its im-
mediate adoption by the Senate. This
conference report Is of utmost impor-
tance to my State and the Nation as a
whole. The cradle-to-grave manage-
ment of hazardous wastes Is a formida-
ble task and one that demands careful
coordination between the public, Con-
gress. Environmental Protection
Agency and States.
Over 240 millIon tons of hazardous
wastes are generated every year—i ton
for every man, woman, and child In
our country. Much of this waste Is now
land disposed of in ways that contami-
October 5, 1.984
nate the water we drink and the air we
breathe. The best solution to the haz-
ardous waste crisis facing our country
is the reduction and recycling of these
wastes. But, for the foreseeable future.
there will be a substantial amount of
waste that must be disposed of
through other means that can harm
the public and the enivironjuent.
The bill that we will approve today
is the first major environmental 1-egu-
latory bill to be enacted since the Su.
per! und bill passed in 1980. It will
greatly improve the management of
our wastes. It will close dangerous
loopholes in the current progr. m and
start the country in a new direction by
encouraging the treatment of danger-
ous wastes and discouraging land dis-
posal.
The main elements of H.R. 2867 are
the limitations on land disposal, retro-
fit requiremen for surface impound-
ments. regulation of small quantity
generators, and a new program for lo-
cating and monstoring undergrcund
storage tanks, many of which are leak-
ing and threatening water supplies.
Madam President, I was honored to
serve as a conferee on this bill. The
bill is the culmination of two sessions
of debate over needed improvemen
to this program. Senate approval of S.
757, on July 26, by a unanL-nous vote
of 93 to 0, is testament to the concern
of all Senators that the storage, trans-
port, and disposal of hazardous r.astes
be carefully regulated.
This bill cloEes dangerous loopholes
in the current law. It narrows the ex-
emption for most small quantity waste
generators who today dispose of 4 mil-
lion tons annually of benzene, toluene,
and other dangerous chemrdcals In our
neighborhood landfills every year. The
bill also regulates the burning and
blending of hazardous wastes for re-
source recovery and bars the disposal
of wastes such as d oxins, In road oils.
While the closing of these loopholes
has received considerable attention,
the real nexus of the bill is the ban on
land disposal of hazardous wastes that
threaten the public health and envi-
ronment.
No longer will the indiscriminate dis-
posal of dioxins, PCBs, and other
highly toxic chemicals be allowed in
landfills. Instead, this bill encourag s
the reduction, recycling, and treat-
ment of hazardous wastes. It is my
hope that the disIncentj ’es to dispose
of waste in landfills included in H.R.
2867 will stimulate the de elopment of
new technologies to safely treat waste.
The limitations on land disposal
center around statutory bans on cer-
tain wastes. These bans will automati-
cally go into effect unless the EPA de-
termines that land disposal of these
wastes is safe, The bans are reasona- -
ble. They will prevent deadlines from
slipping Into the future without
action. They establish an Important
presumpiton that land disposal should
not be used for wastes that pose real
risks.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE
-------
October 5, 1984
This presumption should provide a
stimulus for the commercialization of
technology to treat these wastes. How-
ever, If no adequate alternative to land
disposal are available, the bill does
provide limited extensions from dis-
posal bans by the EPA. It is important
to note that, these extensions will not
be granted on economic grounds.
Madam President. the deadlines in
this bill for banning land disposal of
certain wastes are realistic and should
provide more than adequate time for
EPA to analyze and develop regula-
tions to implement these provisions.
They are consistent with EPA assist,-
ant Administrator Lee Thomas’ assess-
siient of EPA’s capabilities. I hope that
EPA will move as quickly as possible
to implement these provisions and ban
dangerous wastes from our landfills. IL
would be unfortunate if EPA waited
until the 11th hour to take action.
Many of these deadlines are several
years off and I am concerned about
environmental hazards that will con-
tinue during the interim.
It is important to note that the bill
also bans lax-id disposal of liquid haz-
ardous wastes into shallow aquifers
and the underground injection of cer-
tain wastes as well. I strongly support,
the ban on liquid waste disposal. Such
disposal practices are among the most
egregious examples of our past mis-
management of hazardous wastes.
Over 60 percent of our wastes are
disposed of by Injection into under-
ground aquifers. We must be especial-
ly careful, as we move away from dis-
posal in landids and surface impound-
ments, that we do not simply shift to a
form of disposal that will perpetuate
the contamination of our precious
drinking water supplies. The deadlines
in the underground injection provi-
sions are 4 years off. Because we do
not know as much about the impacts
of underground injection as we know
about landfilluig, it is essential that
EPA expeditiously investigate the P0-
tential environmental and health haz-
ards related to disposal of wastes
through underground injection.
Madam President. during our confer-
ence, we engaged In extensive discus-
sion about the retrofit requirements
for surface Impoundments. The bills
approved by both I-louses required that
existing impoundnients —pits, pounds,
and lagoons—be retrofitted with
double liners a leak-detection systems
within 4 years of enactment. Our dis-
cussion focused primarily on the treat-
ment of wastewater surface Impound-
ments, which were provided with an
explicit exemption In the Senate bill,
The criteria for exemption of these
impoundments, which are estimated to
represent between 200 and 300 of the
1,500 existing impoundments, has been
tightened so that the universe of these
Impoundments is limited to those en-
gaged In “aggressive biological treat,-
neat” of wa.stewater, An important
ondition of this exemption is that
groundwater be monitored. Mr. Presi-
ilent, the strict monitoring of ground-
water around these Impoundments
will be critical in assessing the Impact
of the exemptions included in the bill.
This bill sets up, for the fix-st time, a
Federal program for the regulation of
underground storage tanks containing
petroleum. The growing problem of
leaking underground storage tanks Is
one that will require our attention for
many years to come. The regulatory
program included in this bill wlU help
us identify these tanks. It will also re-
quire that new tanks meet strict anti-
leak standards. These provisions will
start us on our way toward preventing
and cleaning up tanks that threaten
the quality of our drinking water.
The emerging statistics on leaking
underground storage tanks are omi-
notm. it is estimated that a 1 gallon a
day leak of gasoline from a tank can
poison the water supply of 50,000 per-
sons. Experts In the petroleum indus-
try estimate that between 15,000 and
100.000 tanks are currently leaking.
and that this number may increase to
over 350,000 In the next 5 years. In my
State alone, it Is estimated that 20.000
tanks may be leaking. -
It Is clear that leaks from these
tanks pose a very serious threat to our
groundwater, That Is why I joined
Senator DURENBERGER In Introducing
legislation j the Senate to regulate
underground storage tanks earlier this
year. I am very pleased that provisions
to address this emerging environmen-
tal problem are included in the bill.
Finally, I want to make mention of
the clarifications H.R. 286’? makes to
the criminal liability provisions of the
act. In September 1963, a New Jersey
district court decision threatened to
undermine effective Federal enforce-
ment actions against midnight dump-
ers. The court refused to prosecute
two plant supervisors who were rou-
tinely ordering the disposal of acetate
and other dangerous chemicals into a
trench behind their factory in Laurel,
NJ. In a bizarre reading of the law, the
judge found that only owners and op-
erators, who are required to obtain
permits for disposing of wastes, could
be prosecuted for illegal waste disposal
under the criminal provisions of
RCRA.
In fact, the law clearly states that
anybody who knowingly and illegally
disposes of hap.ardous waste can be
held liable for a violation of RCRA re-
quirements. During Senate consider-
ation of S. 757, I offered an amend-
merit to the bill to Overturn this court
decision and clarify the intent of the
act. Congressman Jz i FLORIO had in-
troduced similar legislation in the
House after the House had approved
its version of the RCRA bill.
By the time we went to conference,
the third Circuit Court of Appeals had
overturned the district court decision.
Nonetheless, the conference retained
this provision to clarify that any mid-
night dumpers who violated the Jaw
will be prosecuted and cannot dump
Wastes with impunity.
S 13823
Madam President, I want commend
the managers of the Senate and House
conferees, Senator CHAFES and Con-
gressman Dzrr gw., for their strong
leadership and diligence In the confer-
ence. Without their commitment to
seeing this bill through, and their
commitment to a safe and clean envi-
ronment, we would not be approving
this bill today. As a new member of
the Environment and Public Works
Committee, I was privileged to serve as
one of the Seb ate conferees on a piece
of legislation of such Importance.
My only regret Is that the House
conferees so strongly resisted includ-
ing the Superfund amendn,ents the
Senate adopted to 3. 757, a number of
which I sponsored with my colleague
from New Jersey, Senator Bradley. I
strongly supported the Senate provi.
sions to S. 757 to provide cost credits
to States which use their own funds to
cleanup sites eligible for Superfund as-
sistance arid to extend the statute of
limitations for natural resources
claims. Both of these provisions were
important to my State of New Jersey.
The stripping of these Superfur’.d
amendments from the RCRA confer-
ence report is even more disappointing
given the failure of the Senate to con-
sider 8. 2892. the Superfund reauthor-
ization bill reported to the Senate by
the Environment and Public Works
Committee, which also contained
them.
Madam President. as many people
have noted, the Resource Consert a-
tion and Recovery Act and the Super-
fund represent two sides of the same
coin. Both statutes serve to protect
the public from exposure to hazardous
wastes, the first by regulating hazard-
ous waste disposal; the second by pro-
viding Federal assistance to cleanup
abandoned waste sites. Enactment of
an improved RCRA program this year
is important for avoiding the creation
of additional Superfund sites. It is my
hope that with RCRA behind us. we
will be able to take up the reauthoriza-
tion of Superfund at the earliest possi-
ble date in the 99th Congress.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the confer-
ence report.
The conference report was agreed to.
Mr. BAKER. Madam President, I
move to reconsider the vote by which
the conference report was agreed to.
Mr. BYRD. I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to,
GRANTS TO ENCOURAGE
PUBLIC CAPITAL INVEST-
MENT —CONFERENCE REPORT
PROJECTS
Mr. BAKER. Madam President, I
submit a report of the committee of
conference on S. 1330 and ask for its
immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFIC . The
report will be stated.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
July 25, 1984
Mr CHAFEE. Mr. President. I move
to reconsider the vote by which the
amendment was agreed to.
Mr. bI ADLEY. I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to.
AMDIDMCNT NO. 3407
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President.
I send an amendment to the desk and
ask for its Immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendment will be stated.
The assistant legislative clerk read
as follows:
The Senator from Ne Jersey (Mr. L*u.
NB!RCI. for himself and Mr. Baioixv. pro-
poses an amendment numb. red 3407:
On page 93. after line 20. add the follow.
Ins new section:
CLARIFICATION OP CRIMINAL LiABILITY
Sac. 30. Sec. 3008tdX2XA) of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act La amended by strik.ng
Out’ ha. ing obtained.”
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President.
I ask, unanimous consent that my
senior colleague (Mr. BRAaLEYI be
added as an original cosponsor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With.
out objection, it La so ordered.
Mr LAUTENBERO. Mr. President.
I rise today to offer an amendment to
S. 757. to strengthen the criminal en-
forcement provisions of the Resource
Conservation and Recovei y Act. I
originally introduced this amendment
as S. 2741. the Criminal Liability Clan-
ficotion Act, on June ‘7. 1984. My col.
league from New Jersey (St’nator
BRADLEY] joins me as a cosponsor of
this amendment, which was sponsored
in the House of Representatives by
Congressman JIM FLoaxo.
The purpose of my amendment Is to
clarify that the criminal pro isions in
RCRA extend to any individual ho
knowingly and illegally disposes of
hazardous waste. It i1l close a danger-
ous loophole created by a recent Fed-
eral district court decision that could
let many midnight dumpers of hazard-
ous waste off the hook.
Over 240 million tons of hazardous
wastes are generated per year In our
country—i ton for every man, woman,
and child in this country. Official esti-
mates Indicate that the majority of
these wastes are disposed of Improper-
ly or In violation of Federal laws.
In the face of continuing threats
posed by illegal dumping of hazardous
wastes, the Justice Department has re-
cently moved to grant police powers.
Including the right to bear firearms, to
Environmental Protection Agency
criminal Investigators. An astounding
one-half of all criminal investigations
currently carried out by EPA Involve
violations of toxic-waste transporta-
tion and disposal regulations. Grant-
ing EPA the right to conduct searches
and make arrests should result In
more effective enforcement efforts
and provide an additional dcterrent to
those who would engage in these un-
pardonable acts.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
I am concerned that Federal en-
forcement efforts may be seriously
compromised by a Federal district
court decision, This decision, rendered
In September of last year, could pre-
vent a substantial percentage of those
apprehended for illegal dumping from
being prosecuted and punished.
In United States against Johnson
and- Towers, the Federal District.
Court of New Jersey dlsm ssed from
criminal liability two plant supervisors
‘ho were routinely ordering the
dumping of thousands of gallons of ac-
etone and other chemicals into a
trench behind their factory and a
nearby stream. The dismissal In the
case was based on a misreading of con-
gressional intent and could undermine
the effectiveness of Federal programs
for regulat:ng hazardous-waste dispos-
al.
Under RCRA, an owner or operator
of a facility producing hazardous
wastes must apply for a disposal
permit. The Illegal disposal In this case
wa.s ordered by the plant’s supervisors,
and not the o ners or operators of the
company in question. The owners and
operators were technically responsible
for acquiring a disposal permit under
RCRA, Therefore, the court ruled
that the supervisors could not be held
liable under RCRA for knowingly dis-
posing of hazardous aste “without
having obtained a permit,”
Mr. President, the interpretation of
RCRA In United States against John-
son and Towers is not a fair reading of
congressional intent. The practice of
midnight oumping was of deep con-
cern in 1980 when Congress amended
RCRA. In 1980, RCRA enforcement
procedures were Improved and penal-
ties toughened in order to put a stop
to midnight dumping. The language in
the law Is clear and unambiguous. it
imposes a criminal penalty on any
person who, lacking a permit, know-
ingly and Illegally treats, stores, trans-
ports, or disposes of any hazardous
material, It was not the Intent of Con-
gress that criminal liability extend
only to the owners and operators of fa-
cilities. who are responsible for obtain-
ing a RCRA permit. This, however, Is
the way the district court Interpreted
RCRA.
The Justice Department has ap-
pealed the decision in United States
against Johnson and Towers to the
Third Circuit Court of Appeals. While
I am hopeful that this appeal will be
successful, the impact of the decision
Is now being felt from New Jersey to
California. The amendment I offer
today, with my colleague from New
Jersey. would clarify congressional
intent to extend the criminal penalty
provisions in RCRA to any person who
knowingly engages in illegal dumping
practices. I hope it will also send a
clear signal to midnight dumpers that
they cannot continue to dispose of
toxic wastes In our-backyards, sewer
systems. rivers, and streams ith Im-
pumty.
S 9161
Noncompliance with the RCRA pro-
gram has been a tremendous problem
across this country. We must work to
Improve compliance. Effective crimi-
nal provisions, that pro ide strong dis-
incentives for illegal disposal of
wastes, are an important step toward
safe management of hazardous wastes
under RCRA. I appreciate the support
of the committee for this amendment
and urge its adoption.
Mr. BRADLEY. Mr. President. I am
pleased to join my distinguished col-
league from New Jersey In this very
Important amendment. It scnds a mes-
sage to midnight dumpers that when
they are caught, they will be prosecut-
ed and they will be punished. No more
loopholes will be available.
I hope the Senate will adopt the
amendment.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I com-
mend the Senators from New Jersey
for coming up with this amendment.
I must say that I do not know how
the Federal judge ever arrived at his
conclusion. We know from Intimate
contact with Federal judges, both
present and past, that their wisdom is
usually unexcelled. How this could
have occurred leaves me dumbfound-
ed. Nonetheless, it did happen, and it
seems wise to correct it. -
I think the Senators from New
Jersey have done a fine public service
by proposing this amendment, and it La
certainly acceptable to this s;de.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Maine.
Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. President, I
join Senator CRAFEE In commending
Senators LAUTENBERC and BRADLEY.
The amendment is acceptable.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the amend-
ment,
The amendment (No. 3407) was
agreed to.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I move
to reconsider the vote by which the
amendment was agreed to.
Mr. MITCHELL. I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to.
AM IDMENT NO. 340S
Mr. DURENBERGER, Mr. Presi-
d..nt. I send an amendment to the desk
and ask for its immediate consider-
ation.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendment will be stated.
The assistant legislative clei’k read
as follows:
The Senator from Mirine ’soma (Mr. DUREN.
BERGER). for himself and Senators MOYNI-
HAN. LAUTENBLRG, Ba.snixy, C0MIN. HUM-
PHREY. and HEiNZ poses an amendment
numbered 3408.
Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent that
reading of the amendment be dis-
pensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, with-
out objection, it is so ordered.
-------
S 9162
The amendment is as follows:
At the end thereof add the following new
section: (a) the Safe Drinking Water Act
(L 1Ue xr of the Public Health Ser ice Act)
is amended by adding a new Part F as fol-
lows:
“PART F—RCGUaA’rioN or UNDER. ROUND
Srnascs TANKS Cor ’,lriNo SCPSIANCES
OT!IER T & HAZARDOUS WASTE
“DE!INITONS
SEc. 1451 For the purposes of thls part,
the t rm—
“(1) ‘Administrator’ mear,a the Adminis-
trator of the Environmental Protection
Agency:
“(2) ‘regulated substance’ means (A) any
substance defined in section 101(14) of
Public Law 9’l-510, the Comprehe.’isive Erwi-
ronmental Response, Cornpensstien. and Li-
ability Al of 1980 (btt not including sub-
stances regulated as hazardous wastes under
the Sohd Waste Disposal Art), and (B) pe-
troleum. Including crude oil 0! any fraction
thereof which is liqiud at standard condi-
tions of temperature and pressure (60 de-
grees Fahrenheit and 14.7 pounds per
square Inch absolute);
(3) ‘owner’ means (A) In the case of an un-
derground storage tank In use on the date
of enactment of this part or brought Into
use alter that date, any person who owns an
underground storage tank used for the stor-
age. use, or dispensing of regulated sub-
stances, and (B) in the case of any under-
ground storage tank prevtousiy in use but
no longer In use on the date of enactment of
this part, any person who owned such tank
Immediately prior to discontinuaclon of use;
“(4) ‘operator’ means any person in con-
ti-ol of or having responsibility for the daily
operation of the underground storage tank
for the storage, use, or dispensing of regu-
lated substances:
“(5) ‘person’ means an Individual, firm,
corporation, association, partnership, trust,
consortium, Joint venture, commerclal
entity. United Stats Government, State. mu-
nicipalit y, comnuscion. political subdivision
of a State, or any interstate body;
“(6) ‘release’ means any actual spilling,
leaking emitting, discharging, escaping,
leaching, or disposing from an underground
storage tank Into ground water, surface
a ater or subsurface soils;
“(7) ‘underground storage tank’ means
any tank. including underground pipes con-
nected thereto, which is used to contain an
accumulation of regulated substances and
which is substantially or totally beneath the
surface of the ground. This term does not
include (I) aboveground storage tanks which
are in compliance with natior,al consensus
codes and for which r,inety (90%) or more of
the tank volume Is above the ground sur-
face, (ii) farm or residential underground
storage tanks of one thousand one hundred
gallons or less capacity used for storing
motor fuel for noncommercial purposes, (iii)
underground storage tanks used for storing
heating oil for consumpti e use on the
premises where stored. (iv) septic tanks Cv)
p!peline facilities regulated under the Natu-
ral Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1968, as
amended (49 U.SC. 1671. et seq) or the
Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Act of 1973, as
amended (40 U.S C. 2001, et seq ). ( t) sur-
face inipoundn,ents, pits, ponds or lagoo.-ts
(vii) storm aster and waste water collection
systems, or (viii) flow-through process
tanks;
“(8) ‘nonoperatlonal underpround storage
tank’ means any Lank a hich has been used
for (he storage, use, or dispensing of regu-
lated substances which will not have regu-
lated substances deposited or d:spensed
from the storage tank after the date ol en-
actment 01 thIs part;
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
“(9) ‘natIonal consensus code’ means any
safety or fire standard or modification
thereof which has been adopted and pro-
mulgated by a nationally recognized stand-
ards-producing organization, including Na-
tional Fire Protection Association Standard
Number 30, “flammable and Combustible
Liquids Code.” and Western Fire Chiefs As-
sociation Uniform Fire Code Article Number
‘19, ‘F1am .able and Combustible Liquids”.
“NCJIIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION
“Sac. 1452. (aXi) UNDERGROUND 8ro sc
TANKS.—Within eighteen months of the
date of enactment of this part, any owner of
an underground storage tank shall notify
the State or local agency or department des-
ignated pursuant to subsection (b)( 1) of the
existence of such tank, specifying the age,
size, type, location, and uses of such tank.
“(2) NoNorgasr ioN UNDERGROUND SToRAGE
Ta1exs.—For any underground storage tank
taken out of operation alter January 1,
19’4. the owner of such tank shall, within
eighteen months of the date of enactment.
of this part, notify the State or local
agency, or department designated pursuant
to subsection (b)(1) of the existence of such
tanks (unless the owner knows the tank sub-
sequently v-as removed from the ground).
Notice under thIs subsection shall specify to
the extent known the date the tank was
taken out of operation, the age on the date
taken out of operation, the size, type and lo-
cation of the tank, and the type and quanti-
ty of substances left stored in such tank on
the date taken out of operation. This sub-
section shall not apply to tanks for which
notice was given pursuant to section 103(c)
of the Comprehensive Environmental Re-
sponse, Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980.
“(3) Any owner which brings into use an
underground storage tank after the initial
notification under subsection (a)(1), shall
notify the designated State or local agency
or department within thirty da3s of the ex-
istence of such tank. specif ) lr g the age, size,
type, location and uses of such tank.
“(4) Beginning thIrty days alter the Ad-
ministration prescribes the form of notice
pursuant to subsection (b)2) and for eight-
een months thereafter, any person who de-
posits regulated substances in an under-
ground storage tank shall reasonably notify
the owner or operator of such tank of the
owners notification requirements pursuant
to this subsection,
“(5) BeginnIng thirty days alter the Ad-
ministrator issues new tank performance
standards pursuant to subsection 1453(d) of
this part, any person who sells a tank in-
tended to be used for the storage. use, or
dispensing of regulated substances shall
notify the purchaser of such tank of the
owner’s notification requirements pursuant
to this subsection.
“(b)(l) Within one hundred and eighty
days of enactment of this part, the Gover-
nors of each State shall designate the ap-
propriate State agency or department or
local agencies or departments to receite the
notifications under subsection ahl), (2). or
(3).
“(2 Within twelve months of enactment
of this part, the Administrator in consulta-
tion with State and local officials designated
pursuant to subsection (bX1). and after
notice and opportunity for public comment,
shall prescribe the form of the notice and
the Iiflormation to be included In the notifi-
cations under subsection (a)(1). (2), or (3)
In issuing the form of such notice, the Ad-
minustrator shall take Into account the
effect on small businesses and other owners
and operators.
July 25, 1984
“RELEAsE DETECTION, Pi’.EVEIITION, AND
CORRECTION RECIJLSTIONS
“Src. 1453. (a) The Administrator, after
notice arid opportunity for public comment,
shall promulgate release detection, preten
lion and correct’on regulations appil.able to
all o ners and operators of undergrout: r
storage tanks used for 3tOvir,g regulated sub-
stances. s . c may be necessary to prot ct
human health and the einironment.
“(bI In is uing regulattons under this SAC.
Lion, the .‘tdnunistrator may distingJich be.
tween t pe,s. classes, and ages of under.
ground storage tanks, In making such dis-
tinctions, the Administrator may take into
consideration the foilo t-ing factors. includ.
tog, but not limited to’ location of the tanks.
soil and climate conditions, uses of the
tanks, history of maintenance, age of the
tanks, current industry recommended prac-
tices, national consensus codes. hydrogeo-
logy, water table, size of the tanks, quantity
of regulated substances periodically d posiL-
ed in or disp nsed from the tank, the tech-
nical and managerial capability of the
owners and operators, and the compatibility
of the rcgulated substance and the mat,eri-
als of which the underground storage tank -
is fabricated.
“(c) The regulations promulgated pursu-
ant to this section shall include, but need
not be limited to, the following require-
ments respecting all underground storage
tanks-
“(1) maintaining a leak detection system
or maintaining a comparable system or
methods or Inventory control system and
performing tank testing designed to identify
releases:
“(2) maintaining records of any monitor-
ing or leak detection system or intentory
control system or tank testing or compara-
ble system:
“(3) reportIng of any releases and correc-
tive action taken In response to a release
from an underground storage tank;
“(4) taking corrective action In response to
a release from an underground storage tank;
‘ 5) taking underground storage tank Out
of oPeration.
“Cd) The Administrator shall promulgate
regulations for mazataining evidence of fi-
nancial responsibility and he deems neces-
sary and desirable for taking corrective
action and compensating third parties for
bodily injury and property damage caused
by sudden and nonsudden accidental re-
leases arising from operating an under-
ground storage tank.
“Cc) The Administrator shall Issue per.
formance standards for underground stor-
age tanks brought Into use on or after the
effective date of such standards. The per
formance standards for new underground
storage tanks shall Include, but need not be
limited to, design, ronstruction. installation,
notification, compatibility and re!ease detec’
tlon standards.
‘(f) Regulations issued pursuant to sub.
section Cc) of this section and standards
issued pursuant to subsection Cd) of this sec-
tion for undergiound storage tanks con(ain
trig regulated substances defined in section
1451 t2)(B) (petroleum, including crude oil
or any fraction thereof which is liquid at
standard conditions of temperature and
pressure) shall be effecii e not later tl an
thirty months after the date of enactment
of this part
“(g) Until the effective date of the stand-
ards promulgated by the Administrator
under subsection Cd) of this section. and
after ninety (90) days of enactment of this
part, no person shall install an underground
storage tank for the purpose of storing reg-
ulated substances unless such i mk in-
stalled and brought Into use in accordance
-------
July 25, 1984
with an enforced national consensus code(s).
Not laler than six months after the date of
cnactn’.ent of this part, the Administrator
shall report to the Senate and the House of
Representatives of the United States his
views on the national consensus codets).
‘APPROVAL OF STATE PROGRAMS
“Ssc. 1454 (a) Any State may thirty
months alter the date of enactment submit
an underground storage Lank release detec-
tion. prevention, and correction progi am for
revIew and approsal by the Admtnistrator.
The Stale must demonstrate that the State
program includes the following elements
and provides for adequate enforcement of
compliance with such requirements.
“(1) maintaining a leak detection system
or inventory control system and performing
tank testing designed to identlf ) releases:
“(2) maintaining records of any monitor.
trig or leak detection system or inventory
control system or tank testing s3stem:
“(3) reporting of any releases and correc-
Live action taken in response to a release
from an underground storage tank;
“(4) standards of performance for new un
dergrotind storage tanks;
“(5) taking corrective action In response to
a releitse from an underground storage tank:
“16) taking underground storage tanks out
of operation: and
“(7) maintaining evidence of financial re-
sponsibility for taking corrective action and
compensating third parties for bodily injury
and property damage caused by sudden and
nonstidden accidental releases arising from
operating an underground storage tank.
“(b) A States new tank standards submit.
ted for approval under subsection (aX4)
shall be no less stringent than the perform.
ante standards promulgated by the Admin-
istrator pursuant La subsection 1453(c).
‘(c) Corrective action and compensatIon
programs financed by fees on tank owners
and operators and administered by State or
local agencies or departments may be sub-
mitted for approsal under subsection (a)7)
as evidence of financial respons bility
“(did) Within one hundred and eighty
days of the date of receipt of a proposed
State program, the Administrator shall,
after notice and opportunity for public com-
ment. make a determination whether the
States program includes the requirements
identitled in subsection Ca) and prosldcs for
adequate enforcement of compliance with
such reqwrement.s.
“(2) If the Administrator determines that
a State program tr,cludes the requirements
identified in subsection (a) and pros ides for
adequate enforcement of compliance with
such requirements, he shall approve the
State program in lieu of the Federal pro-
gram and the State shall base primary en-
forcernerit responsibility with respect to re-
quireincnts related to control of under-
ground storage tanks used to store regulated
substances.
“(3) Any State may submit and the Ad.
mir.lstrator shall approie an under ’ roind
storage tank release. detection. pre”enruon.
and correction program for uridergrour,d
stori ge tanks containing regulated sub-
stances defined In si ction 145l 2 B, (petro-
leum. including crude oil or an) fractIon
ther’of v’hlch is liquid at standard cofldl-
tions of tentperat l lre and pressuret but d.- es
not include tanks containing other re ’iJat.
ed substances, if the Administrator, a t r
notice and o portunlt’, for p ibllc coniment,
makes a determination that thc- States pro-
gram includes the rt ’guiremenL identified
in subsection (a) and pros ides for adequate
enforcement of compliance with such re-
qnirernents. If a State program shall be ap-
proved under this subsection, the State pro-
gram shall be in lieu of a Federal progrnm
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
for underground storage tanks containing
regulated substances defined in section
1451(2)(b) and the State shall have primary
enforcement responsibility with regard to
such tanks.
•‘(e) Wheneter the Administrator deter.
mines after public hearing that a State is
not wdir,iniztering and enforcing a program
authorized under this part in accordance
with the requirements of this section. he
shall so notify the State. and, if appropriate
action is not taken within a reasonable time.
not to exceed ninety days. the Ad 1 ninistra-
tor shall withdraw authorization of such
program and reestablish enforcement of
Federal regulations pursuant to this part.
“INSPECTIONS, MONITORING. AND TESTING
“Ssc. 1455. (a) For the purposes of devel-
opIng or assisting in the development of any
regulation, conducting any study, or enfore.
ing the provisions of this part, any owner or
operator of an underground storage tank or
any tank subject to study under section
1459 that is used for storing regulated sub-
stances shall, upon request of any officer.
emplo ee or representative of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency, duty designated
by the Administrator, or upon request of
any duly designated officer, employee, or
representative cf a State with an approved
program, furnish information relating to
such tanks, their associated equipment,
their contents, conduct monitoring or test-
ing, and permit such officer at all reasona-
ble times to base access to, and to copy all
records relating to such tanks. For the pur-
poses or des eloping or assisting in the devel-
opment of any regulation. conducting any
study, or enforcing the provisions of this
part, such officers, employees, or represent-
atives are authorized—
“(1) to enter at reasonable times any es-
tablishment or other place where an under-
ground storage tank is located.
“(2) to inspect and obtain samples from
any person of any such regulated substances
and conduct monitoring or testing of the
tanks, associated equipment, contents, or
surrounding soils, air, surface water or
ground water, Each such Inspection shall be
commenced and completed with reascnable
promptness,
“(b)(l) Any records, reports, or informa-
tion obtained from any persons under this
section shall be available to the public,
except that upon a showing satisfactory to
the Administrator (or the State. as the case
may be) by any person that records. reports.
or information, or a particular part thereof,
to which the Administrator (or the State. as
the case may be) or any officer. empIo ee,
or representative thereof has access under
this section if made public, would divulge in-
formation entitled to protection under sec-
tion 1905 of title 18 of the United States
Code, such information or partlcular por
tion thereof shall be considered confidential
In accordance with the purposes of that sec-
tion except that such record, report. docu.
ment, or information may be disclosed to
other officers. emplo )ees, or authorized rep-
rerentauvea of the United States concerned
with carrying out this act, or when relevant
in any proceeding uniter this Act.
“(2) Any person not subject to the provi-
sions of sectIon 1905 of title 18 of the
Ue’ted Statcs Code who knowtnCl )’ and will-
full)’ divulges or discloses any ir,lormatiOn
entitled to protection under this subsection
shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine
of not more than 55.006 or to imprisonment
not to esceed one yeai. or both.
“(3) In submittiiig data unuer this Act, a
pcrson required to pros ide such data mas—
“(A) designate the data which such perron
believes is entitled to protection under this
subsection, and -
S 9163
“(B) submit such designated data sepa’
rately from other data submitted under this
Act.
A designation under this paragraph shall be
made in writing and in such manner as the
Administrator may prescribe.
“(4) Notwithstanding any limitation con-
tained In this section or any other pros ision
of law, all information repoi ted to. or other-
wise obtained, b} the Administrator (Or any
representative of the Administrator) under
this Act shall be made available, upon writ-
ten request of any duly authorized commit-
tee of the Congress, to such committee (in-
cluding records, reports, or information ob-
tained by representatives of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency).
“FEOERAI. ENFORCEMENT
“Sec. 1456, (a)(1) Except as provided in
paragraph (2). whenever on the basis of any
information, the Administrator determines
that any person Is in violation of any re-
quirement of this part, the Administrator
may issue an order requiring compliance
within a reasonable specified time period or
the Administrator may commence a civil
action in the United States district court In
which the violation occurred for appropri-
ate relief, including a temporary or perma-
nent injunction,
“(2) In the ca.se of a violation of any re-
quirement of this part where such violation
occurs in a State with a program approved
under section 1454. the Administrator shall
give notice to the State in which such viola.
lion has occurred prior to issuing an order
or eommencing a civil action under this sec-
tion.
“13) If such violator fails to comply with
the order within the time specified In the
order, he shall be liable fnr a civil penalty of
not more than $25,000 for each day of conS
tlnued noncompliance.
“(bI Any order shall become final unless,
no later than thlrt ) days alter the order Is
served, the person or persons named therein
request a public hearing. Upon such request
the Administrator shall promptly conduct a
public hearing In connection with any pro-
ceeding under this section the Administra-
tor may Issue subpoenas for the attendance
and testimony of witnesses and the produc-
Lion of relevant papers, books, and docu-
ments. and may promulgate rules for discov.
ery procedures,
“(c) Any order issued under this section
shaU state with reasonable specificity the
nature of the violation, specify a reasonable
time for compliance, and assess a penalty, if
any, which the Administrator determines is
reasonable taking Into account the serious’
ness of the violation and any good faith ef.
forts to comply with the applicable require-
ments
“(dl Any owner who knowingly fails to
notify or submits false information pursu-
ant to section 1452(a) to a State or local
agency or department designated pursuant
to section 1452tb)(1) shall be subject to a
civil penalty not to esceed gto.ooa for each
tank for which notification is not given or
false information is submitted,
“(el Any ow-ner or operator of an under-
ground storage tank used for storing a regu-
lated substance who fails to comp’y with
the release detection, prevention, and cor-
rection regulations as promulgated by the
Administrator or a State program approved
pursuant to section 1454. shall be subject to
a civil penalty not to exceed 310.000 for
eacul tank for each da) , of violation. -
“U) Any owner or operator of all under-
ground storage tank used for storir,g regu.
lated substances who failr to comply with
the provisions of section 1453(g) shall be
subject to a clvii penalty not to exceed
-------
S 9161
$10,000 for each tank and for each day of
violation,
‘rEDEZAL FAC1L1TD
“Ssc. 1457 Each department, a ene}, and
Irstrumentala 3 , of (he e :ecuthe, Iegi latJve,
a’id Jucucial branches of the Federal Gov-
ernment ha inq J;irtsdit ’th n o er any iind. r.
grour.d storage ta’lk as definrd in secUon
1451(7) and used for the purpos of storing
regulated substances as defined in subsec-
tion 14512), shall be subject to and comply
\vlth all Federal. State, Interstate, and local
requjreme ,s, both 5ubsu1Jlti C and proce-
durstl in the same maiu r, and to the same
extent, as any person is suWeet to such re-
qulrement , Including payment Øf reasona-
ble service chargei,. Neither the United
States, nor any agent, employes, or officer
thercif, shall be hnrnune or exempt from
any process or sanuuon of any Suite or Fed-
eral court with respect to the enforcement
of any such injunctive rtllef, The President
may exempt from any p:-occss or sanction of
any State or Federal court aith respect to
the enforcement of any such injunctive
relief. The Piesident may exempt any un-
derground storage tanks of any department,
agency, or instrumentalIty in the executive
branch f .or.s compliance with such a re-
quiremeru. if he aeterrnines It to be in the
paramount interest of the United States to
do so. No such exemption shall be granted
due to lack of app opriauon unless the
Pi esidcnt shall have specific-ally requested
such appropriat ion ss a part of the budget.-
ary process and the Congress shall have
failed to mase available such requested ap-
propriations, Any eaempllon shall be for a
period not in excess of one year, but addi.
tiunal exemptions may be grar ,.cd for peri-
ods not to exceed one year upon the Presi-
dent’s making a new detci-imnation, The
President shall report each January to the
Congress all exemptions from the require-
ments of this section granted during the
preceding calendar sear, together aith his
reason for granting each such elLemptlon,
“STATE AUTHORITY
“Sac. 1458. Nothing in this part shall pre-
clude or deny any right of any State or po-
litical subdivision thereof to adnpt or en-
force any regulation, requirement or stand.
ard of performance respecting underground
storage tanks that Is more stringent than a
regulation, requirement, or standard of per-
formance in effect under this part,
“STUDY Or UNDssGROOTt D STORAGE TANKS
“Src. 1459. (a) Not later than twelve
months after the date of enactment of this
part, the Administrator shall complete a
study of underground storage tanks used for
the storage of regulated substances defined
in section 1451(2)(B). Not later than thirty-
six months after the date of enactment, the
Administrator shall complete a study of all
other underground storage tanks, Such
Study shall include an assessment of the
ages, types (Including methods of manufac-
ture, coatings, protection sl’stems. and com-
patibility of the construction mater:ais and,
the installation methods) and locations (in-
cluding the climate of the locations) of suth
tanks: soil conditions, water tables, and the
hydrogeology of tank locations: the rein-
tionship between the foregoing factors and
the likelihood of releascq from underground
storage tanks: the effectiveness and costs of
inveni ory sYstems, tank tecting, and leak de-
tection systems: and such other factors as
the Adnunistrater deei-as appropriate,
‘(b) Not later than thirt -s: mor.t’is
after tl’e da:e o enactment of thit part, the
Administrator shall conduct a rtudy regard-
ing the underground storaqe tanks exempt.
ed in subsection 1451(7)ii) and (1111. Such
study shall include estimates of the number
and location of such tanks and an analysis
of the extent to which there may be re-
leases or threatened releases from such
tanks into the envIronment.
“(C) Upon completion of tile Studies au-
thorh ’d by this sect ion, the Adm 1 nistrator
shall submit, reports to the Presmder t and to
the Congress containing the results of the
studies and recommenthtions respecting
whether or not such tanks should be subject
to the preceding provisions of this pei’t.
“(dXl) If any owner or operator (except-
ing an agency, department, or Instrumental-
ity of the United States Government, a
State or a - political subdh ision thereof)
shall incur costs, Including the loss of busl.
ness opportunity, due to the closure or
interruption of operation of an under-
ground storage tank solely for the purpose
of conducting studies authorized by this sec-
tion, the Administrator shall pros ide Such
person fair and equitable reimbursement for
such costs.
“(2) All claims for reimbursement shall be
filed with the Administrator not later than
ninety (90) days after the closure or inter-
ruption which gives rise to the claim.
“(3) Iteimbur em made under this sec-
tion shall be from funds appropriated by
the Congress pursuant to the authorization
contained In subsection 1450,ap of this part
“(4) For purposes of judicial review, a de-
termination by the Admiqistrator under
this subsection shall be considered final
agency action.
0? APvRopRMs’zo
“Sac. 1460. (a) There are authorized to be
appropriated to the administrator for the
purpose of carrying out the provisions of
this part, *10.003,000 for each of the fzsnal
years ending September 30, 1985, 1986. 1987.
and 1988.
“(b) There Is authorized to be appropri-
ated $25,000,000 for each of the fiscal years
ending September 30, 1985, 1986, 1987, and
1988 to be used to ma’ce g”ants to the States
for purposes of asiistlng the States in the
implementat ion of iippro , ed State under-
ground storage tank release detection, pre-
vention, and correction programs,
(b) Section 1448aXl) of the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act is amended by Inserting after
the words “any regulation for State under.
ground injection control prograjas under
section 1421,” the follo ing: “any regulation
for underground storage tanks under sec
Uon 1453’
Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. Presi-
dent, I offer an amenctwent to the Re-
source Conservation and Recovery Act
amending the Safe Drinking Water
Act to protect groundwater resources
from leaking underground storage
tanks, This amendment Is cosponsored
by Senators MOIrNuUN, LAUTENDERG,
BRADLEY, COHEN, and HUMPHREY.
It Is my pleasure to offer this
amendment, which will a,sslst the
States in establishing effective pro-
grams for the prevention, detection,
and correction of co litammr.ation of
ground ater from the pervasive
source of underground stor,sge tanks
contalnng petroleum and other chem-
ical produ.ts. This represents a mr.Jor
step In assurir,g the public that tile
Nation’s vital ground water resources,
which supply drl king water for 50
rer ent of the countr ‘a population,
does not contain health.threatenir.g
chemicaLs,
The Emit ironmental Protection
Agency first identified leaking under-
ground storage tanks as a potential
July 2.5, 1.984
major source of ground water contami.
nation in November 1983 in a hearing
before the Committee on Environment,
and Public Works. Since that time, we
have become aware of the dimensions
and set er’ity of this real threat. No O’ i
kno s precisely how many tar,k:. e:ir-
rently exist but estimates of th
number of underground storage t nk.s.
coi tain1iig both petroleum au:d othcr
chemical products, range from 2 8 to 5
million, As many as 85 percent of
these may be constructed of bare steel,
ith no corrosion protection. The life
of a typical tank is about 15 to 20
years. Figures of the numbers of gaso-
line tanks which are now leaking vary
from 75,000 to 350,000. Some experts
predict that due to the common old
age of the tank population, that as
many as 75 percent of the existing
tanks will begin to leak over the next
10 years.
These figures Indicate the dimen-
sions of the threat and the fact that
this is a problem we all share with
thousands of storage tanks found in
every State in the country, To make
matters worse, according to the Envi.
ronmental Protection Agency only 1
gallon per day leaking Into an under-
ground source of water is sufficient to
pollute the water supply of a comrnu-
nity of 50.000 persons to a level of 100
parts per billion. An underground tank
leaking two diops a second wIll release
1,2 gallons per day or 38 gallons a
month, A tank leaking a ¼ .inch
stream will release 931 gallons per day
or 27,936 gallons per month. Clearly, it
does not take much to produce an
enormous contamInation problem for
a locality. Once the damage Is finally
detected it is extremely difficult and
Costly to chi’an up. Therefore, we must
establish a program now to prevent
future damage to the public health
and ent Ironment. from leaking tn.nks.
This legislation is particularly
tlmely—tt ith the growing awarene of
the problem, detection of gasoline and
other synthetic organic Contaminants
has Increased threefold In some
States. Iricidences of contamination
from tanks have been reported in all
50 States, Increasing concern on the
part of the States Is also Indicated by
the fact that 32 States have now en-
acted or inItiated legislation to regu-
late underground storage tanks.
The purpcse of this amendment Is to
establish a constructive Federal role to
aid the States In establishing pro.
grams to safeguard their atcr sup.
plies. Passage of this progran will
help to ensure consistency bet ,t-een
State progrsms and tank staidards
and measured progress to rd our
goal of protecting ground water fru jm
this ubiquitous source of coflt,trIl,,un.
tion,
Th” role designated f r the Ent irol.
mental Protection Agency is a tr.’cii.
tional one—that of issuing staii ,r,;
for design, Construction, and ir,’ialla.
tion of flCW tanks and Criteria for
sound tank programs capable of pie-
cONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
July 25, 1984
vention. detection, and correction of
leaks. States which are attempting to
move on this problem are now looking
to EPA for this information. EPA’s
timely standard-setting function will
eliminate the need for reinvention of
the wheel.
States will submit their programs to
EPA for approval. If these programs
meet the general designated program
criteria and reflect new tank perform-
ance standards at least as stringent as
those of the Agency they ill be eligi’
ble for grant moneys for the purpose
of program implementation. The
amount of money available for this
purpose would be $25 million a year
through 1988. This is a small amount
of money compared to after-the-fact
cleanup costs hich have been known
to range as high as this at a single site.
A State must demonstrate that its pro-
gram includes the following elements
and provides for adequate enforce-
ment of compliance with these re-
quirements:
First, maintaining a leak detection
system or inventory control system
and performing tank testing designed
to identify releases;
Second, maintaining records of any
monitoring or leak detection system or
inventory control system or tank t.est-
ing system;
Third. reporting of any releases and
corrective action taken In response to
a release from an underground storage
tank:
Fourth, standards of performance
for new underground storage tanks;
Fifth, taking corrective action in re-
sponse to a release from an under-
ground storage tank;
Sixth, taking underground storage
tanks out of operation; and
Seventh, maintaining evidence of f i-
nancial responsibility for taking cor-
rective action and compensating third
parties for bodily Injury and property
damage caused by sudden and nonsud-
den accidental releases arising from
operating an underground storage
tank.
Exempted from this program are
tanks that are less than 1,100 gallons
capacity used for storing motor fuel
for noncommercial purposes or and
tanks for storing heating oil for con-
sumptive use.
This amendment will assure that all
other new tanks are built and installed
as they should be and that old tanks
are operated and maintained so that
the possibility of leaks is minimized.
We must take this sensible and rea-
sonable action in order to avoid na-
tionwide contamination of our pre-
cious ground water resources. I ask my
distinguished colleagues to join with
me in support of this program which
provides essential protection to the
publ:cs drinking water.
• Mr. MOYNIRAN. Mr. President. I
rise to cosponsor with the Senator
from Minnesota (Mr. DURENBERCER]
an amendment that will close a major
gap in environmental control.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
We are all aware by now of the sen.
ous problem of ground water contami-
nation. Those who draw their drinking
water from the water.bearing geologic
formations known as aquifers count on
a supply free of toxic pollutants. Yet
many of man’s activities on or below
the land surface introduce contami-
nants to underground supplies of
drinking water. We have only recently
realized the gravity of the problem
with the discovery of high concentra-
tions of pollutants in many aquifers
used by millions of people.
A variety of environmental laws
serve to partially control ground water
contamination, but much more must
be done. Some types of sources are not
regulated under any Federal law. Per-
haps the most significant category of
unregulated source is the underground
storage tank.
Underground storage tanks are ubiq-
uitous in our society. They are most
commonly used to store petroleum
products such as gasoline, but many
tanks also contain industrial chemi-
cals. Nobody knows how many million
tanks exist in the United States or
what proportion of the tanks leak, but
that should not stop us from acting
promptly to reduce the threat to
ground ater. We do know that the
majority of tanks are made of bare
steel and that many have been in the
ground for decades. The basic princi.
pies of chemistry lead to the conclu-
sion that many of these tanks are
leaking.
More direct evidence of the phe-
nomenon derives from the many Inci-
dents of ground water contamination
that have been traced to leaking Un ’
derground storage tanks. In some
cases, leaks occurred for many years
before they were detected, Sometimes
the contamination is detected only
when pollutants reach a drinking
ater supply.
For example, a most amazing epi-
sode has unfolded In Brooklyn, New
York City’s most populous borough.
Quite by accident, the pilot of a Coast
Guard helicopter noticed in 1978 what
appeared to be an oil slick in Newtown
Creek, which separates the Boroughs
of Brooklyn and Queens. The slick is
now known to be seepage from a 17
million gallon, 52-acre lake of petrole.
urn floating on the aquifer beneath
the streets of Brooklyn. Hydrologists
have traced the origin of the spill to
an array of gasoline storage tanks.
Even more astonishing than the mag-
nitude of the spill is the fact that the
leakage might have started as 1ong go
as 1948, escaping detection for 30
years.
1 10w can we prevent large, undetect-
ed leaks of hazardous and toxic chemi-
cals into Soils and aquifers? The
amendment we are proposing today
will move us In the right direction. It
would establish sensible practices
aimed at preventing, detecting, and
correcting leaks from underground
storare tanks. First, owners of tanks
would provide the States with some
S 9165
basic Information about their tanks.
leading to the compilation of tank in-
ventories. The Environmental Protec-
tion Agency would promulgate regula-
tions to Improve the management of
tanks. The regulations would require
such practices as inventory control, a
simple method for detecting leaks
soon after they start. The EPA would
also Issue performance standards for
new tanks in order to reduce the
future incidence of leaks. - -
The need for better control of un-
derground storage tanks has been rec-
ognized by many States and local com-
munities. For example, the New York
State Legislature recently enacted a
law applicable to the bulk storage of
petroleum. Suffolk County. NY, which
has experienced serious pollution of
its sole-source aquifer, passed a strict
local ordinance.
It Is now time for Congress to act.
There Is no question that toxic chemi-
cals are leaking from storage tanks to
aquifers. Yet no clear Federal author-
ity is currently available to tackle this
threat.•
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I sug-
gest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to
call the roll.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President. I ask
unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
GORTON). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Mr. SYM.MS. Mr. President, I wish
to thank Senator CHAFEE, Senator
DURENBERGER. and also, of course, our
distinguished chairman and distin-
guished ranking minority member of
the subcommittee, and others who
have worked on this for their coopera-
tion.
I wish to make a few comments here.
I will be as brief as possible. I know
the floor managers of the bill are anx-
ious to move on with this project and I
think it is Important.
Mr. President, reauthorization of
the Resources Conservation and Re.
covery Act has been a long, complex.
and arduous task. It began during the
97th Congress. when, in September
1982, the Senate Environment and
Public Works Committee passed a
simple reauthorization of the act.
That, In itself, shows what a strong
statute RCRA is. The committee origi-
nally Intended to keep it on the books
as It was.
In this Congress, the committee
changed direction, partly because of
the problems that occurred at EPA.
and began searching for more compre-
hensive language to the act. With that
effort, more and more discretionary
authority was yanked from EPA. The
Senate was not only reauthorizing the
act, it was establishing EPA’s regulato-
ry programs as well. When S. 757 came
out of the committee last November, I
opposed its passage, and outlined five
-------
S9166
major concerns that I felt had to be
addressed before the bill was palatable
Lu i.-ie. Those points were:
First, deadlines for EPA action must
- be attainable;
Second. a provision to consider
mining waste differently than other
waste because it is, by nature, high
volume waste with low toxicity;
Third. a provision to exempt second-
ary and tertiary ponds from the
double liner requirements of the bill;
Fourth, opposition to the House
— amendment requiring landfills to con-
duct risk assessment surveys that are
too expensive and questionable in
value: and
Fifth, support for EPA’s current
study of underground storage tanks
and opposition to efforts to tie the
Agency’s hands with requirements
that are unnecessary and which pre-
suppose the outcome of the study now
underway.
First, I wish to say that without the
cooperation of Senator CHAFEE. it
would not have been possible, as far as
this Senator is concerned, that I could
be here on the floor supporting this
legislation. And on these criticisms,
which I think have been corrected, he
certainly deserves a lot of commenda-
tion for his able leadership and his
able staff to make these corrections
and work these things out.
Let me address these points Individ-
ually. Although they are not the only
problems I have with S. 757, they do
constitute the lion’s share of those
concerns.
First, the committee bill originally
established some 35 deadlines for EPA.
Now all of us know that EPA has
never seen a deadline It could not miss.
The problem is that oftentimes, EPA’s
resources are limited, and their prior-
ities are not always in harmony with
the demands of Congress. The result is
that the moment EPA misses a dead-
line, they are in litigation, and the
court mandates timetables or makes
decisions that are not always in the
best interests of good rulemaking.
When EPA originally proposed the
deadlines in the bill, they were acting
under the assumption that they had
unlimited resources. When those dead-
lines were Incorporated into the bill,
EPA realized how very unrealistic
they were. I joined the battle In their
support, and the result of those ef-
forts is the committee amendment re-
vising those deadlines. I feel that It Is
important for this body to be delibera-
tive, especially in the case of highly
emotional issues like this one. The
committee amendment does that in
this case— it substitutes deadlines that
are workable for deadlines that were
simply unattainable. It Is my sincere
hope that even these deadlines are not
overly optimistic, because if they are
the courts will make the decisions
EPA is directed to make. Nonetheless,
the House bill retains deadlines that
are more unrealistic than those in the
Senate bill. This body should adopt
the more reasonable deadlines of the
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
committee amendment, and it must
stand firm with the House to see that
the deadlines that find their way into
law will result in deliberative-and sup-
portable rulemaking by the Agency.
I think this is most critical that this
happen and that all Senators under-
stand the critical nature of this and
that the Senate be able to stand by its
position on this particular issue.
Second, the bill as passed by the
committee contains provisions that
relate to banning certain land disposal
practices. During committee consider-
ation, Senator SIMPsoN and I proposed
an amendment to recognize that, for
the purposed of this amendment,
mining waste is not the same and
should not be treated as the same as
other wastes covered under RCRA. By
its nature, mine waste must be dis-
posed of in surface Impoundments be-
cause of the sheer volume of waste
rock, mill tailings, slag, and overbur-
den generated on a daily basis In the
extraction, beneficiation, and process
ing of ores and minerals. The double
liner requirement of 5. 757 Is impracti-
cable for these surface impoundments.
and the effect of this requirement
could be to shut down certain parts of
the mining industry altogether. Al.
though the language that the commit-
tee adopted originally left ambiguity
In its application to the mining com-
munity, the committee has since
agreed to offer an amendment to recti-
fy that ambiguity, and I urge the
adoption of this very important com-
mittee amendment.
In a related issue, my third concern
revolved around the Imposition of
double liner requirements on second-
ary and tertiary treatment facilities.
By nature, these facilities are also very
large, often acres and acres In size.
Double lining these ponds would be
impractical, and most companies
would simply opt to close them down
altogether. This concerned me primar-
ily because the ponds are usually used
for secondary treatment of water
which is close to being clean, arid con-
taining few of the hazardous wastes
that this bill is designed to address.
Tertiary ponds are often used only to
cool the water before it Is discharged
into the receiving waters or to control
the flows of those discharges. In
either event, it Is simply unnecessary
to double line these facilities. Again. I
commend Senator CuAr z and Senator
STAFFORD for their efforts In resolving
this concern, The committee amend-
ment would waive the double liner re-
quirements If the NPDES permit re-
quirements were being met by the fa-
clilty.
My fourth concern revolved around
an amendment that was passed by the
House relating to risk assessment sur-
veys. This amendment would require
each of 450 landfill operators In the
United States to choose and pay con-
tractors to perform complete health
risk assessments at their sites, withIn 1
year. The assessment would have to
include comprehensive air and water
July 25, 1984
monitoring and the taking of medical
histories of all persons living or work-
ing within 2.5 miles of the site, It is
doubtful whether EPA and all private
contractors combined could perform
these amendments. In addition, the
studies would be highly questionable
because of the small size of the sam-
ples. the lack of any consistent expo-
sure at the site, and the lack of any
meaningful control group. In short,
what seems to be a good concept, is se-
verely flawed. The risk assessments
would be expensive—at least $300,000
a piece—and since the operator pays
for the study, it is questionable wheth-
er anyone would believe the results.
Senators HUMPHREY and CRANSTON
have come up with an amendment
that is satisfactory to me, and I hope
the Senate will adopt it and stick to it
In conference,
My final concern was one which was
only resolved today. It deals with un-
derground storage tanks.
First, EPA is currently doing a study
to determine the extent of this prob-
lem. The Agency testified to the com-
mittee that it had the authority to es-
tablish a regulatory program if it
deemed it to be necessary.
Second. the Agency and I opposed
initial efforts to go beyond that, and I
still have concerns over the extent of
the Durenberger amendment. None-
theless, I want to commend the Sena-
tor for his accommodations to the con-
cerns we raised. Although his amend-
ment still binds EPA to a regulatory
program that is specific, he has come a
long way to resolve the concerns I had
over this problem.
Third, the amendment Is not yet
complete or reviewed by me or the
committee. Consequently, I ask the in-
dulgence of the Senate and the floor
leaders that we have an opportunity to
review It for its technical accuracy.
Fourth, In addition, since the lan-
guage was only agreed to this after-
noon, and I feel that a legislative his.
tory accompanying the amendment Is
essential, I hope the RECORD could
remain open for a period of time ade-
quate so that the Senate could clarify
the legislative record as to exactly
what is Intended if there Is no prob-
lem.
I thank the Senator very much.
I commend my colleagues on the En-
vironment and Public Works Commit-
tee for their hard work and persever.
ance on this piece of legislation. It Is a
highly technical piece of legislation. I
tiunk we made substantial improve-
ments from where we were 6 months
ago with this. I thank all my col-
leagues.
Mr. DURENBERGER addressed the
Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Minnesota.
Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent that
the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr.
SPECTER] be added as a cosponsor to
this amendment.
-------
July 2 1984
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection. It Is so ordered.
Mr. DURENBERGER. Yesterday.
Mr. PresIdent. on a vote of something
like 72 to 19. a majority of this body
- - chose to criticize the administration.
and Indirectly the EPA for going in
the wrong direction In the area of the
environment. And I think It Is fitting
today that the committee and mem-
bers of this committee—particularly
the Senator from Rhode Island, the
Senator from Maine. who have been
leaders, the chairman of the commit-
tee, Senator STAFFORD, and the rank-
ing member, Mr. RANDOLPH. who has
been the leader In this Congress in
moving the country toward a sound
environmental policy—are moving this
particular bill. The Senator from
Idaho has wisely pointed out a couple
of potential problems while he Is
moving in a positive direction, one
being overloading the EPA with work.
I know this Is a concern of those on
this side of the aisle as It Is on the
other side of the aisle. We have tried
carefully through the area of the work
requirements, as well as in one case
the rather open-ended deadlines that
have been put in this bill, to take that
under consideration.
The second point the Senator from
Idaho makes that I think Is Impor-
tant—that I make, too, as the author
of this amendment—is that it could
u.ce some Improvement In the legisla-
tive history. I hope that In the course
of the next day or so the committee
will be together for a markup, and
that during the occasion of that
markup on another piece of legislation
all of us who have been In one way or
another Involved since November of
last year in dealing with the subject of
leaking underground storage tanks
will come equipped to that markup to
develop a piece of legislative history
that can then be added to this bill.
I thank my colleague from Idaho for
his sensitivity not only to the Issue,
the concerns that are expressed re-
garding the ground water, but for the
practicality of dealing with those
Issues, and the sources of contamina-
tion which vary as much as they do
across this wonderful land of ours.
I thank you very much for your
help.
I move the passage of the amend-
ment. Mr. President.
Mr. CHAFEE addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Rhode Island.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President. e
have had a fine explanation of this
amendment from the Senator from
Minnesota. from the Senator from
Idaho. who had some severe reserva-
tions about It, and who has worked
closely with the Senator from Minn-
sota and the EPA. We had a chance to
talk with the authorities from the
EPA on this subject. While they see
some problems with It. nonetheless
they are amenable to It going ahead.
It seems to me this Is a matter that
Is of great concern to the Nation—
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
these underground storage tanks.
They are a matter that we are going to
have to deal with sooner or later.
I had some reservations because we
gave EPA a pretty full plate here.
Anybody who studies these amend-
ments to RCRA will acknowledge
that we are making some very, very
bold steps forward. I think the Sena-
tor from Minnesota quite accurately
said that this will be the most signifi-
cant piece of environmental legislation
that we have passed this year, and
Indeed last year. We do not want to
overburden EPA so they cannot get
things done. I think the quote that
the Senator from Idaho made that
EPA has never had a deadline that it
did not fall to meet Is true. It is not be-
cause of negligence or ineptitude on
the part of EPA.
It is just that these are every, very
technical matters. They are difficult
to handle. But with the assurance we
have received and with the extended
deadlines that have been placed In this
biU. we are happy to proceed with It.
It may be that there will be some fur-
ther refinements necessary.
The Senator from Idaho mentioned
that he would like the RECORD kept
open for additional remarks or views.
The train is leaving the station. So
there is no more time for additional
views and remarks. It is our hope to
finish this in a half an hour. So if the
Senator has something he wants to
Insert in the Rzcoan. now would be
the time.
Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. Presi-
dent. if the Senator would yield, I
think the request by the Senator from
Idaho Is for a more elaborate legisla-
tive history. That does not have to
take place here this afternoon before
final passage of the bill. My suggestion
was that we consider developing that
legislative history next week when we
are engaged in the markup on the Su-
perfund. Am I correct In that?
Mr. SYMMS. The Senator from
Minnesota Is correct In that. I say to
my colleague from Rhode Island that
what I was thinking about was the
language in the text, the technical as-
pects of the amendment, and the
highly technical nature of this. If we
could finally get this—we think we
have it the way we want it, and if it Is
written into the legislative history—es-
tablished as to what our intention Is. I
certainly think we should move right
ahead with it.
Mr. CHAFEE. Fine. As far as this
side goes, the amendment Is accepta-
ble. and we congratulate the Senators
involved In It.
Mr. MITCHELL addressed the
ChaIr.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Maine.
Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. President, I
commend the Senator from Minnesota
for his lcad rship in this area, consist-
ent with his leadership in many areas
of environmental policy. As the distin-
guished Senator from Rhode Island
has just indicated, this Is a complex
S 9167
and technical area. Pursuant to the
discussions that we had within the
past hour, it Is my expectation that we
will continue to make refinements in
this area between now and the time of
the conference, so that the ultimate
product may not be Identical to that
which Is being enacted here. But it is a
very good beginning in a very difficult
area, and under those circumstances
the amendment is acceptable. -
Mr. DURENBEROER. Mr. Presi-
dent, I wonder if I might yield to the
Senator from Mississippi for a state-
ment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Mississippi.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President. I
thank the distinguished Senator from
Minnesota. I support this legislation,
and I commend the managers of the
bill, and the leadership for bringing it
to the floor.
Mr. President, I support S. 757, the
Solid Waste Disposal Act amendments.
I am pleased that this very important
legislation Is receiving consideration
by the Senate, and I commend the
leadership for bringing the bill to the
floor.
The problem of hazardous waste dis-
posal in our country Is reaching unac-
ceptable proportlon& While we have
made some progress since 1976 with
the enactment of the Resource Con-
seri’ation and Recovery Act, it Is im-
perative that we take further action
now.
In August 1983. the Environmental
Protection Agency released a report
which let us know the full extent of
the problems we face with disposal of
hazardous waste, and these problems
were worse than anticipated. What
was assumed to be the amount of haz-
ardous waste generated in the United
States was In fact four times as great
as assumed—150 million metric tons of
hazardous waste; less than 25 percent
of the 60.000 identifIed hazardous
waste generators were subject to dis-
posal regulation. The need for reau-
thorization of the act Is clear.
The legislation before us today will
strengthen and clarify the Federal
role to ensure that public health and
safety is protected from toxic or haz-
ardous contamination. The bill con-
tains new requirements on generators
of hazardous waste: establishes dead-
lines by which the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency must complete regula-
tory tasks: and stiffens criminal penal-
ties for violators.
I was one of the Senators requesting
that S. 757 be considered by the
Senate during these 3 weeks. I did
this. Mr. President. both as an expres-
sion of my strong interest In protect-
ing the environment generally
throughout the country, and for more
parochial Interests concerning the
healthy environment of my State of
Mississippi.
The Mississippi Department of Nat-
ural Resources has pending before its
Bureau of Pollution Control an appli-
-------
S 9168
cation to locate a hazardous waste dis-
posal site in Noxubee County. In my
npiy fn i, t!’IIs bill provides the needed
revisions and restrictions on hazardous
waste disposal that more fully protect
the lives and well-being of the public.
The bill provides the necessarily
strengthened framework vihlch estab-
lishes guidelines that take the “guess-
work” out of hazardous waste disposal.
If property administered, this should
prevent disastrous and tragic environ-
mental contamination,
This bill will also aid us In our ef-
forts to control mismanagement of
hazardous waste. We have Superfund,
which is a remedial solution to past
mismanagement, and is In markup
right now for Its reauthorization. Mis-
sissippi has, until recently, been lucky
enough to have only one site which
needed to call on Superfund for clean-
up. I am sad to report today that we
have another potential chemical waste
mess on our hands,
By passage of this legislation, we
take another step toward wiping out
the violators of hazardous waste dis-
posal regulations. By tightening the
monitoring of hazardous waste genera-
tors, we take preventive measures
which iil work with those remedial
measures already In place, Mississippi
will benefit from passage of this bill;
the people of the United States will
benefit from passage; and, future gen-
erations are protected from current
abuses and mistakes,
I commend the managers of 5. 757
and the members of the Committee on
Environment and Public Works for
their work in fashioning this consen-
sus environmental protection legisla-
tion. I am pleased to support its pas-
sage.
• Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I rise in
support of the amendment offered by
Senator DURENBERGER to regulate most
commercial underground storage
tanks,
According to the General Account-
ing Office (GAO] report on Federal
and State efforts to protect ground
water, published in February 21, 1984,
Michigan State officials believe that
ground water contamination is a sig-
nificant problem. An assessment of
ground water contamination In July
1982 showed that there were 441
known contamination sites in Michi-
gan, 456 suspected sites, and thou-
sands of potential sites. Of those 441
contamination sites, 171 or 38.8 per-
Cent are contaminated by petroleum
products storage, Including under-
ground gasoline storage tank leakage.
Surprisingly, fewer of these sites are
contaminated by Industrial waste than
by leaking petroleum products.
While the bill before us today ad-
dresses many problems with the cur-
rent law. it can be strengthened by ac-
cepting the Durenberger amendniei t.
Ground ater is the primary source of
drinking water for about 50 percent of
the population j Michigan. Accept-
ance of this amendment can assure
the citizens in Michigan that the Fed-
eral Government is concerned about
their ground water contamination and
will do something about it. EPA
should have the authority to require
owners and operators to monitor the
leakage in these tanks and require
proper cleanup. It is the responsible
action to take. The amendment grants
EPA wide discretion to deal with this
problem and allows the EPA to tailor
its regulations to different categories
of tanks depending on the location
and size. The amendment also gives
special consideration to small business-
es and special problems they may en-
counter with the new regulations,
I urge Senate adoption of this
worthwhile amendment..
Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. Presi-
dent, I move approval of the amend-
ment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
there further debate on the amend-
ment? If not, the question is on agree-
ing to the amendment of the Senator
from Minnesota (Mr. DURZNBERGER].
The amendment (No. 3408) was
agreed to.
Mr. CHAPEE. Mi-. President, I move
to reconsider the vote by which the
amendment was agreed to.
Mr. DURENSERGER, I move to lay
that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to.
AMENDMENT 505, 2794, 279 !, 2796, 5797, 2900.
3801. 2802, 280!, AND 2806
Mr. CHAPEL Mr. President, I see
no more Senators on the floor that
have amendments. We have some com-
mittee amendments. The Senator
from Alabama has an amendment.
Mr. President, I send amendment
Nos. 2794, 2795, 2796, 2797, 2800, 2801,
2802, 2805, and 2806 to the desk and
ask for their immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will report.
The biU clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Rhode Island, Mr.
CXA EE (for himseif. Mr. STAITOED. Mr. RAIf-
aoz.pn, and Mr. Mn’ciwuj. proposes amend-
ments numbered 2794, 2795. 2796. 2797,
2800, 2801, 2802. 2805. and 2806, en bloc.
Mr. CHAPEE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that further read-
ing of the amendments be dispensed
with. -
The PRESIDrNG OFFICER. With-
out objection, It Is so ordered.
The amendments are as follows:
AMENDMENT No. 2:94
(Purpose: To make conforming amendments
to title and short title)
AMENDMENT TO TITLE
Amend the title to read as follows:
‘To amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act
to authorize funds for fiscal years 1985.
1986. 1987, 1988. and 1989. and for other
purposes.”.
SHORT TITLE
Strike the phrase “Solid Waste Disposal
Act Amendments of 1983” each place it ap-
July 25, 1.984
pears and insert in lieu thereof “Solid
Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1984”.
AMzPmawirr No. 2795
(Purpose: To make conforming amendments
to change years and amounts of authori-
zations for appropriations)
AUTEORIZATION
Amend S. 757 by striking sections 2 and 3
and inserting in lieu thereof the follo ung.
•• 5 2. Section 2007(a) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act is amended by striking ‘and’
immediately follos ing ‘1981’, and by insert-
ing Immediately before the period at the
end thereof ‘, $70,000,000 for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 1985, and $80,000,000
per fiscal year for fiscal years ending Sep-
tember 30. 1986, September 30, 1987, Sep-
tember 30, 1988, and September 30, 1989’.
“Sac. 3. Section 3011(a) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act Is amended by striking ‘and’
immediately following ‘1981’, and by insert-
ing immediately following ‘1982’ the follow-
ing: ‘, *55.000,000 for the fIscal year 1985.
and *60,000,000 per fiscal year for fiscal
years 1986, 1987, 1988 and 1989’.”
AMENnunrr No, 2 ’198
On Page 35, line 8. strike “standards are”
and insert in lieu thereof “variation Is nec-
essary by reason of the smaller size and the
technical and managerial capability of such
generators, and is”.
AMzPnmspzrr No. 2797
(Purpose: To clarify which dioxin-contain-
ing wastes are included in the first catego-
ry of hazardous wastes to be considered by
the Administrator for land disposal limita.
lions)
On Page 39, lIne 13, insert “(Proposed
EPA Hazardous Waste Nos. P020, P021,
P022, and P023)” immediately alter “dioxin
containing hazardous wastes”.
Aiswmsury No. 2800
(Purpose: To make technical and clarifying
amendments to Section 13 regardIng
export of dangerous waste)
On page 58, line 22, insert “and the ship-
ment conforms with the terms of such
agreement” Immediately after “ifi”.
Page 69, line 10, strIke “concern” and
insert in lieu thereof “contain”,
Page 71, lIne 2, Strike “subsection” and
insert in lieu thereof “subsections (al(s)
and”.
Page 71, line 19, insert “(A)” immediately
before “without”.
Page 71, line 20, Insert “or, (B) where
there exists an international agreement be-
tween the United States and the govern-
ment of the receiving country establishing
notice, export, and enforcement procedures
for the transportation, treatment, storage,
and d:sposal of hazardous wastes, in a
manner which is not in conformance with
such agreement” inunediately after “coun-
try”,
AMENDMENT No. 2801
(Purpose To make miscellaneous technical
and clarifying amendments)
On page 33, lIne 4. insert “without
permit” immediately before the comma,
On page 46, line 10, insert “; Provided
That the Administrator “shall not be pre-
cluded from requiring” installation of a new
liner when the Administrator has reason to
“believe that any liner installed pursuant to
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
- ,o tseeurft1Wdfapeneis dae n t’erottd
- a presumption of tootrol or’ ! ck of dontroir
and ; . . . - -
“(1)-the ‘j Iudba-tflany in-
dividual. (lac o ‘ecanp”iy. as-
soclation. tbm,.91gtueI btp,aagiety, trust.
joint ventu r1eintate company, and
(WY the govenucëntot an , country or any
political aubdlvialoner agenapthereef,
“(2XA) It shall be unlawful— -
“(1) for any major energy concern or any
affiliate thereof, to acquire, directly or Indi-
rectly, by purchase, trade, or otherwise,
dfrecl or indirect ownership or control of
another major energy concern or of a do.
mestic petroleum company orof Its affiliate;
and
“(2) for any domestic petroleum company
oi any affiliate thereof, to acquire, own, or
control either directly or Indirectly any
major energy concern or Its affiliate.
“( 5) Whenever ft appears to the Attorney
General, the Federal Trade Con mL lon , or
any other aggrieved person that a major
energy concern, affiliate, or any agent
thereof, or any domestic petroleum compa-
fly, any affiliate or agent thereof has en-
gaged, is engaged, or Is about to. engage In
any acts or practices constituting a violation
of subparagraph (A). such person may bring
an action in the appropriate district court of
the United States to enjoin such acts or
practices, and upon a proper showing, a
temporary restraining order or a prelimi-
nary or permanent Injunction shall be
granted. For purposes of this paragraph,
where some on all of the assets of an ac-
quired major energy concern or domestic pe-
txoleuin company axe temporarily being
held and operated independently, pursuant
to a judicial or administrative agreement, a
violation of this paragraph does not occur
until the expiration of such temporary
agreement. Any such permanent Injunctive
relief may provide for restitution of
moneys.”.
“(C) This paragraph shall net apply’ to
any acquisition if—
‘11) the pasties to the acquisition demon.
stiate that the transaction is likely to result,-
in a material increase in new energy explo-
ration. extraction, production, or conver-
sion, and that such an Increase cannot rea-
sonably be achieved by means not pre-
scribed In subparagraph (A); or
“(2) such parties demonstrate that the
transaction Is necessary in order to prevent
one or both of the parties from having In
file a petition with the bankruptcy court or
from being declared bankrupL”,
SOLlD WA s DISPOSAIt ACT
AUTHOR3ZATIO II ’ ‘ -
DURENBERW (AND. OTHERS)
A) NDMENT NO: 2?58
My, DURENBEI%GER (for himself,
Mr. Moyzrinu,, and Mr. Liumiu,ZRO)
Submitted an amendment Intended to
be proposed by them to the bill (S.
757) to amend the Solid Waste Dispos-
al act to authorize funds for fiscal
years 1983. 1084. 1985, 1988, and 1987.
and for other purposes, as follows:
8. 757 Ia amended by adding at the end
thereof a new section as follows:
Src. . The Sate Drinking Water Act
(title XIV of the Public Health Service Act)
Is amended by adddbig a new Part? as fol.
-:
RZCVT.ATIOIt &wiDiRGaoWiD 5TORAGL JANR5
OONTAmTWO SUBSTAIWZS ovma THAV’IIAZ-
£55003 WAST5
“S 145L For the purposes of this Part.
the term—
“(1) ‘hazardous substance’ means (A) any
substance defined in Section (101X14) (A),
(B). (C) (other than hamrdous waste), (D)-
(F) of Public Law 91-510, the Comprehen-
sive Environmental Response, Compensa-
tion, and Liability Act of 1980. (3) petro-
leum. including oil or any fPaction thereof,
and (C) natural gas liquids or gas liquids:
“(2) ‘owner or operators means (A) in the
case of an underground storage tank, and
(B) In the case of any abandoned under-
ground storage tank, any person who
owned, operated, or otherwise controlled ac-
tivities at such tank immediately prior to
such abandonment;
“(3) ‘person’ means an Individual, firm.
corporation, association. partnership, con-
sortium, joint venture. commercial entity;
United States Government. State. munici-
pality, co. .n u ..lon. political subdivision of a
State. or any Interstate body:
“(4) ‘release’ means any spWlng, leaking,
emitting, discharging, escaping, leaching, or
disposing into groundwater, surface water
or subsurface soils;
“(5) ‘underground storage tank’ means a
stationary device and its connective pIping,
designed to contain an accumulation of haz-
ardous substances which Is constructed pri-
manly of nonearthen materials (e.g., wood,
concrete, steel, plastic, fibergisas) which
provide structural support and which axe
partially or wholly under the ground. This
term does not Include (I) farm or reaI v
underground storage tanks of UOG.gallam
or less capacity used for storing fuel far
noncommercial purposes or (U) under-
ground storage tanks used for storing heat-
ing oil for consumptive use on the premises
where stored.
“PRanIMIISART liOTu’ZCA 0I
“Sac. 1452, (a) Op rxoiisi. pzwsaoaouim
Siosace TAiixs.—Wtthln one hundred and
eighty days of enactment, any person who
owns or operates an underground storage
tank used for storing hazardous substances
shall notify the State or the Ath InI trator
of the existence of such tank, specifying the
age, size, type, location. and uses of such
tank and any previous releases and correc-
tire action.
“(b) NoNopERATsoleaL on ABARDONED Un-
macnouns STORAGZ TARXs.—WIthlx i one
hundred and eighty days of enactment, any
person who owned or operated an under-
ground storage tank used for storing petro-
leum, Including any fraction thereof and
naturpi gas-liquids oc gs a liquids at the time
such tank was. taken out of operation or
abandoned underground, shall notify the
8taXe.or the Administrator of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency unleas the
person knawa the tank subsequently was re-
moved from the ground) of the existence of
such tank, specifying the date taken out of
operation or abandoned, the age on the date
taken out of operation or abandoned, the
alec, type, location of the tank and the type
and quantity of substances left stored in
such tank on the date taken out of oper-
ation or abandoned.
“(C) Within ninety days of enactment, the
Administrator of the Environmental Protec-
tion Agecoy. In consultation with State and
local officials, shall Prescribe in greater
detail the form of the notice and the Infor-
motion to be Included in the notifications
under subsections(s) and b.
“(dl Within one hundred and twenty days
of enactment, the Governors of each State
shall designate the appropriate State
- -
agency or ddphment’ I enC±m.OZ
departments to receive the notifications
under subsectioza (a) and (b). The designat-
ed State agency or department shall com-
pile the notifications into a comprehensive
Inventory and submit such inventory to the
Administrator within twelve months of en-
actment.
“Ce) Any owntr or operator who knowing-
ly fails to notify the State or the Adminis-
trator of the existence of a tank they -own
or operate or owned or operated shall, upon
conviction, be fined not more than 15.000
for each tank for which notification is not
given.
“RELZAsE D!TECTION, Pazvnuyion. AND
CORRECTION RECULATIONS
“Szc. 1453. (a) Within twelve months of
enactment, the Administrator, after consul-
tation with State and local officials and op-
portunity for public comment, shall promul-
gate release detection, prevention and cor-
rection regulations for all operational tin-
derground storage tanks used for storing
hazardous substances. The Administrators
regulations shall, at a minimum, Include the
following provisions—
“(1) the Issuance of a certificate or regis-
tration to every owner and operator for
each operational underground storage tank
for which notification was received pursu-
ant to section 1452(a) and a periodic certifi-
cate or registration renewal process ii
deemed necessary by the Admfnthtrator for
an effective program. -
“C2) a requirement that every owner or
operator maintain & leak detection or Inven-
tory system ade iate to identify releases
from their underground storage tankn
“(3) a requirement that every owner or op-
erator keep adequate records of any leak de-
tection or Inventory system and report any
releases- to the Administrator (such reports
shall be available to the public); V
“(4) a requirement that every owner or op-
erator take appropriate corrective action In
response to a release from their under-
ground storage tank; -
“(5) a requirement that every owner or op-
erator comply with new underground stor-
age lank standards promulgated by the Ad-
ministrator pursuant to section 1454:
“(6) an adequate enforcement program in-
cluding a requirement for periodic inspec-
tion of underground storage tanks and
records:
“(7) a requirement that every owner or op-
erator comply with closure standards that
will ensure against any future release from
an underground storage tank being closed
or otherwise being taken out of operatlon
and
“(8) a requirement that owners and opera-
tors maintain e*Idence of financial resp .rnsl-
bility for bodily injury and property damage
to third parties caused by sudden and non-
sudden accidental occurrences arising from
operating their underground storage tank.
“(b) Any person who owns or operates an
underground storage tank used for storing a
hazardous substance and knowingly fails to
comply with the release detection, preven-
tion and correctIon regulations as promul-
gated by the Administrator or a State pro-
grain approved under Section 1456. shall
upon conviction, be subject to a fine of nor
more than $25,000 for each tank,
“(C) If after January 1, 1986. a person
knowingly deposits hazardous substances In
an underground storage tank that does not
have a Federal or State certificate or regis-
tration Issued pursuant to this Part or such
person does not assure that a tank without
a certificate or registration will not allow re-
lease of the hazardous substances deposited
in the tanks, such person shall, upon convic-
-------
C
tion.. be-subjeCt to a fine of n ’sesre than
$25,Q0G for each tank. s...: r’ ---
‘i on0LO0 ’Y Rseusa ra Pd* saw
uwaneonousu azosase 7lans -
“Sac. 145& WIthWtI $a4assd $ev-
enty days of enactment, th 1nlstrkter
shall propose snd -prOeauhg&th ’perfbflnance
standards for any widergruund ’atOrsge tank
used for storing hawdoua substances which
is installed and used alter promulgation of
such standards. Such performance stand-
ards shall include but not be limited to—
“(a) design, construction and installation
guidelines;
“(b) a prohibition of installation and use
of bare steel tanks (steel tanks not treated
to minimize corrosion) except where the Ad.
ministrator finds there is minimal danger of
corrosion:
•‘(c) a req’:trement that pressure piping
systems be equipped with leak detection sys-
tems: -
“(d) a requirement that each tank be
equipped with a leak detection system; and
“(e) a requirement to notify the adminis-
trator within thIrty days of installation of
the new tank.
..usapscTZOxs
“Sac. 1455. (a) For the purposes of devel-
oping or assisting in the development of any
regulation or enforcing the provisions of
this Part, any owner or operator of an un-
derground storage tanks used for storing
hazardous substances shall, upon request of
any officer, employer or representatIve of
the Environmental Protection Agency, duly
designated by the Administrator, or upon
request of any duly designated officer, em-
ployee or representative of a State with an
approved program, furnish information re-
ating to such tanks or contents and permit
such person at all reasonable times to have
access to. and to copy all records relating to
such tanks. For the purposes of developing
or assisting in the development of any regu-
lation or enforcing the provisions of this
Part, such officers, employees or representa-
tives are authorized—
“(1) to enter at reasonable times any se-
tablishment or other place where an under-
ground storage tank is located;
“(2) to inspect and obtain samples from
any person of any such hazardous sub-
stances.
Each such inspection shall be commenced
and completed with reasonable promptness.
“(hi Any records, reports, or information
obtained from any person under this section
shall be available to the public. -
“assyossa re azz,zsszs
“Sac. 1456. (a) If a release is detected pur.
suant to section 1453. the Administrator in
authorized to— .
“(i) issue an order or request the Attosney ’
General to commence a civil action pursu-
ant to authoritice delegated to the-Adminis-
trator under section L0 of Public Law 96-
510.and -. - “- - ‘ ‘t. c ’ - -
“(U) take respOnse adios pursuant to-au-
thorities delegated tO the Administrator
under section 104 of Public Law 96-510. if
the Administrator deems such response
action necessary to protect human health
and the environment.
“(b) Any person who knowingly violates,
or fails or refuses to comply with, an order
of the Administrator under subsection (ski)
may. in an action brought in the appropri-
ate United States district court to enforce
such order, be fined not more than $5,000
for each day in which such violation occurs
or such failure to comply continues.
“(C) If the AdminIstratOr takes action pur-
suant to subsection (aX ii). the owner or op-
erator’s liability shall be consistent with the
liability provisions under section 107 of
PublIc LovI6-51S exea$it ’that I1sbWtN
ent,to all ’ bmardous- gubatan’ -Ude
fi* .ed in seetion 145 Ita). -..- .. .
“amovas. op STATS PROGRAMS -.
“Sec. 1457. Cal Any State may submit an
underground storage tank release detection.
prevention, and correction, program for
review and approval by tize Administrator.
The State must demonstrate that the State
program meets the requirements of Section
1453(aXJi-(8) except that a periodic certifi-
cate or registration renewal requirement
may not be required as a condition for ap-
proval of a State program if the State dem-
onstrates comparable enforcement can be
achieved without such a requirement.
“(bXl) Within 90 days of the date of re-
ceipt of a proposed State program, the Ad-
ministrator shall, after notice and opportu-
nity for public comment, make a determlna-
tion whether the State’s program meets the
requirement of Section 1453(aXl)-(8).
“(2) If the Administrator determines that
the State programs meet the requirements
of Section 1453(aXl)-(8). he shall approve
the State program and the State shall have
primary enforcement responsibility with re-
spect to requirements related to control of
underground storage tanks used to store
hazardous substances.
“(C) Whenever the Administrator deter-
mines after public hearing that a State is
not administering and enforcing a program
authorized under this Part in accordance
with the requirement of Section 1453(a)(1)-
(8), he shall so notify the State. and, if ap-
propriate corrective action is not taken
within a reasonable time, not to exceed
ninety days, the Administrator shall with-
draw authorization of such program and
reestablish enforcement of Federal regula-
tions pursuant to this Part
“FLDERAI. F&CIUTI
“Sac. 1458. Each department. agency, and
instrumentality of the executive. legislative. .
and Judicial branches of the Federal Gov-
ernment having jurisdiction over any under-
ground storage tank as defined in subsection
1451(5) and used for the purpose of storing
hazardous substances as defined in subsec-
tIon 1451(1). shall be subject to and comply
with all Federal, State. interstate, and local
requirements, both substantive and proce-
dural respecting construction. installation.
operation, testing, corrective action, remov-
al, and closure of underground storage
tanks in the same manner, and to the sante
extent, as any person is subject to such. re-
quirements. including payment of reason-
able service charges.
“s’runv or msrr uwnazcaouico 5TORAO!
- - - fAsecs
“Sec. 1450. Not later than twenty four
months after the date of enactment, the Ad-
ministrator of the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency shall conduct a study regarding
the underground storage tanks exempted in
Section 1451(5)(i) and (U). Such study shall
include estimates of the number and loca-
tion of such tanks and an analysis of the
extent to which there may be releases or
threatened releases from such tanks into
the etwironment. Upon completion of the
study, the Administrator shall submit a
report to the President and to the Congress
containing the results of the study and rec
ommendations respecting whether not such
tanks should be subject to the preceding
provisions of this Part.
“Av’ruOiuzAT!Ol’ Or APPROPRIATIO 1IS
“Sac. 1460. There is authorized to be ap.
propriated such sums as may be necessary
to carry out the provisions of this Part for
each of the fiscal years 1985. 1988, 1987 and
198&
dent. ‘It-a
parent that pollutIon -of the ’NatlOn’
ground waters is & serious and growing
problem. Although ground water re-
mains an essentially pristine and tin-
contaminated resource throughout
most of the United States, pollution Is
increasing, especially in urban areas.
The bill which I am introducing today
attempts to deal with one major
source of contamination, underground
storage tanks.
Gasoline is one of the most common
causes of ground water pollution, and
much of this may be attributed to un-
derground storage tanks which are
leaking. For example. Maine officials
have estimated that of the roughly
5.000 actIve service stations in that
State, about 25 percent have leaking
storage tanks. While Maine is In only
the first stages of responding to this
problem, other States such as Califor-
nia and florida,- have already acted to
protect ground waters from leaking
storage tanks.
Experts in. the field have estimated
that there are between 75.000 and
100,000 leakIng ,tanks In the country,
contamination, from these leaking
tanks Is overwhelming. A leak ”of only
1 gallon a day from a single service
station Is enough to pollute the,water
of a 50,000-person community to 100
parts per billion, according to the En-
vironmental Protection Agency.
The proposal which I am introduc-
ing Is drafted as an amendment to S.
757, whIch is the compreh ’ensive reau-
thorization of the Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act. This proposal
would amend the Safe Drinking Water
Act by adding a new part F to dea1 , .. . L
with leaking underground storage
tanks. A tank is defined so that small-
er containers—those of 1,100 gallons
or less—are excluded from the pro-
gram, as are those tanks in whlch ,J aa,
heating oil is stored for consumptlv#’ ”
use on the premises. Although such
tanks are not covered by the regula-
tory program of this proposal, the
amendment does require the Environ-
mental Protection Agency to conduct
a study of the hazards created by such
tanks.
The bill also requires that an lnven-
tory of both oper.ational and aban.tt
doned storage tanks be prepared so
that we can gage more accurately the
full extent of the problem facing us.
Tanks which are in operation would be
required to register with the State in
which they are located, Each tank’
owner or operator would be required -
to maintain either a leak detection
system or an inventory system ade-
quate to identify releases. Finally, the
proposal would establish technology- jui
standards for new underground stor-,-rss . .nJ ”
age tanks, First, the Installation of the
common but less adequate tanks— •
those made of bare steel—would be lair,.
prohibited unless the hydrogeology of
the area is such that there Is a mini-
mal danger of corrosion. Second, all
-------
tanks Installed after the effentivedat.s
would be requked to meet pe’forni-
auce standards developed by the Envi.
ronmental Protection .Age!my. At the
very least. thesq atandarth must re-
quire that tanks nd prenaure piping
systems be eQu1pped with leak detec-
pn systems. -‘ -
( Mr. President, It Is my expectation
that this program will be run by the
State governments with. very little
LFederal Involvement. The amendment
(is designed to assure that new tanks
are built and installed as they should
Fbe and that old tanks are operated and
(mamtained so that. the possibility of
j leaks is mlnImi, cL Leaks which do
cur should be detected quickly so
that the chance of contamination is
w-
I hope that this proposal can be of-
fered as an amendment to the RCRA
reauthorization when S. 757 Is brought
to the Senate floor. Kowever, to assure
that those with an interest in tills pro-
posal have the opportunity to com-
ment on the bill, the Committee on
Environment and Public Works will
hold a hearing on March I. L hope
that at this hearing we can identify
and correct whatever imperfections
may remain. in thfs proposal so that it
can be offered and adopted In the near
ftture.
Mr. Prestdent, I would ask unani-
mous consent that a study by the Cbn-
gressional Research Service on under-
ground storage tanks be printed in the
RECORD.
There being no ebjeetion. the study
was ordered to be printed In the
RECORD, &S follows:
LEADING UIThesGWOwNDSTOItAGE TaNwa: A
PovesTiAs. WThmaWEWTM. PitomaM
(By Dosald V. PelIctseo Analyst iii Envl-
roninental Poilcy. ivVonseent and Natu-
ral Resoumes Piskay DIvisi . , siaary 11.
1984)
This report on leattog flde uw ,d SlOT’
age tanks examines the potential threat to
groundwater, the lack of understandiog 08
the extant of the problem, the existing reg-
ulatory controls for storage tanks, and the
issues as octated with the problem.
sUuIXA SY
An estImated 14 miUlan umdergroand
tanks tn the United States store gasoline..
An unknown additional number. of tanks
store a veslely td geüvlema prodecto. ether
cheranab,, • Of the 1.4
miulten i...J .r ,d storing gaao ne.
aopr $y 86 i L are made al steel
with no ennndaa pr sctan sn re
buried over 20 years ago. Although few data
exist, some petroleum industry experts esti-
mate that ?5.000-t00.000 of these tinder.
grotmd gasoline tanks may eurrentPy be
leaking tk ceuttoras into the gretmd and
groundwaser stsspues. and perhaps r to
350,900 tanks may be leaking within the
nezi five ysar Cmwess has identilied
groundwater coatse &nation as a major
emerging issue, particularly besause half of
the United. States population depends, pri-
marily on . , dwater for drinking water.
Undergroond storage tanks are seldom
reguilted. At preseni, Pbdesai regulatinn of
storage t s essr only above-grotin
Lanka cenlajakig chemical waston List a
Lank Is leaking, the Federal Oovernment
OI tl t Supesfund aflth86lty te sa1
oo.clsea ,e aipul if ft. Involves petroiesew
products. Most States have little Idea of the
number of storage tanks within their bound-
aries. and although the lnstallst.ion of stor-
age tanks is regulated under some local
codes (mainly for fire protectton). this prac-
lice Is not consistent. Most Industry stand.
ards for storage tanks relate solely to their
constriction; few industry standards exist
for preventing or detecting leakage from un-
derground tanks. While several major petro-
leum companies sponsor spill prevention or
tank replacement programs, these programs
vary from company to company, and only
an estImated 25-35 percent of the gasoline
tanks hr the United States are owned by
major oil companies: far more tanks are
owned by gasoline distributors or Independ-
ent companies.
The Senate Environment and Public
Works Cotrmrlttee recently held hearings in-
vestigating the problem of underground
storage tanks. The issues Include the need
to better understand the extent of the un-
derground tank leakage problem, and
whether regulatIon’ of underground tanks Is
needed.
OVinVTEW OP IZA !NO U1ThinGRO END STORAGS
TAJIZ5 -
Groundwater eontam aatlon Is an emerg-
ing environmental issue In the U.S. Con-
gress. Because over 116 mIllion people—hall
of the population—depend on groundwater
for their primary source of drinking water,
many members are concerned about the
protection of this valuable resource from
contaminatIon.. Furthermore, contamination
of gronodwater can result in substantial 5-
irancial losses foe those deprived of their po-
table water supply, rising difficult questions
about liability and redress.
Further information on groundwater can
be obtained iii IS 83091—Oroundwater Con-
tamirintion and Protection.’
In its assessment of the extent of ground-
water contaisinathwa Ihe U.S. Envlronmen-
1*1 ProtectiOn Agency (EPA) Identified the
moat frequent contaminants of groundwater
W spills or tank teaks to be organic chemi-
cals. end especially hydrocarbons such as
gsaollne’ Several agency experts believe
that one 01 the major sources of ground-
water contamination is from leaking under-
ground storage tanks and pipelines. In fact.
an Incre ig namber of incidents of under-
ground tark leakage are being reported:’
tlirdergrosnd storage tanks owned by the
on Company were found In 1978 to be
leaking gasottne at a service station in East
Meadow, N.Y. An estimated 30,000 gallons
of gasoline leaked into groundwater Sup-
plies, causing odor and safety problems for
2 ’l families living In 25 homes. Exxon subse-
ently bought 27 or the homes at SC per-
cent of their market value and settled With
two others, who remained, for $14,000 each.
An Exxon summary saId 21 of the faznDiea
She aceeptod. liability settlements of $8,000
per adett and $3,000 per child. With some
suits st pending. Exxon’s total costs to
date are estlinatecf to be between U million
and $10 minion.
A gasoline teak that resulted In a manhole
cower being blown of f was traced in 1980 to
a Chevron station In the Northglenn suburb
of Denver, Coh. A Federal court convicted
the company in Jbne 1981, forcing Chevron
to purchase 41 of the homes In the affluent
neighborhood at 2.2 times their appraised
value. Estimated losses to Chevron are in
the area of 10 mllllen.
In Dov.r’Walpele, Mass., 23 prIvate wells,
I in Dover sad 22 in Walpole. were found I.e
be contkml.mted with gasoline in 1961. The
responsible party. Texaco, has provided the
residents with bottled water since then LII.
table water use. Negoui ec ’) ,
going .wIlh , iert ts esIead . a’ town
water line £roeaWals.- -, ,
In Ito growing uadeistandlngi 01 ground-
water contamination. Congress has also
sought to learn more about leaking under.
ground storage tanks and whether there is a
need for regulating them, On November 29.
1983, the Subcommittee on Toxic Sub-
stances and Environmental Oversight of the
Senate Environment and Public Works
Committe, began hearings on groundwater
contamination. Asked about underground
storage tanks by Subcommittee Chairman
David F. Durenberger (R,.Mljm,). EPA off I.
daIs acknowledged the problem and pointed
out the lack of regulation., in existence
under which the agency could deal with the
problem.
irtent of underground storizge tank Leakage
Underground storage tanks are used for
the storage of petroleum products, other -
chemical products, and waste liquids. Al-
though few estimates exist on the number
of underground storage tanks used for all
purposes, experta believe that there are over
1.4 mIllion gasoline storage tanks buried un-
derground, not including abandoned gaso-
line tanks. An unknown number of active
and abandoned tanks. store chemicals and
chemical wastes. Of the 1.4 millIon gasoline
tanks, an estimated 1.2 millIon are made of
steel with little or no corrosion protection,
loss than 25.000 are steel tanks cathodically
protected against con lon . and about
100.000 are tanks made from fiberglass.’
Some petroleum industry experts estimate
that betWeen 75.000 and 100,000 of the tm-
protected steel Lanka are currently leaking,
and perhaps up to 350,000 will be leaking
within the next fIve years.’
Several States are actively assessing the
threat to groundwater by underground stor-
age tnaks. The State of New York has esti-
mated that 16.000 (19 percent) of Its 83,000
active underground gasoline tanks are leak-
Inst and that another 28,000 tanks may have
been abandoned during the past 10 years.
The State of Maine estimates that 25 per
cant of Its 1.600 retail gasoline Outlets have
underground tanks that, are leaking a total
of some 11 millIon gallons yearly.’
The State of Michigan, believed by many
to have one of the, best groundwater protec
tion programs In the country, has been in-
vestigating gasoline contaminatIon for some
time. One State survey found that at least
21 percent of 268 known groundwater con-
tamination incidents Involved petroleum
product leakage from underground tanks.’
Another Stale of Michigan survey showed
that pollution of soils and groundwater by
petroleum fuels from underground storage
was reported 390 tImes awing 197 -79.
Nearly 35 percent of these incidents In-
volved leakage from sndergrowid tanks or
pipelines. One leak caused over 60,000 gal-
lons of gasoline to enter the groundwater.’
W7 1g wrdergrnwid tanks may Leak
Undergrcano tanks and pipelines may
begin to iea as a result at external or Inter-
nal corrosion (particularly In the case of un-
protected steel tanks), or physicaj breakage,
such as punctures or cracks (especi ljy In f I-
berglazs tanks). By far the biggest potential
for leakage occurs with aging, unprotected
steel tsnks In the Great Lakes region, a
typical tank may begin to leak wIthin 7
years of installatlon conversely, in an arid,
non-corrosive region such as Alixons. a tank
may remain Intact for well over 30 years. Al-
though data are scanty, experts estimate a
typical steel tank’s life expectancy to be
out 15-80 yesee.”
IUT IIECORD — rA B r” i
-------
To ose storm lank resistance to eorre-
alms. tha 8 l Tank Zastitute developed a
pre-engineered. cathodically protected steel
. ge tank system a8out 15 yeaza ago. Ba
slcafly. corrosion is prevented Intheae lanka
because magaesiumjg electrically bonded’to
the tank. so the magnesium corrodes in-
stead of the steel. The 8IeeL Tank Institute
claims this. since 19w. over 11.000 of these
tanks have been Installed without a single
reported case of leakage.” Some petroleum
industry experts note. however, that such
tanks are not protected from corrosion from
within.”
Another corrosion protection system used
in Steel tanks involves Impressed current
techniques. Basically, the system uses an
electrical cureil around the tank to reverse
corrosion. One problem to using both types
of cathodic protection systems Is they re-
quIre maintenance to ensure that the elec-
trical charge Is working: another Is that the
wires leading to the tanks may break or be
accldenuy cut,
Ftberg!am storage tanks are apparently
the most popular type of tank because they
are essentially corrosion-proof and require
hitle inaincermnce. In fact, several of the
major petroLeum companies, such as Exxon.
SbeU, and l’bxaco. have programs to replace
their steel tanks with fiberglass ones.” Ft.
bergiass tanks, however, are subject to fall’
ure. They can crack if improperly Installed,
and an EPA report states 4liat documented
cases of tank leakage hav occurred as a
result of certain aIcohol-bl nd gasolines
weakening the polyester resins iii the fiber.
glass.” One petroleum company study
found no damage to fiberglass tanks filled
with alcohol-based gasolines for six
months.”
hazards of gasoline contamtnailon of
ground water
Gasoline is a refined product of crude oil
and contains several hydrocarbons and
often a variety of additive chemicals. Typi-
cal contents of gascilne include benzene. to-
luene. and xylene. and additives such as eth.
ylene dibromide, tetramethyllead. and eth’
lene dlchloride. Benzene and ethylene dibro.
nude are suspected carcinogens, and other
components may cause a variety of toxic ef.
fects; tetramethyllead, for example. is ex-
tremely toxic by any acute route of expo-
sure.
Being less dense than water, gasoline that
contaminates ground water will float on top
of the water table. Even at small concentra.
lions of a few parts per million, some people
can smell or taste Its presence in water;
while this level of gasoline does not seem to
be toxic, it nevertheless makes the water
containing It objectionable as a drinking
water supply. Higher concentrations may
become leefi and when concentrations
reach levels of s.rs 10,000 parts per mU-
lion in the air, the gasoline reaches an ex
plosive threshold.
Preventing underground storage tank
leakage
To prevent leakage, gosoline tank bwners
generally bare three optIons: (I) replace ex-
isting unprotected steel tanks with fiber-
glass tanks or cathodically protected steel
tanks; (2) retrofIt existing steel tanks with
cathcdlc protection: or (3) apply an Internal
lining to existing tanks. Reportedly. in most
cases, tank owners decide to continue to use
the existing steel tanks and gamble that
they either will not leak, or If a leak devel-
ops that it will be detected before a signifi.
cant amount of product is lost.”
Some leak detection devices are available;
however, they usually are effective only at
detecting leaks in pressure piping systems.
Industry’ reconnuends the use of daily in.
ventoly control as a leak detection proce-
dune, bwt.fta.e1fe v s larlledbed aInse-
cannot detect all amail’lenk. Smalk-leW.
can mi gplfy into large psob an under.
gouiwi tank leaking two dropslsecosid will
release Li gallons/day, or 38 gallons!
month; a tank leaking a tt .buch. stream will
release 931 g..limteiday. or 21,931 gallons!
month. -
Only about 25-35 percent of the under-
ground gasolme storage tanks in. the United
States are owned by the major oil compa-
nies; the rest are owned by gasoline distribu-
tors. independent service station owners,
and businesses (such as those owning deliv-
ery trucks that require on-site gasoline
pumpe. The major oil companies generally
require dealers and employees to maintain
accurate, daily inventory controls, but such
controls may not be exercised by all tank
owners. Some of the major companies also
have leak or spill response programs to re-
spond quickly to tank problems; for Inde-
pendent owners, such programs may not be
financially feasible.IT
Many of the major oil companies are cur-
rently replacing all of their unprotected
steel tanks with fiberglas or cathodically
protected steel tanks. Again, smaller compa-
nies may or may not even be In a position to
know If their tanks are leaking, let alone be
able to afford total tank replacement. Any
tank owner must bear substantial costs, at
times in excess of $70,000. to replace tanks
and pipelines at just one service station.”
For a large oil company owning thousanØs
of tanks, the chances of leaks occurring are
fairly high; for the small owner who owns
only a few tanks, the odds are much better,
better to the point that It may be worth the
gamble not to replace underground storage
tanks. ThIs choice, however. may backfire:
In cases of ground water contamination by
gasoline service stations, total liability for
the owner has run over Si million in fines
and cleanup coats; legal costa for Individual
lawsuits or victim damage awards may push
a tank owner’s liability up even further.”
REGULATION 0? UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS
Federal regulation of underground storage
tanks
Although scanty, the Federal regulations
that apply to storage tanks sometimes dif-
ferentiate between above-ground and under-
ground tanks. As far as the Federal Govern-
ment is concerned, for purposes of environ-
mental regulation the contents of storage
tanks may be categorized as either chemi-
cals or chemical wastes. Because it is not a
waste, gasoline could only be classified as a
chemical: in any case, no specific require-
ments exist for gasoline.
U a storage tank contains chemicals, Its
usage could be regulated under the Toxic
Substances Control Act, specifically under
Section 6 .” This section gIves the EPA ad-
ministrator the authority to regulate the
handling or use of a chemical when neces-
sary to prevent an unreasonable risk. Al-
though EPA has not currently regulated
chemical storage tanks, an agency task force
Is studying the possibility of usIng the Toxic
Substances Control Act to set standards for
tank construction and to require monitoring
for detection of leaks. Such regulation is ex-
pected to be delayed for at least two years
while the agency compiles further informa-
tion on the extent of the problem.”
If a storage tank contains hazardous
wastes, EPA can regulate it under the Re-
source Conservation and Recovery Act regu-
lations for hazardous waste facilities.”
Under the interim status requirements
(Subpart J), all facilities using tanks to
treat or store hazardous wastes must insure
that the tanks do not leak, overflow, or rup-
ture, and that they are inspected periodical-
ly.” Reactive or ignitable wastes may only
mi g — ‘- se*
by SectIon- 3004 at lhe . der to
tanks treating or storing haser or wastes,
However, the reqairement, of &ISpert J
apply only to above auu4 tanks not to
underground tanks,”
If a storage tank containing thendeals or
hazardous wastes begins to leak. EPA can
respond to the problem under toe Coespre-
hesisive Envtronmz uta1 Response, Compen-
sation, and Liability Act (‘SoperfUnd”).
However, the Superfund law does not au-
thorize EPA to respond to releases of petro-
leum products.” At the time of the Acts
passage, several members wanted to Include
petroleum product spills in the Seperlund
Act, but the possibility that a prolonged
debate would prevent enactment before the
end of the Congress led these members to
agree to the exclusion; they intended to pro-
pose a petroleum product superfund at a
later time, but such a bill has yet to appear.
State Regal all eu of Underground Storage
Tanks
Few State laws or regulations are directed
toward prevention of leakage and ground-
water contamination by naderground stor-
age tanks. In several cases, the laws or regu-
lations refer mainly to the need for prevenL-
log fire or explosion hazards by the con-
tents within the tanks. At present, however.
several States and local governments are
moving to address the problem of leaking
underground storage tanks, an newer laws
and regulations are being proposest
State laws applying to underground stor-
age tanks have been passed In California,
Maryland, Michigan. and New York.” The
States of Florida and Connectlent-are con-
sidering regulations, and many county and
local authorities, such as In Suffolk County,
NY., Barnstable County. Mass., and Santa
Clara County. Cal.. have passed Ordinances
regulating underground storage tanks.””
Other authorities, such as the Los Angeles
Region of the California Regional Water
Quality Control Board. are currently inves.
tigating the number of leaking tanks within
their jurisdictions as a basis for decisions on
regulation.”
Other Regulation of Underground Storage
Tanks
Several Industry organizations have rec-
ommended practices or procedures that
relate to underground storage tank iristalla-
lion or use, Most national fire code writing
associations specify installation procedures
and requirements for corrosion protection,
Underwriters Laboratories (UL 58) is the
standard for fabrication of underground
steel tanks. The Steel Tank Institute has
certain requirements with respect to the ca-
thodic protectIon of steel tanks. Fiberglass
storage tanks are buft to performance
standards from Underwriters Laboratories
(UL 1316) and front the American Society
for Testing and Materials (B40 1). The
American Petroleum Institute has issued re-
ports on the installation of underground
storage tanks, inventory control, cathodic
protection of tanks, and treatment tech-
niques for gssoline-contsznlnated ground-
water. ’°
Several of the major’ oil companies are
moving to replace their unprotected steel
underground storage tanks and to be in a
position to respond quickly to spills and
leaks. Exxon Company, for example, claims
to have spent over $100 million sinee 1979 to
replace steel underground stora_ge tanks,
and the company expects to have replaced
all of Its old tanks by 1986: Chevron Is in-
volved in a five-year, $105 million replace-
ment progrsnL” Some companies are ex-
perimenting with added protection against
NGRESS N1 CQRD’ 1EWXTh -
-------
- .: .;S2 W :.- -
zoundvater centa Ii k froce- under-
pound g r g tank leakage by Installing
secondary containment tems around un-
derground -
Most reguIatte iemdbp the-State. that
pertain to undsrpound gge tanks have
to do with , v i .t nç bes or- explosions.
Some 34 8tatea aNde by theJfatioual Fire
Protection AssadaUofl f1maueabIe and com-
bustible liquids code - (NPPA 30). several
Western States follow the Uniform Fire
Code for flammable and combustible liquids
(Article 79. SectIon 70.603). and some South.
ens States used the fire prevention codes
prescribed by the Building Officials and
Code Administrators International (BOCA).
local ordinances In States. including Mary.
land. Pennsylvania. Illinois, Kansas, nd
Ohio, reqwre periodic tank testhsg for
leaks.”
ISSUES REGARDING LEAKING UNDanOROUND
STORAGI TANKS
What Is the ezte’il of leaking wlderproiznd
storage tanks?
Although little information exists with re-
spect to the number of underground storage
tanks, some petroleum industry experts
speculate that 75,000-100.000 of the estimat-
ed 1.4 million tanks containing gasoline may
currently be leaking into potable ground-
water supplies, indicating a potential threat
to public health and the environment The
above estimates pertain only to gasoline
tanks; a further area of concern is that few
data are available for underground chemical
or chemical waste storage tanks or for un-
derground storage tanks that have been
abandoned.
The concern for leaking underground
storage tanks is further complicated by lack
of sufficient knowledge to predict when
tanks may leak. Even when tank owners
practice accurate inventory control over the
quantities of the fluids in their tanks as an
early warning tool against leakage. in many
cases they cannot determine the loss of
amall amounts.
Several Federal. State, and local agencies
are now beginning to assess the extent on
underground tank leakage by compiling in ’
rentories of the number of tanks in their iii-
risd ctioim, but this activity is expected to
take several years. In the meantime, many
underground tanks will presumably contin-
ue to leak, and most will presumably be un-
regulated.
Should underground storage tanks be
regulated to prevent leakage?
Few laws under any authority exist spe-
elf ically regulating underground storage
tanks. The Federal Government only regu-
lates above-ground storage tanks that con-
tain chemical wastes, and can routinely re-
spond only to chemical or chemica waste
i ,pills that do not involve petroleum prod-
ucts. The tank storage of one of the most
common groundwater contamInants—gaso-
line—Is unregulated because it is not-a waste
product (and thus not under the authority
of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act), and spills of the fuel cannot be cleaned
up under the Superfund law because It Is a
petroleum product. Fewer than a dozen
States have underground storage tank laws
or regulations, and probably few local codes
exist for storage tanks as welL
The petroleum Industry is well aware of
the potential liability leaking storage tanks
may Impose. Although most of th. major oU
companies have spill response plans and
tank replacement programs, they control
only 25-35 percent of all the underground
storage tanks In the United States. The ma
jorlty of storage tanks in use or abandoned
are owned by independent businesses that
may be unaware that their tanks are leak-
tog, or do — 1 have the finances to replace
tanks before they leak.
EPA Is currently moving to address the
problem of leaking underground storage
tanks as part of its pending groundwater
strategy. Those pressing the action see regu-
lations of non-waste underground storage
tanks under Section 6 of the Toxic Sub-
stances Control Act as offering a significant
step toward removing the environmental
threat of leaking underground storage
tanks. Further regulatory actions may in-
clude the development of specifications for
tank testing, Installation procedures, Inven-
tory collection, and splU cleanup actions.
Opposition Is likely to come from those
seeing such regulation as another burden on
small businesses, undertaken without con-
clusive evidence of a public health threat
Finally, sonic consideration might be
given to developing a system for compensat-
ing victims of leaking underground storage
tanks. People have been deprived of their
drinking water supplies because of ground-
water contamination. Because the contami-
nation sources are often difficult or impossi-
ble to detect, affected parties may face sub-
stantlal losses in terms of property values.
FOOTNOTEs
‘U.S. Ubmzry of Congress. Congressional Re-
search Service, Groundwater Contamination and
Protection, by Donald V. Feliclano (continuously
updated). Issue Brief 83091.
‘U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The
Report to Congress: Waste Disposal Practices and
Their Effect, on Ground Water. Office of Water
Supply and Office of Solid Waste Management Pro-
grams. January 1917 WashIngton. 1077 p 421.
‘Shaner. J Richard. How Non-Detection Can
Cost You: The Tank teak Mess. National Petro-
leum News. vol. 74, July i98k 36-40.
‘Personal communication with Frederick Kill.
mar, Kallinar A soclates, Great Fails, Va., January
5. 1984.
Shaner. How Non’Detectlon Can Cost You, p.
37
‘U.S Environmental Protection Agency, Storage
Tank Fact Sheet (dm111. Office of Drinking Water.
December 5. 1983 WashIngton, 1983 3 p.
TMIcflIgan Department of Natural Resources.
Study on the Underground Storage of Gasoline.
Water Quality DIvision. September 1981. p. Ii.
‘Ml. higan Department of Natural Resources,
Study on the Underground Storage of Gasoline. p.
11.
‘Larmn. Dan. Subsurface Strategies Super Serv-
ice Station, vol. 107. February 1993 p 17.
‘°Per.onai communication with Frederick Kill-
mar, Killmat Associates, Oreat Falls, Vs.. January
5. 1984.
“Steel Tank institute. A Specifier’s OuIde to Un-
derground Storage Systems. 1983 advertisement in
several --g- ’reu. Steel Tank Institute, North-
brook. Ill.
“Personal communication with Frederick Kill.
mar, Klllznar Associates, Great Falls. Vs.. January
5, 1984.
“Shansr, Row Non-Detection Can Coat You, p.
37.
“US. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
I. Underground Gasoline Storage T ,na Leaks and
Their Impac t s on Drinking Water Supplies. Pre-
pared by David Chlm. David A. Pierre, and Jerome
J. Healy, Water Management Divlslo . October 25.
1983, Boston. Mass.. p 2.
“Compatibility of Fiberglass with Fuels Contain-
ing Oxygenates. Oxygenated Fuel, Technical Suite-
tin. No. 8208. August 1982. Arco Chemical Compa-
ny. Philadelphia, Pa.. and Houston, TeE. 15 p.
“Personal communication with Frederick Kill-
mar. iCillnuar Associates, Great Fails. Vs.. January
5. 1984.
“Ibid.
“Ibid.
“Ibid.
“P L 94-469.
“Regulation of Underground Storage Tanks Al
Least Two Year. Away. EPA Official, Say. Environ-
ment Reporter, December 23. 1983: 1472.
“P 1. 94-500.
“40 C PR. 265.190.
“40C.PR 264.190(b).
“FL 96-510. SubsectIon 101(14).
“Personal communication with Frederick Kill-
mar. IClllmar Aociates, Great Fails. Va., January
5,1984. -
FI ua Z9?IS84’
“Michigan DepsrinieM .aI Nsiuraj Reasurcis,
Study on the UnJ , .. . , , .,ud Storage ci Gasoline, p.
10 9- is a.
“Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors. An
Ordinance to Add Chapter IX cCommenclng with
Section 311-301.01) to Division 311 of the Santa
Clara County Ordinance Code. Relating to Hazard-
ous Materlala Storage PermiL November iS. 1983.
Santa Clara County. Calif., 1983.
“California Regional Water Quality Control
Board. Staff Report to the Board on the Problem
of Underground Tank Leaks In the Los Angeles
Region. Prepared by the Los Angeles Region staff.
May 32. 1983. Los Angeles, CalIf.. 1983.
“Personal communication with Frederick Kill-
mar. KJlllnar Associates. Great Falls, Va.. January
5. 1984.
“60 MInutes. Check the Witer. December 11
1988. CBS New.. New York, N.Y.
“Larson. Subsurface Strategies, p.60.
“Personal communication with Frederick Kill.
mar. KJllmar Associates, Great Falls, va,, Januasy
5, 1984.
“ Ibid S
EXPORT ADMINISTRATION ACT
BRADLEY AMENDMENT NO. 2759
Mr. BRADLEY proposed an amend-
ment to the bill S. 979, supra. as fol-
lows:
On page 53, alter lineS, add the followlnr
AUTHORIZATION FOR CUSTOMS SDt VICE
Szc. !. (a) There are authorized to be ap.
proprlated to the United States Customs
Service. Department of the Treasury, to
carry out the purposes of the Export Ad.
ministration Act of 1979 912.000.000 for.
each of the fiscal years 1984 and 1985.
(b) The Commissioner of Customs shall
notify the Committee on Finance of the
Senate and the Committee on Ways and
Means of the House of Representatives at
least 90 days prior to talking any action
which would— -
(1) result In a significant reduction in
force of employees other than by means of
attrition.
(2) eliminate or relocate any office of the
United States Customs Service,
(3) elimInate any port of entry.
(4) reduce the number of employees as-
signed to any office of the United States
Customs Service or any port of entry, or
(5) reclassify or reassign employees of the
United States Customs Service Irons tradi-
tional commercial functions.
JOHNSTON (AND Mgl’ZENBAUM)
AMENDMENT NO. 2760
Mr. JOHNSTON (for himself and
Mr. MEIZENBAUM) proposed an amend-
ment to the bill S. 979, supra, as fol-
lows:
At the appropriate place in the bill insert
the following:
“Sec. . The Mineral Lands Leasing Act
of 1920. as amended, (30 U.S.C. 181 et. sec.)
is further amended by inserting a new sec-
tion as follows:
‘L1MIT TION on AUTHoRITY WITH RESPECT TO
MERGES PARTIES
‘Sxc. 43. Gmeca4u. PRrnnslTIoN.—Not-
withstandIng any other provision of this
Act, the Secretary Is prohibited from issuing
any lease or granting any right-of-way
under the provisions of this Act to any
person who Is subject to the provisions of
this Section.
‘(a) APpucAsxLri-T.—The provisions of
this section shall apply to any person—
“(1) who Is a party to a merger consum-
mated after February 21, 1984. and prior to
- CONGRESSIONAL RECORDLZ2SENATE
-------
S 2194
10. TarIffs and import quotas, and matters
iated thereto.
1. Transportation of dutiable goods,
• S S S
Rut.s XXV I
COMMfl’r PROCEDUR!
2. Each committee shall adopt rules (not
inconsistent with the Rules of the Senate)
governing the procedure of such committee.
The rules of each committee shall be pub.
lished in the Congressional Record not later
than March 1 of each year. except that if
any such committee is established on or
after February 1 of a year. the rules of that
committee during the year of establishment
shall be published in the Congressional
Record not later than sixty days after such
establishment. An amendment to the rules
of any such committee shall be published in
the Congressional Record not later than
thirty days after the adoption of such
amendment. If the Congressional Record Is
not published on the last day of any period
referred to above, such period shall be ex-
tended untU the first day thereafter on
which It is published.
• S S S S
L (a) Notwithstanding any other provision
of the rules, when the Senate is in session,
no committee of the Senate or any subcom-
mittee thereof may meet, without special
leave, after the conclusion of the first two
hours after the meeting of the Senate com-
menced and in no case after two o’clock
posimeridian unless consent therefor has
been obtained from the majority leader and
the minority leader (or in the event of the
absence of either of such leaders, from his
designee). The prohibition contained in the
- eceding sentence shall not apply to the
‘unittee on Appropriations or the Corn-
ee on the Budget. The majority leader
his designee shall announce to the
tate whenever consent has been given
under this subparagraph and shall state the
time and place of such meeting. The right
to make such announcement of consent
shall have the same priority as the filing of
a cloture motion.
(b) Each meeting of a committee, or any
subcommittee thereof, Including meetings
to conduct hearings, shall be open to the
public, except that a meeting or series of
meetings by a committee or a subcommittee
thereof on the same subject for a period of
no more than fourteen calendar days may
be closed to the public on a motion made
and seconded to go into closed session to dis-
cuss only whether the matters enumerated
in paragraphs (1) through (6) would require
the meeting to be closed, followed Immedi-
ately by a record vote In open session by a
majority of the mem ers of the committee
q subcommittee when it is determined that
the matters to be discussed or the testimony
to be taken at such meeting or meetings—
(1) wtU disclose matters necessary to be
kept secret in the Interests of national de-
fense or the confidential conduct of the for-
eign relations of the United States;
(2) will relate solely to matters of commit-
tee staff personnel or internal staff manage-
ment or procedure:
(3) will tend to charge an individual with
crime or misconduct. to disgrace or Injure
the professional standing of an Individual.
or otherwise to expose an individual to
public contempt or obloquy, or will repre-
sent a clearly unwarranted invasion of the
wacy of an individual:
will disclose the identity of any Inform-
r law enforcement agent or will disclose
/ information relating to the investiga-
n or prosecution of a criminal offense
is required to be kept secret in the in-
terests of effective law enforcement.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
(5) will disclose Information relating to
the trade secrets of financial or commercial
information pertaining specifically to a
given person if—
(A) an Act of Congress requires the Infor-
mation to be kept confidential by Govern-
ment of ficers and employees; or
(B) the information has been obtained by
the Government on a confidential basis.
other than through an application by such
person for a specific Government financial
or other benefit, and is required to be kept
secret in order to prevent undue Injury to
the competitive position of such person: or
(6) may divulge matters required to be
kept confidential under other provisions of
law or Government regulations.
Cc) Whenever any hearing conducted by
any such committee or subcommittee Is
open to the public, that hearing may be
broadcast by radio or television, or both.
under such rules as the committee or sub-
committee may adopt.
Cd) Whenever disorder arises during a
committee meeting that is open to the
public, or any demonstration of approval or
disapproval Is indulged in by any person in
attendance at any such meeting, It shall be
the duty of the Chair to enforce order on
his own initiative and without any point of
order being made by a Senator. When the
Chair finds it necessary to maintain order.
he shall have the power to clear the room.
and the committee may act in closed session
of order.
(e) Each committee shall prepare and
keep a complete transcript or electronic re-
cording adequate to fully record the pro-
ceeding of each meeting or conference
whether or not such meeting or any part
thereof Is closed under this paragraph.
unless a majority of its members vote to
forgo such a record.s
REGULATION OF UNDER-
GROUND STORAGE TANKS
FOR PicricOLEUM PRODUCTS
• Mr. LAUTENBERO. Mr. President.
I am pleased to join Senators DUREPI-
BERGER and MoYNxitar in submitting
amendment No. 2758, intended to be
proposed to S. 757, In order to estab-
lish a system for regulating and moni-
toring underground storage tanks of
petroleum products. Leaks from tin-
derground gasoline and other storage
tanks threaten our environment and
the purity of our ground water,
This amendment would accomplish
three general goals. First, it would
help prevent leaks at the outset, by
setting performance standards on the
design, construction, and installation
of underground storage tanks. Second.
the amendment would help us detect
leaks when they do occur, by setting
up a national Inventory of tanks, and
by requiring owners and operators to
strictly monitor their supplies, in part
by maintaining accurate records and
by utilizing effective measuring de-
vices. Third, the amendment would
help us clean up and repair the
damage, by empowering the EPA to
take corrective action,
Mr. PresIdent, there are over 20.000
underground storage tanks in New
Jersey utilized by some 7.000 fuel dis-
pensing facilities. I am afraid that
some of those tanks, at this very
moment. are leaking and contaminat-
ing our environment undetected. My
March 1, 1984
State’s Department of Environmental
Protection reports that just last year
there were 117 cases in which under-
ground fuel tank leaks contaminated
ground water. Just by way of example,
In Little Silver Borough, in Monmouth
County, leakage from underground
fuel tanks reportedly caused extensive
ground water damage. In Branchville.
in Sussex County, an underground
storage tank failure resulted in the
discharge of gasoline that seeped Into
the basement.of a nearby building and
caused a fire. In Warren Township, in
Somerset County, some 30 private
wells have been affected by leaks from
underground tanks and lines.
We face a problem that must be ad-
dressed. I trust that responsible
owners and operators of underground
tanks will Join us in this effort to fash-
ion a scheme that is fair and effective
In preventing, detecting, and curing
the environmental damage caused by
faulty underground storage tanks. The
full Committee on Environment and
Public Works today conducted a hear-
ing on ground witer contaminated
from underground storage tanks in an
effort to gather comment and make
any appropriate Improvements in this
provision.
I urge my colleagues to support this
amendment when offered.
“HALFrIME” OF SENATE BANK-
ING COMMITTEE I [ EARINGS.
MARCH 1. 1984
• Mr. GARN. Mr. President, the con-
clusion of yesterday’s hearing marked
the halfway point of 8 days of hear-
ings in the Senate Banking Committee
on legislative proposals to establish a
national policy response to our chang-
ing financial system.
This respite in the hearings, and yes-
terday’s announcement by Congress-
man ST GERMAIN that the House
Banking Committee wIll conduct hear.
ings to review the changing financial
landscape, offers an opportunity to re-
flect on where we are and where Con-
gress Is headed.
During the past year, the Senate
Banking Committee has held 13 days
of oversight hearings on the financial
services industry and, counting these
recent four hearings. 7 days of hear-
ings on several different legislative
proposals dealing with, among other
things, moratoriums on nonbank
banks and powers of banking and
other financial services organizations.
It has been clear throughout this proc-
ess that the financial system is a tranS
sitiorial stage and that there Is a need
for a congressional policy response.
The response is necessary to assure ev-
eryone affected by the financial
system that there Ls a national policy
and not Just regulatory, Judicial, and
State policies under which our finan-
cial system operates. Thus, I am en-
couraged that the House Banking
Committee will be looking at these
issues also and look forward to work-
-------
-j 4S
TITLE VU—OTHER PROVISIONS
REPORT TO CONGRESS ON INJECTION OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
SEc. 701. (a) The Administrator, in cooperation with the States,
shall compile and, not later than six months after the date of
enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984,
submit to the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the
United States Senate and the Committee on Energy and Commerce
of the United States House of Representatives, an inventory of all
wells in the United States which inject hazardous wastes. The
inventory shall include the following information:
(1) the location and depth of each well;
(2) engineering and construction details of each, including the
thickness and composition of its casing, the width and content of
the annulus, and pump pressure and capacity;
(3) the hydrogeological characteristics of the overlying and
underlying strata, as well as that into which the waste is
injected;
(4) the location and size of all drinking water aquifers pene-
trated by the well, or within a one-mile radius of the well or
within two hundred feet below the well injection point;
(5) the location, capacity, and population served by each well
providing drinking or irrigation water which is within a five-
mile radius of the injection well;
(6) the nature and volume of the waste injected during the
one-year period immediately preceding the date of the report;
(7) the dates and nature of the inspections of the injection well
conducted by independent third parties or agents of State,
Federal, or local government;
(8) the name and address of all owners and operators of the
well and any disposal facility associated with it;
(9) the identification of all wells at whith enforcement actions
have been initiated under this Act (by reason of well failure,
operator error, ground water contamination or for other
reasons) and an identification of the wastes involved in such
enforcement actions; and
(10) such other information as the Administrator may, in his
discretion, deem necessary to define the scope and nature of
hazardous waste disposal in the United States through under-
ground injection.
H. R. 2867—69
(b) In fulfilling the requirements of paragraphs (3) through (5) of
subsection (a), the Adminifitrator need only submit such information
as can be obtained from currently existing State records and from
site visita to at least twenty facilities containing wells which inject
hazardous waste. -
(c) The States shall make available to the Administrator such
information as he deems necessary to accomplish the objectives of
this section.
C..ou,.
SECTION 701—REPORT TO CONGRESS ON INJECTION OF HAZARDOUS
WASTE
House bilL—No provision.
Senate amendment.—The Senate amendment adds a new section
1426 in Part C of the Safe Drinking Water Act to require that by
June 15, 1984 (sic}, EPA, with the States, shall compile and submit
to Congress an inventory of all wells which inject hazardous
Conference substitute.—The Conference substitute is the same as
the Senate amendment, except the June 15, 1984 date is changed to
6 months after enactment and the amendment is transferred to the
-------
; -
REPORT TO CONGRESS
SEC. 29. Part C of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
amended by adding at the end thereof a new section as fol-
lows:
“UNDERGROUND INJECTION OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
“SEc. 1426. (a) The Administrator, in cooperation
wil)z the Slates, shall compile and, not later than June 15,
1984, submit to the Committee on Environment and Public
Works of the United States Senate and the Committee on
Energy and Commerce of the United Slates House of Rep-
HR 2867 EAS——6
-------
82
resentatives, an inventory of all wells in the United Stales
which inject hazardous wastes. The inventory shall include
the following information:
“(1) the location and depth of each well;
“(2) engineering and construction details of each,
including the thickness and composition of its casing,
the width and content of the annulus, and pump pres-
sure and capacity;
“(3) the hydrogeological characteristics of the
overlying and underlying strata, as well as that into
which the waste is injected;
“(4) the location and size of all drinking water
aquifiers penetrated by the well, or within a one-mile
radius of the well or within two hundred feet below the
well injection point;
“(5) the location, capacity, and population served
by each well providing drinking or irrigation water
which is within a five-mile radius of the injection well;
“(6) the nature and volume of the waste injected
during the one-year period immediately preceding the
date of the report;
“(7) the dates and nature of the inspections of the
injection well conducted by independent third parties
or agents of State, Federal, or local government;
HR 2867 EAS
-------
“(8) the name and address of all owners and op-
erators of the well and any disposal facility associated
with it; and
“(9) such other information as the Administrator
may, in his discretion, deem necessary to define the
scope and nature of hazardous waste disposal in the
United States through underground injection.
“(i) in fulfilling the requirements of subsections
(a)(3)—(5), the Administrator need only submit such in for-
mation as can be obtained from currently existing State
recorçls and from site visits to at least twenty facilities con-
taining wells which inject hazardous waste.
“(c) The States shall make available to the Adminis-
trator such information as he deems necessary to accomplish
the objectives of this section. ‘
-------
ç ( cmrz-1 47 ’jJ q-1...
,
18 REPORT TO CONGRESS
19 SEC. 28. Part C of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
20 amended by adding at the end thereof a new section as fol-
21 lows:
22 “UNDERGROUND INJECTION OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
23 “SEc. 1426. (a) The Administrator, in cooperation
24 with the States, shall compile and, not later than March 15,
25 1984, submit to the Committee on Environment and Public
S 757 RS
-------
91
1 Works of the United States Senate and the Committee on
2 Energy and Commerce of the United States House of Repre-
3 sent atives, an inventory of all wells in the United States
4 which inject hazardous wastes. The inventory shall include
5 the following information:
6 “(1) the location and depth of each well;
7 “(2) engineering and construction details of each,
8 including the thickness and composition of its casing,
9 the width and content of the annulus, and pump pres-
10 sure and capacity;
11 “(3) the hydrogeological characteristics of the
12 overlying and underlying strata, as well as that into
13 which the waste is injected;
14 “(4) the location and size of all drinking water
15 aquifiers penetrated by the well, or within a one-mile
16 radius of the well or within two hundred feet below the
17 well injection point;
18 “(5) the location, capacity, and population served
19 by each well providing drinking or irrigation water
20 which is within a five-mile radius of the injection well;
21 “(6) the nature and volume of the waste injected
22 during the one-year period immediately preceding the
23 date of the report;
-------
92
1 “(7) the dates and nature of the inspections of the
2 injection well conducted by independent third parties
3 or agents of State, Federal, or local government;
4 “(8) the name and address of all owners and op-
5 erators of the well and any disposal facility associated
6 with it; and
7 “(9) such other information as the Administrator
8 may, in his discretion, deem necessary to define the
9 scope and nature of hazardous waste disposal in the
10 United States through underground injection.
11 “(b) in fulfilling the requirements of subsections (a)(3)—
12 (5), the Administrator need only submit such information as
13 can be obtained from currently existing State records and
14 from site visits to at least twenty facilities containing wells
15 which inject hazardous waste.
16 “(c) The States shall make available to the Administra-
17 tor such information as he deems necessary to accomplish the
18 objectives of this section. “.
7/),
-------
‘i 4s e’ )h 16A. b
EXTENDING THE USEFUL LWE OF SANITARY LANDFILLS
SEC. 702. Section 8002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by adding the following new subsection after subsection (r) thereof:
“(s) EXTENDING LANDFILL Liit AND REUSING LANDF’TJ- n AREAS.—
The Administrator shall conduct detailed, comprehensive studies of
methods to extend the useful life of sanitary landfills and to better
use sites in which filled or closed landfills are located. Such studies
shall address—
“(1) methods to reduce the volume of materials before place-
ment in landfills;
“(2) more efficient systems for depositing waste m landfills;
“(3) methods to enhance the rate of decomposition of solid
waste in landfills, in a safe and environmentally acceptable
manner;
“(4) methane production from closed landfill unite;
“(5) innovative uses of closed landfill sites, including use for
energy production such as solar or wind energy and use for
metals recovery;
“(6) potential for use of sewage treatment sludge in reclaim-
in Iandfihled areas; and
‘(7) methods to coordinate use of a landfill owned by one
municipality by nearby municipalities, and to establish equita-
ble rates for such use, king into account the need to provide
future landfill capacity to replace that so used.
The Administrator L 5 authorized to conduct demonstrations in the
areas of study provided in this subsection. The Administrator shall
periodically report on the results of such studies, with the first such
report not later than October 1, 1986. In carrying out this subsec-
tion, the Administrator need not duplicate other studies which have
been completed and may rely upon information which has
previously been compiled.”.
&OM,t?-Th’T. 3 r ’ ’
SECTION 7 02—EXTENDING THE USEFUL LIFE OF SANITARy LANDFILLS
House bill—No provision.
Senate amendment—The Administrator is directed to conduct
detailed, comprehensive studies of methods to extend the useful life
of sanitary landfills and to better use sites in which filled or closed
Conference substitute. The Conference substitute adopts the
Senate amendment with a clarification that the Agency is not re-
quired to duplicate studies that have already been conducted.
7 7 L
-------
c —- ‘ - .‘ ‘ c—- p I
EXTENDING THE USEFUL LIFE OF SANITARY LANDFILLS
SEc. 31. Section 8002 of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act is amended by inserting after subsection (p) the follow.
ing new subsection, and redesignating succeeding subsec-
lions accordingly:
“(g) EXTENDING LANDFILL LIFE AND REUSING
LANDFILLED AREAS.—The Administrator shall conduct
detailed, comprehensive studies of methods to extend the
-------
85
useful life of sanitary landfills and to belier use sites in
which filled or closed landfills are located. Such studies
shall address—
“(1) methods to reduce the volume of materials
before placement in landfills;
“(2) more efficient systems for depositing waste in
landfills;
(3) methods to enhance the rate of decomposition
of solid waste in landfills, in a safe and environ men-
tally acceptable manner;
“(4) methane production from closed landfill
units;
“(5) innovative uses of closed landfill sites, in-
cluding use for energy production such as solar or
wind energy and use for metals recovery;
“(6) potential for use of sewage treatment sludge
in reclaiming landfilled areas; and
“(7) methods to coordinate use of a landfill owned
by one municipality by nearby municipalities, and to
establish equitable rates for such use, taking into ac-
count the need to provide future landfill capacity to re-
place that so used.
The Administrator is authorized to conduct demonstrations
in the areas of study provided in this subsection. The Ad-
ministralor shall periodically report on the results of such
studies, with the first such report not later than October
1986.”
-------
July 25, 1984
ability of Improper alternatives. Regu-
latory development and implementa-
t on has bccn slower than expected. In
part due to the difficulties of assuring
- the availability of disposal or treat-
ment alternatives.
Over the years, evidence has been
presented to the committee that cer-
tain types of land disposal techniques
do not constitute sound long-term dis-
posal options. In particular, landfills
and surface impoundments will ulti-
mately leak no matter how secure
their original construction, no matter
how well they are initially lined. In
this context, the committee was faced
with considering whether landfills and
surface Impoundments should be al-
lowed to receive certain types of waste.
It is a troubling dilemma when Con-
gre s must addrem detailed technical
i,rohlems as a matter of public policy.
Un!ortunately, we do not have the ex-
pertise to acquire and assess the infor-
mation on these problems in the same
fashion as a regulatory agency. Gener-
ally. we are not scientists, we are not
eng:neers, we do not have the detailed
experience In the design, construction,
and operation of various technical al-
ternatives. Nevertheless, when public
pi.iicy demar.ds it, Congress must be
prepared to squarely confront these
difficult decisions,
Within this legislation the commit-
tee compels the EPA Administrator to
deternune whether certain wastes
should continue to be deposited in
land disposal facilities. The bill pro.
vides a rigorous time schedule for
these decisions, If the Administrator
fails to adhere to the c ’lieaiiie, the bill
rcquires that the waste be deposited in
the most tethnoiogicallv advanced
land disposal facil ties until a decision
Is made. In adopting this approach,
the committee rcjected argume
that failure of EPA to make a timely
judpnient should result in the prohibi-
tion of placement of these wastes in
land disposal sites.
It makes little sense to create a forc-
ing mechanism which, If It fails to
work, would drastically disrupt the
fundamental waste disposal system.
There is too much reliance on land dis-
posal and too long a leadtime to get
adequate alLernatlves Into commi reial
operation to believe that the prohibi-
tlor of land disposal as a penalty for
EPA failing to conclude a regulatory
study for unknown reasons is a proper
environmental result. Consequently,
the committee acted to assure that if
EPA could not meet the ambitious de-
cision schedule included in this bill.
wastes would be deposited In the most
advanced disposal facility to enhance
envIi- nmental protec( on.
Although the committee bill places a
difficult test for the Administrator to
meet In making a decision to allow a
waste to continue land disposal, it rec-
ognizes that certain types of land dis-
posal can be appropriate and environ-
mentally sound. For example, land
treatment may be an acceptable dis-
posal alternative for those hazardous
wastes which can be biodegraded or
transformed directly by the land treat-
ment process or, If hazardous sub-
stances remain after land treatment,
where the hazardous substances can
be immobilized.
Similarly. In requirIng a showing
that there Is no migration of a waste,
as long as the waste remains hazard-
ous, from the disposal unit or the in-
ject:on zone, the bill recognizes that
underground Injection of hazardous
wastes can be safe environmental tech-
nology. Underground injection of haz-
ardous wastes Is regulated through the
Safe Drnklng Water Act. These regu-
lations require so-called class I wells to
inject below drinking water sources
and to assure that no migrat lob will
oc,iir from the injection zone. This
bill specif Ically refers to the term—in-
jection zone—as it Is used In the Safe
Drinking Water Act and Its regula-
tions.
Thus, operators who can demon-
strate that their wells meet the under-
ground Injection control regulations
would be able to show that the waste
that they dispose of would not migrate
from the Injection zone. Similarly,
States that o;erate approved under-
ground Injection control programs
could make such a demonstration for
all approved wells within the State.
This is an Important elt-rnent of the
bill. While there is considei able anxie-
ty over the use of the land for the dis-
posal of hazardous waste, It is equally
Important that the law provide an ade-
quate distinction between those tech-
niques that can be environmentally
sound and those that cannot. This dis-
tinction Is provided for cla. ..s I under-
ground Injection wells that meet exist-
ing regulation.s which require no mi-
gration from the injection zone: It is a
proper distinction.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President. we
have some housekeeping details, but I
would just taken one of them and
then I know Senator Buanxcx, Senator
BRADLEY, and Senator LAUTENBERG
have amendments, -
Let me Just take this one first:
Mr. President, on October 28, 1983,
the Conimittae on Environment and
Public Works favorably reported S.
757 with ai amendment in the nature
of a substitute.
Mr. President, I ask u.naninious con-
sent that the comrnittce amendment
be agreed to and that all subsequent
amendments be to the text of S. 757 as
reported on October 28. 1963.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, It is so ordered.
The committee amendment In the
nature of a subbt ltute was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does
the Senator from Rhode Island re-
quest that the amendment agreed to
be considered as original text for the
purpose of amendment?
Mr. CHAFEE. Yes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it Is so ordered.
S 9153
AIIENDMUITNO 3405
(Purpose- This amendment Instructs the Ad-
ministrator of EPA to study mrthod.s for
e tcnding the useful life of sanitary land-
fills and Lu explore more eff,cient aays to
use filled or closed landfills, -
Mr. BURDICK. Mr. President, I
send an amendment to the desk and
ask for its Immediate consideration,
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read
as follows:
The Senator from North Dakota LMr.
Euiwicxj proposes an amendment num-
bered 3405.
Mr. BURDICK. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that further read-
ing of the amendment be dispensed
with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, It is so ordered.
The amendment Is as follows:
S 757 Is amended by adding the folios ing
new section:
Sac. . Section 6002 of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act is amended b Inserting after
subsection (p1 the following zie subsection,
and redesigriating succeeding subsections ac-
cordmyly.
. (q) EXTENDING L YDFiLL Lire AND Rays-
INC L ms’ii,urm Ai.E*s.—Th Aomuiistrator
shall conduct detailed. comprchtnsi p stud-
ies of meti’ods to extend the useful life of
sanitary landfills ar.d to better use .sites in
which ii:ed or closed landlills are located
Such studies shall address—
‘ li methods to rpt’ ,ce the volume of ma-
teriAls before p!aeemrnt in lapdf:ils:
“(2) more efficient systems for depositing
waste m landfills:
“(3) methods to enhance (lie rate of de-
composinor, of solid wasLe in landfills, in a
safe and environmentally acceptable
manner,
“(4) methane production from closed land-
fill units:
“(5) inno ative uses of closed la’idf ill sites,
Including use for eni,rgy production such as
solar or wind energy and use for metals re-
covery;
‘(6) potential for use of sea age treatment
sludge in reclaiming landfilled areas: and
“(7) methods to coordinate use of a land-
fill, owned by one munie:pality by nearby
municIpalitIes. and to establ,sh equil-atile
rates for such use, taking into account the
need to provide future landfill capacity to
replace that so used
The Administrator Is authorized to conduct
demonstrations in the areas of study pro id-
ed in this subsection. ‘l’he Administrator
shall periodically report on the results of
such studies, aith the first such report sub-
mitted not later than Octobet 1. 1986.”.
Mr. BURDICK. Mr. President, I am
Introducing an amendment to S 757,
the Resource Conservation and Recov-
ery Act. This amendment instructs the
Administrator of EPA to Study meth-
ods for extending the useful life of
sanitary l nd!ills and to explore more
efficient ays to use filled or closed
landfills.
In North Dakota and all over the
country there are thousands of mu-
nicipalities with landfills that are
filled or nearly filled to capacity, Find-
ing sites to replace these landfills Is
becoming Increasingly more difficult
and expensive. Cities In my State can’t
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
S9151 -
find or afford to buy more landfill
sites. The city fathers have thrown up
their hands In frustration because
they don’t know where to turn for
help.
EPA has not studisd this problem In
sufficient detail for oter a decade. As a
consequence. EPA officials currently
are unable to assist those municipali-
ties who need help and guidance.
I propose that it is time for EPA to
refocus Its efforts In thfs area. Time
marches on arid It is essential now that
the Agcncy reesamine the studies it
conducted, In some cascs, 10 to 15
ycars ago. Once the Agency has ful-
filled this task, it is imperative that It
share the Inf-rmation wtth those
State and local o!fic;als who desper-
ately need it.
I want to stress to my colleagues
that this problem will not go away, it
will only persist and cause greater
problems for future generatIons unless
something constructite Is done. If
North Dakota can’t find sufficient
landfill sites, consider the difficulties
facing heat ily populated urban States.
Now Is the time to direct EPA to
concentrate on this growing problem
of garbage disposal. I am asking them
to study the following areas:
First, methods to reduce the volume
of garbage before It is placed In land-
fills;
Second, more efficient s stems of de-
positing waste In landfills;
Third, ways to make solid waste de-
compose faster:
Fourth, the possibility of producing
methane from closed landfill units;
Fifth; Innovative uses of closed land-
fill sites, including solar Os- wind
energy production and metals recov-
ery:
Sixth, methods to coordinate use of
a landfill owned by one municipality
by nearby municIpalities, and to estab-
lish equitable rates for such use,
taking into account the need to pro-
vide future landfill capacity to replace
that so used.
The Administrator Is authorized to
Conduct demonstratIons In the areas
of study provided in the amendment, I
suggest a good place to conslder a
demonstration project of this kind
would be In Fargo, ND. Because their
landfill is nearly filled to capacity,
they would value any assistance and
guidance EPA could give them.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, as far
as this side is concerned, the amend-
ment Is a good one, and we accept it.
Mr. MITCHELL. The a.-nendinent Is
acceptable.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question Is on agreeing to the amend-
ment of the Senator from North
Dakota.
The amendment (No. 3405) was
agreed to.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I move
to reconsider the vote by which the
amendment was agreed to.
Mr. MITCHELL. I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to.
AMENDMENT NO. 3406
(Purpose: To provide for State credits for
Superfund work and extend the natural
resource damage deadline)
Mr. BRADLEY. Mr. President, I
send sri amendment to the d sc and
ask for its immediate ccnsideratjon.
The PRESIDIIJG OFFICER. Tile
amend -nent will be stated.
The assistant legislative clerk read
as follows:
The Senator from New Jersey (Mr. BRAD-
LEY). for himseLf, Mr. L UTaNSEaG. Mr.
Bwcus. and Mr. AsDi oa, proposes an
amendment nur.ibered 340 .
Mc. BRADLEY. President, I ask
unanimous consent that further read-
ing of the amendment be dispensed
with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment Is as foll. ws:
At the end thereof add the foUow-in new
section:
“STATE-FEDELq L RELATIONS DROSS THE
SUPERPURD ACT’
SEC. - (21(1) SectIon 1O4’dXl) of the
Comprehensh-e Emironmental Response.
Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 is
amended by adding ;ne folk’wlng new sen-
tence: For the purposes of the last sen-
ter.ce of subsection (c)( i) of this section, the
President may enter ir.to a contract or coop-
erative agreement with a State ur.der this
paragrapil under which such st e wtll take
response actions in connection with releases
listed pursuant to Section 10 5i8)’B), using
non-Federal funds for such response ac-
tions, In advance of and without any obhga-
tion by the President of amounts from the
Fund for such response actions.”
(2) Sect on 104cj 3) Os tile Comprehen.
sive wironlnental Response, Compensa-
tion and Liability Act of 1980 is amended by
adding the folios ing sentence: -The Presi-
dent shall grant the State a credit against
the share of costs (Or which It is responsible
under this paragraph for any reasonable.
documented, direct out-of-pocket r.ori-Feaer-
a) funds expended or ob! ga1ed by the SLate
under a conLract agreement under the last
sentence of subsection (d( I 1.”
(b) Section 112 d) of the Comprehen.qjve
En jronmen Response, Compensation
and Liability Act of 1980 Is amended to read
as follows:
“(d) No claim may be presented’, nor may
an action be commenced, under this tii!e—
“(1) for the costs of rerponse. ur .ess that
claim Is presented or action commenced
within three years after the date of comple-
tion of the response action;
“(2) for damages wider subparagraph (C)
of section 1O ’Ua. unless that claim is pre-
sented or action commenced within three
years after the date on which final regula-
tions are promulgated under section 301c).
or
“(3) for any other dani tges. unless that
claim is preser.tcd or action cwnmen ed
wit iin three years after the da:e of the d.q-
covery of the loss or w:thin three ycars
after the date of enactment of this A t.
whichever Is later: Prot4ctf, howi’i,r, That
the time limitations contained in th ’ para-
graph shall not beg:n to run agamns a minor
until he reaches eighteen years of a or a
legal representative Is duly appomted for
him, nor against an lnconipctcnt person
until his Incompetency ends or a legal repre-
sentative is dui appointed for h:m.’.
Mi-. BRADLEY. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that. Senator LAn-
TE 1iBERG. Senator BAUCUS. and Senator
July 25, 1. 84
ASDNOR also be added as ollclz:al 1’O-
sponsors.
The PRESiDING OFFICER Wit li.
out object ion, it is so ordered.
Mr. BRADLEY Mr. Pre idcnt, th-.’ i.
the State credit an I n,tturai rc ou’
damace amendment i.nat I ha.e d’ -
cus.;cJ with the two floor xr.ar.a r
The amend nei ; has two parIs Li ’
f;rst would allow a State with EP. “ii-
pro al to clean up a Superfurid .tm’
using State hinds and then recei.c
credit for its expc-nditures. The c-ech
would be used at any Superft.rid si-c in
the State.
Mr. Presf dent, this Is not a nec. con-
cept. We used It In the original Siig.’i--
fund law passed in 19S0. Section lN’c)
of the Superfund law allows EP.’
give Stairs credit fcr State ex3encT-
turcs at approved Superfund sites, A
the Superfund law was beIng written.
we recognized that States ought to be
allowed to begIn the cleanup at parti-
ciparly threatening Superfund sites
even before Supes fund money was
available. The State credit provision
included In the Superfund law thus al-
lowed EPA to repay States for their
early cleanup elfoi-ts. This mechanism
was a good one and should be used
again now as Superfund money begins
to dry up pi’nding reauthorization.
This State credit provision would
enable States to pay for site cleanup
with their own funds and then recehe
credits for thcse expenditures for
other Superfurid w-ork. This will allow
us to maintain the cleanup munien-
turn. WhIle we wait for additional
funds to be earmarked for the Super-
fund, we must not allow the feasibility
and design studies that have already
been completed to sit idle. The State
of New Jersey for example is prepared
to spend as much as $130 million of its
own funds to start the cleanup process
at the most severe sites. But how can
we expect them to make this commit-
rnent without some assurance that
they will receive credit for the work
they do? Without such as assurance
we are telling States like New Jersey
to sit on their hands (and their drums
of Toxic wastes) until the EPA gets
around to doing something or until
Congress and the President get around
to reauthorizing Superfund. From an
environmental health standpoint and.
more importantly frcni a public eredi.
tibi;ity standpo!nt. the cleanup must
begin without delay.
Each dzy the sites in New Jersey and
in other States are slowly wors ning_
continuing to pollute the water, con-
tlr.uing to c”eate victims. We ran
cri hle States to proceed without di’I.:v
by allow-mg States to use their own
funds and then ailowiiig EPA to e
them credit for other Superfund ‘.;ork
States would be limited to appi-o eJ
sites on the nat;onal priorities list ano
would be sub act to the terms of a sp .
cif c EPA/State agreeme , This
amendment is crucially important and
Lime sen.citive.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
/4c c,C 4A.1t sI6 Jc b
URANIUM MU.L TAILINGS
SEc 708. Nothing in the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments
of 1984 shall be construed to affect, modify, or amend the Uranium
Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978.
c i )r PP-r.,?rz ’
SECTION 703—URANIUM MILL TAILINGS
House bill.—No provisions.
129
Senate amendmeng.—The Senate amendment includes a provi-
sion to assure that the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of
1984 do not affect, modify, or amend the Uranium Mill Tailings Ra-
diation Control Act of 1978, as amended (UMTRCA).
Conference su1 stitute.—The Conference substitute is the same as
the Senate amendment. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to
preclude or to require the revision of existing regulations promul-
gated under UMTRCA.
-------
s - 4 5L )
102
URANIUM MILL TAiLINGS
SEC. 42. Nothing in the Solid Waste Disposal Act
Amendments of 1984 shall be construed to affect, modify, or
amend the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of
1978, as amended.
-------
t7(.L 5
cals to continue to pollute our drink- tecting the public health and safsty (Mr. ECL RT asked and Was giveR I
lag water LUPPL1 a—EPA must act and the environment, Pm 1 t° revise and extend his to-
quickly to evaluate them and ban just a minute to marki.) I
them where necessary. comn id some of my colleagues who Mr. ECKART. Mr Speaker. In
Surface impoundments, which are have worked extremely hard, often March 1983. dWIItg aub m1ttec
filled with liquid hazardous wastes, are with difficulty and adversity, to come markup of H-fl. 2887. I offered an I
also appropriately regulated In this up with a reasonable and workable imendme —along with my friend I
measure. These facilities which are bill. I would like to commend the gen- and distingUished collewie. JZX I
generally unlined and located within a tieman from New Jersey (Mr. FLoRrol. PLoalo—to prohibit land disposal of I
one.çuarter mile of underground the ‘subcommittee chairman, as weli 83 the Cal if ornia list wastes—that Ii.
sources of drinking wateT, are required ,the gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. thoSe with heavy concentrations of at-
to be double lined and have leak detec- ‘fncut.sxil, the gentleman from Lou- senic, cyanide, lead, mercury. PCB’s, et
tion Installed, Several narrow exemp. isiana (Mr. T*uzncl, the gentleman cetera. My amendment also required I
Lions are provided, but on the whole, from Ohio (Mr. ECRARTI. the gentle- EPA to conduct a waste-by.Waste
HR. 2867 will result In these unpaund. man finns Mississippi [ Mr. Downy), review-of all the remaining listed and I
nients being appropriately safeguard- and the gentleman from Mabarna (Mr. Identified hazardous wastes and to
ed. sir i. I want also to commend our allow continued land disposal of these
Dioxin emissions from resource re- member, starting with my wastes only under circumstances that
covery facilities are abs addressed iii good friend and ranking member, the will be protective of human health i
this legislation. EPA is directed to gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. and the envlronment Under my
submit a report describing the current Baoynru.l. the ranking member of the azneritlment, EPA’s failure to review a I
data and information on dioxins from sutcomrniuee, the gentleman from waste would mean that, by statue, I
resource recovery facilities, any signi!- New York (Mr. Larryl. and the ,gentle- that the waste would be prohibited
leant risks to human health posed by man from Pennsylvania from any form of land disposal.
these emissions and operating prac- of I slatiozila a p ( Mr. Speaker, with some modi! lea-
I,ices appropriate for cont.rollirig these Jvlslon whloh states that iothlzig In tions. this provision Is contained in the
emlssioi:is. Based on this report. EPA this action shall &ff t or change the flnal version of R.R. 2867.
may publish advisories on gwdelines Uranium MIII Tallliiâ Act, and In Wa. By enacting this provision, as well as
regarding the control of dlo n einls-
sions from resource recovery cussing the matter, t e onfe.rees the other safeguards In this blU. Con.
I strongly endorse this provision ,c- agreed to accept the prov1si. ” gresa wllf be sending a clear and unam-
cause there is a resource recovery fa. The s ction was ad6ed at the behest biguous message to the regulated coin- I
cility on Long Island which was forced of the Senatocfroth Wypmlnz Mr, munlty and the Environmental Protec.
to close by public pressure over dioxin SIMPsoN ], and I want to cominendiilm tion Mencr reliance on land disposal
emissions. If EPA had dioxin emission for his accommodation with respect to of hazardous waste has resulted In an I
regulations in place, this closing could the agreement, not only on the statu- unacceptable risk to human health
have been avoided, I will, therefore, tory language but also on the state. and the environment, Consequently,
work to assure that EPA prepare this ment of managers. What we agreed to the Congress intends that through the I
dioxin report and guidelines in a in the conference committee was that vigorous ImplementatIon of the objec- I
timely fashion so that my facility the statement of managers would con- Uves of this act, land disposal will be I
might be reopened and stitute, for purposes of legislative eliminated for many wastes and mini- I
other parts of the country car; be tory, the sole explanation. For the rslzed for all others, and that ad. I
avoided, benefit of may COlleagUe. ,, I would like vanced treatment, recycling, Inciner.
One other Important provision to quote that statement at this point. atlon. and other hazardous-waste-con- I
trol technologies should quickly re- I
H.R. 2867 should be mentioned—arid House bilL—No provialona —
that is the new regulatory program for Senate amendment—The Senate amend- place land disposaL In other words,
underground storage tanks. Most Qf us meal Includes a land disposal should be used only as a I
here today are aware of the large Solid Waste Duoossi Mt Amendments oI last resort and onl3r under conditions I
number of these tanks which are leak- 1984 do not affect. modify, or amend ‘ - which are fully protective of human
big and polluting our precious ground Uranium Mill TaliLn adlatlon Control health and the environment.
water supplies. It Act 011978. as amended (UMTRCA). In addition, the enactment of this I
Conference substltute.—The Conference bill constitutes a recognition that the I
these tanks be regulated. I believe that su tltute Is ti ’same as flue Senate amend- successful implementation of the 1984
H.R. 2887 does this In an evenhanded ment. Nothing in this section shall amendments will require an Improved I
way which will result In increased en- deemei to g,reciude OP 10 T 4UIYO working relationship between the En-i
ylronmental protection and a minimal aba of existing gu1ations promulgated
amount of disruption to the regulated under UMTRCA. vironmental ProteCtion Agency and
the State.s. Congress, In my opinion,
community. thInk this resolution of the matter regards the development of a viable
In sum, Mr. Speaker. I wholeheart.- is entirely acceptable, and deeply ap- Federal-State partnership to be one of
edly support H.R. 2867 and urge Its cx- predate the cooperation of the other the highest priorities of this legisla-
peditiois passage today, body and, particularly, of the sponsor Lion and expects the Agency to devote
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Speaker, I yield of the amendment, the Senator from much greater effort to assisting States,
minutes to the chairman of the full Wyoming. ‘ in achieving authorization of their I
committee, the en,tleman from Michi- The majority and minority staffs of RCRA programs. I
gan (Mr. Dnwn .].
(Mr. DINGELL asked and was given both this body and of the other body p’j ’ ]jy, j would like to mention that I
permissIon to revise and extend his re- have worked long and hard on this. BR. 2887 amends RCRA by adding a I
marks.) and they had Invaluable support, new title—Regulation of Underground I
Mr. DING LIL Mr. Speaker, I thank We always do. from the Office of Leg J Storage Tanks. There are more than 2!
my distinguished friend, the gentle- Llati e Counsel.
million underground tanks the I
man from New Jersey, the able chair.: Again, I think this is a superb piece United States which contain hazard-
man of the subcommittee, of legislation, crafted with a great deal ou substances or gasoline. An estinsat.
Mr. Speaker. I rise in strong support of care, and I urge my colleagues to ed 100,000 are presentiy leaking._..
of this conference report. We have Support it. potentially contaminating ground I
worked over this legislation over a Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Speaker, I yIeld 4 water—and another 350.000 are ex.i
long number of months, and I am con- minutes to the gentieman from Ohio pected to leak in the next 5 year,, I
fident. that it will lead this Nation for. (Mr. Ecxaarj, a very valuable member Since half the population of this coun- I
ward in Its absolutely essential task of of the subcommittee who played a try depends on ground water as it., I
controlling hazardous waste and pro- very significant role in the conference. mairee of drinking water, a continina.
703
-------
S 13812
ing supplier programs) are amended by
striking out “January 1, 1985.” each place it
appears and inserting in lieu thereof “Janu-
ary 1. 1980.”.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, the motion is agreed to.
HAZARDOUS AND SOLID WASTE
ANENDMENTS
Mr. BAKER. Madam President, I
submit a report of the committee of
conference on H.R. 2867 and ask for
its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
report will be stated.
The Assistant Legislative clerk read
as follows:
The committee of conference on the dis-
agreeing votes of the two Houses on the
amendments of the Senate to the bill (H.R.
2867) to amend the Sohd Vaste Disposal
Act to authorize appropriations for the
fiscal years l 85 through 1988, and for
other purposes, having met, after full and
free conference, have agreed to recommend
and do recommend to their respective
flouses this report, signed by all of the con-
ferees.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, the Senate will proceed
to the consideration of the conference
report.
(The conference report will be print-
ed in the House proceedings.)
Mr. SYMMS. Madam President, I
rise in somewhat reluctant support of
the conference report on the “Hazard-
otis and Solid Waste Amendments of
1984.”
About the most that I can say in
favor of this bill is Uiat it i not as bad
as it could have been in several key re-
spects. and that a few provisions may
make a positive contribution to the
proper management of hazardous
waste. -
The fundamental problem with this
bill is that it attempts to write detailed
regulations Into the law. It is insti-uc-
tive to compare the original 28 page
version of S. ‘757 as introduced with
the voluminous, extraordinarily com-
plex bill that we have before us today.
Can any Member of this body explain
why it Is necessary to’require EPA to
list halogenated dibenzofurans as haz-
ardous wastes within the next 15
months? Or why the lower liner of a
hazardous waste disposal facility
should have a permeability of 1 x 10
- centimeter per second? Or why sec-
ondary waste.water treatment ponds
employing biological treatment should
be retrofitted if they have a retention
time In excess of 5 days? Or why steel
underground tanks can no longer be
used in soils with a resistivity of 12.000
Ohms? I submit that making these
kinds of technical judgemerits is the
function of EPA. not the Congress.
These particular regulations may be
workable, even appropriate, but writ-
ing regulations is not our job.
Ne ertheless, I am pleased that
some necessary modifications In the
Rouse and Senate bills were made
with regard to small quantity genera-
tors. EPA deadlines, and surface Im-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
poundments. In particular, I endorse
the compromise on mining wastes
worked out by the conferees. The stat-
utory language and the statement of
managers make it very clear that the
conferees do not Intend for this
amendment to in any way diminish
the scope of the so-called “Bevill
Amendment” that was adopted in
1980. This language clearly reflects
the intention of the House and Senate
conferees with regard to this provi-
sion, and leaves no room for amnbigui-
ty.
The Senate conferees, and this Sena-
tor in particular, have made consider-
able concessions to get a bilL Although
I am dissatisfied with many provisions
of this bill. I believe that it is the best
we are going to get and so I will sup-
port its passage.
Mr. DENTON. Madam President,
the disposal of hazardous waste is a se-
rious national issue. I feel that we as
legislators have a responsibility to pro-
vide all Americans the maximum envi-
ronmental protection allowed by in-
sisting that environmental laws are en-
forced. Clarification of our laws will
help companies, who deal with hazard-
ous waste, comply with the letter of
the law.
I wish to commend the distinguished
chairman of the Subcommittee on En-
vironmental Pollution for his efforts
to fashion a reasonable compromise in
the RCRA Conference Committee
report. I was particularly pleased to
see that, in section 215(j) dealing with
existing surface impoundments, the
conferees kept the Senate exemption
for impoundments that are part of a
secondary or tertiary wastewater
treatment system. This measure
strengthens existing laws to ensure in-
creased protection for both public
health and the environment,
Further, I wis’ i to make a point of
clarification for the record. In my dis-
cussions with the subcommittee chair-
man and the staff of the Committee
on Environment and Public Works, I
have been assured that the exemption
in section 215(j)(4) to the requirement
In section 215(j)(1) has a foundation in
existing regulations. The exemption in
paragraph (4) allows the EPA Admin-
istrator to modify the requirements of
paragraph (1) if the owner demon-
strates that a:
Surface impoundment Is located, designed,
and operated so as to assure that there will
be no migration of any hazardous constitu-
ent into ground or surface water at any
future time.
The phrase “any future time” is not
Intended to present a legal bar to the
consideration of petitions for exemp-
tion from the requirements of para-
graph (1). For example, an equaliza-
tion basin that collects wastewater
prior to biological treatment could rea-
sonably be considered for an exemp-
tion under paragraph (4) it It were
built in natural clay with a compacted
clay liner that would prevent migra-
tion of hazardous constituents for 150
years. A period of 150 years clearly
October 5, 1984
falls within the definition of “any
future time” In a legal Interpretation.
However, given the engineering and
technological considerations in the
design and construction of any surface
impoundment. 150 years may not nec-
essarily be considered within “any
future time.” Indeed, 150 years is
longer than the design life of synthet-
ic liners used for.
No engineer will certify that a sur-
face impoundment, regardless of how
it is constructed and with what inateri-
al it is constructed, wilj not leak for
any future time if “any future time” is
given a strict legal definition,
Mr. DURENBERGER. Madam
President. I wonder if I might direct
the attention of the distinguished
manager of the conference report to a
particular portion of the manager’s
language on Underground storage
tanks. I refer specifically to the follow-
ing sentence which describes the
second modification to the Senate bill
made by the conferees:
In this regard, the conferees believe that
while sophisticated methods of unventoi’y
control may be adequate to determine
whether a tank is leaking, exclusive reliance
on a “dipstick” method of inventory control
(even with periodic tank testing) will not be
sufficient to detect slow leaks.
Does the Senator from Rhode Island
find that reference,
Mr. CHAFEE. Yes, the Senator from
Minnesota correctly states the lan.
guage of the conference report,
Mr. DURENBERGER. Would the
Senator from Rhode Island assure this
senator that the specific sentence
which I have read does not imply that
an automatic gauging system or other
electronic detection system is a mini-
mum requirement under the Statutory
language reported by the conference.
Mr. CHAFEE. The Senator from
Minnesota states the intent of the,
conference correctly. We do not intend
this sentence to be Interpreted as a re-
quirement for automatic gauging. The
discussion of the conferees focused on
the way that data collected by me-
chanical devices is analyzed and not
solely on the characteristics of the me-
chanical devices.
Mr. SIMPSON. Madam President, I
do support the conference report on
the “Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984,” and I richly
commend the conference chairman,
my fine friend Senator JoHN CHAFEE,
who served with patience and real
skill.
By that act I do not pretend to be
wholly satisfied with the work of the
conference committee. Yet, In order to
forge a compromise—the essential act
of legislating—with the House it was
necessary to drop certain provisions
from the Senate bill that I feel very
strongly about and that I indeed still
hope and expect to see enacted in the
future. We also accepted certain provi-
sions of the House bill about which I
have reservations. In general the bill
lurches ponderously In the direction of
7ô
-------
October 5, 1984
writing regulations Into law and that
Is a manifestation of the tendency of
this body to often act as elected bu-
reaucrats rather than as lawmakers.
In the main, however, this bill repre-
sents a series of fair and workable
compromises.
Let me briefly elaborate on the reso-
lution of a few issues in which I have
taken particular interest.
The House agreed to the decision of
the Senate that those facilities subject
to the minimum technological require-
rnents. that is, the double-liner re-
quirement. will have the option of
using alternative technology if they
can show that a different containment
system Is equally effective for their
particular facility. I think that it Is
vital, given the detailed technical re-
quireinents we are L’nposing, that
some flexibility and ability to accom-
modate unusual circumstances and
new technology be retained, as this
amendment surely would do.
The conference substitute amend-
ment on mining wastes Is based upon
an amendment to the Senate bill
which I sponsored. The statement of
managers makes it clear that this pro-
vision, which has been expanded to In-
clude other special study wastes.
covers all of the mining wastes under
the so-called Bevill amendment and
does not In any way narrow the uni-
verse of wastes covered by the Bevill
amendment.
The Senate mining waste amend-
ment I authored covered only landfills
and surface impoundments, and the
conference substitute Includes the -
same limitation. Consequently It does
not directly apply to the pro ision of
the House bill regarding salt domes,
salt beds, mines, and caves that Is In-
cluded, in modified form, In the com-
promise bIll. However. mine wastes
which are solids or which assume a so-
lidified form after they are placed in a
mine or cave would only be subject to
the permitting requirement and not to
the requirements that apply to bulk
liquids.
Finally, the conferees agreed to an
amendment which I offered to clarify
the relationship between the R.CRA
regulations and the uranium mill tail-
ings regulatory program in order to
avoid any possible confusion or delay
that might otherwise result. The Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency and the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission now
have an extensive regulatory program
underway, and this amendment will
ensure that this program will be able
to proceed on its current course—
under existing law—without any Un-
necessary disru p Lion.
Finally, I note with satisfaction the
decision of the conference committee
to reject the House amendment enti-
tled “Preservation of Other flights.”
This innocuous sounding amendment
was intended to convey the message to
the Federal Judiciary that there Is a
“Federal common law” applicable to
hazardous wasLe.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
As a result of the decisions In the
City of Milwaukee and National Sea-
clammers cases It Is clear beyond dis-
pute that there cannot be any “Feder-
al common law” in an area covered by
a comprehensive Federal statute such
as the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
Adoption of the House amendment
would at the very least have created
enormous confusion in the Federal
courts and could easily have disrupted
EPA’s regulatory program. It could
have resulted in the imposition of an
additional overlay of requirements
heaped on top of the comprehensive
Federal and State laws that currently
exist, depending heavily upon the Indi-
vidual predilections of each Federal
district court judge. Given this open-
ended mandate, It could well take
years for the courts to determine the
scope of “Federal common law”, or
even whether it is constitutional.
The Ironic thing is that there Is
hardly any area In which the ad hoc
creation of remedies by individual
judges Is less necessary. Under current
law any person can bring suit against
anyone violating the Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act in FederaL court or bring suit
In State court on the basis of State
statutory or common law. This bill will
further allow citizens to bring “immi-
nent and substantial endangerment”
suits, which are very similar to
common law nuisance actions, In the
Federal courts.
For these and other reasons the
House amendment was dropped from
the conference substitute. The state-
ment of managers does provide that
rejection of the House amendment is
not intended to preclude the use of
conunon law principles by the courts
In interpreting the provisions of
RCRA. This, of course, is simply a re-
statement of existing law. Obviously it
is common practice for the Federal
courts to call upon established
common law principles In construing
statutory language, and yet that prac-
tice is In a completely different catego-
ry from any “Federal Common Law.”
Madam President, I should like to
clarify just a couple of matters about
section 703 of this bill.
Both the House and Senate bills In-
cluded a number of provisions which,
if adopted in their present form, will
have significant Impact on the regula-
tory program established by the Con-
gress fok uranium mill tailings. That
program is now underway pursuant to
the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation
Control Act LUMTRCA]—the statute
that establishes the basic framework
and the underlying legal authority for
uranium mill tailings regulation.
Although the bill agreed to by the
conferees does not directly amend
UMTRCA, ft does change in a number
of respects, the Solid Waste Disposal
Act. And because UMTItCA requires
that certain standards promulgated
pursuant to UMTRCA:
Shall provide for the protection of human
health and the environment consistent with
the standards required under subtitle C of
S 13813
the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended,
which are applicable to such hazards.
It does, in fact, appear that the po-
tential exists for construing this bifl as
somehow requiring changes in the lira-
mum mill tailings regulatory program,
In order to ensure continuing consist-
ency with the standards of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act, as amended, when
In fact that La not the case.
Indeed, representatives of the Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency advised
the conferees that, In the absence of
further clarification, the uranium mill
tailings regulatory program would, In
fact, have to be modified in a number
of significant respects.
This is not the conferees’ intent, and
this provision is intended to clarify
that nothing in this bill is intended to
affect, modify, or amend UMTRCA.
Similarly, the conferees do not Intend
to alter, amend, repeal, ratify, or sus-
pend any of the regulations or stand-
ards of the Nuclear Regulatory Com-
mission or the Environmental Pro tee-
tion Agency, if they were lawfully pro-
mulgated in accordance with the re•
quirements of UMTRCA.
This bill is not Intended, and should
not be construed, to require changes in
the regulatory program for mill tail-
ings that is now underway. To the
extent that this bill adds to, or modi-
fies the provisions of. the Solid Waste
Disposal Act, as amended, thIs provi-
sion Is intended to clarify that the ura-
nium mill tailings regulatory program
need not z ow be changed to meet
these new or modified requirements
for the purpose of satisfying the statu-
tory requirements of UMTRCA that
certain standards promulgated pursu-
ant to UMTRCA shall be consistent
with the standards of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act, as amended.
This provision would not limit or
otherwise affect In any way the Ad-
ministrator’s authority or flexibility to
treat uranium mill tailings wastes in a
fashion similar to the approach taken
or all other mining wastes that are
subject to regulation under RCRA.
Indeed, if the Administrator should
decide to exercise his authority to
tailor the requirements of RCRA to
address the special characteristics of
mining wastes, In general—an author-
ity which, In a separate provision, we
have confirmed that the current law
provides—then the Administrator
shall, If he deems it appropilate,
pursue a similar approach for uranium
mill tailings wastes.
Finally, Madam President, I should
like to point out that it was after en-
tensive discussion of these issues
among the conferees and with repre-
sentatives of the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency—see transcript of Sep-
tember 20, 1984 meeting of the confer-
ees—that the conferees agreed to
recede to the Senate position to ad-
dress these concerns. I am grateful,
Mr. President. that the conferees have
agreed to the Senate position, and
have confirmed this hi the joint ex-
7 23
-------
S13S14
placatory statement of the committee
of conference. (“The Conference sub-
stitute Is the same as the Senate
amendment.”)
Before I yield the floor. Madam
President, I should like to ask my dis-
tir.guished colleagues. Senators
CHAFi.z and RANDOLPH. whether this
explanation of the conference agree-
ment on section 703 of this bill, deal-
ing with uranium mill tailings, Is con-
sLstent with their understanding of
this provision, and the agreement of
the conferees?
Senator CHAFEE. Yes, Madam
President, the explanat.lon of the Sen-
ator from Vyoming accurately ex-
plains the agreement of the conferees.
Senator RANDOLPH. I, too, agree
itla that explanation, and concur
that it represents the agreement
reached by the conferees.
Senator SIMPSON. I thank my dis-
tinguished colleagues for those assur-
ances. Thank you Madam President.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Madam President.
the conference report on HR. 2867,
the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1934. represents a 3-
year effort to address the serious prob-
lems of hazardous and municipal
waste disposal In this country. This
measure makes major improvements
in existing law. When enacted, greater
protection to public health and the en-
vlronmcnt will be provided.
I have said in the past that the 1976
amendment, the Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act, was misnamed,
because It did little to.move the Nation
toward materials and energy recovery.
The hazardous waste regulatory pro-
gram under subtitle C, which is the
heart of the 1976 act, was disappoint-
ingly slow in Implementation. This
bill, however, by adding real teeth to
the regulatory program and firmly
moving away irom land disposal for
hazardous wastes, could legitimately
be called the Recycling, Incineration,
and Treatment Act of 1984. In making
these changes in the law, the Congress
shows that it Is serious about encour-
aging the use of alternative technol-
ogies.
‘On July 25 of this year, the Senate
unanimously adopted amendments to
the Solid Waste Disposal Act. The
House approved similar legislation
nearly a year ago. Over the past 2
weeks, the 26 House and Senate con-
ferees met on four occasions to resolve
differences between the two measures,
The conference report contains
changes from the previously adopted
bill, S. 757, that merit clarification and
discussion. Accurate interpretation
and L’nplernentation of several provi-
sions requires that the intent be care-
fully understood. The statement of
managers describes many of these pro-
visions, but I wish to make additional
observations about several of particu-
lar concern to rae.
Among those of greatest interest for
me are amendments revising subtitle
D of the Solid Waste Disposal Act. Im-
plementation of the existing program
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
has faltered, primarily because of
budget decisions, The subtitle D pro-
gram has not been funded or imple-
ment.ed for several years, prompting
me to introduce the amendment that
was adopted during earlier Senate con-
sideration of this measure.
That amendment seeks to impi-ove
the management of municipal landfills
and eliminate open dumps. It, author-
izes funding to enable States to oper-
ate programs upgrading sanitary land-
fills and closing out existing open
dumps. The lack of Federal assistance
in recent years has brought this effort
to a standstill. Under my amendment
$15 million of the budget provided the
Environmental Protection Agency in
fiscal year 1985 could be allocated for
this purpose, Our expectation is that a
portion of the congressional increase
in the EPA budget will be used for this
work. The amendment authorizes $20
million for each year through fiscal
year 1988.
The Administrator of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency will be re-
quiz-ed to rev!se existing landfill crite-
ria in recognition of the fact that vir-
tually all landfills serve as repositories
for some hazardous waste. Household
waste, small generators, and illegal
dumpers contribute to landfills. It is
necessary to apply controls and moni-
toring requii-ements to assure that
these facilities are adequate. The
amendment requires that these stand-
ards be promulgated by March 31,
1988. This will allow consideration of
the information gathered In the small
quantity generator study.
States will be required to establish
regulatory programs to assure that
solid waste management facilities
comply with subtitle D criteria. This
may include a permitting program or
comparable system subject to the ap-
proval of the Administrator. The
amendment requires that States bring
solid waste facilities into compliance
with existing requirements In 3 years.
They will have an additional 18
months to meet the revised criteria
after they are promulgated, In the
event that a State should fail to imple-
ment a solid waste management pro-
gram, the Administrator is authorized
to prohibit open dumps. States Imple-
menting approved solid waste pro-
grams are completely responsible for
enforcement.
The underlying standard for facili-
ties subject to this amendment to sub-
title D remains protection of human
health and the environment. Require-
ments Imposed on facilities may vary
from those for subtitle C facilities.
however, and still meet this standard,
They may be phased In over time, as
the Administrator deems appropriate,
to take account of the practicable Ca-
pability of the facilities covered.
New statutory requirements for sub-
title D facilities may hasten the clo-
sure of many solid waste facilities that
have only a few years of remaining ca-
pacity. The requirements could also
precipitate the closure of facilities
October 3, 1984
with substantial capacity, but that are
either unable or unwilling to accept
new regulatory costs.
By allowing the administrator to
consider the practicable capability of
solid waste disposal facilities, the Con-
gress has expressed its desire to avert
serious disruptions of the solid waste
disposal Industry. The Administrator
could phase In new requirements other
than ground water monitoring and
corrective action over time. Phasing
may be tailored to the characteristics
of broad categories of facilities. Such
phasing might include, for example
imposing requirements first on large
facilities which have the greatest po-
tential for affecting human health
and the environment In the absence of
added regulatory controls. Phasing
also might inclu.de imposing some re-
quirements Immediately on existing
units but giving time to meet other re-
quirernents so that facilities are not
faced with all major new requirements
at once.
The public is alarmed by the piof U-
slon of chemical contamination inci-
dents that threaten homes, neighbor-
hoods and whole communities. Recent-
ly, this concern has been centered
almost exclusively on massive industri-
al chemical dumps and has let to ne-
glect of a foremost threat to health
and the environment.
V/e assume that our trash will be
picked up at home, but seldom ques-
tion where it goes, how it is disposed
of, or whether it is an environiiaental
problem. In fact, a substantial amount
of hazardous material finds its way to
sanitary landfills and open dumps
through household waste, small gener-
ator waste, and illegal dumping. Ne-
glect of open dumps and sanitary land-
fills will continue to produce Super-
fund sites. Fully half of the original
national priority list encompassed
landfills, In most cases ground water
contamination has occurred.
Implementation of the existing sub-
title D program has faltered largely
through misguided budget decisions.
The current administration has failed
to recognize that municipal landfills
and dumps are very much a part of
the hazardous waste disposal problem.
The subtitle D amendments in this bill
will do much to help correct this situa-
tion,
Another area of my concern Is the
exemption for petroleum coke under
the provisions for the control of burn.
Ing or blending hazardous waste. The
Agency Is authorized to determine ad-
ministratively which entitles must give
notification, and the administrator has
asked that the notification deadline be
postponed until the regulatory pattern
is determined. In this way, notific ,ttion
can generally be required from those
the agency proposes to regulate. Since
petroleum coke is exempted from reg-
ulation under these provisions, the
Agency would not be requiring notifi-
cation from purchasers, distributors.
marketers, or users of petroleum coke,
-------
July 25, 1984
gated under paragraph (1) of this subsec-
( Jon...
szrrr No. 3409
(Purpose: To clarify application of require-
ment to conduct ground water n’.onitor-
Ing,
Proposed by Mr. CIIAFEE (for himself
and Senators ErSTSaM. S rvono, Rs otpic.
and MITCHELL).
On page 86. line 18. strike the quotation
marks and final peziod. and alter lIne 18
Insert the folios Lnr
“This subsection shall not be construed to
affect other exemptions or a’ait’ers from
such standards provided In regulat’ons In
effect on the date of enactm nt of the Solid
Wa.ste Dispo aI Act Amendments of 1994 or
as may be pro ided in re i.,ions to those r ”g-
u)ations. to the e ter.t consistent with this
subsection. The Admmi rator is authorized
on a cane.by.ca.ce basis to exempt from
ground aster monitoring reqiilrerients
und er this seetfon (ir.”Iuv ng subsection (f))
any engineered structure anith the Admin-
Istrator finds does not receive or con a:n
liQuid wa.cte (nor c.aste contalnir.g free liq
uids). Is desiirned and operated to exclude
liquid from precipitation or other runoff,
utilizis mul’lpie leak detect!on systems
aithin th— outer layer of containmpnt, and
prov des for cor.t.nuanv operation and main-
tenance of these leak detection systems
during the operating period, closure, and
the period required for post-closure moni-
toring and for which the Administrator con-
cludes on the basis of auth findings that
there is a reasonable certainty hazardous
conjstltuenzs aill not migrate beyond the
outcr laler of contain.nent prior to the end
of the period required for post-closure moni-
coring.”
AsZIND CeNT No. 3409
(Purpose: To clarify scope of nes scct on
3004(e) ban on eer(ain aells)
Proposed by Mr. CHAFE Uor him el1
and Senators STAFFORD. RaooI R. and
MITCKELL.
RE Ir4JEC11ON OF TREATED G!OUIçfl WAT
On page 44. line 23. after “wsf er” ‘nsert
the foIlo ing. This subsecl:on shall not
apply to the Injection of contalr!!’ated
ground a acer into the aquifer from a hlth It
ass aithdiawn. If such injection (a a re-
sponse action taken under section 104 or 106
of the Comprehensive Environmental Re-
sponse, CompensatIon and Liability Act of
19 0 or part of corl-ectite action required
under trns title Intended to clean up such
contamination and such contamins ted
ground sater is treated to substnnclaily
reduce hazardous constituents prior to such
Injection.”.
AMz DM rr No. 3409
(Purpose: To clarify authority of A !w,inis-
trator to modify application of cc.t ir, re-
quirements to some mining wastes)
Proposed by Mr. CHAFEE (‘3r hin’w’lf
and Senators SIMPso& and Rarwuti’H)
M!r IhG WASTE AMEDSICNT
On page 48, begtnn’t.g on lIne 18 through
line 2 on p ;e 49. strike the senterce folija.
lng ‘the eri’,ironrnt’nt,”.
At the end of S. 757, add the fol:oa:ng
ne v aect ion:
“Src, - Section 30u4 of the Solid V’aste
et Is a endrd Lv ai l’J.ng at the
end tl’crecjf clp foloa !ng nes suC ?C’UOn:
-.1 ) If sniid waste fo n thc e ’rarticn,
benv(ii’ac on or prc ’essing of oes a:id n,.:%-
erais, including phosphate rock and over-
bu:.Ieii from the mir.ing of uran:u ore, is
subieci to regulation under this subtitI , the
Administrator is authorized to modify the
requirements of subsections cb), (f)(L)
(other than the requirement for ground
water monitoring), and (g), in the cue of
landfills or surface impçunctments receiving
such solid waste. to take into account the
apeci l cnaracter:stlcs of such aastes, the
praeii sl Jifficulturs associated a :th imole-
menta:LoL) of such requirements, and site.
apec f Ic charactt’ris ics, tneluaing but not
l mlted 10 the cl mate, geology, hydrology
and soil chemistry at the s!te, to long as
such niu’J:f:ed requ reInents assure protec-
tjon of human health and the environ-
ment.’,”
AFDME -’ No. 3409
Purpose: To a. sure that the Solid Waste
Disposal Act Amendments of 1i84 do not
affect, modify, or amend the Ura!ucun
Mill Tatiir gs R’,diatlon Control Act of
1978, as amended)
Proposed by Mr, C!{AFEE (for hliuself
and Senator SIMPsON).
Amend 8. 757 by adding the following new
section:
“URAS 1DM MTLL TAILINGS
“Sac. . Nothing in the Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act Amendments of 1984 shaU be con-
strue’J to alfect. modify, or amend the Ura-
niur’i Mill Tailines Radiation Cc,ntrol Act of
1978. as amended,”,
AMENDMENT No. 3409
IPurpose: To establish minimum technologi-
cal re uiremer.ts for ex stlng surface tin.
poundnients)
Proposed by Mr. CXAFEE for himself
md Senators BENTSEN. STAFFORD. Raeooi.rn.
and MlrcHr ..IJ.
On paas- 49, alter line 19, Insert the fol-
lowing:
(c)(l) .S etIon 3005ie) of the Solid Waste
Dii,posal Act is amei ded by Inserting “(1)’
alter “r,tcrun Stittus. “, by rede,,tgm’tuig
paragi-phs (1, (21. and (3) as subpara-
graphs (Al, (B). and (C). and by adding the
followinj new paragraph:
“(2(A) Except as protided in subpara-
graph tC). each surface lnipoui’d.-nent in ex-
ist.mee on the date of enactment of the
Solid Waste Diaposai Act Amendments of
1934 and qna1lf tng fur the authorisatlon to
operate unoer paragraph (1) of tins subsec-
tion, a hich—
“ Ci) does not have at least one liner, for
ahich there is no evidence that such liner is
leaicing, or
is located in an area of vulnerable hy.
drogeo ogy as defined in subparagraph (0)
or as dctet.nined by criteria or gu dance for
the accept ble location of facilItIes Issued in
accordance sith section 3004.f).
sh .ill not receive, store, or treat hazardous
v’i,ste after Inc dLte four years after such
d4te of enactment unless such surface im-
poundment is in compliance ath the re
quirelnents of eciton 3004( 1) a.meh would
apply to such imr,oundir ent jilt aere new.
For the p Iruoses of clause 1) of this suboar-
ag; .i h, the term “liner” means a liner
meeting inc iequi:ements of regulations for
n a surface tirpoundmi,ts In effect as of
such date of enactment, and that the sur-
face im ounornerit is in compliance aith
grneraIl aijpiicable ground water monitor-
mi reqL iretfle, for lacilattes v.ith p ’rmits
uiiucr subsection (C) of Ui’s section.
“131 The At.irnittisirator (or the State, in
the case or a Su.te alib art authorized pro-
g;aw,), after not!ee and o poriunity for
cur.imer•t. ma ’ niocify the requirements of
subparagraph (A) ior any surface Impound-
meut ii. not later than 24 rt:or,ths after the
date of enactment of tue Solid Waste Dis.
posal Act Amendments of 1934, the owner
S 9173
or operator demonstrates that such surface
impoundments is located, designed and op-
erated so as to assure that there aill be no
migration of any hazardous consu luir.t Into
ground sater or surface a -ater at au time
dur:ng the period ha.:ardous a.icle tCln3:’is
In such surfa’e Impoundment. ‘v iihmn 12
months after the receipt of c c ide!ice submit.
ted unJer (his subparagraph and not later
than 36 mrin’l,s after such date cI er rt.
ment, the Administrator (or, II eppropriale,
l’ie Stat .) ehail advise n:ch os—er or op ’ra-
tor as to whether and, if so, t e- the re
quirements of subparal,rcph (A) shall be
modified and applied to such surface lm.
poundnient.
“(C) Subparagraph (A) of this psi sgraph
shall not a ply to any surf a e Impour.amcnt
which (ii eontauis treated sasce aatcr
during the sci ondary or tertiary phsse of an
aggres ive biological treatment far i1i.y sub-
ject to a permit Issued under section 402 of
the Cltan Water Act (or which holds such
treated waste water after trestr.tene and
prior to discharge), UI) Is in comp l lance aith
generally applicable ground water mocutor-
Ing requirements for facilities a:th permIts
under subsection (c) of this section. and (iii)
is part of a facility In compliance with sec-
tion 3fl1(b) 12) of the Clean Water Act, or. In
the cre of a facility for ahich no eafluent
guidelines required under section 304. o:(2)
of the Clean Water Act are in effect and no-
permit under section 40211)(1) of suth Act
implenientuig section 3Oltb)(2) of such Act
has been issued. I, part of a facility in com-
pliance with a p-’rmit under section 402 of
the Clean Water Act which Is achieving slg-
r.iflcant degradatIon of Imuic pollutants and
hazardous cor’.itituents contained in the un
treated wti te stream and ahich has tdcntl.
fled those toxic pollutants and h.1 ,,ardouis
constlttcents In the untreated waste stu’eam
to the appropriate persn ttirg authonty.
The Administrator shall s’udy aid report to
the Congress on the number, range of size.
construction, likelihood of hacarlius con-
stituents migrating into ground water, and
potentIal threat to human health and the
environment of existing surface linnound.
ments excluded by this subparagraph from
the requirements of subparagraph (A), S.ch
report shall address the need, fea I5 lity,
and estimated costs of subjecting su li esist.
ing surface unpoundmer.t.s to the require.
rnents of subparagraph (A). In the case of
any existlng surface Impoundment or class
of surface impoundments from a hich the
Adrnlnistral.or (or the State, In the case of a
State with an authorized program) deter.
mines haaantiuiis cunstltuents are lizely to
migrate Into ground vattr, the Admlr ,istra.
tor (or. if appropriate the State) is author-
ized to impose such requirements as nra be
n cessary to protect human health an the
encironnient. lnc!idirg the requiren-.ents of
section 3UU4’f ahu”i socid apply to such
Impoundments If they acre new,
“D) ‘I he owner or ocerator of any surface
Impound_nicnt potentially subject to sub-
paragraph (Al of ttat , Pflragra h shro his
reason to btlieve that on the b.’t is of sub.
paragraph (A ti) or (ii) or s’it’parag -s , n (C)
such surface Impoundment iS flOt required
to comply with the requ:rem fl s of sub.
paragraph (A) shall apply to the Adm’zp’s.
Irator (or the State. In the case of a StaIn
with au authorized prcgran) not later than
24 months after the date of ena(tmeiu of
the Solid Waste Disposal Act An .n’s
of 1984 fur a det rmm”,a mun of the apn’lca.
bility of subparagraph (Aj to st-en st:rf-”e
Impoundment, Such oaner or ouera:. r s!,.’i
p;oiide ecidence perLiilCnt to su.”
Including eviden’-e as to Corfl.’.. n.e a:th
ground water monitoring and
all reasonably ascertainable cc id, ’nc. on
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
July ‘5, 1.984
pending cninpletlon of the studies mandated
under sccUon 8002 (1) and (Pt. Those EPA
‘tud:ca have not been completed. When the
tre enmp’eted, the EPA is required
to dtr ’rm1ne ahich of those aaati thould
be regt.lated under subUtle C.
Solid wastes from. mining and m:iieral
beneiic!ation and processing are prir. ar.ly
v.rste rock from the extr ctiori process and
crushed rock, commonly called !.aili:’es. pro.
durea From concentrating siros suih a,
grinding, crushing, sorting, sizing. classif ca-
tion. athing. d . waterIng. aniaIgama lon.
gravity treatment. flotation agglomeration
and cyanide ion. The 19 O amendments coy-
eicd a ttes from t e i.nl’ial stages of miner-
al proeccaing, uhere cori:eotratlons of mm-
eruls of value are lrptt!v ;reased through
phl,. cal means, before appI ;ng seconoary
prcces.ses sn-h a. pyroneiaJurgi al or elec-
trotitic metb- ids. S r.el;er slag m.ght also be
aicluded. Massite vc!ulr.es of this aasts ore
are prcduced nnuaIl at mining and miner-
al pro c”c ng fsi lities—rougltl) est:mared
by me £-erican M.iirg Congress (AMC) to
be ai;prclcimaLely 1.75 b 1licn tons In a t pi-
cal year. a hich is uearly significantly great-
er In volunv than the solid aaste generated
by all t uter industries combined. These
wastes aeie considered “special wa Stes”
under the 1978 proposed regulations as
being or large ‘volume ar.a relatitely low
hazard.
On an lndivtdual mine bas’s, past AMC as-
timal..s for a t)pical l.ad, zinc uiderground
tn.c rcdt.cmg 50.00 .J tons of metal per
ycar requires remo al of as much as 5.000-
6,000 Ions per day of rock. That toni,age
breaks do’rn as follou a: roughly 1,000 tons
per day of development rock, which Is the
rock that has to be removed to reach the
pre, and 4.000 to 5.000 tons of mineral bear-
ing ore. 01 that 4.000-5.000 tons of ore, 150
to 200 tons of mineral concentrate are pro-
dut.ed. Because of such large volumes of
waste and rock tailings, mine surface Im-
poundmei,ts and landfills typically cover
large areas close to the mine. ThSC laid
di po ’J facilities, unliI e those of other in-
du;tri”s. often cannot be dredged, bulldozed
or dug our of the earth, and coter vera large
areas v.here the corresponding natural lea-
tu,’es. such as boulders, trees, stumps. de-
prc .sions. and elemarions. cannot ala ays be
reasonably cleared or excavated In connec-
tior, with disposal. Maintaining the integrity
of a liner with the massive ‘reight of typical
mining waste would be extremely diffirilt.
Con,sequently. lining such areas may be In ,-
practical in many cases.
If landfills and surface imy,ouztd;nents
conta’ning minIng arid mineral pro”ening
sastes arc determined by tee Administrator
to be appropriate for regulation under sub-
title C after conclusion of the studies man-
dated under setton 8002 (F) and p) of the
Act new section 30fl4f) req iiies grounda . t-
cc monitorIng at the sIte and a hatever
other requirements are n ccassr for the
landfill or impoundment to assure tue proS
tection of human health and ta( e’ iron-
merit. The Administrator m’ist &u ”mlnv,
howe er, ahether to mndd’. t e sta-. ry
double liner-leachate collcct,oa system re-
qutrerient for such mining a’ tes, and if he
de’ermines that requirement Is not neces-
rary to protect human health and the envI-
ronment, he may promulgate subitilute re-
qtiirent nts. The amendment. thtretore.
prcser.es the performance standardc of sub.
title C but provides the Agency’ van the
flexibility it needs to deterr.une the rnozt
nppropr’a’e approach to manage the par.
tic l r he.ardous aaste at the site The
amendment does riot preclude FPA from re-
quiring double lining of landfills or surFace
iruipotinduients for mining and mineral proc.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
eating wastes In those cases where it Is ap-
propr:ate to do so.
In making a determinatIon on whether or
noc an exccot.on to the double liner require-
ment for trifling assle Is appropr,ate, EP.
is to caiistder ahether the mo , tied rcq ,Ire-
merits assure protection of human health
and the emironment. 1’ractical or e’onomic
conslderatioiis can only be used to select
among alternative requirements ahi h
assure protection of human health and the
environment.
The mining waste modification authority
of this amendment does not cover aastes
specifically listed as hazardous ar’stes prior
to the 1980 legislation because of their haz-
ardous nature.•
AtIENDMt2iT TO ASSURE THAT TIlE SO.I V. %STE
DtSFOS%L ACT AMENDMZItTS or 1514 L’3 NOT
AIFECT. MODIFY. 0 5 AM YD ThE VRANIUM
MILl. TAILINGS RADIArIoN CONTPOL ACT OF
1970, AS AMYNDED
This amendment is desIgned to assure
that the Solid Waste DI-iposal Act Amend-
ments of 1984 do not affect, modify, or
amend the Uranium Tailings RadIation
Control Act of 1978, as amended
S. 757. as it was reported tram Committee,
includes a number of protisiona Ahich, ii
adopted In their prenept form. rnsy have a
significant impact on the reiiu,aI.Iry pro-
gi sin established by the Congress f,jr uram-
u n mill tailings, Tnat program is now un-
deraay puisuant to the Uranium Mill Tell-
togs Radiation Control Act, of 1978. as
amer’ded (tflwiTFtCAI —rhe statute that es-
tablishes the ba.sic framework and the Un-
derlyIng legal authority for uranium mill
tailings regulation.
A question was raised during the Commit-
tee’s consideration of this b’ll as to ahether
the restrictions on land disposal contained
In section 5 are intended to apply to urani-
um or thorium tailings subject to regulation
under UMTRCA. As stated in the Commit-
tee Report at page 21. sectIon 5 is not In-
tended to affect the statutory- program that
has been established by Congress in
UMTRCA.
In addition to section 5 of the bill, it ap-
pears that there are other provisicns of S.
‘157 shica may’. in the absence of further
clarification, aLso have an impact on the
regulatory program for uranium mill tail’
lngs. Although S. 757 does not directly
amend UMr1 CA. it does change. In a
number of respects, the Solid Waste Dispos-
al Act. And because UMTRCA requires that
certain standai ds promulgated pursuant to
LJM’IRCA “shall provide for the protection
of hu-,nan health and the environment con-
sistent a ‘th the standards required under
subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
as amended, which are applicable tO such
hazards”, it does. in fact, appear that the
potential etusts tar construing S. ‘157 as re-
q ’;irmng cl ’ma’iges In the uranium mIll tailings
regiiiator program. in order to ensure con-
tinu:nz “coiisistemwy” with the standards of
the dulid ‘ % aste D sposal Act, as amended.
This is not the Committee a intent, and
this amendment Is rutended to clarify that
nothing in S 757 Is Intcndtd to affect.
modify. er ertpr.d tYMTRC/i —the basic stat.
utory auiho:ity for the regulait n of mill
tailings. Sf’r.’larly. the Cor.mlttee did not
Intend to alter amend, repeal. ratify, or sits-
pci d arty of the reguiatiori.• or standards of
Lhe Nuclear Regulatory Commission or the
Enviror,menal Protec,lon Agency, if they
were last fully pr,rnuigated in accordance
with the rtqu!rements of UMTRCA,
S. 757 is not in’erithd. a id should not he
construed to requ:re changes In the rLguia-
tory program for miLl taitines that is now
Ufldc W5y in order to satiai the statutory
requirement of LYMTRL’A that certain
S 9181
standards promulgated under that Act for
tt’e regulation of uranium mill Lellings
should be ‘cousistelit” stitli the standards
of the So ’d Waste Di’possl Act, as mcnd.
ed, To the extent that S. 757 adds to, or
mooi ics tue pro r ons of lhe Sol d .Vs te
D’ .i,o ’J Act as ani . md d. this arncn’tincnt
ao.’d clarity thst th ‘u :um n’i l ratings
regulatory pragrstm nt-e I ‘at b eharced lu
meet thcs iie or m.d.!ie rert i:r.”n n’c
for the purp;se of srtr fyinp the statutory
re ’iircnt nts of uMrRcA tiiat certain
standards promulgated pursuant to
UMTRCA shall he contistefit with the
standards of the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
as smend d.
The rer ilato program promulgnted pur’
suant to UMTP.CA is a contros ersial pro-
gram that is being challenged in thc courts
by both ens ironmental groups and irdustry
Both the standards promulgated by EPA
and the reguta’ions p 1 omulcated by NRC
are In question. By adopting this amend.
menL Congress Is neither endorsir-g nor
criticistr.g the existing regulatory program.
I should like to emphasize mat this
asncndntent would not limIt or utui—rstlse
affect in any way the Adntliuistrator a so-
titority or flexibility to treat uranium mill
ta’iinga wastes In a fa.shion similar to the
approach taken for all other raining a sates
that. are ss.bj ct to regula:ion under RCRA.
Indeed. If the Administrator should decide
to ecercise his authority to tailor the re
quirements of RCRA to address the special
charac-tersiics of minnig wastes, in gener-
al—an atiuhority aluch. in a separate
amendment, , .e hate confirmed the current
la.v provides—then the Administrator shall,
If he dne:na it appropriate, pursue a similar
approach for uranium mill tailings aastes,
I V.ou!d also note that, in sestral In-
stanre , thIs b l either endorses or repeals
existing portions of EPA a RCRA regulatory
program. B doing so. and by, be:rg Stient On
other portions ci that program. ste do nut
intend to tacitly endnrse portiuns of the
RCRA reg.ilations, The volume nd com-
plexity of these regulazons mal ’es such an
assumption unreasonable,
URASTUIS MILL TtILir .Gs AMEWDUEaT
• Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. President, I am
most grateful for the efforts of the
Senator from Rhcede Island and of his
staff to assist us in the resolution of
thIs complex issue, and I am phcaacd to
join him as a cosponsor of this amend-
ment, I trust that this protision a-UI
serve to clarify much of the c rifuaton
that might otherwise have arisen over
the applicability of the various new or
amended provisions includr.d In 8. ‘57.
and thcr;’ y ae can enable the Utaisi-
urn Mi1 TaiIit gs Reg Jato: y Program
to move for ard, in addition. I am
pleased to have the lmpo;tont assur•
ances of the Senator from Rhode
Island that the Admhiistra’or of 5.?A
has the broad Iatttude to trt’.7( urani-
um mill tailings waates In a fashion
similar to the a ro ch that It t takes
foi’ alt other mining wastes cou’erea by
RCRA. and that l’ e is areeahle to
confirming thIs broad dis.retionary
author.ty’ In a separate amend’rent
agreed to by the Senate en t .:s b ’:I.
Indeed, sInce uranIum rn il tn:l:n:s
n’a.stes are similar in r,atLmc to t’t:. ;
rn.tiiiy v.’a.stes be, .j e of their h ,’h
volune. Iow-toid: ty nature, su ’t an
apprr.sth makes a great d ’t of .,e’t-e
and It would satl fy the rt ’qlI’rt’rnenl
-------
S91’36.
panslons of facilities but provides an
exception for that requirement upon
application to and approval by the Ad-
miniatrator of EPA. It is that excep-
tion which the Senator seeks to have
rendered inapplicable to th s facility,
which the State Is requiring to install
a dc uble liner.
The owner of the facIlity Intends to
install double liners for those cells of
the landfill hich contain PCB’s,
which Is the principal aspect of the
problem, and Is exploring the possibili-
ty of the Installation of double liners
at any other cells.
The amendment as drafted exempts
from the exception provision of the
bill any landfill located ahin the
State of Alabama. It Is the under-
standing of all concerned that that
language will be refined at the confer-
ence. to make clear that hatever de-
scription accurately describes the fa-
cility at Emelle. this provision applies
only to that facility.
Is that the Senator’s understanding?
Mr. M FL1N. That is correct.
Mr. MITCHELL. Accordingly. Mr.
President. the amendment Is accepta-
b 1 e.
Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. President. this is
a correction of an amendment I previ-
ously applied to this legislation. I have
no objection to the amendment of the
Senator from Alabama; but, frankly, I
do not feel it is necessary. Apparently,
the chap In Alabama who wrote letters
to the editors around the country has
confused it thoroughly.
The Senator from Alabama has
al ays been most helpful. I have vis-
ited with some of the citizens of Ala-
bama, and 11 this amendment allays
the r fears, it is acceptable to me. It
has never been my Intention to pre-
vent the people of Alabama or any
other State from imposing whatever
regulations they wish upon their fa-
cilities.
We have different geological situa-
tions In Wyoming and in Alabama and
different sites and different levels of
toxicity, and I think this Is appropri-
ate. -
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the amend-
ment.
The amendment (No. 3416) was
agreed to.
Mr. HETLIN. Mr. President, I move
to reconsider the vote by which the
amendment was agreed to.
Mr. CIjAFEE. I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to.
Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. President, I
would like to take this opportunity to
discuss for a moment the regulat’iry
program promulgated pursuant to the
Uranium Mill Tailings Radiat:nn Coii-
trol Act—a program that has becn
quite controversial.
In 1978. h€n Corgress pa’sed the
thaniuin Mill Tailings Radiation Con-
trol Act (UMTRCAJ. the En’ ironmen-
tal Protection Agency as directed to
Promulgate “standards of general ap-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
plic’atlon” In order to protect the
public health, safety, and the environ-
ment from the radiological and neura-
diological hazards assuciated with ura-
nium mill tailings For nonrntiiolopcal
hazards. EPA’s sr,andards v ere to pro-
vide for the protection of human
health and the environment ccn;ictent
il.h the standards require’i under
subtitle C of the Soi d Waste Disposal
Act whiuh are applicable to sucn haz-
ards.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commis-
sion, In turn, was directed to come up
with a detailed regulatory program for
Its licensees w’ho operated uranium
mines, incorporating EPA’s standards
and prescribing the steps that NRC li-
censees would be required to take to
meet the general environmental stand-
ards established by EPA. NRC as
also charged with the responsibility
for all L’nplementatlon and enforce-
ment.
In October of last year, EPA promul-
gated its “standards of general appli-
cation.” The EPA standards resulted
in Instant controvers 3 ’. Tne NRC swift-
ly objected, arguing that, rather than
promulgating a “general environmen-
tal standard,” EPA had really estab-
lished detailed prescrlpt ;ve engIneer-
ing requirements that intruded on the
NRC’s jurisdiction. La suits cre filed
by both the uranium industry and the
environmentalists—virtually wit bin
minutes of promulgation of EPAs
standards—challenging their ac’equa-
cy. Numerous Mcnibrrs of Congress
expressed grate concerns about the
approach taken by EPA. questioning
EPA’s ir.terpre(at n of its jur tsdi:-
tion, as well as EFAS d elson to r il ’
the highly prescriptive RCRA require-
ments—which were originally estab-
lished for low-volume, high-tox clty
waste4. to the high-volume, low-toxici-
ty wastes that result from uranium
mir.ing. An absurd result.
Of particular concern to me is the
dispute that has now developed be-
t cen EPA and NRC over the Jurisdic-
tional responsibilitIes of each agency.
This problem appears to be most acute
in—but is by no means limited to—the
area of ground water protection.
where EPA, pressed to meet a statuto-
ry deadline to promulgaTe Its stand-
ards, has simply applied the detailed
and highly prescrtptive regulatory re-
quirements of RCRA. This process
gives little recognition of the Jurtsdic-
tional difflcult es that such an ap-
proac’h has created for the N! C, and
very little, If any, flex bility to tailor
the RCRA requiremerts— liich ere
Initially Intended for high t micity,
low-volume wastes—to the unique s:tu’
ation posed by the hlgh.vcliime. low-
to, lcity uranium mining u a.sI Cs.
Unfortunatcly, the regulatory pro-
gr rn for uranium mill tailings is n w
at a total impasse as a result of the
d’tacreernent that h s tmerged over
the EPA standards. with no clear reso-
lution now in sight. Deadlines estab-
lished by Congress have come and
gone. Some of the States that are re-
Ju h’ 25, 1.9Sj
sponsible for the regulation of the
uranIum mining industry are wholly
confused over what direction to take.
And the NRC licensees are left in
limbo.
At tlu pon ’.. Mr. Presmch ni 1 a—k- -
tinaiiimous con ent to insert in I
REc’ORJ a nur ber of lettcrs from ‘arm
ous indnidua!s, groups, and a’i”i
dc-sri’it ing the coMu mon L’ at ze n:;
have as a result of the rtan-!ar p’o
mu!ga’ed by EPA.
It is absolutely essential that t’w
agencies get this regulatory prog-cm
back on track and do so prompti:-. If
thebe problems are not resohed .ri a
timely fashion. Mr. President, it i my
intention to ask the chairman of the
Environment and Pubic Works Com-
mittee, the Senator from Vermont. to
schedale hearings eai’13- next scasion
fur the purpose of consldcr ng s heth-
er the authority that has been con-
ferred upon EPA to promulgate vari-
ous standards for nuclear activities ta
necessary, In light of the poor per-
fotmance of EPA In this arena and in
light of the broad authority that the
NRC already has to regulate these ac-
tl lties.
Finally, before I yield the floor. Mr.
President, I should like to discuss just
briefly one other Important consider-
ation that has led me to conclude that
perhaps the time has come for us in
the Congress to reexamine the NRC-
EPA relationship.
This particular jurisdictional qmi ’s-
tlon that Is now dividing the NRC and
EPA over uranium mill tailings reg’.iia-
tion Is not a new question. In fa”t. the
entire question of here the Jurisdie-
t;on of the EPA stops and the jur ;sdic-
tion of the NRC begins has been the
subject of e’ctensive discussion over
the years. arid there i.i now a cor sider-
able body of precedent, de eloped
since 1970. to guide these two agencies
In the e tercise of their respective re-
sponsibilities.
Because of that substantial body of
precedent, Mr. President. I must say
that I am truly frustiated. chagr!ned,
and awfully dIsappointed that u e find
these two agenci’ s at increasing odds
over their respective jurisdiction oi or
nuclear matters—an Is.sue that I
thought e had settled a long tune
a;o amid or. which the Congress has al-
ready prov:ded clear and consistent
guidance to each of thc3e two a en-
cies.
Mi’ RANDOLPH. Mr Pre’ .iden . the
able Senator from \Vyomirmg (Mr
SIMPsoN) correotly brings a set ions sit-
uation to the attention of the Senrte.
I fully agree that we iiould not ha e
two im oitant Fcriri’al ageiu ks argu.
Irig with each othcr c r’r the ext”nt of
their jurisdictions. This s:tuatioi& is
unsati fartory and be resol ed.
I w li be ple srd to work with S.’un-
tor St ’ x t:i bring about a r ’s ” a
ble and pr c’ise solution to a pro h’in
that shoul’j n ’ er hate de ”elcped an,:
certalny cannot be allowed to ecnt n-
ue.
-------
S 9182
of UMTRCA that EPA’s generally ap-
plicable standards for nonradiological
haz.rd 3ha l ;rovide for the protec-
tion ol human health and the environ-
ment consistent ith the standards re-
quired under subtitle C of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act, as amended.
which are applicable to such hazards.
while at the same time ensurir,g ap-
propriate and uniform treatment of all
mining wastes..
AJ4ENDMENT TO ESTABLISH MINIMITh( TECHNO-
LO irAL pgQTflg5yg rI ’$ FOR EXISTING SUR-
FACE IMPOUNDMENTS
This amendment establishes a minimum
technological retrofit requirement (double
liners or equjialency) for certain existing
surface impoundments as an intenni status
requirement, and provides statutory guid-
ance on what qualifies as a liner.
Surface Impoundments In interim status
must come into compliance with the mini-
mum technological double liner and leak de-
tecuon requirements of new section 3004(f)
wIthin 4 years after enactment, or stop re-
ceiving hazardous waste. Permit acLion is
not required.
Surface impoundments with one or more
intact liner that meets current EPA require-
ments, as set forth in 40 CFR 264.221(a), are
not subject to this requirement, ur.less lo-
cated in an area of vulnerable hydrogeologr
as defined in subparagraph 0 or as deter-
miucu uy cIi eria or guidance issued by
EPA. One condition of this ei ciusion is corn-
pliance with those portions of the ground.
water monitoring requirements contained in
40 CFR Part 264 that are not dependent
upon Issuance of a permit.
— Surface unpoundments which contains
treated waste water during or after the see.
ondary or tertiary p 1 iase of an aggressive bi’
ologica] treatment facility subject to a
permit issued under section 402 of the Clean
Water Act are not subject to this require-
ment if those portions of the groundwater
monitoring requirements contaired in 40
CFR Part 264 that are not dependent upon
issuance of a permit are being comn l ed with
and if the impoundment is part of a facility
that is compliance with best available tech-
nology effluent guidelines issued under the
Clean Water Act. For those facilities for
which no BAT guidelines are In effect and
no Clean Water Act permit Implementing
such guidelines has been Issued, the facility
must be in compliance with a Clean Water
permit, and must have Identified to the ap-
propriate permitting authority the toxic
pollutants and hazardous constitutents con-
tained in the untreated waste stream and be
acliie ’ing significant degradation of those
pollutants and constituents.
FPA or an authorized State may waive the
aection 30 (14(f) tec.inology requ:rements for
e ’sisling impoundments if the operator dem-
onstrates the fac lity Is located, designed
and operated so as to assure no migration of
a hazardou,c constituent lr,to ground or sur
face eater while waste remains in the liii.
poundnient.
All of tne provisions of section 3004( 1)
apply for existing surface Impoundments;
that is. operators may demonstrate that al.
ternative technolowies prevent migTlttlon at
least as eIfi’tnely as double liners and cer-
tain mining wtis es may be e’ empted from
the d’ubie liner requirements.
Surface Impoundments that retrofit in
compliance and good faith reliance on the
statL ’iory defiriliiiin and EPA guidance doe-
timents. could not be required to do fore at
the time of their first permit unless there Is
evidence of leakage,
Uiui EPA regulations or guidance docu-
ments are published, a satisfactory upper
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
liner Is defined as one which prevents ml-
gi’ation Into the liner during the operating
and pnst.ciosure monitoring period, and a
satisfactory lower liner is one which pre.
vents migration through the liner in such
period. Three feet of 10-7 cm/second perme-
ability clay constitutes an adequate lower
liner.
One variance from the double liner re-
quirement atiows a stngle liner, that meets
the current 40 CFR 264 221(a) liner requ 1 re.
ments, provided that there is no evidence
that such liner is leaking. Evidence that the
liner is leaking includes: (1) contamInants
from the Impoundment detected lii ground
water: (2) seeps and leaks observed coming
out of the impoundment dile: and (3) a
sudden or unexplained drop in the fluid
level in the ‘impoundment, Any ecie of these
three conditions Is evidence that the liner is
leaking, To maI e these determinations, the
Impoundment owner and operator must: (1)
monitor ground water dowrigradient and up-
gradient of the impoundment arid compare
these for significant differences: (2) periodi’
call, Inspect the whole outside perimeter of
the dike for seeps and leaks: and (3) mor.itor
the fluid level in the impoundment and do a
liquid balance (I.e., compare the level ex
pected based on a calculation of inflow. out.
flow, and percipitauon/evapnration with
the actual fluid level). Of cojrse. a sudden
drop in liquid level in an Impoundment
without an outflow of essentially equisalent
volume is an indication of a major leak. The
variance does not apply whenever such cii-
dence of a leak exists.
This amendment is meant to provide only
a minimum level of protection during inter.
Im status. EPA can require higher level of
protection and is free to require more so-
phisticated liner systems and/or compliance
with locational criteria as part of a correc-
tive action order or as a permit requirement.
Since the early 1900L liquid lndustrfal
wastes or wastes containing bquids have
been dumped into “surface Impound.
ments”—flatural ponds, pits and lagoons, or
shallow exca aLed depressions Lu the ground
above the water table. Surface impound-
ments of chemial wastes are used to sepa.
rate, through evaporation, solid wastes from
the water in which they are suspended and
for the disposal, temporary storage, and
treatment of Industrial wastes.
The use of surface impoundments poses a
threat to public health an the environment
because the wastes deposited In them
escape. The pressure of the liqu 1 ds forces
hazardous contents to flow dowuwaro into
the surrounding soils where even dilute con-
centrations of toxic substances can, over
time, pollute the ground eater Heavy rain-
fall can cause ponds to overflow into sur-
rounding areas, resulting In contamination
of nearby streams and, eventually. coznamni-
nation of subsurface waters. Many of the
most dangerous cor.Laminat’on 5 1tC5 ii the
nation have been caused by hazardous mate-
rtals escaping from surface impoundments.
Almost one.third of the federal “Super-
fund” sites were a result of leaking surface
impoundments Ten of the 15 d.i p sites
identified for maximum priori . cleanup in
ali1omia were contansinateu by unlined
Impoundments.
Under present federal laws and regula.
tions. hazardous waste Impoundments con.
structed after January 26, 1963. must be
double lined, have leak detection systems.
and comply with standards regulat:ng
where these facilities may be located. How-
ever, the hundreds of ponds bi.ilt before
1963 are exenipt from pre ’er.tiie safety fea-
tures. Instead, these ponds are only re
quired to have four ground water monitor-
ing wells—one “upgradienc” from the Im-
poundment and three “downgi’adient,”
July 25. 1984
Current law does not ensure that hazard.
otis wastes in surface Impoundments will
not contaminate underground water slip.
plies.
Facilities built before January 26. 1981
are net required to hate construction ha.
ture.s that Impede or prevent wastt from
escaping, nor are they requin,’d to hate leak
detection systemc. Regulation of tI,t’ce iri
poufldmcflt.s relies on monitoring proce-
dures ah;ch require Lechnolpeiec that t’ te
not been fuly developed and are difficult to
I mplement. Further, these regulations ha;e
not been complied with nor enforced.
Fieseiit federal and stale reguiazions fail to
prevent contaminants from entering ground
water supplies because they rely on timely.
effectwe coirective action ehitn is ex1reme
ly costly and generally ineffective.
Reliance on gro.nd water monitoring to
regu!.ite facilities built before January 26.
1953. will neither preserve drinking water
quality nor protect public health for the 101.
lowing rcasoiis
(1) MonItoring ground water i s difficult.
complex nud aovs not often produte accu
rate. reimahle results To detect hazardous
substances, monitoring must be (a) locatcd
near the toxic pond; (be constructed and
drtlled property: (e designed t.o detect the
conmt’ti,er,ts placed In the pond: (d l plared
properir to intercept the flow of hazardous
contaminants in underground basins, and
streams: and tel operated pursuant to a reli.
able sarnp’ing plan. -
(2) Moo toning Ia useful only to the’eatent
that eflect;ve, timely corrective action can
be taken on the basis of information aerived
from the monitoring. Corrective actions,
such as removing contaminated soiL or
pumping out contaminated ground waters.
are al ays expensive, but seldom effective.
in presenting the spread of contamination.
Waiting untIl pollu’ion occurs and then
attempting to contain the contamination is
e tremcly costly. The U.S. Office of Tech-
nology A,ssessmnent estimates that it costs 10
to 1C0 times more to clean up a cofltar.iInat
ed site and compensate victims than to pre-
vent pollution migration tI roug’t adcnuate
waste co”itainment. A thousand pounds of
earle generated today can mean one million
to 10 miliion pounds of contaminated so!l in
three or four years and millions of gallons
of contaminated water later.
SURFACE IMPOUNDMENTS
• Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President, I
agree with the distmguished floor
manager’s description of our amend-
ment establishing certain require-
ments for existing surface impound-
ments. I would like to ask for addition-
al clarification of one po!nt. As I
understand one provision In the com-
mit tee’s an-.endinent, a surface Im.
poui’ nient wi’.ich does not qualIfy to
contmnLe to receive or store hazardous
waste after 4 years after enactment
may, hoa ever, receive nonhazardous
wa.ctc after that date for storage or
disposal. Is that correct?
• Mr. CHAFEE. Yes, the amendment
proi ides for this.
• Mr. RANDOLPH. I thank the Sena-
tor. This is important to West Virgin-
ia, and I believe to other States. In my
State there Is at least one surface im-
poundment that receives wasLe for dis-
posal which Is prImarily ash from the
combustion of West Virginta coal; but
also includes sludge from a city-owned
sewage treatment plant, sludge from
an IndustrIal waste water treatment
7 3
-------
/Yi r l S J& . -
NATIONAL GROUND WATER C45MMISSION
SEC. 704. (a) There is established a commission to be known as the
National Ground Water Commi ion (hereinafter in this section
referred to as the “Commission”).
(b) The duties of the Commission are to:
(1) Assess generally the amount, location, and quality of the
Nation’s ground water resources.
(2) Identify generally the sources, extent, and types of ground
water ContAmination.
H. R. 2867—70
(3) Assess the scope and nature of the relationship between
ground water contamination and ground water withdrawal and
develop projections of available, usable ground water in future
years on a nationwide basis.
(4) Assess the relationship between surface water pollution
and ground water pollution.
(5) Assess the need for a policy to protect ground water from
degradation caused by conti rnination.
(6) Assess generally the extent of overdrafting of ground
water resources, and the adequacy of existing mechanisms for
preventing such overdrafting.
(7) Assess generally the engineering and technological capa-
bility to recharge aquifers.
(8) Assess the adequacy of the present understanding of
ground water recharge zones and sole source aquifers and assess
the adequacy of knowledge regarding the interrelationship of
designated aquifers and recharge zones.
(9) Assess the role of land-use patterns as these relate to
protecting ground water from contamination.
(10) Assess methods for remedial abatement of ground water
contamination as well as the costs and benefits of cleaning up
polluted ground water and compare cleanup costs to the costs of
substitute water supply methods.
(11) Investigate policies and actions taken by foreign govern-
merits to protect ground water from contamination.
(12) Assess the use and effectiveness of existing interstate
compacts to address ground water protection from contamina-
tion.
(13) Analyze existing legal rights and remedies regarding
contamination of ground water.
(14) Assess the adequacy of existing standards for ground
water quality under State and Federal law.
(15) Assess monitoring methodologies of the States and the
Federal Government to achieve the level of protection of the
resource as required by State and Federal law.
(16) Assess the relationship between ground water flow sys-
tems (and associated recharge areas) and the control of sources
of contamination.
(17) Assess the role of underground injection practices as a
means of disposing of waste fluids while protecting ground
water from contamination.
(18) Assess methods for abatement and containment of ground
water contamination and for aquifer restoration including the
costs and benefits of alternatives to abatement and
containment.
(19) Assess State and Federal ground water law and mecha-
nisms with which to manage the quality of the ground water
resource.
(20) Assess the adequacy of existing ground water research
and determine future ground water research needs.
(21) Assess the roles of State, local, and Federal Governments
in managing ground water quality.
(cXl) The Comnii ion shall be composed of nineteen members as
follows:
(A) six appointed by the Speaker of the United States House
of Representatives from among the Members of the House of
Representatives, two of whom shall be members of the Commit-
-------
H. R 2867—71
tee on Energy and Commerce, two of whom shall be members of
the Committee on Public Works and Transportation, and two of
whom shall be members of the Committee on Interior and
Insular Affairs;
(B) four appointed by the majority leaders of the United States
Senate from among the Members of the United States Senate;
(C) eight appointed by the President as follows:
(1) four from among a list of nominations submitted to
the President by the National Governors Association, two of
whom shall be representatives of ground water appropria-
tion States and two of whom shall be representatives of
ground water riparian States;
(ü) one from among a list of nominations submitted to the
President by the National League of Cities and the United
States Conference of Mayors;
(iii) one from among a list of nominations submitted to
the President by the National Academy of Science;
(iv) one from among a list of nominations submitted to
the President by groups, organizations, or associations of
industries the activities of which may affect ground water;
and
(v) one from among a list of nominations submitted to the
President from groups, organizations, or associations of
citizens which are representative of persons concerned with
pollution and environmental issues and which have partici-
pated, at the State or Federal level, in studies, administra-
tive proceedings, or litigation (or any combination thereofl
relating to ground water; and
(D) the Director of the Office of Technology Assessment.
A vacancy in the Commission shall be filled in the manner in which
the original appointment was made. Appointments may be made
under this subsection without regard to section 5311(b) of title 5,
United States Code. Not more than three of the six members
appointed under subparagraph (A) and not more than two of the
four members appointed under subparagraph (B) may be of the same
political party. No member appointed under paragraph (C) may be
an ‘fflcer or employee of the Federal Government.
(2) If any member of the Commission who was appointed to the
Corn rni ion as a Member of the Congress leaves that office, or if any
member of the Commission who was appointed from persons who
are not officers or employees of any government becomes an officer
or employee of a government, he may continue as a member of the
Commission for not longer than the ninety..day period beginning on
the date he leaves that office or becomes such an officer or
employee, as the case may be.
(3) Members shall be appointed for the life of the Commission
(4XA) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), members of the
Commission shall each be entitled (subject to appropriations pro.
vided in advance) to receive the daily equivalent of the maximum
annual rate of basic pay in effect for grade GS-18 of the General
Schedule for each day (including travel tune) during which they are
engaged in the actual performance of duties vested in the Commis-
sion. While away from their homes or regular places of business in
the performance of services for the Commission, members of the
Commission shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in
lieu of subsistence, in the same manner as persons employed inter-
-------
H. R. 2867—72
mittently in Government ser ice are allowed expenses under section
5703 of title 5 of the United States Code.
(B) Members of the Commission who are Members of the Congress
shall receive no additional pay, allowances, or benefit.s by reason of
their service on the Commission.
(5) Five members of the Commission shall constitute a quorum but
two may hold hearings.
(6) The Chairman of the Commission shall be appointed by the
Speaker of the House of Representatives from among members
appointed under paragraph l A of this subsection and the Vice
Chairman of the Commission shall be appointed by the majority
leader of the Senate from among members appointed under para-
graph (IXB) of this subsection. The Chairman and the Vice Chair.
man of the Commission shall serve for the life of the Commission
unless they cease to be members of the Commission before the
termination of the Commission.
(7) The Commission shall meet at the call of the Chairman or a
majority of its members.
(d x I) The Commission shall have a Director who shall be
appointed by the ChaLrman. without regard to section 5311b of title
5, United States Code.
(2) The Chairman may appoint and flx the pay of such additional
personnel as the Chairman considers appropriate.
(3) With the approval of the Commission, the Chairman may
procure temporary and intermittent services under section 3109(b)
of title 5 of the United States Code.
(4) The Commission shall request, and the Chief of Engineers and
the Director of the Geological Survey are each authorized to detail,
on a reimbursable basis. any of the personnel of their respective
agencies to the Commission to assist it in carrying out its duties
under this section. Upon request of the Commission, the head of any
other Federal agency is authorized to detail, on a reimbursable
basis, any of the personnel of such agency to the Commission to
assist it in carrying out its duties under this section.
(eR 1) The Commission may, for the purpose of carrying out this
section, hold such hearings, sit and act at such times and places,
take such testimony, and receive such evidence, as the Commission
considers appropriate.
(2) Any member or agent of the Commission may, if so authorized
by the Commission, take any action which the Commission is
authorized to take by this section.
(3) The Commission may use the United States mails in the same
manner and under the same conditions as other departments and
agencies of the United States.
(4) The Administrator of General Services shall provide to the
Commission on a reimbursable basis sucl administrative support
services as the Commission may request. -
(5) The Commission may secure directly from any department or
agency of the United States information necessary to enable it to
carry out this section. Upon request of the Chairman of the Commis-
sion, the head of such department or agency shall furnish such
information to the Commission.
(f)(1) The Commission shall transmit to the President and to each
House of the Congress a report not later than October 30, 1986. The
report shall contain a detailed statement of the findings and conclu-
sions of the Commission with respect to each item listed in subeec-
-------
H. R. 2867—73
tion (b), together with its recommendations for such legislation; and
administrative actions, as it considers appropriate.
(2) Not later than one year after the enactment of the Hazardous
and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984. the Commission shall com-
plete a preliminary study concerning ground water contamination
from hazardous and other solid waste and submit to the President
and to the Congress a report containing the findings and conclusions
of such preliminary study. The study shall be continued thereafter.
and final findings and conclusions shall be incorporated as a sepa-
rate chapter in the report required under paragraph (1). The prelirri-
mary study shall include an analysis of the extent of ground water
contamination caused by hazardous and other solid waste, the re-
gions and major water supplies most significantly affected by such
contamination, and any recommendations of the Commission for
preventive or remedial measures to protect human health and the
environment from the effects of such contamination.
(g) The Commission shall cease to exist on January 1, 1987.
(h) Nothing in this section and no recommendation of the Commis-
sion shall affect any rights to quantities of water established under
State law, interstate compact, or Supreme Court decree.
(i) There is authorized to be appropriated for the fiscal years 1985
through 1987 not to exceed $7,000,000 to carry out this section.
Speaker of the House of Representatzues.
Vice President of the United States and
President of the &nate.
7 5L
-------
C°’” ‘
SECTION 704—NATIONAL GROUNDWATER COMMISSION
House bill—The House bill establishes a National Groundwater
Commission. The duties of the Commission are to evaluate the
quality of the nation’s groundwater, identify the sources and extent
of groundwater contamination, assess the need for a policy to pro-
tect groundwater, assess the adequacy of existing standards for
groundwater quality under state and federal law and assess the
effort of state, local, and federal agencies protecting and preserving
the quality of the nation’s fresh water aquifers.
The Commission is to be composed of 19 members, including 10
members of Congress, and nine others representing state, local, sci-
entific, industry and environmental interests.
The Commission is directed to submit a report to Congress con-
taining its findings and conclusions, together with its recommenda-
tions for legislation and administrative actions which it considers
appropriate.
Senate amendrnent.—The Senate amendment does not contain a
similar provision.
Conference substitute.—The conference substitute adopts the
House provision. In carrying out its responsibilities, the Conferees
direct the Commission to focus its efforts on the quality of the na-
tion’s groundwater. The problems with the quality of the ground-
water supply are becoming increasingly apparent as the extent of
contamination by the existing and abandoned hazardous waste fa-
cilities becomes known. It is expected that the Commission will be
sensitive to the desirability of not disturbing existing water rights.
BIENNIAL REPORT
House bilL—No provision.
Senate amendment.—The Senate amendment directs the Admin-
istrator to report to the Congress (no less than every two years)
concerning the quantities and types of hazardous waste generated,
treated, stored and disposed of. States with authorized programs
shall assist the Administrator in the compilation of such reports.
Conference substitute.—The conference substitute does not con-
tain a similar provision. The Administrator has begun a program
to compile data concerning the quantities and types of hazardous
waste generated, treated, stored, and disposed of and to update
such data on a regular basis. This information is available to the
Congress and to the public and need not be submitted as a formal
report to Congress. The Administrator is expected to continue this
program and to seek more accurate data than has been available in
the past. —
7 t0
-------
130
PRESERVATION OF OTHER RIGHTS
House bill.—The House bill clarifies that enactment of section
7002(f) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act in 1976 was
intended to preserve the rights of litigants under any statute or
common law notwithstanding the enactment of RCRA.
Senate amendment.—The Senate amendment does not contain a
similar provision.
Conference substitute.—The Conference substitute is the same as
the Senate amendment. Failure to adopt the House amendment
does not preclude the use of common law principles by the Federal
courts in interpreting the provisions (such as section 7003) of
RCRA.
HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS -
House bill. —The House bill provides that, in the context of deter-
mining the applicability of a waiver from the requirement that sur-
face impoundments receiving hazardous wastes must be lined, the
term “hazardous constituent” does not include those hazardous
constituents which the owner or operator demonstrates will not mi-
grate into groundwater or surface water in concentrations which
may adversely affect human health and the environment.
Senate amendment.—No provision.
Conference subst tute.—The conference substitute omits the
House provision.
JUDICIAL REVIEW
House bill.—The House bill contains no amendments to section
7006(a).
Senate amendmenL—The Senate amendment revises section 7006
to: (1) allow review of regulations in United States Courts of Ap-
peals for circuits in which the petitioner resides or transacts busi-
ness which is directly affected by such regulations; (2) to extend the
period within which a petition may be filed from 90 to 120 days; (3)
to establish a random selection procedure to determine in which
court a regulation is to be reviewed when petitions have been filed
in more than one court; and (4) to make minor additional modifica-
tions.
Conference substaute.—The Conference substitute is the same as
the House bill.
SECTION 303 OF PUBLIC LAW 96—510
House bill.—The House bill contains no comparable provision.
Senate amendment.—The Senate amendment contains a revision
to P.L. 96-510 (CERCLA) which will allow the continued collection
of taxes for the Post-Closure Liability Fund under CERCLA.
Conference substitute.—The conference substitute omits the
Senate amendment.
AMENDMENT TO CERCLA; STATE SHARE
House bill.—The House bill amends CERCLA to reduce (from 50
to 10 percent) a State’s share of the cost of cleanup if the site was
ct 0
-------
131
owned, but not operated, by the State or political subdivision. The
House bill also provides a credit for expenditures incurred by a
State for remedial actions between January 1, 1978, and December
11, 1980.
Senate amend ment.—T he Senate amendment contains five
amendments to CERCLA.
Conference substttute.—The Conference substitute contains no
amendments to CERCLA
For consideration of the House bill and the Senate amendments
except for section 28(c) of the Senate amendment:
JOHN D. DINGELL,
JAMES J. Fwruo,
BARBARA A. MIKULSKI,
BILLY TAUZIN,
D.E. ECKART,
WAYNE Downy,
JIM BROYHILL,
NORMAN F. LENT,
DON RFrFER,
Solely for consideration of section 28(c) and modifications thereof
committed to conference:
DAN ROSTENKOWSKI,
SAM M. GIBBONS,
J.J. PICKLE,
BARBER B. CONABLE, Jr.,
JOHN J. DUNCAN,
Solely for consideration of sections 29 and 45 of the Senate amend-
ment and modifications thereof committed to conference:
HENRY A. WAXMAN,
JAMES H. SCHEUER,
ED MADIGAN,
Solely for consideration of section 3 of the House bill and modifica-
tions thereof committed to conference:
RICHARD C. SHELBY,
Solely for consideration of section 5 of the House bill and modifica-
tions thereof committed to conference:
JOHN BREAUX,
Managers on the Part of the House.
ROBERT T. STAFFORD,
JOHN H. CHAFEE,
AL SIMPSON,
STEVE SYMMS,
JENNINGS RANDOLPH,
GEORGE J. MITCHELL,
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG,
Managers on the Part of the Senate.
0
-------
1l ( C; ; S S -
BIENNIAL REPORT
This provision amends section 3004(a) to require the Agency to
periodically prepare and submit to Congress and the President a
report characterizing hazardous waste generation, storage, treat-
ment, and disposal nationwide. The report must be submitted no
less frequently than every two years and describe the quantities of
specific types of wastes regulated under subtitle C that are being
generated as well as the disposition of those wastes and the
number of firms engaged in such hazardous waste generation, stor-
age, treatment, and disposal activities. The first such report shall
be submitted to Congress no later than March 31, 1985, and shall
cover the 1983 reporting year.
This information is necessary to identify trends in hazardous
waste management, establish resource needs and priorities, and to
assist in evaluating the impact of the hazardous waste regulations.
The report shall summarize the information obtained by the
Agency under reporting requirements promulgated pursuant to
sections 3002(a)(6) and 3004(a) (1) and (2) which require hazardous
waste handlers to submit biennial reports to EPA for all odd-num-
52
bered calendar years. The Agency will not obtain these reports di-
rectly from hazardous waste handlers located in States that have
received interim or final authorization. States with interim or final
authorization are therefore directed to assist the Administrator in)
r:’ • aring such report for Congress in a form and manner to be
p.. escribed by the Administrator. The Administrator may request!
copies of those reports received by the States or may specify a I
format for submission of aggregated data from the individual I
States. The Administrator may also rely on his existing authority
under section 3007 of the Act to obtain the necessary information.
7ôc
-------
5 i’7 1- / -c
JUDICIAL REVIEW
This section of the reported bill revises section 7006, the provi-
sion of the Solid Waste Disposal Act governing judicial review of
certain actions of the Administrator.
Section 7 006(a) of the Act is amended to provide that a petition
for review of the promulgation of final regulations under the Solid
waste Disposal Act or the denial of a petition for the promulga-
tion, amendment, or repeal of a regulation under the Act may be
filed either in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Colum-
bia or in any U.S. Court of Appeals for a circuit in which the peti-
tioner resides or transacts business which is directly affected by
such action. The petition must be filed within 120 days from the
date of the action complained of unless it is based solely on
53
grounds arising after 120 days. An Agency action which could have
been reviewed under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial
review in enforcement proceedings.
The principal purpose of this amendment is to allow the filing of
petitions for review of nationally applicable actions of the Adminis-
trator under the Solid Waste Disposal Act in U.S. Courts of Ap-
peals other than the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Co-
lumbia, which currently has exclusive jurisdiction over such peti-
tions.
The justification for the current centralized judicial review of en-
vironmental laws is that it eliminates the possibility of conflicting
interpretations of the law in different circuits and allows a single
court to develop expertise in this area of the law. However, these
advantages are insufficient to offset the disadvantages of central-
ized judicial review, which include inconvenience to litigants who
do not reside in Washington, D.C., and a concentration of power in
a single intermediate appellate tribunal, which may in turn gener-
ate narrow political pressures on the appointment of judges. Cen-
tralizing review in a single court also deprives the law of diverse
views on complex legal issues, and as a result may make the task
of the Supreme Court more difficult. Although other circuit courts
of appeals may not possess the technical expertise of the D.C. Cir-
cuit, the reponsibility of the courts is to review actions of EPA for
conformity with the law, not to undertake technical review of the
details of regulations, and there is no reason to believe that other
courts of appeals lack competence to review regulations and other
actions for conformity with the Solid Waste Disposal Act and other
applicable laws.
The purpose of changing the period within which a petition must
be filed form 90 to 120 days is to assure that persons who will be
significantly affected by an action of the Administrator have an
ample opportunity to assess the consequences of such action and, if
necessary, file a petition for review prior to the expiration of the
time period. This issue was previously reviewed by the Committee
in a similar context (Senate Report No. 97—666 at pp. 94—5) and it
was determined that 120 days is a reasonable period within which
to require the filing of a petition for review.
Section 7006(b) is amended to provide that a petition for review
of the issuance, denial, modification,, or revocation of a permit
under section 3005, or the grant, denial, or withdrawal of autoriza-
tion or interim authorization under 3006, may be filed by any in-
terested person in the U.S. Court of Appeals for a circuit in which
the petitioner resides or transacts business which is directly affect-
ed by such action. As under section 7006(a), the period within
which a petition must be filed is changed from 90 to 120 days.
Currently, section 7006(b) provides for venue in the Circuit Court
of Appeals of the United States for the Federal judicial district in
which the petitioner “resides or transacts such business”, a phrasel
which is drawn from section 509(b)(1) of the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act. This phrase is inherently ambiguous because the
word “such” has no antecedent. The legislative history of this
phrase is also ambiguous and is not consistent with the plausible
interpretation, urged by the Department of Justice, that the words I
“such business” refer to business which is directly affected by the
7oK
-------
54
action which is the subject of the application for review. The two
courts of appeals which have sought to construe this phrase, the
Fifth Circuit in Tenneco Oil Co. v. EPA, 592 F. 2d 897 (1979), and
the Eighth Circuit in Peabody Coal Co. v. EPA, 522 F. 2d 1152
(1975), ultimately avoided ruling on its meaning and, therefore,,
proper venue for section 509(b) cases and section 7006(b) cases re-
mains unsettled. In order to eliminate, or at least reduce, the po-
tential for threshold litigation over proper venue, the amendment
changes the venue provisions so that the language conforms to the
reading of current law which has been suggested by the Depart.
ment of Justice. The filing of an application for review shall be
proper in the circuit in which the applicant resides, i.e., has his
principal place of business, or where he transacts business which is
directly affected by the action of which he complains. For example,
in a case in which the action complained of is a denial of a permit
for a proposed facility, the direct effect of the action would be felt
only at the location of the proposed facility, even though indirect
effects of the action might be felt at other facilities of the company.
In a case involving review of a regulatory action under section
7006(a) the direct effect of the action would be felt at the location
of the facility or activity subject to the requirements of the regula-
tion.
The new subsection (c) of section 7006 simply relocates the cur-
rent provision governing the adducing of additional evidence in the
course of judicial review of an agency action, previously section
7006(a)(2), and does not change its meaning or applicability.
New subsection Cd) of section 7006 establishes a random selection
procedure, to be administered by the Administrative Office of the
United States Courts, to determine the court of appeals in which
an agency action is to be reviewed when petitions for review have
been filed in two or more courts of appeals within a 30 day period.
Following the selection of a court of appeals, other courts in which
petitions have been filed are directed to promptly transfer such pe-
titions to the court in which the agency record has been filed. Not-
withstanding the outcome of the random selection procedure, any
court in which a petition has been filed would retain the power to
transfer the petition to any other court of appeals for the conven- 1
ience of the parties or otherwise in the interest of justice.
The purpose of the random selection procedure is to eliminat
the “race to the court house” phenomenon and provide for an or 1
derly means of consolidating petitions for review of the same 1
agency action. This process is in no way intended to preclude or
discourage any court of appeals from exercising its inherent power
to transfer a petition for review to any other court of appeals for
the convenience of the parties or otherwise in the interest of jus-
tice.
New subsection (d)(2) provides new authority for any court of ap-
peals to grant a temporary stay of the effective date of a final
agency action pending selection of the court of appeals in which
the action will be reviewed. However, stays should not be granted
unless the same requirements that ordinarily apply to a petition
for a stay of an agency action are fully satisfied.
New subsection (e) would authorize the awarding of costs of liti-
gation under section 7006 on the same basis and subject to the
55 .
same limitations which apply in the f . .
?O02(e) as amended by this bill), case o en suits (section
-------
6 --- plc A E O
12 NATIONAL GROUND WATER COMMISSION
13 SEc. 31. (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established a
14 commission to be known as the National Ground Water
15 Commission (hereinafter in this Act referred to as the “Corn-
16 mission”).
17 (b) DUTIES OF OOMMISSION.—The duties of the Corn-
18 mission are to:
19 (1) Assess generally the amount, location, and
20 quality of the Nation’s ground water resources.
21 (2) Identify generally the sources, extent, and
22 types of ground water contamination.
23 (3) Assess the scope and nature of the relationship
24 between ground water contamination and ground water
-------
96
1 withdrawal and develop projections of available, usable
2 ground water in future years on a nationwide basis.
3 (4) Assess the relationship between surface water
4 pollution and ground water pollution.
5 (5) Assess the need for a policy to protect ground
6 water from degradation caused by contamination.
7 (6) Assess generally the extent of overdrafting of
8 ground water resources, and the adequacy of existing
9 mechanisms for preventing such overdrafting.
10 (7) Assess generally the engineering and techno-
11 logical capability to recharge aquifers.
12 (8) Assess the adequacy of the present under-
13 standing of ground water recharge zones and sole
14 source aquifers and assess the adequacy of knowledge
15 regarding the interrelationship of designated aquifers
16 and recharge zones.
17 (9) Assess the role of land-use patterns as these
18 relate to protecting ground water from contaminatiofl
19 (10) Assess methods for remedial abatement Of
20 ground water contamination as well as the costs and
21 benefits of cleaning up polluted ground water and coifl
22 pare cleanup costs to the costs of substitute water
23 supply methods.
-------
97
1 (11) Investigate policies and actions taken by for-
2 eign governments to protect ground water from
3 contamination.
4 (12) Assess the use and effectiveness of existing
5 interstate compacts to address ground water protection
6 from contamination.
7 (13) Analyze existing legal rights and remedies
8 regarding contamination of ground water.
9 (14) Assess the adequacy of existing standards for
10 ground water quality under State and Federal law.
11 (15) Assess monitoring methodologies of the
12 States and the Federal Government to achieve the
13 level of protection of the resource as required by State
14 and Federal law.
15 (16) Assess the relationship between ground water
16 flow systems (and associated recharge areas) and the
17 control of sources of contamination.
18 (17) Assess the role of underground injection
19 practices as a means of disposing of waste fluids while
20 protecting ground water from contamination.
21 (18) Assess methods for abatement and contain-
22 ment of ground water contamination and for aquifer
23 restoration including the costs and benefits of alterna-
24 tives to abatement and containment.
?ôct
-------
98
1 (19) Assess State and Federal ground water law
2 and mechanisms with which to manage the quality and
3 quantity of the ground water resource.
4 (20) Assess the adequacy of existing ground water
5 research and determine future ground water research
6 needs.
7 (21) Assess the roles of State, local, and Federal
8 Govermnents in managing ground water quality and
9 quantity.
0 (c) MEMBERSHIP.—(1) The Commission shall be corn-
1 posed of nineteen members as follows:
2 (A) six appointed by the Speaker of the United
3 States House of Representatives from among the Mem-
4 bers of the House of Representatives, two of whom
5 shall be members of the Committee on Energy and
6 Commerce, two of whom shall be members of the
7 Committee on Public Works and Transportation, and
8 two of whom shall be members of the Committee on
9 Interior and Insular Affairs;
0 (B) four appointed by the majority leader of the
1 United States Senate from among the Members of the
United States Senate;
3 (C) eight appointed by the President as follows:
(i) four from among a list of nominations sub-
5 mitted to the President by the National Governors
-------
99
1 Association, two of whom shall be representatives
2 of ground water appropriation States and two of
3 whom shall be representatives of ground water ri-
4 parian States;
5 (ii) one from among a list of nominations sub-
6 mitted to the President by the National League of
7 Cities and the United States Conference of
8 Mayors;
9 (iii) one from among a list of nominations
10 submitted to the President by the National Acade-
11 my of Sciences;
12 (iv) one from among a list of nominations
13 submitted to the President by groups, organiza-
14 tions, or associations of industries the activities of
15 which may affect ground water; and
16 (v) one from among a list of nominations sub-
17 mitted to the President from groups, organiza-
18 tions, or associations of citizens which are repre-
19 sentative of persons concerned with pollution and
20 environmental issues and which have participated,
21 at the State or Federal level, in studies, adminis-
22 trative proceedings, or litigation (or any combina-
23 tion thereof) relating to ground water; and
24 CD) the Director of the Office of Technology
25 Assessment.
7°c’
-------
100
1 A vacancy in the Commission shall be filled in the manner ir
2 which the original appointment was made. Appointment
3 may be made under this subsection without regard to sectior
4 5311 (b) of title 5, United States Code. Not more than thre
5 of the six members appointed under subparagraph (A) and noi
6 more than two of the four members appointed under subpara.
7 graph (B) may be of the same political party. No membe
8 appointed under paragraph (C) may be an officer or employe
9 of the Federal Government.
10 (2) If any member of the Commission who was appoint
11 ed to the Commission as a Member of the Congress leave
12 that office, or if any member of the Commission who wa
13 appointed from persons who are not officers or employees o
14 any government becomes an officer or employee of a govern
15 ment, he may continue as a member of the Commission fo
16 not longer than the ninety-day period beginning on the dati
17 he leaves that office or becomes such an officer or employee
18 as the case may be.
19 (3) Members shall be appointed for the life of th
20 Commission.
21 (4)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), member
22 of the Commission shall each be entitled (subject to appropi
23 ations provided in advance) to receive the daily equivalent
24 the maximum annual rate of basic pay in effect for grad
25 GS—18 of the General Schedule for each day (includinj
7 çL
-------
101
i travel time) during which they are engaged in the actual per-
2 formanCe of duties vested in the Commission. While away
3 from their homes or regular places of business in the perform-
4 ance of services for the Commission, members of the Corn-
5 mission shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem
6 in lieu of subsistence, in the same manner as persons em-
ployed intermittently in Government service are allowed ex-
8 penses under section 5703 of title 5 of the United States
9 Code.
10
11
12
‘3
14
13
16
17
18
19
20
21
— —
23
a
(B) Members of the Commission who are Members of
the Congress shall receive no additional pay, allowances, or
benefits by reason of their service on the Commission.
(5) Five members of the Commission shall constitute a
quorum but two may hold hearings.
(6) The Chairman of the Commission shall be appointed
by the Speaker of the House of Representatives from among
members appointed under paragraph (1)(A) of this subsection
and the Vice Chairman of the Commission shall be appointed
by the majority leader of the Senate from among members
appointed under paragraph (1)(B) of this subsection. The
Chairman and the Vice Chairman of the Commission shall
serve for the life of the Commission unless they cease to be
members of the Commission before the termination of the
Commission.
7o
-------
102
1 (7) The Commission shall meet at the call of the Chair-
2 man or a majority of its members. -
3 (d) DIRECTOR AND STAFF OF COMMISSION; EXPERTS
4 AND C0NSuLTANTS.—(1) The Commission shall ha’ e a Di-
5 rector who shall be appointed by the Chairman, without
6 regard to section 5311(b) of title 5, United States Code.
(2) The Chairman may appoint and fix the pay of such
8 additional personnel as the Chairman considers appropriate.
9 (3) With the approval of the Commission, the Chairman
10 may procure temporary and intermittent services under sec-
11 tion 3109(b) of title 5 of the United States Code.
12 (4) The Commission shall request, and the Chief of En-
13 gineers and the Director of the Geological Survey are each
14 authorized to detail, on a reimbursable basis, any of the per-
15 sonnel of their respective agencies to the Commission to
16 assist it in carrying out its duties under this section. Upon
17 request of the Commission, the head of any other Federal
18 agency is authorized to detail, on a reimbursable basis, any of
19 the personnel of such agency to the Commission to assist it in
20 carrying out its duties under this section.
21 (e) POWERS OF COMMIssI0N.—(1) The Commission
22 may, for the purpose of carrying out this section, hold such
23 hearings, sit and act at such times and places, take such tes-
24 timony, and receive such evidence, as the Commission con-
25 siders appropriate.
HR 2867 RFS
7051
-------
103
1 (2) Any member or agent of the Commission may, if so
2 authorized by the Commission, take any action which the
3 Commission is authorized to take by this section.
4 (3) The Commission may use the United States mails in
5 the same manner and under the same conditions as other
6 departments and agencies of the United States.
7 (4) The Administrator of General Services shall provide
, 8 to the Commission on a reimbursable basis such administra
tive support services as the Commission may request.
• io (5) The Commission may secure directly from any de
11 partment or agency of the United States information neces 1
12 sary to enable it to carry out this section. Upon request of the
13 Chairman of the Commission, the head of such department o
14 agency shall furnish such information to the Commission.
15 (1) REP0RT.—(1) The Commission shall transmit to the
16 President and to each House of the Congress a report not
17 later than October 30, 1985. The report shall contain a de-
18 tailed statement of the findings and conclusions of the Com-
19 mission with respect to each item listed in subsection (b),
20 together with its recommendations for such legislation and
21 administrative actions, as it considers appropriate.
22 (2) Not later than one year after the enactment of thi
23 Act, the Commission shall complete a preliminary study con
24 cerning ground water contamination from hazardous and
25 other solid waste and submit to the President and to the Con-
7cc ’
-------
104
1 gress a report containing the findings and conclusions of such
2 preliminary study. The study shall be continued thereafter,
3 and final findings and conclusions shall be incorporated as a
4 separate chapter in the report required under paragraph (1).
5 The preliminary study shall include an analysis of the extent
6 of ground water contamination caused by hazardous and
7 other solid waste, the regions and major water supplies most
8 significantly affected by such contamination, and any recom-
9 mendations of the Commission for preventive or remedial
10 measures to protect human health and the environment from
11 the effects of such contamination.
12 (g) TERMINATION.—The Commission shall cease to
13 exist on January 1, 1986.
14 (h) AUTHORIZATION OF APPR0PRIATIONS.—There is
15 authorized to be appropriated for the fiscal years 1983
16 through 1985 not to exceed $7,000,000 to carry out this
17 section.
-------
S?c — 4 q5
BIENNIAL REPORT
SEC. 15. Section 2006 of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act is amended by inserting “(a) ACTIVITIES OF THE
OFFicE.—” after “SEC. 2006.” and by inserting at the
end thereof the following new subsection:
“(b) HAZARDOUS WAsTE.—(1) The Administrator
shall transmit to the Congress and the President, periodical-
ly but no less often than every two years a report describing
quantities and types of hazardous waste generated, stored,
treated, and disposed of. The Administrator shall compile
and update such information comparable to that required
under section 3002(a) (6) and section 3004(a) (1) and (2).
“(2) States with authorized programs under section
3006 shall make available those reports they have received
or compiled to assist the Administrator in preparing such
report for Congress. The first such report shall cover calen-
dar year 1983 and 8hall be transmitted to the Congress no
later than March 31, 1985.
“(3) The authority of section 3007 of this Act shall be
available in the implementation of this subsection. “.
,Oc 7 L
-------
7 4 7 Z /- l) J p(
1’7 BIENNIAL REPORT
18 SEC. 15. Section 2006 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
19 is amended by inserting “(a) ACTiViTiES OF THE
20 OFFICE.—” after “SEc. 2006.” and by inserting at the end
21 thereof the following new subsection:
22 “(b) HAZARDOUS WAsTE.—(l) The Administrator
23 shall transmit to the Congress and the President, periodically
24 but no less often than every Iwo years a report describing
25 quantities and types of hazardous waste generated stored,
74
1 treated, and disposed of. The Administrator shall compile
2 and update such information comparable to that required
3 under section 3002(a) (6) and section 3004 (a) (1) and (2).
4 “(2) States with authorized programs under section
5 3006 shall make available those reports they have received or
6 compiled to assist the Administrator in preparing such report
7 for Congress. The first such report shall cover calendar year
8 1983 and shall be transmitted to the Congress no later than
9 March 31, 1985.
10 “(3) The authority of section 3007 of this Act shall be
11 available in the implementation of this subsection. ‘
7 5L
-------
T’ rrf ‘t-V”
16 JUDiCIAL REVIEW
17 SEC. 17. Section 7006 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
18 is amended to read as follows:
19 “SEc. 7006. (a) REVIEW OF FINAL REGULATIONS
20 AND CERTAIN PETITIONS.—A petition for review of the pro-
21 mulgation of final regulations under this Act and the Admin-
22 istrator denial of any petition for the promulgation, amend-
23 ment, or repeal of any regulation under this Act may be filed
24 in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of
25 Columbia or in any United States Court of Appeals for a
7oc [
-------
75
1 circuit in which the petitioner resides or transacts bwsiness
2 which is directly affected by such promulgation or denial,
3 and such petition shall be filed within one hundred and
4 twenty days from the date of such promulgation or denial,
5 unless such petition is based solely on grounds arising after
6 such one hundred and twentieth day. Any action of the Ad-
7 ministrator with respect to which review could have been ob-
8 tamed under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial
9 review in civil or criminal proceedings for enforcement.
‘tb) REVIEW OF CERTAIN ACTIONS UNDER SEC7
11 TIONS 3005 AND 3006.—A petition for review of the Admin-
12 istrator ‘s action (1) in issuing, denying, modifying, or revok-
13 ing any permit under section 3005, or (2) in granting, deny-
14 ing, or withdrawing authorization or interim authorization
15 under section 3006, may be filed by any interested person in
16 the United States Court of Appeals for a circuit in which the
17 petitioner resides or transacts business which is directly af-
18 fected by such action, and such petition shall be filed within
19 one hundred and twenty days from the date of such issuance,
20 denial, modification, revocation, grant, or withdrawal, or
21 after such date only if such petition is based solely on
22 grounds which arose after such one hundred and twentieth 1
— — — 1
23 day. L4ny action of the Administrator with respect to which I
24review could have been obtained under this subsection shall
76 1 )
1 not be subject to judicial review in civil or criminal proceed-
2 ings for enforcement.
7c 1
-------
3 “(c) In any judicial proceeding brought under this sec-
4 tion in which review is sought of a determination under this
5 Act required to be made on the record after notice and oppor-
6 tunity for hearing, if a party seeking review under this Act
7 applies to the court for leave to adduce additional evidence,
8 and shows to the satisfaction of the court that the information
is material and that there were reasonable grounds for the
10 failure to adduce such evidence in the proceeding before the
11 Administrator, the court may order such additional evidence
12 (and evidence in rebuttal thereof) to be taken before the Ad-
13 ministrator, and to be adduced upon the hearing in such
14 manner and upon such terms and conditions as the court
15 may deem proper; the Administrator may modify his findings
16 as to the facts, or make new findings, by reason of the addi-
17 tional evidence so taken, and he shall file with the court such
18 modified or new findings and his recommendation, if any, for
19 the modification or setting aside of his original order, with
20 the return of s tch additional evidence.
21 “(d) (1) if petitions for review of the same agency action
22 have been filed in two or more United States Courts of Ap-
23 peals asia the Administrator has received written notice of the
24 filing of the first such petition more than thirty days before
25 receiving written notice of the filing of the second petition,
-------
77
1 then the record shall be filed in that court in which the first
2 petition was filed. if petitions for review of the same agency
3 action have been filed in two or more United States Courts of
4 Appeals and the Administrator has received written notice of
5 the filing of one or more petitions within thirty days or less
6 after receiving written notice of the filing of the first petition,
7 then the Administrator shall promptly advise in writing the
8 Administrative Office of the United Stales Courts that peti-
9 Lions have been filed in two or more United States Courts of
10 Appeals, and shall identify each court for which he has writ-
11 ten notice that such petitions have been filed within thirty
12 days or less of receiving written notice of the filing of the first
13 such petition. Pursuant to a system of random selection de-
14 vised for this purpose, and within three business days after
15 receiving such notice from the Administrator, the Adminis-
16 trative Office thereupon shall select the court in which the
17 record shall be filed from among those identified by the Ad-
18 ministrator. Upon notification of such selection, the Adminis-
19 trator shall promptly file the record in such court. For the
20 purpose of review of agency action which has previously been
21 remanded to the Administrator, the record shall be filed in
22 the United States Courts of Appeals which remanded such
23 action.
24 “(2) Where petitions have been filed in two or more
25 United States Cou ’ts of Appeals with respect to the same
7rc(
-------
78
1 agency action and the record has been filed in one of such
2 courts pursuant to paragraph (1), the other courts in which
3 such petitions have been filed shall promptly transfer such
4 petitions to the United States Courts of Appeals in which the
5 record has been filed. Pending selection of a court pursuant
6 to subsection (1), any court in which a petition has been filed
7 may postpone the effective date of the agency action until
8 fifteen days after the Administrative Office has selected the
9 court in which the record shall be filed.
10 “(3) Any court in which a petition with respect to any
11 agency action has been filed, including any court selected
12 pursuant to subsection (d)(1), may transfer such petition to
13 any other United Stales Courts of Appeals for the conven-
14 ience of the parties or otherwise in the interest of justice.
15 “(e) in any judicial proceeding under this section, the
16 court may award costs of litigation (including reasonable at-
17 torney and expert witness tees) to any prevailing or substan-
18 tially prevailing par4 whenever it determines that such
19 award is ppropr ate. ‘
7(D
-------
within 86 months. EPA’s statutory mandate
is to prohioft the land disposal of these
wastes unless ft finds that one or more
methods of disposal will not harm public
health or the environment. If EPA falls to
meet either of It.. first two deadlines and ii
there Is no treatment capacity, then the
wastes that have not been reviewed would
have to be sent to land dispasaj facilities
that are double-Iizied and have Ieathate col.
lecuon systems. If EPA fails to meet its
final deadline, then all unreviewed wastes
would be banned from land disposal, unless
the generator qualifies for a limited van-
silos.
HR. 2807 closes a number of regulatory
loopholes which have ailo ed the dlsposaj
of signifi e s_nt quantities of hazardous waste
to remain uncontrolled. Among these loop-
holes is the “small generator” exemption
which permits the disposal of .up to one
metric ton a month (per generator) Into so.
called sanitary landfills or into sewers—siL .
posal practices which obviously are not pro-
tective of human health or the environ.
merit. The legislation requires regulation of
generators who produce more than 100 kilo-
grams (220 pounds) each month. These sen.
craters wlU be required to send their haz.-
ardous wastes to an appropriate dispo ai or
treatment facility.
Another major loophole which ii ad-
dressed by this legislation concerns the use
of hazardous wastes as fueL Currenuy. some
of the most dangerous wastes, such as PCBs
and dioxin. are blended into used oil or
other fuel and burned in residential boilers
which are not cepable of destroying the
toxic component of these wastes. Thia prac-
tIce, which has become increasingly preva-
lent. particularly in the Northeast. creates a
substantial risk to those citizens whose
health is most vulnerable, especially the eld.
erly. young children and persons with respi-
ratory Illnesses, Under the legislation. EPA
must issue regulations that would allow
burning of hazardous wastes only under cir-
cumstances that would not harm public
health.
U(FOIC rr
KR. 2867 contains a number of provisions
designed to promote compliance with the
bill’s regulatory safeguards by Increasing
civil and criminal penalties for violators. For
example, placing another person in danger
of death or serious bodily injury by Wegal
disposaj or management of hasardous waste
Carries a maximum 15 year prison sentence
arid a 1250.000 fine. A corporation could be
fined $1 million.
In addition, citizens would be provided the
right to sue responsible parties and compel
them to clean up hazardous waste sites.
Congress has recognized that leaving all en-
forcement responsibility to PA and the
states has not been satisfactoqr in light of
the widespread non.compliance by hazard.
ous waste facilities. Citizen involvement, in-
cl ’ding lawsuits, to force abatement of
public health dangers. is designed to law-
suits, to force abatement of public health
dangers, is designed to complement the gow.
ernmenls enforcement efforts and encour-
age greater compliance by the regulated
community.
OROW!DWAim CONMiSSIIII
KR. 2867 also establishes a 19-member
National Groundwater Commission to inves-
tigate and report on causes of groundwater
contaminatIon and to recommend a naz.ional
strategy for addressing threats to the Na.
Uons freshwater aquifers.
LLA iiIO UWDssGIOWID ITQRAGI TPJ!XS
HR. 2867 establishes a comprehensive
regulatory progi-arn to prevent leaks from
underground storage tanks. There are more
than 2 million underground tanks in the
United States which contain hazardous sub.
stances or gasoline. An estimated 100.000
are presentiy leaking (potentially contam-
inating groundwater) and another 350.000
are expected to leak in the next five years.
HR. 2867 mandates the use of leak detec-
tion systems, the development of new tank
standards which will protect against corro-
sion, as well as many other safeguards.
Mr. EDGAR. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield? -
Mr. FLORIO. I yield to the gentle-
man from Pennsylvania.
Mr. EDGAR. I thank the gentleman
for yielding.
Mr. Speaker. I would Just like to
commend the gentleman on the legis.
latlon and point out that the legisla-
tion does include the establishment of
a National Groundwater Comninrnlc.
siori, which the gentleman and I have
worked on. and I want to congratulate
him for his efforts.
Mr. FLORIO. I thank the gentle-
man. P
Mr, Speaker, I reserve the balance of
say time.
C 2140
Mr. BROYHILL. Mr. Speaker, I
yield myself 5 minutes.
I rise in support of HR. 2867. I be-
lieve it is an important envlronrnentaj
measure which is deserving of passage
this year.
My understanding of this measure Is
that It Incorporates a number of com-
promises on important Issiles such as
small quantity generators. PCB’s and
underground storage tanks. -
The language adopted on small
quantity geri ratq is virtually identi-
cal to Ihat. otan ageemenv reached by
the b siness siid environmentaj corn-
munWy this -pear, it provides for a
work&ble f?g 11atory program for small
quantity aen erators of between 100,
k1lOgra nsa$ d 1.000 kilograms of haz-
ardops waste per month, Appropriate.
ly, this program is restricted to that
universe of generators_there is no
regulation below 100 kilograms per
month. In my opinion, regulation of
these small generators should not go
below 100 kilograms per month. I be-
lieve the conferees did well In adopting
this commonserise cornpromj e.
Further, the Conferees agreed to
drop a House provision which would
have required the listing of PCB’s
under RCRA. I advocated and corn.
pletely SUPPOI-t this approach. PCB’s
are already regulated under the Toxic
Substances Control Act. and EPA is In
the process now of reviewlng’whether
or not supplementnj regulatIon Is ap-
propriate under RCRL It Is clear that
PCB’s are now, and will continue to
be, carefully monitored -and that a
mandatory listing procedure is inap-
propriate. -
Further, the conferees adopted a
compromise underground storage tank
propocaJ. It appeai- that this proposal
is a commonsense comprombe be.
tween the House and Senate versions
of the tank regulatory program which
will provide a minimum amount of dis-
ruption to the regulated community.
In light of this sensible compromj e
provision, I can support HR. 2867 and
look forward to the President signing
It into law this year.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 mInutes to the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Lain-],
the ranking minority member of the
subcommittee who has worked so hard
and effectively with respect to this
program.
Mr. LENT: Mr. Speaker, I rise In
support of the conference report on
H.R. 2867—the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984. ThIs is a
carefully crafted compromise bill
which has resulted from many years
of hard work by both Members and
staff. I want to particularly commend
the chairman of the full committee on
Energy and Commerce, the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. DINGELL). the
gent’eman from New Jersey (Mr. I
FLoalo]. the gentleman from North
Carolina (Mr. Bnoyn iu.J. the gentle-
man from Ohio (Mr. ECKART]. and the
tentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
RIr ’rERJ.
In my opinion, this conference
report represents a fair compromise
between the provisions of H.R. 2867
and S. 757—its Senate companion
measure, In most instances the differ-
ences between the two bills have been
split almost equally—resulting in an
Important new environmental statute.
The Hazardous and Solid Waste En-
forcement Act of 1984 represents a
dramatic new shift in our national
policy about. hazardous waste disposal,
After this measure is enacted, small
quantity generators of hazardous
waste who are now able to generate
2,20Q kilograms or 1 ton of hazardous
waste a month will have to dispose of
their waste in a properly permitted fa-
cility rather than In an unregulated
dump.
Following enactment, the EPA will
be on a strict timetable for reviewing
and banning hazardous waste from
land disposal. Some of the most toxic
chemicals will be banned by statute
unless EPA determines that is not nec-
essary to protect human health and
the environment. These chemicals In-
elude arsenic, cyanide, and dioxins.
For too many years in this country,
we have permitted the practIce 0(1
dumping hazardous wastes in the land
to go virtually Unchecked. Even now
that the EPA Is requiring landfills to
be lined, I do not feel confident that
these liners will remain secure In the
long term. Therefore, I believe IL is ap-
propriate for the Congress to inter.
vene at this time and to establish a
new policy which calls for a review of
known hazardous wastes and a deter-
mination whether these wastes are ap-
propriate for land disposal.
We simply cannot afford to allow
these dangerous and persistent chemi.
! E)A.) ‘ C(’ _ . L4 ii’ .i
t)e-c
£ oui 4Th 7c
-------
Azigu.sf , 1983
As a member of the ergy and Coin-
inerce Subcommittee on Oversight and
.nvestigations. I was involved in a
most thorough investigation of the
EPA and their mismanagement of the
hazardous waste progra.m. I am con-
cinced more than ever that we must
enact tough standards for hazardous
waste generators, and we must give
EPA the ability to carry out the law.
ThLS bill closes many of the loopholes
hi RCRA. and gives EPA the power to
enforce the law we have passed. ‘This
bill deserves the support of my col-
leagues for it offers enforcement of
present law and tough restrictions on
unsound dumping. The past several
months have demonstrated to all
Memoers the seriousness of our haz-
dous wmt.e problem and the poten-
tial for abuse. I urge my colleagues to
support this bill and make a .strong
statement for control of hazardous
wastes.e
• Mr. FRENZEL. Mr. Chairman, con-
tinued reliance on land disposal of
hazardous wastes is a dangerous policy
which threatens the health of Amen-
cans now and in the future.
As more and more contaminated
sites ire being discovered and people
are displaced from hometowns such as
Times Haach and Love Canal. the
mandate for legislative and adminis-
a ve action to set forth guidelines
for the disposal of h rdous ‘wastes
-becomes clearer and clearer. -
H..R. 286’ ?, the Hazardous ‘Waste
Control d n!orcernent A. of l9 .
outlines a plan or managing the coun-
try ’s 250 million tons of hazardous
waste generated each year. In my
judgment, the oW is a, good start, but
there are some provisions with which I
Lake issue.
Dry cleaners, gas stations. hosptals,
painters, and other nnil generators of
wastes will be severely burdened and
perhaps put out of business if we allow
them to be sub3ected to the regula-
tions now governing larger generators
just because the EPA failed to ‘write
the mcafl generator regulations within
the statutory deadline. The
prOvisiOn should be removed trBm sec-
tion 3 of the bin. The shelby-Lent
amendment would provide for the re-
moral of the hazmner. It should be
supported.
Requiring notification manifests for
25 kilogram/month producers while
the regulation requirement threshold
is 100 kilogram/month is confusing
and burdersome The enforceability of
the manifest provision is questionable.
Representatives SILEE.EY and Lz,r
should be supported in their attempt
to readjust the requirement so that
both the manifest requirement and
the generation provision aill be con-
sistent at 100 kilogranvmonth.
Mr. Chairman, the thembers of the
House Energy and Commerce Commit.-
tee and the House Judiciary .Corzmut-
tee are to be commenced for their
work on this bill. waste
managen iefl4 is not an issue that Is
easily resolved.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
I intend to support the bill, whether
or not it is unproved by the Shelby-
Lent amendment. This bill is too im-
portant and too long overdue. It must
be passed now..
• Mr. FAtJNTROY. I rise in support
of R.R. 286’;, the Hazardous Waste
Control and Enforcement Act of 1983.
ILR. 2367 reauthor2es and en.nances
the Resource Conservation and Recov-
ery Act (RCRA) which governs the
treatment, storage, transportation.
and disposal of hazardous waste.
Toxic waste is a threat to the health
and well-being of aLt Amencans in our
great Nation. Each year. our industries
generate approximately 250 million
tons of hazardous we.ste. Alamiungly,
the disposal of a great proportion of
this waste it unregulated.
Mr. Chairman, on December 16.
1982, my colleague, the distuiguished
chairman of the Subcommittee on
Commerce, Transportation, and Tour-
ism of the Committee on ergy and
Commerce, and I requested the Gener-
al Aecounung Office to determine the
correlation between the location of
hazardous waste landfills and the
racial and economic status of the stir-
rounding communities.
We asked them to focus their review
on ofisite landfills—those not part of
or contiguous to an rndustrml facifl-
ty—found m the erght Soutt’ieast ri
Ztates comprising the Envn’onmental
Pro an Agency’s Region l v. We
also asked for .n1crmation on site loca-
tion standards. ‘public particIpation re-
.urernents ror sicLig offs te hazardous
waste landfills, and EPA’s class permit
proposal wmch addresses the permmt-
ting, s a grc p, less complex Waste
management facilities such as storage
tank&
• The General Amounting Office
lound that: -
There re four offslie hszardo’.is waste
landfiLls in Region rVs eight States. Blacks
make up the maiortty of the population In
three of the four cornmuniues where the
landfills are located. AL least 26 percent of
the population in all four commomtles have
income below the poverty level and q%ost of
this population Is black. -
This study confli-med our suspimon
tha I those who are both poor a,nd
black are being forced more than
others to - live with the potential
health risks posed by hazardous waste
landfills,
This is yet another example which
illustrates that the problems which
affect all Americans are most acutely
reflected In the black experience.
There is a compelling national inter-
est In improving strong legislation
such as that before us that would
make the land disposal of hazardous
waste inappropriate.
No one—black, white, Hispanic, or
Native American. poor or affluent—
should be forced to Ilve near a hazard-
ous waste landfill. There is no such
thing as a “safe” hazardous waste
landfill.
I am in agreement with the holding
of H.R. 2867 that .safer alternative
H 6511
forms for disposal are avaflable and
their capacity is being underutilized,
Incentives must be created to shift dis-
posal from the land to other tec moi-
ogies. Most disturbing is the fu- thng
that many land disposal facthues do
not even comply with current law. A
current EPA study found that 109 of
171 sites examined were in viotanon of
RCRA regulations,
Mr. Chairman. H.R. 2867 is deserv-
ing of support because It conveys a
clear and unamb guous message to the
regulated community and the Em’u’on.
mental Protection Agency: ReLia.nce
on land disposal of hazardous waste
has resulted in an unacceptable risk to
human health and the envircriment”
Under this legislation, land cisposal
would be authorized Only as a last
resort and only under conditions
which would insure the full protection
of human health and the environ-
merit.
I urge support of ‘this most impor-
tant legislation..
• Mr. TIDALL. Mr. Chairman. I appre-
ciate the cooperation of the gentleman
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Encaa) arid
the manager of the bill, the ger.tleman
from New Jersey (Mn Fx.oRio) in con-
sidering my concerns with respect to
the ,National Groundwater Cmis-
slon.
The amendment ‘which Mr. c a
sponsored would establish a Nanonal
Groundwater ComrniQ’ ion . The Corn-
mission is a.ssigued the duty of exam-
inizg 1 specif c matters relating to
ground water quality and qtmntisy
which are listed in subsection i6(o.
The Commiss:on is to report to the
President and each House of Congress
its findings and recommendations for
legislation and acn’.inistrative actions
no later than October 30,, 1985.
Same of the matters which the Com-
mission will address, and relating to
which it may be expected to recom-
mend legislation, are matters which
are within the legislative iunsdicr.ion
of the Committee on Interior and In-
sular Affairs.
For example, the Comrniccion is to
assess generally the engineering and
technological capability to recharge
agnifers.
I would call your attention to the
fact that the House has r criIty
passed and sent to the Senate HR. 71,
a bill which would establish a program
within the Department of the Interior
for the construction of demonstration
plants to test various techniques for
ground water recharge. H2.. 71 was re-
ported to the House by the Committee
on Interior and Insular Affairs,
The Committee on Interior arid Li-
sular AUalrs has jurisdictIon over in-
terstate compacts relating to water.
The Commission will have the duty to
assess the use and effectiveness of In-
terstate compacts to address ground
water protect:on from coatamninar,iOn.
Water research programs have traC
tionally been within the legislative Ju-
risdiction of the Committee on Interi”
-------
H 6512
or and Insular Affairs, and the Coin.
mission is to assess the adequacy of
ground water research and determine
future research needs.
The Committee on Interior and In-
sular Affairs also has jurisdiction over
he U.S. Geological Survey which has
an ongoing program of assessing the
amount and locations of the Nation’s
ground water resources. The amend.
merit would assign a similar duty to
the Comirussion.
In fact, of the 21 duties assigned to
the Commission, at least 8, numbers 1,
6. 7, 8. 12. 19. 20. and 21. listed in sub.
section 26(b) in the amendment, are
matters which would fall within the
legislative jurisdiction of the Commit-
tee or. lnterior and Insular Affairs.
As originally drafted. I noted that
the Commission, which would consist
of 17 members, would have included 4
members appointed by the Speaker of
the House. 2 of whom were to be mem-
bers of the Committee on Public
Works arid Transportation, and 2 of
whom shall be members of the Cam.
mittee on Energy and Commerce. In
view of the interests of the Committee
on Interior and Insular Affairs, which
I have pointed out, I felt that this
committee should also be ,represented
on the Comnussion. I am pleased that
my colleagues agreed to modify this
arnendrner.t to Include two members
from the Committee an Interior arid
Insular Affairs and I thank them for
‘heir courtesy in considering this
ange.3
Mr. LAFALCE. Mr. Chairman. I rise
support of H. . 2867, the azaraous
aste Control and Enforcement Act
of 1 83. —
Although we have several amend-
merits to debate before we vote final
passage, I believe that the resulting
legislation will be a significant Im-
provement over current law.
H.R. 2867, and amendments thereto,
does away. I believe, with the pre-
sumption that the landfill disposal of
hazardous wastes is protective of
human health and the environment.
As we have seen over and over again at
hazardous waste sites thoughout the
Country, we cannot guarantee—scien-
tLfically or politically—that the haz-
ardous wastes d lspGsed of in the
ground will remain safely segregated
from the euvironment for extended
periods of time.
H.R. 2867 prohibits the landfill dis-
posal of noncontainenzed liquid ha,z.
ardous wastes and requires that the
land disposal of containerized liquid
hazardous wastes be minimized to the
ex Lent technologically possible. The
bill also directs EPA to review the
safety of all hazardous wastes regulat.-
ed under RCRA and to issue regula-
tions regarding the landfill disposal of
‘h wastes. If EPA fails to meet this
tine. all methods of land disposal
d be prohibited. This so-called
ner provision is, in light of EPA’s
record in promulgating regula-
uons under RCRA. most important.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
H.lt, 2867, as amended by the
Shelby-Lent amendment, will bring
small quantity generators under
RCRA’s regulatory umbrella. Present-
ly. generators producing less than
1,000 kilograms of hazardous waste
per month are exempted from RCRA
requirements. Under Shelby-Lent,
those that generate between 100 and
1,000 kilograms per month will be sub-
ject to special re uiations designed to
safely handled such wastes while
taking Into account the economic
effect of regulation on the small busi-
ness community.
Mr. Chairman, the Shelby-Lent com-
promise amendment provides a work-
able solution to the small quantity
generator .problem, one that is sup-
ported by both, the environmental and
business communit es.
I would also like to note my strong
support for an amendment that will be
offered by the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Lm r) to restore the original
congressional intent of enabling a
State that received credit for its ex-
penditures prior to enactment of Su-
perfund to apply that credit toward
the State share of Superfund-related
costs at other abandoned hazardous
waste dumpsites. --
What this amendment says is that
we will stop punishing States that
moved forward to clean up abandoned
hazardous waste sites before the Fed-
eral Superfund scheme was in place.
And that we will allow these States to
use funds spent before Superfurid was
enacted to meet the State share re-
quirements of the S perfund law.
I will also support an acier crnenz :o
be offered by the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. EDGAR) to establish
a National Groundwater Commis. ion.
As a cosponsor of his bill, amid a
Member whose district is the focus of
an extensive EPA-sponsored ground
water monitoring study, I can attest
not only to the need to protect our
ground water resources, but also to
the need to have a rational program to
protect this vital resource. The Com-
mission will fill a troublesome void fri
our environmental protection effort. -
- I also want to voice my support for
the provisions of the bill -that extend
EPA’s enforcement powers. WR. 2867
gives EPA exclusive authority over,
civil enforcement actions. EPA Is em-
powered to litigate civil cases If. and
let us not forget this If, the Depart-
ment of Justice fails to act In a timely
fashion. The bill also authorizes EPA
criminal investigators to carry fire-
arms, execute and serve warrants,
summonses, and subpenas. administer
oaths, and make arrests without war-
rants for offenses committed in the in-
vestigator’s presence or for felonies.
The bill also contains provisions that
would allow citizens the right to sue, if
EPA fails to do so, to stop actions that,
present an imminent and substantial
endangerment to health and the envi-
ronment.
Mr. Chairman, these two provisions.
coupled with Congress’ continuing
August 4; 1.983
oversight responsibilities, will provide
sufficient checks to insure that our
hazardous waste management laws are
brought to bear on real problems with.
out the delay and confusion that has
characterized action to date.
In summary, we have before us a bill
that strengthens our Federal hazard-
ous waste management program, I
urge aLl my colleagues to support H.R.
2867: to breathe renewed life into our
attack on the improper management
of the hazardous wastes that abound
in our society.•
• Mr. WALGREN. Mr. Chairman, I
am pleased to support the Hazardous
Waste Control and Enforcement Act
which will require further progress in
cor. air.u’.g hazardous waste. We
should not have to live in fear that
Love Canal or Tunes Beach could
happen in our own community, We
must do all we can to keep hazardous
substances out of the food and water
we depend on. -
Without this bill, an estimated 4 mil-
lion tons of hazardous waste are dis-
posed of each year with no accounting
or control. As a result of this kind of
practice, EPA now estimates that
there are as many as 34.000 sites in
the country that are a threat to
human health, from dumps to play-
grounds. The types of substances this
bill addresses are clearly toxic to
people like arsenic, cadmium, chrorni-
urn. lead, mercury, and PCB’s. H.R.
2367 will close the gaps in coverage of
the present law, that will push indus-
cries to better contain or neutralize
wastes, and u.ill give the Eiv ror.men-
tal Protection Agency more effec: ve
author:ty to assure proper disposal of
hazardous wastes. -
In my view, our society should seri-
ously question the continued land dis-
posal of hazardous wastes. I! we can
find ways to dispose or neutralize haz-
ardous waste Instead of dumping it in
the ground, we should. Ground dispos-
al is inherently dangerous because
subsequent contamination of liners in
landfills can be penetrated with under-
ground water. There are other ways to
dispose of wastes that we should turn
to like incineration, chemical fixation,
and biological treatment and stabiliza
Lion, This bill moves us in that direc
tion. -
In the past several years. two highly
visible incidents have roused public
awareness on hazardous waste prob-
lems. In the Làve Canal area near Ni-
agara Falls uncontrolled disposal of
dioxin and other contaminants, like
benzene, DDT, chloroform, arsenic.
and mercury, forced widespread evacu
ation.
In Times Beach, Mo., the soil was
contaminated •with dioxin, from mate-
rial sprayed on unpaved streets for
dust control. EPA has now agreed to
pay to “move” the town, a rather
costly cleanup.
Chemicals are a part of everyday life
in a modern society. Yet a.s cherntcais
become more ever present, our incas-
7r
-------
Nouember 3,1381
laminatIon 13 turnIng a potential te-
isrce Into a waste.
s $ result, New York and ieveral
w Jersey niunicipalities feel obliged
.o barge their sludges out to sea—out
- of sight, out of mind. Other municipal-
Ities across the enuntry are likewise
limited in their sludge disposal op.
-
We can no longer afford to hide our
contarrnnated wastes under the carpet.
It is time to look seriously at responsi-
ble management options. Mr. Mouss-
asu’s amendment addresses a serious
flaw In our ha douz waste policy In
this country, and I urge my colleagues
to join In support of this amendznent4
• ‘ 01630
The CHAIRMAN. The question Is an
the asnendxnent offered by the gentle-
man from New York (Mr. Lmrr).
The amendment was agreed to.
On page 58, after lIne 14, add the follow-
new sect lon - ‘
AT1OMAL 5 500W) WaT COkMiSslOIi
“Sac, 24A. (a) E!TAZLZSH’T.—Thele h
established a commission to be known as
the National Ground Water C”n’ on
(hereinafter In this Act referred to as the
“CommIssion”).
“(b) Dimss or Co iss:oii.—The dulies
of the Commission are to:
“(1) Assess generally the amount, bce
lion, and quality of the Nation’s ground
water resourt’es.
- “(2) ldentily gtrierally the sources, exter.L,
types of ground water contamination,
31 Assess the scope and nature of the re-
.onshlp between ground water containi-
lion and ground aster withdrawal and de-
lop projections of available, usable ground
in future years on a nationwide basii
‘(4) Assess the relationship between sur-
face water pollution and ground water pol-
Iution.
(5) Assess the need for a policy to protect
ground water degradation caused by ron.
tamination
“(6) Assess generally the extent of over-
drafting of ground water resources, and the
adequacy of existing mech.n , nE for pee-
- venting such overdisltizig.
‘(7) Assess generally the eagtheedng sad
technologIcal capability to recharge
SQulfes ).
‘18) Assess the adequacy of the present
smderstanthng of ground water recharge
sanes and sole source aquifers and assess
the adequacy of knowledge regarding the In.
terrelatlonshlp of designated aquifers and
recharge zones.
(9) Assess the role of land-use pattems U
these relate to protecting ground water
from cont T!lT UOn.
110) Assess methoth Sr remedial abate.
meet of ground waler cemlasnination as well
as the costs and benefits of cleaning up p01’
toted ground water and compare cleanup
cost.s to the costs of substitute waler supply
methods.
“Ill) Investigate policies and aetl
taken by foreign governments to protect
ground water from contamination.
“(12) Assess the use and effectiveness of
ealstmg Interstate compacts to address
-“und a’ater protection from contamlna’
1$) Anslyze legal rights and
edies regaz ‘-‘ ati of
md aster.
14) Assess the adequacy of existing
standards for ground water quality er
State and Fbd ial inw.
‘85 £ monitoring methodologies a!
the States and the Federal Government to
achieve the level of protection of the so-
source as required by State and Federal law.
“(161 the relationship between
ground waler flow systems (and associated
recharge areas) and the control of sources
cont.amuraUon.
‘117) ssan the role of.jmderground mice-
ton practices as a means of disposing of
waste fluids while protecting ground water
from r mt.ft M
‘118) A mrl.hods for ahai ent and
mmtalnment of gretund water cont nm tlon
and for aquifer reatora on fric imding the
costs and of al&esnetjre to ahaic-
esent and containment.
“(19) Assess State and Federal ground
water law and mechanisms with which to
manage the quality and quantity of the
ground water resource.
“(20) A the adequacy of tlng
ground water research and determine future
ground water research needs. -
“(21) Assess the roles of State, local, and
Federal Go ernments In managing ground
water quality and quantity.
‘ Ic) Mmsscasssp.—41) The Comi , - i ion
shall be composed of nineteen meabesa as
blows; — -
‘ 1A) Sli appointed by the eaker of the
United States House of Reprea 1t tiveu
from among the Members of the House of
Representatives, two of whom shall be
members of the Committee on Energy and
Commerce, two of whom shall be members
of the Committee on Public Works and
Transportation, and two of whom shall be
members of the Committee on Interior and
Insular Mfairs:
“(B) Feur appointed by the majority
leader of the United States Senate from
among the Members of the United States
Senate;
“(Cl Eight appointed by the President as
follows:
‘11) Pow from among $ list of meinina-
tons submitted to the President by the Na-
tional Governors r i ’iat1on, two of whom
shall be representatives of ground water ap-
propriation Slates and two of whom shall be
representaUvea of ground water rlparlan
States;
“UI) One from SThIWIE $ list of f ,.iih a .
tons submitted to the President by the Na-
tonal League of Cities and the U,& ‘-“ ‘
of Mayors;
‘ 1W) One from among a list of nomina-
tions submitted to the President by the Na-
tonal Academy of Sciences;
“ (lv) One from among a list of no” ”-
lImo submitted to the President by gioupo.
organizations, or associations of Industries
the activities of which may affect ground
sad
‘ lv) One from among a list of nominations
submitted to the President from groups, or-
ganizations, or associations of citizens which
sew of p ...
with pollution and environmental issues and
which have participated, at the State or
Federal level, in studies, administrative pro-
ceedings, or litigation (or any combination
thereof) relating to ground wate1- and
“CD) The DIrector of tin Olin of
nology Assemment. -‘ -
A vacancy in the Commission shall be filled
In the manner In which the original ap-
pointnsent was made. Appointments may be
made under this subsection without regard
to sectIon 5311(b) of title 5, United States
, Not more than three of the six mem-
bess appointed under subparagraph (A and
mare than two of tin low bess ap-
pointed under subparagraph CB may be of
the ume political party. No member •p.
Wider paragraph C may be an of-
.11 9163
Seer es employee of the Federal Oovern-
“(2) If any member of the Comnueslon
who was appomted to the Conuntasion as a
Member of the Congress leaves that office.
or if any member of the Commission a-ho
was appointed from persons who are not of-
fioera or employees of any government be-
comes an of 1eer or employee of a govern-
ment. he may continue as a member of the
Commission for tiot longer than the ninety.
day perIod beginning on the date he leaves
that office or betvwnes such an offi se
employee, as the case may be.
‘13) Wembers shall be appointed for the
We of the C IssIan.
‘ I4MA) Except as provided In aubpara’
graph (B). members of the Commission
shall each be entitled (subject to appropri-
ations provided in advance) to receive the
daily equivalent of the maximum annual
of hesie pay in effect far grade 06-18
of the General Schedule for each day (in-
cluding travel time) during which they are
engaged in the actual performance of duties
rested In the Commission. While away from
their homes or regular places of business In
the performance of services for the Commis-
sion, members of the C mmi ion shall be
allowed travel expenses, Including per diem
In lieu of subsistence, In the asme “ .“ as
persons employed lntermlttenUy In Govern-
ment service tie allowed expenses under
section 5703 of title 6 of the United States
Code.
“(B) Members of the Commission who a ie
Members of the Congress shall receive no
additional pay, allowances, or benefits by
reason of their service on the Commission.
‘(5) Five members of the Commission
shall constitute a quorum but two may Itoid
hearings.
“(6) The Chairman 01 the Commission
shall be appointed by the Speaker of the
House of Representatives from among mem-
bers appointed under paragraph (iRA) of
this subsection and the yin Chairman of
the Commission shall be appointed by the
niajonty leader of the Senate froen se
members appointed under paragraph (LXB)
of this subsecUon. The Chairman and the
Vice Chairman of the Commission shall
serve for the life of the Commission unless
they cease to be members of the Commis-
sion before the I Ins$-iIi,i of _____
slon.
‘17) The Commission shall meet st the
cell of the Chairman or a majority v i its
members.
“Cd) sirs Sv*rr or Coiansszow
Exvssrss sea Cowsm.rsirys.—(l) The Com-
mission shall have a Director who shall be
appointed by the Chairman, without regard
to section 5311(b) of tItle 5, United &ates
Code.’
“(2) The Chairman may appoint and fix
the pay of such additional personnel as the
Chairman considers appropriate.
- With the approval of tin
Ec the Chairman may procwe temporary
and Intermittent services under section
3lOPb) of title 5 of the United States Code,
‘14) The Comm ion shall request, and
- (he Chief of Engineers and the Director of
tfiq Geologies] Survey are each suthorbed
to detail, on a reimbineable basis, any of the
ersonneI of their respective agencies to the
Commission to assist IL in carrying out Its
duties under this section, Upon requ of
the Commission, the head of any other Fed.
eral agency is authorized to detail, on a ,‘e-
imbursabie hash, ens at the personnel St
such agency to the to amiss It
13 can7thg cut lb dates wider this ve ’
‘ 1e) Powus or Co.vinssiow.—(l) The
Co ,m lrwb i may, for the purpose of eszs’y-
leg sot this — bold hearingi,
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE
-------
and act at such times and planes, take such
testimony, and receive such evidence, as the
Commisuon cocestereap ta,.
“ (2) Any member or agent of the Cosomla.
slon niar. If so &uthorizad ay the Ccmmia.
slon. take any action which the Co mission
la authoriz.ed to take by this section.
“(3) The Commission may use t.he United
S’.ates malls In the same manner end under
the same conditions as other departments
and agencies of the United States.
- ••(4) The Administrator of General Serv-
Ices shall provide to the Comm on on a
leimbuisabie basis such administrative sup-
port nerviocs as the miedo .y se-
• quest
‘(5) The Commission y asome d ectty
froici any department or ueney ef the
Vnlted States iziformatlon necesssry to
• enable It to carry out this section. Upon ye-
guest of the Chairinsn of the Commission.
the ficed of such depsri.ment or agency
sbs furnish such Informatton to the Cam-
-. . -
‘(f) Rxrowr- 1) The Cosnn,Isslon shall
transmit to the President end to each Rouse
of the Cangrees a repcet not later than Co.
tober 10. 1 5. The yeport shall contain a
detailed atetnent of the findings and con-
eluslons of the Commission with respect to
each item listed In subsection (hI. together
wflh its recommendations for such legisla-
tion: and admlnla*stive sctioos, as It consid-
era approprIate.
fl) Slot later then one ,ser after the en-
setment of this Act, the Commission shall
nomplete a preliminary study concerning
ground waler contamination from beserd-
ous end other solid waste and submit to the
President and to the Congress a report con-
taming the findings and conclusions of such
preluninsi’y study. The study shall be con.
tinued thereafter, and final findings and
Conclusions shall be Incorporated as a sepa .
rate chapter In the report reQuired unth r
paasgrwh (1). The preliminary study shaU
Include an anazrsis of the extent of ground
water contamination caused by hazardous
and other soUd waste, the regions and maior
Eater supplies mcat slgnlficanUy affected
by such contamination, and any r mmen.
deLions of ll mi ion far saevrntive r n
remedial measures to protect huisan health
and the ensironmmt Irma the eIte s of
such contamination.
“(g) TssMza&nOx.—Tbe Commission shall
cease to exist on January 1. 1986.
(h) Aumoszzarzoic or ArraoraxAT!oxs.—
There is autborssed to be appropriated L X
the fIscal years 1983 through 1995 not to
ceed 17.000.000 to carry out this section.”
- Amend the tab le of contents accordingly.
- The CRAIRMAN pro tempore. Are
there further amendments to this see-
t lon?
LEDmII.seT Or1 . ST fl. Pi IO
Mr. lWRIO. Mr. Chairman. I offer
an amendment on behalf ‘of myself
and Mr. 1E oaa- . - - -
The Clerk read as follo r
Amendment offered by Mr. Fwaio:
Mr. FLORIO (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman. I ask uninimotis
sent that the axnenthnent be tonsid.
eTed as read and printed in the
RaCOHD.
The CHAIRMAN pro teanpore. k
there objection to the reqiseat of the
getnlema.n from New Jersey?
There was no objecUon.
(Mr. FLORIO asked arid Was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
qarks.)
‘dr fl.ORIO. Mr ChaIrman. I offer
behalf of the distinguished gentle-
119164 . - ‘. - CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE
‘November 8, 1983
man from Pennsylvania (Mr. Eoc a) Mr. LENT Mr. Chairasen. WUZ the
and myself this amendment, gentleman yield?
The Ground Water Commission was Mr. FLORIO. I yield to the gentle.
included In last year’s bill (E.R. 6307) man from New York.
and intervening events—such as the (Mr. LENT asked and wan given per-
wide , 1 ad revelations about dioxin missiem to revise and extend his re•
Contaznlnatlon—have only reinforced
the need for a comprehensive, cooi’di- Mr. LENT. i U k the gentleman
nated effort to preserve this recio s. for yielding. Mr. Chairman. I rise to
Irreplaceable resource.
The primary purpose of fl.R. 2867 Bunport the amendment offered by
the Pasardo ,ç Waste Control and the gentleman from New Jersey on
forcemesmt Act of 1983. Is to close the behalf of Mr. *a of Pennsylvania
loopholes In RCRA. the law governing for the establishment of a National
the bandflng and d tim ] Ground Water Contsni esion.
ous waste. One of the loopholes in commend the gentleman for this
RCR.A Is that there no farsighted amendment which will pro-
policy ______ wide a mAiJT step toward resolving this
ground water. As a r’eaulL there is Ito Nation’s ground water problems. A.s
unform approach—and precious little ranking minority member of the
cooperation between the Federal Bouse Commerce Subcommittee with
ernment and the States—in addressing lunsdictlon over our Nation’s hazard.
one of the most dangerous threats OUS waste disposal laws, my Interest In
biic hesIUL- • - ground arater protection has been
hR. 2867 recognIzes this threat and, longstanding.
If enacted, will curb, and hopefully In 1979. I held a hearing In Long
eliminate, the potential for ground and specifically to assess the ground
water pollution resulting from improp- water situation and to find answers to
or disposal of hazardous waste. While contaminati on problems. Lest
we have taken every possible legisla- yco.I ’, I supported adoption of a virtual-
tive action Im shis bill ly Identical smeodment to the one
ground water contsmthatkM believe being offered today. Unlortnnately
It is Imperative that we take th f that RCRA reauthorization measure
thor step of development of a compre- was never enacted into law,
hensive national pian to insure that Furthermore. I personally wrote a
everything that can be done w u be letter to the President earlier thIs year
done, and that the Nation’s supply of requesting that the administration es-
water will be safe and tablish a blue ribbon panel to develop
I would like to remind the Members a coherent national ground water
of the House that aquifers do not - - strategy. Unfortunately my request
cgntze State boundaries, which Is all las never acted upon.
the more reason for a policy tihat is The ground water situation Is espe-
national En scope. The interstate char- clally serious on Long Island. where
acter of ground water contamination is tl Y congressional district Is located.
just one of the many dimensions of bause the 2.75 million residems
this Problem that the comnxmaslon there rely entirely on three aquifers
would address. - for their water supplies. These
Finally, I would like to mention the aquifers hold about 8.3 cubic miles of
Importance of ground water to States water, an amount so vast that it could
with aquifers which constitute the sole cover the entire Earth under 2
source of drinking water for most of Inches of water. Protected by bun-
its citizens, New Jersey Is auth a State. dreds of feet of soil and gravel, Long
Three million people In to counties Island’s ground water was for years
Ire supplied with dz-jnkjng a’ai - from simply considered invulnerable to con-
the New Jersey coastal plain aquifer, ta.inliiatlon by organic chemicals. How-
There is no existing alternative to that ever, during the 1970’s, a variety of or-
source of drinking water. Further- ganic chemicals were discovered to
more, this aquifer is extremely suseep- have penetrated the Island’s water
tible to contamination because of the supplies. Testing during those years
highly permeable nature of New Jer ’ revealed tiat i4gnificant contamina-
sey’s soil. tion had touched a number of public
There is a critical need to protect and private well water supplies, This
these and other aquifers and to devel- contaminatIon is attributable to a van-
up the best policies for providing per- ety of factors Including gasoline awe-
wisnent protect ion. That _ : age tanks, fertUmeT runoff, sonnary
need a comprehensive, Independent dfi , and septic tank systems.
evalUation. I am confident that this Ground water contamination Is not
wIU be accomplished by the Ground Isolated to Long Island but has
Water Commission. • become a problem of national signifi-
In essence, what this provision does. .canoe In recent years. WhIle I believe
wblth Is offered by myself and Mr. that the States should ultimately have
IGAR, with the concurrence of a- the primary responsibility for protect-
number of people here In to establish Ing ground water, I favor a coordinat-
the Commission which will go bra-and ed effort at the national level to deter-
end develop a comprehensive ground mine what is needed to prevent fur-
water strategy. I think It Is something ther deterioration of our ground water
that is highly desirable and long over- supplies. The Ground Walem’ C nn”a.
, . sian ‘ th1 5 amendment estab-
-------
November 3 1983 -
lishes will provide such a coordinated
national approach. -
The Con mLccion would be charged
tb numerous Important tasks Includ-
assessing curTent State and Feder.
regulation of ground water. assess-
jug the adequacy of existing ground
water research and assessing the roles
of State, local, and the Federal Gov-
errunent In managing ground water
• Quality. And, most Importantly, the
Commission will not be empowered to
establish any new regulatory authori-
ties, but rather will study these issues
and report back to Congress with Its
recommendations. Congress will then
amine the Commisuon’s recommen-
dations and make the appropriate
policy decisions. .:
Preservation of the purity of our
ground water depends on vigilant over-
sight by public officials who sie In a
position to make policies which will
Insure its protection. I am proud to be
here today to lend my support to a Na-
tional Ground Water . Comm1 . ion
which will provide us with major prog-
ress toward establishing a coinprehen-
sive national ground water protection
policy.
I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. MOLINARI. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. FLORIO. I yield to the gentle-
man from New York.
(Mr. MOUNARI asked and was
given pci-mission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. MOLINARI. I thank the gentle-
i for yielding.
fr. Chairman, I rise in support of
ie amendment. offered by the gentle-
nan from Pennsylvania. This measure
is long overdue.
We biow that our ground water re-
sources are threatened with contami-
nation and depletion, yet we lack corn-
prehemsire information on the nature
and scope of these threats. Six Federal
statutes, many of which overlap.
govern aspects of ground waler prob-
lems. Additionally. State protection
measures are inconsistent, fragnien-
tary. and limited. A Commission will
transcend this jur Isdictional confusion
and objectively determine the best re-
medial and preventive action to take.
Controlling ground water contami-
nation poses unique problems. Unlike
pollution of the air or surface waters,
ground water pollution travels slowly.
Therefore, ground water pollution
which occurred decades ago may now
be appearing hi parts of aquifers used
for water supply. SirrfflQ. ly, ground
water pollution oecurring today may
not appear for decades.
As of 1982. EPA located over 180.000.
waste Impoundments at some 80.000
sites. Of the industrial landfill sites
evaluated in the Agency’s surface Im-
poundment assessment, ‘ 0 percent
aere found to be unlIned. 50 percent
‘e sitting directly on top of ground
•r aquifers, and 98 percent were £0
d within I mile of a water supply
d. The Council on Environmental
lality estimated that serious -
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
th Linttun of iround water by toxic
aynthetic organic chenilesis had cc-
cuired In 34 States. Within the last few-
years. for ‘ .‘ ‘ple. public wells have
been clbsed In 22 communities In Mas-
nchiiaetts. 18 in ConnectIcut. 23 in
Pennsylvania. and 22 In New York.
Over 100 prIvate wells have been
dosed in New Jersey and 500 in Long
Island.’
Bence, the need for a comprehensive
study of our national ground water sit-
uation Is clear. It will provide vs a
sound basis for determining itoir to In-
tegrate Federal. State. and isa 1 se-
sponslbillt .Ies so that they work to-
gether as effectively as possible. As
the proper mechanisms for dealing
with these problems are Installed, we
will gain better control of ground
water at the source and thereby pre-
vent future eslamitles. Once an
aquifer Is contaminated, the process of
reclaiming It Is a difficult and expen-
sive one. The natural rate of ground
water recharge Is on the order of dee-
sd
I urge my colleagues to support this
amendment as a wise step toward
saving our most precious resource—
water. -.. -
Mr. ECKABT. Mr. Chairman. “I
move to strike the last word, and I rise
In support of the amendment. -
(Mr. t’-J ART asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. EC ART. I thank the Chair-
man. Mr. Chairman. I rise In support
of the amendment on my behalf and
on behal.f of our colleague from Okia-
hoina. Congressman SYNAR. Congress-
man Ss-ssu’s subcommittee and task
force has been hard at work trying to
formulate an appropriate ground
water policy, a policy that Is long over-
due both within the EPA and through.
out the States working together In a
coordinated effort.
On August 11 and October 3 1 sent
letters to the new head of the EPA,
Mr. Ruckp1 h lic. asking for the ad-
ministration’s position on a ground-
water policy—requests made by both
Congr cn n Smaa and by niembera
of our subcommittee. While I am con-
tident that we will be able to work out
an equitable solution to the questions
raised by Congressman Smait’s. Con-
gre rn n Fx.oiuo’s, and CongrPc mnn
Wsxxsa’s hearings, I am enthusiastic
In support of the Edgar Ground Water
Commi csion because I believe It will
add an important dimension to the
planning process both for this adxnin-
Istratlon and for local governments.
The Edgar Cornrnie Ion amendment
which has been cosponsored by my
friend from New Jersey, myself, and
my friend from Oklahoma, adds a lot
to the efforts to determine how we are
going to protect ground water. Once
an aquifer Is poisoned, as my friend
from New York knows, all too often
the expense Incurred by the taxpayers
acclaIm It is prohibitively high. If
we plan better we mm, like that
famous television ercial suggests,
H 9165
Ivold paying exorbitant ta later.
Pay me now or pay me later reminds
us that paying later costs much, much
moie,
I would urge the adoption of the
Ground Water CoYn,n cion amend-
ment and I yield back the balance of
my lime.
Mr. BROWN of California. Mr.
Chairman, I move to strike the requi-
site number of words.
(Mr. BROWN of California asked
and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.) -
Mr. BROWN of California. Mr.
Chairman, I rise In support of this
amenament. While I would not ordi-
narily take the floor to express “my
strong support for It, I am moved to do
so because of the fact that just within
the last few days the Office of Tech-
nology Assessment. which Is an arm of
the Congress, has issued a report indi-
cating the seriousness of the problem
of ground water and presenting cer-
tam options with regard to future
policy treatment of this subject. -
The proposal for the Commission
that this amendment makes fits In
very well with the policy options sug-
gested by the OTA. which include the
need for some additional research, and
better means for collecting and man-
aging Information related to this prob-
lem, as well as other recommenda
tions. I think the Commission, as a
result of Its own work, will probably
bring back to the Congress sonic mee
ommendations for substantial increase
In the effort currently being devoted
to analysis of ground water problems
of all kinds, including not only the
contamination from hazardous wastes,
but the problems caused by the over-
use. In some cases, or the Inappropri-
ate use of agricultural chemicals, as
well as other practices which ean
Itamfige this very Important natural
resource.
I commend the distinguished gentle-
man from Pennsylvania for offering
this Important amendment. The
Ground Water Commission was In-
cluded In last year’s bill (HR. 6307)
and Intervening events (such as the
.ajdespread revelations about dioxin
contamination) have only relnloreed
the need for a comprehensive. coordi-
nated effort to preserve this precious.
Irreplaceable resource.
The primary purpose of H.R. 2867,
the Hazardous Waste Control and En-
forcenient Act 011983, Is to close tbe
loopholes In RCRA, the law governing
the handling and disposaj of hazard-
ous waste. One of the loopholes In
CBA Is that there is no national
policy to control contsmlnRtion of
ground water. As a result, there is no
jnlforun approach—and precious little
cooperation between the Federal Oov-
em inent and the States—In addr lng
one of the most dangerous threats to
public health.
RE. 2867 this threat and.
If enacted, will curb, and hopefully
•lfi ’,i ate, the potential for ground
-------
.u r . ,1ONAL RECORD— HOUSE November 3, 1983
water pollution resulting from Improp- Mr. Chairman we have studied this forming a comprehensive study
er disposal of hazardous waste. While matter to death. Its time to take ground aater.lncludtn&—
we have taken every possible legisla- actIon. .1 have been . ven assnr.nms £ general assessment of the anioum
tive action In this bill to guard aganist by ‘A Administrator Bill Ruckel- location, nd quality of the Nations
ground water contamination. I believe shaus that be considers the protection ground water resources.
It Is Imperative that we take the fur- of ground waters top priority. has es- A general Identification of th’
thea step o developing a compechen- tablished a task force on this Issise, souroes, extent, and types of groun
sive national plan to insure that every- .and will report back to our subcommi&- water contaniinatlon
thing that can be done will be done. tee later this year. We should not An assessment of the relationship
and that the aUon’s supply of water accept anything less than a full. cc- between surface water pollution and
will be safe and pure. ordinated program designed to provide ground water pollution.
I would like to remind the Members the States with the tools they need to An assessment of the extent of over-
of the House that aquifers do not. ace- protect the jirinking water supply of drafting of gv id water ources
cgnlze State boundaries, which ls $31 over too million Americans. • and the adequacy of 5J J 5 ui .
the more reason for a policy that. IS My concern. Mr. Chairman. Is that nisnis for preventing such overdraft-
aUonal In scope. The interstate char- the amendment. U passed, will provide
-- aster of ground water ccn lnAtIon Is EPA with Sfl PT JJ 5 10 10 An assessment of the engineering
just one of the many dimensions of drag Its heels on the establishment of and technological capability to se-
this problem that the Commission this needed policy. We nnt afford charge squif ems.
wouH address. . . to let that happen, so I ask the gentle- An assessment of the methods for
Finally, I would like to mention the man to assure me that the establish- abatement of ground water contanii-
fmportance of ground water to States nient of this Comrnis-’ion Is not de- nation and a comparison of cleanup
with aquifers which constitute the sole signed to slow down the development the cesta of substitute wazer
source of drinking water for most of of a coordinated national groundwater ppiy metbo s.
Its citizens. New Jersey Is such a State; protection policy, and that It £ 5 the SU- An assessment of the adequacy of
I mUlion people in 10 counties we sup- thors intent that EPA move ahead St existing standards for ground water
plied with drinking water from the full speed and not wait until the Corn- quality under State and Federal law.
New Jersey coastal plain aquifer. mission has finished Its work. III An assessment of Federal and State
There Is no existing alternative to that obtain my collewje’s assurances that monitoring methodologies.
source of drinking water. Further- the Commlaeion will only further An assessment of the adequacy of
more, this aquifer l extremely suacep- assist the States and Federal Govern- existing ground water research.
- tible to contamination because of The ment once a draft or final policy Is de- am ment of the Federal. State.
jg ijy me e nature of New Jer- veloped. I will be happy t uppOit and local roles In managing ground
soYa soil. - amendment. - water quality and Quantity.
There Is a critical need to protect So 1 would hope that this amend- This Information developed by the
these and other aquifers and to devel- nient. If accepted, would not give the Com sion will enable the Congress
op the best policies for providing per- EPA the opportunity or excuse by to determine what measures are ap-
inanent protection. That Is why we which to delay and would like to as- propriate and necessary to preserve
need a comprehensive, independent aured that we would stay on schedule and protect the Invaluable ground
evaluation. I am confident that this on that policy. - water resources of our Nation.
will be accomplished by the Ground Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, will The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
Water Commission, the gentleman piets? question Is on the amendment offered
Mr. SYNAR. Mr. Chairman, I move Mr. SYNAR. I yield to the subcozn- by the gentleman from New Jersey
to strike the requisite number of mittee chairman. (Mr. Fi.oaxO).
words. Mr. FLORIO. I thank the gentleman The amendment was agreed to.
(Mr. SYNAR asked and was given for yielding.
permission to revise and extend his re- 3 san assure the gentleman that. The CHAIRMAN pro Lempore. Are
marks.) . hi no way adversely affects the I 5POT%. there further amendments to section
Mr. SYNAR. Mr Chairman, I rise to sibility of EPA to come forward with 24?
enter Into a colloquy with the gentle- that policy statement they are sup- &j ’DNesT SY MR. 0055
man from New Jersey (Mr. FtoEio). posedly working on. Mr. GORE. Mr. Chairman. I offer an
As he knows, I have been acutely In- Mr. SYNAR. i thank the gentleman amendment to section 24(a).
volved In the Subcommittee on Envi- very much. The Clerk read as follows: -
ronment. Energy, and Natural Re- Mr. Cbairman. I would like to thank Amendment offered bg Mr. Gosm Page U,
sources. which I chair on the issue of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. siter lIne 14. L t
ground water. .. Ec,canr) for his kind remarks. ccaszcrivs *crtoa sgyowo vacuiTy
Mr. Chairman, while I rise in sup- Mr. Chairman. I yield back the hal- souxoasiss vi nmceouws asxs
port of the amendment I have some ance of my time. Sec 24A. Section 3004 Is amended by
reservations which I think he may be Mr. ROE. Mr. ChaIrman, 1 rIse In ,,
able to clarify. As the Members know, support of the ()i
the Subcommittee on Environment. This amendment Is essentially the ‘ (ml Cor.azcnvr Acrio,is Bevo,jn Paclz,Z-
Energy and Natural Resources, which asnie as that contained In R.R. 630i of ri BousDeRv.—As promptly as practicable
I chair, has been working on the serl- the last Congress. That bill was se- slier the date of the enactment of this aub.
iection. the Admln istr&Lør shall amend the
ous problem of cound water contanil- quenilafly referred to the Committee standards under this section regarding .
nation for over 3 years now. What we on public Works and Transportation reeuve action required at facilitpes for the
need, and this Is the agreement from for consideration of provisions direct- ,. ot hamxdoua
both the Republicans and Democrats log a study on mixtures of sewage and waste to require that CorrectIve action be
on the subcommittee. is a coordinated hazardous waste and establishing a taken beyond the facility boundary where
national ground wates’ protection National Commi lon on Ground necemary to protect bum&n health and the
policy. The Committee on Govern- Water. These provisions were amend- .environment unIon the owner or operator
mont Operations, In September of ed by our committee, and R. 6307. as Q! the facility concerned d on tra to -
1980. urged EPA to develop such a It jassed the House. contained ver- sst 0ni of the Administrator that.
•des tte the owner or operators beat effort ,
policy, but the latest proposal to es- alcoa of them which were weed to by the owner or operator was unable to obtain
tablish a ground water policy was re- cur Committee and the Committee on the neceonry permission to undertake auth
jected by Interior Secretary James Energy and Commerce. - scf, Such Tegulatlons i.halI take effect
Watt at the President’s Council on The amendment ‘etahliahes a Na- Immediately upon omula&tion. notaith.
Natural Resources In February of this tional Ground Water Commission. standing .ectlon 3 0 10 (b ), and stiali appay
year. - . . . The CommI I n Is charged with pei’ . .
-------
September 8 1982
shall file with the Administrator a notifica-
tion stating the location and general de-
scnpt (on of the facility, together with a de-
scription of the Identified or listed hazard-
ous waste involved and. In the case of a fa-
cility referred to in paragraph (1) or (2). a
descrLptlort of the production or energy re-
co ery activity carried out at the facility
and such other information as the Adnunis-
tralor deems necessary, y’or purposes of the
preceding sentence, the term ‘hazardous
waste listed under section 3001’ also in-
cludes any commercial chemical product
which Is listed under section 3001 and
which, In lieu of its original Intended use, Is
i produced for use as (or as a component
of I a fuel, till distributed for use as a fuel,
or flu) burned as a fuel. Notification shall
not be required under this subsection in the
case of facilities (such as residential boilers)
where the Administrator determines that
such notification is riot necessary in order
for the Adminu irator to obtain sufficient
information respecting current practices of
facilities using haaardous aa.ste for energy
reco ery Nothing in this subsection shall be
construed to affect or impair the protisions
of secuun 300l(b)13>. Nothing in this subsec.
tion shall affect reg 1.acory deternunatloris
under section 3012 as amended by the Used
Oil Recycling Act of 1980).”
(2) Section 3010 is amended by striking
out “the preceding sentence” and substitut-
ing “the preceding provisions”.
(hI SrAxDARDs.—Seeti on 3004 of such Act
Is amended by adding the following at the
end thereof:
“Ce) 1{ zza OuS Wasi’s Usco AS Pus .—Not
later than two years after the date of the
enactment of this subsection, and after
notice and opportunity for public hearing,
the Administrator shall promulgate regula-
tions establishIng such— -
“(1) standards applicable to the owners
and operators of facilities which produce a
fuel (Al from any hazardous waste Identi-
fied or listed under sectIon 3001. or (B) from
any hazardous waste Identified or listed
under section 3001 and ary 0* her material;
“(2) standards applirable to the owners
and operators Of facilities which burn for
purposes of energy recovery any fuel pro-
duced as provided in paragraph (1) or arty
fuel which otherwise contains any hazard-
ous a ,iste Identified or listed under section
3001: and
“(3) standards applicable to any person
who distributes or markets any fuel which is
produced as provided in paragraph ( I I or
any fuel a tuch otherwise contains any haz-
ardous waste identified or listed wider sec-
tion 3001
as may be necessary to protect human
health and the en lronment, Such stand-
ards may include any of the requirements
set forth In paragraphs (1) through (7) of
subsection (a) as map be appropriate. Noth-
ing in thu subsection shall be construed to
affect or impair the provisions of section
300isbX3). For purposes of this subsection,
the term ‘hazardous a. sate listed under sec-
tion 3001’ includes any commercial chemical
product which Is listed under sectIon 3001
and which, In lieu of its original intended
use, is (A) produced for use as (or as a com-
ponent of) a fuel, (B) distributed for use as
a fuel, or (C) burned as a fuel,
“Ct) LABcLINC.—Nolalthstanthng any
other pro ision of law, It shall be unlawful
for any person a ho is required to file a noti-
fication in accordance with paragraph (1) or
(3) of section 3010 to distribute or market
any fuel which is produced from any haz.
ard us waste Identified or listed under sec-
tion 3001, or any fuel which otherwise con-
tains any hazardous waste identified or
listed under section 3001 if the invoice or
the bill of sale fails—
“Cl) to bear the following statement
“WARNINO: THIS FUEL CONTAINS
HAZARDOUS WASTES”, and
“2) to list, the hazardous wastes contained
therein,
Such statement shall be located in a con-
spicuous place on every such invoice or bill
of sale and shall appear in conspicuous and
legible type fri contrast by typography, lay-
outs, or color with other printed matter on
the Invoice or bill of sale,”,
SECTION 3005 Pfltlli’TS
Sec. 7 (a) FixaL Pwezr.—Section 3005 of
the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by
adding the following new subsection at the
end thereof:
°cgj REllasEs.—Any permit (other than a
permit treated as Issued pursuant to subsec-
tion Ce)) issued to a treatment, storage, or
disposal facility under section. 3005 (or
under an authorized State hacardous waste
program under section 3006) shall, in addi-
tion to other applicable requirements, ad-
dress any release of hazardous waste from
such fartlity which occurs prior to the date
of issuance of such permit. Such permits
shall include schedules and provide finan-
cial assurances for addressing such releases
a here the required actton cannot be com-
pleted prior to permit Issuance. The permit
provisions required under this subsection
shall not apply to any portion of the facility
at which hazardous waste treatment, stor-
age or disposal activities do not take place,
tb Expa sroN DURPW Irrrs uis Srsros.—
Section 3005(e) of such Act is amended by
adding the following at the end thereof:
“The Administrator shall promulgate regu-
latlons under which any owner or operator
of a treatment, storage, or disposal facility
operating under Interim status pursuant to
this subsection who expands the capacity of
the facility (except the capacity for storage
or treatment in tanks or containers and en-
closed waste piles) by an amount in excess
of 10 per centum of the capacity specified in
the permit application shall be required to
obtain a permit under the provisiOnS of this
section prior to conslroction of such expan-
sion. The regulations of the Administrator
wider this subsection may, In the discretion
of the Administrator, contain standards for
facilities which expand such capacity by 10
per centum or less and such standards may
vary from the standards applicable to ihoae
facilities operating puisu ant to a permit
under this subsection which do not expand
such capacity.”.
?LIEEThSLI ?oa REVIZW D l’ A pmaaT
- . — APPUCATION S
Sac. 8. Section 3005(e) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act Is amended by Inserting “(i) ”
alter “Passern Isstr,qjcz.—” and by adding
the IoPowing new paragraph at the end
thereof:
“42XA) Not later than the date four years
after the enactment of the Resource Con-
aervation and Recotery Act Reaulhorization
Act of 1982. in the case of each application
for a permit fur a land disposal facility
under this section which was submitted
before such date, the Administrator shall
issue a final permit pursuant to such appli-
cation or issue a final denial of such applica-
tion.
“(B) Not later than the date six years
after the enactment of the Resource Con-
servation and Recovery Act Reauthorization
Act of 1982, in the case of each application
for a permit for any facility under this sec-
tion (other than a facility referred to In sub.
paragraph (A)) which was submitted before
such date, the Administrator shall Issue a
final permit pursuant to such application or
Issue a fInal denial of such application.
“(C) The time periods specified in this
paragraph shall not apply in the case of any
H 675
State which is administering an authorize
hazardous waste program under aeclio
300t !ntertm status under subsection (e
shall terminate for each facility referred I.
In subparagraph (A) or (B) on the expire
lion of the four- or slx.year period referrer
to En subparagraph IA) or (H), whichever i
applicable, unless an application Is filed foi
a permit under other provisions of this su
section withIn such louryear or slx.year
period, as the case may be.”.
NSTIONAI. Gaouxaw*Tmt COSURSSION
Sac. 9. (a) Esriiar .isusrairr.—There is estab-
lished a commission to be known as the Na-
tional Grounda ater Commission (herein-
after In this section referred to as the
“CommissIon”).
(b) Durras or Coweissioi,,—The duties of
the Commission ate to:
(1) Assess generally the amount, location,
and quality of the Nation’s groundwater re-
sources.
(2) Identify generally the sources. estent,
and types of growidaater contaminatIon.
(3) Assess the scope and nature of rela-
tionship between groundwater contamina’
tlon arid groundwater withdrawal and devel-
op projections of aaaiiable, usable ground-
water in future years on a nationwide basis,
( I) Assess the relationship between sur-
face water pollution and grounda ater pohlii-
LIon. -
(5) Assess the need for a policy to protect
groundwater from degradation caused by
contaminatlon,
(6) Assess generally the extent of over-
drafting of groundwater resources and the
adequacy of existing mechanisms for pre-
venting such overctj’afting.
(7) Assess generally the engineering arid
technological capability to recharge
aquifers.
(8) Assess the adequacy of the present un-
derstanding of groundwater recharge zones
and sole aource aquifers and assess the ade-
quacy of knowledge regarding the interrela-
tioiistilp of designated aquifers and re-
charge zones.
(9) Assess the role of landuse patterns as
these relate to Drotecting groundwater from
contamination.
(10) Assess methods for remedial abate-
ment of groundwater contaznmation as well
as the costs and benefits of cleaning up pol-
luted groundwater and compare cleanup
costs to the costs uf substitute water supply
methods,
(11) Investigate polIcies and actions taken
by foreign governments to protect ground-
water from contaminatIon,
(12) Assess the use and effectiveness of ex-
isting interstate compacts to address
groundwater protection from contamuta-
tlon.
(13) Analyze existIng legal rights and rem-
edies regarding contaminatIon of ground.
water.
UI) Assess the adequacy of existing stand.
ards for groundwater quality under State
and F deri4 law,
(151 Acress monitoring methodologies of
the States and the Federal Government to
achieve the level of protection of the re-
source as required by State and Federal law.
(181 Assess the relationship between
groundwater flow sstems (and associated
recharge areas) arid the control of sources
of contamination.
(17) Assess the role of underground injec-
Lion practices as a means of disposing of
waste fluIds while protecting groundwater
from contamination.
(18) Assess methods for abatement and
containment of groundwater contamination
md for aquifer restoration including the
4J. , V?o3 c, as k
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 4/HOUSE
7c4
-------
H 6760
costs and benefits of alternatives to abate-
bent and containment.
(19) Assess State and Federal groundwater
hia and mechanisms with which to manage
the quality and quanUly of the groundwater
resource
(20) Assess the adequacy of existing
groundwater research and determine Suture
groundwater research needs.
(21) Assess the roles of State. local, and
Federal Governments In managing gound-
water quality and quantity.
(C) MssrsrasHzp.—(1) The Commission
shall be composed of seventeen members as
follows:
(A) Four appointed by the Speaker of the
United States Rouse of Representatives
from among the Members of the House of
Representatl%es, two of whom shall be
members of the Comnutie on Pubbe Works
and Transportation and two of whom shall
be members of the Committee on Energy
and Commerce;
(B) Four appointed by the majority leader
of the United States Senate from among the
Members of the United Slates Senate;
(C) Eight appointed by the President as
follows:
(I) Four from among a list of nominations
submitted to the President by the National
Governors Association, tao of whom shall
be representatives of groundwater appropri.
stion States and two of whom shall be rep-
resentatives of groundwater riparian States;
(u) One from among a list of nominations
submitted to the President. by the Nai.ional
League of Cities;
(iii) One from among $ list of nominations
submitted to the President by the National
Academy of Sciences; . -.
(iv) One from among a list of nominations
submitted to the President by groups. orga-
nizat ions, or associations of industries the
acti ities of hlch may affect groundwater
and
(VI One from among a list of nominations
submitted to the President from groups, or-
ganizations, or associations of citizens which
are representative of persons concerned
with polutlon and environmental Issues and
which have participated, at the State or
Federal level, in studies, administrative pro-
Ceedings, or litigation (or any combination
thereof) relating to groundwater and
(D the Director of the Office of Technol.
ogy Assessment.
A varancy hi the Commission shall be filled
In the manner In which the original ap.
polntment was made. Appointments may be
made under this subsection without regard
to section 5311(b) of title 5, United States
Code. Not more than two of the four mem-
bers appointed under .ub aragraph (A) and
not more than two of the four members ap-
pointe’l under subparagraph (B) may be of
the same political pafll ) No member ap-
pointed under paragraph (C) may be an of ft.
car or cmplo)ee of the Federal Government.
(2) If any member of the Commission who
was appoL’ited to the Commission as a
Member of the Congress leaves that office,
or IS any member of the Commission who
a is appointed from persons who are not of.
Ilcers or employees of any government be-
comes an officer or employee of a govern-
ment, he may continue as a member of the
Commission for not longer than the ninety’
day period beginning on the date he leaves
that office or becomes auth an officer or
employee, as the case may be.
(3) Members shall be appointed for the
life of the Commission.
(4 1(A) Except as provided in subparagraph
(B), members of the Commission shall each
be entitled (subject to appropriations pro-
vided In advance) to receive the daily equiv-
alent of the maximum annual rate of basic
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
pay in effect for grade OS-IS of the Gener-
al Schedule for each day (including travel
time) during ehich they are engaged in the
actual performance of duties vested In the
Commission. While asay from their homes
or regular places of business In the perform-
ance of services for the Commission, mem-
bers of the Commission shall be allosed
travel expenses, ii luding per diem In lieu
of subsistance, In the same manner as per-
sons employed intermittently in Govern-
ment service are alloeed expenses under
section 5703 of title 5 of the United States
Code.
(B) Mem’ibers of the Commission who are
Members of the Congress shall receise no
additional pay, a!Joaances. or benefits by
reason of their serr,cv on the Commission.
(5) Live members of the Commission shall
constitute a quqi-unr but two may hold hear-
(81 The Chairman of the Comnslsaiozi
shall be appointed by the Speaker of the
House of Representatives from among mem-
bers appointed under paragraph (11(A) of
this subsection and the Vice Chairman of
the Commission shall be appointed by the
majority leader of the Senate from among
members appointed under paragraph (1KB)
of this subsection. The Chairman and the
Vice Chairman of the Commission shall
serve for the life of the Commission unless
they cease to be members of the Commis-
sion before the termination of the Commis-
sion.
(7) The Commission shall meet at the call
of the Chairman or a majority of its mem-
hers. -
(d) Disacros amen STAFF OF Cowisszoic
Exesers aim CONStI .TANTS —U) The Corn.
mission shall have a Director who shall be
appointed by the Chairman, without regard
to section 5311(b) of Utle 5, United States
Code-
(2) The Chairman may appoint and fix
the pay of such additional personnel as the
Chairman considers appropriate.
(3) With the approval of the Commission,
the Chairman may procure temporary and
Intermittent services under section 3109(b)
of title 5 of the United States Code.
(4) The Commission shall request, arid the
Chief of Engineers and the Director of the
Geological Survey are each authorized to
detail, on a reimbursable basis, any of the
personnel of their respective agencies to the
Commission to assist it In carrying out Its
duties under this section. Upon request of
the Commission, the bead of any other Fed-
eral agency is authorized to detail, on a re-
imbursable basis, any of the personnel of
such agency to the Commission to aSsist it
in carrying out Its duties under this section.
Ce) Powsas or CowMissioim.—(1) The Com-
mission may, for the purpose of carrying
Out this section, hold such hearings, sit and
act at such times and places, take such testi-
mony, and receive such evidence, as the
Commission considers appropriate.
(2) Any member or agent of the Commis-
sion may. if so authorized by the Commis’
sion, take arty action which the Commission
Is authorized to take by this section.
(3) The Commission may use the Catted
States malls in the same manner arid under
the same conditions as other departments
and agencies of the United States.
(4) The A,ImIn(strator of General Services
shall provide to the Commission on a reim .
bursable basis such administrative support
acrviees as the Commission may request.
(5) The Commission may secure directly
from any department or agency of the
United States Information necessary to
enable It to carry out this section. Upon re-
quest of the Chairman of tbe Commission,
the head of such department or agency
September 8, 1982
shall furnish such Information to the Corn.
mission.
(f) R oRr.—(1) The Commission shall
transmit to the President and to each House
of the Congress a report not later than Oc-
tober 30, 1985 The report shaU contain a
detailed statement of the findings amid con-
clusions of the Commission with respect to
each item listed In subsection (b), together
with its recommendations for such legisla-
Uon and administrative actions, as It consid-
ers appropriate.
(2) Not later shari one yeas after the en-
actment of this Act, the Commission shall
complete a preliminary study concerning
groundwater contamination from hazardous
and other solid waste and submit to the
Pres.dent and to the Congress a report con-
taining the findings and conclusions of such
preliminary study. The study shall be con-
tinued thereafter, and final findings and
conclusions shall be Lncorpoi-ated a.s a sepa-
rate chapter In the report .required under
paragraph (1). The preliminary study shall
Include an analysis of the extent of ground-
eater contamination caused by hazardous
and other solid waste, the regions and major
water supplies most slgnuficantiy affected
by such contazrjnation. and any recommen.
dations of the Commission for preventive or
remedial measures to protect human health
and the environment from the effects of
such contamination.
(5) TERMINATION —The Commission shall
cease to exist on October 30. 1985.
(Ii) Au’riIORIZ ATiOg OF APPROPPJATIONS —
There is authorized to be appropriated for
the fiscal years 1983 through 1985 not to
exceed 57.000,000 to carry out this secUon.
PRESERVATION 0? OTHER RIGHTS
Sxc. 10. Section 7002( 1) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act Is amended by striking out
“section” and substituting “Act”.
Ssc. 11, Section 1004(27) of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act is amended by adding
the folIos. ing at the end thereof: “The Ad-
ministrator shall promulgate such regula-
tions as may be necessary to protect human
health and environment ensuring that the
use, reuse, recycling, and reclamation of
hazardous waste identified or listed under
section 3001 Is conducted in a manner con•
siatent with such protection.”,
SIZE 0? CERTAIN FACILITIES
Ste. 12. (a) Section 4001 of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act is amended by adding
the following at the end thereof. “In devel-
oping such comprehensive plans, It Is the In-
tention of thIs Act that In determining the
size of the east.e-to-energy facility, adequate
provision shall be given to the present and
reasonably anticipated future needs tif the
recycling and resource recosery Interest
within the area encompassed by the plan-
ning process.”.
(b Seet.on 4003 of such Act Is amended
by adding the following new subsection (C)
at the end thereof:
“(C) Szzz or WASTE-TO-ENERGY PACILI-
ares—NotwIthstanding any of the above re-
quirements, it is the intention of this Act
amid the planning process developed pursu-
ant to this Act that in determining the size
of the waste-to-energy facility, adequate
provision shall be given to the present and
reasonably anticipated future needs of the
recycling and resource recovery interest
within the area encompassed by the plan-
ning proceSs.”.
DIZ(OWSTRATION PROIteT
Sac. 13. Section 4008 of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act Is amended by adding the 101-
lowing new subsection at the end thereof:
“(It) RacYcLiso INTIiIILEDIATT Paoczsszmea
Cz irrxs.—(1) The Administrator Is author-
1011
-------
+LR k O7 as
16 NATIONAL GROUNDWATER COMMISSION
17 SEC. 9. (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established a
18 commission to be known as the National Groundwater Corn-
19 mission (hereinafter in this section referred to as the “Corn-
20 mission”). 47. ) 3
21 (b) DUTIES OF COMMISSION.—The duties of the Corn- V
22 mission are to:
23 (1) Assess the scope and nature of the relationship
24 between groundwater contamination from hazardous
25 waste and solid waste and groundwater overd rafting
7ôL(
-------
14
1 pro blems in order to develop projections of available,
2 usable groundwater in future years on a nationwide
3 basis.
4 (2) Assess methods used by State and Federal
5 agencies to measure and monitor amounts of ground-
6 water contamination from hazardous waste and assess
7 the adequacy of existing standards for groundwater
8 quality under State and Federal law.
9 - (3) Assess the need for a policy to protect ground-
10 water from degradation due to hazadous waste contami-
11 nation.
12 (4) Assess the adequacy of the present under-
13 standing of groundwater recharge zones and sole source
14 aquifers and assess the adequacy of knowledge regard-
15 ing the interrelationship of designated aquifers and re-
16 charge zones.
17 (5) Assess the role of land-use patterns and un-
18 derground injection practices as these relate to protect-
19 ing groundwater from hazardous waste contamination.
20 (6) Assess methods for remedial abatement of
21 groundwater contamination from hazardous waste as
22 well as the costs and benefits of cleaning up polluted
23 - groundwater and compare cleanup costs to the costs of
24 substitute water supply methods.
HR6307RH
-------
15
1 (7) Assess and compare Federal authority and
2 mechanisms and the authority and mechanisms of the
3 States in protecting groundwater.
4 (8) Investigate policies and actions taken by for-
5 eign governments to protect groundwater from hazard-
6 ous waste.
7 (9) Assess the use and effectiveness of existing in-
8 terst ate compacts to address groundwater protection
9 from hazardous waste.
10 (10) Analyze existing legal rights and remedies
11 regarding contamination of groundwater from hazard-
12 ous waste.
13 (c) MEMBERSHIP.—(1) The Commission shall be com-
14 posed of thirteen members as follows:
15 (A) Four appointed by the Speaker of the United
16 States House of Representatives from among the Mem-
17 bers of the House of Representatives;
18 (B) Four appointed by the majority leader of the
19 United States Senate from among the Members of the
20 United States Senate;
21 (C) Four appointed by the President as follows:
22 (i) One from among a list of nominations
23 submitted to the President by the National Gover-
24 nors Association;
HR 6307 RH
-------
16
1 (ii) One from among a list of nominations
2 submitted to the President by the National Acade-
3 my of Sciences;
4 (iii) One from among a list of nominations
5 submitted to the President by groups, organiza-
6 lions, or associations of industries the activities of
7 which may affect groundwater; and
8 (iv) One from among a list of nominations
9 submitted to the President from groups, organiza-
10 lions, or associations of citizens which are repre.
11 sent alive of persons concerned with pollution and
12 environmental issues and which have participated,
13 at the State or Federal level, in studies, adminis-
14 tralive proceedings, or litigation (or any combina-
15 lion thereof) relating to gi oundwater; and
16 (D) the Director of the Office of Technology As-
17 sessmenl.
18 A vacancy in the Commission shall be filled in the manner
19 in which the original appointment was made. Appointments
20 may be made under this subsection without regard to section
21 5311(b) of title 5, United States Code. Not more than two of
22 the four members appointed under subparagraph (A) and not
23 more than two of the four members appointed under subpara-
24 graph (B) may be of the same political party. No member
HR 6307 RH
7o
-------
17
1 appointed under paragraph (C) may be an officer or employ-
2 ee of the Federal Government. -
3 (2) If any member of the Commission who was appoint-
4 ed to the Commission as a Member of the Congress leaves
5 that office, or if any member of the Commission who was
6 appointed from person.s who are not officers or employees of
7 any government becomes an officer or employee of a govern-
8 ment, he may continue as a member of the Commission for
9 not longer than the ninety-day period beginning on the date
10 he leaves that office or becomes such an officer or employee,
11 asthe case may be.
12 (3) Members shall be appointed for the life of the Corn-
13 mission.
14 (4)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), mem-
15 bers of the Commission shall each be entitled to receive the
16 daily equivalent of the maximum annual rate of basic pay in
17 effect for grade GS—18 of the General Schedule for each day
18 (including travel time) during which they are engaged in the
19 actual performance of duties vested in the Commission.
20 While away from their homes or regular places of business in
21’ the performance of services for the Commission, members of
22 the Commission shall be allowed travel expenses, including
23 per c 7 iem in lieu of subsistence, in the same manner as per-
24 Sons employed intermittently in Government service are al-
HR 6307 RH
1o
-------
18
1 lowed expenses under section 5703 of title 5 of the United
2 States Code.
3 (B) Members of the Commission who are Members of
4 the Congress shall receive no additional pay, allowances, or
5 benefits by reason of their service on the Commission.
6 (5) Five members of the Commission shall constitute a
7 quorum but two may hold hearings.
8 (6) The Chairman of the Commission shall be elected
9 y the members of the Commission and shall serve for the life
10 of the Commission unless he ceases to be a member of the
11 Commission before the termination of the Commission.
12 (7) The Commission shall meet at the call of the Chair-
13 man or a majority of its members.
14 (d) DiRECTOR AND STAFF OF CoMMissioN; Ex-
15 PERTS AND CONS uLTANTS.—(1) The Commission shall
16 have a Director who shall be appointed by the Chairman,
17 without regard to section 5311(b) of title 5, United States
18 Code.
19 (2) The Chairman may appoint and fix the pay of such
20 additional personnel as the Chairman considers appropriate.
2! (3) With the approval of the Commission, the Chair-
22 man may procure temporary and intermittent services under
23 section 3109(b) of title 5 of the United States Code.
24 (4) Upon request of the Commission, the head of any
25 Federal agency is authorized to detail, on a reimbursable
HR 6307 RH
-------
19
1 basis, any of the personnel of such agency to the Commission
2 to assist the Commission in carrying out its duties under this
3 section.
4 (e) POWERS OF C0MMISsI0N.—(1) The Commission
5 may, for the purpose of carrying out this section, hold such
6 hearings, sit and act at such times and places, take such
7 testimony, and receive such evidence, as the Commission con-
8 siders appropriate.
9 (2) Any member or agent of the Commission may, if so
10 authorized by the Commission, take any action which the
11 Commission is authorized to take by this section.
12 (3) The Commission may use the United States mails
13 in the same manner and under the same conditions as other
14 departments and agencies of the United States.
15 (4) The Administrator of General Services shall provide
16 to the Commission on a reimbursable basis such administra-
17 tiDe support services as the Commission may request.
18 (5) The Commission may secure directly from any de-
19 parlment or açency of the United States information neces-
20 sary to enable it to carry out this section. Upon request of the
21 Chairman of the Commission, the head of such department or
22 agency shall furnish such information to the Commission.
23 (f) REpoRi.’.—Tlie Commission shall transmit to the
24 President and to each House of the Congress a report not
25 later than October 30, 1986. The report shall contain a de-
HR 6307 RH
-------
1 tailed statement of the findings and conclusions of the Corn-
2 mission with respect to each item listed in subsection (b),
3 together with its recommendations for such legislation, and
4 administrative actions, as it considers appropriate.
5 (g) TERMINATION.—T1Le Commission shall cease to
6 exist on October 30, 1986.
7 (ii) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPR1ATIONS.—There is
8 authorized to be appropriated for the fiscal years 1983
9 through 1986 not to exceed $10,000,000 to carry out this
10 section.
-------
!I’ t i. I’3 ’f7 1o 1 ‘ 17 Ctz 4 c 1 . 2 es’ . ( 22)
Section 9. Nof4onu2 Groundwater Commission
Section 9 establishes a national commission to examine the nature
and scope of the groundwater contamination problem, and to issue
recommendations on the need for additional legislation to implement
a national groundwater policy.
Presently groundwater contamination is subject to controls under
two statutes, the Resource Recovery Act (RCRA); and the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act (SDWA). At present, there is an inadequate under-
standing of several important aspects of groundwater contamination,
and an mconsistent approach to groundwater protection under RCRA
and SDWA.
It is the Committee’s belief that such a Commission would provide
the necessary technical information based upon which to fully imple-
ment a national groundwater protection strategy. Such a Commission
would benefit the work of the Congress and the Committee in develop-
ing a unified, and coherent approach to groundwater protection.
Nothing in this Section shall be construed to affect or impair the is-
suance of a national strategy on groundwater protection or the assess-
ment of groundwater contamination from surface impoundments, both
of which are expected to be issued in the very near future.
-------
September 8, 1982
leagues. Mr. Ros and Mr. H4 sa m -
SCHMIDT for their contribution as well.
I believe that the substitute that will
be before this committee today is far
superior to our origLnal committee bill.
If It Is adopted along with a number of
other meritorious amendments to be
offered today, such as an amendment
to strike sectIon 10, I believe the Mem-
bers of this body will have produced a
well-considered and much-needed envi-
ronznental measure.
Mr. Chairman, I would now like to
take a moment to highlight what I
consider to be several of the more im-
portant provisions of the amendment
in the nature of a substitute to HR.
6307 which will be offered shortly.
Section 3 of the substitute brings
Into the RCRA regulatory system for
the first time a large number of small
generators of hazardous waste. These
small generators previously had been
exempted from RCRA so the EPA
could concentrate on regulating the
larger generators which are producing
the lIon s share of hazardous waste in
this country. Now that EPA has com-
pleted the regulations implementing
ECRA, I am hopeful that the agency
will have sufficient resources to ade-
quately regulate these small gener-
ators. In addition, since compliance
with RCRA will impose additional
costs on these small businesses, I am
pleased to point out that the substi-
tute makes provision for regulatory
variances for those businesses. For in-
stance. section 3 of the substitute
makes it clear that all the complicated
RCRA testing procedures do not have
to be followed by the small gener-
ators—Identification of wastes to the
level of process involved will be suffi-
cient to satisfy the RCRA require-
ments. This variance provision will
substantially lessen the financial and
regulatory impacts of RCRA on small
generators.
Another extremely Important provi-
sion of the substitute is section 6. That
section calls for a two-step approach
to regulating the burning and blend-
ing of hazardous wastes as fuel, it La
badly needed because the burning of
hazardous wastes for purposes of
energy recovery is totally exempt from
RCRA regulation at this time. Even
though energy recovery is a laudable
goal and should be an important na-
ional priority, it should not, In ray
opinion, be achieved at the expense of
our national health and environmen-
tal goals. Therefore. section 6 per-
forms an important service In requir-
ing notification to EPA by those who
produce, distribute and burn hazard-
ous waste fuel. EPA is then required
to regulate those production, distribu-
tion, and burning practices which are
determined to be harmful to public
health and the environment. Once
these practices are regulated, a major
gap in the RCRA regulatory program
wifi be closed.
Mr. Chairman. I do not want to mo-
nopolize the time the minority has
available on this measure but suffice it
to say that sectIons 3 and 8 are only
two of many worthwhile’ RCRA
amendments contained In the substi-
tute to be offered shortly. I believe it
is our obligation as Members of Con-
gress to support legislation which con-
tributes to the long.term environmen-
tal well-being of our country, Today
we are being given an opportunity to
fulfill that obligation—I believe each
of us should seize this opportunity and
vote in favor of the bipartisan substi-
tute.
0 1400
Mr. ROE. Mr. Chairman, I yield
myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. ROE asked and was given per-
mission to revise and extend his re-
marks.) -
Mr. ROE. Mr. Chairman, I am
pleased to Join with our colleagues
today and particularly pay my deepest
respect In regard to our chairman of
the committee, the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Fz.oaio). the gentle-
man from New York (Mr. Lnr) and
also the gentleman from Arkansas
(Mr. HAanrExscmsmT), and strongly
support HR. 6307, to which I know
there will be an amendment in the
nature of a substitute which will incor-
porate the amendxhents in the nature
of a substitute of the Subcommittee
on Water Resources of the Public
Works Committee to sectIons 4 and 9.
In my Judgment, I think it is an ex-
tremely Important environmental bill.
As background, Mr. Chairman, thla
bill, after being reported by the Com-
mittee on Energy and Commerce, was
sequentially referred to the Commit-
tee on Public Works and Transporta-
tion for consideration of section 4 and
sectIon 9. These sections direct a study
by EPA of mixtures of sewage and
hazardous wastes and establish a Na-
tional Groundwater Comm ion to
study and report on our ground water
resources.
I might say at this point, Mr. Chair-
man, that the ground water of our
Nation has been really neglected over
the years in most of our legislation. I
think that this bill Is a monumental
step forward in bringing into clear
focus the policy developments that the
Congress chooses to make to protect
our ground water drinking water
supply.
Our committee amended each of
these provisions and our amendments
will be incorporated In the substitute.
Section 4 dlrec s the Administrator
of the Environmental Protecc on
Agency to submit a report to Congress
on mixtures of sewage and hazardous
wastes. These mixtures are presently
regulated under the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act. EPA would be
directed to include recommendations
as to whether regulations of these
mixtures would be better accom-
plished under the Solid Waste Dispos-
al Act.
The amendment to section 4 deletes
the reference to the Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act and calls, rather, for recom-
II 6747
mendationa on whether existing law
applicable to such mixtures is ade-
quate to protect human health and en-
vironment.
The Subcommittee on Water Re-
sources of the Committee on Public
Works now has under review the pre-
treatment requirements under the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act
which relate directly to this amend-
ment.
Section 9 of HR. 6307 establishes a
National Groundwater Commission
composed of four Members of the
House, four from the Senate, four ap-
pointed by the President from lists
submitted by various groups and the
Director of the Office of Technology
Assessment. - -
The commk ion is charged with as-
sessing a number of problems associat-
ed with contamination of ground
water from hazardous wastes, together
with that contamination coming from
possible solid waste disposal, with a
report to be submitted to Congress by
October 30, 1980. The amendment to
sectIon 9 expands the scope of the
study, Mr. Chairman, to include other
aspects of the subject of ground water,
including a general assessment of the
amount, location and quality of the
Nation’s ground water resources; a
general identification of the sources.
extent and types of ground water con-
tamination; an assessment of the rela-
tionship between surface water pollu-
tion and ground water pollution; an as-
sessment of the extent of overdrafting
of ground water resources and the ade-
quacy of existing mechanisms for pre-
venting such overdrafting an assess-
ment of the engineering and techno-
logical capability to recharge aquifers;
an assessment of the methods for
abatement of ground water contain!-
nation and a comparison of cleanup
costs to the costs of substitute water
supply methods; an assessment of the
adequacy of existing standards for
ground water quality under State and
Federal law: an assessment of Federal
and State monitoring methodOlogy-, an
assessment of the adequacy of existing
ground water research; and, finally, an
assessment of the Federal, State, and
local roles in managing ground water
quality and quantity.
The amendment also changes the
membership of the Commission, as I
previously mentioned. Of the tow-
House Members, two would be from
the Energy and Commerce, and two
from Public Works and Transporta-
ti3rL Fl ht Members would be ap-
pointed by the President. four from a
list submitted by the National Gover-
nors ocjation, and four from lists
submitted by other organizatio and
groups.
The commission would be directed to
utilize on a reimbursable basis person-
nel from the U.S. Geological Survey
and from the Corps of Engineers.
Finally. Mr. Chairman, the date for
submission of the report to Congress
would be changed from October 30.
p- & -J4. . ( 7c3
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
II 6748
1986, to October 30, 1985. and the
amount authorized to be appropriated
for this lndepth Commission review
and study of the Nation’s ground-
waters wW be $7 million.
The substitute includes an addition.
al provision directing the Ground-
water Commission to submit a sepa-
rate preliminary study to Congress
concerning ground-water contamina-
tion from solid and hazardous waste,
and this study would be submitted
within 1 year as an exigency to deal
with this vitally important measure, as
was mentioned by the subcommittee
chairman (Mr. Fz.oaro), -
In addition, the final conclusions
and findings of this study would be In-
corporated in the Commission’s report
as a separate chapter. -
May I conclude, Mr. Chairman, by
complimenting the distinguished gen-
tleman, my colleague, the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. FLoaio), hi
having joined his subcommittee with
our subcommittee In the tv.o major
• elements of our concern and responsi-
bility in this legislation, and also par-
ticularly compliment him on the joint
work we did in the State of New
Jersey—if our other colleagues will
pardon us that provincial observa-
tion—coming out of the joint hearings
we held In the county of Morris in the
State of New Jersey, particularly
Rockaway Borough, relating to solid
waste and hazardous waste disposal In
so-called dumps and land disposal of
that nature, which brought forth
znany of the problems that our Nation
is faced with In this vitally Important
Issue.
Take Into consideration, my col-
leagues, that 50 percent of the drink-
ing water supply of this country is
groundwater supply affecting the very
life and health and safety of the
people of our Nation.
Mr. RAMMERSCLIMIDT. Mr.
Chairman, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
(Mr. HAMMERSCHMIDT asked
and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks,)
Mr, HAMMERSCHMIDT. Mr.
Chairman, I wish to associate myself
with those remarks just made by our
very able Chairman of the Water Re-
sources Subcommittee. Mr. Rox of
New Jersey,
Mr. Chairman, there are two provi-
sions of HR. 6307. As reported by the
Committee on Energy and Commerce,
which involve matters under the juris-
diction of the Public Works Commit-
tee. These two provisions relate to reg-
ulation of hazardous substances In
publicly owned treatment works and
creation of a national groundaater
commission. The two committees have
resolved their differences with respect
to these two provisions, and I rise In
support of this compromise on sec-
tions 4 and 9 of the bill.
Others have explained the process
whereby HR. 6307 was sequentially
referred to the Committee on Public
Works and Transportation. They have
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
also summarized the provisions of the
different versions reported by the two
committees reporting this legislation.
I would like to emphasize just a few
matters in my statement,
First, I would like to recognize and
thank the leadership Chairman
Pz.oaso and Mr. Lain’ of the Energy
and Commerce Subcommittee and
their staff for their willing coopera-
tion in fashioning the compromise lan-
guage that reconciles the differences
In sections 4 and 9 between the bills
reported by the two committees.
Second, the Public Works Commit-
tee received sequential referral of HR.
6307 only for consideration of section
4 (dealing with publicly owned treat-
ment works) and section 9 (dealing
with the Groundwater Cornmisslorn.
In testimony received on the bill
during the Water Resources Subcom-
mittee’s bearings, concerns were raised
with respect to other sections but the
committee limited Its amendments
only to those areas covered by the se-
quential referral. Two of the concerns
expressed include the small generator
provision and the Federal common law
provision. The committee discusses
these concerns in Its committee report,
Regarding section 3, the small gener-
ator provision, there was concern ex-
pressed that reducing the exemption
for small generators from 1,000 to 100
kilograms per month would add sig-
nificantly to the number of those
people regulated without substantial
benefit in control of hazardous wastes,
Section 10 might, according to those
testllying, subject those who are in
full compliance with the act to addi-
tional undefined Federal liabilities and
be an invitation to plainttffs to reverse
legitimate añminh trative determina-
tions. -
Third, Mr Chairman, the Public
Works Committee amendments to sec-
tions 4 and 9 of the bill reported by
the Energy and Commerce Committee
were designed to improve those proi’i-
slons while maintaining the basic
thrust and intent of the Energy and
Commerce committee. Our amend-
ment to section 4 maintaIns the Clean
Water Act focus of EPA’S pretreat-
ment study and calls for the results of
the study in 1 year rather than 2
years. The shorter time frame is ap-
propriale because much work has al-
ready been done and data collected
concerning EPA’s pretreatment pro-
gram and because the 1-year period
will better dovetail with future con-
gressional legislative schedules. Our
amendment to section 9 expands the
scope of the Groundwater Conamls-
slon’s duties to deal with ground-water
contamination of all types, not just
that associated with hazardous waste,
and to make a number of other
changes to the structure and charter
of the Commission. The compromise
that has been agreed to by the two
committees is identical to the Public
Works Committee amendments,
except that an additional paragraph
has been added o subsection 9f) of
September 8, 1982
the bill calling for EPA to submit after
1 year a preliminary study concerning
ground-water contamination from haz-
ardous and other solid waste.
Finally, I think it is important to
note that the amendments to section 4
and 9 of H.R. 6307 which were ap-
proved by the Public Works Commit-
tee were unanimously adopted by
voice vote, with obvious support from
both sides of the aisle.
In summary, then. I believe that sec-
tions 4 and 9 of HR. 6307 are un-
proved by actions taken In the Com-
mittee on Public Works and Transpor-
tation, and I urge my colleagues to
support these provisions.
Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as
he may consume to the distinguished
ranking minority member of the full
committee, the gentleman from Cali-
fornia (Mr. Ci.avsm ).
(Mr. CLAUSEN asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. CLAUSEN. Mr. Chairman, I am
pleased to be able to join my col-
leagues In support of the compromise
version of HR. 6307’s provisions relat-
big to hazardous wastes entering pub-
licly owned treatment works and for-
mation of a National Groundwater
Commission.
Our Committee on Public Works and
Transportation received sequential re-
ferral of HR. 6307 to consider sections
4 and 9 of the bill reported by the
Energy and Commerce Committee.
Section 4 required EPA to submit a
report to Congress within 2 years of
enactment, addressing whether haz-
ardous wastes exempted from Solid
Waste Disposal Act control when dis-
charged to a sewer should be regulated
under the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
Section 9 established a 13-member Na-
tional Groundwater Commission to
conduct a 4-year study of ground
water contamination by hazardous
wastes and to report to Congress with
recommendations for appropriate leg-
islative and administrative actions.
The amendment reported by the
Public Works Committee refined the
study authorization contained in sec-
tIon 4, restructured the National
Groundwater Commission authorized
in section 9, and expanded the scope
of the Commission’s responsibilities.
The 2-year section 4 study’ was short-
ened to 1 year, with a progress report
due in 6 months, and the Solid Waste
Disposal Act orientation of the study
was broadened to an evaluation of ade-
quacy of existing law generally.
Section 9’s ground Water Commission
charter was amended to caU for an ex-
amination of all types of ground water
contamination rather than lust that
resulting from hazardous WMtes, In
addition, the due date for the report
was advanced from 1986 to 1985, the
authorized funding reduced from $10
million to $7 million, a requirement
added that the Chairman of the Com-
mission will be selected from among
the House-appointed Commission
-------
September 8, .1982
members, and a number of other
changes made to improve the organ!.
zation and effectiveness of the Coin’
mission.
Alter a number of discussions, the
Public Works and Energy Committees
‘have reached a consensus position con-
cerning these provisions. Essentially,
this compromise version is Identical to
the language reported by the Public
Works Committee with the addition of
a new requirement that the Commis-
sion submit an Interim report within 1
year focusing on the narrower issue of
ground water contamination resulting
from hazardous wastes.
Mr. Chairman, I am persuaded that
these two provisions will be valuable
additions to our national effort to ad-
dress the problems associated with
safeguarding the quality of our ground
water supplies and disposing of haz-
ardous wastes in a safe and environ-
mentally sound fashion.
Protecting our ground water Is a
matter of very special priority.
Twenty-five percent of the fresh water
used for all purposes in this country
comes from ground water. Fifty per-
cent of our population relies on
ground water as its primary source of
drink Ing water.
Despite these facts, it Is only recent-
ly that we have begun to realize how
remiss we have been in understanding
and protecting this invaluable natural
resource. The General Accounting
Office reports that, in 25 States, pri-
vate and public water supply wells
have been capped as a result of con-
tamination. Over 200 wells in Califor-
nia have been contaminated by toxic
,wastes. On Long Island, N.Y.. where
100 percent of the population depends
on ground water, 36 public water sup-
plies and dozens of private wells have
been closed because of contamination.
The water supplies for nearly 2 million
residents have been affected. Just this
year, it was reported that contamina-
tion was only 900 feet from the well
field that supplies Atlantic City, N.J.
These are just a few examples that
Wustrate how Important our ground
water supplies are and how necessary
it is that we direct more national at-
tention and resources to protecting
this special national resource. Estab-
llshment of this ground water comnils-
sion will significantly assist us In these
efforts, and I complement. the two
committees for recognizing this fact
and bringing this important legislation
to the floor this afternoon.
Mr. Chairman. I commend these pro-
visions to the attention of my col-
leagues here today and I urge you to
join me in supporting their enactment.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield
such time as she may consume to the
gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. Ms.
KULSKI), a very valuable member of
our subcommittee.
(Ms. MI}CULSKI asked and was
given permission to revise and extend
her remarlcs.
Ms. MIKLJLSKI. Mr. Chairman, the
esource Conservation and Recovery
CONG RESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
Act deals with one of the most serious
health hazards facing this Nation, the
hazard of toxic waste. It is a problem
that knows no boundaries. It affects
every person, every home, every farm
and every neighborhood in this coun .
try. It is Insidious and deadly.
The legislation we are asked to vote
for today, the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act Is the most Impor-
tant vehicle, the most critical tool we
have to deal with hazardous waste—to
contain its creeping power. RCRA. is
the most effective shield we have to
help protect our communities and our
citizens.
Earlier thIs year I held extensive
hearings on hazardous waste in my
district. And I would like to take this
opportunity to thank the chairman
for allowthg me to hold those hear-
ings. They were Invaluable.
As the hours went by 1 heard horror
story after horror story about toxic
and hazardous waste, not only in my
community, but in communities
throughout the State, and throughout
the country.
I learned two very important facts
from those hearings. First, I learned
that the law must be enforced, that It
must be enforced fairly and equitably,
and that there must be some control
over those who enforce it.
Second, I learned that there is no ve-
hicle now for citizens to find redress
for their grievances. I found that
people were being treated as if they
were the problem, when the problem
was the poison of hazardous waste.
RCRA took Important steps to tight-
en up loopholes that allowed improper
disposal of toxic waste. We must pass
and support funding for the legislation
as our pledge toward a poison-free
community.
What we are talking about in this
legislation Is the right of human
beings to live without the fear of dis-
ease of Impairment by chemical poi-
soning. We are talking about the re-
sponsibility of Government to protect
its citizens, and we are talking about
the ability of the Government to re-
spond to the people—the people who
have heard the warning of Rachel
Carson, and who do not want to face a
silent spring, or poisoned neighbor-
hood.
1415
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. I yield
1 minute to the gentleman from Iowa
(Mr. Bmrr.xJ.
(Mr. BEDELL asked and was given
permission to revise and e%tend his re-
marks.)
Mr. BEDELL Mr. Chairman. I
would like to ask the gentleman from
New Jersey. who is the author of this
legislation and the chairman of the
subcommittee from which it is report-
ed, a few questions concerning the so-
called small generator exemption now
found in the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act. It is my under-
standing that facilities generating less
than 1,000 kilograms per month of
H 6749
hazardous wastes currenily are
exempt from most RCRA regulation
and may dispose of their wastes at
sanitary landfills. Section 3 of HR.
6307 would lower the threshold to 100
kilograms per month.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. BEDELL. I yield to the gentle-
man from New Jersey. -
Mr. FLORIO. That Is correct. Sec-
tion 3 also provides, though, that the
EPA may establish a different set of
standards for generators in the 100- to
1,000-kilogram range than they have
for those who produce more than
1,000 kilograms.
Mr. BEDELL. Those of us who serve
on the Small Business Committee
have advocated two-tier regulations
for some time now, and that distinc-
tion in your legislation Is welcome.
I also commend the gentleman for
his floor amendment to clarify the
present two-tiered nature of the sma1
quantity generator provision by inodi-
lying the managerial and administra-
tive requirements imposed on such
generators prior to the actual disposal
or treatment of the waste.
However, I still am troubled by the
large number of small businesses that
could be brought under RCRA’s provi-
sions who are now eubstantiaUy
exempt.
Clearly, there are certain hazardous
substances that cannot be overlooked.
no matter how small a quantity we are
talking about. But there are other ma-
terials, which when properly recovered
and recycled, do not endanger public
health or the environment.
In particular, I am concerned about
the tens of thousands of service sta-
tions where waste oil, used car batter-
ies, and various solvents are collected.
As the gentleman knows, the Small
Business Subcommittee on Energy,
Environment and Safety, which I
chair, has been deeply involved in
both motor fuel marketing issues and
used motor oil recovery.
We have found that waste oil, in par-
ticular, baa become an increasingly
valuable commodity. Gasoline dealers,
car care centers, and others are being
paid up to 30 cents per gallon for the
waste oil they collect. Similarly, there
is a lucrative market for used batteries
and solvents.
Mr. FLORIO. The gentleman Is cor-
rect. Used motor oil is a recyclable
product and this committee has
sought to encourage the recovery of
this resource through enactment of
the Used Oil Recycling Act of 1980.
We are disappointed that the Environ-
mental Protection Agency has not yet
issued regulations covering the recy-
cling of waste oil. Section 3012 of
RCRA mandates that such regulatio
should be promulgated promptly. I
would also point out that it is the pur-
pose of H.R. 6307 to serve as an addi-
tional impetus in this regard by bring-
ing the appropriate incentives and
-------
September 8, 1982
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman. I yield 3
minutes to the gentleman from New
Jersey 4Mr. Hou.miarcx).
(Mr. HOLLENBECK asked and was
given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. HOLLENBECK. Mr. Chairman.
I rise in strong support of H.R. 6307 as
substituted, the Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act reauthorization
before us this afternoon. I believe that
the $113.5 million authorized by this
legislation for fiscal year 1983 as well
as the $11.5 million for fiscal year 1984
will go far in our Nat1on s light
agalr.st environmental degradation.
In 1976. Congress revised the Solid
Waste Disposal Act to establish the
RCRA program and provide for a basic
national hazardous waste program.
Since that time, we have made great
progress In our ability to better con-
trol hazardous solid wastes.
Today, we have an opportunity to
expand on that progress by voting in
favor of this legislation as reported by
the House Energy and Commerce
Committee and amended by substi-
tute. Based on an evaluation of the
RCRA’s performance to date, the
Energy and Commerce Committee In
conjunction with the Public Works
Committee has proposed certain
changes designed to improve the pro-
gram s effectiveness through the clos-
ing of loopholes In the system of
tracking hazardous waste and the
streamlining of EPA disposal permit
processing.
Finally. I favor the work done to
‘arrow the hazardous waste exemp-
on for small quantity generators.
Mith about 10 percent of all hazard-
otis wastes, about 8 billion pounds. the
responsibility of small quantity gener-
ators. I think the need to control this
waste Is sell-evident. Currently, I un-
derstand that these wastes are
dumped Into sarutary landfills or
public sewage treatment systems—nei-
ther of which are designed to safely
contain hazardous materials. 1 find
this unacceptable.
I hope that my colleagues will join
me In support of this legislation to
help preserve our environmental qual-
ity of life.
Mr. ROE. Mr. Chairman. I yield 8
minutes to the distinguished gentle-
man from Pennsylvania (Mr. EDGAR).
(Mr. EDGAR asked and was given
permission to re ise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. EDGAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise In
strong support of H.E. 6307 and comrn
mend the chairman of our subcommit-
tee. the genhlen’.an from New Jersey
Mr. ROE), Ofl the Public Works and
Transportation Committee; our chair-
man of the Commerce Committee, the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
FLcPIO); the ranking Republican rnein ’
bers of both Commerce and Public
Works, particularly the gentleman
from Arkansas (Mr. Joici P*vi. 1L M-
scHMinT), for their work in putting
ther this reauthorization of
tA.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
I commend all of these who have
taken the time to look at the way in
which resource recovery and Its legis-
lation has been put in place so that we
can protect ourselves in the disposal of
hazardous substances.
I could go into some great detail
about the provisions of the legislation
that deal with resource recovery, but I
would like to take the few minutes I
have been granted In general debate to
talk about one section of the bill
which I had something to do with and
also a section which I think is in por-
tant to the whole Nation, North. East,
South. and West.
Mr. Chairman, I rise In support of
HR. 6307, the blU reauthorizing the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act.
As chairman of the Northeast-Mid-
west Congressional Coalition, I am
aware that the proper management
and disposal of hazardous wastes has
to be one of the Northeast-Midwest re-
gion’s top priorities. Due to the re-
glon’s history of heavy Industrializa-
tion, our States have been the sites of
numerous horror stones about illegal
or careless disposal of hazardous
wastes. In fact, under the Superfund
program, 57 percent of the priority
cleanup sites that were both solid and
hazardous waste facilities are located
In the Northeast-Midwest region.
The Resource Conservation and Re-
covery Act provides the public with
Important protections against the en-
vtronmental and health Impacts of
hazardous substances. HR. 6307
amends the 1976 act In ways that will
serve to enhance that protection and
close certain loopholes which other-
wise may allow dangerous disposal
practices to continue at many facili-
ties. For example, hR. 6307 phases
out the current exemption for those
which generate between 100 and 1,000
kilograms per month of hazardous
wastes. Eight States in the Northeast-
Midwest region already have regula-
tions which establish a 100-kllorram
cutoff, as does the committee bill, and
some States have substantially lower
cutoff points. Several other States In
the region have imposed requirements
that are significantly more stringent
than EPA’s current practice. I L Is pos-
sible that, due to a lack of uniformity
In the treatment of small quantity
waste generators by the States, certain
areas wUl suffer a competitive disad-
vantage with businesses that are con-
cerned about waste disposal require.
ments.
Other provisions of the bill which
will help control one of the most zen-
otis threats to environmental quality—
that Is. the contamination of ground
water with hazardous substances.
These provisions will restrict the dis-
posal of hazardous waste liquids in
landfills and the injection of hazard-
ous wastes into ground water.
Section 9 of ILR. 6307 authorizes
the creation of the National Ground-
water Commission. As an author of
the original legislatton to create the
116751
Commission included to Mr. FL0RX0’s
bill and modified by the Public Works
Committee amendments I want to un-
derline the importance of this section.
A great deal of evidence has surfaced
showing that contamination of our
Nation’s ground water supplies Is in-
creasing at a dangerous pace. When
you consider the fact that over one-
ball of all Americans depend on
ground water for drinking water, you
can begin to realize the magnitude of
this problenL
According to- a survey published last
year by the New York Public Interest
Research Group, a sampling of 450
wells In Nassau County found traces of
suspected carcinogens In 25 percent of
the tested wells. Public water supplies
have been found to be contaminated
In 20 Massachusetts communities. 16
communities In Connecticut, 25 In
Pennsylvania. and 22 In New York.
About 100 drinkIng water wells sur-
rounding a landfill in Jackson Town.
ship. N.J.. have been closed because of
organic cuntaminatlon. ililrty square
miles of the shallow aquifer under the
Rocky Mountain Arsenal In Denver
have been contaminated by chemical
byproducts from the manufacture of
pesticides and herbicides. A May 6,
1982 survey by the General Account-
ing Office points out as a major na-
tional Issue Impending water shortages
in the West and Southwest caused by
continual shllting of population to
urban centers in the western region
which are dependent on underground
aquifers for water supply.
Congress has addressed ground
water problems In the past—notably in
the area of hazardous water controL
The Resource Conservation and Re-
covery Act, the Safe Drinking Water
Act, and the Superfurid Act all address
Issues concerning ground water coo-
tamtnatlon and related health haz-
ards. The Northeast Midwest Congres-
sional Coalition held an Informal field
hearing on this subject last fall at
Greenvale, Li. At that hearIng 11 wit-
nesses told Senator PAT Mo n ia&r
and Representatives Lirrr, Fuutazo,
arid CAIu.IAN of the need for a more
concerted Federal and State attack on
ground water contamination.
The idea for a Groundwater Com-
mission grew out of that hearing on
Long Island and a subsequent confer-
ence on water Issues in January. At
the Non heest-Midwest Coalition con-
ference in January. whIch was attend-
ed by our distinguished subcommittee
chairman. Mr. Roz. Prof. David Mor-
rell of Princeton tJnh ’erslty strongly
advocated the need for a high•level
Commission to focus on ground
problems. Subsequently. Dr. Morrell
wrote to me:
While local areas already face serious dan-
gers. at the national level v.e still ha’e suffi-
cient time (perhaps two or three years? to
formulate responsible and eftecthe public
policy. Moreover, this Is an ares of ubllc
policy which, while national in scope. re-
Qufree a great deal of action on the state
and local level . In addition, ground.
7ot7
-------
H 6752
water policy remains highly ambiguous. Es-
sentially, no one knows what we should be
doing not the government regulatory of Ii-
dais at EPA or in the states; not the sea-
dcmlc experts: not the business executives;
not the environmental community; and not
the politicians. Frankly, all of us are still
foundering in a morass of unclear scientific
information, political and economic pre&
sures, and regulatory confusion. -
These are the words of an environ-
mental engineer and one of America’s
top experts in this field. While much
work and research Is being conducted
on ground water currently, there is no
overall focus for these efforts. The bu-
reaucracy at EPA has not helped sub-
stantially. Congressional committees
have tried to find answers, but con-
gressional jurisdiction is scattered and
chaotic on this issue. Dr. Morrell went
on to suggest to me that what we need
is a congressionally charged commis-
sion. with specific duties.
The Water Resources Subcommittee
examined the Groundwater Commis-
sion concert In hearings and heard no
substantive objections to the legisla-
tion. Representatives of the EPA ex-
pressed concern that the formation of
the Commission might somehow inter-
fere with administrative activity now
being undertaken on the groundwater
Issue, but were reassured that the for-
mation of the committee would not
preclude any near term actions being
taken by EPA or the administration.
The Commission is, rather, a long-
range effort to Instill coherence In our
knowledge and policy on a problem
that is dealt with in several Federal
statutes, dozens of State laws, and a
handlull of committees of the House
and Senate.
Membership on the Commission Is
equitably composed of Members of
Congress and representatives of State
government, public interest groups
and Industry. There is no prior bias as
to the policies and directions the Com-
mission may eventually recommend. I
believe that this provision will put us
on a firm path toward preserving a
safe and adequate supply of ground
water and is an Important addition to
the reauthorization of the RCRA pro-
gram. I urge my colleagues to support
this legislation.
I ask the Members as they think
about this pr-ticular legislaton to
think about the many other experts
throughout the Nation who have re-
minded us that we really are In a time-
skip as we live In our society, We are
the only generation in human history
that has an opportunity to plan, not
predict, Its future, and I think that
moving toward the establishment of a
National Groundaater Commission
gives us an opportunity to put handles
on this very serious problem in time
for us to address in an adequate way
the solutions to that problem In the
future.
Mr. ROE. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. EDGAR. I yield to the gentle-
man from New Jersey.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
Mr. ROE. I thank the gentleman for
yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I want to take this
opportunity to Identify myself with
the gentleman’s comments and also
thank the gentleman for the extensive
effort the gentleman has been putting
forth In really spearheading the work
that we are projecting in this legisla-
tion. in the ground water area.
I think it is an extremely Important
environmental issue that has been
completely overlooked over the years.
I think the gentleman is doing a
superb job. I want to compliment the
g ’nLleman for his efforts. -
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield’
Mr. EDGAR. I yield to the gentle-
man from New .Tersey.
Mr. FLORTO. Mr. Chairman, I
would likewise like to recognize the
Initiative of the gentleman coming for-
ward with this proposal and it Is out of
the gentleman’s Ideas that this whole
situation of the bill has developed.
I thank the gentleman.
Mr. EDGAR. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2
minutes to the gentleman from Cali-
fornia (Mr. ThoMAs).
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Chairman. I
would ask If the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. FLoRID) would engage In a
colloquy briefly.
Several oil refineries In my district
Inject refinery wastewater through
class IV wells Into an old oil and gas
producing formation located several
thousand feet underground, well
below any current or even anticipated
future sources of drinking water. Cur-
rent EPA regulations define the term
“underground source of drinking
water” to allow such a formation to
avoid designation as a USDW If It can
be shown the aquifer does not now
and cannot In the future serve as a
source of drinking water.
Was it the gentleman’s Intention, in
drafting section 5 of H.R. 6307, to in-
corporate the current EPA regulatory
definition of the term ‘underground
source of drinking water”?
1430
Mr. F’LORIO. Mr. Chairman, if the
gentleman will yield, the answer is’
“Yes.”
Mr. THOMAS. I thank the gentle-
man. Therefore, this bill and the gen-
tleman’s substitute will not change the
existing regulatory procedure for the
designation as “exempted aquifers” of
those formations which do not now, or
cannot in the future, serve as under-
ground sources of drinking water, as
provided by the EPA regulatipns; Is
that correct?
Mr. FLORIO. If the gentleman will
yield, the gentleman is correct.
Mr. THOMAS. I thank the gentle-
man very much.
Mr. HAMMERSCRMIDT. Mr.
Chairman, at the moment I have no
further requests for time, and I re-
serve the balance of my time.
September 8, .1982
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, I have rio
further requests for time, and I re-
serve the balance of my time.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. I yield
minutes to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. LAFALCE), who has been ex-
tremely helpful In developing this leg-
islation.
(Mr. LAFALCE asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. LAFALCE. Mr. Chairman, I rise
In strong support of the subcommit-
tee’s substitute being offered by both
the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
FL0RI0) and the gentleman from New
York (Mr. LENT).
I want to thank the gentleman from
New Jersey and the gentleman from
New York, and their staffs, for work-
ing with me and my staff to put to-
gether what I believe Is a responsible
approach to the hazardous wastes In
landfills issue.
The amendment contained In the
substitute embodies a fundamental
principle with which all Members can
agree: Hazardous waste management
must fully protect human health and
the environment.
The compromise amendment directs
EPA to submit annual reports to Con-
gress identifying those hazardous
wastes for hIch landfill disposal may
not be protective of human health and
the environment based upon the toxic-
ity, mobility, persistence, and the abili-
ty of the waste to bioaccumulate.
The amendment also directs EPA to
also identify those hazardous wastes
for which there exists one or more
technologically feasible means of
treatment, recover, or disposal, other
than landfill disposal, which will pro-
tect human health and the environ-
ment. Most Importantly, the compro-
mise amendment directs EPA to pro-
mulgate regulations respecting those
hazardous wastes for which land .iiu
disposal may not be protective of
human health and the environment,
For the purposes of such regulatio ,
the amendment directs EPA to consid-
er the ability of landfill disposal facili-
ties to contain hazardous wastes over
time; to examine alternative treat-
thent, recovery, and disposal technol-
ogies. and the actions taken by State
governments In this regard; and to
review, for possible regulatory action,
all halogenated organlcs.
The compromise amendment is fully
consistent with EPA policy. Yesterday,
Rita Lavelle, Assistant Administrator
for Solid Waste and Emergency Re-
sporlse, wrote to both the Speaker and
the minority leader. Ms. Lavelle’s
letter notes:
The Agency now plans to prohibit land
disposal ot hazardous Wastes hich are
tiigliiy toxic, persistent and mobile, where
alternative treatment or recovery technol.
ogies are reasonably available.
Mr. Chairman, the evidence contin-
ues to demonstrate that the unre-
strIcted landfill disposal of hazardous
wastes In secure landfills makes those
7Ôcf
-------
H 6754
I believe this funding level would
allow for an effective hazardous waste
program at the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency.
In addition, I wholeheartedly ap-
prove of the provisions In the bill that
would tighten the management re-
quirements for hazardous waste gener-
ated in this country.
Existing law has failed to address
some very serious hazardous waste
problems and I believe appropriate ac-
tions must now be taken.
Specifically, I refer to the handling
of hazardous wastes from small gener-
ators, the disposal of hazardous wastes
In municipal land fills, and the use of
fuel that has been combined with haz-
ardous waste materials.
Oversight activities conducted by
the Subcommittee on Natural Re-
sources, Agriculture Research and En-
vironment, which I have the honor to
chair, confirm the fact that these are
all serious problems, not only in my
StaLe of New York but also in many
other parts of the country.
We cannot ignore these problems
and further jeopardize our environ-
ment and our citizens.
This legislation addresses these
problems responsibly and I. therefore,
strongly urge Its adoption by the
House._____
• Mr. .r RETrI. Mr. Chairman, I
rise in support of H.R. 6307, the Re-
source Conservation and Recovery Act
reauthorization.
Hazardous waste management has
become an issue of major national con-
cern and one of great concern for both
New York SLate and New York City.
Since passage of the Resource Conser-
vation and Recovery Act in 1976, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
has been slow to implement this un.
portant law. The EPA did not issue Its
first major package of hazardous
waste regulations until May 1980. and
It had barely begun to implement
them before the Reagan adnainistra-
tion took office. Since then. EPA has
been hit with severe budget reduc-
tions.
As approved by the Energy and
Commerce Committee, the bill author-
izes appropriations of $108.5 million In
fiscal year 1983 and $111.5 million In
fiscal year 1984. These figures are
more than $30 million more than the
President had originally requested for
the Resource Conservation and Recov-
ery Act (RCRA). In addition, the bill
earmarks $109 million to enhance the
enforcement activities of RCRA. H.R.
6307 will significantly expand the
scope of the hazardous waste law and
will force the EPA to meet new dead-
lines for issuing or denying disposal
permits to the generators of hazardous
wastes. Plus, this legislation will create
a National Groundwater Commission
to recommend ways of protecting
ground water from contamination.
Specifically. Mr. Speaker. I support:
Restricting the disposal of bulk and
containerized liquid hazardous wastes
in landfills. Present EPA regulations
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
are inadequate to protect the environ-
ment from contamination in that
those regulations permit the free dis-
posal of untreated bulk liquid wastes
in landfills. The regulations ignore the
fact that toxic chemicals can migrate
through the ground and Into the
groundwater.
Prohibiting the injection of hazard-
ous wastes into underground sources
of thinking v .ater and restricting the
injections above present and potential
underground water supplies, pending
the development of State programs to
regulate this practice. EPA has vacil-
Iattd on whether to regulate under-
ground thJecti n wells for the disposal
of hazardous wastes under RCRA of
the Sate Drinking Water Act. Thus
the regulation of class IV underground
Injection wells used for the disposal of
toxic and radioactive liquids into and
above underground sources of drink-
log water has been sorely neglected.
Requiring the EPA to set standards
for Industrial boilers that burn haz-
ardous wastes as fuel.
Requiring that Interim status facili-
ties wanting to expand by more than
10 percent obtain permits In accord-
ance with the standards that apply to
new facilities.
Establishing a timetable for the EPA
to review permit applications to accel-
erate the issuance of final permits
which spell out specific environmental
protection measures for existing haz-
ardous waste management facilities.
All of these issues—my concerns, the
concerns of the Nation, the concerns
of my congressional district, and the
people of Staten Island—are addressed
by H.R. 6307. The national hazardous
waste problem has reached a crisis
stage in many of our communities. If
we fall to act now, we may very well
lose the opportunity to develop a pre-
ventative approach to future hazard-
ous waste problems. We need a strong
Federal law now more than ever to re-
store public confidence. We need to
put teeth In the Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act. We need HR.
6307, and I call upon my colleagues to
give their holehearted support to It..
• Mr. CORRADA. Mr. Chairman, I
rise in support of H.R. 6307. the
RCRA Reauthorization Act of 1982.
This legislation provides a 2-year
reauthorization for a major law that
established our Nation’s basic hazard-
ous waste system.
RCRA represented a milestone in
our efforts to regulate and monitor
the problem posed to the environment
by the increasing amounts of hazard-
ous wastes which are generated annu-
ally. If unchecked, these wastes would
create enormous environmental and
health problems for generations to
come.
This legislation seeks to provide ad-
ditional guidelines for the implemen-
tation of the law. The establishment
of specific deadlines in the legaslation
dealing with the issuance of hazardous
waste disposal permits Is an additional
step in the right direction and which
September 8, 1982
will provide certainty in this complex
regulatory area.
At the same time, I also support the
amendment that will be offered by our
colleague, Congressman PHIL GRAMM,
dealing with small generators of haz.
ardous wastes. I agree that there
should be some consideration given to
the regulation of generators of hazard-
ous wastes In quantities of less than
1.000 kilograms per month. However,
the immediate applicability of the
RCRA regulations on small gener-
ators, as provided for In section 3 of
the bill, will have a significant eco-
nomic impact on those generators, the
majority of which are small businesses
such as gas stations, dry cleaners, auto
repair shops, laboratories, and so
forth. I favor the approach taken by
Congressman Pint. Gaasras which dl.
recta the Environmental Protection
Agency to conduct a comprehensive
study on small generators to assess the
problem they present and to analyze
the regulatory alternatives available
to deal with these hazards. In this -
way, different options can be studied
that will achieve the desired purpose
without being onerous on the small
generators that will be regulated.
I urge my colleagues to vote in favor
of the Gramm amendment and will
-also support the prompt enactment of
this bill.s
• Mr. MOi ’ - i-’r. Mr. Chairman, I
rise in strong support of H.R. 6307.
First, let me thank Mr. FLORIO and
Mr. Ros for their leadership on this
issue and congratulate them on this
excellent reauthorization bill.
Over 80 billion pounds of hazardous
wastes are dumped each year. creating
a serious threat to the land, to drink-
ing water supplies, and to the health
and well-being of our citizens. H.R.
6307 is an important and essential step
in providing a solution to this problem
and in reaching the goal of protecting
the public from significant environ-
mental and health damage. -
In particular, I would like to empha-
size the Importance of the creation of
the National Ground Water Commis-
sion. The Subcommittee on Environ-
ment. Energy and Natural Resources,
which I chair, undertook a year-long
investigation Into the ground water
problem. Our investigation Culminated
In a report of the full Government Op-
erations Committee which urged, In
the strongest terms. the development
of a national strategy to protect our
ground water resources.
Over 100 millIon Anierican , depend
on ground water. Over 40 percent of
our citizens in my State of Connecti-
cut obtain their water from wells.
Ironically, as the dependence on
ground water is growing, so Is the de-
struction of precious underground
di ’lnklrig water supplies. In Connecti-
cut alone, some 25 percent of the
towns have suffered from hazardous
waste and toxic chemical contamina-
lion of ground water.
7 1
-------
September 8, 1982
Just last week. I visited the residen-
tial community of Montville, Conn.,
where toxic organic solvents had de-
stroyed 13 private wells and pose a
threat to dozens more. The problems
faced by the citizens of Montville are
being faced by residents of towns
across the Nation.
Despite my pleasure at seeing the
ground water issue addressed. I am dis-
appointed that EPA’s failure to act in
this vital area has necessitated further
congressional action. The Reagan ad-
rninistrauon has not used Its authori-
ties to address this issue and, by fail-
ing to act. is exposing our resources
and our citizens to dangers which
could be mitigated. As Mr. Fi.oazo
noted In the full committee markup
on this legislation, the establishment
of this Commission should be viewed
by the EPA as a signal that the Con-
gress is not happy with its “go slow”
approach, that Congress Is frustrated
by the EPA’s meager efforts to pre-
vent the destruction of ground water
supplies. Thus, the creation of the
Commission must be seen as a call to
action.
I would also like to say that I believe
Mr. FITHIAN’S amendment is essential.
Hearings held by my subcommittee in
the field earlier this year clearly indi-
cated that this amendment will correct
s asteful and unnecessary ambiguity in
the Superfund legislation, I believe
this amendment clearly expresses the
intent of the Congress that only mu-
nicipally owned and operated sites
should be forced to pay 50 percent of
the cleanup costs.
I believe that H.R. 6307 deserves the
full support of the House. I look for-
‘ard to working with my colleagues in
future efforts to protect our essential
and irreplaceable underground drink-
ing ater supplies•
• Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Chairman, I rise
In support of HR. 6307, legislatIon to
reauthorize the Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act. This statute
has been most effective in addressing
the hazar ious waste question, and the
protections it affords the public
should be retained,
It Is widely accepted that the mis’
management of hazardous wastes Is
one of the most serious public health
and environmental problems before
our country today. This fact is under-
scored by the large number of aban-
doned toxic dimp sites littered across
America, and the continued illegal
dump!ng of wastes down sewers, storm
drains, arid In tacant lots. It is discon-
certing to realize that the public still
relies on land disposal facilities for the
most de ad1y and persistent chemicals
despite c er hel’ning evidence that
most landf lls e ent’ialIy leak.
The Resource Conservation and Re-
covery Act of 1976, whIch sought to
correct these egregious problems, was
modeled on California’s 1972 hazard-
ous waste law. Cal fornia, with one of
the Nation’s most serious waste prob-
lems and one of the most progressive
programs to combat It, provides an in-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
teresting case to study during our con-
sideration of RCRA’s reauthorization.
Indeed, my State has assumed an im-
portant role In the debate surrounding
the hazardous waste question, and a
review of the relevant facts concerning
California’s current situation is appro-
priate. Given the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency’s claims that California
is the fourth largest producer of haz-
ardous wastes In the country, a discus-
sion of my State’s problems will also
be instructive to other Industrial
States faced with similar difficulties.
During the past several years, nearly
100 hazardous waste sites have been
Identified throughout California. The
soit and water surrounding these areas
has been contaminated with danger-
ous pol utaiits and are a profound
threat to human health and the erivi-
ronment. Cleanup of these sites repre-
sents a long.term commitment of re-
sources and time, as it will require
hundreds of miLlions of dollars and
many years to complete the task.
These 100 sites are only the first to be
discovered, and it is expected that nu-
merous other hazardous dump sites
will be located before California’s
county-by-county search Is ended.
We cannot shirk our commitment to
the eradication of dangerous wastes,
as many of these sites have coptami-
nated drinking wells with solvents,
pesticides, and other possible carcino-
genic materials, The existence of these
tainted wells poses an unacceptable
hazard to the public’s well-being and
as such, It becomes our responsibility
to present such pollution from occur-
ring. Once an aquifer Is contaminated,
the process of reclaiming it is a diffi-
cult and expensive one, and the natu-
ral rate of ground water recharge Is on
the order of decades. This problem
needs to be addressed, as over half of
all U.S. citizens rely on ground water
aquifers for their thinking water. We
cannot continue to threaten that
water supply by relying on question-
able land disposal practices.
Hazardous wastes of all types contin-
ue to be churned out at an alarming
rate. In 1982. California discovered
that the actual amount of aste gen-
erated within its borders is close to 18
million tons, rather than the 5 million
tons previously estimated. Most re-
cently, we have itnessed the Santa
Clara Valley’s citizens contend wt’h ft
critical waste problem This prud’lcLlbe
ar a. which is the ca;i’al of the
State’s electronics industry, has been
plagued by a serlcs of massive leaks In
underground storage tanks containu g’
toxic solvents, The event’s potential
for damaging the integrity of the
area’s graund water supplies was sig-
nificant and is indicative of the need
for society’s greater vigilance in the
d posiLion and long-term management
of hazardous waste.
Notv.ithstanding the numerous haz.-
ardous waste problems encountered by
the State, Califcrr ia has been in the
vanguard of the battle to reclaim
these-poisoned sites. Our State’s haz-
H 6755
ardous waste laws have been updated
during each of the last 10 years as the
extent of the problem becomes under-
stood more fully. The Resource Con-
sen’atlon and Recovery Act, on the
other hand, has not been modified to
reflect the new changes in our knowl-
edge about hazardous wastes. It is my
firm belief that the adoption of H.R.
6307, as amended by the committee
proposals, will allow our country to
keep pace with the growing complex-
ity of this problem, I urge my col-
leagues to support this measure o
• Mr. BROWN of California. Mr,
Chairman, I rise In support of HR.
6307. the reauthorization of the Re-
source Conser ation and Recovery Act
and in support of strengthening
amendments.
Mr. Chairman, I commend by col-
leagues on the Energy and Commerce
Committee for the excellent work
they have done in addressing the prob-
lem of hazardous waste management.
In particular, I commend my colleague
from New Jersey (Mr. F I .oalo) for the
leadership he has demonstrated. The
Superfund legislation enacted In 1980,
providing authority for clean up of
abandoned hazardous waste sites, was
guided through the committee by Mr.
Fi.onio and will benefit communities
across the country suffering the re-
sults of poor or Illegal dumping prac-
tices. The Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) is designed to
control current waste management
practices so that ideally, Superfund
would no longer be needed.
The problems of hazardous waste
management describe by my col-
leagues and aell known to most Mern-
bers are very real. Tziey certainly are
found in my o n SLate of California,
long kno n for its aggressi e efforts to
protect Its rich environmental re-
sources. In my own district, the com-
munity of Cien Avon in the Jurupa
hills has suffered years of turmoil and
uncertainty regarding a liquid hazard-
ous waste site leachii;g toxic chemicals
Into underground streams feeding the
community. The Strtngfellow Acid
Pits, as the site is called, is listed as
one of the 100 or so sites on the Feder-
al Superfund list. I appreciate the pro-
visions contained in Superfund which
can help alleviate the problems of
sites lIke £trtngtellow across the coun-
try. But I am also interested in Insur.
irig that communities do not have to
face problems like this in the future.
California’s hazardous waste law was
enacted In 1972. It was the first law In
the country and provided the model
for RCRA, California updated its stat-
ute durL’lg each of the la.st 10 years as
the extcnt of the hazardot 1 s waste
probiem became more fully under-
stood. I belie’ e that a few points about
California’s program are rele ant to
our debate today,
ico SMAI.L Gfl ERATOR CXIMPTIOy,
California has never exempted
smaller generators from hazardous
waste controls, Many of the most s ji
-------
H 6756
sonous wastes, such as cyanide, toxic
metals, PCB’s, and chlorinated sol-
vents, are produced by smaller busi-
nesses. In practice, this has not been a
burden for either the State or for In-
dustry. An Envfronmental Protection
Agency (EPA) exemption can have se-
rlous results. Each small generator can
send up to about 50 barrels per year of
waste to the local municipal landfill.
In any good size city you may have 100
smaller generators. Thai is 5,000 bar-
rels per year of toxic wastes going into
a landfill that was never engineered to
accept hazardous wastes. The results
are Injured municipal Lra,!h collectors,
combinations of incompatible wastes
that can form toxic clouds that drift
over residences, and continued con-
tamination of groundwater.
This situation must be changed and
this bill does that by reducing the
small-generator exemption.
140 EXEMPTION 7OR BURNING WASTES IN
BOILESS
EPA now allows generators to burn
their hazardous wastes in their own
boilers without a permit. Just because
the aste is to be burned for the laud-
able goal of energy recovery does not
mean that the hazards of such a prac-
Uc’e can be ignored. The flagrant
abuses of this exemption have become
clear over the last year—the mixing of
hazardous wastes with fuel oil. Califor-
nia has no such exemption—a permit
Is required no matter hether treat-
ment, incineration, recycling, or land-
filling is planned.
TIns bill addresses this problem.
BAN ON ThZ 11410 DISPOSAL OF RICKLY TOXIC
WASTES
Despite EPA’s ban on the landfilllng
of liquid wastes and new design and
operating standards for disposal facili-
ties. there is nothing to prevent many
of the worst wastes from continuing to
go to surface Impoundments, Injection
wells, or land farms. EPA is taking the
bandaid approach, patching the symp-
toms but not addressing the cause of
the illness.
California has an aggressive new
program that has received national at-
tention. I will Insert a Washington
Post article for the record for those of
any colleagues who may have missed It
over the recess. The Governor’s Office
of Appropriate Technology has
worked for a couple of years on alter-
natives to land disposal of toxic
wastes. The Governor’s office has
identified wastestreams that are not
suitable for land disposal, has set up a
3-year schedule to ban about 500,000
tons of the most toxic wastes from
land disposal, and aggressively encour-
aged the construction of alternative
management technologies that recy-
cle, treat, or destroy these hazardous
wastes. Technologies to treat, recycle,
or destroy such toxic wastes are
proven and in use in Europe or In
other parts of the world. A future of
safer waste management is possible
today If we are willing to recognize It.
I understand that my colleague from
New York (Mr. LaF*zcx will offer an
‘CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
amendment that will require EPA to
promulgate regulations Indentifytng
hazardous waste which would be
banned from land disposal. I urge my
colleagues to support this amendment.
The State of California has shown
that It can be done for the State, Let
us show that we are committed to solv-
ing this problem for the Nation.
Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of
the bill.
At this point I include the following:
fFmrn the Wa.thlngton Post. Sept. 1, 1982]
Caiiposuw vrrrs SrIucT Nxw Toxic
Was’ a Bm.zs
(Br Ward Sinclair)
The California state government yester-
day announced details of a fat-reaching new
program to ban the land disposal of a van-
ety of highly toxic chemical wastes identi.
fled as serious hazards to human health.
The program, which would require that
toxic wastes be treated at new handling
facilities, would be the most stringent in the
nation when its first portions take effect, as
expected. early next year.
Oov. Edmund 0. (Jerry) Brown Jr., who
unveiled the program at a San Francisco
press conference, said the program, an out-
growth of his executive order last year ban-
ning toxic waste land dumps, “will help pre-
vent intolerable human suffering .. - and
help end enormous cleanup costs that nei-
ther industry nor the taxpayer can afford,”
Although the proposed regulations apply
only to California, Brown’s action yesterday
earned a decidedly national slant.
Public concern over toxic waste disposal
has been heightened by the Lore CanaI
N.Y., tragedy, involving sickness and land
contamination, and disclosures that hun-
dreds of unregulated toxic dumps may
threaten public health across the country.
Brown, the Democratic candidate for the
U.S Senate from California is a frequent
critic of Reagan administration environmen-
tal enforcement and a gubernatorial aide
conceded yesterday that the state action is
intended to spur the federal Environmental
Protection Agency to ‘take a more militant
enforcement stand,
Brown was joined at his press conference
by Sen Gary Hart D-Coloj, who has pro-
posed amendments to the federal Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA),
now awaiting congressional reauthorization,
that parallel California’s program,
The Hart proposals are pending before
the Senate Entironment and Public Works
Committee. The House is expected to
debate its own version of a RCRA extension.
with amendments similar to Hart’s offered
by Reps. James J. Florlo (D-N.J.), John J.
LaFal’-e (D-N.Y) and Norman P. Lent (R’
N.Y.).
Brown said yesterday that he was “fully
supportive” of the Hart proposals.
California officials estimate that their
new regulations, although subject to final
public comment and review before they take
effect next March. would affect at least half
a million tons of highly toxic chemical
wastes now dumped in landfills.
Wastes that would be banned from land-
fW’dumping include cyanides. toxic metals,
strong acids. PCBs, halogenated organic
compounds such as the pesticides DDT,
DBCP and Kepone, and all other wastes
currently classified by the state as “cx-
tretnely hazardous.”
The proposed regulations carry a maxi-
mum fine of $25,000 per day for each viola-
Lion of the land-dumping ban,
Compliance and enforcement, according
to Kent Sloddard of the governor’s Office
September 8, 1982
of Appropriate Technology, will be keyed to
a two-year timetable for construction of
treatment facilities, beginning next March
32.
The facilities will be built by private en-
terprise, with low-interest sate pollution-
control loans available. The Brown program
also calls for expedited state processing of
applications for construction pennits.
“We have identified the treatment and re-
cycling technologies that could be used,”
Stoddard said, “and e know there are clear
alternatives to land disposal of these wastes.
We hate worked closely with the chemical,
petroleum and electronitz industries In
laying out these treatment tImetables.”
California’s plan to phase out landfills as
dumps for highly toxic wastes began last
October hen Brown Issued an executive
order banning such actit ity and increasing
stale monitoring and enforcement at all
hazardous wi ste disposal sites.
State officials estimate that California,
with perhaps the nation’s fourth largest
volume of toxic nastes, has at least 70 major
dumping sites that need cleaning up, includ.
log some In the state’s most populous coun-
ties.S
• Mr. HOWARD. Mr. Chairman, I rise
in support of H.R. 6307. a bill to
amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act
and authorize appropriations for fiscal
years 1983 and 1984.
This bill was sequentially referred to
our Committee on Public Works and
Transportation for consideration of
sections 4 and 9 in recognition of our
jurisdiction over water pollution and
water resources management, conser-
vation and development.
Section 4 directs the Environmental
Protection Agency to submit a report
to Congress with recommendations as
to whether regulation of hazardous
wastes mixed with domestic sewage
under the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
necessary to protect human health
and the environment, or whether the
existing provisions of law are ade-
quate. SectIon 1004(27) of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act provides that the
term “solid waste” does not include
solid or dissolved material In domestic
sewage. Therefore, hazardous waste
mixed with domestic sewage Is cur-
rently exempt from regulation under
the provisions of the Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act. Instead, the pretreat nt
provisions of the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act establish a program
for the regulation of toxic pollutants
which Interfere with, P 5 55 through, or
contaminate the sludge produced by
municipal sewage treatment plants,
Section 9 establishes a National
Ground Water Commission to Investi-
gate and assess a broad range of mat-
ters relating to ground water contam.
ination by hazardous wastes and exist-
ing or needed mechanisms for the pro.
tection or rehabilitation of ground
water resources. The Commission Is di-
rected to transmit a report along with
recommendations for appropriate leg-
islation and administrative actions to
Congress amid the President no later
than October 30, 1986; $10 million Is
authorized to Carry out the study.
our committee adopted amendments
to these sections, WhIch Will be cx-
-------
&ptember 8, 1982
plalned In detail by Congressman Ros,
chairman of our Water Resources Sub-
committee. I would like, however, to
discuss the National Ground Water
Commission provision. Ground water
Is one of our most precious resources.
It is used extensively for human con-
sumption. irrigation of agricultural
crops and Industrial purposes. It is es-
sential that it be protected and used
wisely so that its availability for con-
tinued and future use will be assured.
We know that our ground water re-
sources are threatened with contami-
nation and depletion. Yet we lack com-
prehensive information on the nature
and scope of these threats and possi-
ble remedial action which can be
taken with regard to them.
So that this Information wiil be
available, the Commission is charged
with the study of a broad range of
matters relating to ground water,
ranging from the extent and condition
of available resources to measures
which can be taken to restore and pre-
serve them- This will enable us to de-
termine what measures should be
taken to insure that future genera-
tions will be able to enjoy the benefits
of this vital resource.s
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, I have no
further requests for time.
Mr. HAMMERSCHMIDT. Mr.
Chairman, I have no further requests
for time.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield
1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. SEIBr iiLxNa).
(Mr. SEIBERLING asked and was
“iven permission to revise and extend
s remarks.)
itr. SEIBERLrNG. Mr. Chairman, I
iuld Like to commend the gentleman
irom New Jersey (Mr. FLoIuo) for his
leadership in this field of storage and
disposal of toxic wastes. I commend
and thank him, In particular, for
taking time out of the recess last week
to come out and spend a day in Ohio
to look at a novel situation where PPG
Industries is proposing to use a 2,000
foot deep abandoned limestone mine
as a permanent disposal site and also a
temporary storage site for hazardous
wastes.
I would like to ask the gentleman
from New Jersey. with respect to the
study and the proposed regulations
that the EPA is directed by this substi-
tute to come up with. is it the gentle-
man’s Intent to the maxunum extent
feasible to require treatment or proc-
essing of wastes so that they are re-
duced to their least hazardous form
before they are permanently stored or
disposed of?
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, If the
gentleman will yield, the gentleman is
correct. That is the clear intent of this
legislation, so as to discourage inap-
propriate disposal means. We saw at
the gentleman’s facility a good exam-
ple of a hybrid system that was a com-
bination storage and disposal facility
for which there really is not a clear
Cf “ulatory system that has been
so the gentleman is correct..
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
Circumstances such as the proposed,
underground mine site require sepa-
rate standards for facility operation
and specific restrictions on the types
of wastes that can be placed In the fa-
cility.
Mr. SEIBERLING. I thank the gen-
tleman and I commend him and also
the other gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. Ros) for the work that he has
done In connection with this legisla-
tion.
The CRAIRMAN. Pursuant to the
rule, the committee amendment In the
nature of -a substitute recommended
by the Committee on Energy and
Commerce now printed in the reported
bill shall be considered as an original
bill for the purpose of amendment. It
shall be in order to consider amend-
ments to said substitute printed in the
CoNGREssIoNAL Rxcoao of August 3,
1982. by, and if offered by, Repre-
sentative ROE of New Jersey In lieu of
the amendments recommended by the
Committee on Pubic Works and
Transportation now printed in the re-
ported bill.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows
R.R.6307 -
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of
America in Congress assembted,
AUTHORIZATION OP APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL
TEARS 1983 AND 1984
A D WIT IN TUE NATURE OF A SVBSTITUTS
OFFERED BY MR. FLORIO
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. I offer
an amendment In the nature of a sub-
stitute.
The Clerk read as follow&
Amendment in the nature of a substitute
offered by Mr. Pi,oiuo. Strike out all alter
the enacting clause and Insert In Ueu there-
of:
SNORT TrILl
Silc’rtON I. This Act may be cited as the
“Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Reauthorization Act 011982”.
AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL
TZARS I9I3AND I B S A -
Sac. 2. (a) Ozxvux. Av,’uoR lasl’IoN.—Sec-
tlon 2007(a) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
is amended by striking out “and $80,000,000
for the fiscal year ending September 30.
1982” and substituting ‘880.000,000 for the
fiscal year- endIng September 30. 1982.
$44,520,000 for the fiscal year ending Sep-
tember 30, 1983. and 844.520.00(1 for the
fiscal year ending September 30, t984”.
(b) STATE UAZARZIOtIS WASTE PaoGRAMs —
Section 3011ia’ of such Act is amended by
sLriking Out “asid $40,000,i ,’OO for the l sr,aI
year 1982” and substituting “$40,000 008 for
the fLqcal year 1982, 540.000.000 for the
fiscal year 1983, and $40,000,000 for the
fiscal year 1984”.
(C) HA2.ut000s WASTE SiTE INVENTORY,—
Section 3012 of such Act (relating to the
hazardous waste in.ientory) is amended by—
(1) redesignating such section (and the
corresponding reference thereto in the table
of contenisi as “Section 30 2A.”; and
(2) by striking out “$20,000,000” in subsec-
tion (c)(2) and inserting in lieu thereof
“810.000000 for the fiscal year 1983. and
$ 10.000.000 for the fiscal year 1984”,
(dl DEVELOPIeENT M.D IMPISMERTATION As-
sisTAiICR.—Seetion 4008(a)U) of such Act is
amended by striking out “and $20,000,000
H 6757
for fiscal year 1982” and substituting
“520.000.000 for the fiscal year 1982,
810.000.000 for fiscal year 1983, and
$10,000,000 for fiscal year 1984”.
Ce) IMpLEI.InITA T I0I4 Assss ’raxcz ,—Section
4008(a)2RC) of such Act is amended by
striking out “and $10,000,000 for fiscal year
1982” and substituting “$2,000,000 for the
fiscal year 1982, $2,000,000 for fiscal year
1983, and $2,000,000 for fiscal year 1984”,
(f) Speciax. COMMUNITIES ,—Section
4008(eX2) of such Act Is amended by strik-
ing Out, “and 51.500,000 for each of the fiscal
years 1981 arid 1982” and substituting “,
$1,500,000 for each of the fiscal years 1981
and 1982. $500,000 for the fiscal year 1983
and $500,000 for the fiscal year 1984”,
(g) ASSISTANca TO STATES FOR RWTCUD
On. PitoaaaMs ,—Section 4008 of such Act Is
amended—
(1) by redeslgnating subsection (f) (relat-
ing to assistance to municipalities for
energy and materials conservation and re-
covery planning activities) as subsection (g);
and
(2) in paragraph (4) of subsection (f) Ire-
lating to assistance to States for discretion-
ary programs for recycled oil) by striking
out “and $5,000,000 for fIscal year 1983” and
substituting “85.000.000 for fIscal year 1983
and 53.000.000 for fiscal year 1984”.
(h) DE snmirNT or Coswsmca Fci,c-
TIoNs,—Section 5008 of such Act Is amended
by inserting after “1982” the following
“$1,500,000 for fIscal year 1983. and
$1,500,000 for fiscal year 1984”.
SMALL QUANTITY GENERATORS
Szc. 3. Section 3001 of the SoLid Waste
Disposal Act is amended by adding the fol-
lowing at the end thereof:
“Cd) Su*u. QUANTITY GENERATOR WASTE.—
(1) After the date twenty-four months after
the date of the cnactment of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery ACT. Reauthort.
tation Act of 1982, no hazardous waste
which is generar ed by any generator In a
quantity greater than one hundred kilo-
grains during any calendar month shall be
exempt, by reason of the small Quantity
generated, from standards under this subli’
tIe.
“(2) Not later than twenty.tour months
after the date of the enactment of the Re-
source Conservation arid Recovery Act
Reauthorization Act of 1982 the Adminis-
trator, alter opportunity for notice, coca-
inent, and public hearthes, shall promulgate
standards under sections 3002. 3003, and
3004 for hazardous waste v.hich is generated
during any ca endar month by any gener-
ator in I quantity greater than one hundred
kilograms but less than one thousand kilo-
grams. Such standards may vary as provided
In this paragraph from the standards appli-
cable to hazardous waste generated in larger
quantities to the extent that the Adminis-
trator deems such variation neces.sary by
reason of the smaller Caparitv of the facifl-
Iii ’ S concerned. The Ath ir ,trator Is direct-
ed to provide tariances in such standards
which—
‘tA) in the case of standards under section
3002, prov de that—
“ Ci) a determination cor.cerning whether
or not hazardous was’e is b- ing gelierated
may be made through testing, or process
ide:.tl!ic,ation, or applying krio’aiedge of the
characterLstica of the waste based upon ma.
terlals or processes tiaed, or generic testing
for an indu try a-here waste stream S of gen-
erators within the industry have the same
or similar characteristica
“(ii) ret uirement.s for waste identification
on manifests may be modified so thai. such
requIrements may be satisfied on the basis
of Information obtained by testing, or proo-
7OC(
------- |