RCRA
Legislative
Hi story
esource
Volume 2
1984
-------
(L “Z$G 4 d .
H. IL 2267—28
Subtitle C—Amendments Primarily to Other Sections in Subtitle C
SMALL QUANTITY GENERATOR WASTE
Szc. 221. (a) Section 3001 of the Solid Waste Disposai Act is
amended’by adding the following new subsection after subsection (c):
“(d) SMALL QUAN’TTTY GENERATOR W*sTE.—i 1) By March 31. 1986.
the Administrator shall promulgate standards under sections 3002.
3003, and 3004 for hazardous waste generated by a generator in a
total quantity of hazardous waste greater than one hundred kilo-
grams but less than one thousand kilograms during a calendar
month.
“(2) The standards referred to in paragraph (1), including stand-
ards applicable to the legitimate use. reuse, recycling, and reclama-
tion of such wastes, may vary from the standards applicable to
hazardous waste generated by larger quantity generators. but such
standards shall be si ifficient to protect human health and the
env iron. ent.
“(3) Not later than two hundred and seventy days after the
enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984
any hazardous waste which is part of a total quantity generated by a
generator generating greater than one hundred kilograms but less
than one thousand kilograms during one calendar month and which
is shipped off the premises on which such waste is generated shall be
accompanied by a copy of the Environmental Protection Agency
Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest form signed by the generator.
This form shall contain the following information:
“ (A) the name and address of the generator of the waste;
“iB the United States Department of Tt ansportation descrip-
tion of the waste, including the proper shipping name, hazard
class, and identification number UN NM, if applicable:
the number and type of containers;
Di the quantity of waste being transported, and
Ei the name and address of the facility designated to receive
the waste.
If subparagraph B) is not applicable, in lieu of the description
referred to in such subparagraph B), he form shall contain the
Environmental Protection Agency identification number, or a
generic description of the waste, or a description of the waste by
hazardous waste characteristic. Additional requirements related to
the manifest form shall apply only if determined necessary by the
Administrator to protect human health and the environment.
“(4 The Administrator’s responsibility under this subtitle to pro-
tect human health and the environment may require the promulga-
tion of standards under this subtitle for hazardous wastes which are
generated by any generator who does not generate more than one
hundred kilograms of hazardous waste in’a calendar month.
“(a) Until the effective date. of standards required to be promul-
gated under paragraph (1), any hazardous waste identified or listed
under section 3001 generated by any generator during any calendar
month in a total quantity greater than one hundred kilograms but
less than one thousand kilograms, which is not treated, stored, or
disposed, of at a hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal
facility with a permit under section 3005, shall be disposed of only in
a facility which is permitted, licensed, or registered by a State to
manage municipal or industrial solid waste.
c2e2 /
-------
H. R. 2867—29
“(6) Standards promulgated as provided in paragraph (1) shall, at
a minimum, require that all treatment, storage, or disposal of
hazardous wastes generated by generators referred to in paragraph
(1) shall occur at a facility with uiterirn status or a permit under this
subtitle, except that onsite storage of hazardous waste generated by
a generator generating a total quantity of hazardous waste greater
than one hundred kilograms, but less than one thousand kilograms
duruig a calendar month, may occur without the requirement of a
permit for up to one hundred and eighty days. Such onsite storage
may occur without the requirement of a permit for not more than
si.x thousand kilograms for up to two hundred and seventy days if
such generator must ship or haul such waste over two hundred
miles.
“(7XA) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to affect or
impair the validity of regulations promulgated by the Secretary of
Transportation pursuant to the Hazardous Materials Transporta-
tion Act.
“ Bi Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to affect,
modify, or render invalid any requirements in regulations promul-
gateti priur to January 1. 1983 applicable to any acutely hazardous
waste identified or listed under section 3001 which is generated by
any generator during any calendar month in a total quantity less
than one thousand kilograms.
“(8) Effective March 31. 1986. unless the Administrator promul-
gates standards as provided in paragraph 1) of this subsection prior
to such date, hazardous waste generated by any generator in a total
quantity greater than one hundred kilograms but less than one
thousand kilograms during a calendar month shall be subject to the
following requirements until the standards referred to in paragraph
(1) of this subsection have become effective:
‘Ai the notice requirements of paragrap’h 3) of this subsec-
tion shall apply and in addition. the information provided in the
form shall include the name of the waste transporters and the
name and address of the facility designated to receive the waste:
“i B) except in the case of the onsite storage referred to in
paragraph 6) of this subsection, the treatment, storage. or
disposal of such waste shall occur at a facility with interim
status or a permit under this subtitle;
“(C) generators of such waste shall file manifest exception
reports as required of generators producing greater amounts of
hazardous waste per month except that such reports shall be
filed by January 31, for any waste shipment occurring in the
last half of the preceding calendar year, and by July 31, for any
waste shipment occurring in the first half of the calendar year:
and
“(D) generators of such waste shall retain for three years a
copy of the manifest signed by the designated facility that has
received the waste.
Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as a determination of
the standards appropriate under paragraph (1).
“(9) The last sentence of section 3010(b) shall not apply to regula-
tions romulpted under this subsection.”.
(b) The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
shall undertake activities to inform and educate the waste genera-
tors of their responsibilities under the amendments made by this
section during the period within thirty months after the enactment
-------
H. R. 2867—30
of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 to help
assure compliance.
(c i The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency in
cooperation with the States shall conduct a study of hazardous waste
identified or listed under section 3001 of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act which is generated by individual generators in total quantities
for each generator during any calendar month of less than one
thousand kilograms. The Administrator may require from such
generators information as may be necessary to conduct the study.
Such study shall include a characterization of the number and type
of such generators, the quantity and characteristics of hazardous
waste generated by such generators. State requirements applicable
to such generators. the individual and industry waste management
practices of such generators, the potential costs of modifying those
practices and the impact of such modifications on national treat-
ment and disposal facility capacity, and the threat to human health
and the environment’and the employees of transporters or others
involvea in solid waste management posed by such hazardous wastes
or such management practices. Such study shall be submitted to the
Congress not later than April 1. 1985.
td) The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
shall cause to be studied the existing manifest system for hazardous
wastes as it applies to small quantity generators and recommend
whether the current system shall be retained or whether a new
system should be introduced. The study shall include an analysis of
the cost versus the benefits of the system studied as well as an
analysis of the ease of retrieving and collating information and
identifying a given substance. Finally, any new proposal shall in-
clude a list of those standards that are necessary to protect human
health and the environment. Such study shall be submitted to the
Congress not later than April 1. 1987.
le) The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. in
conjunction with the Secretary of Transportation. shall prepare and
submit to the Congress a report on the feasibility of easing the
administrative burden on small quantity generators. increasing
compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements. and sirnplt-
fying enforcement efforts through a program of licensing hazardous
waste transporters to assume the responsibilities of small quantity
generators relating to the preparation of manifests and associated
recordkeeping and reporting requirements. The report shall exam-
ine the appropriate licensing requirements under such a program
including the need for financial assurances by licensed transporters
and shall make recommendations on provisions and requirements
for such a program including the appropnate division of responsibil-
ities between the Department of Transportation and the Environ-
mental Protection Administration. Such report shall be submitted to
the Congress not later than April 1. 1987 ,--
( (Xl) The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
shall, in consultation with the Secretary of Education, the States,
and appropriate educational associations, conduct a comprehensive
study of problems associated with the accumulation, storage and
disposal of hazardous wastes from educational institutions. The
study shall include an investigation of the feasibility and availabil-
ity of environmentally sound methods for the treatment, storage or
disposal of hazardous waste from such institutions, taking into
account the types and quantities of such waste which are generated
by these institutions, and the nonprofit nature of these institutions.
-------
H. R. 2867—31
(2) The Administrator shall submit a report to the Congresa
containing the findings of the study carried out under paragraph (1)
not later than April 1. 1987.
3) For purposes of this subsection—
(A) the term “hazardous waste’ means hazardous waste
which is listed or identiiied under Section 3001 of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act;
(B) the term “educational institution” includes, but shall not
be limited to.
U) secondary schools as defined in section l98(a 7) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965; and
(ii) institutions of higher education as defined in section
120 1(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965.
-------
1 C ?’ i? jZ P , /00
SECTION 221—SMALL QUANTITY GENERATOR WASTE
House bilL—The House bill requires EPA to issue regulations
within eighteen months for generators, transporters, and disposers
of wastes from generators of 100—1,000 kg per month. The stand-
101
ards may vary from those for large quantity generators but must
be sufficient to protect health and the environment.
Minimum requirements for the regulations are: (1) on-site stor-
age by generators producing 100-1,000 kg per month may occur up
to 180 days without a permit; (2) subsequent treatment, storage, or
disposal must be at a permitted facility; and (3) wastes shipped off-
site must be accompanied by a manifest, though the manifest may
vary from that used by large generators.
If the regulations have not been promulgated after thirty
months, then: (1) in addition to the manifest requirements below,
the manifest must indicate the name of the waste transporter and
the name and address of the receiving facility; (2) all treatment,
storage, or disposal must occur at a facility with interim status or a
Subtitle C permit; (3) exception reports must be filed twice yearly;
and (4) generators must retain copies of signed manifests for three
years. -
The required use of EPA’s uniform hazardous waste manifest is
phased-in in three steps: After 270 days for generators of over 250
kg per month, after 540 days for generators of over 100 kg per
month, and after 810 days for generators of over 25 kg per month.
The most ignitable, corrosive, reactive, and toxic types of wastes
generated in amounts under 25 kg per month must be accompanied
by a notice to the transporter and the TSD facility. Existing regula-
tions applicable to generators of less than 1,000 kg per month are
not affected, nor are Department of Transportation regulations.
RCRA Section 3010(b), providing a 6-month delay after promulga-
tion before a regulation becomes effective, does not apply to regula-
tions issued under this section.
EPA shall undertake a program to inform and educate small
quantity waste generators of their new responsibilities; $500,000
per year is authorized for this purpose for FY84—FY86.
Within 30 months EPA shall study and recommend whether the
current manifest system is appropriate fbr small quantity genera-
tors.
Within 18 months EPA and the Department of Transportation
shall submit to Congress a report on the feasibility of establishing
a licensing system whereby transporters assume the responsibil-
ities of small quantity generators.
Senate amendment —The Senate amendment requires EPA to
study the small generator issue and submit a report to Congress by
March 31, 1985. By March 31, 1986, EPA shall issue regulations
under section 3005 (permits for treatment, storage, and disposal) as
well as under section 3002, section 3003, and section 3004 covering
the wastes from generators of less than 1,000 kg per month. The
standards may vary from those for large quantity generators but
must be sufficient to protect health and the environment.
Minium requirements for the regulations are: (1) on-site storage
by generators producing less than 1,000 kg per month may occur
up to 180 days without a permit, unless the waste must be shipped
over 200 miles, in which case on-site storage is allowed for up to
270 days for up to 6,000 kg of waste; and (2) subsequent treatment,
storage, or disposal must be at a Subtitle C permitted facility for
quantities above 100 kg/month. Below 100 kg/month EPA has dis-
cretion.
38—993 0 — 84 — 7
-------
102
After 270 days and until March 31, 1986 (or until EPA issues
small quantity generator rules, if prior to March 31, 1986), all
wastes from generators of less than 1,000 kg/month shall go to
Subtitle C facilities or facilities licensed by a State to manage mu-
nicipal or industrial wastes.
If the regulations have not been promulgated by March 31, 1986,
then: (1) all treatment, storage, and disposal by generators of 100 to
1,000 kg/month must occur at a facility with a Subtitle C permit;
(2) exception reports must be filed twice yearly; and (3) generators
must retain copies of signed manifests for three years.
EPA’s uniform hazardous waste manifest must be used by gen-
erators of 100-1,000 kg per month after 270 days. Like the House
bill, the Senate amendment requires that the manifest show the
source, type, and amount of waste, and also requires its destina-
tion.
EPA may require the use of the manifest by generators of less
than 100 kg per month. Existing regulations applicable to acutely
hazardous wastes generated in quantities less than 1,000 kg per
month are not affected by this subsection.
EPA is required to undertake a program to inform and educate
small quantity waste generators of their new responsibilities.
EPA is directed in consultation with the Secretary of Education
and appropriate educational insitutions, to conduct a comprehen-
sive study of problems associated with the management and dispos-
al of hazardous wastes from educational institutions.
Conference substitute.—The Conference substitute combines the
House bill and the Senate amendment.
As in the Senate amendment, the Conference substitute requires
EPA to study the small quantity generator issue and submit a
report to Congress by March 31, 1985. As in the House bill, the
Conference substitute requires EPA to issue regulations by March
31, 1986, for generators, transporters, and disposers of wastes from
generators of 100-1,000 kg per month. The standards may vary
from those for large quantity generators but must be sufficient to
protect health and the environment.
The Conference substitute explicitly provides that the require-
ments that are to be promulgated by March 31, 1986, for small
quantity generators “may vary from the requirements applicable to
hazardous waste generated in quantities greater than one thousand
kilograms during any calendar month, to the extent the Adminis-
trator determines such standards are adequate to protect human
health and the environment.”
Concern has been expressed that retention of the law’s underly-
ing requirement and ultimate standard that RCRA regulations
assure protection of human health and the environment might un-
dercut the explicit authority to vary for small quantity generators
the requirements applicable to hazardous waste generated in quan-
tities greater than one thousand kilograms per month. Such a con-
cern is based upon an improper reading of the law. It is based upon
a mistaken belief that the Administrator is required by law to
select a single regulatory approach that is applicable to all hazard-
ous wastes and generators of hazardous waste. Having promulgated
a regulatory program for large generators of chemical hazardous
wastes, a program that EPA contends is protective of human
-------
103
health and the environment and is necessary to assure such protec-
tion, it is argued that the same regulatory program must be used
whenever EPA is directed to promulgate regulations that assure
protection of human health and the environment from hazardous
waste. The notion is that if EPA is authorized and capable of devel-
oping different regulations for different situations, then the exist-
ing regulations for large generators are not “necessary” to protect
human health and the environment and are, therefore, not legally
defensible.
This amendment is a clarification of the Administrator’s existing
authority. As with other wastes, the Administrator may choose
from a range of regulatory options that will satisfy the mandate
that protection of human health and the environment be assured.
When faced with a specific problem, the Administrator can often
identify several options, each of which would protect human health
and the environment. The Administrator is not required to select
the option that woul,d satisfy the statutory mandate in the most
simple or most cost-effective manner. He has a responsibility to
protect human health and the environment and, as such, may
choose among several approaches. The selection of a particular ap-
proach shall be lawful provided it satisfies the statutory mandate
and is not an arbitrary or capricious decision. Distinctions often
can be and are made on the basis of waste characteristics, waste
management practices and locational criteria. This amendment
will simply clarify the Administrator’s existing authority to make
such distinctions in the specified instances.
It is recognized that many small quantity generators may be
small businesses that may be adversely affected if the full set of
Subtitle C regulations are required. Nevertheless, these quantities
of wastes from smaller individual generators may cause potential
harm if they are improperly managed. Given these considerations,
the Agency should determine whether requirements for small
quantity generators can be varied from those applicable to other
generators while assuring protection of human health and the en-
vironment. In particular, the Administrator should examine wheth-
er it is possible to simplify, reduce the frequency of, or eliminate
the existing reporting and recordkeeping requirements and still
provide adequate protection of human health and the environment.
Distinctions may be made from requirements for larger generators,
and among classes of small quantity generators or of wastes pro-
duced by them.
Minimum requirements for the regulations are the same as in
the Senate amendment.
The Conference substitute adopts the Senate amendment regard-
ing use of the hazardous waste manifest by generators of the 100—
1,000 kg per month after 210 days, as well as the provision that
until March 31, 1986 (or until EPA issues small quantity generator
rules, if prior to March 31, 1986), all wastes from generators of less
than 1,000 kg per month shall go to Subtitle C facilities or facilities
licensed by a State to manage municipal or industrial wastes.
If the regulations have not been promulgated by March 31, 1986,
then: (1) all treatment, storage, and disposal by generators of 100 to
1,000 kg/month must occur at a facility with a Subtitle C permit;
-------
104
(2) exception reports must be filed twice yearly; and (3) generators
must retain copies of signed manifests for three years.
The Conference substitute contains a specific provision stating
that EPA’s responsibility to protect human health and the environ-
ment may require the promulgation of standards for waste generat-
ed in quantities less than 100 kg per month. The inclusion of a
statutory 100 kg per month threshold for the first phase of EPA’s
small quantity generator regulatory program is not intended to
imply that regulations for generators, transporters and disposers of
waste from generators of less than 100 kg per month are not neces-
sary.
As in the House bill, the Conference substitute provides that ex-
isting regulations (for acutely hazardous wastes) applicable to gen-
erators of less than 1,000 kg per month are not affected, nor are
Department of Transportation regulations. RCRA (section 3010(b)),
providing a 6-month delay after promulgation before a regulation
becomes effective, does not apply to regulations issued under this
section.
EPA shall undertake a program to inform and educate small
quantity waste generators of their new responsibilities; $500,000
per year for 3 years is authorized for this purpose.
By April 1987, EPA shall study and recommend whether the cur-
rent manifest system is appropriate for small quantity generators.
Also by April 1987, EPA and the Department of Transportation
shall submit to Congress a report on the feasibility of establishing
a licensing system whereby transporters assume the responsibil-
ities of small quantity generators.
In calculating the weight of hazardous waste, the weight of con-
tainers that are not contaminated or mixed with hazardous waste
shall not be included, as under current regulations.
The Conference substitute adopts the Senate amendment which
directs the Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of
Education and appropriate educational institutions, to conduct a
comprehensive study of problems associated with the management
and disposal of hazardous wastes from educational institutions.
-------
H’ ‘ ‘ Ic -/& ‘ p -
Section 3. Small quantity generators
The purpose of this provision is to direct EPA to regulate under
Subtitle C h ’ %Lrdous waste from generators who generate a total
quantity of hazardous waste between 100 and 1,000 kilograms per
calendar month (kg/mo). EPA is required to promulgate such
standards within 18 months of enactment. However, if EPA fails to
meet the statutory deadline for promulgation, then on the date 24
months after enactment, hn rdous wastes generated by small
quantity generators become subject to all of the Subtitle C stand-
ards applicable to hn rdous waste generated by larger generators
(i.e., generators of more than 1,000 kilograms of hazardous waste
per month). Should this occur, hazardous waste from small quanti-
ty generators will remain subject to standards applicable to hazard-
ous waste from larger generators until such time as special stand-
ards for small quantity generators are promulgated and in effect.
For purposes of this provision, EPA is authorized to waive the six-
month effective date requirement of Section 3010 and promulgate
regulations which are either immediately effective or effective
after some period of less than six months but in no event are the
regulations to become effective before the date 24 months after en-
actment. In addition, this section also contains a notice require-
ment applicable to all off-site shipments of hazardous waste by gen-
erators of more than 25, but less than 1,000, kilograms of hR7nrd-
ous waste per calendar month.
The Committee has included this provision to correct a current
regulatory exclusion from the Act that was not envisioned by the
Congress. Under regulations promulgated on May 19, 1980 (40 CFR
261.5), the Agency excluded from most RCRA requirements gener-
ators who generate 1,000 kilograms/calendar month of hazardous
waste or less. As a consequence of this exclusion such generators
are allowed to dispose of their waste into permitted licensed and
registererd saritary landfills, or into sewer lines that are connected
to publicly owned treatment works—facilities that frequently are
not suited to manage or treat hn,.nidous wastes. Such generators
are also not required to manifest, transport, treat or TnRint .ain
proper records for the wastes they generate.
The Committee believes that this exclusion is unwarranted and
allows substantial quantities of otherwise hazardous waste to be
disposed of in an environmentally unsound mfinner. The Agency
estimates that only one percent of total hw,ardous waste escape
coverage, yet, the Office of Technology Assessment has estimated
that an amount up to 10 percent of the 40 million metric tons of
:1a1
-------
26
hazardous waste that are currently regulated under the Act may
be escaping proper controls through this exclusion. Furthermore,
in its May 19, 1980 regulations the Agency committed to lowerin
the level of this exclusion from 1,000 kg/mo (one metric ton) to 10
kg/mo (Via of one metric ton). B r enacting this provision, the Com-
mittee is ensuring implementation of the Agency’s previous com-
mitment to lower the present small quantity generators exclusion
ten fold within 18 months so that the same universe of hazardous
wastes is regulated for both large and small generators.
The Committee recognizes that the hazard of a given waste is un-
parted by its intrinsic toxicity and other inherent properties suchi
as ignitability, corrosivity and reactivity, and is not a function of
the specific volume in which the waste is produced by a given gen-
erator. ‘I’he Committee also recognizes that the handling, transport,
and disposal of hazardous wastes are important factors in control-
ling the magnitude and extent of the health and environmental
hazards posed by such wastes. Given those considerations, it is the
Committee’s intention that the wastes produced by this class of
newly covered generators (those who produce more than 100 kg/mo
but less than 1000 kg/mo) will be manifested, transported, stored,
treated, and disposed on in a manner consistent with the current
requirements for generators of greater than 1000 kg/mo, while at
the same time limiting the administrative burden. EPA is there-
fore given discretion to vary the standards applicable to small
quantity generators (and the hazardous waste they generates) from
the standards applicable to hazardous waste from larger generators
except in three specific areas. Standards applicable to small quanti-
ty generators must, at a minimum, provide that:
1. Small quantity generators may store their wastes on-site
for up to 180 days without a permit;
2. All other treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous
waste from small quantity generators must occur at a facility
with interim status or a Subtitle C permit; and
3. All off-site shipments of hazardous waste from small quan-
tity generators must be accompanied by a manifest; however,
the manifest need not necessarily contain all the information
required on the manifest used by larger generators.
In providing for on-site storage for up to 180 days, EPA may pre-
scribe design or operating standards as necessary to protect human
health and the environment. However, small quantity generators
shall not be required to have or obtain interim status or a permit
for such storage.
For those generators which generate 100 kg/mo or less of hazard-
ous waste, the Administrator may promulgate requirements, in ad-
dition to those that apply under current regulation (40 CFR 261.5),
as may be necessary to protect public health and the environment.
Nothing in this provision shall be construed to remove the current
disposal requirements for generators of acutely hazardous wastes
as listed in 40 CFR 261.33(e) or to impair the Administrator’s dis-
cretion to impose disposal requirements on other categories of
acutely or chronically hazardous waste, irrespective of the quanti-
ties in which they are generated. The Committee also believes that
it would be both prudent and reasonable for generators of 100 kg/
mo or less of hazardous waste to be required to notify the disposer
-------
27
of such wastes of its qualitative content so as to minimize the haz-
ards to personnel involved in the disposal of such wastes.
With regard to the requirement for a manifest, the Committee
envisions that small quantity generators will be required to use the
same manifest forms as larger generators but will not necessarily
be required to ml out all the information on the form. EPA, in con-
junction with the Department of Transportation (DOT), may choose
to require some sort of indication on the manifest form that the
source of the waste is a small quantity generator.
Other than these specified standards, EPA may vary the small
quantity generator standard from the larger generator standards
for waste identification, waste analysis, recordkeeping, reporting,
pre-transport requirements, or any other requirements under Sec.
tions 3001, 3002, 3003, or 3004. However, in all cases standards for
small quantity generators must be sufficient to protect human
health and the environment.
Until special small quantity generator standards are in effect, or
the full set of Subtitle C standards are applied by the operation ofi
Section 3001(d), waste from small quantity generators can continue
to be sent to Subtitle D facilities to the extent provided by existing
EPA regulations. However, the Committee believes that there is an
immediate need to provide notice to transporters, disposers, and
other handlers of small quantity generator’s wastes, of the type o
waste they are handling. Such notice will enable handlers to insti-
tute proper precautions to assure that waste is safely managed. Ac-
cordingly, the amendment contains a requirement that any off-site
shipments of hazardous waste by generators generating between 25
and 1,000 kilogram of hazardous waste per month must be accom-
panied by the EPA uniform hazardous waste manifest form, signed
by the generator. This requirement is intended to be self impLe-
menting in that no regulations are necessary to implement it. The
req uirement becomes effective 90 days from enactment.
EPA and the DOT jointly proposed the uniform hazardous waste
manifest form on March 4, 1982 (47 FR 9336). Under the proposal,
both EPA and DOT would require use of the uniform manifest for
all regulated shipments of hazardous waste. Although the uniform
manifest form has not been promulgated as a final rule, EPA and
DOT expect it to be promulgated prior to enactment of this legisla-
tion.
Under the amendment, small quantity generators are required to
complete only the follwing information on the form: (1) the namei
and address of the generator; (2) the DOT description of the waste,
including the proper shipping name, hazard class, and identifica-
tion number; (3) the number and type of containers; and (4) the
quantity of waste being transported. Although the form contains
space for other specific information, small quantity generators are
only required by this provision to supply the four specified pieces of
information. If the DOT description of the wastes is not provided
under applicable DOT and EPA regulations, then the form would:
contain, in lieu of the DOT description, the EPA identification
number, or a generic description of the waste by hazardous waste
characteristic. Furthermore, this provision does not impose record-
keeping or reporting requirements on small quantity generators.
However, the Administrator is authorized to require that addition-
-------
28
al information be included on the form by small quantity gener-
ators or even to require recordkeeping and reporting, if deemed
necessary to protect human health and the environment.
The notice provision is intended as an interim requirement for
generators of between 100 and 1,000 kilograms of hazardous
waste—that is, standards promulgated by EPA applicable to such
generators will supersede this requirement. However, EPA may
choose to continue to require a partially completed Uniform Na-
tional Manifest. If EPA fails to promulgate standards on time and
generators of between 100 and 1,000 kilograms of hazardous waste
per month become subject to the full Subtitle C standards, then for
such generators this interim requirement would be replaced by the
full manifest requirements applicable by regulation to larger gen-
erators.
For generators of hazardous waste in the 25 to 100 kilogram
range, the notice requirement in this amendment will remain in
effect. EPA may add additional requirements for generators in this
range, but at a minimum the notice provision shall remain applica-
ble.
None of the requirements in this amendment are intended to su-
persede DOT requirements relating to the transport of hazardous
materials. Thus, to the extent that any generator of Less than 1,000
kilograms per month of hazardous waste is subject to DOT regula-
tions under the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, such gen-
erators shall remain subject to those rules.
r2 /
-------
i2PT.
SMALL QUANTITY GENERATOR REGULATION AND STUDY
The reported bill adds a new subsection (b) to section 3002 of the
Solid Waste Lisposal Act, closing out the administrative exemption
of hazardous waste from small quantity generators from regulation
under subtitle C. The amendment establishes requirements for
notice to transporters and disposers of such waste and for proper
containerization of such wastes. The Agency is required to conduct
a study of wastes from generators of less than 1,000 kilograms
(2,200 pounds) per month and to establish standards under subtitle
C for those generators.
The purpose of this amendment is to correct a current regulatory
exclusion from the subtitle C program that was not contemplated
or intended by the Congress in enacting the 1976 Act. Under the
existing regulations promulgated on May 19, 1980, the Agency con-
ditionally excluded from hazardous waste control most generators
who generate less than 1,000 kilograms per month. As discussed in
the preamble to those rules, the decision to establish an exclusion
limit of 1,000 kilograms per month was not based on a detailed
evaluation of the risks associated with exempting small quantity
generator wastes, but on considerations of administrative conven-
ience. The Agency recognized the need to regulate these smaller
quantity generators when it stated in that preamble that it would
“initiate rulemaking within 2 to 5 years to phase in expanded Sub-
title C coverage of small quantity generators down to those gener-
ating more than 100 kg/mo.”
It is questionable whether such an exclusion is authorized by the
Act, which requires all hazardous waste to be regulated to protect
human health and the environment. The Committee registered its
opposition to the 1,000 kilogram per month exclusion when the reg-
ulations were originally promulgated in 1980, having earlier object-
ed to the proposal for a 100 kilogram per month exclusion. More
recent evidence confirms the validity of those concerns.
As a consequence of the exclusion, most generators have chosen
to manage these “small quantities” as conventional trash rather
than as the hazardous waste which they are. A survey of one
“small quantity generator” industry provided by the Chamber of
Commerce of the United States indicated that 85 percent of the
small quantity generators in that industry placed their hazardous
waste in amongst their conventional solid wastes when they place
those wastes for collection. As a direct result, there have been a
series of serious accidents injuring unsuspecting trash collectors,
destroying their vehicles, and jeopardizing the integrity of the sam-
tary landfills which receive these wastes. Testimony indicated solid
waste collectors are not being told when hazardous waste is being
placed for disposal. Hazardous wastes have been taken to sanitary
landfills where disposal of these wastes represents an unanticipat-
ed environmental risk.
On the basis of the most recent estimates available to the Corn-
mittee, as much as 15 million metric tons per year of hazardous
-------
8
waste from “small quantity generators” may be excluded from reg-
ulation under subtitle C.
The reported bill responds to this problem in two stages. Within
270 days after enactment, several minimal requirements are placed
on hazardous waste from small quantity generators. A major study
of such wastes is mandated as well, to produce regulations more
completely eliminating this regulatory exclusion by March 31,
1986.
There is an immediate need to provide notice to transporters,
treaters, storers, and disposers of small quantities of hazardous
waste of what they are handling or receiving. Such notices will
enable the handlers of those wastes to properly manage them and
be aware of the dangers they present. Accordingly, new section
3002(bXl) requires that any off-site shipment of hazardous waste
listed or identified under section 3001 that is generated by a gener-
ator who generates between 100 kilograms and 1,000 kilograms of
hazardous waste in any calendar month must be accompanied by a
copy of the Environmental Protection Agency’s uniform hazardous
waste manifest form signed by the generator. This requirement is
intended to be self-implementing and becomes effective 270 days
after enactment.
In using the uniform hazardous waste manifest, small quantity
generators are not being required to fill out the entire form but
only the following information:
1. Name and address of the generator of the waste;
2. The United States Department of Transportation (DOT)
description of the waste (including the proper shipping name,
hazard class, and identification number (UN/NA), if applica-
ble) or, if the DOT description of the waste is not provided
under the applicable DOT and EPA regulations, the EPA iden-
tification number or a generic description of the waste or a de-
scription of the waste by hazardous waste characteristics;
3. The number and type of containers;
4. The quantity of waste being transported; and
5. The name and address of the facility designated to receive
the waste.
Care has been taken in assuring that there be no excessive
burden in the notification requirements. Many hazardous wastes
are required to be subject to the Hazardous Materials Transporta-
tion Act. This provisjon allows compliance with the written notice
requirement under that Act to satisfy the requirements of this sec-
tion. Alternatively, a generator can identify his waste in terms of
the EPA identification number, a generic description of the waste
such as “waste paint” or “used solvents”, or merely by describing
the waste in terms of its hazardous waste characteristic Unless the
Administrator finds that additional requirements are necessary to
protect human health and the environment, this is the extent of’
the required notice under this section.
The Administrator is authorized to apply this notice requirement
to hazardous waste from generators of levels of less than 100 kilo-
grams per month. In exercising this authority, the Administrator is
to establish a lower threshhold for the new section 3002(b)(1) notice
requirement at that level necessary to protect human health and:
the environment.
-------
9
None of the requirements in this amendment is intended nor
should be construed to limit the Agency’s authority to impose addi-
tional requirements on acutely hazardous wastes or to list addition-
al wastes as acutely hazardous wastes. New section 3002(b)(6) spe-
cifically preserves the current regulations regulating acutely haz-
ardous wastes generated in quantities of one kilogram per month
or more.
New section 3002(b)(2)(A) requires that generators who generate
between 100 kilograms and 1,000 kilograms of any hazardous waste
identified under section 3001 on the basis of the characteristics of
ignitability, reactivity, or corrosivity, or listed under section 3001
place those wastes in suitable, sound, non-leaking containers when
they are transported off the premises on which generated. This re-
quirement is effective 270 days after enactment. A suitable contain-
er is one that will not be adversely affected when the hazardous
waste in placed in the container (i.e., the waste will not be incom-
patible with the container). The intent is that the containers pre-
vent spills or leakage. Such containers as 55 gallon drums, if sound
and non-leaking, could contain within them smaller containers
which may or may not be intact (subject to new section 3004(c)). Of
course, any container deemed appropriate for transporting particu-
lar wastes under EPA regulations applicable to other generators
would be considered suitable for small quantity generators as well.
The amendment allows the generator and the transporter of such
wastes to mutually agree on the type of container or method of
handling to be used. Under the provisions of this bill, hazardous
waste identified on the basis of the characteristic of extraction pro-
cedure toxicity are not covered by these container requirements.
New section 3002(b)(2)(B) provides that until the Administrator
completes the study and regulations required by paragraph (7)(A)
and (B), or except as required under State law, no small quantity
generator shall be subject to additional manifesting, recordkeeping,
or reporting requirements beyond those in EPA regulations pro-
mulgated prior to January 1, 1983. The primary purpose of this
provision is to limit the types of requirements which may be im-
posed on small quantity generators pending completion of the regu-
lations required by paragraph (7)(B).
Paragraph (3) of new section 3002(b) requires that until the spe-
cial small quantity generator regulations under paragraph (7)(B) go
into effect, or until the failback requirements of paragraph (7)(C)
apply due to a failure a meet the statutory deadline for publishing
those regulations, all hazardous waste from small quantity gener-
ators can be disposed of only in a facility which is permitted, li-
censed, or registered by a State to manage municipal or industrial
solid waste. This codifies the existing regulatory requirement, ex-
cluding from subtitle C regulation only those small quantity gener-
ator wastes which are disposed of in approved facilities. There is no
delay in the effective date of this provision since it continues the
current requirement.
This language does not allow these waste to go to any municipal
or industrial disposal facility, but only to sanitary landfills or other
facilities that are approved by the State to handle such wastes.
Under current law, these facilities should comply with the sanitary
landfill criteria under subtitle D.
2 J
-------
10
New section 3002(b)(5) requires the Agency to modify the regula-
tions for storage facilities under section 3004 to allow small quanti-
ty generators to store their waste on-site in tanks or containers for
up to 180 days without a permit. If the generator must ship or haul
such waste over two hundred road miles, small quantity generators
may store wastes on-site without a permit for up to 270 days, up to
a total accumulation of 6,000 kilograms of hazardous waste.
Certain generators may be located long distances from the appro-
priate treatment storage, disposal or recycling facility, and the ad-
ditional time for storage and quantity of waste that can be stored
without having to receive a permit is not unreasonable. The longer
storage period provided by paragraph (5) will allow the generator
to consolidate wastes into larger loads for shipment off the prem-
ises. The period 270 days for remote generators was chosen primar-
ily to accommodate schools and universities, which could accumu-
late wastes through an academic year for a single shipment. Of
course, the more liberal storage requirements also mean that a
single shipment from a single “small quantity generator” could
total 6,000 kilograms, or 13,200 pounds—over 6 tons.
Paragraph (7)(A) of new section 3002(b) requires the Administra-
tor to conduct a study, in cooperation with the States, of all hazard-
ous waste generated by small quantity generators. The study, to be
submitted to Congress by March 31, 1985, is to include a character-
ization of the number and type of small quantity generators, the
quantity and characteristics of hazardous waste generated by such
generators, State requirements applicable to such generators, the
waste management practices used by individual generators and by
industry classes to manage such wastes, the potential costs of modi-
fying those practices, any impact such modifications will have on
treatment and disposal facility capacity on a national scale, and
the threat presented to human health and the environment and
the employees of transporters and solid waste management facili-
ties posed by such hazardous wastes or such management practices.
The study is also to consider whether the containerization require-
ment of new section 3002(b)(2) should be extended to wastes which
are identified as hazardous on the basis of toxicity or additional
characteristics which may be promulgated by the Agency. The Ad-
ministrator may require from such generators any information as
may be necessary to conduct the study. This statement simply
clarifies that the authorities of section 3007 are available to the
Administrator in conducting the study and developing regulations
under this subsection.
This study is already underway. If, however, it proves difficult to
complete by March 31, 1985, this should not be allowed to delay the
promulgation of regulations by the statutory deadline. More than
20 States presently regulate hazardous wastes excluded from subti-
tle C regulations under the small quantity geneator definition. The
experience of these States should be a major focus of this study.
The basic standard of subtitle C is the protection of human
health and the environment. While the exposure of some individ-
uals to hazardous waste from small quantity generators occurs in a
primarily occupational setting, protection of their health is still the I
object of subtitle C regulation. The provision directs the Agency in
-------
11
conducting the study and preparing regulations, to give full consid-
eration to the need to protect such employees.
New section 3002(bX’7)(B) requires the Administrator, no later
than March 31, 1986, to promulgate additional regulations under
sections 3002, 3003, 3004, and 3005 for hazardous waste from small
quantity generators. These regulations must contain such require-
ments as are necessary to protect human health and the environ-
ment. The regulatory requirements can supplement those estab-
lished by paragraphs (1) through (5) of this new subsection.
Many small quantity generators may be small businesses that
may be adversely affected if the full set of subtitle C regulations
are required. These quantities of wastes from smaller individual
generators may cause potential harm if they are improperly man-
aged. Given these considerations, the Agency should determine
whether requirements for small quantity generators can be varied
from those applicable to other generators while assuring protection
of human health and the environment. In particular, the Adminis-
trator should examine whether, because of the smaller amount of
waste involved, it is possible to simplify, reduce the frequency of, or
eliminate the existing reporting and record keeping requirements
and still provide adequate protection of human health and the en-
vironment. Distinctions may be made from requirements for larger
generators, and among classes of small quantity generators or of
wastes produced by them.
At the time the Agency promulgates standards for small quanti-
ty generators under this new subsection, notification would not be
required under section 3010(a) because the Agency is not listing or
identifying a hazardous waste under section 3001. However, in de-
veloping such standards, the Agency may, of course, use its au-
thorities under section 3010 or 3002 to require small quantity gen-
erators to notify the Agency or obtain identification numbers if the
Agency believes such requirements are necessary to protect human
health and the environment.
The provision directs the Administrator in developing revised re-
quirements for small quantity generators to consider State require-
ments applicable to small quantity generators. In the event the re-
quirements developed by the Agency are different than those State
requirements, the Administration must explain the basis for those
differences. The purpose of this provision is to assure that the
Agency fully considers the States’ experience with small quantity
-.-. , generators in developing revised Federal regulations under para-
graph (7)(B). Thus, where States have adopted alternative regula-
tory approaches and articulated a rationale for their requirements,
it is appropriate for the Agency both to evaluate such approaches
and explain its decision to impose different requirements in Feder-
al regulations. On the other hand, if States have simply adopted
EPA’s existing small quantity generator regulations (or its 1978
proposal) by reference, it is not necessary to exhaustively analyze
State requirements or to explain or to justify differences between
State and Federal requirements.
While paragraph (7)(B) allows standards for waste from small
quantity generators to vary from those for other generators’ waste,
some minimum requirements are specified for small quantity gen-
erator waste. The notice requirement of paragraph (1) is a mini-
-------
12
mum, as is the requirement for suitable containers under para-
graph (2). In addition, standards for small quantity generators
must also provide that all treatment, storage, and disposal of haz-
ardous waste generated by small quantity generators must be at a
facility with a permit under section 3005. This includes both facili-
ties that have a subtitle C permit issued by either EPA or an au-
thorized State or facilities with interim status, since interim status
facilities are deemed to have a permit under the language of sec-
tion 3005. Paragraph (7)(B), however, authorizes the Administrator
to establish a level of total generation of waste by a generator, not
to exceed 100 kilograms per month of hazardous waste, which the
generator would be allowed to continue to manage at a facility
which is permitted, licensed, or registered by a State to handle
such waste (i.e., a subtitle D facility), if the Administrator deter-
mines that such practice will be adequate to protect human health
and the environment for that quantity of waste. The Administrator
may distinguish among classes or categories of wastes in establish-
ing that level. Any use of this authority should be on the basis of
the study of small quantity generator wastes: a 100 kilogram per
month cutoff for this requirement should not become a general use.
Along with the requirement that small quantity generator wastes
go to a subtitle C-permitted facility, the Agency must promulgate
whatever additions to the manifest requirement are necessary to
enforce the adequate disposal facility requirement.
In the event the Administrator does not promulgate revised
small quantity generator requirements by March 31, 1986, new sec-
tion 3002(b)(7)(C) provides that three requirements (in addition to
those set forth in paragraph (1) and (2) and (2)(A)) will automatical-
ly go into effect. First, under subparagraph (C)(1), effective March
31, 1986, all small quantity generator waste from a generator pro-
ducing more than 100 kilograms in any month must be treated,
stored, or disposed of at facilities with permits under section 3005.
Again, this phrase encompasses not only facilities which have ob-
tained individual permits from EPA for from an authorized State,
but also those with interim status.
Second, also effective March 31, 1986, generators subject to sub-
paragraph (C)(i) must begin filing manifest exception reports, al-
though only twice a year. These reports should be filed with EPA
in non-authorized States and with the appropriate State agency in
authorized States. Similariy, the contents of the reports should be
governed by Federal law in unauthorized States and State law in
authorized States.
Finally, the generator must begin retaining a copy of the mani-
fest form which has been signed by the designated facility. Consist-
ent with EPA regulations, this copy must be kept for at least three
years from the date the waste shipment was accepted by the initial
transporter.
The Administrator is expected to promulgate small quantity gen-
erator regulations under paragraph (7)(B) by March 31, 1986. The
Agency should seek whatever resources are necessary to allow it to
complete this task and the others established by this legislation.
After such regulations are promulgated as required by March 31,
1986, the requirements of paragraph (1) will remain in effect in au-
thorized States as a Federal requirement until such time as the
-------
13
States adopt regulations equivalent to EPA’s and those regulations
are approved by EPA under section 3006(b). Similarly, if the Ad-
ministrator fails to meet the March 31, 1986, deadline and the re.
quirements of paragraph (IXC) go into effect automatically, the re-
quirements of paragraph (1) and this subparagraph shall remain in
effect in each authorized State until such time as the State issues
regulations equivalent to those ultimately developed by the Admin-
istrator under paragraph (7)(B) and those State regulations are au-
thorized by EPA under section 8006(b). The requirements of para-
graph (7)(C) are not an indication of what is adequate to protect
human health and the environment under paragraph (7)(B). Rather
they are requirements of a minimum nature intended to provide
some protection on an interim basis until the paragraph (7)(B) reg-
ulations are promulgated.
The first new requirements of new section 3002(b) come into
effect 270 days after enactment. This period prior to implementa-
tion is necessary to assure sufficient time for small quantity gener-
ators to become aware of and prepare for their responsibilities
under this provision.
To this end, under paragraph (7)(B) the Administrator is also re-
quired to undertake activities to inform and educate small quantity
generators of their responsibilities. Since many small quantity gen-
erators are small businesses, they may not be aware of their legal
responsibilities unless the Agency makes an effort to inform them.
Unless small quantity generators are advised of their responsibili-,
ty, many of them will not comply with the rules. Thus, the Agency
is required to inform them of their responsibilities, to the extent
possible, to help assure compliance. In doing so, the Agency should
continue working closely with the appropriate trade associations
and trade press to inform small quantity generators. In addition,
the Agency may also find it helpful to hold public meetings, semi-J
nars or workshops as another means to advise small quantity gen I
erators of their responsibilities.
-------
______ \j 1 O ,
22 SMALL QUANTITY GENERATOR WASTE
23 SEC. 3. Section 3001 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
24 amended by adding the following at the end thereof:
1 “(d) SMALL QUANTITY GENERATOR WAS’rE.—(l) Ef-
2 fective thirty months from the date of enactment of the Haz-
3 ardous Waste Control and Enforcement Act of 1983, unless
4 the Administrator promulgates standards as provided in para-
5 graph (2) of this subsection prior to such date, hazardous
6 waste generated by any generator in a total quantity greater
7 than one hundred kilograms but less than one thousand kilo-
8 grams during a calendar month shall be subject to the follow-
9 ing requirements until the standards referred to in paragraph
10 (2) of this subsection have become effective:
11 “(A) in addition to the notice requirements of
12 paragraph (4) of this subsection, the information pro-
13 vided in the form shall include the name of the waste
14 transporters and the name and address of the facility
15 designated to receive the waste;
16 “(B) except as provided in paragraph (3)(A) of
17 this subsection, the treatment, storage, or disposal of
18 such waste shall occur at a facility with interim status
19 or a permit under this subtitle;
20 “(C) generators of such waste shall file manifest
21 exception reports as required of generators producing
22 greater amounts of hazardous waste per month except
23 that such reports shall be filed by January 31, for any
24 waste shipment occurring in the last half of the preced-
25 ing calendar year, and by July 31, for any waste ship-
-------
1 ment occuring in the first half of the calendar year;
2 and
3 “(B) generators of such waste shall retain for
4 three years a copy of the manifest signed by the desig-
5 nated facility that has received the waste.
6 Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as a determina-
7 tion of the standards appropriate under paragraph (2).
8 “(2) Not later than eighteen months after the date of
9 enactment of the Hazardous Waste Control and Enforcement
10 Act of 1983, the Administrator shall promulgate standards
11 under sections 3002, 3003, and 3004 for hazardous waste
12 generated by a generator in a total quantity of hazardous
13 waste greater than one hundred kilograms but less than one
14 thousand kilograms during a calendar month. Except as pro-
15 vided in paragraph (3) of this subsection, such standards, in-
16 cluding standards applicable to the legitimate use, reuse, re-
17 cycling, and reclamation of such wastes, may vary from the
18 standards applicable to larger quantity generators but must
19 be sufficient to protect human health and the environment.
20 “(3) Standards promulgated under paragraph (2) shall at
21 a minimum provide that—
22 “(A) onsite storage of hazardous waste generated
23 by a generator generating a total quantity of hazardous
24 waste greater than one hundred kilograms but less
‘25 than one thousand kilograms during a calendar month,
-------
1 may occur for up to one hundred and eighty days with-
2 out the requirement of a permit;
3 “(B) all other treatment, storage, or disposal of
4 hazardous wastes generated by such generators shall
5 occur at a facility with interim status or a permit under
6 this subtitle; and
7 “(C) any hazardous waste generated by such gen-
8 erators which is shipped off the premises on which
9 such waste is generated, shall be accompanied by a
10 manifest, except that the specific requirements for en-
11 tries on such manifest may vary from those applicable
12 to the manifest required for larger quantity generators.
13 “(4) No later than one hundred and eighty days after
14 the enactment of the Hazardous Waste Control and Enforce-
15 ment Act of 1983, any hazardous waste which is part of a
16 total quantity generated by a generator generating greater
17 than twenty-five kilograms but less than one thousand kilo-
18 grams during one calendar month and which is shipped off
19 the premises on which such waste is generated shall be ac-
20 companied by a copy of the Environmental Protection
21 Agency Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest form signed by
22 the generator. This form shall contain the following informa-
23 tion:
24 “(A) the name and address of the generator of the
25 waste;
-------
1 “(B) the United States Department of Transporta-
2 tion description of the waste, including the proper ship-
3 ping name, hazard class, and identification number
4 (UN/NA), if applicable;
5 “(0) the number and type of containers; and
6 “(B) the quantity of waste being transported.
7 If subparagraph (B) is not applicable, in lieu of the descrip-
8 tion referred to in such subparagraph (B), the form shall con-
9 tam the Environmental Protection Agency identification
10 number, or a generic description of the waste, or a descrip-
11 tion of the waste by hazardous waste characteristic. Addi-
12 tional requirements related to the manifest form shall apply
13 only if determined necessary by the Administrator to protect
14 human health and the environment. In the case of the most
15 ignitible, corrosive, reactive, or toxic types of hazardous
16 wastes identified or listed under section 3001, where such
17 waste is part of a total quantity generated by a generator
18 generating twenty-five kilograms or less during one calendar
19 month and shipped off the premises. on which such waste is
20 generated, the Administrator shall promulgate regulations re-
21 quiring appropriate notice (including a description of the
22 waste and the identity of the generator) to be provided to the
23 transporter and to the owtier or operator of any treatment,
24 storage, or disposal facility to which such waste is
25 transported.
-------
1 “(5) Notwithstanding paragraph (4)—
2 “(A) no later than two hundred and seventy days
3 after the enactment of the Hazardous Waste Control
4 and Enforcement Act of 1983, any hazardous waste
5 which is part of a total quantity generated by a gener-
6 ator generating greater than two hundred and fifty
7 kilograms but less than one thousand kilograms during
8 one calendar month and which is shipped off the prem-
9 ises on which such waste is generated shall be accom-
10 panied by a copy of the Environmental Prote tion
11 Agency Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest from
12 signed by the generator;
13 “(B) no later than five hundred and forty days
14 after the enactment of such Act, the same requirement
15 shall apply to generators generating greater than one
16 hundred kilograms but less than one thousand kilo-
17 grams during one calendar month; and
18 “(C) no later than eight hu ndred and ten days
19 after the enactment of such Act, the same requirement
20 shall apply to generators generating greater than
21 twenty-five kilograms but less than one thousand kilo-
22 grams during one calender month.
23 “(6) Except as provided in paragraphs (1) through (4),
24 nothing in this subsection shall be construed to affect or
25 impair the validity of regulations of the Administrator pro-
-------
- I mulgated prior to the date of enactment of the Hazardous
2 Waste Control and Enforcement Act of 1983 with respect to
3 hazardous waste generated by generators of less than one
4 thousand kilograms per calender month.
5 “(7) The Administrator may promulgate regulations
6 under this subtitle which establish special standards for, or
7 exempt from regulations (other than regulations under para-
8 graph (4)), hazardous wastes which are generated by any
9 generator who does not generate more than one hundred
10 kilograms of hazardous waste per calendar month.
11 “(8) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to
12 affect or impair the validity of regulations promulgated by the
13 Secretary of Transportation pursuant to the Hazardous Ma-
14 terials Transportation Act.
15 “(9) The last sentence of section 3010(b) shall not apply
16 to regulations promulgated under this section.
17 “(10) The Administrator shall undertake activities to
18 inform and educate the waste generators of their responsibil-
/ 19 ities under this section during the period within thirty months
20 after the enactment of this section to help assure compliance.
21 There is authorized to be appropriated for purposes of this
22 paragraph, $500,000 for each of the fiscal years 1984
23 through 1986.
24 “(11) The Administrator shall cause to be studied the
25 existing manifest system for hazardous wastes as it applies to
-------
1 small quantity generators and recommend within thirty
2 months of the date of enactment of the Hazardous Waste
3 Oontrol and Enforcement Act of 1983 whether the current
4 system shall be retained or whether a new system should be
5 introduced. The study shall include an analysis of the cost
6 versus the benefits of the systems studied as well as an anal-
7 ysis of the ease of retrieving and collating information and
8 identifying a given substance. Finally, any new proposal shall
9 include a list of those standards that are necessary to protect
10 human health and the environment.
11 “(12) Not later than eighteen months after the enact-
12 ment of the Hazardous Waste Control and Enforcement Act
13 of 1983, the Administrator, in conjunction with the Secretary
14 of Transportation, shall prepare and submit to the Congress a
15 report on the feasibility of easing the administrative burden
16 on small quantity generators, increasing compliance with
17 statutory and regulatory requirements, and simplifying en-
18 forcement efforts through a prograni of licensing hazardous
19 waste transporters to assume the responsibilities of small
20 quantity generators relating to the preparation of manifests
21 and associated recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
22 The report shall examine the appropriate licensing require-
23 ments under such a program including the need for financial
24 assurances by licensed transporters and shall make recom-
25 mendations on provisions and requirements for such a pro-
1 gram including the appropriate division of responsibilities be-
2 tween the Department of Transportation and the Environ-
3 mental Protection Administration.”.
-------
S c - , ?‘ -
SMALL QUANTITY GENERATOR REGULATION AND STUDY
SEc. 4. Section 3002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
is amended by inserting “(a) STANDARDS.—” after “SEC.
3002. “ and by adding the following new subsection:
“(b) HAZARDOUS WASTE FROM SMALL QUANTITY
GENERA TORS.—(1) Beginning two hundred and seventy
days after the enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
Amendments of 1984, any hazardous waste listed or identi-
fied under section 3001 which is paTs of a total quantity
generated by a generator generating greater than one hun-
dred kilograms but less than one thousand kilograms during
one calendar month and which is shipped off the premises
on which such waste is generated shall be accompanied by a
copy of the Environmental Protection Agency uniform haz-
ardous waste manifest form signed by the generator. This
form shall contain the following information:
“(A) the name and address of the generator of the
waste;
“(B) the United States Department of Transpor-
tation description of the waste, including the proper
shipping name, hazard class, and identification
number (UN/NA), if applicable;
“(C) the number and type of containers;
HR 2867 LAS
-------
3
“(D) the quantity of waste being Ira nsporled; and
“(E) the name and address of the facility desig-
nated to receive the waste.
if subparagraph (B) is not applicable, in lieu ‘of the desc’rip-
tion referred to in such subparagraph (B), the form shall
contain the Environmental Protection Agency identification
number, or a generic description of the waste, or a descrip-
tion of the waste by hazardous waste characteristic. Addi-
tional requirements related to the manifest promulgated
under this Act shall apply only if determined necessary by
the Administrator to protect human health and the environ-
ment. The Administrator is authorized to apply the require-
ments of this paragraph to hazardous waste which is part of
a total quantity generated by a generator generating less
than one hundred kilograms during one calendar month.
“(2) Until the effective date of regulations prom ulgaled
under paragraph (6), or as specified in paragraph (6)(C),
any hazardous waste identified or listed under section 3001
generated by any generator during any calendar month in a
total quantity less than one thousand kilograms, which is
not treated, stored, or disposed of at a hazardous waste
treatment, storage, or disposal facility with a permit under
section 3005, shall be disposed of only in a facility which is
permitted, licensed, or registered by a Slate to manage mu-
nicipal or industrial solid waste.
HR 2867 EAtS
-------
4
“(3) The provisions of paragraph (2) shall take effect
on the date two hundred and seventy days after the enact-
ment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of
1984.
“(4) Requirements under section 3004 for storage of
hazardous waste identified or listed under section 3001
which is generated by any generator during any calendar
month in a total quantity less than one thousand kilograms
shall provide for onsite storage in tanks and containers of
such hazardous waste for up to one hundred and eighty
days without a permit, unless the generator must ship or
haul such waste over two hundred miles in which case such
requirements shall provide for onsite storage for up to two
hundred and seventy days of up to six thousand kilograms
of such hazardous waste.
“(5) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to
affect, modify, or render invalid any requirements applica-
ble to any acutely hazardous waste identified or listed under
section 3001 which is generated by any generator during
any calendar month in a total quantity less than one thou-
sand kilograms, in regulations promulgated prior to Janu-
ary 1, 1983. Any additional acutely hazardous waste listed
under section 3001 after January 1, 1983, shall be subject
to all regulations applicable to acutely hazardous wastes.
HR 2867 LAS
-------
5
“(6)(A) The Administrator in cooperation with the
States shall conduct a study of hazardous waste identified
or listed under section 3001 of this Act which is generated
by individual generators in total quantities for each genera-
tor during any calendar month of less than one thousand
kilograms. The Administrator may require from such gen-
erators information as may be necessary to conduct the
study. Such study shall include a characterization of the
number and type of such generators, the quantity and char.
acteristics of hazardous waste generated by such generators,
State requirements applicable to such generators, the indi-
vidual and industry waste management practices of such
generators, the potential costs of modifying those practices
and the impact of such modifications on national treatment
and disposal facility capacity, and the threat to the protec-
tion of human health and the environment and the employ-
ees of transporters or others involved in solid waste manage-
ment posed by such hazardous wastes or such management
practices. aSuch study shall be submitted to the Congress not
later than March 31, 1985.
“(B) Based upon the study required by subparagraph
(A) and other information available to the Administrator
and after consultation with the States, the Administrator
shall promulgate not later than March 31, 1986, additional
regulations establishing such requirements under this sec-
HR 2867 LAS
-------
6
tion and sections 3003, 3004, and 3005 of this Act for haz-
UT&nLS waste identified or listed under section 3001 which
is generated by a generator during any calendar month in a
total quantity less than one thousand kilograms, as may be
necessary to protect human health and the environment.
Such requirements may supplement the requirements of
paragraphs (1) through (5) of this subsection and may dis-
tinguish among classes and categories of generators or
waste, and may vary from (lie requirements applicable to
hazardous waste generated in quantities greater than one
thousand kilograms during any calendar month, to the
extent the Administrator determines such variation is neces-
sary by reason of the smaller size and (lie technical and
managerial capability of such generators, and is adequate to
protect human health and the environment. The Administra-
tor shall consider State requirements applicable to genera-
toTs of hazardous wastes which generate such wastes in a
total quantity less than one thousand kilograms per month
in promulgating such regulations and shall explain differ-
ences between State requirements and regulations promul-
gated under this subparagraph. Except as provided in para-
graph (4), regulations promulgated under this paragraph
shall provide that treatment, storage, or disposal of a haz-
ardous waste identified or listed under section 3001 generat-
ed by a generator during any calendar month in a total
HR 2867 EAS
-------
7
quantity less than one thousand kilograms occur only at a
treatment, storage, or disposal facility with a permit under
section 3005. The Administrator may establish in such reg-
ulations a total quantity of wastes generated by a generator
during any calendar month, not to exceed one hundred kilo-
grams, for which disposal may occur in compliance with
paragraph (2) rather than the preceding sentence, if the Ad.
ministrator determines that such compliance will be ade-
quate to protect human health and the environment. Such
quantity may vary for different wastes or classes of wastes.
“(C) In the case no regulations in accordance with
subparagraph (B) of this paragraph have been promulgated
prior to March 31, 1986, after such date—
“(i) all treatment, storage, or disposal of any haz-
ardous waste identified or listed under section 3001
generated by a generator during any calendar month
in a total quantity greater than one hundred kilograms
but less than one thousand kilograms shall occur only
at a treatment, storage, or disposal facility with a
permit under section 3005;
“(ii) generators of such waste shall file manifest
exception reports as required of generators producing
quantities greater than one thousand kilograms per
month except that such reports shall be filed by Janu-
ary 31, for any waste shipment occurring in the last
HR 2867 EJIS
-------
8
half of the preceeding calendar year, and by July 31,
for any waste shipment occurring in the first half of
the calendar year; and
“(iii) generators of such waste shall retain for
three years a copy of the manifest signed by the desig-
nated facility that has received the waste.
“(D) The Admini8trator shall undertake activities to
inform and educate wa ste generators of their responsibilities
under this section during the period after enactment to help
assure compliance. ‘
c V
-------
c;; - 5’
STUDY OF THE PROBLEMS ASSOCiATED WiTH DISPOSAL
OF HAZARDOUS WASTES GENERATED BY EDUCA-
TIONAL INSTITUTIONS
SEC. 37. (a) The Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency shall, in consultation with the Secretary
of Education, the States, and appropriate educational asso-
cia/ions, conduct a comprehensive study of problems associ-
ated with the accumulation, storage and disposal of ha:ard-
HR 2867 EAS
-------
95
ous wastes from educational institutions. The study shall
include an investigation of the feasibility and availability of
environmentally sound methods for the treatment, storage or
disposal of hazardous waste from such institutions, taking
into account the types and quantities of such waste which
are generated by these institutions, and the nonprofit nature
of these institutions.
(b) Not kiter than twelve months after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit a
report to the Congress containing the findings of the study
carried out under subsection (a).
(c) For purposes of this section—
(1) the term “hazardous waste” means ha’ardous
waste which is listed or identified under Section 3001
of the Solid Waste Disposal Act;
(2) the term “educational institution” includes,
but shall not be limited to,
(A) secondary schools as defined in section
198(a)(7) of the Elementary and Secondary Edu-
cation Act of 1965; and
(B) institutions of higher education as de-
fined in section 1201 (a) of the Higher Education
Act of 1965.
HR 2867 EAS
-------
Hi?. 1tG ’ £t ‘ VIU) £qI P?iVt l’s) fl ’M .vt. :(.i
M’ g I’ pr
18 SMALL QUANTiTY GENERATOR 4STE
19 SEc. 3. Section 3001 is amended by adding the follow-
20 ing at the end thereof:
21 SMALL QUANTiTY GENERATOR W.-lSTE.— ’1) -
22 Effeciiie twenty-four months from the dale of enactment of
23 the Ha: rdous Waste Control and Enforcement Act of 19S3,
24 ha:ardou wa. !e ‘cr erated .5y any generator generailny (1
25 tokil quantity of ha:ardous waste greater than one hundred
HR 2W RH
-------
6
1 kilograms but less than one thousand kilograms during a cal-
2 endar month shall be subject to the same requirements under
3 this subtitle as hazardous waste produced by a generator in
4 amounts greater than one thousand kilograms during a calen-
5 dar month, until the standards referred to in paragraph (2) of
6 this subsection have become effective.
7 “(2) Not later than eighteen months after the date of
8 enactment of (he Hazardous 13’a,cte Control and Enforcement
9 Act of 1983, the Administrator shall promulgate standards
10 under sections 3001, 3002, 3003, and 3004 for ha:ardous
11 waste generated by a generator generating a total quantity of
12 hazardous waste greater than one hundred kilograms but less
13 than one thousand kilograms during a calendar monil .
14 Except as proridcd in paragraph (3), such standards, includ-
15 ing standards applicable to the legitimate use, reuse, recy-
16 cling, and reclamation of such wastes, may . -ary from the
17 standards applicable to larger quantity qenerator9 but mu ’
18 be sufficient to protect human health and the environment.
19 “(3) Standards promulgated under paragraph (2) shall
20 at a minimum pro ‘ide that—
21 “(A) onsite storage of hazardous waste generated
22 by a generator generating a total quantity of ha:ardou
23 waste greater than one hundred kilograms but less than
24 one thousand kilograms during a calendar month. may
HR 2867 RH
-------
4
1 occur for up to one hundred and eighty days without
2 the requirement of a permit;
3 “(B) all other treatment, storage, or disposal of
4 hazardous wastes generated by such generators shall
5 occur at a facility with a permit under this szibtitle;
6 and
7 “(C) any hazardous waste generated by such gen.
8 erators which is shipped off the premises on which such
9 waste is generated, shall be accompanied by a mardi-
10 fest, except that the specific reqtdrements for entries on
11 such manifest may vary from those applicable to the
12 manifest required for larger quantity generators.
13 “4.) .Vo later than ninety days after the enactment of
14 the Hazardous Waste Control and Enforcement Act of 1983,
15 any hazardous waste which is part of a total quantily ge ner-
16 aled by a generator generating Øreater than twenty-fire kilo-
17 grams but less than one thousand kilograms during one cal-
18 endar month and which is shipped off the premises on which
19 stch waste is generated shall be accompanied by a copy of the
20 Envirnomental Protection Agency Uniform hazardous waste
21 manifest form signed by the generator. This form shall con-
22 lain the following information:
23 “(A) the name and address of the generator of the
24 waste;
-------
8
I “(B) the United Slates Department of Transpor-
2 lotion description of the waste, including the proper
3 shipping name, hazard class, and identification
4 number (UN/NA), if applicable;
5 “(C) the number and type of containers;
6 “(D) the quantity of waste being transported.
7 If subparagraph (B) is not applicable, in lieu of the descrip-
8 lion referred Ia in such subparagraph (B), the form shall con-
9 lain the Environmental Protection Agency identification
10 number, or a generic description of the waste, or a description
11 of the waste by iza:ardous waste characteristic. Additional
12 requirements related to the manifest shall apply only if deter.
13 mined necessary by the Administrator to protect human
14 health and the environment.
15 “(5) E.vcepl as provided in paragraphs (1) lhro yh (4),
16 nothing in this subsection shall be construed to affect or
17 impair the alidiy of regulations of the Admini tralor pro-
18 mulgated prior to the date of enactment of the Solid Wa ie
19 Disposal Act Amendments of 1983 with respect to ha:ardous
20 waste generated by generators of less than one thousand kilo-
21 grams per calendar month.
22 “(6) The 4dministrator may promulgate regulations
23 under this subtitle which establish special standards for. or
24 exempt from regulations. ha:ardous u-astes which are gener-
HR 2867 RH I
-------
9
1 aled by any generator who does not generate more than one
2 hundred kilograms of hazardous waste per calendar month.
3 “(7) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to
4 affect or impair the validity of regulations promulgated by
5 the Secretary of Transportation pursuant to the Hazardous
6 Materials Transportation Act.
7 “(8) Notwithstanding the last sentence of section
8 3O1O( b, , no regulation promulgated by the Administrator as
9 provided in this subsection may take effect before the date
10 twenty-four months after the dale of the enactment of this
11 sulisection..
-------
$ C’Z r ”-t ?/Z /J P
12 SMALL QUANTiTY GENERATOR REGULATiON AND STUDY
13 SEC. 4. Section 3002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
14 is amended by inserting “(a) STANDARDS.—” after “SEC.
15 3002. “and by adding the following new subsection.
16 “(b) HAZARDOUS WASTE FROM SMALL QUANTITY
17 GENERA TORS.—(1) Beginning two hundred and seventy
18 days after the enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
19 Amendments of 1983, any hazardous waste listed or identi-
20 tied under section 3001 which is part of a total quantity
21 generated by a generator generating greater than one hundred
22 kilograms but less than one thousand kilograms during one
23 calendar month and which is shipped off the premises on
24 which such waste is generated shall be accompanied by a
25 copy of the Environmental Protection Agency uniform haz-
-------
30
1 ardous waste manifest form signed by the generator. This
2 form shall contain the following information:
3 “(A) the name and address of the generator of the
4 waste;
5 “(B) the United States Department of Transpor-
6 tation description of the waste, including the proper
7 shipping name, hazard class, and identification
8 number (UN/NA), if applicable;
9 “(C) the number and type of containers;
10 “(D) the quantity of waste being transported; and
11 “(E) the name and address of the facility desig-
12 nated to receive the waste.
13 If subparagraph (B) is not applicable, in lieu of the descrip-
14 tion referred to in such subparagraph (B), the form shall con-
15 tam the Environmental Protection Agency identification
16 number, or a generic description of the waste, or a description
17 of the waste by hazardous waste characteristic. Additional
18 requirements relatedto the manifest shall apply only if deter-
19 mined necessary by the Administrator to protect human
20 health and the environment. The Administrator is authorized
21 to apply the requirements of this paragraph to hazardous
22 waste which is part of a total quantity generated by a gener-
23 ator generating less than one hundred kilograms during one
24 calendar month.
S 757 RS
-------
31
1 “(2)(A) Any hazardous waste identified in accordance
2 with section 3001 on the basis of the characteristic of ignita-
3 bility, reactivity, or corrosivity or listed under section 3001,
4 which is part of a total quantity generated by a generator
5 generating greater than one hundred kilograms but less than
6 one thousand kilograms during one calendar month when
7 such waste is transported off the premises on which such
8 waste is generated, shall be placed in suitable, sound, non-
9 leaking containers as follows:
10 “(i) off-specification materials, residual materials,
11 and materials from spill cleanup may be placed in the
12 original containers of such materials, or in equivalent
13 containers labeled with the same information as the
14 original containers and suitably constructed to contain
15 such materials;
16 “(ii) a waste may be placed in a Department of
17 Transportation specification hazardous material con-
18 tamer with prescribed labeling in compliance with the
19 Hazardous Materials Transportation Act; and
20 “(iii) other wastes may be placed in a container
21 or otherwise handled by a method (including a method
22 of identification or labeling consistent with this subpar-
23 agraph) mutually agreed by the generator and the
24 transporter of such wastes.
S 757 KS
-------
32
1 Wastes that are not incompatible may be aggregated in such
2 suitable containers. For the purpose of this subparagraph,
3 aggregation means the mixing of two or more types of wastes
4 within the innermost container.
5 “(B) Except as provided in paragraph (7) or under
6 State law, a generator generating waste subject to this para-
7 graph shall not be subject to additional requirements for
8 manifesting, recordkeeping, or reporting beyond those in reg-
9 ulations promulgated prior to January 1, 1983.
10 “(3) Until the effective date of regulations promulgated
11 under paragraph (7), or as specified in paragraph (7) (C),
12 any hazardous waste identified or listed under section 3001
13 generated by any generator during any calendar month in a
14 total quantity less than one thousand kilograms, which is not
15 treated, stored, or disposed of at a hazardous waste treatment,
16 storage, or disposal facility with a permit under section 3005,
17 shall be disposed of only in a facility which is permitted,
18 licensed, or registered by a State to manage municipal or
19 industrial solid waste.
20 “(4) The provisions of paragraphs (2) and (3) shall take
21 effect on the date two hundred and seventy days after the
22 enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of
23 1983. -
24 “(5) Requirements under section 3004 for storage of
25 hazardous waste identified or listed under section 3001
S757RS
-------
33
1 which is generated by any generator during any calendar
2 month in a total quantity less than one thousand kilograms
3 shall provide for onsite storage in tanks and containers of
4 such hazardous waste for up to one hundred and eighty days,
5 unless the generator must ship or haul such waste over two
6 hundred miles in which czse such requirements shall provide
7 for onsite storage for up to two hundred and seventy days of
8 up to six thousand kilograms of such hazardous waste.
9 “(6) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to
10 affect, modify, or render invalid any requirements applicable
11 to any acutely hazardous waste identified or listed under sec-
12 lion 3001 which is generated by any generator during any
13 calendar month in a total quantity less than one thousand
14 kilograms, in regulations promulgated prior to January 1,
15 1983. Any additional acutely hazardous waste listed under
16 section 3001 after January 1, 1983, shall be subject to all
17 regulations applicable to dcutely hazardo’ :“astes.
18 “(7)(A) The Administrator in cooperation with the
19 States shall conduct a study of hazardous waste identified or
20 listed under section 3001 of this Act which is generated by
21 individual generators in total quantities for each generator
22 during any calendar month of less than one thousand kilo-
23 grams. The Administrator may require from such generators
24 information as may be necessary to conduct the study. Such
25 study shall include a characterization of the number and type
S 757 RS——5
‘-1/
-------
34
1 of such generators, the quantity and characteristics of hazard-
2 ou waste generated by such generators, State requirements
3 applicable to such generators, the individual and industry
4 waste management practices of such generators, the potential
5 costs of modifying those practices and the impact of such
6 modifications on national treatment and disposal facility Ca-
7 pacity, and the threat to the protection of human health and
8 the environment and the employees of transporters or others
9 involved in solid waste management posed by such hazardous
10 wastes or such management practices. Such study shall spe-
11 cifically address whether the requirements of paragraph (2)
12 should apply to hazardous wastes identified on the basis of
13 the characteristic of extraction procedure toxicity or addition-
14 al characteristics promulgated under section 3001 (b) (5).
15 Such study shall be submitted to the Congress not later than
16 March 31, 1985.
17 “(B) Based upon the study required by subparagraph
18 (A) and other information available to the Administrator and
19 after consultation wit/i the States, the Administrator shall
20 promulgate not later than March 31, 1986, additional regula-
21 lions establishing such requirements under this section and
22 sections 3003, 3004, and 3005 of this Act for hazardous
23 waste identified or listed under section 3001 which is gener-
24 aled by a generator during any calendar month in a total
25 quantity less than one thousand kilograms, as may be neces-
S 757 RS
-------
35
1 sary to protect human health and the environment. Such re-
2 quirements may supplement the requirements of paragraphs
3 (1) through (5) of this subsection and may distinguish among
4 classes and categories of generators or waste, and may vary
5 from the requirements applicable to hazardous waste general-
6 ed in quantities greater than one thousand kilograms during
7 any calendar month, to the extent the Administrator deter-
8 mines such standards are adequate to protect human health
9 and the environment. The Administrator shall consider State
10 requirements applicable to generators of hazardous wastes
11 which generate such wastes in a total quantity less than one
12 thousand kilograms per month in promulgating such regula-
13 lions and shall explain differences between State require-
14 ments and regulations promulgated under this subparagraph.
15 Except as provided in paragraph (5), regulations promulgat-
16 ed under this paragraph shall provide that treatment, storage,
17 or disposal of a hazardous waste identified or listed under
18 section 3001 generated by a generator during any calendar
19 month in a total quantity less than one thousand kilograms
20 occur only at a treatment, storage, or disposal facility with a
21 permit under section 3005. The Administrator may establish
22 in such regulations a total quantity of wastes generated by a
23 generator during any calendar month, not to exceed one hun-
24 dred kilograms, for which disposal may occur in compliance
25 wit/i paragraph (3) rather than the preceding sentence, if the
S757RS
-------
36
1 Administrator determines that such compliance will be ade-
2 quate to protect human health and the environment. Such
3 quantity may vary for different wastes or classes of wastes.
4 “(C) In the case no regulations in accordance with sub- -
5 paragraph (B) of this paragraph have been promulgated prior
6 to March 31, 1986, after such date—
7 “(i) all treatment, storage, or disposal of any haz-
8 ardous waste identified or listed under section 3001
9 generated by a generator during any calendar month
10 in a total quantity greater than one hundred kilograms
11 but less than one thousand kilograms shall occur only
12 at a treatment, storage, or disposal facility with a
13 permit under section 3005;
14 “(ii) generators of such waste shall file manifest
15 exception reports as required of generators producing
16 quantities greater than one thousand kilograms per
17 month except that such reports shall be filed by Janu-
18 arij 31, for any waste shipmQnt occurring in the last
19 half of the preceeding calendar year, and by July 31,
20 for any waste shipment occurring in the first half of
21 the calendar year; and
22 “(iii) generators of such waste shall retain for
23 three years a copy of the manifest signed by the desig-
24 nated facility thai has received the waste.
37 -t
1 “(D) The Administrator shall undertake activities to
2 inform and educate waste generators of their responsibilities
3 under this section during the period after enactment to help
4 assure compliance. ‘
-------
1Tp io -L)
4
1 (g) ASSISTANCE TO STATES FOR RECYCLED OIL PRO-
2 GRAMS.—Section 4008 of such Act is amended—
3 (1) by redesignating subsection U) (relating to as-
4 sistance to municipalities for energy and materials con-
5 servation and recovery planning activities) as subsec-
6 tion (g); and
7 (2) in paragraph (4) of subsection (0 (relating to
8 assistance to States for discretionary programs for re-
9 cycled oil) by striking out “and $5,000,000 for fiscal
10 year 1983” and substituting “, $5,000,000 for fiscal
11 year 1983, and $5,000,000 for each of the fiscal years
12 1984 through 1986”.
13 (h) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FUNCTIONS.—Sec-
14 tion 5006 of such Act is amended by inserting after “1982”
15 the following “and $1,500,000 for each of the fiscal year
16 1984 through 1986”. -
17 SMALL QUANTITY GENERATOR WASTE
18 SEc. 3. Section 3001 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
19 amended by adding the following at the end thereof:
20 “(d) SMALL QUANTITY GENERATOR WAsm.—(1) Ef-
21 fective twenty-four months from the date of enactment of the
22 Hazardous Waste Control and Enforcement Act of 1983,
23 hazardous waste generated by any generator generating a
24 total quantity of hazardous waste greater than one-hundred
25 kilograms but less than one-thousand kilograms during a cal-
HR 2867 III
-------
I
5
1 endar month shall be subject to the same requirements under
2 this subtitle as hazardous waste produced by a generator in
3 amounts greater than one-thousand kilograms during a calen-
4 dar month, until the standards referred to in paragraph (2) of
5 this subsection have become effective.
6 “(2) Not later than eighteen months after the date of
7 enactment of the Hazardous Waste Control and Enforcement
8 Act of 1983, the Administrator shall promulgate standards
9 under sections 3001, 3002, 3003, and 3004 for hazardous
10 waste generated by a generator generating a total quantity of
11 hazardous waste greater than one-hundred kilograms but less
12 than one-thousand kilograms during a calendar month.
13 Except as provided in paragraph (d)(3), such standards, in-
14 eluding standards applicable to the legitimate use, reuse, re-
15 cycling, and reclamation of such wastes, may vary from the
16 standards applicable to larger quantity generators but must
17 be sufficient to protect human health and the environment.
18 “(3) Standards promulgated under paragraph (d)(2) shall
19 at a minimum provide that:
20 “(A) onsite storage of hazardous waste generated
21 by a generator generating a total quantity of hazardous
22 waste greater than one-hundred kilograms but less
23 than one-thousand- kilograms during a calendar month,
24 may occur for up to one hundred and eighty days with-
25 out the requirement of a permit;
HR 2867 IH
-------
6
1 “(B) all other treatment, storage, or disposal of
2 hazardous wastes generated by such generators shall
3 occur at a facility with a permit under this subtitle;
4 and
5 “(C) any hazardous waste generated by such gen-
6 erators which is shipped off the premises on which
7 such waste is generated, shall be accompanied by a
8 manifest, except that the specific requirements for en-
9 tries on such manifest may vary from those applicable
10 to the manifest required for larger quantity generators.
11 “(4) No later than ninety days after the enactment of
12 the Hazardous Waste Control and Enforcement Act of 1983,
13 any hazardous waste which is part of a total quantity gener-
14 ated by a generator generating greater than twenty-five kilo-
15 grams but less than one-thousand kilograms during one cal-
16 endar month and which is shipped off the premises on which
17 such waste is generated shall be accompanied by a copy of
18 the Environmental Protection Agency Uniform Hazardous
19 Waste Manifest. form signed by the generator. This form shall
20 contain the following information:
21 “(A) the name and address of the generator of the
22 waste;
- 23 “(B) the United States Department of Transporta-
24 tion description of the waste, including the proper ship-
HR 2867 III
-------
7
1 ping name, hazard class, and identification number
2 (UN/NA), if applicable;
3 “(C) the number and type of containers;
4 “(D) the quantity of waste being transported.
5 If subparagraph (B) is not applicable, in lieu of the descrip-
6 tion referred to in such subparagraph (B), the form shall con-
7 tam the Environmental Protection Agency identification
8 number, or a generic description of the waste, or a descrip-
9 tion of the waste by hazardous waste characteristic. Addi-
10 tional requirements related to the manifest shall apply only if
11 determined necessary by the Administrator to protect human
12 health and the environment.
13 “(5) Except as provided in paragraphs (1) through (4),
14 nothing in this subsection shall be construed to affect or
15 impair the validity of regulations of the Administrator pro-
16 mulgated prior to the date ,of enactment of the Solid Waste
17 Disposal Act Amendments of 1983 with respect to hazardous
18 waste generated by generators of less than one-thousand
19 kilograms per calendar month.
20 “(6) The Administrator may promulgate regulations
21 under this subtitle which establish special standards for, or
22 exempt from regulations, hazardous wastes which are gener-
23 ated by any generator who does not generate more than one-
24 hundred kilograms of hazardous waste per calendar month.
HR 2867 111
-------
8
1 “(7) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to
2 affect or impair the validity of regulations promulgated by the
3 Secretary of Transportation pursuant to the Hazardous Ma-
4 terials Transportation Act.
5 “(8) Notwithstanding the last sentence of section
6 3010(b), no regulation promulgated by the Administrator as
7 provided in this subsection may take effect before the date
8 twenty-four months after the date of the enactment of this
9 subsection.”.
10 INTERIM CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE INJECTION
11 SEC. 4. (a) Subtitle G of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
12 is amended by adding the following new section at the end
13 thereof:
-------
a wrnznonsense COmpromi I
wIthin 66 months. EPAs statutory mand la HR. 2887 establishes a comprehensive tween the House and Senate versious I
is to prohiolt the land disposal of these r g ” ry p gram to prevent leaks from of the tank regulatory program which
wastes unless It finds thai. one or more underground ut tanks. There are more will provide a minimum amount of dis. I
methods of disposal will not harm Public . than 2 millIon underground tanks In the ruption to the regulated community.
health or the environment, U EPA fails to United States which contain hazardous sub-
meet either of Its first two deadlines and If stances or gasoline. n esmated In light of this sensible comprornj e I
there Is no treatment capacity, then the are presently leaking (potentially contsj - provision, I can support HR. 2867 and
wastes that have not been reviewed would friat groundwater) and another 350.000 lOOk forward to the President signing
have to be sent to land disposal facilities are expected to leak In the next live years. it into law this year.
that are double-lined and have leachate ccl. HR. 2867 mandates the use of leak detec- Mr. Speaker. I yield 5 minutes to the
lection systems. If EPA fails to meet Its Lion systems, the development or new t&nk gentleman from New York (Mr. Lci J, I
final deadline, then all unreviewed wastes standards which will protect against COITU-
oWd be banned from land disposal, unless eion, as well as many other safeguards, the ranking minority member of the I
subcommittee who has worked so hard I
the generator qualifies for a limited vail- Mr. EDGAR. Mr. Speaker, will the and effectively with respect to this I
asice.
gentleman yield? program. •
Mr. FLORIO. I yleld to the gentle- Mr. LENT: Mr. Speaker. I rise in f
2867 closes a number of regulato ’i man from Pennsylvania.
loopholes which have allowed the dlzpoaaJ!L Mr. EDGAR. I thank the gentleman support of the conference report on
of significant Quantities of hazardous waste for yielding. HR. 2867—the Hazardous and Solid
to remain uncontrolled. Among these loop- Mr. Speaker. I would just like Waste Amendments of 1984. This is a I
holes Is the smaU generator” exemption commend the gentleman on the legis- carefully crafted compromise bill
which permits the disposal of ‘up to one
metric ton a month (per generator) lation and point out that the legisla- which has resulted from many yearsi
of hard work by both Members and I
called sanitary lan Iills or into sewers_ - tion does Include the establishment of staff. I want to particularly commend
posal practices which obviously are not pro- a National Groundwater Comrnmic. the chairman of the full committee on
tective of human health or the environ. sion, which the gentleman and I have
ment. The legislation requires regulation of worked on, and I want to congratulate Energy and Commerce. the gentleman i
generators who produce more than 100 kilo- him for his efforts. from Michigan (Mr. DINGELL], the
grams (220 pobnds) each month. These gen- Mr. FLORIO. I thank the gentle- gent4eman from New Jersey (Mr.
craters will be required to send their has- man. Fi.ozt o] , the gentleman from North
i ardous wastes to an appropriate disposal Mr. Speaker. I reserve the ballnce of Carolina (Mr. Bnoyiuu.J. the gentle-I
, ,,,3reatment facility.
man from Ohio (Mr. ECKABTI. and the
Another major loophole whIch my time. - gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. I
dressed by this legislation concerns the use 0 2140 R irrEn].
of hazardous wastes as fueL Currently, some
of the most dangerous wastes, such as PCBS Mr. BROYHrLL. Mr. Speaker. In my opinion, this conference
and dioxin, are blended Into used ou or yield myself 5 mInutes. re ,ort represents a fair compromise i
other fuel and burned In residential boilers I rise in support of H.R. 2867. I be- between the provisions of H.R. 2867
which are not capable of destroying the lieve it is an important environmental and S. 757—Its Senate companion
toxic component of these wastes. This prac- measure which is deserving of passage measure. In most Instances the differ-
Lice, which has become increasIngly preva. this year. ences between the two bills have been
lent, particularly In the Northe t. creates a ‘ My understanding of this measure split almost equally—resuiting in an
health is most lnerable. especially the eld. that It thco orates a number of com important new environmental statut
substantial risk to those citizens whose
erly, young children and persons ith rmp l- Promises on important Iss ues such as The Hazardous and Solid Waste En.
ralory illnesses. Under the legislation. EPA small quantity generators. PCBs and forcement Act of 1984 represents a
must issue regulations that would allow underground storage tan , - dramatic new shift In our national
burning of hazardous wastes only under dr - The language adopted on small policy about hazardous waste disposal.
cuznstances that, would not harm public quantity gen rat is virtually identi- After this measure Is enacted, small
health. cal to that otan agreement, reached by quantity generators of hazardous
m voac v the b .siness and envirorutientaj corn. waste who are now able to generate
HR. 2867 contains a number of provisions muni ttil.s -9’ear. It provides for a 2.209 kilograms or 1 ton of hazardous
designed to promote compliance with the work. 5 ,b!e fegj Zatory program for small waste a month will have to dispose of
bilrs regulatory safeguards by Increasing quantity generators of between 100, their waste In a properly permitted fa-
civil andcrlmlna,l penalties forviolators For kilogra rnsajià 1.000 kilograms of has- dility rather than In an unregujated
example. placing another person In danger ardo is waste per month. Appropriate, dump.
of death or serious bodily Injury by Ulegal ly, this program is restricted to that Following enactment, the EPA will
disposai or management or hazadous waste universe of generat.ors—the is no be on a strict timetable for reviewing
carries a maxImum 15 year prison sentence regulation below 100 kIlograms per and banning hazardous waste from
and a $250000 fine. A corporation could be
fIned 11 millIon, month. In my opinion, regulation of land disposal. Some of the most toxic
In addition, citizens would be provided the these small generators should not, go chemicals will be banned by statute
right to sue responsIble parties and compel below 100 kilograms per month. i be- unless EPA determines that is not nec-
them to clean up hazardous waste sI . ileve the conferees did well in adopting essary to protect human health and
Congress has recognized that leaving all en. this commonsense compromise, the environment. These chemicals in-
torcernent responsibility to PA and the Further, the conferees agreed to dude arsenic, cyanide, and dioxins.
states has not been satisfacto , In light of drop a House provision which would For too many years In this country,
the widespread non-compliance by hazard- have required the listing of PCB’s we have permitted the practice of
ous waste facilities. Citizen involvement, In’ under RCRA. I advocated and corn- dumping hazardous wastes in the land
eluding lawsuits, to force abatement of pletely support thL approach. PCB’s to go virtually unchecked, Even now
public health dangers, Is designed to law-
suits, to force abatement of public health are already regulated under the ‘Voxlc that the EPA La requiring landfills to
dangers, Is desIgned to complement the ccv- Substances Control Act arid EPA is in be lined. I do not feel confident that:
eminent’s enforcement efforts and encour the process now of reviewing’whether these liners will remain Secure In the I
age greater complIance by the regulated or not supplement,al regulatIon is ap- long term. Therefore, I believe it is ap- I
community. , proprlate under RCRA. It is clear that propriate for the Congress to Inter- I
GSOUNDWATDI PCB’s are now, and will continue to vene at this time and to establish a I
HR. 2867 also establishes a 19-member be. carefully monitored and that a new policy which calls for a review of I
National Groundwater Commission to Inves. mandatory listing procedure is map- known hazardous Wastes and a deter- I
ligate and report on causes of groundwater propriate. - mination whether these wastes are ap- I
contaminatIon and to recommend a national Further, the conferees adopted a proprlate for land disposal. I
strategy for addressing threats to the Na- compromise underground storage tank We simply Cannot afford to allow I
Lion’s freshwater aquifers. proposal. It appears that this proposal these dangerous and persistent chemi.
t’O, 1i çc !IH-J
-; g t/
—
i l_n— T 13 ” ’
-------
October 5, 1984 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
achieved a workable balance between fully appreciated after we examine
two conflicting considerations: just how much hazardous waste Is
First, the recognition that unless the being generated each year In the
status quo with respect to the han- United States. The numbers are stag-
Wing of hazardous wastes is altered gering.
raaically, we will be condoning the When the Environmental Protection
eventual chemical contamination of Agency (EPA] developed its regulato-
all elements of bur natural life-sup- ry program and when we first began
port system—air, water, and land; and working on this legislation, it wa .s esti-
Second, the reality that because the mated that approxImately 11 billIon
pervasive nature of the hazardous gallons—40 million metric tons—of
waste problem is largely a result of a hazardous waste are produced in the
successful industrialized society, the United States each year. In August of
ultimate solution is a basic change in 1983. EPA upped this estimate to
the operation of large segments of our roughly 40 billion gallons—150 million
industries—a course that should be metric tons, almost four times the pre-
charted carefully and brought about vious estimate. On AprLl 20. 1084. the
at a deliberate but measured pace. EPA released the results of the Na-
H.Il. 2867 represents a mandate for tional Survey of Hazardous Waste
change in the status quo. It also repre- Generators and Treatment. Storage
sents a mandate for Informed regu.la- and Dlsposcl Facilities Regulated
Lion which does not threaten precipi- Under RCRA In 1981 (National
tons disruptions which could ultimate- Survey). It is now estimated that more
ly doom our legislative strategy to fail- than 71 billion galloris—264 million
ure, metric tons—of hazardous wastes are
The bill before us is a compromise In generated in the United States every
the best sense of that. term. It at- year. According to news reports, that
tempts to accommodate the many Is enough to flood the District of Co-
varied concerns expressed by hundreds lumbla to a depth of 5 feet; enought to
of persons over the past years. it is supply every man, woman and child in
also a compromise In the sense that the Nation with six 55-gallon drums of
probably no one person or interest hazardous waste.
supports every single element of the Sadly, the actual number far exceeds
legislation, the 71 billion gallon estimate. EPA’s
We have had to make difficult judg- National Survey did not Include
ments as to how the results we desire mining aste, some of which is clearly
can be best achieved. This bill repre- hazardous: It did not include house-
sents that judgment. I urge my col- hold hazardous waste such as discard-
leagues to support the legislation ed pesticides, paint thinners and clean:.
before the Senate. If approved, it will ing solvents: it did not include hazard-
be another significant achievement by ous wastes generated by individual
this body in assuring a safe environ- businesses that produce less than 1,000
ment for all persons of this country. kilograms—2,200 pounds—of such
• Mr. CHAFEE. Madam President, I waste each month; it did not Include
am pleased to present to the Senate hazardous waste that is discharged
the conference report on HR. 2867. through sewers into publicly owned
the solid and hazardous waste amend- wastewater treatment works; it did not
rñents of 1984. When we last addressed include hazardous wastes deatined for
this matter on July 25. 1934. the recycling: and, of course, it did not in-
Senate unanimously approved S. 757, elude hazardous wa,stethat is Illegally
the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amend- generated or managed. The survey and
meat of 1984, the estimate only included those
The bill before us today is a confer- wastes and activities that are regulat.
ence substitute for S. 757 and for the ed under the existing ECRA program.
original version of H.R, 2367. To my There is no question, Madam Presi-
mind, Madam President, we have dent, that we have given the EPA an
taken the best ,of both bills and pro- enormous responsibility. In 1981, EPA
duced a piece of legislation that we received nearly 60.000 notices from
can all be proud of. It is a tough bill generators of hazardous waste. The
designed to deal with a tough problem: Agency has roughly 8,500 applicatIons
the control of hazardous waste. on file for permits for treatment, stor-
In 1976. the Resource Conservation age, and disposal facilities. The permit
and Recovery Act (RCRA] was en applications and sources of hazardous
acted as an amendment to the Solid waste come from a wide variety of in-
Waste Disposal Act. Subtitle C of dustries, each one posing unique prob-
RCRA established this Nation’s basic lems. Add to that the problem of
hazardous waste management system.’ household waste and waste from the
That law, and the amendments we are truly small quantity generator. EPA’s
considering today, are desIgned to’ task under RCRA is a tough one. It is
assure the people of this Nation that also absolutely essential that it be
the generation, handling, storage, done right and that it be done soon.
treatment, transportation and disp s tl This program is closely related to
of hazardous waste In this country is the much talked about Superfund pro-
regulated and controlled in a manner gram. What this program Is meant to
that protects both human health and do is to assure the public that, al-
the environment, though we may be discovering new Su-
The Importance of this law and the perfund sites on a daily basis, at the
need for such assurances can only be very least we are taking steps to pre-
S138i7
vent the creation of new Superfurid
sies. Hazardous waste can and must be
handled in a manner that is safer than
it was in the past. That is what RCRA
is supposed to be about.
We often hear the refra!n from
those who are responsible for disasters
like Love Canal, Stringfellow Acid Pits
and, in my home State, the Western
Sand and Gravel and Picillo dumps,
that we should not hold them respon-
sible because what they did was legal
at the time. Well, using legal to mean
not specifically prohibited by RCRA
or by regulation under RCRA. let’s
look at what is legal under our current
RCRA program: It is legal to produce
2,000 pounds of hazardous waste each
month and to dispose of it In the town
dump as If It. were normal trash. It Is
legal to use z aste oil containing dioxin
as a dust suppressant on roads as was
done In Times Beach, MO. It is legal
to avoid regulation by blending haz-
ardous waste with other fuels and to
burn it for energy or to sell it to unsu-
specting customers,
Madam President, our current
RCRA program Is riddled with loop-
holes. That Is why this bill Is so impor-
tant. We have identified a n unber of
gaps in the regulatory program and
have attempted to fill them statutori-
ly, Even with this bill there will be
gaps. The scope of the problem is such
that we cannot reasonably expect to
address It comprehensively with legis-
lation. We must continue to rely to a
large— ext t on Federal and State
common law and State statutory law
to fill the gaps. Nevertheless, we must
do as much a.s we can to assure the
public that hazardous waste are being
handled in a safe manner. This bill is
an important part of the solution to
the problem.
I would now hue to briefly explain
some of the bill’s key provisIons and
the specific problems they are de-
signed to address.
SMAZ.L QOANTTTY GENEIUTOCS
First, let us review the problem. As a
result of an EPA regulatory decision
In 1980, small quantity generators—
currently defined by EPA as those
v .ho produce 1,000 kilograms per
month (kg/mo) or less of hazardous
waste—are now exempt from most
ECRA requirements and may dispose
of their waste into sanitary landfills
and Into sev.’ers that are connected to
publicly owned treatment works. Nei-
ther of these types of facilities is
suited to the disposal or treatment of
toxic organlcs or metals. In addition,
such generators are not required to
package the wastes In a safe manner
nor to notify the transporters that the
waste being transpcrted is hazardous.
In addition to being toxic, many of the
wastes are ignitable, reactive or con’o-
sive and, therefore, create an occupa-
tional safety hazard for the unwitting
transporter.
To address this problem, HR. 2867
will require that,within 270 days, gen-
erators which generate greater than
-------
S 13818
103 but less than 1.000 kilograms of
hazardous wastes per month must pro.
ride for proper Identification of such
wastes which are transported off-site.
Such generators would have to notify
transporters that such wastes are has-
ardous but would not have to comply
with full hazardous waste testing.
manifesting, record keeping or report--
Jug rcqulrements during the period be-
tween enactment and promulgation of
regulations. Methods of Identification
are specified.
Until completion of a study of small
quantity generators and promulgation
of final regulations for such genera-
tors. hazardous wastes generated by a
generator in quantities less than 1,000
kilograms pz r month must be dcliv-
erect to a permitted treatment, storage
or dIspQsal facility or a sanitary land-
fill which meets current criteria.
Regulations for storage of hazardous
waste generated In quantities of be-
tween 100 and 1.000 kilograms per
month shall provide for onsite storage
for up to 100 days without a permit—
twice the 90-days storage period al-
lowcd for large quantity generators.
For smril quantity generators who
must ship or haul their waste over 200
road miles, the regulations shall pro-
vide for onaite storage without a
permit for up to 270 days of up to
6,003 kilograms of such waste.
By March 31, 1985. EPA must com-
plete and submit to Congress a study
of small quantity generators. Using
the results of the study and other
available data, EPA must promulgate
by March 31, 1986, additional regula-
tions as may be necessary for small
quantity generators who generate be-
tween 100 and 1.000 kilograms per
month of hazardous waste. The
threshold of 100 kilograms per month,
however, is not the end of this issue. It
represents a logical next step In the
regulatory process but it does not
mean that EPA Is relieved of their re-
sponsibility to regulate in a timely
manner all generators of hazardous
waste as may be necessary to protect
human health and the environment.
If no regulations have been pro nul.
gated for small quantity generators by
March 31, 1986. after that date any
hazardous waste from small quantity
generators generating such waste in
quantities of greater than 100 kg/mo
must go to a treatment. storage or dis-
posal facility permitted under RCRA.
The Administrator is Instructed to
undertake activities to educate small
Quantity generators as to their respon-
aibilitles under this section.
Regulations for management of haz-
ardous waste from small quantity gen-
erators may vary from regulation for
larger generators; such regulations
must provide, however, that wastes
generated In quantities of greater than
100 kg/mo go to a treatment, storage
or disposal facility permitted under
RCRA.
LAZED DISPOSAL LIMITATIONS
The continued use of some methods
of land disposal of some hazardous
wastes presents an unwarranted and
unnecessary risk to human health and
the environment. Particularly trouble-
some are landfills and surface im-
poundments of highly toxic, mobile, or
persistent wastes and wastes that have
the potential to bioaccumulate.
The problem presented by land dis-
posal of hazardous wastes is a classic
example of the Inability of the free
marketplace to provide for the public
good. Land disposal is extremely cheap
when compared with the available al-
ternatives such as incinceration or
chemical-physical treatment, There-
fore, we should not be surprised to
find that Land disposal and treatment
in land disposal facilities such as sur-
face impoundments are being utilized
much more frequetly than the newer,
high-tech options.
According to EPA ’s NatIonal Survey,
of the listed treatment processes in
1981, incinerators treated the least
amount of hazardous waste. Only
about 450 millIon gallons—1.7 million
metric tons—of hazardous waste was
incinerated during that year. About 40
times more hazardous waste was treat-
ed in surface impoundments—1G.6 bil-
lion gallons, 62 million metric tons.
Nearly 20 times nicre hazardous waste
was disposed of in Injection wells—8.6
billion gallons, 32 millIon metric tons.
Over 10 times as much hazardous
waste was disposed of in surface fin-
poundments—5.1 billion gallons, 19 bil-
lion metric tons—and nearly twice as
much hazardous waste was disposed of
in landfills—810 million gallons, 3 mU-
lion metric tcnz. In 1981, only 23 per-
cent of our Nation’s treatment capac-
ity was being used.
Unfortunately, land disposal pre-
sents far greater rIsi:s to society than
are necessary, We have the technology
to reduce the quantity of hazardous
wastes disposed of in the land and to
render the waste less harmful. What
we do not have, and will not have as
long as cheap land disposal options are
available, is a viable market to support
the development and expansion of
new, safer treatment and disposal
technologies. This bill recognizes that
many of the risks associated with land
dIsposal are being unnessarily Imposed
upon the public and it is design ’d to
eliminate those ricks. The result
should be the creat!on of a new
market and increased demand for new,
safer treatment and disposal technol-
ogies.
By enacting H.R. 2867 Congress will
state It’s findings that reliance on land
disposal should be minimized and land
disposal, particularly landfill and sur-
face impoundments, Should be the
least favored method for managing
hazardous wastes. As reported by the
conference committee, EPA must,
within 24 months after enactment,
promulgate regulations to prohibit
land disposal of dioxins and solvents
unless the Administrator determines
that such a prohibition-is not required
to protect human health and the envi-
ronment. The Administrator may dis-
October 5, .1934
tlngutsh between various methods of
land disposal. Similar regulations and
findings must be made by EPA first,
within 32 months after enactment for
a specified list of hazardous wastes
that are specified in the bill on the
basis of their toxicity, mobility, per-
sistence or potential to bloaccumulate,
second, for all other listed hazardous
wastes on a staggered timetable—one-
third of list within 45 months of enact-
ment, one-third within 55 months, and
one.third of all listed and Identified
wastes wIthin 66 months.
If EPA fails to meet the statutory
deadlines for dio;cins. solvents, or the
specified list, and if the agency fails to
meet the 66-month deadline, land dis-
posal of the affected wastes is statuto-
rily prohibited.
Land disposal prohibitions are effec-
tive immediately or, on basis of avail-
ability of adequate alternative treat-
ment, storage, or disposal capacity, up
to 2 years after promulgaticri The 2-
year period may be extended on a
case-by-ca.se basis for 1 year and re-
newed once for an additioal year if,
after good faith efforts to develop ade-
quate capacity, It can be shown that
mcre time is needed.
If the Administrator finds a lack of
alternative capacity, he may set the
different effective date based on the
earliest date on which sufficent capac-
ity will becoree available. In setting
longer effective dates, the Administra-
tor can cor.sider the fact that different
physical or chemical forms of a par.
ticular waste are treatable by different
methods. Thus, different effective
dates may be set for a single waste
code—for example, FOOL P016. differ-
entiating between physical or cliemni-
cal forms of the waste. For example.
the Administrator may find that there
is sufficient alternative capacity for
liquid FOOl waste—and thus restrict it
immediately—but not for Fool waste
that is a solid or sludge—and thus set
a longer effective date for these forms
of the waste. This Will Insure that re-
strictions become effective as soon as
possible based on the availability of al-
ternative capacity.
Use of waste oil ccntalnng dioxin or
other hazardous wastes for dust sup-
pression is banned. The disposal of
hazardous waste by underground In-
jection Into or above any formation
which contains a potential under-
ground source of drinking water—
within one-quarter mile of injection
well—Is banned.
Expansions of existing waste pjl s,
landfills or surface Impoundments
under interim status are subJect to the
same requirements for liners, Icachate
collection systems groundwater moni-
toring and locational criteria as new
facilities.
Land disposal facilities which
stopped accepting wastes between July
26, 1982 and January 26. 1983, are re-
quired to take corrective action and
undertake groundwater monitoring
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
July 25, 1984
I inquire of them especially of the
chairman of the Committee on Envi-
ronment and Public Works, if there is
a likelihood that he could finish this
bill today, say, by the normal recess
— hour of 6 o’clock, or if it Is likely that
we will hate to go until tomorrow to
do that.
Mr. STAFFORD. If the Senate
Could suffer a temporary case of lock-
jaw, we could do it in the next hour. I
am very optimistic that we can com-
plete It by 6 o’clock. from reports on
both sides of the aisle.
Mr. BAKER. I thank the Senator.
In view of that, I announce that we
will try to finish; and ii it is necessary
to stay a little past 6 o’clock. the lead-
ership on this side is prepared to ask
the Senate to do that.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. BAKER. I yield the floor, and I
hope the Chair will then recognize the
distinguished Senator from West Vir-
ginia.
Mr. RANDOLPH. I thank the Sena-
tor.
Mr. President. I have just come into
the Chamber, and I did not hear all
that was said, except that I under-
stand there will be an effort to pass
this bill in approximately 1 hour. Is
that correct?
Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mr. RANDOLPH. I yield.
Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I have
not been privy to the conversations be-
tween the two managers, but the ques-
tion I put was whether or not the
manager on this side thought it possi.
ble that we could finish the bill this
afternoon, by 6 or thereabout, and the
answer was in the affirmati e,
The leadership on this side is pre-
pared to devote whatever reasonable
time Is required in order to complete
this measure.
Mr. RANDOLPH. I say to the major.
Ity leader and the chairman of our
committee that Senator Mrrci su.,
who will handle the measure on behalf
of the minority, will be most coopera-
tive In doing what the majority leader
desires, as will others. However, it is
my understanding that If we cannot
complete It by 6 o’clock. It Is to go
over. Is that so’
Mr. BAKER. Yes. I announced that
I would be willing to ask the Senate to
stay a little past 6 In order to finish.
Otherwise, It is the Intention to go
over until tomorrow.
Mr. RANDOLPH. All of us on the
minority will work closely with the
able chairman of our committee,
Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, the Sen.
ator from %Vest Virginia always does
that, and I am a’ways grateful.
He was once chairman of the En’ I.
ronment and Public Works Commit-
tee. I have often said that my first ex-
posure to Senate procedure and the es-
sence and substance of Senate delib.
erations was while he was chairman. I
learned a great deal from him, and I
continue to do so. I ne’ er tire of cx-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
pressing my appreciation to him for
his good service to the Senate.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
Mr. RANDOLPH. The majority
leader is very kind.
Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. President, I
should like to echo what the majority
leader has said.
During the early years I served on
the Committee on Environment and
Public Works, the Senator from West
Virginia (Mr. RArmoLPHl was an ex
ceptionally able chairman; and what-
ever I have learned of committee work
I learned at his side. So I am also
grateful for all the guidance he has
given to our committee and to me over
the years In the work of the commit-
tee.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. STAFFORD. I yield.
Mr. RANDOLPH. I could speak at
greater length to the majority leader
and to my friend the present excellent
chairman, but I will say only this:
Thanks very much.
Mr. STAFFORD. Mr, President, the
manager on our side for this bill will
be Senator CHAFES. If the Senator will
indulge me for a moment. I will turn
over that task to him. Senator CHAFES
Is the chairman of our Subcommittee
on Pollution, which has handled this
measure, and It Is appropriate that he
be the manager for this side of the
aisle, just as Senator MITCUEL.L, the
ranking minority member, will be the
manager on the minority side. Senator
RA$DOLPH and I will be here for what
ever backup we cart offer.
Mr. President, the Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act Amendments of 1984 have
been a long time In the making.
The Committee on En ironment and
Public Works began woik on these
amendments in the 97th Congress. We
reported S. 757, the pending bill, on
October 28. 1983. Refinements and ad-
justments have conunued to be made
since then and will be part of the corn-
mittee’s proposaLs today.
The bill reflects Intensive delibera-
tion by the committee, extensive con-
sultations with current officials at the
Environmental Protection Agency.
with the whole spectrum of outside In.
terests, and with Members of the
Senate who are not on the Environ.
merit and Public Works Committee.
The product of this exhaustive proc-
ess Is a balanced bill that will enhance
protection of public health and the en-
vironment against harm from the
toxic wastes so pervasive In our socie-
ty.
By clarifying existing law In several
respects, the bill closes some major
gaps in the Nation’s hazardous waste
disposal program—gaps created. In
some instances, by overly lenient regu-
latory interpretations.
It sets realistic—and I emphasize the
word “realistic”—schedules according
to which both regulators and those
who generate or handle hazardous
waste must take specific, protective ac-
tions.
S 91-17
The distinguished chairman of the
En ’ironmental Pollutron Subcommit-
tee, Mr. CHaFES, has outlined what we
know at this time to be the dimensions
of the hazardous waste prohiem in this
country. I would like simply to note
that the more we learn, the bigger we
find the problem to be.
In this bill we are puttIng into place
measures to reduce the likelihood of
future tragedies such as those at Lote
Canal. Tunes Beach, and Woburn. MA.
Investments made as a result of this
legislation will, I believe, not only
reduce future human suffering but
also the tremendous costs of respond’
ing to releases of toxic substances Into
the environment after they have oc-
curred.
The statement by the distinguished
subcommittee chairman has also pro-
vided a clear and comprehensive de-
scription of the bill before us. There Is
only one section of the bill I would
like specifically to discuss.
Section 26, the waste minimization
provision, amends the Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act in several ways. First, It sets
out as national policy that hazardous
wastes are to be reduced or eliminated
as expeditiously as possible and that
wastes that are nonethelesS generated
are to be disposed of in the most en i-
ronmentally sound manner.
Second, it requires generators of
hazardous waste to certify that they
are reducing the quantity or toxicity
of their wastes to the maximum
extent they determine Is economically
practicable. Generators must also cer-
tify that they are employing those
practicable methods of disposal that
minimize threats to health and the en-
vironment and must report every 2
years on their production and manage-
ment of hazardous wastes.
Finally, the bill requires the Adxnin-
Istrator to submit to Congress a report
on methods in addition to those in cur-
rent law to reduce the quantity and
toxicity of wastes generated In this
country and to assure that the wastes
that are generated are managed so as
to minimize their threats to human
beings and the environment.
Mr. President, I believe we are
making some headway In protecting
this Nation from the harm caused by
hazardous wastes. But the fact re-
mains that neither existing law nor S.
757 guarantees anything like truly
safe disposal of the vast quantities of
hazardous waste generated In this
Nation.
We need to find ways to greatly
reduce the amount of harmful wastes.
At the Federal level we must look for
ways to encourage the development of
alternative production processes, the
substitution of less hazardous materi.
als for more toxic ones, and other
means to reduce both the quantity
and toxicity of wastes.
We must also provide incentives for
development of treatment and disposal
practices that minimize threats from
-------
S 9118
those hazardous wastes that continue
to be produced.
The waste minimization provisions
in S. 757 are a step in that direction.
They represent a starting point, not
the last word.
It is my hope that the certification
required of hazardous waste genera-
tos will elicit from them serious and
successful reduction efforts.
IL Is my expectation that the report
required from EPA, together with in-
formation from the biennial reports
submitted by generators, will provide
the basis for sound future changes in
the direction and emphasis of a na-
tional hazardous waste program.
Those changes v. ill, I believe, empha-
size waste reduction. with the goal of
eliminating disposal of hazardous
wastes where they might in any way
harm public health or the environ-
ment.
Mr. President. as I said at the start
of my remarks, action on S. 757 is
needed now. The bill is a good and bal-
anced one. I urge my colleagues to
pass It quickly so that conference with
the House can proceed and a bill can
be sent to the President before sum-
mer’s end.
Mr. President. I ask unanimous con-
sent that the following staff members
be granted floor privileges:
Ste e Shimberg, Bob Hurley, Curtis
Moore, Vic Maerkl, Phil Cummings,
Charlene Sturbitts,’ Jimmie Powell.
Bill Fay, Boyd Holllngsworth. Brent
Erickson. Jim Curtiss. and Jon Jewett.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
SPEcT a). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. President. I
yield the floor to the manager on this
side. Mr. CHAFEs.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President. I am
pleased to present an amendment to S.
73T. the Solid Waste Disposal Amend-
ments of 1984.
The Committee on Env rbnment and
Public Works has been working on leg-
islation to amend the Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act and as part of that law the
so-called RCRA. the Resource Conser-
vation and Recovery Act, we have
been attempting to do this for the past
4 years. We have held numerous hear-
ings, meetings, and markups in an
effort to perf’ct this important meas-
ure, and I can now confidently and
wholeheartedly recommend it to my
colleagues.
On July 28. which was nearly a year
ago, the Committee on Environment
and Public Works reportcd this meas-
ure favorably and recommended by a
vote of 14 to 1 that the fLil Senate
pass this bill.
Mr. President. let me begin by
noting that the title of this bill and
the law that is the primary focus of
these amendments to RCRA are to
some degree misleading.
Yes, there are protisions dealing
with solid waste, and, yes, there are
pro isions dealing with resource con-
servation and recovery. But that is not
the focus of this bill.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
What we are really talking about
today is the control of hazardous
wastes.
In 1976 RCRA was enacted as an
amendment to the Solid Waste Dispos-
al Act.
SubF:tle C of RCRA established this
NatLon’s basic hazardous waste man-
agement system.
That law and the amendments we
are considering today are designed to
assure the people of this Nation that
the generation, handling, storage,
treatment, transportation, and dispos-
al of hazardous wastes in this country
is regulated and controlled in a
manner that protects both the human
health and the environment.
We are getting down to a pretty fun-
darnental matter here. We are dealing
with hazardous wastes in every aspect
of them, not only the generation but.
as I said, the handling, the storage.
the treatment, the transportation, and
disposal of them.
Obviously the public of this Nation
believes in this. The importance of
this law and the need for such assur-
ances can only be fully accomplished
after we examine just how much haz-
ardous waste Is being generated each
year in the United States. The num-
bers are staggering.
When the EPA developed its regula-
tory. program and when we first began
working on this legislation, it was esti-
mated that 11 billion gallons, that is
400 million metric tons of hazardous
waste are produced in the United
States each year.
In August 1983. a year ago. EPA
upped this estimate to roughly 40 bil-
lion gallons, 1.500 millIon metric tor.s.
almost four times the previous esti-
mate.
On April 20. of this year. the EPA
released the results of the natIonal.
survey of hazardous waste generators
and treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities regulated under RCRA in
1981. This will be referred to as the
national survey. -
It is now estimated that there are
not 11 billion gallons nor 40 billIon
gallons: it is now estimated that more
than 71 billion gallons of hazardous
waste are generated in the United
States every year. That is 264 million
metric tons. It just staggers the imagi-
nation.
According to news reports, that is
enough to flood the District of Colum-
bia to the depth of 5 feet.
Mind you, this is annual. annual dis.
posal. enouth to supply every man.
woman, and child in the Nation with
six 55-gallon drums of hazardous
waste e ery year.
Sadly, the actual number we believe
even exceeds the 71 billion gallon ccii.
mate.
EPA’s national survey that I just re-
ferred to did not Include mining
wastes, some of which is clearly haz-
ardous. it d d not include household
hazardous wastes such as discarded
pesticides, paint thinners, and clean-
ing solvents. It did not include hazard.
July25, 1984
ous waste generated by individual
businessmen that produce less than
1,000 kilograms of waste a month.
A thousand kilograms, by the way, is
no tiny amount. That is 2.200 pounds.
over a ton of such waste a month, and
that is what we call small quantity
generators. It did not include hazard-
ous waste that is discharged through
sewers into publicly o vned wastewater
treatment works. Ii did not include
hazardous waste that is illegally gener-
ated or managed. And it did not in-
clude those hazardous wastes destined
for cycling.
The survey and estimate only mnclud.
ed those wastes and activities that are
regulated under the existing RCRA
program.
There is no question, Mr. President,
that we hare given the EPA an enor-
mous responsib lity. In 1981 EPA re-
ceived nearly 60.000 notIces from gen-
erators of hazardous waste. The
agency has roughly 8,500 applications
on file for permits for treatment, stor-
age. and disposal facilities.
This just gives you some Idea of the
tremendous job that EPA has under
thi, program.
The permit applications and sources
of hazardous waste come from a wide
variety of Industries. Each one of
these industries poses a separate prob-
lem.
Add to the problem of household
waste and waste from the truly small
quanuty generator. All of that you put
together and we can conclude that
EPA’s task is indeed a difficult one. It
is alrno t absolutely essential that it be
done right and that it be done soon.
This program is closely related to
the much talked about Superfund pro-
gram. What this prcgram is meant to
do is assure the public that although
we may be disco er ng some new Su-
perfund siLs on a daily basis, at the
least we are taking steps to prevent
the creation of new Superfund sites.
In other words, as you know, there
are some 6.000 Superfurid sites. some
sites that are needing of the Super-
fund cleanup in the Nation, and there
they are. We are working on those
throti h the Superfund. But the whole
purpose of this bill we are considering
today is to prevent the creation of new
such sites. -
Hazardous waste can and must be
handled in a manner that is safer than
It was in the past. That is what RCRA
is suppcsed to be about.
No . wa often htar the refrain from
those ho were re pcnzibile for disas-
ters l l;e Lo c Canal. the String(ellow
acid pits in California. and in my home
State the Western Sand & Gravel, and
the so-called Potello dump, that we
shou’d not hold them responsible be.
cause what they did was legal at the
time.
Wed, using the word “legal” to mean
not specifically prohibited by RCRA
or by regulatIons under RCRA, let us
see what they mean, let us look at
-------
July 25, 1.984
what Is legal under our current RCRA
program. -
Now it i s true under the existing
laws, prior to these amendments we
are considering today. It is legal to
produce 2.000 pounds of hazardous
waste eath month ar .d to uispose it In
the town d’imp as If it ere normal
trash. This uas what we v .ere talkthg
about previously, th.it I referred to as
the small-quar .tj ’ generator. The
small-quantity generator who is not
regulated under present law is that
p .rson or business that produces 1
mc-Lric ton, 2,200 pounds or less a
month. Now as f mentioned before,
that is a ton and that “an be disposed
of In the no mat trnsh heap.
It is legal under the current. law to
use waste oil containing dioxin as a
dust s lppressant on reeds as cvas done
in Times Beach. MO. It is Legal under
the exii t:ng law to avoid regulation by
blending hazardous waste with other
fuel and to burn it for energy and to
sell It to U’”iUspPef r.g Customers,
So “hat I am saying here, Mr. Presi-
dent, is the curtent RCRA law Is rid-
dlcd with loopholes. And those were
enacted at. the time and undoubtedly
TP o .n,zpd at the time hen the legis-
lation was passed. hccatLse when we
first won: on legislation, we cannot
achieve perfection, And what this leg-
islation we have before us today, S.
757, is all about is trying to plug those
loopholes and that is hy we believe it
Is so Important, We have identified a
number of gaps in the regulatory pro-
grain and have attempted to fill them
under this legislation. E en v ith this
bIll, there will be some gaps still exist-
ing. The scope ut the problem is such
that we cannot rcasondbly be expected
to address It comprrhens lvely utn leg-
islation. We ha e got to continue to
rely to a large extent on Federal and
State common law and State statutory
law to fill the gaps. Nevertheless, we
must do as much as we can to a.ssure
the public that hazardous wastes are
being handled in a safe manner and
thea L’!il I s important to that.
Now, there are se cral key provi-
sions that till come up. 1 am not going
to dwell on those in detail, but I will
jug mention some of them. The small-
quantity generator, which I talltad
about ‘iefore. We had long d scussions
on what to reduce that to. nether we
should reduce it from the current
1.000 kilograms amount dowr to de
minimis. We fmallv st- tled on 10.’ kilo.
gi’airs a month. There a-e 9 nlcnt lis
allowed oefore e get InLO er.actm t,
of the requirement for the small quan-
tity generators of less than 1,030 kilo-
grams a month, nam ly the 2.200
pounds. They have 9 months to get ad-
justed to the new def r ,ition of small-
quantity generator which, as I say, is
100 kilogianis a month.
We’ ha e limnia:ions on the laid dis-
posal which e v:ill be discussing fur-
ther, if anybody would like to raise
questions in connection with those.
That Is a very important part.
We have minimum technological re-
quirements in permit life, We hate
continuing releases on permitted Is-
c’iiti s and we have a prcp-js ’ ii to Jis .-
Ing and delisting, We n odif ’ that
from the existing law.
Then also we touch on the burnfig
and blending matter which I rkw!-itiQn
in my stP.tement.
We have problem i’aatters dt3ling
th mandatory lnspectons in Federal
facilities, Federal enforc .ment and
the export of hazardous waste. We
have a pros iSIOfl dealing with immi-
nent hazard citizens’ stilts. Those are
the principal provisions of this act.
Working with Its on the committee
and a ery valuable member was the
ranking member, the jut ior Senator
from Maine (Senator MZ ’CIIELLJ and
he did an excellent job.
Does the Sens ton have an cpening
statement?
Mr. MITCHELL. I do, Mr. President.
but I yield to the ranking member of
the full committee, the former chatr-
man (Senator RAXaOLPH].
Mr. RANDOLph. I th.’ink the able
Senator from Maine very much.
Mr. President, as a principal author
and sponsor of S. 757. amendments to
the Solid Waste Disp’ al Act. I strong-
ly support this measure. S 757 is per-
haps the most sigr ifica-it public
health and environmental proposal to
be debated by the Senate since the
passage of the Comprehensive Envi-
ronmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act, or Superfund, in
1980.
Senate consideration of this measure
follows 2 years of dedicated work by
members of the En ironment and
Public Works Committee and other in-
terested Senators. Waste management
Is a nonpartisan issue, and S. 757 is the
result of a bipartisan effort to assure
that hazardous and other wastes are
properly disposed of.
The Solid Waste 5 Disposal Act
Amendments of 1984 refine and
expand the scope of the solid waste
program originated nearly 20 years
ago. The first Solid Waste Disposal
Act, Public Law 89-272, e tablished a
modest research effort and technical
& .sistance program to States and local-
ities to improve management and con-
servation practices with respcct to mu-
ncipal waste. This was the first step
in developing a national policy to en-
courage recycling of usable materials
and discourage disposal practices
ahiel’ threaten public health and scar
the iand
Subsequent ainend;nents began to
d.stinguish the letels of tiireat po’ .ed
by land dispo . al of various ma crials.
The Resource Recctery Act of 1970,
h!ch I authored, man ated a nation-
al disposal sites stujy, That bill em-
bodied the first references to cat’-go-
ries of hazardcus waste septrate fio
the bi-ca ’ei solid aste des l’bn :-c ion.
In 19C, the landmark legi taiion
knoan as the Resource Con ri ti 1
and Reco ery Act as sIgned into law.
The protislon I proposed, nch
S 91- 19
became subtitle C of the cur-rnt law,
establisf’ed the concept of “crm dle to
grate’ management of hazardou’,
v sste. Thue d’stli .ct sets of stsnthrd
and rts on biliteq were ap Jied t
l i rdotis a , generators, tran .port-
ers, arjd ov .ru’r. anti operators ci
pos tl farilit rs Ccncui-rerty ti ” a ’ .
estabIi;h . ’d a program for corn reheri-
sh’e ma l’agenient plar.nhig f r mui - ci-
pal wa te and ca k -d for cIo .ure of
open dumps.
Modifications have been niade to the
1976 act, but the structure and objec-
tives have rema!!:ed the same. S. ‘h57
continues this refinement process as
experience in implementing tOe pro-
gram outlines deficiencies and over-
&ghts in exi i ing law,
Several pu ovisionS of S. 757 address
problems that have been td nt :ied as
the Superfund program has been Im-
plemented, The origins of Su rfund
sites, the degree and extent of con-
taniination, and the technological Ca-
pabilities and limitations for corrective
aetiun are better defined. The lnfor-
matloit that has accrued over the past
-several years enables us to strengthen
the protective features of the solid
and hazardous waste regulatory p:o-
gram.
S. 757 contains iniportant ne initia-
tives and expands existing mandates
to provide for improved comorehten-
sive v aste mana erner ,t. I will c0n-
rnent on -several issues, Including the
small generator anienclment, and dis-
cus, an amendment I intend to offer
at the appropriate tune modifying sub-
title D of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act.
One of the more difficult issues to
res ,l’,e ii’ comrni tee consicn ration of
S. 757 was the definItion of smaH gen-
eretors of hazardous waste and the ap-
pr ’ priate level of regulation to apply
to this category of generators.
Current law requires the AdnithI-
trat.or to promulgate regulations appli-
cable to generators of hazardous waste
“as may be necessary to protect
huur.an health and the ensironmeni.”
The law does not authorize distinc.
tiotis between large and small genera-
tors c-s a criterIon for regu1 t un In
pror i! ating standards. howes ‘i’, the
EIr ir3nirnentsl Protccti ’ ti Agency sir-
tually exempted generato of less
than 1.04)0 kilograms per calendar
month of hazardous waste from regu-
lation. Thus, purely for administrative
ConS cruu ’nce and without authority In
the stit’jt ’, the Agency exempted up
to a ton of hazardcus waste p .r
mor.Ji, front a small g nera ot of
sssste, This exPrnp ic,n has been flfl jer
I!t!gat lon.
The bill requires EPA to close out
thIS illegal excmnoton for smal: qua .
t 1 t 1 generators. The Agency is dii ecu&d
tu uni;rta,e a compi-ehensi ’e stu Iy t
cl.i ,’ ,’terize gcnez tor of haa:ii 1 jiv
wa t(’ in CP ’antiLies less than 1,Oti0 Ll .
gram.; per m u. 5 h and their dkpoiai
prattices. Actually, the Agency al-
ready has this study underway, At thc
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
S 9150
Conclusion of this study the Adnalnis-
trator Is required to promulgate ap-
propriate regulation gover,riing the
handling of all hazardous waste pro-
duceci 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-
tiona by March 31. 1986. this minimum
requirement goes into effect by oper-
ation of the statute, for all generators
producing more than 100 kiloerams
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 pro ide
notice of the hazardous nature of the
waste to transporters and disposal f a-
dilitles.
Originally in the committee’s delib-
eratinn , e 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 11 all wastes.
regardless of quantity, 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 l ndf ills, 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 pro-
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 dlspos-
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 undt-r the Superfund are munici-
pal landfills. If 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 As oc ation of State and
Territorial Solid Waste Management
officials recently conducted a survey
of State subtitle D activities. Prelinil-
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 If 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 possible. Technology
should be gu ded by prudent use and
protection of resources. Mir.iznizirig
the amount of hazardous waste gener-
ated and continued research into alter-
native waste neutralization and treat-
ment techninucs are necessary steps in
diminish ng threats to public he lth
and the environment.
Mr. President, I have been lnvol ed
with legislation relating to solid wa;te
management and control for more
than 20 years. This bill incorrorales
the latest amendments to the Solid
Waste Disposal Act and greatly en-
hances our ability to address the
issues associated with both ta2ardous
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, 1,984
and to consider additional legislation
in the future.
This measure represcnts a substan-
tial commitment of time and effort by
members of the Committee on Envi-
ronment and Public Works. I acknowl-
edge particularly the dedicated le:tder-
ship of our able chairman, Senator
STAFFORD. and of the chairman and
ranking minority mcmber of the Sub-
committee on Environmental Pollu-
tion, Senator CRAFEE and Senator
MITCHELL.
In developing this legislation, we
have been greatly aided by the com-
mittee staff which has brought its
knowledge and experience to bear en
this subject. I express appreciation for
their work on this bill to membeis of
the minority staif: Philip T. Cum-
mings; John W. Yago, Jr.; Stephanie
Clough; Lee Fuller; Helen Kalbaugh:
Elizabeth Thompson; and Margie
Wright.
Mr. MITCHELL addressed the
Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Maine.
Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. President. I
thank the dhtinguished Senator f rem
West Virginia who has contributed sig-
nificantly not only to this bill but to
virtually every major environrneni,al
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 CHAFEE, whose
leadership has macic this legislation
possible as well as other members of
our committee, the distinguished
chairman, Senator STAFFORD of Ver-
mont, Senator BUPDICK. and Senator
LAUTENSERG 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
Recos cry Act, marks yet another mile.
stone in our efforts to protect our-
seltcs from the ubiquitous byproduct
of our highly Industralised society—
hazardous waste.
in 1976. the Congress enacted the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act. It was an amibicious, far-reaching
statute. It conferred on the Environ-
mental Protection Agency broad gen-
eral author tmes 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 for the disposal of hazard-
ous waste s ere mandated.
Enforcement authorities Wel e man-
dated.
Citizen participation in regulatory
and entorcernent proccedii s uas
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 rcgulatjon were and cor.tin-
uc to be measured Is protectwr. of
public health and the em ii ont : t.
Tric statute established a fran c ork
— for the pre ention of h r : to l, ; -nan
beings and natural rcsoure ’s.
Today, we propose a se ie. of amend-
m nts to the b.isic 1atute.
The prevenu e t.-amework of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act is sound. Today we proj ose niodi-
fications b s d on the kno iedge at’-
quired sInce 1976. Alt of the changes
we are r cnirnendtn to the Senate
will strep then the ability of the Fed-
eral Gcvernr.ient to protect public
health and the environment from haz-
arc ouz wastes. They are designed to
give EPA more s ec Ce guidsuce,
based üa our evpcric:we with irrpte-
meritatton of the ia :’s general au-
thoritics since 1976.
P1h t have we learned In ‘1 years?
We have learned that the magnitude
of the problem Is far greater than be-
ileved. We now know that over 264
million metric tons of hazardous u’aste
are generated In this country cach
year: this estimate Is more than four
times greater than pre%iousl thought.
V/e have learned that there are
thousands of waste sites across thIs
country which present poter.tIal or
actual threats to human health or,
well-being. EPA now est mates that
there may be 22.000 sites in need of
some type of cleanup; 54.6 of these
sites have been designated as priorities
for cleanup. The Superfund law en-
acted in 1989 was a necessary response
to our past Inattention to the careful
disposal of hazardous wastes.
Snnply put, past practices ha%e left
us a legacy of chemical 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 ju.t
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 hi ii.
We cannot afford the status quo.
We also know now that the genera-
tion of hazardous waste continues to
grow and that most of thi t waste—80
percent—is currently disposed of on or
in the land.
It has become e’ ident that a strong
congressional expression of dis pprov.
at of EPAs slow and ti:nid Irnpi men .
tation of the existing law is r.eces ary,
as well as a clear congressiontil direc-
tive mandating c rtain bold. prevc-
tive actions by EPA v hich will rot be
taken otherwise, despite the existing.
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 esen exacerbated the has-
ardous wa tc pru’o!em by suspending
certain regulalioi:s.
It has become evident that this slow,
plciding course u Ill be continued in
the ab uice of a clear con ressi3nai di-
rective. ‘ltts s nut a cep able. Accord-
ingy. S. 57 provides more specific
guidance to EPA as to how the b oid
gramita of author 1 ty of the exisrmg
RCRA law should be used.
The bill declares as congessiom:a.l
POliCY that—
T.. a o.d substant.aI risk to human bea!tii
and the c .tmronment, relmanr.e on lani dis-
pom.al should be mLnImi: ’d aa:i land dispos-
al. particularly landf!ll and surface Ira-
poundmer,t. should be the least favored
method Icr managlnç hazardous :2stes.
ft specifically reaffirms the Adminis-
trators authority to prohIbit land dIs-
posal methods that cannot be shown
to be protective of human health and
the environment, and directs the Ad-
ministrator to use that authority.
Deadlines are estabh.ched by which
EPA must evaluate all wastes l sted as
hazardous and subject to RCRA regu-
lati’)n, as to the appropriateness of
ttmeir disposal on land.
The bill establishes minimum tech-
nologir al standards for land disposal
facilities and inc.nerators to insure
that EPA requirca the use of the best
technology available at. hazardous
waste d;sposal fari!iLics.
Henccforth, the use of landfills will
be circumscribed by str:ct rules go’,-
erning. first, under section 5, what
kinds of materials may be landfilled,
and second. under section 6, what the
physical character of the landfills
themselves will be.
Th 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 isnecessary to do
more. In Its section 5 technical evalua-
tions, EPA will match certain wastes
to certain land d sposa1 technologies
or determine that no match is feasible,
Within the framework of those evalua-
tions, Congress under the terms of this
legisiaticn is also directing EPA to
take into account certain locational
chararteristmcs with respect to all land
di posal facilities in the country in
ord to establish a performance range
for landfills. The locatIonal character-
istics to be factored in’o EPA ’s analy-
ses include. an on others, the hydro-
geology of the site, and cirmatological
and d mograhic effects. Landfills
thus will be able to be assessed accord-
ing to theIr hyrogec logmc performtnce
and cla si2ied as fully acceptable, ac-
ceptab!c for certain himttcd uses, and
uriat’ce t2ble. V ch a phaseout of Un.
aceeptaffle landfills and a highly ana-
lytic evaluation of the remai idrr at ’-
cording to their highest and best uses.
I anticipate that the health and safety
of the American people will be slgn:t!-
cantly enhanced with respect to their
S 9151
potential exposure to harmful toxics
in the environment.
The bill expands the coverage of the
law to those tho generate bi een lAO
anti l/ .’riO :lograms of waste a n nth -
In i . 0. EPA e .empted all gL:irrators
of less tnar. 1 09 kilograms, solely on
the baits of its workload. and z.at c
that it i,it rided to inItiate ru!eniakn’
to expand the law’s coverage v .itLmn
to 5 years.
This has not occurred. Accordingly,
the committee proposes to lmpement
EPA’s 1980 commitment. This will
bi ing Into the regulatory system an
additional 15 m:’lion tons of hazardous
waste.
The bill strengthens signifleantly
the role of citizens in enforcing the
law. As the spcr. or of this prot :siori. I
bt’ieve that it will provide an impor.
tant and necessary supplement to
EPA’s efforts.
The bill expands the law to pretent
the export of hazardous waste to for-
eign countries witnout the receiting
country’s consent. -
I would like to di:cuss in greater
detail two provisions of S. 757 which I
sponsored.
CITIFEN SUITS
The citizen stilt amendments con-
tained in S. 757 provide an important
supplement to the efforts of the Fed-
eral and State Governments to abate
the most serious kinds of hazardous
waste situations: Those that may
present an imminent and substantial
endangerment to human health or the
environment.
I reiterate: These amendments are a
supplement to. not a substitute for
Got errnnent 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 Immi-
nent hazard urd-r 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 sen e.
The Environmental Protection
Agency clearly does not have the re-
sources to deal wIth all of these smtes.
nor do the States.
Citizen suits to abate Imminent has•
ards can expand the national effort to
minimize these very real threats to
our well-being.
This bill nut horises citiaens to br’ g
imminent hazard s ir s in the s. rnee
of CPA actIon. The rrovision is . ruc
tur d earefu:ly in the following ways
to insure that cI 1 en suits do not
interfere with ongoing Federal or
State enforccmer.t efforts:
Citi cn action coniot occur until 123
days after EPA, the affected State and
the alleged defendant have been given
not Ice of Intent to sue.
-------
July 25, 1984
the requirements of this subsection Is leak.
Ing” immediately after “such facility”.
AMENDMENT No. 2002
(Purpose: To clarify authority of Adminis-
trator to enter Into cooperative agree-
ments with States to assist In the adminis-
tration of new requirements and prohibi-
tions)
On page 85. line 18. insert immediately
after “requirement.” the follo lng new sen-
tence: “Pending authorization under this
section of a State program which reflects
the amendments made by the Solid Waste
Divposal Act Amendments of 1984. the Ad-
ministrator may enter into an agreement
with the State under hlch the State may
assist in the adxnir.istratlon of the require-
ments and prohibitions which take effect
pursuant to such amendments.”.
AMENDMENT No. 2805
(Purpose: To grant interim status to facili-
ties not previously required to have a
permit under Section 3005 of the Act)
Amend S. 757 by adding the folloa ing new
section:
INTERIM STATUS
Sec. . Section 3005 of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act is an,endcd by amending para-
graph (1) of subsection (e) to read as fol-
lows-
“(1) owns or operates a facility required to
have a permit under this section—
“(A) which facility was in existence on No-
vember 19. 1980. or
“(B) which facility is In existence on the
effective date of statutory or regulatory
changes under this Act that render the fa-
cility subject to the requirement to have a
permit under this section: Provided. That
the facility has not been previously denied a
permit under this section and authority to
operate the facility under this section has
not been pre iously terminated.”.
(Purpose: To extend deadline for expiration
of interim authorization of State hazard-
Otis waste programs)
Amend S. 757 by adding the following new
section:
INTERIM AUTUORI!ATION OF STATE HAZARDOUS
WASTE PROGRAMS
Sec. - Section 3006(c) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act is amended by striking
“tweflty-four month period beginning on
the date six months after the date of pro-
mulgation of regulations under Section 3007
through 3005” and inserting in lieu thereof
“period ending no later than January 31.
1986”.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is the
Senator asking for consideration of
those amendments en bloc?
Mr. CHAFEE The- answer Is yes. I
move the adoption of those amend-
ments en bloc.
Mr. President. I ask unanimous con-
sent that the followini explanations
of amendments No 2794. 2795 2796.
2797. 2800. 2801. 2802, 2 O5. and 2806
be printed in the RECORD.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Wilh.
out objection, the explanations will be
Included in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the expla-
nations of the amendments were or-
dered to be printed in the RECORD, as
follows:
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
AMENDMENT No. 2795
(To make conforming aniendnaents to
change years and amounts of authoriza-
lions for appropriations)
As introduced In March 1903 and reported
in October 1983, 8. 757 authorized funds for
fiscal years 1983, 1984. 1985, 1986. and 1987
at let els based upon the administration’s
budget requests for fIscal years 1983 and
1984.
To account for the delay in Senate consid-
eration of the bill, this amendment will
retain the 5-year reauthorization cycle that
was entisloned by the Committee and au-
thorize funds for fiscal years 1985 through
1989. The amounts authorized are also in-
creased to reflect the fact that both actual
1984 appropriations and Administrator
Ruckelshaus’ fiscal year 1985 budget sub.
mission to the Office of Management and
Budget exceed the figures In S. ‘157. The Ad-
ministrator’s budget submission Is the best
estimate of funds needed for this program
and, as such, form the basis for the amounts
set forth in this amendment to sections 2
and 3 of S. 757.
There are no “Implied authorizations” in
S. ‘157. Agency actions that are directed by
this bill, including reports to Congress, are
to be carried out with funds that are avail-
able under the authority of other existing
laws or are eaplicitly authorized by this bill.
AMENDMENT No. 2796
(To clarify authority of Administrator to
promulgate regulations for small quantity
generators that differ from those applica-
ble to large quantity generators)
As reported, the bill explicitly provides
that the requirements that are to be pro-
mulgated by March 31. 1986 for small quan-
tity generators ‘-may vary from the require-
ments applicable to hazardous waste gener-
ated in quantities greater than one thou-
sand kilograms during any calendar month.
to the extent the Adnunistrator determines
such standards are adequate to protect
human health and the ent ironment?’ That
phrase is explained at page 11 of the Com-
mittee Report.
Concern has been expressed that reten-
tion of the law’s underlying requirement
and ultimate standard that RCRA regula-
tions assure protection of human health
and the entironment might undercut the
explicit authority to vary fbr small quantity
generators the requirements applicable to
hazardous waste generated in quantities
greater than one thousand kllograir.s per
month. Such a concern is based upon an hit-
proper reading of the law. It is based upon a
mistaken belief that the Administrator is re-
quired by law to select a single regulatory
approach that, is applicable to all hazardous
Eastes and generators of hazardous a nate.
Hating promulgated a regulatory program
for large generators of chemical hazardous
wastes, a program that EPA contends is pro-
tective of human health and the ent iron-
ment and is necessary to a.saure such protec-
tion, it is argued that the same regulatory
prog: am must be used a hone’ er EPA is di-
rected to promulgate re .ilat ions that
assure protection of human health and the
environment from hazardcu.s wastes The
notion is that if EPA is authorized ann capa-
ble of developing different regulations for
different situations, then the existing regu-
lations for large generators are not “neces-
sary” to protect human health and the enti-
ronment. and are, therefore, not legally de-
fensible.
Such an argument assumes that use of the
word ‘necessary’ In section 3004 Imposes
upon EPA a responsibility to select anti pro-
mulgate only regulations that are “essen-
tial”. “vital” or “Indispensable”. However.
S 9169
“necessary” denotes that which fills an
urgent need, but not invariably an alt-com-
pellIng need. The stronger “essential” and
“vital” are applied to that without ahich
something, bY its nature, cannot exist. - in
dispensable” even more specificall ’ denotes
that ahich cannot be sacrificed: freq enel
it is applied to part of a whole there are tin-
do.ibtedly portions of esisting regulations
that are ‘indispensable” and cannot be
taried ahen faced with a requiremci;t to
“protect human health and the enttron-
ment”. To recognize that there are portions
of existing regulations that are not “Indis-
pensable”, hc’ ever, does not in any way
suggest that those portions are not “neces-
sary” and, therefore, unlawful.
This amendment is a clarification of the
Administrator’s existing authority, As with
mining wastes, the administrator is able to
choose from a range of regulatory options
that will satisfy the mandate that protee-
lien of human health and the entironment
be assured. When faced with a spec.! ic prob-
lern, the Administrator can often identify
several options, each of which would protect
human health and the environment. The
Administator is not required to select the
option that aould satisfy the statutory
mandate In the most simple or most eost-ef-
fectite manner. He has a re:ponsibil:ty to
protect human health and the environment
and, as such, may choose among set eral ap-
proaches. The selection of a particular ap-
proach shall be la.sful provided it satisfies
the statutory mandate and is not an arbi-
trary or capricious decision. Distinctions
often can be and are made on the basis of
waste characteristics, waste management
practices and locational criteria This
amendment will simply clarify the Adminis-
trator’s existing authority to make such dis-
tinctions in the specified instances and to
consider ahether variation is necessary by
reason of the smaller size and the technical
and manageiial capability of small quantity
generators.
It is rezognized that many small quantity
generators may be small businesses that
may be adterseiy affected if the full set of
subtitle C regulations are required. Never-
theless, these quantities of aastes from
smaller individual generators may cause po-
tent:al harm if they are Iinproperl man-
aged. Given these considerations, the
Agency should determine whether require-
ments for small quantity generators can be
varied from those applicable to other gen-
erators while assuring protection of human
healtn and the entironment. In partitular,
the Administrator should examine ahether
it is potsible Io simplify, reduce the frequen-
cy of. or eliminate the existing reporting
and record keeping requirements and still
prot ide adequate prptcction of human
hea lh and the environment. Distincticr 1 s
m y be made from requirements for larger
generators, and among classes of sn’all
quanTity generators or of aastes prodtieed
by tht ”n
AMrr Dzt NT No. 2797
(To clarify which diotin ontair.ing e sat-s
are included in the first categor, o’ h’t-
ardnus wastes to be cons:dered bs’ the Ad
ministralor for land disposr.l himitatiei- ’
In hearings before the Comm:ttee. EPA
stated hdt it planned to begin to pic’n l.
gate land disposal limitation regulnti na ard
a ould in,tia’!y ret iew d:oxin-ccntair mi’ hat-
ardons aastt’s and hazardous aaMes r,.’u-
bercd FOOl, P002, P003, F0C4. and F005 In
regulations promulgated pursuant to section
3001, Recognizing that such anates arc
properly candidates for early ret lea. the bill
specifies that these wastes have been selrct-
-------
S 9170
ed to be reviewed first and on a “fast.track”
basis.
On February 15. 1984, the Agency pub-
lished an Advanced Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking to announce the Agency 5 cur-
rent activities to develop regulations to re-
strict or prohibit the land disposal of haz-
ardous a es (49 FR 5854). On page 5858.
the Agency stated that the dioxin-contain-
ing hazardous wastes included in the “fast
track” study are those identilied and pro-
posed to be added to 40 CFR 261.13 in an
April 4. 1583. Federal Register notice. Those
are proposed EPA Hazardous Waste Nos.
P020. F021, F022 and F023. This amend-
ment clarifies the reference to “dioxin-cots-
talrmg hazardous wastes” in this section of
the bill by adding specific reference to the
proposed hazardous waste numbers that are
set forth in the April 4, 1983, Federal Regis-
ter notice and cited in the February 15,
1984. notice.
It is noted that by including hazardous
wastes numbered P003. the universe of
wastes selected by the Congress for a “fast.
track” ret iew under this section is some-
ahat larger than that identified in the Feb-
ruary 15. 1984. Federal Register notice.
AMggDM .-T No. 2800
(To make technical and clarifying amend-
ments to Section 13 regarding export of
hazardous waste)
- This amendment does not change the
meaning or original intent of the provision.
As stated on page 48 of the Committee
Report “(s)hiprnents must conform with the
terms of the (internutional) agreement to
satisfy the requirements of this section. /’
The language added by this amendment
clarifies and codifies that original intent.
AMEND.MENT No. 2801
(To make miscellaneous technic-al and
clarifying amendments)
This amendment makes two clarifying
amendments and one technical amendment
to correct a typographical error.
This first clarifying amendment relates to
on-site storage by small quantity generators
and the second relates to preservation of
the Administrator’s authority, in the con-
te ct of permit issuance or otherwise, to
ord,-r new liners at landfills or surface im-
poundments which installed liners during
Interim status.
Aressmas iy No. 2802
(To clarify authority of Administrator to
enter into cooperative agreements with
StaLes to assist In the administration of
new requirements and prohibitions,)
This amendment ratifies the current prac-
tice of using State-EPA agreements to
enable States to participate as much as pos-
sible in the implementation of RCRA prior
to authorization of a State program under
Section 3006, For example, Slates that do
not yet hate adequate authority to obtain
authorization may still hate sufficient State
authority to be able to enter into agree-
ments to conduct inspections and draft per-
mits for EPA, Other States may have made
the necessary statutory and regulatory
changes to implement an independent State
re-guintory program for small quant,ity gun-
(‘rators between 100 and 1,000 kilograms
that EPA can ac-knott ledge in an agreement,
In thoce cases, the Administrator may well
tush to arrange to detote his priorities and
resources to other areas a here there is not
al”eady considerable State actitity and/or
to other States, —•
The agreement or existence of an operat-
ing State program does not mean that the
Admin;strator reiinquishes his authority or
responsibility, Until a State receives interim
or final authorization for a program compo-
nent, the Administrator alone is charged
with the legal responsibility under subtitle
C. We do not intend agreements to be
viewed as a de facto, more lenient type of
authorization,
A.MENDMENT No, 2805
(To grant inter-ins status to facilities not pre-
viously required to have a permit under
Section 3005 of the Act)
New paragraph (1RB) amends RCRA Sec-
tion 3005(e) to allow facilities in existence
subxequent to November 19, 1980 to qualify
for interim status If those facilities become
subject to the subtitle C requirements as a
result of amendments to the RCRA statute
Or regulations issued pursuant thereto, Fa-
cilities sub cct to this provision include fa-
cilities In existence subsequent to Notember
19, 1980 ahich treat, store or dispose of
newly listed hazardous wastes, including
mobile treatment units, and facilities which
treat, store or dispose of hazardous wastes
which were previously exempted from cer-
tain RCRA requirements but subsequently
became subject to these requirements as a
result of legislative amendments (i.e.. small
quantity generator aastes). Facilities for
which RCRA permits have been previously
denied or Interim status has been previously
terminated would not be able to qualify for
interim status pursuant to this protision
under any circumstances,
AMENDMENT No. 2806
(To extend deadline for expiration of inter.
ins authorization of Slate hazardous aBate
programs)
This amendment will assure that the
States have adequate time to fulfill the nec-
essary requirements to become fully author-
ized under Section 3006. Without this
amendment, the States’ intc m author-isa.
thins will expire on January 26, 1985. It is
my understanding that approx’mateiy 7 to
14 States will not be able to meet this dead.
line, and so would lose their interim author.
izations. Therefore, this amendment gites
the States until January 26. 1986 to fulfill
their requirements before they lose their in-
terim status.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
there further debate on the committee
amendments’
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I with-
draw amendment No. 2794.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered,
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I move
adoption of those amendments.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question Is on agreeing to the amend-
ments.
The amendments (Nos. 2795. 2796,
2797, 2800, 2801. 2802. 2805. and 2806)
were agreed to en bloc.
AMEYDME?rT 140. 3409
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I send
a series of 18 co.rnmittee a’nendments
to the desk and ask for their immedi-
ate consideration. I ask that they be
considered en bloc,
The PRESIDING OFFICER. VIth-
out objection, it Is so ordered. The
clerk will report the amendments.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Rhode Island (Mr.
CHAFES) proposes an amendment numbered
3409. en bloc.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that further read-
July 25, 1984
Ing of the amendment be dispensed
with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
The anieridment Is as follows:
AMENDMENT No. 3409
(Purpose To extend deadlines in various
sections of the bill)
Proposed b ’ Mr. CHAFEE (for himself
and Senators STAFFORD. RANDOLPH. and
MIrcHE L I.).
SECTION 5 LAND DISPOSAl, LIMITATIONS
On page 39. line 11, strIke “July 1, 1985”
and insert in lieu thereof “twenty-four
months after the enactment of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act Amendments 011984”,
On page 41, line 11, strike “twelve” and
insert in lie i thereof ‘taenty-four”.
On page 41. line 18. strike “thirty-two”
and insert in lieu thereof “forty-eight”,
On page 41, line 20. strike “forty-two” and
Insert In lieu thereof “sixty”.
On page 41, line 21. strike “fifty-two” and
insert in lieu thereof “seventy-two”,
On page 41, line 22. ImmedIately following
“enactment” add the following new sen-
tence: “The Administrator shall base the
schedule on a ranking of such listed wastes
considering their intrinsic hazard and their
volune such that decisions whether or not
to prohibit the laud disposal of high volume
hazardous ttastes with high intrinsic hazard
shall, to the maximum extent possible, be
made by the date 42 months after the enact-
ment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
Amendments 011984 and decisions regard-
ing low volume hazardous wastes with lower
intrinsic hazard shall be made by the date
72 mont ha after the date of such enact-
ment.”.
On page 43, line 23. strike “one year” and
insert in lieu thereof “fifteen months”,
S T1ON 5 LIsTZreG/DzaI5i zc MODIFICATIONs
On page 51, lines 12 and 13, strike “twelve
months after the date such petition Is
granted or six” and insert In lieu thereof
“twenty-four”,
On page 51, line 15, stnke “, whichever is
later’,
On page 53, line 22, strike “two years” and
insert In lieu thereof “twenty-eight
months”.
SECTION 8 BURNING AND BLENDING 0?
HAZ.% IIDODS WAsTES
On page 54, line 16, strike “twelve” and
insert in lieu thereof “fifteen”.
On page 60, line 12. strike “twelve” and
insert in l:eu thereof “fifteen”,
SECTION 24 MR ESIISSIONS FROM LAND
DiSPOSAL FACILITIES
On page 85, lIne 22, strike “thirty” and
lnser in lieu t?’ereof “thirty.six”,
8E(r10N 28 REPORT TO CONOREm
On page 90, line 24 and 25, strike “March
15. 1964” and insert in lieu thereof “J.Ine
15. 1984”.
AMENDMENT No. 3409
(Purpoce’ To clarify Administrator’s author-
ity to require a permit to construct a haz-
ardous aaste treatment, storage, or dispos-
al faculty)
Amend S 757 by adding the follotting new
section.
Sic. . Section 3005(a) of the Solid Waste
Dispozal Act Is amended by—
(1) Strik:ng ‘a” immediately after
“oanlng or operating” in the first sentence
and inserting in lieu thereof “an existing fa.
cility or planning to construct a new”:
(21 1ns rting in the second sentence “and
the co ctruct :on of any new facility for the
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
S 9172
health and the envjronmc,it and may take
Into account the practicable capacity of
such facilities. At a minimum such ret islons
for f igiLi potentially receiving such
Wastes should require grounda ater monitor-
ing as necessary to detect contamination, es-
tablish criteria for the acceptable location
of new or eaisting Iacil.tles, and provide for
corrective action as appropriate.”.
On page 72. beginning line 20. strike aU
through page 73, line 16. and ins rt In lieu
thereof the following;
‘(C) CONTROL Or Hszsasotjs Dis ossi,.—
(1)(A) Not later than thirty-six montt s
after the date of enactment of the Solid
Waste Disposaj Act Amendments of 1984,
each State shall adopt and implement a
permit program or other system of prior op.
prosal and conditions to assure that each
solid waste management facility althin such
State ahich may aeceive hazardous house-
hold waste or hazardous waste due to the
pros isbn of section 3002vb, for small quan-
tity generators (otherwise not subject to the
reqL ircmen for a permit under section
3005) will comply with the applicable crite-
ria promulgated Under section 4004(a) and
section 1008(a)(3),
‘(B) Not later than eighteen months
after the promulgation of revised criteria
under subsection 4004 1at2), each State
shall adopt and implement a permit pro-
grpvn or other system or prior approval and
Conditions, to assure that each solid aaste
management facility aithin such Slate
wt ic! rny receive hazardous household
aste or hazardous waste due to the pros-i-
slon of section 3002th ) for small quantity
generators (othcra-L e not subject to the re-
quirement for a permit under secion 3005)
will comply with the criteria revised unoer
section 4004(a)(2).
‘( c i The Administrator shall determine
whether each State has developed an ade-
uate proeram unoer this paragraph The
‘Administrator may make such a dett’rmina.
huh in Conjunction aith approval, disap.
protal or partial approval of a State plan
under ection 4007.
‘(2) In any State that the Administrator
di ternu:,cs has not adopted an adequate
prcg;a;n for such facilities Under paragraph
(1 NB) by the date provided in such para-
graph, the Administrator may use the au-
thorities asailable 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.
mini.strator or any other person be author.
ized to bring 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.
tot has deierniined to be adequate Under
this paragraph, For purposes of this para-
graph, the term ‘reqLilrerne of this Sub-
title’ in section 3008 shall be deemed to in.
elude criteria promugated by the Adnur,is.
trator under sections 1008 101(3) and 4004(a)
of this title, and the term ‘hazardous
wastes” in section 3007 shal be deemed to
Include sol:d aaste at fac’ilic es that may
handle hazardous household v,astes or has
arclous aastes from small Quantity gencia.
Lots.’.”
AMENDMENT No. 3409
(Pttrp ce: To clarify a hen common carriers
by rail are subject to citizen suits)
Proposed by Mr. CHAFEE (for himself
lad Senator RAsoocpH),
On page 8!. line 25. strike out “and”.
On page 83. line 4. strike out the period
pd u cert in lieu thereof “: and”,
n page 83, after line 4. insert the follow.
“(5) insertIng after the first sentence
hereof the following:
“A transporter shall not be deemed to
have contribut or to be contributing to
such handling, storage, treatment, or dispos-
al taking place after such solid waste or has.
ardous aaste has left the possession or con-
trol of such transporter, if the transporta-
tion of such waste aas under a sole contrac.
tual 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,”.
On page 80, line 10. insert Immediately
after “(g),” the following:
“A transporter shall not be deemed to
have contributed or to be contributir.g to
such handling, storage, treatment, or dispos.
al, taking pace after such solid waste or
hazardous aaste has left the possession or
control of such transporter, if the transpor-
tation of such waste was under a sole con-
tractual arrangement arising from a pub’
lished tariff and acceptance for carriage by
common carrier by rail and such transporter
has e’cercised due cure 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. CHAFEE (for himself
and Mr. RANDOLPH).
On page 30, line 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 “(3)” and insert
in lieu thereof “(2)”.
On page 32, line 11, strike “(7)” 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 “para.
graph (2)”,
On page 32. line 24, strike “($1” and insert
in lieu thereof “(4)”.
On page 33. line 9, strike “(6)” ano insert
in lieu thereof ‘ (5)”.
On page 33, line 18, strike “(7)” and insert
in lieu thereof “(6)”.
On page 34, line 10. strike all after “prac-
tices.” through line 14.
On page 35. line 15, strIke and insert
in lieu thereof “(4”.
On page 35, line 25, stnke “(3Y’ and insert
in lieu thereof “(2)”,
AMENDMENT No. 3409
(Purpose’ To make a clarifying amendment
on the usc o absorbents)
Proposed by Mr. CHAFEE (for himself
and Senators ST rrORo. RINDOLJ’M, and
M rcHE1,z,),
On page 44, beginriiig on lir.i i, strike
“(including the mlnimzzatlon of free hi uids
by other means than the add:tton 01 Rbsorb
ent material, where technologically feasi-
ble),”,
On page 44, line 6, Insert irnmedia:ely
fter “landfills,” the following new sen-
tence’ “Such regulatio shall aLso prohibit
the disposal In landfills of liquids that hate
been absorbed in materials that biodegrade
or that release liquids ahen compressed as
might occur during routine landfill ops-r’
atlon”,
July25, 1984
On page 44. line 8. strike “of” 1mm media.
tely after “disposal” and Insert in lieu there-
of”in”.
AMENDMENT No, 3409
(Purpose. To au5stitute the phrase “oily ma-
terials” for the more narrowly defined
term “used oil”)
Proposed by Mr. CRAFEE (for himself
and Senators STAFIOPO, RANDO 1,pH and
MITCHELL.
On page 60. lines 4 and 6. strike “used oil”
each place it appears and insert in lieu
thereof “oil) materials”,
On page 60, line 4, insert a comma imnu’-
diatel after “refining”.
AMENDMENT No. 3409
(Purpose To delete deadline for EPA to de’
terrn:zie appropriateness of using extrac-
tion procedure toxicity characteristics for
evaluating delisting petitions)
Proposed by Mr. CIIAFEE (for himself
and Susators STAFT0RD. RAYDOLPH. and
On page 53. lInes 15 through 22 and Insert
in lieu thereof the following;
“‘(D) ncu later than twenty-eight months
after the date of enactment of the Solid
Waste O:’posal Act Amendnicnts of 1984,
make”.
AMENDMENT No, 3409
(Purpost-. To make locational criteria appli-
cable it Ad’ninistrator fails to meet land
disposal l mitation deadlines)
Proposed be Mr. CHAFEE (for himself
and S ..nator, STAFFoRD. RANDOLPh. and
MITCHELL)
On pase 43. lines 19. strike “UY’ immedl-
atel) after’ 3004’rr’.
AMENDMENT No 3409
iP rp se To clarify authority of Admiiiis.
t ator to t’stabl.sh treatment star,tjards
applicjble to land d:sposal practices)
P;ooosed be Mr CHAFEE (for himself
and Senators STSFThPD, RSNDO1J’H. and
MITC’MELL ),
On page 38. line 7, insert “(other than
paragraph (7)” immediately after “subsec-
tion”.
On page 42. line 19. insert ‘let els or” Im.
med.ate:y after “those”,
On pace 42. ltnes 19 to 22. strike “are flee.
essar - before such method or methods or
dsspo 5 a! of such hararcous aaste aould be
prc’ ectiue of hi:man health and the er i-
roraner.t” and insert in li u thereof “sub.
staiii:a!y d m’n sh the tOxiCity of the aaste
or sub tanLiai!y reduce the likelihood of ml.
gration o! hazardous constituents from the
aaete so that short-term and long-term
threats to human health and the ens iron-
menu a r rr,ir,lrni:t-d”.
On pate 42. l:nes 22 to 25. and on page 43,
lines I and 2 strike all after’ ens ironnient.”
and in crt in l,eu thereof the follotsing
“If such hazardous waste has been treated
to Lhe lese; Cr bt a rr.etl,od specified in reg-
u.acior.s prurn,.,ga (e under this paragraph,
such uaste or residue thereof shall not oe
subject to any prOhit’ tion promuIgat
unoer p.Iragraph (ii of this subsection and
ma ot’ d.ceosed of in a land disposal faci:i :
huch meets die requirements of thi sub-
title. Ar,s regu!alion promulgated under
this paragraph for a particular hazardous
waste shall become effective on the same
dale as any applicable prohibition prorr.t,’l.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
July 2.5, 1984
The Senator has asked for hearings
on this subject, and I will join In the
arrangement of this Inquiry. I also be-
l cve that e, and hopefully others,
should contact EPA and NRC to urge
- and help facilitate an end to the dif-
ference of opinion that exists.
Again. I commend the Senator from
Wyoming for his interest and his work
on this problem.
Mr. SIMPSON. I thank ‘the Senator
from West Virginia.
AMERDMENT NO. 5411
Mr. ABDNOR. 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 South Dakota (Mr.
ABDN0RJ (or himself. Mr. L zriautc. Mr.
DunExassom. and Mr. MIrciiEu., proposes
an amendment numbered 3417.
Mr. ABDNOR. Mr. President. I ask
unanunoias consent that the reading of.
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With.
out objection. it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
On page 93. after line 20. add the follow.
in nea section:
SECTION 30. Study of the problems associ-
ated with disposal of hazardous wastes gen-
erated by educational institutions.
(a) The Administrator of the Erivironrnen-
tal Protection Agency shall. In consultation
with the Secretary of Education, the States.
and appropriate educational associations,
conduct a comprehensive study of the prob-
lems associated with the accumulation, stor-
age and disposal of hazardous wastes from
educational Institutions. The study shall In-
elude an investigation of the feasibihL and
availability of environmentally sound meth-
ods for the treatment, storage or disposal of
hazardous waste from such Institutions,
taking into account the types and QuantiLles
of such waste which are generated by these
Institutions, and the non-profit nature of
these institutions.
(bi Not later than twehe months after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Ad-
ministrator shall submit a report to the
Congress containing the findings of the
study carried out under subsection (a).
(c) For purposes of this section—
(1) the term ‘-hazardous waste” means
hazardous waste which is listed or identified
under Section 3001 of the Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act:
(2) the term ‘educational Institution” in-
eludes, but shall not be limited to.
(A) secondary schools as defined in Sec-
tion 198(a)Cl of the Elementary and Sec-
ondary Education Act of 1965. and
(B) institutions of higher education as de-
fined in Section 1201(a) of the Higher Edu-
cat ion Act of 1965.
Mr. ABDNOR. Mr. President, on
behalf of myself. Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr.
DURENEERGER. and Mr. MITCHELL I
send an amendment to the desk,
I I. requires the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency to
conduct a study of the problems asso-
ciated with the disposal of hazardous
waste which Is generated by educa-
tional institutions.
Mr. President. I know of no problem
on either the majority or the minority
side with this amendment. I urge
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
adoption of this amendment which ad-
dresses the concerns expressed by sev-
eral educational associations, Includ-
ing the National Education Associa-
tion and the National PTA. ‘Addition-
ally, I am advised that the distin-
guished chairman of the House Sub-
committee on Commerce, Transporta-
tion, and Tourism. Mr. FI.oRxo. has ex-
pressed his desire to address this issue
In the upcoming conference on these
amendments to the Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act.
Mr. President, I trust this study will
help Congress and EPA ensure that
educational agencies which generate
hazardous wastes—often in very small
amounts—will be regulated in an ap-
propriate manner. I do not believe
that we wish to Impose an unwarrant-
ed degree of burden on these nonprof-
it institutions.
Mr. President, before the vote I ask
unanimous consent to add the names
of Senator DUBENBERGER and Senator
MITCHELL. who are not listed on my
amendment, as cosponsors of my
amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Rhode Island.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, this
has been submitted to us and It seems
like an excellent one on this side. We
support it.
We commend the distinguished Sen-
ator from South Dakota for his excel-
lence in pursuing this matter.
Mr. ABDNOR. I thank the Senator.
Mr. MITCHELL, Mr. President, this
amendment is acceptable.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
there further debate on the amend-
ment’ -
The question Is on agreeing to the
amendment of the Senator from
South Dakota.
The amendment (No. 3417) was
agreed to.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I move
to reconsider the vote ‘by which the
amendment was agreed to.
Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. President, I
move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to. -
REAUTHORIZATION 0? THE RESOURCE
CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT IRCEA)
Mr. PERCY. Mr. President, the gen-
eration of hazardous waste Is not
new—yet it has only been in the last
few decades, with the use of new In-
dustrial processes and the develop-
ment of synthetic materials, that we
have discovered how widespread the
harm to the public and the environ-
ment could be. Only very recently
have we discovered the problem to be
as large as it is.
New studies released this year by the
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) quadruple earlier estimates of
the amount of hazardous waste pro-
duced annually. The EPA now believes
that 150 million metric tons or 40 bil-
lion gallons of hazardous waste are
generated each year. This means that.
every year, close to one ton of hazard.
S 9197
ous waste Is added to the environment
for every person in the Nation.
People in my own State of Illinois
have particular reason to take the has.
ardous waste problem seriously. Be-
cause of our large industrial base, we,
along with five other Midwestern
States, produce more hazardous waste
than any other region in the country.
A day does not pass by that I do not
hear from a constituent in Illinois con-
cerned about a hazardous waste site in
the State.
In 1976, I supported the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, the
first major piece of legislation dealing
with hazardous waste disposal. The
bill established a cradle-to-grave
system for tracking hazardous waste,
from generation to final disposal. New
technical Information, and EPA’s ex-
perience to date In implementing the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act, make it clear that the law should
be strengthened. For instance, we are
just now coming to understand the
problems associated with disposing of
certain hazardous wastes in landfills.
That is why I am supporting the
passage of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act Amendments of 1983 (S. 757). The
bill reported by the Committee on En-
vironment and Public Works is not
perfect, but it goes far in addressing
many weaknesses of existing law. It
expands the number of generators cov-
ered by Federal law. It minimizes the
Iandfilling of liquId hazardous wastes
and establishes land disposal as the
least favored method for managing
hazardous waste. It provides a method
for listing such new types of hazard-
ous waste as dioxin and makes the de’
listing procedure more strlngent. It ad-
dresses the problem of the burning
and blending of fuels.
• I am particularly pleased that the
bill increases the penalties for crimi-
nal violations of hazardous waste laws.
At a hearing of the Permanent Sub-
committee on Investigations, of which
I am a member, It became clear that,
while we require every company and
individual to comply with the rules
and regulations established by the
EPA, this does not always occur. It
touches a raw nerve to hear about the
crimes the witnesses describt d—know-
ingly mixing toxic substances with
other sewage and selling the result as
fertilizer, which then contaminates
our farmland and our food—or mixing
oil tith flammable toxic substances
and resellir.g it to unsuspecting cus-
tomers. Some of the culprits may have
existing criminal records; others may
just be greedy businessmen In search
of an easy profit. They are all threats
to our society.
Proper disposal of hazardous waste
is sometimes costly. If penalties are
small and enforcement inadequate—
which may now be the case—some
companies may resort to midnight
dumping rather than proper hazard-
ous waste treatment. Under such cir-
-------
August 4, 1,988
The Commic .cion s work is respected
and responsible. Let us keep them in
busii ess. I urge my colleagues to vote
zye on H.R. 2230.i
The CHAIRMAN. Are there further
nendrnents to the bill?
If not, under the rule, the Commit-
tee rises.
Accordingly the Committee rose:
and the Speaker pro tem pore (Mr.
BROWN of California) having assumed
the chair. Mr. UIiAZ.L. Chairman of the
Conizmttee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union. reported that that
Cornrmttee. having had under consid-
eration the bill (H.P.. 2230) to amend
- . the Civil Rights Act of 1957 to extend
the life of the Civil Rights Cornm s-
sian. and for other purposes, pursuant
to House Resolution 273. he reported
the bill back to the House with sundry
amendments adopted by tne Commit-
tee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under
the rule, the previous question is or-
dered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any
amendment? If not, the Chait will put
them en gras.
The amendments were agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is o n the engrossment and
third reading of the .bill.
The biU was ordered to be engrossed
and read a third time, and was read
the third time.
MOTIO2 TO RECOMIT OPT , PY MR.
sn sn aRz?q1cER
Mr. SENSENBR NER Mr. Speak-
r. I offer a motion to recommit with
Lnstructions.
The SPEAKER pro tempore Is the
gentleman opposed to the bill?
Mr. SENSENBREN’NER. In its
present form. I am. Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro texnpore. The
Clerk will report the motion to recom-
mit.
The Clerk read as follot s’
Mr. SENS BR! ?( moses to recommit
the bill. E.R. 2230 to the Committee on the
Judiciary with instrucuons Uie Committee
report the bill back forthwith with an
amendment as follows:
“On pagc 2. after line 4, insert the follow-
lag alter “duty” on line 6 or the amendment
of Mr. Eow uuis of California. “incfficien-’
C T ... ,.
The SPEA pro tempore. Does
the gentleman desire recognition on
his motion?
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. I yield
back the balance of my tune. Mr.
Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. With.
Out objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is on the motion to recommit.
The motion to recommit was reject -
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
uestlon is on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on
he table.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
GENERAL LEAVE
Mr. EDWARDS of California. Mr.
Speaker, I ask unanimous consent. thnt
all Members may have 5 legislatr.’e
days in which to revise and exteid
their rezitarks t .n the bill just passed
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is
there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There ‘a as no objection.
HAZARDOUS WASTE CONTROL
AND ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 1983
Mr. BEILENSON. Mr. Speaker, by
direction of the Committee on Rules. I
call up House Resolution 21 . and ask
for its Immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as fol-
lows:
H. Rm. 2’74
Resolved,. That at any tune alter the acop-
tint, of this resolution the Speaker may,
pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule XtI!1. de’
dare the House resoi ed into the Comn,at-
tee of the Whole House on the State of tne
Union for the consideration of the bill (H.R.
2867) to amend the Solid Waste Dispcsal
Act to authorize appropriations (or the
fiscal years 1984 through 1986. and for
other purposes, and the first reading of tne
bill shall be dispensed with. Alter gen&al
debate, which shall be confined to tzie bill
and shall continue not to exceed one hour.
to be equally divided and controlled by the
chairman and ranking minority membe- of
the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
the bill shall be considered for amenament
under the five-minute rule. It shall be in
order to consider the amendment in the
nature of a subsutute recommended by the
Corr.mitt e on Energy and Commerce now
pr.nted in the blIl as an original bill for the
purpose of amenament under the f!te-
nunu:e rue. and all point.o of order agarnst
said st.bstitute for failure to compl with
tile pro isioris cit clause 5(a). rule CX1 are
hereby waived, At the conclusion of the con-
siderauon of the bill for amencment, the
Committee shall rise and report the bill to
the House with such amendments as may
haie been adopted, and any ,Member mai
demand a separate vote in the House on any
amendment adopted in the Committee 01
the Whole to the bill or to the committee
amendment in the nature of a substitute.
The previous question shall be consuderea as
ordered on the bill and amendments thereto
to final passage without rnlervenrng motion
except one motIon to recommit with or
without Instructions.
0 1310
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
gentleman (rota California (Mr. Bzn.-
ENsoN) is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. BEflENSON. Mr. Speaker, for
the purposes of debate only. I yield
the customary 30 mInutes to the gen-
tleman from Tennessee (Mr. Quirj,sr ),
pending which I yield myself such
time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker. House Resolution 214
provides for the consideration of H.P.,
2867. the Hazardous Waste Control
Enforcement Act of 1983. The resolu-
tion allows 1 hour of general debate.
to be equally divided and controlled by
the chairman and the ranking minor-
ity member of the Committee on
Erierg ,- and Commerce. This is an
open rule, allowing any germane
H 6499
amendment to be oflered under tr.e 5.
minute rule. At the conclusion of the
bill’s consideration, a motion to recoin.
nut tt:th or without instructions is ifl
order
The rule makes the committee
amendment in the nature of a substi-
tute to order as original text for
amendment purposes. The resolution
also wazves points of order untler
clause 5(A) of rule XXI aga nst Consid.
eration of tl - ’e substitute This largely
techn:ca] walv r was granted because
the nature of the Superfu:d author-
ized uncer the Comprehens: e Envi-
ronmental Response, Compensation,
and L;ability Act of 1980 invoites re-
programing of funds aireac:: appropri-
ated
Mr Speaker. H.P. 286 reauzhcrizes
ana amends the principal ia got em-
tog the diposal of solid and nazardous
waste—the Solid Waste Disposal Act
commonly known as the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act.
The bill authorizes $154 million in
fiscal year 1984. $162 million in fiscal
year and S168 million in fiscal year
1986. to carry out the responsibilities
under the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
The bill also amends the act to require
the EnvIronmental Protection Agency
to promulgate a variety of standards
within statutorily set deadlines. The
bill addresses several loopholes that
exist in the Resource Conservation
Recovery Act—specifically: Small
quantity generators: land disposal of
iiazadous waste; and, the triject on of
hazardous aste in or arou.-id drink:ng
ater suppltes. In addition. t .e bill
confers on ci:izer,s a limt:eci r:ghc to
sue to abate an lrn.minent and su stan-
tial endangerment. This right can only
be exerc:sed if the Administration fails
to file an actlon.
Mr. Speaker, this legislation was se-
quentially referred to the Judictary
Committee for its review of several
sections contained in the bill. As re-
ported from the Energy and Cam.
merce Committee, EPA Investigators
are granted the authority to: Carry
firearms: execute, and serve warrants,
summons and subperias; administer
oaths: and make arrests without war-
rents for offenses agaInst the United
States committed in their presence.
and for felonies if they have reason.
able grounds to believe that the
person to be arrested has committed
or is committing a felony. In addition,
the Administrator of the EPA is di-
rected to request the Justice Depart-
ment to file and represent the EPA in
civil enforcement actions under
RCRA. Once a referral has been made
by the Administrator, the Attorney
General would have 30 days to Initiate
action. If the Attorney General does
not do so, Administator can appoint
EPA attorneys to represent the
Agency in civil enforcement action.
The Judiciary Committee reported out
commttee amendments to szr..ke these
last mentioned sections of the legisla-
tion. I would like to point out that this
-------
H 6500
..opeti rule affords the Judiciary Ccrn-
rnittee the opportunity to offer the
anendment.s which were reported
the Judiciary Committee to
sections.
Speaker. H.R. 2867 addresses
ii important issues regarding the
sal and management of hazard-
ous wastes. I urge my colleagies to
adopt this open rule. House Resolu-
tion 274 so that the House may consid-
er the Haz2rdous Waste Control Act
of 1983.
Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker. I yield
myself as much tune as I may use.
(Mr. QUILLEN asked and was given
permission to revise arid extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. QU LEN. Mr. Speaker, this is a
controversial b ll, but I know of no
controversy on the rule itself.
I would like to point out that there
is a. pj-uv ,ion in the bill that regulates
small S nerators of waste. This provi-
sion could affect 1,400,000 small busi-
nesses, which produce a small amount
of waste far disposal. I think that pro-
vision is most bureaucratic. All it is
going to do is throw a bigger burden
on EPA and make them add mere
staff to do the investigation and en-
forcement of the act. Something
should give, arid an aniendment which,
will be offered shou.id be adopted to
l en that effect.
Mr Speaker. t e is also a section
in the bill which provides that any of-
or employee of EPA shall be an—
id to carry firea.rms. make ar-
serve warrants, and adrzmxster
We can imagine this horde of
— mployees going into place with
.wo gi on their :u s and
Ing our people- I tn derstand there is
going to be an amenc.me to lmi t
that, and I hope the dment .
passes.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, I know of no
opposition to the rule. We all know
that this act has to be extended, I
think In the end, after It is amended,
that the House will agree.
Mr. Speaker. I have no r uests for
time, and I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. B t. TNSON. Mr. Speaker, we
have no requests for tune, and I move
the previous question on the resoki-
tion.
The resolution was agreed to,
A motion to reconsider was laid on
Lhe table,
The SPEA R pro tenipore. Pursu-
ant to Souse Resolution 274 and rule
‘TT1• the Chair declares the House
in the Coinmitte.e of the Whole on the
State of the Union for the considera-
tion of the bill. aP., 2887.
11 TEZ cOMMIi ’ 0? Ti WIiOL&
Accordingly the House resolved
Itself Into the Committee of the
‘ House on the State of the
or the consideration of the bill
367). to amend the Solid Waste
- Act to authorize appropri-
for the fiscal years 1984
1.986, and for other purposes,
with Mr. BW4ARn 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-
perised with.
Under the rule, the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Ftoaio) will be rec-
ognized for 30 minutes, and the gentle-
man from New York (Mr. Lmrr) will be
reeogr’. zed for 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Pm.oarc .
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman . I yield
myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. FLORIO asked and was gwen
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, the
House today considers H,R. 2267. the
Hazardous ‘aste Control arid Ez’,-
orcement Act of 1G2 Thu bill, if en-
acted. would reauithorize and substan-
tially strengthen the Resource Conser-
vanon and Recovery Act (RCRA), the
statute which governs the treatment,
storage, transportation, and disposal
of hazardous wastes and whicn regu-
lates. to a large degree, the recycling
and disposal a-f solid wastes.
Last year, the House overwhelmmg-
ly passed an RCRA reauthr.zat on
bill. H.R. 6307, with many of the same
provisions contained in this yeaYs
measure. tinfortunatels-, the other
body. u ier considerable pressure
from the administration, failed to pass
any bill, depriving Congress of the
early opnorti.mity to correct the defi-
ciencies in the current law The casu-
alties of the years celny have been
the American peopie, who are afrt. d.
legiL at ip c.Lra d, of toxic con mi-
nation res t:.ng from roper disoos-
iii naz.arc s wazz.e
Hanric: before my subccznntee
botn last year and this year haie con-
fnmed that toxic waste threatens the
health of millions of Americans across
this country. Each year, we generate
about 250 million tons a! ham.rdous
waste—over 2.000 pounds lot every
man, woman, arid child in America.
The disposal of much of this waste is
um’egulated, Improperly disposed has-
ardous waste threatens the air, surface
water, and drinking water. The threat
to ground water is especially acute.
Americans depend upon ground water
for their drinking water, often using
wells without any treatment equip-
ment whatsoever. One EPA study of
underground drinking wat supplies
in 954 cities showed contaminated
water in almost 300 municipalities.
each with a population over 10,000.
Not surprisingly, one of the major
causes of contaminated ground water
is America’s continued reliance on
land disposal In landfills or In pits,
‘ponds, and lagoons, This is a short-
sighted approach since it is virtually
impossible to build a land disposal f a-
cility that can contain waste for as
long as that waste threatens public
health. My- subcommittee, during ex-
tensive hearings on March 22 and 24
of this year, learned that safer alter-
native forms of disposal are available
and their capacity is underutilized. We
.4tig’.1st 4, i98,
mu.st cr iz :lves to shlft disposal
from the -_. I :c ‘ther technologies.
It has ccne to light that many
land d. .ifaci1 ties do not even
comp y .. current law. A recent
EPA szuc - jun; that 139 of 171 sites
stucec - ‘ o ating P,cR.A regula-
tLor .s.
Recencl nuch attention has been
:c:usec C’ e S iperfund law and the
- was designed to solve,
r..zrnely --t zci do iith abandoned
‘is e :ae!lIries that threat-
en punir - Yet, without ii-
prcvemer- ii ‘ -ren: law, we are cre-
at:t; :c: v Superfund sites
tcday.
T e C o: Technology Assess-
met’.: hz .c: .rd that cleaning up a
lea n - :nd ccmpenan:g its
VICt i mS c- - c zt 10 to 100 times the
cost f ct. ,:-isin; of the waste sa.feiy.
Accord in EPA. the current cost of
d i spcs ir.2 -; hazarcouis waste in ac-
corucrice -..h RCPAis S 0 per ton,
O:i the a . r h:i id, tue cost of clean-
ing u, 1 —rcp —iy cirposed waste is
app rox tr - y 2.000 per ton. More
signiiicac::: once an a u:fer becomes
cocta-nin :‘ i c:- ha dous waste, it
can ‘ie ’er : cleaned up.
This bl ‘- I D :-elp pre ’.ent these ex-
penswe a as im the case of aqmfers
somnetime irreparable problems.
Among c :r tz.ings, H.R. 2867 will
oan soint r:’ the most toxic wastes—
sucn as t’ -ser c and cyanide—from
,ano dup i. in adci oz’., toe b 1l pro-
vi es for reater er fcrcemnent powers.
tn c_rtr . ::ffe— r : penalties for
thcse ‘ . - lihe:a:el ioia:e RCRA,
- ..he .i.me:umii puhuic oat
lost faith :-, th ariuui::; of its Govern-
menu ag ac.es to protect them from
h ardou! asZe. it i oractically ii-
pozsfcle - “ulId new I’.arardous waste
faciLties thout Lrlcurring tremen-
dous arir tten overwlieinurig public
oppcsiticr. y imprcv ng RCRA. we
can cegz resto:c the public trust
and get : with the task of proper
treatment, recycLing, and disposal.
Th.s is one of the most important.
envt-or.n ‘-n ‘.aI bills the House will
ccr.s acr = this Congress. It provides
proteczIo;. .,gai.nst improper disposal
of hazard uc waste that is desperately
needed, ard strengthens the ability of
EPA arid citizens to prohibit Improper
disposal. I urge my colleagues to sup-
port the 1.111.
0 1320
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
general support of H.R. 2867. the
Hazard Waste Control and iioree.
nient Act of 1983. which reauthorizes
the Resource Conservation and P,eeov-
ery Act. This measure substantially
strengthens RCRA in a number of Im-
portant respects.
CONGRESSiONAL ) .ECORD — HOUSE
-------
August 4, 198.S
While, on balance, I believe that
K.R. 2867 deserves the support of this
bcdy, there is one provision which in
view needs revision. That Is section
hich will. for the first time, bring
600.000 sinai ] businesses, such as
cleaners and service stations.
u. er the RCRA regulatory system..
The way section 3 Is cuuzeut!y drafted.
it carries with It the strong potential
to seriously disrupt the ongoing RCRA
regulatory program by forcing these
small businesses to comply with a con-
fusing and potentially unenforceable
system of regulations.
Therefore, Congressman Siwz.zr and
I wifi be offering an amendment to
section 3 of H.R. 2867 which adopts.
a’crd for word, a compromise agree-
ment arrived at earlier this year by
major environmental and smaLl buss-
ness organizations such as:
Ern-ironmental Defense Fund; Sierra
Club; National Audubon Society:
American Council on Education:
American Retail Federation: Chamber
of Commerce of the United States:
Furniture Manufacturers Associationsi
National Association of Manufactur-
arm National Oil Jobbers CounciL and
Printing Indust.ries of America
Our aeiendment does two things
FIrst. It removes the h .rnnw now con-
tamed In section 3 whIch requires
smafl generators to comply with regu-
lations desi ed for much larger, more
srinbjsticated generators if EPA fails
In a timely f hinn — Second. our
dment raises from 25 kilograms
zionth to 100 IdLigranis per month
-equirernent that small generators
_y transporters that their waste is
harardous.
Since the EPA rarely, if ever, meets
congressionally imposed deadlines.
why should small businesses be penal-
ized by EPAs Inefficiency? Our
amendment will Insure that these
small bus nesses are not unfairly pe-
nalized by having to comply with com-
plex and costly larger generator regu-
lations. At the same time, our amend-
ment requires that the smafl gener-
ator waste be manifested and sent to a
hazardous waste disposal facility If
EPA falls to act. Thus, our amend-
ment insures environmental protec-
tin without Inflicting undue punish-
merit on the small business communi-
ty-
On the notification provision. I be-
lieve that leaving the notification at
25 lcilogram.s per mouth presents a
greater environmental threat than
raising It to 100 kilograms per month..
Why? Simply because of this: When a
laridfifl discovers that the waste It Is
receiving is hazardous, I think the
!a.”id.fIll will turn it away at the gate. 11
there were thousands of permitted
--“-“Ie C or hazardous waste facilities
‘5 counr.ry. I do not think we
have a problem. But there are
few of these facilities and will
be even fewer in the future. So
Is a small businessman to do if
the nearest facility willing to take his
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
25-kilogram carton is several hundred
miles away in another State?
I hate to say It but I think I know
the answer, and the answer is a real
threat to public health.. The material
will go down a drain, off a bridge, or
into a field or a river. There a-ill be
massive resistance to the regulations
we are writing, And the threats to
public health and the environment
will grow, not diminish. And that we
should all be very concerned about
today.
So I urge your support for the
Sa’v-Lnrr amendment when it is of-
fered and urge your opposition to any
amendmenrs which may be offered to
It,
As I said earlier, I believe that, with
the exception of section 3. E.R. 2867 is
on balance a very worthwhile measure.
It provides important new sole-
guards f human health and the erivi-
ronment, incthding an agency review
of practices of burning and blendmg of
bazai-dous waste which may be dan-
gerous: a ban on the underground In-
jection of h . rdous waztes into or
above underground sources of drink-
ing wst and a prohibition on the
disposal of bulk liquith in landfills, an
extremely dangerous practice..
Furtber. E..R 2867 calls an the EPA
to being reviewing certain hazardous
wastes for the purpose of determining
wbethes they should be banned from
one or more methods of land disposal.
For too any years in this country, we
have permitted the practice of dump-
ing hazardous wastes the land to go
virtually unchecked. Even now that
the EPA is requiring landfills to be
lIned. 1 do not feel confident that
these liners will remain secure in the
long term. Therefore. I believe it Is ap-
propriat.e 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.
In sum. I would reiterate that, on’
balance, HR. 2867 Is worthy of this
House’s endorsement, However, It does
need to be changed in one important
respect—to section 3. I urge your sup-
port for the Sitn.ay-Latrr amendment
to section 3.
Mr. PLORIO. Mr. Ctmirnia.n. I yield
three minutes to the gentleman from
New Mexico (Mr. Rrcir EDsoN). a
memher of the subcommittee, who has
been very helpf.ul In the formation of
this bilL
(Mr. RICHARDSON asked and was
gtven permission to revise arid extend
his remarks.)
Mr. P.ICHARDSON. Mr. Chairman.
I rise in strong support of R. 2867,
the Eazardous Waste Control and En-
forcement Act of 1983. ThIS bill, of
which I am a cosponsor. would reau-
thorize the Resources Conservation
and Recovery Act of 1916 and in doing
so would close or reduce many of the
loopholes that exist In the current
law.
H 6301
Mr. Chairman, this bill is a product
of several days of hearings held in
March in the Commerce. Transporta-
tion and Tourism Subcommittee,
chaired by the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. FLoRio). At our hearings.
we learned that RCRA is not funcuon-
lug properly to carry out its stated
purpose of regulating hazardous waste
from the cradle to the grave, in fact,
RCR,A. as implemented by the Envi-
ronment.al Protection Agency, is leak-
ing like a sieve. EPA has dragged its
feet on the listing of hazardous wastes.
RCR.A was passed in 1976. yet it was
not until the week before our hearings
began that EPA began to list any
wastes. In the meantime, 7 years bad
passed. That is unconscionable.
The current law is full of structural
loopholes. Untreated hazardous
wastes, for example, may be dumped
into an industrial drain that is hooked
up to a municipal sewer system with-
out regard for whether the municipal
se e system has the technology to
treat the waste properly before they
dump the waste as sludge. There are
many more examples. Mr. Chairman.
but I will supply summarize by point-
ing out that a recent Office of Tech.
riology report on hazardous waste
found that 255 to 2 ’S million tons of
hazardous wastes are generated each
year but only 40 n flli in tons of that
wazte is currently subject to Federal
regulation.
The bill currently before the House
makes important progress in mating
RCRA what it should be: a compre-
hensive Federal regulatory concept
that really does control hazardous
wastes at every step in the industrial
process. This bill authorizes needed
funds so that EPA can carry out our
mandate. It prohibits Injection of haz-
ardous waste into underground
sources of druiking water. requires
EPA to issue regulations within 6
months to prohibit the landiffling of
noncontainerized wastes. The bill gives
EPA exclusive authority over civil en-
forcement actions when the Justice
Department fal]s to act, and the crimi-
nal penalties under RCRA have been
beefed up.
These are important improvements
‘of current law, Mr. Chairman, but the
most important provision in tb-Is bill is
the section dealing with small gener-
atom. Under cm’rent law, those gener-
ators producing 1.000 kilograms of
hazardous wastes each month are
exempt from regulation. This exemp-
tion, which is supposed to benefit
small business, Is actually open to
anyone. And large corporations are
lobbying just as hard as anyone to
keep the current exemption. The
point, however, Is not whether the
beneficiary Is large or small. The point
is tb-at the waste Is just as hazardous
and harmful If It Is generated at a rate
of 1.000 kilograms a month tb-an if it
was generated at 1 inifilon kilograms a
month.
-------
August 4, 1983
this serious and troublesome problem
in our environment.
Additionally we discovered, as we
went along, that we had to do some-
htng about the problem of existing
‘sposal sites containing numerous
id unknown hazardous materials.
It was not long after passage of our
act, for example, while disposing some
materials into a current site one of our
young citizens was overcome by fumes
and died as a result. This heightened
in the minds of our cftizens their anxi-
ety over hazardous waste disposal, and
I think in a large measure contributed
to our efforts to revise and improve
upon our act.
I want to compliment the chairman
of our subcommittee, the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. PLoRro) for h s
ongoing efforts to improve upon the
1976 actions of this Congress in adopt-
leg a comprehensive national system
for controlling hazardous wastes.
The effort has been ongoing. The
chairman has been relentless in his
pw’sult of making sure the act is com-
prehensive and covers all of the pi’ob-
lems that are envisioned by our citi-
zens. This current bill proposed by
him and the subcommittee is I think a
very far-reaching and very i mportant
step in ‘the direction of niakng sure
the national act works well and works
to complement the efforts of ocr var-
ious States In controlling this problem.
There are some areas in this. bill
today where we hope to improve upon
- acL The small generator problem
ie that we will address and which I
have other comments on.
v.111 be offering two adthzional
naments. one to deal with tne spe-
cial situation of mines and the disnosi-
tion of materials left over from the
Tnir lng process, mainly rock and other
materials, and the other to deal with
the. problem with impoundments of
liquid hazardous wastes in land dispos-
als, which is a ser ous one.
Under current conditions ae can
only find out that a leak is occurring
In one of these impoundments wben it
has impacted upon a water system or
when It has already done something
harmful to drinking water supplies.
The amendment I will propose will
require EPA to do a better Job of de-
tcrxxuni.ng when in fact those leaks
occur, before a water supply Is con-
taminated.
I again wish to add my voice in great
support for the action of the gentle-
man from New Jersey (Mr. Fi.oiuo)
and the subcommittee.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman. I yIeld 5
minutes to the gentleman from Penn-
sylvania (Mr._Rrz-rss.)
(Mr. RI L i a.z asked and wa,s given
pcrmisslori to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
0 1340
Rii wc, Mr. Chairman, I agree
the Resource Conservation Re-
y Act (RCRA) enacted In l! ’76 is
IL’ute need of revision, We need
ose existing oopholes In the law
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
in an effort to further protect the
American people, the environment;
and there are many provisions in E,R
2867 which address those concerns.
However, I do not agree with all the
means used to accomplish those ends.
As a member of the Coinnierce, Trans-
portation and Tourism Subcommittee
I have spent a fair amount of time on
the legislation.
I voted in subcommittee and in full
comn’..ittee to pass this legislation al-
though I did not have serious reserva-
tions which were expressed in the ml-
nox-ity news which accompanied the
bill. Let me outline a few. They are
founded on a basic concept. I feel
strongly that we should not here in
this Congress. mostly lawyers and poli-
t c:ans. be in the business of regula-
tion. Congress should pronde ade-
quate guidelines to the executive
branch to enable compliance with the
law, but Congress should not write de-
tailed instructions on how to comply
with the regulations in legislation.
The means of accomplishing the goals
set forth in the law should be left to
the experts.
Two examples of regulation via legis-
lation contained In 2867 are the pro’ii-
sions for small generators of hazard-
ous waste and the complete prob.ibi-
rico of land disposal of hazardous
waste. The small generators provision
in section 3 regulates by Imposing the
ful] weight of the RCI A program on
small companies if EPA falls to act
within a specified time,
The second example, land disposal
provision, section 5, presents provi-
sions which a ]tomaz.ically prohibit
waste from all forms of land disposal if
the Administrator has not made a neg-
ative finding, again within a certain
period of time.
I submit these are unprecedented
provisions and they set precedents of
requiring negative findings and they
contain absolute deadlines by which
the agency must act or prohibitions
take place by law.
This can be referred to as “regula-
tion by operation of law. The Interest
in promoting regulation statutorily LI
deadlines are missed has come about
because if and when Congress set im-
realistic guidelines In administrative
laws then we have in this body delayed
and delayed in so many different cases-
or even sometimes when the deadlines
were realistic and EPA failed to meet
them. The result was that affected In-
dustries, workers and products are
punished with a legislative require-
ment that lacks technical basis, when
the culprits might really be Congress
and/or EPA. I arm reminded of a simi-
lar approach to legislation which was
attempted, not successfully, In the last
Congress in the proposed amendment
to section 112 of the Clean Air Act
dealing with hazardous air pollutants.
It also required negative findings and
contained absolute deadlines by which
the agency had to act or prohibitions
would have taken place by operation
of law.
H 6503
The problem Is that science and the
development of a science base to these
regulations is not as neat and as tidy
as we politicians or lawyers would like
them to be,
The Admlrnstrator In this case was
required to determine whether or not
each of 37 listed pollutants was a bar-
zardons pollutant. There was a lot of
questions about where these 37 came
from.. If such a determination was not
made within a year. it was to be listed
as a hazardous waste by operation of
law and the full regulatory structure
would have to come into play. This
type of approach to legislation is dan-
gei-ous because politicians are a,ssum-
ing the role of technical and medical
scientific experts in drafting legisla-
t.ion. lnd I submit we in Congress do
not have the technical expertise to de-
clare such prohibitions merely because
EPA is missing an arbitrary deadline.
We have go to give the expert
agency guidelines and then flexibility
to adds’ess the important questions.
I do not feel the affected industries.
In any evenj . whatever we may think
about ithe performance of EPA. I do
not feel industries should be penalized
by effective prohibition when a techni-
cal basis is lacking because Congress
set ces’ am deadlines that EPA has not
met, ‘whether it is on a technical or
otherwise basis.
My colleagues, we have a chance in
these wel-y controversial subjects to
take a view which understands that we
are in the 20th century, we are very
much involved with the products- of
the 2C th century and we must not
turn ol! indj’ . idually, one by one, those
valves, one of them is a vital chemical
industry in this country, those valves
which provide the basis of our pros-
perrty
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I yjeki
3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Maryland (Ms. Mircutsici).
(Ms. MIKULSKI asked and was
given p’ermlssion to revise and extend
her remarks.)
Ms. MIKULSKL Thank you very
much. Mr. Chairrimu,
Mr. Chairman. I rise In support of
this leg:,islatian to reauthorize the Re-
soul-ce Recovery Act. I would like to
compliment the subcommittee chair-
man, the gentleman from New Jersey,
as well as the ranking minority, the
gentleman from New York, in arriving
at this bipartisan improvement of the
recovery resource le slation.
Ladies and gentleman of the House,
we often hear a lot about the horror
stories arid disasters that focus on the
inapprc priate disposal of hazardous
waste. We are all familiar with the
horror stories of the Love Canals and
the Times Beaches. We also then
know the enormous amount of re-
sources that goes Into Supex-fund
clearrupis when the law is either delib-
erately riot obeyed, or Ignored,
The resource recovery legislation is a
framework of prevention. It Is one of
the most important pieces of legisI.
ii
4
-------
H 6502
This bill takes an important step
toward eliminating that loophole by
reducing the level of generation for
exemption to 100 kilograms a
h. Those above the 100 kilogram
WOUld now be subject to regula-
Those generating more than 25
k.ilograms a month would have to pro-
vide certain labeling information for
offsite shipment and disposal.
Mr. Chairman. I do riot wish to sug-
gest that the bill would completely
eliminate hazardous wastes being
placed in landfills, where there is sub-
stantial likelihood of seepage into the
ground and possibly the groundwater
table. Certain types of hazardoui
wastes will still end up in landfills
under this new bill.
It is for this reason that I introduced
H.R 262’?, a bill to place a tax on haz-
a.rdous a.ste generators £0 provide a
direct economic incentive not to land-
fill the wastes, but rather to dispose of
the waste through proper and safe and
effective methods of Incineration or
chemical treatment. The bill would
also reauthorize and extend the life of
Superfund. something which will
clearly be needed if we do not close all
of the loopholes.
Let me conclude. Mr. Chairman, by
commending the gentleman from New
Jersey for his Important work in this
area, E.R. 2867 Is an important step in
the right direction, but I must tell my
wileagues that I believe we need to go
her In this area and I suspect we
nave to revisit this question in the
future. -
0 1330
Mr. L T. Mr. Chairman. I yield 3
minutes and 30 seconds to the gentle-
man from Indiana (Mr. Hitzii).
(Mr. HILER asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. HILEI . Mr. Chairman. I thank
the ranking minority member for
giving me this time.
Mr. Chairman. I rise In basic support
of the bill but in opposition to section
3. the small generator provisions as
they currently exist,
We are on the verge of promoting a
tremendous amount of regulation.
needless regulation, I think, on nearly
700,000 to 800,000 small businesses in
our country.
To give you an idea of who the type
of businesses are that would come
under the legislation as It Is currently
written, we would have garden supply
stores, paint stores. retail nursenes.
general merchandIse stores, auto-
motive dealers, grocery stores, motor-
cycle dealers, fuel and ice dealers, boat
dealers, hotels, motels, laundry, dry
cleaning and garment services, shoe
- -‘air and cleaning. electrical repair,
urns. newspaper or any printing
.stry, furniture, metal plating,
,ies.
you can see, it is a aide variety of
-ju, .zlesses that are going to be affect-
ed.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
Under the current small generator
provision as It stands in the bill.
within 18 months if EPA has not put
forth new regulatior,s for small gener-
ator businesses, the types of business-
es I just mentioned, they will come
under the full effect of RCRA, which
is where duPont and Dow and the
other major chemical companies fall,
all in an efforf to try to regulate an
extremely small percentage of the
hazardous wastes that are generated
on an annual basis.
I am in support of the Shelby-Lent
amendment and I think it is absolutely
necessary that we pass that amend-
ment so that we can give EPA time to
complete their survey of over 50.000
businesses so that they can put forth
regulations that will meet the needs of
the small business community.
I intend to offer an amendment to
the Shelby-Lent amendment which
would phase in the reporting require-
merits for those generators of hazard-
ous wastes between 100 kilograms arid
1.000 kilograms.
My amendment would say that 270
days after the bill becomes law, all
small business generators who gener-
ate between 250 and 1,000 kilograms
would begin to report their hazardous
wastes; and then 570 days after enact-
ment of the bill those generators who
generate between 100 kilograms and
250 kilograms would then have to
report.
What this amendment does is it
gives these paint stores and garden
supply stores and drug stores and serv-
ice stations time to understand what
the bill is so that they can meet the
law, which is what they all want to do.
Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield’
Mr. HIL.LER. I yield to the gentle-
man from California.
(Mr. THOMAS of California asked
and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr.
Chairman, I have great concerns
about HR. 2867.
I want to identify two provisions of
this bill that cause my constituents in
the land disposal business a great deal
of concern.
First, they are greatly disturbed by
the stringency of the section 5(d). The
maximum of 54 months given to EPA
for assessment of the list of over 500
suspected toxic materials creates a sig-
nificant amount of difficulty for the
U.S. waste disposal businesses.
Unless adjustments are made in this
legislation, EPA will be forced, under
5d), to ban land disposal of a large
number of materials about which little
Is known. The problem is one of tech-
nology. My con.stituents in.Ior-m me
that, as professionals, they do not be-
lieve EPA has the technology needed
to decide on the safety of the items on
this list. By forcing EPA to ban dispos-
al because the Agency cannot meet Its
burden of proof under the deadlines
by H.R. 2867, Congress would be guar-
anteeing that the industries which
August 4, 198.3
produce these materials must be shut
down because alternative disposal
technologies are either Prohibitively
expensive or nonexistent.
The second problem stems from the
statutory requirements on land dispos-
al that are found in section 21(k)(1),
Examining these provisions, one finds
that Congress would be requiring land
disposal operations to be double-Lined,
My constituents note that such proce-
dures may be desirable In the Eastern
United States, but that conditions may
justify other, more cost-effective con-
trol techniques in other parts of the
country. For example, one disposal
site in my district sits 600 feet above
the water table in a region that re-
ceives minute amounts of rainfall each
year. Given the possibility of estab-
lishing sound control criteria witnout
requiring EPA to be inflexible on the
strategies it must adopt, it would seem
better to grant EPA the discretion to
adjust disposal site requirements ac-
cording to the facts and circumstances
governing individual sites. More liii-
portant, giving EPA clear discretion
would allow the agency to encourage
new, superior control techniques that
could be utilized as technology devel-
ops. There Is no reason to discourage
new control techniques by identifying
one approach as superior as a matter
of law.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield
3 minutes and 30 seconds to the gen-
tleman from Louisiana (Mr. T*uzx ).
Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, 1975
was an important year in my uSe. It
was the year that I became chairman
of the natural resources committee in
the Louisiana State Legislature. It was
also a year as chairman of that com-
mittee when we made a startling dis-
covery in Louisiana. It was that our
State was a net Importer of hazardous
wastes.
We also learned why that cond.tion
existed. It existed because our State
was absent any regulations whatsoever
governing the diposition and handling,
storage and disposal of hazardous
wastes within our borders.
In 1975 we commissioned a special
subcommittee chaired by a State rep-
resentative, Mannie Fernandez of St.
Bernard Parish in Louisiana, and that
subcommittee produced one of the
first pieces of hazardous waste legisla-
tion I think this country saw.
In 1975 we adopted in Louisiana a
comprehensive piece of legislation gov-
erning the handling, storage, disposal
of hazardous wastes from the’ gener-
ator through transportation, eventual-
ly to the disposal site.
Since 1975 we have experienced
problems with that act. We have had
to come back and amend It and revise
it again in drder to close loopholes and
to correct deficiencies in the act.
One of the glaring deficiencies we
noticed was that In fact the Nation
needed a comprehensive natior.al pro-
gram that would complement each in-
dividual State’s effort in controlling
-------
H 6506
posal. the goal of naitaging “asic nt an
propriaxe rnar.rier m the first instance, and
the pe stence. toncny. obthty. and pro-
pemity to o* ’,n- uiate of such hazardous
was .es and Lhe.Lz toxic consw.uenrs.
th reviews and deternuna.tioris are
be completed within 4” years of en-
ment.
£1 the Administrator of EPA fails to
make a deternsrnat on on any waste
within the specified time, such waste
shall automatically be prohibited from
all means of land disposal. The provi-
sion also allows the Administrator to
delay the effective date of any prohibi-
tion for up to 42 months in the event
adequate capaccy for alternative man-
agement iS flOt available. In the co.se of
proh rntions for which an effective
date is not extended due to lack of al-
ternanve capacity, the Administrator
may grant a case-by-case variance for
up to 6 months, renewable twice, upon
a showing by the generator of severe
economic hardship.
Mr. Chairman, I would submit this
phased reduction in tradthonal land
disposal practi is entirely defensible
and should be supported by every
Member of this body. In fact, there
are many of ns, Including myself., who
would have argued for an even shorter
timeframe—as was prcp ed in ER.
1700. While I am willmg to yield to the
jud ient of. my cofleagues on the
ergy and Comn,e ’ce mmlttee
that this provision will a mpbsh our
common objective. I do not believe
that the House should accept any
akenieg of this schedule wheat it
Lferences this bUl with the one
rig developed in the other body.
urther. I will be offeru”.g, at the ap-
proprmae time, an amendment that is
des ed to address my concerns ‘z•ith
this section of the bill. C-eueraily, the
amendment would further limit the
discretion of the Adxnzri ator in cer-
tain instances and statutorily prohibit
the placement of liquid hazardous
waste into certain land facilities. Spe-
cifically. the amendment wou1d
First, ban, not later than February
1. 19E4. the placement of containerized
liquid 7 rdous waste into salt dome
formations, underground mines or
caves. The amendment would aLso pro-
hibit, by February 1. 1984. the place-
ment n( bulk or noucontainerized
liquid hazardous waste into unlined
landfills, salt dome forntatioris, under-
ground nunes and caves. I beLieve tins
action, which is consistent with cur-
rent EPA policy, should be statutorily
proscribed by Corigress
Second. ban, effecti 6 months
after the date of enactment, the place-
ment of bulk or noricorit,arnerized
liquid hazardous waste into any land-
filL EPA has admitted that all land-
fills leak. This provision would allow
generators and/or disposers of these
‘iastes 6 months to clean ‘all Iiqwd,s
‘of their existing land5.lls
trd, require the Administrator of
to develop regulations m.inuniz-
to the extent technologically lea-
the placement of containerized
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOCSE
liquid hazardous waste. This provision
is Intended to allow the continued
landflillrxg, until such time as alterna-
tive management capacity is available,
of small containers, commonly re-
fei-red to as lab packs, that result from
ongoing research at medical and other
educational institutions:
Fourth, ban. effective 1 year after
enactrriertt, the placement of any
liquid, whether hazardous or- not, into
a landfill containing hazardous ‘waste.
It makes no sense for EPA or the Con-
gress to oetermme that the placement
of liquid hazardous waste into landfills
is a bad practice because of the prob-
lems associated with the migration of
such wastes and not to proscribe the
commingling of solid hazardous waste
with otner liquids: and
Fifth. establtsh a timef-arne for the
issuance of final perm:ts to existing in.
term status surface impoundments.
Such final permits most contain a
compliance schedule for the retrofit-
ting of those impoundments that do
not meet the double liner standard es-
tabhshed for new surface impound-
ments by section 21 of the reported
bill.
The amendment also prohibits the
placement of nocliqusd hazardous
waste to salt dome formations, Un-
derround mines cr caves until the Ad-
ininisnator of EPA issues permit
standards for the placement of these
hazarcious wastes into such facilities
and the facility receives a permit pur-
siiant to such standards.
- As I indicated, current EPA policy
generally prohibits the pacernent of
built hazardous waste ccnta.n.ng ,ree
liquids into unlined andillis and con-
tainerized’ bulk waste cocc.t.ining free
liquids into any lane ’ - Thus, the
amendment stipulates that until EPA
has tune to promuiate final tegula-
tioxis defining the term liquid hazard-
ous waste. -as set forth in the amend-
ment, or promulgate final regulations
miz irni7ing the placement dl contain-
erized liquid hazardous waste in land-
fills, the existing regulations will
remain in effect. -
Mn Chairman, as I indicated, the
Committee reported bill also contains
a ini n by ahich the Admuinis.
trator of EPA can decide to allow spe-
cific liquid hazardous waste to be
placed in certain land disposal facili-
ties. It is my understanding that UIé
intent of the Committee was not to
allow the Administrator to overturn
its determin.a’-’on concerning Liquids in
landfills. I certainly share that belief
and have included In my amendment a
provision that. would so restrict the
Administrators discretion.
Mr. Chairu-ran, there are three other
signrfcant provisions to the amend-
ment that I will offer that should be
noted at this time. They are:
First, a provision that a’dl restrict
the ability of Government z,gencies to
obtain the so.called capacity waiver
for a.lternative waste management to a
period no longer than 18 months.
rather than the 42 months allowed
August 4, 1.98.3
pri ate industry. Unanimous tesurno-
n received by our comnuttee &nducates
the appropriateness of having the Fed-
eral Government lead the way to the
full utilization of alternative waste
management pract:ces
Second. a provision that requires
EPA to promulgate an- emission moni-
toring and control regulations aithuii 2
years for land storage, treatment and
disposal facilitiec and
Third, require Federal agencies.
within 1 year, to undertake annual in-
spections of their land stora ’e. treat-
ment and disposal facilities,
This provision has been carefully
drafted to till in the remaining gaps of
a generally comorehensive bin that
a-Ui, as I have previously i.ndrcated, go
a very lor.g way to insuring t! e long-
term health of the American people
and their envirorunent.
The issue of hazardous waste dispos-
al is one that should be, as we are
doing today, fully and openly deoated
in the House. It is certainly well past
the time that all of us should come to
urrder and the extent of th& probiem
we have created by the exlsttr,g out-of-
sight, ont-of-mrr,d philosophy with re-
spect to liquid hazardous -iste. We
must understand that if it is ‘i? ‘- fl pos-
sible, and it is. to destroy or t r-it the
hazardous waste that we are generat-
ing, we must do so.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman. I yield 3
minutes to the gentleman frum Ala-
bama (Mr. Sanz .a ).
(Mr. SHELEY asked and a g-ven
perrnmss:ori to revise and extena his re-
marks)
Mr. SHELBY M:’. Chairman, many
Members of this bony and I agree that
we sbou d do the best we possibi u.n
to protect ‘ nnrr. n health and thi t...ivi-
ronment from the potential —
agemnent of hazardous a ir e.s. We
should approach this task, he eve:, in
a fair-minded and evenfland, fashion
bearing in mtnd that ovei-re .z,ation LU
seri’es the interests of all parties in-
volved—from those who re -ulate. to
those who are regulated, to the pubiic
at large.
I have several concerns abnut ER.
2867. section 3, relating to generators’
of small quantities of hazardc .: w’ ste.
The gentleman from New York,. (Mr.
Lz r. and I will be offering an amend-
rnent to section 3 of the bill ‘.lesigned
to bring ‘into better balance Lhc neecs
of envu-onmental protection and the
need to maintain a reasonabir regula-
tory and financial cost to trim all busi-
ness,
Mr. Chairman, our Nations small
businesses are the backbone of Ameri-
can society: they are the source of the
greatest number of jobs and they az-c
the key to a sustained econoramc recov-
ery. In this light, it is vital that ae
look ver closely at the potenttal nega-
tive ramnificat,ons on sma.ll hus ness
embod!ed in the Dill before us. It has
been estimated that some 1.4 todlion
small businesses wi t J be affecied by
new requirements In ER. 2867 which
-------
Augyist 4, 198S
slgnificantl ’ alter their liabilities for
the proper disposal of hazardous
waste: 1.4 mIllion small businesses—
this is a terrific number of enterprises
to bring under the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency’s police power. Are
EPA’s limited resources adequate to
meet the demands of such increased
regulatory powers? Are small business-
es. inducing dry clear.ers. auto deal-
ers. schooLs, hosp:tals. and harduare
stores prepared to meet thier responsi-
bilities for managing this waste? Can
they devote an adeqiate amount of
their productive time to compliance
measures without ncurring extensive
losses? WIll they even be educated as
to what the new Fe erai requiremen s
are, at what stage dramaticaily new
and onerous Federal reg j1at ons will
apply to them? All of these questions
must be answered with a resounding
yes before provisions as called for In
the F’lorio ball should stand as written.
We do not feel that these questions
have been appropriately dealt with
and we feel that section 3 as an over-
zealous attempt to regulate businesses
who produce at most 7 percent of the
total quantity of hazardous waste gen-
erated in this country. The EPA even
questIons their own ability to regulate
such generators under RCRA and is
currently conducting a study of alter-
native methods for regulating small
quantity generators of hazardous
waste—due to be completed in June
1985
A?the time Mr. Lccr and I offer our
amendment, I will delve further into
the merits of our amendment to sec-
tion 3 regarding small generators.
Until that time, I urge my colleagues
to remember that In pursuing our
worthy goal of managing hazardous
waste—overregulation of enterprises
which caruiot physically bear the bur-
dens may result In no regulation at all.
The balance must be struck, or we all
suffer the consequences.
0 1400
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. I yield
2 minutes to the gentleman from Ne-
braska (Mr. DAirs).
Mr. DAUB. I appreciate the distin-
guished and capable chairman of the
subcommittee for yielding, and I
would like to take this time to enter
into a colloquy with the gentleman.
My State has urged me to ask for
the committee’s defimtion of “equiva-
lency” as utilized In section 3006(b) uf
the Resource Conservation and Recov-
ery Act. -
It Is my understanding that this
yardstick by which States are judged
to be eligible for authorization is cur-
rently being interpreted by the Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency as being
synonymous with “identical.”
Since little report language on floor
bate addressed this important crTte-
.n during the 1976 and 1980 consid-
‘ition of this act, I am interested in
. e chairman’s interpretation.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, the
gentleman’s Inquiry is certainly wel-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
come. I. too, have deLcted confusion
surrounding this word. As you know,
regardless of which word Congress
might have chosen to gage a State’s
program against the Federal program
for authorization, a word with no con-
gressional guidance could be misunder-
stood.
For that reason, I would like to take
a few moments to clarify the commit-
tee s intent.
States offer a unique set of experi-
ences in the practical administration
of this Nation’s hazardous waste pro.
gro.m. As evidenced by amendments
under consideration today, State pro-
grams have evolved over the years into
more sophisticated programs in re-
spon.se to issues and problems raised
by hands-on experience. For example.
20 out of 45 States recently surveyed
already regulate small generators
more stringently than EPA
Moreover, California’s ban on land
disposal of certain chemicals serves as
a ptototype for this bill.
This realm of experience should be
brought to bear in the hazardous
waste program under subtitle C of
RCRA. rather than removed from its
consaderat on.
Mr. DAUB. I have an additional
question: Row is the administration to
forge unique State program elements
with the Federal program?
Mr. FLORIO. State provisions can
differ as long as they address the Fed-
eral program requirements, arid in-
clude State requirements at least as
stringent as thcse of the Federal pro-
gram. State requirements shoulJ be
equivalent in overall effect to the Fed-
eral program, without the necessity of
showing point-by-point equivalence.
Certainly, the committee agrees,
with the Environmental Protection
Agency’s statement in the Final Au-
thorization Guidance Manual released
June 10, 1963, that secfion 3006(b)
does not mean that States have to im-
plement their programs In exactly the
same way that EPA does, It was not
Congress intent to require States to
Zerox the Federal programs. -
Mr. DAUB. Mr. Chairman, the gen-
tienian’s ar.swers are most appreciated
because I had spent, in my own right,
2 years on the environmental control
board in our State, and having dealt
with this very difficult problem of de-
ciding how our State could be in corn-
pliance has been a problem. I appreci-
ate the defirution that the record will
now show on this point, and I want to
again express my appreciation to the
chairman of the subcommittee for his
colloquy. -
Mr. FLORIO. I thank the gentle-
man, -
Mr. Chairman. I yield 2 minutes to
the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Szi-
BERLING .
(Mr. SEIBERLLNG asked and was
given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. SEIBERUNG. Mr. Chairman, I
want to commend the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Ftoaxo), for the corn-
H 6507
mitment and energy he has devoted to
getting this bill before the House
today. I think there is general agree-
ment that illegal and unregulated haz-
ardous waste disposal Is one of the
most serious and shccking threats
which exist to the puolic health today.
and without’ the leadersnip of the gen-
tleman from New Jersey. ae would not
have a Federal program to address
this nation- ide problem.
I want to also thank the gentleman
far taking the time last year to spend
a day rn Ohio and examine a novel sit-
uation where FF0 Industries proposed
to convert a 2.000-foot deep abandoned
limestone mane as a permarien: dispos-
al site and also a temporary storage
site for hazardous wastes.
With respect to the legi iacaon
before us today, is it the ncent of the
committee to the maximum 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 yeaid, the gentleman is
correct. That is the clear intent of this
legislation so as to discourage inappro-
priate disposal means. At the site the
gentleman refers to. we saw a good ex
ample of a hybrid system that com-
bined storage and disposal for which
there Is really no clear regulatorj
system: so the gentleman is correct.
Circumstances such as the proposed
underground mine site require s ec fic
standards for facility operation and re-
strictrons on the types of wastes that
can,be placed In the facility.
Mr. SE EBLIN0. I support the
legislation before the House today, but
I would li. e to address another issue
to the gentleman from New Jersey
with respect to the types of disposal
which would be regulated by this legis-
latIon under RCRA. By land disposal
did the committee intend to include
any and all forms of land..disposal, u .-
cluding disposal In underground mines
and caverns?
Mrr FLORIO. If the gentleman
would yield, the clear intent of this
legislation is to apply the full arr .y of
land disposal regulation to all forms
of land disposal, including disposal in
deep mine sites and natural under-
ground caves and caverns.
Mr. SEIBERLINO. So If any such
facility were to be developed, to be eli-
gible for a permit as a land disposal fa-
cility, would it have to comply with all
the public health and safety regula-
tions. including the regulations which
govern the method of disposal and
which limit the types of waste which
could be disposed of in such an under.
ground land disposal facility’
Mr. FLORIC. The gentleman is cor-
rect.
Mr. SEIBERUNG. I thank the gen
cleman for clarifying this point.
Ms. LENT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3
minutes to the gentleman from North
Carolina (Mr. BROYXILL), the distin-
-------
_ p— ,
h onUS
guisnezi rani.jng inor ty member of
tne Ccmm t:ee on Energy and Com-
me me.
(Mx. 0Y rTL asked and was
- gv en permiss cn to rev se and extend
.i remarks.)
ir. BROY flLL I appreciate the
t1eciazi y ei±ng.
.Ir. Cha.u-u-.an. there are several pro-
v sions of this bill which I think couid
be amended to mace more workable.
One of the concerns I have in a bill of
this kind is that we are throwing too
much at the agency all at once, and we
have aLready found that in the reorga-
nlzation of the agency, that we are
finding problems with not only carry-
ing out the’ laws that are on the books
but in doing this in a time.iy fashion. It
does concern e tha. we may be, here
a;t.. . :hrouing far more on their reg-
uia:ory table.
Ore of the sectlon.s of the bill that I
ba e concerns about is section 3. This
would for the first, time bring bun-
d -eds of thousands of businesses.
such as retail stores and service sta-
tions. under the wa.ste mnn gernent
system. I do not think anyone can
argue with the fact that we are going
to have t’ do this eventually. I think
hat the concern is. is that we are
forcing small businesses In a very
short ttm to comply with a very con-
fusing sten of regulations. We are
also forcing the agency to take from
its valuable resoi.irces those resources
r.ecessary o revise the reguia.tions tr
trite the regulations that will be
; icabie to these hundreds of thou-
10.5 OZ i 5 s,
we dc ow for a fact that 95
:cent of t e was:c :s being generat-
b Iar:e esses. and we are
oaiy taikjig about 5 perent of the
waste in this part:cuiar circimistance.
I would hope that the House would
us in supporting an amendment
that is going to be offered by the gen-
Uean from Alabama (Mr. Szr)
and the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Lr ’r). This compromise amend-
ment maintains the essential envu-on-
mental elements of a sound ha rdous
waste program. It would regulate
small business, but it would do so in a
far more reasonable way.
There are other concerns I have
about this bill. I understand that the
gentleman from New York (Mr. FISB)
has addressed some of these concerns.
One is the enforcement authority
under RCRA which has been granted
to the Environmental Protection
Agency. Tbe Department of Justice is
now the central litigation agency for
the U.S. Government, and I feel that
they should maintain the primary liti-
gation authority under RCRA.
The bill conta.ins some unrealistic
deadI nes about a-liich I am concerned
th2.t EPA is not going to be able to
meet. There are many technical me-
uirements. There is a great deal of
- e required for adequate public par-
auon.. My unoerstanding is that, a
ipromnue will be offered here, and I
uld urge its adoption.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
I wouid ltKe to coin: out for my col-
les.g,.ies some of the provisions of the
bill which are objectionable and in
need of amendment.
Most sigmhcant of these is section 3
of the biil which a-ill, for the first
lime, bring hundreds of thousands of
small businesses, such as retail stores
and service stations, under the Federal
hazardous waste management system.
Unfortunately. ‘as currently drafted.
section 3 contains the su-ong potential
to seriously disrupt the ongoing RCRA
program as wail as the affairs of these
small businesses by forcing them to
comply with a confusing, unenforcea-
ble system of regulations. -
I urge my colleagues to join me in
supporting an amendment. to this sec-
tion of the bill wnicn will be offered
by tr. S iv and !U. Lzim. This
compromise a endrnent , which
worked out between representatives
from small business and natlonal end-
ronmectal organizarioris protects
small businesses from overly burden-
some Federal regulation, while main-
taining the essential environmental
elements of a sound hazardous waste
program. It is crucial that businesses
regulated under this amendment be
treated consistently therefore, I also
urge you to reject the Florio amend-
men; to Shelby-Lent.. lowering notth-
cation requiremenr.s.
A second area of the hifl which must
be amended concerns enforcement of
RCRA. There are two objectionable
provisions in this area: The first
grants enforcement autziorzty under
RCP.a .o tne Environmental Protec-
zion Agency. The Depa. .- ent 01 Jus-
is tne central litigation agency for
the US.- Government and mould
rriai.ntain pr-.m.ary litiganon authority
under P.C IA. Both EPA and DOJ
oppose this shift of authority. The
second provides EPA criminal investi-
gators a-th full law enforcement au-
thority including the use of aenpons
and arrest powers, EPA does not want
these acoitiocal authorities for its in-
vesttgat.ors and l’ias stated that no
need for these authorities has been
demor. ated at this time. I urge my
colleagues to support an amendment
which will be offered by maembexs of
the Juthcmry Committee which will
delete these two prov ions.
Pinally. the bill contains several us-
realistic des.dllnes which EPA cannot
p sibIy meet because of the complex
Issues involved, technical reqw.re-
merits, arid the time required for ade-
quate public participation. I under-
stand that the two primary SPOnSOrS
of the bill, Mr. Ft.oazo arid Mr. Lmrr,
have been working with EPA on this
issue arid an amendment extending
deadlines will be offered, I commend
the two gentlemen for taking this
action.
Mr. Chairman, these arid other con-
cerns have been raised by the adrainis-
tratlon in its statement of policy on
K.R.. 2867. I urge my colleagues to sup-
port the amendments I have discussed
and I hope that the other concerns
Augu.st - . 198J
ra sea by the an ,-nir.t tration can be re-
solved itt conference.
0 1410
Mr. L ,ORIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield
3 minu:cs to the gentleman from Mis-
sour (Mr. Simt , on)
Mr. S ELTON. I thank the gentle
man for yielding this time to me.
Mr. Chairman, I wish to engage in a
colloquy a ith the gentleman from
New Jersey I wish to ask two ques-
tioris.
One of my greatest concerns in sec-
tion 3 has been the impact this legisla-
tion could hare on small busin es. As
the gentleman from New Jersey is
au-are, the Subcommittee on Energy.
Environment arid Safety of the maU
Bumess Cominit:ee, which I chair,
held a hearing on this subject a little
over a week ago. The testimony indi-
cated that in most cases and for most
purposes, the - so-called Shelby-Lent
amendment satisfied small businesses
who are waling to do more titan their
share to protect the environment. One
industry, however, would be particu-
larly hard tnt by the possible interpre-
tation of the legislation before us. I
refer the gentleman to the testimony
presented to the subcommittee by the
Cleaning and Laundry Association Ex-
ecut ves Association and the Laundry
Cleaning Council.
They provided us with a clear and
convincing statistical analysis showing
that dryclea.ning pricing Is price .in-
elzst c. By this I mean that the con-
sumer cocside.-z drycleaning a lusury
and has in the past cutback on dry-
cleaning use as the pm-ice rises. The
drycleaners, z r:ch average acout six
employees per ;l .anL cannot then
simply pass along the increased cosI. of
waste disposal to their customers.
They also provided testimony which -
tends to prove that their costs win in-
crease from $4,000 to $‘,OOO to dispose
of 2 to 3 gallons of actual hazardous
material per yenr, This is because the
bulk of their waste is inert and only a
small portion is sctuajjy hazardous.
Some of the waste, for example, is con-
tamed in a cartridge filter, similar to
an oil filter in a car. If this weight is
included, then I fear that we are plan-
ing a heavy, and perhaps unjustifiable
burden on the drycleaners.
I would, therefore ask the gentle-
man, what is the basis for regulatory
action here?
Mr. FLORIO , If the gentleman will
yield to me. It is my understanding
that EPA does not Include the weight
of the container hi determining the
total weight of a generator’s monthly
hazardous waste production. Thus, in
the industry you mentioned, the
weight of the drycleamung solvent
rather than the cartridge, container,
or other inert, nonhazaz’dous material
would determine whether section 3 of
the bill would apply to an individual
drycleaner.
I would add further that we should
direct t,he Administrator to pay partic-
-------
August 4, 1.988
ular attention to the drycleantng ln•
dustry to see what the concentrations
of the liquid hazardous waste really
and to take those concentrations
account in his recommendation
regulation.
£ would also note that Lu a direc ve
suggested and forwarded to rue from
the Neighborhood Cleaners Associ-
a on , Mr. Seitz. the director, indicates
that -
Although o orgarnmt an supports i e
ShelbqfLent amendment to section 1 c i
your oil!, we also support yotw amendment
reqoiring gener rs who produce mrd-
ous waste in q tIues of more than 25 kflo-
per ao provide nouse that
their ‘saste is hazardous.
Mr. SK TON. Thider section 5.
wastes. such as the parc which is used
extensively throughout .the dry ‘clean-
ing Industry, must In all probability be
disposed of in an EPA approved incin-
erator. Since this compound is a halo-
gecated organic, the banning of land
disposal would take place in ‘1.2
months. Eowever, the Administrator
would be empowered to exempt the
drycleaners solvents for up to 42
months more if an alte.tive to land
disposal did not exist: The drycleanem
testllied before the subcommittee I
chair that the United States currently
does not have the capacity to inciner-
ate this waste-in anything close--to a
cost-effective manner: This is especial-
true for those dry cleaning estab-
pients which, because of transpor-
costs do not have access to any
! oved alternative. I ask the gentle-
n if the Intent of the exemption au-
thority which his bill confers on the
Administrator is broad enough, so that
sitimuocs. such as this one which will
be createdior the dr lceT ’lfns, can be
dealt with In other words, can EPA be
flexible enough to take in to account
the particuisr problems of an indus-
try. such as drycleaners, while still
pedorming their job to prote the
pith ic hes hii? ‘ . -
- Mr. PW IO. In response to the
gentlemen’s question, the answer Is
What we call “California wastes” In
other words,’ those wastes which are
extremely hasardous a id are banned
law in California would be banned
by the law we now have under consid-
eration In 12 months after Its enact-
ment. Halogenated organics constitute
one of the waste streams on the Ca].!-
fotnta list. The gentleman Is correct,
however, that the Administrator Is
given the flexibility to delay this ban
for up to 42 months so that he can
take L ii to account the realistic needs
Cf the industry and the capacity avail-
able for alternative disposaL In the
ce of the drycleaners. I would recoin-
- id that the Administrator pay spe-
attention to the ability o these
businesses to meet the require-
s of the law and to take cogni-
zance of their efforts to solve their
waste problems. -
‘(Mr. P!LORIO asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, I yield
myself 1 additional minute to ask a
question of the subcommittee, the
gentleman from New Jersey. I was in-
terested In the colloquy that just took
place with respect to container weight.
that container weight was not luchid-
in the weighing or the total consul-
esatinci of the pac e.
Can I ask the genth n n if he has
checked wiLls EPA on that. be- ise It
is my understanding that in many in-
stan the weight of the ca ”n? rIer is
___ in the overall weight determi-
nation for purposes of regulation.
,tr. r. _____ if the
gentleman will yield, EPA currently
permits the placement on landfills of
specially designed lab packs containing
liquid waste. These are the contamers
In tbiz particul field,.
The geatleman s precious question
was with regard to containem in the
drycleanmg field. it is my ‘understand-
ing that the pokey of .EP,A is not to
compute the weight of ‘the nonhazar-
dous container in evaluating whether
someone qualifies niadt rtb.e U gen-
erator exemption.. .. - -
Mr. LENT. It is true that in some in-
stances, is it not, the weight ci the
container is included in the determina-
tion of the overall weight? It is indis-
tinguishable torn the - h rdous
waste.
Mr. FLORIO. If the gentleman
would yield, it is our understanding
that EPA has a policy of not -comput-
ing the weight of containers if the con-
tainers themselves are on , rdous.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, I would
like to inqwre how much tIme I have
xem ining on this sine. --
- The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from New York (Mr. Lm ’r) has5
minutes remaining, and the gentleman
from i ew Jersey (Mr. Fi.oazo) has 3
minutes rem lning.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, I yield
myself such time as I snag consume to
engage in a coflociuy with the d stin-
guished ribalrrnsn of the suhoommt-
tee ontlie issue of lab packs..
I have -a concern kbout the Impact of
the prohililtioris on land disposal In
seedon ‘5 on the ability of colleges. uru-
• versltles, and high schools to dispose
of laboratory wastes. Would these lab-
oratories be allowed to continue to use
lab packs? Laboratories produce small
quantities of many different wastes.
The recycling or treatment options for
these laboratory wastes are uniquely
limited by both their diversity and the
very small volumes of each type of
waste produced. Many laboratories
place their waste in lab packs which
are then sent to secure landfilLs. A lab
pack, as you know, consists of small
containers of wastes, both solid and
liquid, packed inside a sealed large
drum with su ,fficsent compatible absor-
bent material to absorb any spills re-
suiting from breakage of the inside
containers. -
H 6509
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. if the
gentleman ‘will yield, despite a general
restriction on land disposal of contain-
erizeri liquid hazardous waste now in
effect. EPA currently permits the
placement in Landfills of specially de
signed lab packs containing liquid
wastes, Including those that contain
hazardous waste in the categories ape-
mflcally restricted under section 5(c)
and 5(d of our bill. For those wastes
spccifically reat’lcted, the Adznlnistra-
tar is directed under section -5(e) to set
the F’ff ve date for prohibition of
land disposal on the basis of the earli-
est date .on ‘which adequate capacity
br alternative management will be
available. Because lab packs may con-
-tam many different kinds of waste,
the availability of alternatives is
uniquely dependent upon an infra-
structure to manage such a large di-
versity of waste, such as bulk handling
and transfer facilities. To extend the
effective date beyond the 12-mouth
period after enactment which is speci-
fied in section 5(c)421, the Administra-
tor may make a finding that the exist-
ing system or Infrastructure does not
allow ‘for alternative management of
those wastes. Lu any case, the effective
date carmot be later than a total of 54
months after enactment of this act.
Mr. LENT. i fr. Chairman, ‘I am also
concerned that section lO4Lc)(3lLClIi-
of Superfund Is being interpreted to
mean that a 50-percent ‘cost share is
required for the following types of re-
leases: Discharging PCB’s along road.
ways in North Caroilna accumulation
of PCB’s or heavy metals In harbors;
‘arid State and Federal permitted re-
‘eases of heavy metals and other has-
‘ardous substances into streams, overs
r other bodies-o(,,water. As-one-of-the--
primary authors of Superfimd. can the
genUema from.. Itew’ Jersey clarify
the application of section
104(c)(3)(C)I1 under these types of cir-
‘ cumatances?
Mr. F’LORIO. If the gentlemarrwm
yield further, section 104(c)(3XCffa
Intent is that the required State cost
share is 10 percent for those lacillties
‘which were owned by the State bnt-
not osed primarily for treatment, stor-
age, or disposal. When State land is
contaminated with hazardous ma 5erl-
als, and that land was primarily used
‘for treatment, storage, or disposal, the
cost share .ls 50 percent. The fact that
the State permitted a specific release
to water does not make that facility a
50-percent State cost share. State-
owned land that was not permitted to
accept hazardous substances such as
municipal landfills, but which is never-
thelma creating an environmental
problem, still requires a 50-percent
State cost share.
Mr. LENT. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Chairman. I have no further re-
quests for time, and I yield back tt -
balance of my time. -
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. I yield
1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Tennessee (Mrs. LLOTDI. ,, - - -
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
H 6510
(Mrs. LLOYD asked and was given
permission to revise and extend her re-
marks)
— Mrs. LLOYD. I thank the gentleman
ir yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I have a question for
e chairman of the committee, and I
wOUld like to commend him for bring-
ing this legislation to the floor. I do
rise in support of this legislation, and
also the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
EDGAR).
I would like to ask the chairman a
question. Is it the Intent of this legis-
lation that Federal agencies comply
with the regu.latioris enforced by this
legislation?
Mr. FLORIQ. If the gentlewoman
will yield, the answer is unequivocally
yes.
Mrs. LLOYD. I thank the gentleman
for his comment.
Mrs. LLOYD. Mr. Chairman, one of
the more insidious problems with toxic
waste disposal is the potential for con-
tamination of important underground
aquifers which are used by many
people for drinking water, irrigation,
and for other domestic purposes,
In my own district in Tennessee. a.s
In many other locations throughout
our nation, we have a potential prob-
lem from groundwater contamination
that should be studied and evaluated
In terms of the impact on public
health and safety. My Subcommittee
on Energy Research and Production
-eceritly held a hearing near the site
the Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Tennessee. This hearing brought at-
mon to potential groundwater con-
tarr.zriation problems from the use of
out-rnoded oollution control measures
at the Oak Ridge compleL We will
make recommendations regarding
these problems in a forthcoming
report which I hope will be considered
by the committee in September,
If we need national policies to ad-
dress this potential pollution problem.
then this groundwater commission will
help In recommending them to the
Congress and the administration. I,
therefore, urge my colleagues to Join
me In supporting this amendment.
D 1420
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs.
LLOYD) kiss expired.
The gentleman from New Jersey
Mr. FLoRlo) has 2 minutes remaining.
• Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman. I rise
today to support H.R. 2867. reauthor-
Izing the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act. I rise today to support a
bill this country needs to insure pro-
tection of our en ’ironrnenit, This bill
contains tough language for hazardous
waste generators and disposers, This
language is needed and I urge my col-
eagues to support H.R. 2867 and
any weakening amendment to
much needed bill.
s a member of the Engery and
rimnerce Committee. 1 have worked
closely with the sponsor of this legisla-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
tion, my friend and colleague, JIM
FL0RI0, to establish ‘a comprehensive
system to address the hazardous waste
problem, The Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act forced many firms
to dIspose of their waste In an appro-
priate mariner, ending some of the
hazardous waste disposal practices
which endanger many communities.
This body should be proud to have en-
arted such tough and enlightened leg.
isiation on hazardous waste before the
issue was on page 1 of the newspapers,
RCRA established a cradle-to-grave
system for hazardous waste generated
by large producers. This law has
pushed many generators to incorpo-
rate the envtrorlmental and social cost
of hazardous uaste into their business
decisions. As a result, we have seen
more firms doing just what the law
states: Recovering and’ conserving
their hazai-d us resources. Conse-
quently, our disposal problem is not as
severe as it would be if this body had
not had the oresight to enact RCRA.
My cofleagu from New Jersey de-
serves some redlt for that success,
and today we consider legislation
which completes the cradle-to-grave
system. We si-•’uld pass this legislation
and show the - e fortitude and fore-
sight this body exercised when passing
RCRA.
Many Members have expressed con-
cern about the prov isions affecting
small waste generators, These groups
contend that tne provisions of H.R.
2867 present an unfair burden on
these small quant ty generators, The
prcblemn with this argument is that
hazardou. wastes nn be dangerous in
any amount, and to 1.000 kilograms
represents a sun antial threat to
people as well :.s ‘rie environment. I
support the t . .e to include gener-
ators of wast between 100 and 1,000
kilograms under the purview of
RCRA. I want to call the attention of
my colleagu s to the carefully con-
structed lang-. age of the bill. By giving
the EPA l i months to draft regula-
tions unIqueiy appropriate to small
quantity ge.”.er tors, the bill recog-
ruzes the pocition of small quantity
generators and defers to the EPA on
the proper re uletions. The bill does.
however, not just depend on the good
will of the EPA to promulgate such,
regulations. By subjecting small quan-
tity generators to the tough provisions
affecting large generators, If there are
no EPA regul :,ons in 2 years, there is
clear incentive (or small quantity gen-
erators and EP . to expeditiously draft
small quantity generator regulatio ,
In plain temis. the carrot and stick
system is estactished. matching incen-
tives with interest.
Mr. Chairman, there are two other
Important pr ’isions I want to call to
the attention of my colleagues. The
first is the pro’. ‘.s ons on enforcement.
In mar13’ conversations with chemical
and waste generators, the one thing I
hear repeatec is that we do not need
flea’ laws: we just need better enforce-
ment.
Aztgust , 1983
Well. I cannot say that I agree with
them on the former point, but the ar-
gument that we need better enforce-
ment cannot be denied. EPA needs in-
creased enforcement powers, and EPA
needs the ability to take offenders to
court if the Justice Department does
not act quickly. It is important to keep
some enforcement power with the
EPA, for frequently the Justice De-
partment has been slow or unwilling
to act. In those circumstances, the
EPA, if the case warrants it. can move
forward on their own with a suit.
We should not tie the hands of the
EPA on enforcement. As a member of
the Energy and Commerce Subcoci-
caittee on Oversight and Investiga-
tions. I have witnessed claims that
EPA would act on a suit, but they
cannot without the Justice Depart-
ment. Some of the cynical among us
may suggest that the Justice Depart-
ment presented a convenient answer
for EPA employees. I will not draw
any such conclusions. I do know that
the next time the situation arises, this
provision will enable this Member to
ask. Where is the suit?
In addition, the bill grants EPA em-
ployees investigative and enforcement
powers. If we expect EPA to be thor-
ough and diligent in enforcing the
provisons of RCR.A, as I am confident
all Members do, then we must give
EPA employees the powers to carry
out their charge. To deny investigators
the power to execute and serve war-
rants or summons, or to make arrests
for offenses is a disservice to the EPA
employees and creates illusory en
forcernent at best.
The other important provision of
the bill I want to comment on, Mr.
Chairman, is the restncnor.s on land
disposal of hazardous waste. Landfills,
waste piles, and impoundment ponds
are ugly monuments to our Inefficient,
if not dangerous handling of hazard-
ous wastes. In a nation with as much
open land as we enjoy, I think many
people believe that all you have to do
Is take your trash a few miles out into
the country and dump it on some
empty lot, and It won’t hurt anybody.
Incredibly enough, dumping hazard.
ous substances in open pits or in some
empty fields has been the accep
practice of industry for the past 100
years. This practice has produced sites
which emit such a stench rio one will
move near, and produced leaks into
water supplies no one will drink, The
Original RCRA language moved us
toward more environmentally sound
disposal of hazardous wastes. But It
did not go all the way. This bill will
close many of the loopholes left open
by RCR/t arid will begin pha.seout
dumping in landfill and waste piles,
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I want
to urge my colleagues in the strongest
terms to support this legislation and
oppose any weakening amendments.
This bill is a matter of the utmost iii’.
gency, and we must see that hazardous
wastes no longer threaten our citizens,
-------
August 4, 1983
As a member of the Energy and Corn.
merce Subcommittee on Oversight and
investigations, I was involved in a
most thorough investigation of the
EPA and their mismanagement of the
hazardous wa.ste program, I n.m con-
vinced 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.
This bill closes many of the loopholes
in RCRA. and gives EPA the power to
enforce the law we have passed. This
bill deserres the support of my col-
leagues for It offers enforcement of
present law and tough restrictions on
tmsourid dumping. The past several
months have demonstrated to all
Memoers the seriousness of our haz-
-dous waste rob1ern and the poten-
tial for abuse. I inge y colleagues to
support this bill and make a.strong
statement for control of hazardous
wastes.o
0 Mr. FRENZEL. Mr. Chatrman. can-
tinued reliance on land disposal of
hazardous wastes is a dangerous policy
which threatens the health of Aniei-i-
cans now and in the future.
As more and more contaminated
sites are being dIscovered and people
are displaced from hometowns such as
Times Beach and Love Canal, the
mandate for legislative and adminis-
trat ve action to set forth guidelines
for the disposal of h rdous wastes
-becomes clearer and clearer. ‘
ER. 2867, the Banazdous Waste
Control and i!orcement ct of 1983,
outlines a plan for mzna.gmg the coun-
try’s 250 miii.ion tons of hazardous
waste generazed each year. In my
jUdgment, the oW is a good start, ‘out
there are some provisions with which £
take issue.
Dry cleaners, gas stations, hcsp tals.
painters, and other ‘ rm il genemtors of
wastes will be severely burdened and
perhaps put out of business If we allow
them to be suo ected to the regula-
tions now governing larger generators
just because the EPA failed to write
the small generator reguis.tions within
the statutory deadline. The h snnw
provision should be removed from sec-
tion 3 of the bill. The Shelby-Lent
dyrte it would provide for the re-
movs,l of the hammer. It should be
supported.
Requiring notification manifests for
25 kilogramJrnonth producers while
the regulation requirement threshold
m 100 kilogram/month is confusing
a nd burdersome The enforceability of
the manifest provision is questionable.
Representatives Sicv ,s and Lsa-i-
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 kilogramlrnonth.
Mr. Chairznan. the thembers of the
House Energy and Commerce Commit-
tee arid the House Judiciary Commit
tee are to be commended for their
work on this bLil. P ardous waste
mariagemen4 is not an issue that Is
easily resolved.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
I intend to support the bill, whether
or not it is improved by the Shelby-
Lent amendment, This bill is too im-
portant arid too long overdue. It must
be passed now..
• Mr. FAUNTROY. I rise in support
of ER. 2867, the EIaz.ardous Waste
Control and Enforcement Act of 1983.
ER,. 2867 reauthorizes and ennances
the Resource Conservation and Reco-
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 aU Americans in our
great Nation. Each year. our industries
generate approxiir.asely 250 million
tons of hazardous waste, Alarmingly,
the disposal of a great proportion of
this waste is. unregulated,
Mr. Chairman, on December 16,
1982, my colleague, the distinguished
chairman of the Subcommittee on
Commerce, Transportation, and Tour-
ism of the Committee on iergy and
Commerce, and I requested the Genei--
al Accounting Office to determ.ine the
correlation between the location of
h rdous waste landfills and the
racial and economic status of the sur-
rounding communities.
We asked them to focus their review
on offsite landfills—those not part of
or co guous to an industrial facth-
ty—found in the etght Southeastern
States comprising the Envu-onrnental
Pro ction Agency’s Region I V. We
also asked for information on site loca-
tion standai-di, ‘public parclctpation re-
quirernenis Eu !’ sitIng offsate hazardous
waste landfills, and EPA’s class permit
pi-uposal wmch addresses the perintt-
ting, s a grc p, kss complex waste
‘management facilities such as storage
tanks
The General Amounting Office
found that: -
There are four offslte hazardous waste
landfills in Region IV’s eight States. Iacks
make up the ma)or ty of the population In
three of the four communities where the
landfills are located, At least 26 percent of
the population in all four commwiales have
income below the poverty level snd qiost of
this population is bIac -
This study conuii-med our suspicion
that those who are both poor and
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 whtch
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 ci hazardous
waste inappropriate.
No one—black, white, Hispanic, or
Native American. poor or affluent—
should be forced to l:re 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 available and
their capacity is being under’,irilized.
Incentives must be created to shift dis-
posal from the land to other technol-
ogies, Most disturbing is the finding
that uiany land disposal facthues do
not even comply with current law. A
current EPA study found that 109 of
171 sites examined were in violation of
RCRA regulations.
M.r. Chairman, HR. 2867 is deserv-
ing of support because It conveys a
clear and unambiguous message to the
regulated community and the Environ.
mental Protection Agency Reliance
on land disposal of hazardous waste
has resulted in an unacceptable risk to
huri i health and the environment,”
Under this legislation, land disposal -
would be authorized only as a last
resort and only under conditions
which would insure the full protection
of human health and the environ-
rnent,
I urge support of this most Impor-
tant iegislation,o
• Mr. UDALL Mr. Chairman, I appre-
ciate the cooperation of the geritlenmn
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Enc z) and
the manager of the bill, the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mn FtoRlo in con-
sidering my concerns with respect to
the National Groundwater Commis-
sion-
The amendment -which Mr. Eu
sponsored wouid establish a National
Groundwater Comrni ion. The Coin-
mission is assigned the duty of exam-
in tg 21 speciftc matters reia,tmg to
ground water quality and qtmntixy
wh cb are listed in subsection 26(o).
The Commiss on is to report to the
Presi ient and each House of Congress
its findings arid recocamendst ans for
legislation and administrative actions
no later than October 30, 1985.
Sante of the matters which the Cam-
mission will address, and relating to
which it may be expected to recom-
mend legislation, are matters which
are within.the legislative jurisdiction
of the Committee on Interior and In-
sular Affairs,
For example, the Comrn, .sion is to
assess generally the engineering arid
technological capability to recharge
aquifers.
.1 would call your attention to the
fa that the House has r - zis.iy
passed and sect to the Senate ER, 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, HR. 71 was re-
ported to the House by the Committee
on interior arid Insular Affairs,
The Comm ttee on Interior and Li-
sular Aulatrs has jurisdict ou over in-
terstate compacts relating to water.
The Commission will have the duty to
assess the use and effectiveness of m-
Lerstate compacts to address ground
water protection from contaminatiOnS
Water research progracis have t!’5
tionally been within the legislative W .
risdiction of the Comnm.ittee on Iziteii-
-------
H 6514
funds to implement solid wa.s e man-
agement plar.s and conduct Inventories
of active and abandoned open land-
tins, among other activities.
I want to commend all involved for
he bipartisan effort reflected in this
.mendmerit. As’ I understand it, there
no opposition to the amendment
rots either side of the aisle.
This Nation has long realized the
problems we face in adcressing land-
fills and identifying abandoned dump-
sites. Furthermore, for decades we
have been trying to establish healthier
and sanitary methods for disposing of
municipal wastes. While the solutions
to these problems must be developed
by individual communities, Congress
has previously established these coci-
m .tnities right Co depend on frnanc ai
and technical assistance from the Fed-
era.L Goverrunent.
Funding was authorized’ and appro-
pr.ated under RCRA for this purpose
in fiscal year 1978 through fiscal year
1982. In 1982. money was zeroed out of
the budget. The Association of State
and Territorial Waste Management
omciaJ.s conducted a survey in May of
1983 to determine the impact of this
my... The States have simply not been
tole to meet the funding gap.
in MIchigan. 150 or more Illegal
cin s continue to operate. National.
‘y. 3.000 such’ dumps are estimated to
be in operation. Their Itr ipilcations for
our future are disturbing. Of the origi.
nal 115 interim priority Superfund
sites. 65 were open landfills—precisely
he focus of this funding.
U we fad to address sites now, the
st of cleaning them up later will be
astrcnomica1. The health cor.se-
qu ices will be overwhelm.ing. We do
ha an alternative, and a cost effec-
- ‘c alternative, to poisoned ground
It is contained in subtitle D.
The amenamerit is supported by the
Association of State and Territorial
Sol Id Waste Management Officials.
the Sierra Club. the Natural e-
sources Defense Council. the Environ-
mental Defense Fund, and the Nation-
al Audubon Society.
Mr. FL 1 ORIO. Mr. Chairman. will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. BONIOR of Michigan. I yield to
my colleague, the gentleman from
New Jersey.
Mr. FLOPJO. Mr. Chairman. I
would Just commend the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. BoNroR). He obvi-
ousiy recognizes the Important inter-
elationship between solid waste and
hazardous waste. A good percentage of
the hazardous waste dump sites that
are Superurid sites were formerly
solid ‘aaste sites.
So the gentleman’s amendment is
‘ery good. I support It. and I believe
the rrunority does also.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, if the
ge nlemari :ll yield, the minority has
‘‘oked at this amendznenL, and we
c’ no objection to It.
he CH.A M.AN. The questIon Is on
arnendrner.t offered by the gentle-
from ichigan (M.r. Bosros)
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHA1RM J . Are there any
other amendments to section 2?
If not, the Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
S ALX., 0M TXTY CI3I ATOR WASTS
Sac. 3. SectIon 3001 Is amended by adding
the following at the end thereof.
“(di SM.aU, Quairr:v QL’l roa W*rn.—
(1) Elfectwe twenty-four months from the
date of enactment of the Razardous.Waste
Control and Enforcement Act of 1983. haz-
ardous waste generat.ed by any generator
generating a tor.aI quantity of hazardous
waste greater than one hundred kilogramr.s
but less than one thousand kilograms
during a calendar month shall be subject to
the same requiremeocs under this subtitle
as hazardous waste produced by a generator
in amounts greater than one thousand kilo-
grams during a calendar month. until the
standards referred to in paragraph (2) of
this subsection have become effective.
“(2) Not later than eighteen months after
the date of enactment of the Hazardous
Waste Control and Enforcement Act of
1983. the AdnimLstrator shall promulgate
standards under seeslons 3001, 3002. 3003.
and 3004 for hazardous waste generated by
a generator generating a total quantity of
hazardous waste greater than one hundred
kilograms but ‘tess than one thousand kilo-
grams during a calendar month. Except as
provided In paragraph (3). such standards.
including standards applicable to the legiti-
mate use, reuse. recycling, and reclamation
of such wastes, may vary from the stand-
aids applicabie to larger quantity gener-
ators but must be sufficient to protect
human health and the environment.
“(3) Standards promulgated under para-
graph (2) shall at a minimum provide that—
“(A) ons’.te storage of ha.zardous waste
generated by a generator generating a total
quantity of hazardous waste greater than
one hundred ktlog’racis but less than one
thousand kilograms during a calencaz-
monto, may occur for up to one hundred
and eighty days without the requirement of
a permit.
“(B) all other treatment. storage, or dis-
posal of hazardous wastes generated by
such generators shall occur at a facility with
a permit under this subtitle; and
“(C) any hazaroous waste g nerated by
such generators which is shipped off the
premises on which such waste is generated.
shall be accompanied by a manifest, except
that the specific requirements for entries on’
such manifest may vary from those applica-
ble to the manifest required for larger qua,p-
tlty generators.
“(4) No later than ninety days after.the
enactment of the Hazardous Waste Control
and Enforcement Act o’l 1983. any hazard-
ous waste which is part of a total. quantity’
- generated by a generator generating greater
than twenty-five kilograms but less than
one thouaa.nd kilograms during one calendar
month and which is s.iipped off the prem’
Ises on ahich such waste Is generated shall
be accompanied by a copy of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency Uzuforrn hazard-
ous waste manifest form signed by the gen-
erator. This form shall contain the follow-
ing information:
“(Al the name and address of the gener-
ator of the waste;
“(B) the United States Department of
Transportation description of the waste, in.
cluding the proper shipping name, hazard
class, and identification number (UN/NA).
if appLicable:
“(C) the number and type of containers,
“(D) the quantity of waste being trans-
ported.
Augusc 4, 128i
U subparagraph CS) is not applicable, in lieu
of the description referred to in such sub-
paragraph (B). the form shall contain the
Environmental Protection Agency idenWi-
cation number, or a getsrtc description of
the waste, or a debcription of the aaste by
hazardous waste characteristic. Additional
requirements related to the manifest shall
apply only If determined necessary by the
Administrator to protect human health and
the environment.
“(5) Except as provided in pv’sraphs U)
through (4). nothing in this subsection snail
be construed to affect or impair the validity
of regulations of the Adzunistrator proc uJ-
rated prior to the cate of enactment of the
Solid Waste D spo a1 Act Amendments of
1983 ‘xlth respect to hazareous waste gener
ated by generators of less than one thou-
sand kilograzr,s per calendar month.
“(6) The Administrator may promulgate
regulations under thts subtitle which esLao
lish spec al standards for, or exempt from -
regulations, nazardous wastes ah ch are
generated by any generator who coes not
generate more than one hundred kilograms
of hazardous waste p r calendar month,
“(7) Nothing In this subsection shall be
construed to affect or impair the validity of
regulations promulgated by the Secretary of
Transportation pursuant to the Hazarcous
Materials Transportation Act,
“(8) Not withstanding the last sentence
of section 3b10(b). no regulation promulgat-
ed by the A dministraLor as provided in this
subsection may take efect before the date
twenty-four months after the date of the
enactment of this siib,cserinn”
Mr. SHELBY (during the reading),
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
sent that section 3 be considered as
read and printed in the RECORD.
The CHAIRM. _N. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Alabamai
There was not objecton.
AMnfD 7 OFTtni ST ‘SR, S )tE )aY
Mr. SHELBY. Mr. Chairman. I offer
an amenoment to section 3, and I a.i k
unanimous consent that the amend-
ment be considered as read and print-
ed in the Recoan.
The CHAIRMAN. Ls there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Alabama?
There was no objection.
The text of the amendment is as fol-
lows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Sinn.sy Page
5. strike out line 20 and all that follows
down through lIne 11 on page 9 and substi-
tute-
5MALi, QUAN2’ZTY G (saATQR WaSi ’s
Sec. 3 Section 3001 of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act is amended by adding the fol-
lowing at the end thereof.
id) SM,uj. QVANrIrv GErcEsaTog Wss t —
(1) Effective 30 months from the date of en-
aetmeni of the Hazardous Waste Control
and Enforcement Act of 1983. unless the Ad-
ministrator promulgates standards as pro-
vided in paragraph (2) of this subsection
prior to such date. hazardous aaste gerierat-
ed by any generator in a total quar.tity
greater than one-hundred kilograms but tess
than one’thousand kilograms during a cal-
endar month shall be subject to the follow-
ing requirement until the standards re-
ferred to in paragraph (2) of this subsection
have become effective
“(A) In addition to the notice require-
merits of paragraph (4) of this subsection
the information provided in the form shall
-------
.4ug’. st 4, 198 .?
Lnclude the ,ame of the waste .sporters
and the name and adc.-e s of the facility
to rec ve the waste.
(B) except as prov ided i paragr p
13XA) of thig sub ecuori. the treatm t.
storage or dtspo l of such waste shall oceur
at a facility with intertr status or a permit
under this subtiJe:
“CC) generato of sucn waste shall file
niariliest exception report , s required of
generators procuctng greater &mouflt.s of
hazazdous waste per ont except that
such repor .g shall be filed by January 31,
for any waste shipmeflt Occurrix g in the last
half of the preceding calendar year, and by
July 31, for any aaate shipment occurrtng in
the firs’. half of the calendar yea.- and
“CD) generate of sucn waste shall recasn
for three years a copy of the manliest
s gnad by the desigzated facility that has
e c:ved the ‘caste.
in this pra’raph shall be con.
struec as a determina oc of the stand , ’
appropr ate under pa agraph (2).
“C2) Not later than e gh teen z onths after
:r e Qate of e tment of the I
Waste Control and Elicrcernent Act of
1983, the Adrnmi,m ’ r shall promulgate
saanda.i ’ under sections 3002. 3003, and
3004 for hazardous wa.r e generat.e(j by a
generator in a total quant:ty of hazardous
waste greater than one-hundred kflograrns
but less than one-thousand blogram
during a calendar mon Except as pro.
sided In paragraph (3) of this subs ct on,
such standards, lnc’udh’g standards applica-
ble to the kg1tLmat use, reuse, recycLng,
and reelaznat(nn of sucis waste . may ary
from the standarda applicable to Larger
cuanejey generators but must be sufficient
to protect human health and the ensiron-
ment.
“(3) 3tandar promulgated paragraph (2)
shall at a im provide thai’
“(A) or. sie Storage of haza,-dous ‘asic
generated by a generator ger.erat g a total
quant;:y of hazardous ‘laste greater than
cn luncred ilograrns z’it ess than one.
inausano kljorran’ ,s during .a ca1 ncta ’
or.th , may occur for up to 180 days with-
out the r’ uu’ement of a permjt
“13) alt other treatment, storage, or dls .
posai of hazardous wastes genera by
such generators shall ooc r at a !actllty w tS
interim status or a permit under this subti-
tle, amid
“(C) any nazardous waste generated by
such generators which is stupped off the
premises on ahich such ‘aste is generated.
ahail be accompaj-ijed by a tma.rtlfest. except
that the specific requlremen for entries on
such man ;fest may vary from those applica-
ble to the manliest required for larger quan-
tity generators.
“(4) No later than 180 days alter the en-
actmem” of the Hazardous Wasta Control
snçi Enforcement Act of 1983. any hazard.
ous agate ahich La part of a total Quantity
generated by a generator generating greater
Lhan 100 t1logrants but less than one-thou.
sand kilograms during one calendar month
Lid ahich La shipped off the premL es on
ahich such waste is generated shall be ac
companled by a copy of the EPA Urilforn,
!tazardcus Waste Manifest form signed by
thr generator. This form shall contain the
following information;
‘CM the name and address of the genes.
ator of the v . ..te,
“(B) the Department of Transportation
d.icrlptlon of the waste.. includ ing the
proper shIpping name, hazard class, and
ioer,tlfication number (UN/NA), If applica.
ble.
“(C) the number and type of conta iners;
ID) Inc quantity of ‘aste being trans.
Ortr ’d.
If rubparag , , (B) is not applicable, In lieu
of the descnption referred to in sucr sub.
paragraph (B). the form snail contain the
E ’ironinentaI Protec on Agency identifl.
caton number, or a generic description of
the ‘aste. or a aescription of the waste by
hazardous waste characte - ttc Adaitional
requiremnenu related to the manifest form
sha l l apply only Lf determined necessary by
the Admljustrator to protect hu .ina, ’ health
and the envtrbpn en
“(3) Except as provided in paragi’apns (1)
through (4k. nothing in this subsectiofl shall
be construed to affect or impair zne validity
of regtilauo of the Administrator prornul.
gated prior to the date of enactment of e
Hazardous Waste Control and En!orcemenc
Act of 1983 wIth respect to hazardous waste
generated by generato of less tnan oneS
thousand k1logrs , per calendar month.
“(6) the Aam Lat;ator may promu:;a:e
regsijatio under this sunt:: e an estao
lLth special standards for, or exempt from
regujatio , hazardous a sates a hich are
generated by any generator ‘cho noes cot
generate more than cne.nuir ded hilograms
of hazardous waste per calendar mon :i.
“(7) Nothing In this Sunsecrion Sra.l .e
Construed to affect or Lmcpajr the ta1:c :y of
regWaLio promulgated by the Secreiarj of
Tr po iion pursuant to the Hazardous
Matenais Trar.spor .ation Act.
“(3) The last sentence of section 3010(b)
shall not apply to reg’,iJa: ons promulgated
under this section,
“(9) The Admj jtrator shall undertake
activities to miami and educate the aaste
generato of their resporlsiotlities under
this section during the period witctn thirty
montbs after the enar.tmpnt of this sectton
to help assure Comnplianrp
- (Mr. ShELBy asked and c -ts iv ri
permission to revise and e:cr,erd his re-
marks.)
Mr. SEELBY. Mr. Cha:’n an. the
single most critical factor :n the shap-
ing of our hazardous cs: aws r.as
been the element Of ‘oal ce—a cal.
arice between the neec to protect
hunari healtri and the envu’on -flcnt
from the Potential mismanagement of
hazardous waste and the need to keep
down excessive societal expense for
ccntroUing too little of that a .ste.
Given the public policy s grimf:cacce of
thLs balance. Congress has a recpon.s;-
bility to base its laws on a design that
has the best potential for keeping the
scales even. A vitaj part of this respon-
sibility relates to how much complex
regtiJatlon should be required of small
business as part of the overall balance,
Mr. Chairman. many of us are con-
cerned with the very real possIb1i ty
that thousands of small businesses
from drycleaj’iers to small rnanufactur .
ers will have to comply with RCRA
reguiatio designed for the sophisti-
cated. Large generators of hazardous
waste, tinder section 3 of ILR. 2867.
EPA has 18 month , within which to
formulate and Issue new regulations
for geflerato that produce between
100 and 1.000 kilogra of hazardous
waste per month. These are the small
generators businesses which, because
of their low production levels, are now
exempt from the full force of RCRA
reg’u1atjo Small generators are re
Qtiired to meet standards tailored to
their charactensti
In the language of H.R. 2867, If EPA
fails to issue new rules for small gener.
H 651.5
ators wIthin 13 months t± en at the
24th month, all existing !arge gener-
ator regulat io would fa.i upon arty
generator over 100
EPA created these str1ng z -nt regula-
tions to govei- the hazarnous waste
manageme of g’.ant enterprises be.
cause they produce 95 per ei-it of the
total amount of hazardoi.t waste in
this country. That leaves somewhere
beta een 1 to 7 percent of L ie remain-
der of hazardous waste generated is
done so by small bustness. When EPA
ortb-inallv promL!ga ed the small gen-
erator arid large generator regulations,
it proceeded under a ccst-oeflef
guideline and concluded that the enor.
incus nwnocr :1 small ger eritors, if
brougrit ent re : witni. : e regulator
syzzent. would far ouz.strp the ilrnttea
rc-sources a -aianle to effec: vejy tm.
p!ement the act. The a .njs:racLve
and economic ourden of maztagtltg the
small amount of waste from these gen-
erators was seen to be simpi - impracti-
cal, L’ieffic:erit aria couri:er roductive
EPA has yet to meet a statutory
deadJine, Odds predict that they
cannot possibly meet the .8 month
deacline for crafting and issui,ng suca
complex and far-reaching regulatjo ,
Eer.ce. section 3 hoids ‘smaj business
hostage to EPA s abthty to meet regu-
latory deadlines. Not only o we be-
lieve it iznplaustble that will act
oulc’kiy to promujga new re2’u a-
tloru, but ‘;‘e feel It .ll :e - that :he
small generators ‘w:ll case z_- e w thtn
the 24 ’rc ri:n ner.od .o L”.:rm them-
seites of : ‘.e uit cc,c es nn complex.
lt!es of the RC ! “s. A rnaij bust-
flessnerson dcem no: :iave the exten-
sive m poz’er, resouroes :r time to
even attempt to comply ‘ ‘ith large
generator regulations, Reg’u.iatory ex
cesses of this degree do not sei-’.’e the
purpose for which they were intended.
EPA is hat-trig trouble pc icmg the
70.000 or so large generato- of haz-
ardous waste now E . , 2367 adds an
additional 130.000 more generato to
EPA’s checklist. The resulta ‘ziU likely
be sporadic enforcement arid trieffec-
tive results.
HR. 2867 also requires snail busi-
ness to complete mantfe _s before
shipping hazardous waste offaite,
Within 90 days after enactnent, any
establishment generating more than
25 k1iograrns/rnon must !dentify
t”itrnselves and provide a wrtc:eri list
of their hazardous wastes to the col-
lector. If residential dwellmgs were
not now covered by sepa l-ate waste reg.
ulation.s, this requlreme cculd easily
apply to your home and mine,
Conceiveably, this provlsjnn could
affect any business that produces
about 2 pounds of hazai-dou,z waste a
day. While the marufest recuirement
may be less inclusive than those re.
quired by the large generator, there Is
the potential that EPA could require
information that may be beyond the
ability of a small businessperson to
protide without incurring in appropri-
CONGRESSION&L RECORD — HOUSE
-------
H 6516
ate costs and consuming dispropor-
tionate amounts of time.
Mr. Chairman, the amendment I
offer along with my colleague from
New York. (Mr. Lzz’rr), is a compromise
approach and a far more reasonable
and workable alternative. Small busi-
n and envworimeiie i groups have
combined efforts in a unique attenipa
to achieve the elusive balance of often
competing interests. This amendineut
satisfies the need to protect the envi-
ronment without so encumbering
small enterprises with needless regula-
tion as to sap their profitability.
Our amendment retains the notice
reqwrement in R. 2867 for business-
es generating between 100 kilograms
and L000 kilograms per month of ha.r.-
ardous waste. but eliminates the appli-
cability of the notice reqwremen
down to 25 kilograms per month. The
notice/m ’,ilpct reqwremens is e.ffec-
tlve 180 days after the bill’s enact.-
men.. instead of 90 days. Our amend-
w . r t Like R.R.. 2867, dIrects EPA to
develop new regulations for small gen-
erators. but allows EPA a total of 30
months within which to do so. instead
of 24. ,Most importa ntly, the Shelby-
Lent amendment removes the possibil-
ity of sophisticated, large generator
regulations falling an small generators
because of EPA ’s failure to act. Cer-
tarn additional requirements including
biannual exc ,tion reporting and 3-
ycer recordkeeping will be imposed
upon small generators should EPA fall
o imi e rules within 30 months.
Lastly, our compromise amendment
peludes a vita! feature missing from
!he committee bill—a provis on calling
in the EPA to gage in ecucatton ac-
tivicies that v:Ul help the small quanti-
ty generators learn what their respan-
sibilities are.
I urge my colleagues to look closely
aS. the potential for great harm to
smaU business and likely adverse con-
sequences for public health and the
environment. encouched in section 3
of ILR.. 2861. I urge your support of a
consistent, enforceable system of regu-
lation for small quantity generators
which provides maximum environmen-
tal protection -as represented In - the
Shelby-Lent amendment.
Mr. SECELTON. Mr. Chairman. will
he gentleman yield.?
Mr. S lRY. I am glad to yield to
the gentleman from MLssourL
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman. I rise
in support of the Shelby-Lent amend-
ment to E2.. 2867. Ten days ago, the
Energy. Environment and Safety Sub-
committee of the Small Business Com-
mittee which I chair held a hearing on
E.R. 2867. At the hearing it was estab-
lished that the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency estimates that 130.000
businesses would come under regu.la-
ticr. if the threshold for. the small
quantity waste generation exemption
s dropped from 1.000 kilograms/
?nth to 100 kIlograms per marith.
th Shelby-Lent and the Florio bill
ter the threshold to this leveL The
riorlo bill, however, provides a report-
Lag requirement for hazardous waste
generators down I.e a level of 25 kilo-
grams per month. EPA estimates that
an azidinonal 560.000 generators would
fall under this provision but that only
one-fourth of I percent of all hamrd-
cm waste produced would be added to
the cozitrol system. Most testifying
businesses felt that this is too inuca
regulation for too little benefit. The
EPA already has jurisdiction to lower
the threshold where a danger exists—
down to zero kilograms per month if
need be—and has exerc’.sed this -juris-
diction for certain ultrahazardous
wastes.
The Florie bill also provides that the
prmulgation of special regulations
ior new small quantity generators by
EPA must take place within 18
months or the full weight of the Re-
source Conservation ann Recovery Act
regulations would be applied to amsll
generasors at 24 months. EPA in-
formed us that they could not meet
this deadline regardless of the man-
power employed. Our small businesses
felt that it was unfair for them to be
expected to pay the price for EPA’s in-
abilities and to force them to meet the
same techn d r orting and disposal
requirements that major chemical
companies—for example—must comply
with. The Shelby-Lent amendment
provides the EPA with the additional
time they requested to identify and
study the best ways to regulate inch-
vidual small quantity generator waste
streams. We feel this follows the best
intentions of the Regulatory Flexibil-
ity Act and therefore enoomse this ap-
proach.
Th e Shelby-Lent amendment is still
not a. panacea. it still provides very
tough e- .ronmenta.L standards.
Indeed. some of the ousinesses who
presented testimony felt the standards
were too tough and unenforceable. On
the other hand, others felt that they
were too lenient and that the Fiorio
bill should prevaiL We applaud the
Shelby-Lent compromise as an effort
by environmentalists to reach an -ac-
cept.able middle ground with industry.
Most of the witnesses that testified at
-our hearing—even if they offered their
own perfecting amendm its. to
Shelby-Lent-—believed that It was a
step In the right dnectrn -
Small businesses have been in the
forefront of environmental concern
and scientific advancements to solve
our waste problems, and are best
served, we feel, by the Shelby-Lent
ameudmenL
The CE URMAN. The time. of the
gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Sum-BY,
has expired.
0 1430
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman,. I rise i ii
support of the amendment.
(Mr. LENT asked and was given per-
mission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. LENT, Mr. Chairman. I rise to
loin in ofleririg the e)by-LenL
amendment to section 3 of H.R. 2867.
August 4. 1983
This amendment will protect hun.
dreds of thousands of small businesses
from facing a confusing, complex, and
costly system of regulation, while h .
airing a high level of envn-omnemai
protection for the American people.
Section 3 now contained in R. 2387
will, for the first tune, bring over
600.000 small businesses such as dry.
cleaners and service stations under the
SCRA regulatory system. These busi-
nesses generate only between 1 to 3
percent of the hazardous waste in thij
country. Unfortunately, the way sec
tlan is drafted, it carries the strong
potential to seriously disrupt the on-
going RCRA regulatory program by
forcing these small businesses to
comply with a confusing and p .
tinily unenforceable system of regula-
tions. It does this in the following way.
Under current regulations, all these
who generate in excess of 1.000 kilo-
grams per month of hazardous waste
are subject to the full ECRA regula-
tory system. Those generating less
thai 1.000 kilograms per month are
exempted from RCR-A regulations.
except for acutely 1iazaxdqus wastes
which are regulated to one kilogram
per month. Section 3 of RB.. 2867
kiwers the small genemtor exemption
from 1,000- kilograms per month to 100
kilograms per month and directs the
Environmental Protection Agency to
write regulations tailored to smaller
.generators of hem.rdous waste. Howev-
er. section 3 also says that if the EPA
fails to act within the prescribed statu-
tory deadline the s inai ] generators are
automatically subject to the large gen-
erator regulations. The small gener-
ators accurately cha.racterze this pro-
visions as “the hsi’imer” because it
hits them hard if the EPA fails to-act
in a timely fashion. Since EPA rarely
meets statutory deadlines. I do not be-
Ueve it is right for the Congress to
bold small businesses hostage against
EPA’s inability to meet arbitrary login- -
lative deadlines. - :. - -
Another problem with section 3 Is
that It requires any business that gen.
erates more than 25 kilograms -per
month of l azai-dous waste to manifest
such wast4 for purposes of notifica-
tion to transporters only, each time it -
Is shipped offsite. One industry is
pushing this notification requirement.
the solid waste disposal industry. Over
500.000 additional businesses, .ot’erzzig
numerous industries, would be affect-
ed such as hardware, grocery, and
retail stores, colleges and universities.
high schools. photofinishing Oper-
ations, amusement parks, bowling
alleys, ear washes, horse tracks, carpet -
cleaners, barber shops, painting con-
tractors, and, many other. It makes no
sense to bring hundreds of thousands
of additional small businesses into the
Federal regulatory process at the re-
quest of one industry. Furthermore,
the amount of waste generated by
these over-500,000 additional business-
es is less than three-tenths of 1 per-,
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
.4ugu.st 4, L9
cent of the total hazardous waste gen-
erated In this country.
Finally. and most Importanuy. this
notification requireme - down to 25
kilograyri.s per month will have adverse
envli-onrnental and health effects,
Why? First of all, many solid waste
transporte may refuse to pick up ma-
terials that are acConipai j by a fm-rn
stating they are hazardous. Second.
even ii picked up and car’- ed to a sam-
tai-y landfill, the landijll operator may
:ery likely refuse to accept the waste,
especially in these times of high
awarenes,s of the problems of land dis-
posal of hazardous wastes,
If there were thousands of per utted
subtitle C hazardous waste facilities in
this country, this would not be a prob-
lem. The waste would simp y be d.is-
posed of in another nearby location.
But that Is not the way RCRA works.
There are very few subtitle C facilities
and I expect there wifi be even fewer
In the future, ‘What Is the small busi-
nessman to do I L the nearest facility
willing to take his 25 kilogram carton
Is several hundred miles away In an-
other State? I hate to say it, but I
think I know the answer, and the
answer is a real threat to public
health. The matei-ial will never get
packaged, It will never be turned over
to a transporter, It will never get to a
landfill. It wifl go down.a drain, or into
a ditch or off a bridge, There will be
massive resistance to the zegülatlons
?we are writing, They will be]argely 1g.
nored. And the threats to public’
health and the envixon .ment will grow,
-riot diminish.
Mr Chair:nau, read in its enti i-e y.
“with notification down to 25 kJlograms
per month and regulation to 100 ‘kilo-
grams -per month, section 3 creates ,a
‘confusing, unworkable and u ,nen.force-
able regiilar.oi-y program. it wifl likely
adve -se}y affect public health and ‘the
env i i-orl,’r ient.
However. Mr, Chairman, balancing
proper environmental controls on the
hazardous waste from small gener-
ators ‘wyth ‘a reasonable regulatory and
financial cost to small business is pos-
sible. The Shelby-Lent amendment to
sectIon 3 a,diieves this result. Let me
describe how:
First, It removes the hammer ‘from
sect;aon 3 but provides -that small gen-
erator waste be disposed of properly If
EPA fails to act In a timely fashion,
Thus, it retains the essential environ-
mental protection elements of RCRA
but relir. es the sxnafl generators from
many of the burdensome and costly
requirements designed for larger, more
sophisticated hazardous waste gener-
ators,
Second., it raises the nottfk’atlon
1e eJ from 25 kilograms per month to
100 kilo -ams per month so that the
regulatory requiremedts on small gen-
eratoms will be more cons stent and
less confusing. Illegal or .rnidziig’ht
dumping will be discouraged.
In my view, this amencznent will
Insure & aorl (ab [ e, enforceable and en-
vironmentally sound program.
Mr. Chairman, the Shelby-Lent
aniendnient adopts word for word a
Comnprormse agreement arrived at ear-
lier this year by major envzronjnental, -
business and academic organizations
such as:
1viroflrflenta1 Defense Fund,
Sierra Club.
Nationat Audubon Society.
American Council on Education,
American Retail Federation,
Chamber of Commerce of the
Vnited States.
Pui-nitui-e Manufacturers Associ-
auons.
National Association of Manufactur-
ers. -
National Oil Jobbers Councti,
Printing Industries of America.
These groups felt the language of
our amendment was reasoriaole and
workable. I agree with them arid see
our amendment as the logical next
step in regulating small generators of
‘ ,aydous waste, It dramatically in.
creases environmental protection
while not overburderung the RCR.A
regulatory system to the point that it
breaks down entirely,
Once we get this neict step in effect
and allow some time for the system to
absorb these new responsibilities, we
then can look to see if further Fedexn,l
regulation is necessary or appropz-uir,e.
In any event, the ‘Shelby-Lent amend-
ment preserves EPA’,s authority to reg-
ulate generato who generate less
than tOO kilograms per month as they
see fit for prOtection of human health
and the erwi.rcp,znent,
Also, inordez- to prevent further en-
v lroamentaj thsasters such a-s that in
Times Beach. Mo.. the EPA has pro-
posed to list dioxin contaminated
waste as an acutely h ? - a dous waste.
Once regulated, which should be very
shortly, oio in contaminated wa-ste
will be strictly regulated in quantities
greater than 1 kilogram per month—
P..CR.A’.s tightest, level of control.
Therefore, any smati generator notice
r uii-ement under RCPJj would not
apply to dioxin alammated ‘smste,
The C AIRM,AIt The time of the
gentleman ftnni l ew Y
-------
H 651S
same one, it would go down from 25
k,.ograrns or less, where it is saying it
iS down to zero.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, if the
gentleman will yield, I will be happy
to explain the amendment.
Mr. BROYHILL. I just want to make
sure this is the right amendment.
Mr. FLORIO. Yes, that is the
amendment.
Mr. BROYHILL. Mr. Chairman. I
withdraw my reservation of objection.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Fr.oRxo) that the
amendment be considered as read and
printed in the Rzconn?
There was no objection.
(Mr. FLORIO asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
D 1440
Mr. FLORIC. Let me at the outset
commend the gentleman from Ala-
bama (Mr. Siizz.3r) and the gentleman
from New York (Mr. LmrT) for their
amendment. Their amendment is
good, but with one exception.
I am convinced that this amendment
will perfect their amendment in a way
that will make it possible that all can
easily support their amendment.
I think it is important to note that
the opponents of the small generator
eXemption removal last year have
come a long way because they have ac-
knowledged that the small generator
exemption is totally inappropriate,
ti’.st we should be dealing with this
problem that involves 10 percent of
he total amount of toxic wastes that
re generated n this country.
The amendment offered by the gen-
tleman from Alabama (Mr. SHz1. )
and the gentleman from New York
(Mi’. Lzx’r) Is a good amendment with
this one proviso.
I would say, by the way, that one of
the concerns that we have about what
is n the committee bill is the thought
that alter a certain period of tune. if
the regulations that the EPA says that
they want to put Into effect are not
put into effect, the fact of the matter
is that the full scope of the regula-
tioris would go into operation, the so-
caUed hammer that was put into this
bill from last year and earlier in this
year when many of us expressed pub-
licly our concern about the perform-
ance at EPA under previous leader’
sh:p.
That leadership obviously has
changed.
I am prepared to accept the Shelby-
Ler.t amendment LI modified with this
amendment because I just last week
met with the new Administrator. Mr.
R..:cke!shaus. He has provided me with
the assurances that he will make a
good faith effort to comply with the
terms of the committee draft which is
ider.tical to the Shelby•L.ent amend.
ier.t.
am willing to accept the new ad
.Lstrator’s representation that he
I make a good faith effort. So I am
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
convinced that this is a good change.
with one provision in it that this
amendment embodies.
I would now just like to th.ke a
minute to address what my amend-
ment does.
The deficiency In the Shelby-Lent
provision is that it removes the notifi-
cation provisions which are in the
commiLtee bill.
The Shelby-Lent amendment re-
moves ti-us key provision which- is nec-
essary to protect the public from im-
proper disposal of hazardous waste.
Under the Shelby-Lent amendment,
small generators are not required to
provide notification that their waste is
hazardous if they generate less than
100 kilograms—220 pounds—per
month. The public 15 put at risk be-
cause these tpxic, and sometimes ex-
plosive. wastes will be disposed of in
any way the generator chooses with-
out anyone knowing that the waste is
hazardous—until it is too late. My
amendment provides that they must
notify where they are putting it.
The Shelby-Lent proposal assumes
that there is no safety problem pre-
sented by waste generated in this
quantity. That is simply not the case.
The contamination of Times Beach.
Mo.. was caused by the disposal of
under 50 pounds of dioxth. Under the
Shelby-Lent amendment, that could
go on today, and the generator would
not even have to tell anyone it was
dioxin. My amendment would require
a simple disclosure that the waste is
hazardous. Five weeks ago, three solid
as workers in Lexington, Ky., were
hospitalized from the effects of
breathing fumes from a 5-gallon con-
tainer of’hydrocnloric acid. Bottles of
potassium riydroxide. another to’iic
chemical that EPA lists as a hazardous
waste, were found nearby. Over 35
such Incidents have been reported in
1983 alone, jeopardizing hundreds of
lives.
A simple notice provided by the gen-
erator would have prevented each of
these incidents. I would like to ask
whether any of the opponents of this
provision—if they could put them-
selves, for a moment, in the position of
a transporter or a solid waste landfill
operator—whether they would rather
know, or not know, whether the
wastes they are handling are toxic?
The most basic considerations of
safety, to the workers involved in this
businers, should compel us to retain
this provision.
As importantly. this waste Is being
dumped in landfills and other places,
and no one even knows It is being put
there. There is an obvious harm to the
environment which we will pay the
price for In years to come. At least, we
should require generators to notify
others that their .aste is hazardous.
I would like to mention one other
element of the notification provision.
the paperwork burden. For each ship-
ment of hazardous waste, the €ener-
ator would have to fill out one simple
form. The information is limited to:
.4 ugust 4. 19S.’
First, name and address of gener-
ator
Second. ident ffcation of the waste.
This can usually be done by a. single
number of the hazard classification or
a generic description of the waste.
Third, the number and type of con-
tainers.
Fourth. the quantity of waste.
This is not a burdensome, time con-
sunung obligation. particular:y hen
you consider the health and saecy of
thousana.s of sanitary landfill workers
and transporters, and the protection
of the puolic from disposal !n landf:lls
which were ne er desig-ried for hazard-
ous waste. Without tl’us amendment,
we are jeopardizing our environment..
the lives of those exposed to these
wastes, and the public. I urge you to
perfect the Shelby-Lent amendment
by vottng for this amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Ptoaio) has expired.
(By unanimous consent Mr. Pi,.oxio
was allo ed to proceed for 3 additional
minutes.)
Mr. MOLINARI. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. FLORlO. I will be happy to
yield to the gentleman from New
Yorit.
Mr MOLINARI. I thank the gentle-
man from New Jersey for yielding.
I think we get a little confused when
we talk about kilograms. A lot of us
have been raised in the old system and
we do not know what kilograms are.
But tne gentleman mentioned 48
pouncs of dioxin. I thins we all :flOW
hat ha pened in Times Beach. Mo..
witi’. 43 ouri s of dioxin.
Will t .e gentleman be able to tell us
what in tdograms 48 pounds of dioxin
amounts
Mr. FLORIO. Let me just put it this
way’ The threshold we are talking
about, below which there aould be no
need for notification at all, is 100 ktlo-
grams: 100 kilograms is 220 pounds per
month, which on an annual basis is 1
ton. That means 1 ton of dioxin on a
yearly basis could be disposed of. and
as you point out. -48 pounds of dioxin
caused the whole problem In Tunes
Beach, Mo.
Yr. LENT. Mr Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. FLORIO. I yield to the gentle.
man from New York.
Mr. LENT. Would the gentleman
clarify on the 48 pounds of dioxin, or
48 kilograms of dioxin, or whatever it
was’ Maybe it was 42 pounds.
Mr FLORIO. Forty-eight pounds.
not kilograms. -
Mr. LENT. It is my understanding
that the amount of waste that was n-
valved at Times Beach was far in
excess of even the 1,000 kIlogram per
month large quantity generator limit.
currently established by EPA regula-
tions. Therefore lowering this cutoff
to 25 kilograms a month would have
had no effect whatsoever on the Tin-ies
Beach situation.
-------
Az2gust 4, iPaS
that is because while there may
have been 42 pounds of aioxin at
Times Beach, that dioxin existed in
the parts per million level in wastes
from the pronuction of 2.4.5 T ,
trlchloralptier ioL is that not correct?
The CEAIRM.AN. The time of the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
PtoP ..xo) has again expired..
(On request of Mr. Lzirr arid by
unanimous consent, Mr. Fx.oaio was
allowed to proceed for 3 additional
minutes.)
Mr. FLORIO. Let me respond to the
gentleman’s question with regard to
Times Beach. Arid I will defer to those
from the State of Missouri who will
tell you that the whole problem in the
State of Missouri flowed from 48
pounds of dioxin that was mixed in
waste oil and spread across the roads
of a number a! ai.uierent towns. So this
amount .r.haz , we are talking about cer-
tainly would be under the threshold of
100 kilograms-per month and there-
fore there would be a need for notW-
cation under my amendment.
Mr. LENT. If e gentleman will
yield further, the 42 pounds of dioxin
was mixed L’i with over 100.000 kilo-
grams of waste from the production of
2,4.5 TCP is that not correct?
Mr.. OPIO. The waste oil per se is
not hazardous. What we are
about, and another part of the bfll
deals with that particular problem, we
are talking about hazardous wastes—
and no one disp’ntes the fact that
dioxin is a h2zar ous waste—cot being
reqtured to be reported were in fart
mixed b ’ z s waste oil and sprean
across the r.cis.
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. Chairman. z fl the
gentleman yteld? -
- Mr. FLORIO. I yield to the gentle-
man from_Oregon.
(‘Mr. WEN asked arid as given
perrniss on to s’ev se-and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise
in support of the amendment offered
by the gerit3eman from New Jersey.
This amendment simply coils for
mm i i generators o hazardous -waste tu
notify the waste disposer that they ar
in fact disposing of hazardous waste,
albeit a small quantity.
Small quantities do not lessen the
poteubai rd to the public and in
particular to the waste dispacers. If
the waste disposer knowzs that It Is
hazardous waste being disposed of,
then he .ur the can take the necessary
precautions. Absent any simple notifi-
caUon reqmrenient. the horror stories
of explosions. ffres, acid Spills, and
water cOrztarrunauon In ordinary saul .-
tary landfills will continue.
This amendment does not impose
recordkeepuig or reporting require-
ment.s on small gerier tors It simply
requires that offsite shipments of haz-
ardous waste be accompanied by the
EPA uniform hazardous waste mani-
fest form.
The information required of the
small generator only requires the gen-
erator’s name and address, a descrip-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — - C
tion of the waste. The number aric
type of containers and the quantity of
the waste being transported. There is
certainly nothtng onerous lii that.
The ameridrnezxt proposes what mcs
of us must certainly consiaer an ermn-
ently reasonable expectat on—tri :
those generating waste inform those
who are disposing of It what it is they
are handling.
I urge adoption of the gentleman
from New Jersey’s amendment,
Mr. SHEI2Y. Mr. Chairman. wa:
the entlenian yield? -
Mr. FLORID. I am happy to y elc
Mr. S T RY. I know the d st:-
guished chairman of the subcommi:.
tee is familiar h the EPA pronos
rule that was first noticed in the
4 Federal Reg’.ster that would isc
dioxin’contaniinated waste as .n
acutely nazardous waste, and it wot
be strictly regulated in quantities
greater than 1 ‘kilogram per montn.
0 1450.
In other words, it is my understanz-
.ing that dioxin. assung that EPA
goes through what they are do z’.g,
would no be subject xc CR
-anyway.
Mr. ORIQ. Ii -the g nsn
would yield, the genth r n is pDIm..C;
out a very important thing. . s of this
moment while we sta here dicx n is
not a , u ’dous waste acormn; D
ZP The regulatory -process r n.
flone forwarn. I think that :c:i’ —is
com n sense and anethcni and sc o.
tific knowledge.
That maxes aLl the more irniora . t
tie fact that - .e have caese io ,;
tion - oinsioris. not just for d ox ri
br all the other materials that are
definition hazardous and desrimen:. .
to the environment and to puoi c
health. That is what the amenamenc
would do. would notfy us.
Mr. SEELBY. Mr. Ch L-man, would
the gentleman yield further?
Mr. FLORIQ. I yield to the gentle-
Mr. S T.RY. Would not this EPA
regulation on diaxin go ahead ars ore-
.empt this? In other words, would any
small generator notice requirement
not apply to dioxin-contaminated
waste?
Mr. FLORIO. ii in fact that regula-
&ion ever -goes into effect that is the
case with regard to dioxin. But as the
gentleman knows there is a very long
list of equally and in some respects
more hazardous contaminants that are
not covered by regulation that we
would have some ability to know
where It Is that they are going to.
Mr. SHELBY. If the gentleman will
yield further, I believe it is going into
effect at EPA. we have some real lead-
ership in EPA now.
Mr. FLORIO. Well, I am sure you
do. And that is why I am inclined to
Lupport the gentleman’s amendment if
we can have this additional provision
in it.
(On request of Mr. VoucMxx and by
v.nanimous consent. ly lE. 1 .oaxo was
H 6519
a. ed t ’ proceed for 2 additional
m_: tes.) —
-. VQLKMER. Mr. Chairman,
w - the gentleman yield to me?
FLORIO. I yield to the gentle-
VOLKMER. I would just like to
ar couple of questions so I under-
st::. completely what the genr.le-
ni r azm namenc applies to as small
atorz of hazardous waste. This
m - s triat they haveto keep a record
‘io t .ie ’ ve trie hazardous waste
:port?
:. FLORIO. My particular amend-
- - ‘t ,ouid require there be notifica-
- - as to what it ss that was sent,
riaz r:ous wastes were gi7en and
e: ere given to.
‘1 MER. R.ign.t.
LC2IO. And that is all.
.ir. VCLXMER. So, if I can follow it
‘iter we would know in the event it
b . ise irecessary o determine -where
liazaruous -waste went to, we
t . . . i determine that? - -
‘ FLORIO That is correct. I
tL_ it s important to say that it
r very ‘well be some would zay
-:s that mean ‘we are iiotified
w - —-e rt went to: but if somebody
w-- :ed to dump it in the .steet you
wulknowabontitr -
e anzwer is. unfortunately, this
p “. sicn from 100 flograms per
n’.mth down does nor. require appro-
;-.:e dis;csal. All !t requires is that
w: :m&w where c is going.
‘-! . VO C.P.. That is necessary
‘. .jse as : ou nen:ioned in my State
toxin pr ol.e . the ic: n occu
niy in Times Beach, that is where
is a lot of notoriety, but it is
• - ad all over various arid sunery
p - : . of Missouri, that dioxin. -
that reason I ‘think we should
your amennment because we
to know. That has been one of
tl’e big problems in the State of Mis-
s ‘i because we Cannot find Orit
where all of it went to. lt.has been like
Icoking for a needle in the haystack to
!I d out where the dioxin went. So I
u.d support the gentleman’s amend-
ORIO. I thank the gentleman
icr ais comments. And again, I would
just -conclude by saying that this is an
extremely modest amendment, that is
the minimum amount of awareness
t d we should have with regard to
w.ie ..-e these materials are going.
Mr. VOLKM . I would ‘like to
p -3Lflt out that in my own State of Mis-
sours, the State of Missouri right now,
for this purpose, for noti.fication. is
sero. In other words, In oui’ State we
say if you do any, you have to notify
us. -
l, r. FLORIO. Let me close by saying
I would like to emphasize that point.
Some would say this Is a radical ‘new
thing. There are 20 States n the
Union that already ‘have regulatiOOs -
far in excess in terms of -restrlctloflS.
more than EPA does. - .
-------
H 6520
(On request of Mr. BREAUX and by
imaninious consent. Mr. Pz.oaro was
allowed to proceed for 1 additional
minute.)
Mr. BREAt X. Mr. Chairman, will
he gentleman yield?
Mr. FLOR.IO. I yield to the gentle-
nan from Louisiana.
Mr. BREAUX. Mr. Chairman. I
thank the gentleman for yielding.
I just say that while we can talk
about all the problems that the small
generators of toxic hazardous wastes
are going to have if we regulate them.
I know that Louisiana has no exemp-
tion for small generators. No one is
crying, no one is coming to us saying
they absolutely need it to stay in busi-
ness. They have learned to live with it.
The community and the health of the
country is a lot better as a result of it.
No one has gone out of business, We
ha% e had no exemption whatsoever for
small generators,
Mr. FLORIO. I would thank the
gentleman for his comments, New
Jersey is In the same situation as are
18 other States: no dry cleaners are
closing, no service stations are closing.
(On request. of Mr. LEirr and by
ur nimous consent. Mr. Fwaio was
allowed to proceed for 2 addItional
minutes.)
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, will, the
gentleman yield to me?
Mr. FLORTO. I yield to the gentle-
man , , -.
Mr. LENT. I thank the gentleman
or yielding.
- ‘{r. Chairman, I ask the gentleman
LotusLtna-(Mr. BP .zAUx) if he can
us his assurance that all of the
iU generators in Louisiana are
aware of these regulations and are
complying with these regulations.
Mr. FLORIO. I yield to the gentle.
man from Louisiana.
Mr BREAUX. I would be glad to re-
spond. I am not sure whether they are
or not. I know there is no exemption.
They are bound by it. Of course, en.
forceinent Is a separate Issue.
Mr. LENT. We are advised that
these regulations are not well ob-
served, not well-known about and they
have absolutely no beneficLal effect In-
sofar as the environment Is concerned.
I would like to get back to the 42
pounds of dioxin that was involved In
Times Beach. Mo., because the gentle-
man cites that as his main reason for
proposing this amendment.
it is my understanding, and I would
ask the gentleman to straighten me
Out if I am wrong, that 42 pounds of
dioxin existed In parts per million
le el In wastes from the production of
2.4.5 TCP, which is called trichloro-
phenol, of which there was over
100.000 kilograms and that the 100.000
kilograms. containing 42 pounds of
dioxin, was then mixed in ‘wa.ste oil
arid that was what contaminated the
a In Times Beach. The point Is that
gentleman’s amendment would not
any bearing whatsoever here be-
e the waste at Times Beach al.
ready was covered’as a large generator
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
of hazardous wastes, over 1.000 kilo-
grams.
Mr. FLORIO. The gentleman almost
makes my point. Let us assume the
gentleman is correct and I do not be-
lieve he is, the people from Missouri
seem to be emphasizing 48 pounds as
the appropriate number, but If we get
down to 48 pounds. what I am suggest-
ing Is that the notification provisions
included in my amendment would re-
quire that we know where that 48
pounds went to. If we do not have
those noti.ficatlon requirements, there
would be no ability to track that and
to know where it went.
Mr. GRAMM. Mr. Chairman, would
the gentleman yield?
Mr. FLORIO. I yield to the gentle-
man from Texa, .
Mr. ORAMM. The point that Mr.
LE r is n aIn ig is there never was a 48
pounds. you have basically created the
Impression here that we had 48
pounds of dioxin and that that was
mixed with other waste and spread on
the streets. The point is it was a resid-
ual pollutant in. byproducts used- for
that purpose. No one ever mixed 48
pounds of dioxin with anything be-
cause it was never refined out, It was
never a pure product. That creates a.
very misleading Interpretation m the
total debate.
Mr. FLORIO. U the gentleman wlfl
yield so that I may respond to the gen-
tleman, I have been working under the
assumption that everyone knows
dioxin itsel.f Is a byproduct of a proc-
ess, particularly for rn icing herbicides
and pesticides. So the product dioxin
is a waste byproduct. Is that amount
of dioxin that has resulted In the
problem we have by virtue of mtxing
those wastes arid spreading them
along the roads of Missouri. -
Mr. BROTEILL Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike the requisite number of
words.
If I may have the attention of the
gentleman from New Jersey, the gen-
tleman from New Jersey knows full
well that pure dioxin has never been
made except in the laboratories.
Dioxin Is only an unwanted trace con-
t2rntn2nt found. In the manufacture of
certain products. So pure dioxin has
never been manufactured nor made. It
Is only found In some other product
that might be manufactured. As far as
I know, no products are ,being manu-
factured that contain dioxin today.
Now the gentleman well knows too
that the EPA Is proposing regulations
to regulate those products that might
contain dioxin are those waste sites
that may contain trace elements of
dioxin.
The gentleman alsQ knows that
dioxin is also a byproduct of combus-
tion of coal, combustion of wood, So
dioxin comes from a number of
sources.
Mr. FLORIO. I would be happy to
respond to the gentleman If he would
yield.
The gentleman talks about traces of
dioxin. The EPA and all other health
August 4, 198S
authorities have said that any amount
of exposure to dioxin in excess of 1
part per billion is hazardous to health.
Mr. BROYHILL. No. it does not say
that.
Mr. FLORIO. What we are talking
about is that by staying under this re-
striction contained In Shelby-Lent,
you can generate and dispose of as a
waste product or a byprrduct up to
220 pounds per month and not be re-
quired to tell anybody where you are
putting it. I do not think that Is a good
situation.
0 1500
Mr BROY TT 1 . The gentleman Is
comparing apples and oranges because
when you are talking about parts per
billion you would have to have literal-
ly hundreds of thousands of pounds of
a material to be able to generate
mathematically- that type of size. As
far as I know, no one has ever seen
that kind of quantity of dioxin. You
may have eye droppers full that have
been made in a. laboratory, but the
gentleman does not know that. I
would be glad to send him the litera-
ture on this. -
Mr. FLORIO. If the gentleman Will
yield further, EPA felt the exposure of
500 parts per billion was oi sufficient
gravity to spend $33 million to buy a
whole town in Missouri. -
So I think we are talking about
small amounts that constitute a great
hazard. And the amendment of the
gentleman from Alabama would allow
up to 2:0 pounds per mor h of this
material to be disposed of without
notice to anyone. -
Mr. BROYHUL. That is the point
that I am trying to make is that no
one is talking about disposing of any
25 pounds of dioxin because there is
nothing that I know of, any products
that are made in that kind of quanti-
ty, it is infinitesimally small.
Mr. Chairman, I iiI yield to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Rri-raa), who is far better able than I
to explain this from the standpoint of
his background in science.. -. -
Mr. RIri .l E. I thank the gentleman’.
for yieldthg. - -
I doubt if I am going to cure any-
body of their fanciful flights today. -
The dioxin we are dealing with is a
‘byproduct of pesticide manufacture.’
Those wastes re already—and par-
ticularly in the case of Times Beach—
that waste, in the hundreds of thou-
sands of kilograms—I think over,
100,000 kilograms—is already covered’
under the 1.000 kilogram threshold,
In addition, it was mixed in with
waste ods which Increased the weight
of the dioxin containing hazardous
waste.
So the example is not a correct ex-
ample for the disposal of less than 25
kilograms.
The only potential correct item of
the gentleman from New Jersey Is
that if the 25 kIlograms contained a
part per billion of dioxin, potentially It
-------
August 4, 198S
would then be covered under his
amendment, which on the second
page, actually is going to cover the
most so-called ignitable, corrosive, re-
active or toxic types of hazardous
‘a.stes identified or listed under sec-
‘.ion 3001. where such waste is part of
a total quantity generated by a gener-
ator generating 25 kilograms or less.
Now, this has not yet come out as to
the tune of the gentleman from New
JerseYs amendment, but this amend-
ment could cover lust about every-
thing that qualifies under the current
definition of hazardous waste down to
zero.
The CEA1BMAN. The time of the
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr.
BRorrrIu.) has expired.
Mr. RLi i R. Mr. Charunan, r move
to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman I would like to, just
for the sake of an Intelligent debate.
separate out the definitions here.
People are using the term ‘ toxIc” arid
“hazardous” interchangeably. Now
that is incorrect. I know it makes a
good of a rhetorical point to do that.
but it is simply not correct. There are
four categories En the hazardous waste
characterization.’ - -
One is flammable. If it burns. It Is
bazardous It may or may not be toxic.
Two, it is corrosive, which means if
it rusts something It is bzardouse.
That Is not necessarily toxic. A corro-
sive liquid can behave like vinegar.
Three. it is reactive, which means
iere can be some kind of chemical ac-
;‘ity with its surrounding s.
And four, it is hazardous it Is toxic.
And I would appreciate it if my col-
leagues would not use the terms toxic
and hazardous Interchangeably be-
cause that clouds the issue. And before
we lump all things that burn, or cor-
rode, or that react with something, as
being toxic, that we go back to the
original definition of hazardous.
Mr. l . Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman_yield? - :
Mr. Rii r . I yield to the gentle-
man from Indiana..
Mr. Rfl - R . I thank the gentleman
for y1elding.
Let me see if I can get this correct.
The gentleman said that there are
four classifications of hazardous
wastes: ignitable, corrosive, reactive,
and toxic?
Mr. RI ri tt. Yes, that Is true.
Mr. HrLE , So essentially in reading
the second page of this amendment
that has been offered, then that would
say that all hazardous waste would
then come under the 25 to 0 kilogram
leveL
Mr. RI ’t!’ER. It would conceivably.
The language used on line 6 of page 2,
Is that in the case of most ignitable,
corrosive, reactive, or toxic types of.
hazardous wastes less than 25 kilo-
— rns would be regulated. .
lut there is going to be an enormous
ount of Judgment calls here. We are
•,,.ng to end up. not with 500.000 addi-
tional businesses, which Is what Is
going to be covered from 100 to 25
kilograms, we are going to conceivably
end up with just about any installa-
tion that has anything to do with any
kind of chemical whatsoever, perhaps
an additional 500,000 notices.
Ms. MIKULSKL Mr. Chairman. I
move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of
the Plorio amendment.
I just want to make three basic
points. First of all. I would like to
remind my colleagues that the Florio
amendment is supported by the
League of Women Voters, the Clean-
ing and Laundry Executives Associ-
ation, the National Association of
Solid Waste Management and the
League of C4ties. So it enjoys substan-
tial support.
The amendment would create no
regulations or a paperwork burden. It
Is simply a notification. This require-
ment is neither confusing nor burden-
some. ‘ -
And last, but not at all least, many
States, such as California, Rhode
Island, Missouri, and Massachusetts.
already require some form of notice
for these quantities of hazardous
waste and in no way have impeded the
flow of commerce, profitmaking or the
ability to run your business the way
you want.
- It does require this particulafnotifi-
cation. - - ‘ . . -. ‘ -
I would urge the adoption of the
Florio amendment
Mr. HILER. Mr. Chairman, I move
to strike the requisite number of
words.,
Mr. Chairman. I am extremely con-
cerned that when we take the notice
requirement from 100 kilograms to 25
kilograms we are imposing a burden
upon hundreds of thousands of small
businesses in this country that they
will not be able to meet.
Recently a subcommittee of the
Small Business Committee conducted
a hearing on this very bill and on sec-
tion 3 addressIng the kind of ssue that
the particular Florio amendment ad-
dresses. . -. - -
Mr. Lee Th omas. the Assistant Ad-
ministrator for Solid Waste Emergen-
cy Response at the U.S. Evnironmen-
tal Protection Agency, a new appoint-
ment. made these remarks.
We agree with the goai of informing wa.ste
handlers such as transporters and disposal
site personnel about the hazardous nature
of the wastes they are handling. However,
we oppose the application of this require-
meet to generators of between 25 and 100
kilograms per month because we feel that It
will be impossible to educate the hundreds
of thousands of affected generators as to
their reporting respon.sibllities.
D 1510
He goes on to say: -
The most important aspect at implement-
ing this provision is fostering voluntary
compliance through a broad educational
campaign, working with the trade a.ssoci
atlons to alert the affected community of
their duties and responsibilitIes. We believe
that many of the affected generators will
likely be small businesses which in the past
have had little famntharity with the RCRA
regulations. These businesses may not even
be aware that they are generators of haz:
ardous waste, much less be able to identify
their wastes suificiently for purposes of
completing the notice.
We will depend heavily on education to
obtain compliance witir this requiremeriL
We envision taking enforcement actions
when we receive reports of non-compliance
from waste handlers. To conduct occasional
inspections of even a small percentage of
small quantity generators will be very re-
source intensive for EPA and the States
given the enormous size of the regulated
community. Some States may. of course.
have the capability to undertake a more ag’
gressiveenforcemnent program.
What EPA is saying is that they are
not going to have the capability to:
First, enforce the notification of gen-
erators between 25 to 100 kilograms:
arid second, it is going to take a major
educational effort to notify these
people. -:
Now, with this amendment ”we not
only go to 25. but we go from 25 down
to zero for a broad-based classification
of hazardous waste. . -
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman will the
gentleman yield? - . -
Mr. HILER. I yield to the gentl ’i ’ian
from New Jersey. -
Mr. FLORIO, Mr. -Chairman. I will
just say that the concern the gentle-
man has with regard to the potential-
authority to go down to zero is un-
founded because the EPA already has
the authority under existing law to go
down to zero for certain types of
highly hazardous wastes. -
Mr. HILER. Which are not the
wastes that the gentleman lists.
Mr. FLORIO. The gentleman is
pointing to the fact that there is the
potential authority to go down to zero.
I am suggesting that EPA has the
ability as it sees fit, to define what
constitutes particularly hazardous
waste, and go all the way down to zero.
The gentleman’s concerns about
education are going to be ad-
dressed— - - ‘ -
Mr. HILER. If may reclaim my
time, if In fact, then—and there Is no -
question—EPA has that ability now.
let us just strike page because there
is no need for it. Lu fact, what the gen-
tleman’s amendment does, ir broadens
that classification of hazardous waste
to such an extent that EPA is going to
be hamstrung by an inabthty. with
such a large mass, to try to enforce,
Mr. FLORIO. If the gentleman will
yield for just one additional moment,
the difficulty Is, what we are talking
about is by definition “hazardous
waste.” Everything that Is being dealt
with under this law EPA has already
determined to be hazardous.
If the gentleman’s main concern Is
education of the small business people.
the vast majority of whom will un-
doubtedly abide by the law, the gentle-
man from Missouri (Mr. SKZLT° IS
going to have a proposal, which I &
prepared to accept, which provides Qt -
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
H 6521
-------
14 6522
an educational funding program to get
this information out. I think that
should resolve the problem.
Mr. HIL R. I do not think it will re-
oive the problem. I intend to offer an
meridment after the Florio amend-
ient is taken care of that will extend
1’.e time period before this law takes
effect. But the fact of the matter is. if
EPA already has the ability to do
what the gentleman would like to do
in the second page of his amendment.
let us just strike the amendment. In
fact, the gentleman is asking EP re-
uiring EPA. to do far more than what
currently exists under RCRA.
Mr. Mr. Chairman, I move
to strike the requisite number of
words, and I rise in opposition to the
F orio amendment.
(Mr. S BY asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. S TL Y. Mr. Chairman. there.
is an inclination, when speaking -of
hazardous waste management in this
country, to lose sight of the big pic-
ture. to become emotionally sub-
merged in the cause of regulating
every potentially dangerous form or
degree of hazardous waste in exist-
ence. In this instance, I feel it critical-
ly important that Mambers pause and
take a step back from the emotional-
!sm of small generators’ management
of hazardous waste and look at the
possible ramifications of imposing
such requirements on over hail a mil-
lion small bus esses.
- ‘irst of #.il, the Ficr.o amendment
ild create a confusing dual system
rotification and regulation for gen-
tcrs which produce under 1.000
:iiograms per month of hazardous
aste. The amendment would create a
scrierne whereby the small generator
of 100 kilograms per month or less
would be subject to simple notification
requirements, and those generators be-
tween 100 and 1.000 kilograms per
month would fall under a different
compliance schedule for regulations.
What would emerge from the dual
compliance standards Is an entirely
unworkable situation.
The Florio amendment seems to say
that within just 3 months of the bill’s
enactment, hundreds of thousands of
small businesses across the country.
from retail and grocery stores to car
washes, barbershOPS and painting con-
tractors will, with the wave of a hand,
know their full responsibilities when it
comes to manifesting as little as 2
pounds of hazardous waste a day. The
amount of waste generated by these
under 100 kilograms per month gener-
ators is less than three-tenths of 1 per-
ccnt of all the hazardous waste gener-
ated in this country. Members should
know that many small generators are
not regulation-free on the State level
and It has been shown that they are.
id large. unfaxnthar with their
State hazardous waste regula-
How can they possibly be ex-
to comply with federally iin•
posec regulations if they are not re-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
ceiving word now of their State re-
spor isibthties?
The answer is they will not comply—
No. 1. because Government nor indus-
try will oe able to educate these hun-
dreds of thousands of additional small
businesses on these requirements.
Even if it is poss ole to inform some
small percentage of these businesses
of their duties: many generators will
resist the formal manifesting because
they simply cannot devote the pre-
cious, productive time. nor manoower
to compliance duties. As a resu1t in-
stead of pLacing the hazardous waste
material in the trash to oe taken to a
landfill, the waste will ne”er even get
to a transporter, and will end up in a
ditch or cown some river. We risk the
potential of tliegal aumpuig to suca a
degree as this country has never expe-
rienced. The adverse consequences on
the environment and public health.
precisely what we wish to protect, are
staggering.
Many solid waste transporters may
refuse to pick up materials that are
manifested as “hazardous.” Then what
happens? Even if the labeled waste is
picked up, where will it be taken? Will
the landfill operator accept it? If not.
what is the alternative? Is there a
close-by subtitle C faci.1it to handle
these small amounts of hazardous
wastes? Many of these questions
cannot be answered affu-rnatively or
definitively—we owe the public an-
swers to these questions before we act
hastily on this amendment.
Both the Environmental Protection
Agency and the Association of Solid
Waste Management Officials have tes-
ttfied before Congress in support of
the 100 kilograms per month limit as a
reasonable limit at this time. EPA al-
ready has the authority, IL, they
choose, to regulate waste at any level
they deem appropriate. However, they
have concluded that the enormous
number of small generators if brought
entirely within the regulatory system
would far outstrip the limited re-
sources available to effectively iznple.
rnent the act. Apart from this determi-
nation, EPA makes no distinction in
applying RCRA requirements to gen-
erators of acutely hazardous waste.
The full weight of RCRA regulations
apply to any generator that produces,
more than 1 kilogram of acutely haz-
ardous waste per month. EPA Es in the
process of issuing a rule under this au-
thority for the regulation of dioxin
contaminated waste.
Mr. Chairman, we must approach
this issue from a rational, not emo-
tional perspective. Bringing hundreds
of thousands of small businesses into
the Federal regulatory process in one
fell swoop, under the flimsy premises
provided, is simply no way to create
regulatory policy. I urge my col-
leagues’ opposition to the amendment.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, I move to
strike the requisite number of words.
(Mr. LENT asked and was given per-
mission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Au i st 4, 19&?
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman. I rise in
strong opposition to the amendment
of the gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. Ftoaxo). One of the principal
purposes of the Shelby-Lent amend-
ment is to establish a single system of
notification and regulation of small
generators of hazardous waste. This is
done by requiring that all generators
of 100 kilograms per month or more of
hazardcus waste comply with RCRA
reguiat:ons to be promulgated by EPA.
Current law exempts all generators
below 1,000 k:lograrns per month.
Mr. FLORIOS amendment would de-
stro:.’ this consistent system of regula-
tion.
That s why a large numoer of orga-
nizations, including environmental or-
ganizations, have gone on record in
support of the exact language of the
Shelby-Lent amendment. They ao not
want it tampered with. And I am in-.
cluthng the Environmental Defense
Fund. I am including the Sierra Club,
the Audubon Society, as well as a
number of business organizations.
I would like to detail for my col-
leagues the reasons why this amend’
ment is ill-advised. Further. I wtsn to
comment on the arguments in favor of
the amendment which were included
in an extension of remarks published
by Mr. Fr .oaro on July 29.
The Fiorlo amendment to Shelby-
Lent would create a confusing dual
system which would be unworkable
and unenforceable. It would do this by
requiring any business that generates
more than 25 kilograms per month of
hazardous waste to nam!est such
waste, for purposes of notification to
transporters, each time it is snipped
offsite. Different compliance sched-
ules, therefore, would be established
for notice—down to 25kilograzr .s per
month—and regulations—down to 100
kilograms per month.
When I finally saw the amendment
of Mr. Ftoaxo today. I realize that it
requires notification for generators
below 25 kilograms a month, as well. If
a generator’s waste is ignitable, corro-
sive. reactive, or toxic, that generator
a’ill have to notify the waste trans-
porter that his waste is hazardous.
even if it is below 25 kllogi-ams
month—down to zero kilograms a
month.
One industry is pushing triis amend-
ment, the solid waste disposal indus-
try Over 500,000 additional business-
es, covering numerous Industries,
would be affected such as hardware.
grocery, and retail stores, colleges and
universities, high schools, photofinish-
ing operations, amusement parks,
bowling alleys, carwashes, horse
tracks, carpet cleaners. bai-bershops.
painting contractors, and many others.
It makes no sense to bring hundreds
of thousanos of additional small busi-
nesses into the Federal regulatory
process at the request of one industry.
Furthermore, the amount of waste
generated by these over-500.000 add -,
tional businesses is less than thre
-------
Augu ..st 4, 183
t riths oft percent of U-.. ta1 haz-
ardous waste generated .:. - .us coun-
try
Finally, and most ipo:t ”,. hts
notification re u:remcnt -ri to 25
kilogra s per month -:. ac rse
envroren:a and he: -- a:recs.
First, many solid waste sporters
may refuse to p c : up mi :ais that
are accompan ed :y a i.. stating
they are hazardous. S :L_. even ii
picked up ane c:-r:ed t a
lar.dflhl. the !andr ll opcr:t:; nay ‘er:
E ely refuse to acce : the ‘-:o-
cially in these tunes of -
of tne problen’s of nd .:p sal of
bazaroous wastes. Tne:e :i ely
tl-er. be no other p a c .: aste
to gn. There are ; :: fe .::.:e C
facilities in the coin-try - .s the
small businessman to do - - arest
facibty Lhat will i .i e;i i waste is
hundreds of miles away
We can easily guess -at wtll
happon. The matenal w 1. never get
mnru.fested, will n . er get a
porter and wifl never get t-’ landfill.
It tLl be poured cown a d ‘-, or into
a ditch, or otf a br dge. T - -e will be
massive resstance to th. regula-
Lions, arid neither Go’. ernr - nor in-
dustry will be ab’e to ec .c-:e these
hundreds of thousarics o: sld tional
businesses on tl’.ese re uIrc.: nts. The
threats to public health a he envi-
ronment wili g -ro . riot .iim w’,h.-
A close exaniinnt n 01 tne argu-
menu used in ; - of :he Flono
amer.dmer.t srio s !uthe that tnc
amer.c.ment i.s 1-a e . first e:t-
ample that Mr Ficnrn use- su ncrt
hi .mencmer.: . in
tucky where tr.:ee r :.1sc ers wero
hosp talized after r a 5-ga lon
container of hydroc - . :r:c tid, This
mciaent is unfortu:ace. bw .-. no way
could it be prevented by : oaxc’s
amendment.
Twenty-five kilograras
mately 55 pounds. e-ga!ans of hy-
drochloric acid is approx:rnately 40
pounds. which is less than 25 kilo.
grams. So the Florio .inondment
would not address the problem here.
the hydrochloric acid invc.. i would
not be coverea.
Turning to the list of e::amples of
proolems with srn.ail qu:nities of
waste that was compiled t’y the Na.
tional Solid Waste Management Asso-
ciation (NSWMA), the same observa-
tion can be maoe. This list -r ,mpiles a
vague picture of purely ari ccota1 evi-
dence of unfortunate ln.stances due to
hazardous wastes. but. the ‘ast major-
ity of these instances would not be
helped by the form ai:iendment.
Where the quantities are -‘en known
in these e amnplos. most are either
under 25 kilograms or o er 100 kilo-
grams. therefore, they are either not
regulated by Florio or will already be
regulated under Shelby-Lent.
It. is also Interesting to note that
there is no consistent pattern to these
instances In 3 years time, only 44 in-
stances ucre reported out of millions
of pounds of disposed hazardous
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
waste. The nature of the solid waste
disposal industry Is to haul away Items
that people do not want. Eaulers have
a contractual relationship with cus-
tomers and can negotiate safeguards.
Many everyday trash items are poten-
tially dangerous: there must be a limit
on how far the Federal Oo -erri.mer,t
should go to regulate these practices.
01520 -
Mr. RITrER. Mr. Chai.-man. will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. LENT. I am happy to yield the
gentleman from Pennsylvania.
M.r. RIiis jt. I thank the gentleman
for yielding.
Mr. Chairman. the calculation of
530,000 or 600,000 additional business-
es being cd’vered under the reduction
from 100 kilcgrams to 25 kilograms is
changed by this Florto amendment.
Mr. LENT. 5 the point the gentle-
maii is making is that it would be more
than 500,000 businesses.
Mr. RITTER. If the gentleman will
yield further, we do not know, having
read the language, that notice must be
given perhaps to amounts well below
25 kilograms, perhaps even down tO
zero I submit that that is not neces-
sarily the Intent of the gentleman
from New Jersey, but that is exactly
what the language says.
The language says, “In the case of
the most ignitable, corrosive, reactive
or toxic types of hazardous waste, the
not.fication wouid have to occur.’ and
I paraphrase, at less than 25 kilo-
gr:s. Now, at which point does this
amendment cut off? I suot. there is
nc u:off, 5)0. 00 businesoes ma’. seem
l ke a small number in copar:zon to
the realtty of now many are covered.
Mr. LENT. In conclusion, M i-. Chair-
man. I do not believe that we should
reg’.ilate over one-half milLon addi-
t ona1 smaU businesses by adopting
the F’iorio amendment, based on limit-
ed anecdotal evidence submitted by
one industry. I am aLso bothered that
this evidence was not presented for
the record to the Energy and Com-
merce Committee. On closer inspec-
tion of this evidence, one can see why
it was not submitted. Of the 35 Inci-
dents cited in 1983, the quantIties of
waste involved breaks down as follows.
hi only two Incidents, was the quanti-
ty Involved between 25-100 kilograms,
the quantity covered by the Fiorio
amendment. The rest were either
below 25. over 100—covered by Shelby-
Lent -unknown or too vague to say,
This Is hardly a record on which to
build an amendment.
Furthermore, in testimony before
the Small Business Committee.
NSWMA did not even know If ork-
mens compensation claims for Its
members had dropped in States with a
lower notification requirement.
You can see why the Florio amend-
ment is not appropriate. I urge my col-
leagues to support a consistent, en-
forceable system of regulation for
small quantity generators which pro-
vides maximum environmental protec-
H 6523
flon. I urge you to support the Shelby-
Lent amendment as draftee. and reject
the Florio amendment to bring over
half a million additional businesses
under Federal regulation.
Mr. ECEART. Mr. Chairman. I rise
in support of the Florlo amendment.
Mr. Chairman, let me try to address
a cOuOie of issues. that have been
raisea in the recent debate.
First of a]]. It is important to under-
score that the authority to go to zero
already exists in current In.’a’. This is
not a new provision; it is a restatement
of existing law.
Second. we have not heard the tales
of ‘aoe that have been pre&c:ed in the
course of this debate or. the Flor.o
amendment yet this afternoon about
proolems occurring in M mouri, Cali-
fornia. Louisiana. New ampshire,
Massachusetts. or Rhode Island where
this not:ce provision alren y exists.
There has been no demor..strable evi-
dence that any of the small husinesses.
the woes of wh cb have been predicted
for them with the adoptfon of this
amendment, have su!fered in these
other States wh ch already have suni-
lar or more stringent provisions,
The issue is one perhaps cf a paper
traiL It is best probaoly to reflect
upon flow we got where we are with
this bill today.
We do not know where this stuff
comes from, we do not knc where t
is going, and we co not even iow how
many dumps we have in t e Ur.t d
States, ann that is paz-tic acause we
have a ied to have ;rovis:c.ns such as
this which can at least crea: the kind
of e iderice that can give ts a sound
basis for sound decisionmaki.ng in the
future.
One of the problems in haza ous
waste management has been the Un-
known, and with the Fiorto r.otl.fica-
don amendment we will elin-..inate that
problem.
Let us take a look at one of the pro-
ponents of the Shelby-Lent substitute
suggested, arid I support every other
provision of It, and particuia.i-ly would
be supportive of it if the Fiorio amend-
ment and ‘my amendment is included.
‘Landfills may refuse to ancept this
waste If they know what as in their
trucks. I think nothing speaks more
eloquently in favor of a notice require-
ment than that simple Statement. The
reason they might not accept it Is be-
cause they would realize that they are
accepting dangerous, hazardous sub-
stances for which they, under other
provisions of the law, very well
be liable. In this instance the oppo-
nents of the Florio amendment wish
to tell you that silence Is golden. Well,
it may be golden for those w o wish to
profit from other peoples rmisery and
to continue to. provide for the unmiti-
gated dumping, In no matter what
quantities we are talking about, of sub-
stances that are dangerous. and .which
have caused injury and harm to i .ptoid
people across this Nation.
__‘2_j_, //
-------
H 6524
This is not a small-business-against-
the EPA bill, If anything, perhaps the
Floria amendment could also be prop-
erl.y na.rned the Garbage Collection
Protection Amendment of 1983. There
are Literally dozens of people who col.
lect soUd waste In this Nation. There
are literally dozens of municipalities
that dispose of this waste that are
fearful of the accumulat on of these
substances, the synergistic effects of
which can threaten ground water and
pose untold hazards for us in the
future.
The question is not only one of
amount, but type, and the ability of
the people of this Nation, of residen-
tial communities chat are near these
dumpsites. to make an iniormed, intel-
Ugent decision about what goes into
the ground in their ceignborhoods and
— communities. Without the Florto
amendment, we cannot do that.
I urge adoption. Let us discover any
more of these things by accident.
Mr. FLORXO. Mr. Chairinazi, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. ECKART. I would be happy to
yield to gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. FLORIO. I thank the gentleman
for yielding.
Mr. Chairman.. I thank the gentle-
man for his very learned evaluation.
Let me point out one additional
thing. As I indicated before, there are
20 States that already have small-gen-
erator modifications below the Federal
law. A number of States already have
the notification provtnor.s that we are
advocating having on a uniform na-
tional basis—Rhode Island. Massachu-
setts. Louisiana, Missoun. New Hamp-
shire. California, and so on. I do not
know how’ many individuals in any of
those States can oppose this effort to
apply that uniformly, because, as we
know, one of the things we are trjtng
to protect Is ground water, and to the
degree that aquifers do not know
State boundaries, we can have my
State or your State doing the right
thing, and not having the adjacent
States, with notification requirements.
allowing for inappropriate disposal.
having those chemicals work their way
into the ground water that is polluting
the State that does require notifica-
tion. This is a national problem that
requires a national uniform response.
and a minimum response is to know
where toxic materials are going.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. EC ART. I would be happy to
yield to my friend, the gentleman
from New York.
Mr. L T. I thank the gentleman
for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, did I understand the
gentleman to indicate that the Florio
amendment simply restates existing
law, that the EPA Administrator
would promulgate reg’.ilacions govern-
ing the transport of hazardous waste?
Mr. ECKART. It has the authority
under ex scing law to go down to zero.
Mr. LENT. I think the gentleman is
correct that the EPA Administrator
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
does have that authority. My point is
that he is not mandated under exist-
ing law.
The CHAIRMAN. The tune of the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. ECXART)
has ge aexpired.
(On request of Mr. Lzrrr and by
unanimous consenL Mr. Ecx tar was
allowed to proceed for 2 additional
minutes.)
Mr. LENT. But the Florlo amend-
ment would direct the EPA Adzninis.
trator to promulgate regulations down
to zero. My point is that the Florio
amendment does go further than what
is presently in the Law. It directs the
EPA to promulgate regulations.
Mr. MOLINARL Mr. Chairman, I
move to sti’.ke the requisite number of
words, and I rise in support of the
Flor.o ame ’ r ”.ent.
Mr. Chairman, I think the debate on
both asnenameucs here has beesi very
good. There have been good reasons
raised on both sides’of the argument.
We have beard the questions of the
burdens that would be put upon busi-
nesses. and I am concerned about that.
We have also heard about the thflicul-
ty of compuance, and whether indeed
it is possible to be able to effectuate
compliance with this RCRA bill as
amended by the Florio amendment.
0 1530
I suggest Ibis to you, that while it.
may be difficult to effectuate compli-
ance, that i.f we were to be able to get
say 25 percent compliance within a
year or two years, look at the progress
that we would have made. I do not sus-
pect. that we are ever going to get 100
percent compliance or anywhere near
lI-
The question that we have to look at.
is where is the country today? We do
know that there are responsible
people out there, responsible small
businessmen and there are the others..
I ihm they are the ones that we are
attempting to reach today with this
amendment.
We talk about the classifications of
hazardous substances and, yes, indeed,
the gentleman from Pen.nsylvama (Mr.
RImR) listed the four categories. We
must remember that the one I guess
we are most concerned about is the
one that deals with toxr chemicals.
I think the time has come that we
have to face up to the problem. LI it
causes an additional burden to the
businesses of this community, the
small businesses, I think that is a price
chat we are going to have to pay in so-
ciety for what we hope to gain. We
only look back to the last year or two
and study the record. I must say that
at hearings we held by the small busi-
ness committee in New York about a
year or a year-and-a.haif ago, we
heard horror story upon horror story
about what was occurring in the small
business industry -
Mr Chairman, I urge strong support
for the Florio amendment.
Mr. MACKAY. M i-. Chairman, I move
to strike the requisite number of
August 4, 1.98.1
words, and I rise in opposition to the
amendment.
(Mr. MAcKAY asked and was gi en
pern’.i.ssion to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. M cK.AY. Mr. Chairman, like
most Membçrs of the freshman class. I
have not felt it appropriate to becoriie
involved on every issue that has come
before this Chamber. Howe er. I ha e
substantial background on the hazard-
otis waste issue, and hope that the izi-
sights I have gained from that experi-
ence may be of assistance to other
Members in considering the rnpact of
this legislation in their own ±stricts.
I served for 2 years as chairman of
the Governor’s Hazardous Waste
Policy Commission in flor:da. and
have studied and helped deal with nu-
merous hazardous waste c ses wl’ucn
occurred during that tune.
In working at both the State and
local levels, I have discovered a
number of surprise endings in the
effort to manage the hazardous waste
problem. It is my belief that there are
a number of lessons to be lea.-ned from
our experience to date with RCRA and
I believe the Shelby/Lent amendment
will enable us to avoid repeating in the
1930’s the mistakes we have already
made in hazardous waste ma.r.ageent
in the 19 ’TO’s.
The hazardous waste (EW) issue is a
clear example of a Federal policy-that
mandated a massive new set of respon.
sibiiities on State government, and
then failed to follow through with
either the technical or the monetary
assistance necessary to erianle the
States to comply with these mandates.
The result has been delay, confusion,
and unnecessary ill wilL
States hazardous waste ;rograms
are relatively new and many are still
in the process of getting EPA certtfica-
don. In Florida, our depar:nient of en-
vironmental regulation is only now
getting its program in place under
RCRA. At the same time. t is con-
tending with an escalating series of
crises from weekly discoveries of un-
controlled dump sites, and polluted
water supplies.
Today, with the proposal to substan-
tially eliminate the “Small Generator”
exemption, we run the risic of doing
the very same thing to small business-
es in the 1980’s, a-s the original RCRA
legislation did to Stare governrnent,s
and big business in the 19 ’TO’s.
One of the first Surprises is who the
small generators are. In contrast to
large-quantity generators, which are
almost entirely from the manufactur-
ing sector, over 89 percent of the small
generators are from the norirnanufac-
turing sector. They are basically our
small business consticuenctes. operat-
ing in such diverse areas as consu-uc-
tion, printing, schools. automootle
repair garages, and a:iy number of
other areas not normally assoc:ated
with hazardous waste,
Nationwide, it is estimated that busi-
nesses now exempt as small ge er-ators
-------
August 4, L98S
account for less than 10 percent of the
hazardous wa.ste being generated. But
that statistic, like many others. Is not
accurate across the board. In States
like Florida, which are not heavily in-
dustrialized, small generators account
for a far greater percentage of the
total hazardous waste problem. The
best estimates in Florida are that the
small generator is responsible for a
quarter to a half of all our hazardous
waste. I believe those statistics are
typical of nonindustrial States.
We knew at the outset that small
businesses do not have the financtal
and technical resources to comply
with RCRA. What we discovered, how.
ever, Is Chat there are no permitted
sites in which they can legally dispose’
of thier hazardous wastes.
It has thus far r oc been politically
possible to establish new hazardous
waste disposal sites in Florida. So.
there are only a few Sites, hundreds of
miles apart. This means small busi-
nesses could not comply even if they
wanted to. unless they are prepared to
haul their wastes hundreds of miles.
Small businesses are unable to
achieve economies of scale by hauling
in truck.load lots, but Florida has not
permitted transfer stations to enable
these small shipments to be pooled
before transfernng them long di.s-
tances.
I have mentioned Florida a great
deal, but testimony from EPA indi-
cates Florida is typical of most other
nonindustrial States, Snelby-Leot
deals with these proolen’.s by allowing
treatment, storage, and disposal at in-
terim facilities, and by providing a re-
alistic amount of tune to get permitted
facilities in place.
Further. Shelby-Lent adopts realis-
tic timeframes to allow time to edu-
cate local governments and small bum-
nesses as to their responsibilities, and
it directs EPA to undertake education
programs for local governments and
small businesses.
In summary. Mr. Chairman, unless
we adopt the Shelby-Lent amendment.
we are on the verge of putting small
businesses In a classic double bind.
They will face enormous new responsi-
bilities with no realistic way to comply
with the law.
The lesson of the 1970’s is that an
unrealistic law creates an ur..necessar-
ily adversary atmosphere, and strong
incentives toward illegal dumping. It is
my hope that we will not have to learn
that same lesson again in the 1980’s.
The Shelby-Lent amendment is a
reasonable step coward regulating and
educating smaU generators without
placing excessive burdens on State and
local governments. I urge my col-
leagues to suoport its adoption.
Mr. GRAZYLM. Mr. Chairman. r move
Co strike the requisite number of
Words. I rise In opposition to the
Florio amendment. -
Mr. Chairman. I thir.k it is Impor-
tant that this point be answered about
how can it hurt things if we prornul-
gate new regulations, if we pass a law.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
ft is argued that most people are law
abiding and some people will comply
with It. Even if 25 percent comply with
it, are we better off than we are now?
It seems to me that is the real ques-
tion we are talking about here. That
Is, at what point do we optimize the
degree of environmental protection
that we are getting?
Now, clearly, If your objective is to
have good environmental laws on the
books, rather than a good environ-
merit, then you want to support the
Florio amendment because you are
going to be able to open the Iawbook.s,
should this become law, and there it
will be. On the books we are going to
be able to regulate down to zero the
actions of small business In disposing
of hazardous wastes In some circum-
stances, down to 25 kilograms in
others.
But the real questions are whether
this proposal is feasible, whether the
law Is enforceable, and whether or not
its passage will help the environment.
Now, what the Shelby-Lent
amendment does is make a substan-
tial change in current law. We are
going down from 1,000 kilograms to
100 in our level of regulation. We are
asking small business to adjust to this.
Now, forget the cost to small business
for a moment. That argument has
been made over and over. ft Is an argii-
merit that ought to carry a lot of
weight here, but it does not.
The point Is this: For people to be
law abiding, No. 1. the law must be
feasible to comply with, and No. 2.
people have got to believe that it Is
reasonable. If we reach the point
.where the people who are required to
comply with the law do not believe it
is reasonabLe, if they cannot find dis-
posal sites_at prices they can afford to
pay, what is going to happen? Yes:
maybe we will get 25 percent who find
It feasible to comply. But what if we
induce a situation where a substantial
number of people simply take the haz-
ardous wastes and flush them down
the toilet? Are we not worse off then
than we are now, at least the waste is
now going to landfills.
We are finally getting people to view
the new requirements we are unposing
as being reasonable. We are trying to
educate them in terms of being con-
cerned about the impact of waste gen-
erat on. but If we move so far that
they view the requirements as being
ridiculous, then we are going to induce
them to be more Irresponsible than
they currently are being under exist-
ing law. Whether we are, in fact.
better off with t ghter standards de-
pends on the behavior those standards
trigger.
I submit that with the Florto amend-
ment we are likely to trigger very trre.
sporisible behavior. We are likely to
discover this waste, not in the local
dump where we have chemical reac-
tions and the waste dissipates before it
leaks through, but scattered through
our communities. We may create a sit.
uation where the local laundry, the
H i3525
local college, or local car wash simply
has the guy who normally do.’s the job
say, ‘Oh, the hell with It, I’ll flush it
down the toilet.”
I submit that there is a very real
danger here,
Second: we are not going to commit
the whole Treii.surj of the United
States of America to the EPA. I am
sure there are those who would like to
do that and there are many here who
know no bottom line In trie expendi-
ture of the taxpayers’ money, but that
is not going to happen. We have a lot
of other political groups who are riot
going to allow that to happen because
they want the money.
So what do we do by imposing these
constraints? We take the : mited re-
sources EPA has and rather than
using those resources to trj to deal
with big problems, we force them to
run around trying to bc :.: inside everj
can ax. every filing stattoci in America.
I submit that this Is not a reasonable
policy. I think, quite frarciy. that the
gentleman from Aia. ama (Mr.
Sirn.sy) and the gentleman rrom New
York (Mr. Lm ’n have tai .i’n this move
about as far as it is pruor-”it to take it
at this point and that the. r proposal
makes a great deal more sense. Can we
not move from a thousand kjograrns
to a hundred, monitor the result.
begin the education pr cesa., allow
EPA—which everyone agrees has got
the power to do these criinigs ‘iow— o
acc mulace data anc deciot wnere we
go from there?
Mr. Chairman. I urge my c eagues
to look at two points. qu Ce a. ’ e from
the cost to small business:
First, are ae going to in. ’ :c.. people
to disregard law because ‘. think it
is unreasoriabl&
Second,.do we really hi ’ e or are we
going to comzrut to EPA .: e resources
that woud really make .t possible for
us to enforce this propo id law .?
Surely it Is a well-known pr:nciple to
those who serve in the C r.gess that
in order for a law to pruciuc desirable
results, it must be perce:ved as reason-
able. I submit that this proposal will
not be perceived as rec.on ble and
that we are going to indu . e businesses
in the best of consciencx to act li-re-
sponsibly because they are coing to
thinic that we have been untreasonab:e.
arbitrary, capricious, and plain stupid.
I am concerned, quite fr nk1y. that
they are going to be rig’.t. but I a.-n
also concerned they are ;o r’g to react
In a way that might be !iarmiul to us
all.
01540
Mr. GORE. Mr. Chairm:n. I move to
strike the requisite numc r of words.
and I rise in support of the amend
merit.
(Mr. GORE asked and was given per-
mission to revise and exterlu his re-
marks.)
Mr. GORE. Mr. Chairman. I rise Ui
support of this amendmerii. I thi4k
Is fair to say this is the key vo On
1- 2 /
-------
H 6526
this bill this year. This is the key has-
ardcus waste vote in this Congress.
The issue is pretty simple. Are we
going to allow someone who is dump.
ng 1 ton of dioxin per year to be able
do It. w thout even telling anyone
here it has been dumped?
U you are for that, then vote agatnst
the amendment. If you are against
that, and you .ant to at least know
where it has been dumped, then tote
for the amendment.
My colleague ho has just spoken.
my respecten an esteemed colleague.
the gentleman from Texas (Mr
GRAMM has sa a that If this amend-
mer.t is passed ae mnignz see a wave of
v:oiat:ons on t ’.e part of sntai busi-
ness th.rougnout this country I Just
;rt;ak that is wrong.
We hate laws in 20 States already
relating to small generators. We have
five State laws which are much tough-
er than this pronosed amendmer.t, and
there is no e tdence that small busi-
ness is violating the!n. They are not ir-
responsible. They are going to abide
by this law.
In fact, there is a growing awareness
all th.i-ough this country that the time
for talk and rhetoric about hazardous
waste has long passed. People want us
to get serious about this problerc
They wa.nt to see it solved and they
know there are some trade offs in-
volved.
They know it is going to be tough to
S31ve this problem.
But this is the key vote. Are we in-
rested in solving the proolem or ai-e
e interested in just talking aoout it
nc agreeing when our const.zuents
say yes, triis is a terrible prooie&
If you want to help solte the prob-
lem, vote for the Flono amena.ment.
Mr. GRA t. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. GORE. I will be glad to yield.
Mr. GRAMM. I would just like to
make two points.
First of all, we have been debating
for an hour here before the gentleman
cz_’ne on the floor about this use of 1
ton of dioxin. The point we have tried
to make over and over again is that
those kinds of quantities of dioxin in
100 percent form do not exist any-
where .xcept En laboratories. so those
kinds of exa.’nples are misleading at
best.
Mr. GORE. Reclaiming my time for
a moment, first of all, the dioxin that
was dumped at Times Beach amount-
ed to less than 50 pounds. Second of
all, you could use several different ex-
arnples. Someone could be dumping 1
ton of cyanide per year and you would
not even have that person be required
to teU where he is dumping the cya-
nide.
Mr. GRAMM. Will the genLieman
yield further’
Mr. GORE. I will be glad to yield.
Mr. GRAMM. In fact, In the Times
“each case the 42 pounds of dioxin
j contained in 100,000 kilograms of
byproduct of 2-4-5 TCP and never
existed in a pure form to be mixed.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
The second point I wanted to make
was that in fact we have had surveys
in the States that have passed these
tight laws and these surveys tend to
show that small business is not even
aware that the standards exist.
So I do not buy the idea that we
have clear evidence yei as to what is
going on in these States. I think it Is
important that we know what we are
doing if we are going to jump- from
1,000 kilograms to zero all at once
when we have a reasonable, moderate,
rational proposal before us to go from
1.000 to 100.
Mr. GORE. Reclaiming my time, the
gentleman and I have had the oppor-
tunicy to debate th s issue on several
occasions and before the debate
became framed around this narrow
dispute over the Florio amendment
the gentleman has opposed every
single suggestion from the majority
s de to try to get at this problem.
Before it got down to this near com-
promise on the Florio amendment the
gentleman as opposed to doing any-
thing about it.
Mr. GRA D 1. Will the gentleman
yield?
Mr. GORE. I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. GR.Ar fl I. I am here today sup-
porting the amendment of the gentle-
man from Alabama (Mr. Sx ).
from the Democratic side, to drop the
requirements form 1.000 to 100.
Mr. PLORIO. Will the gentleman
yield?
Mr. GORE. I yield to the gentleman
from New Jersey.
Mr. FLORIO. I would just like to
commend the gentleman from Texas
who since last year has developea a
great sense of sophistication. I recall
last year the gentleman was opposng
any modification to the small gener-
ator exemption and asking that we
study it. So I am very pleased to wel-
come him to the idea that the small
generator exemption is against the
public interest,
I think the gentleman has moved
forward dramatically
Mr. GORE. Reclaiming my time. I
would just add that I would iope the
gentleman would come one more rea-
sonable Step further and support the
Flono amendment which will give the
American people the nght l .a know
where hazardous waste is being
dumped.
Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I move
to strike the requisite number of
words and I rise in support of the
Florlo amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I think It is iznpor-
tant that we view the Florlo amend-
ment in connection with the Shelby-
Lent amendment which I also support.
Absent the Shelby-Lent amendment
and the Florio amendment added to it.
the condition of the bill would provide
for an extensive application of regula-
tions upon small generators.
Not only would small generators
have to meet a notice requirement:
that Is, to fill out a form as to what
the chemicals would be. what would be
August 4. iPas
transported and dispcsed of from their
generation factlity, be it a retail outlet
or what have you, but also that gener-
ator would be subject to another
number of other EPA requiremerlt.s
provided under RCRA.
In fact. absent Shelby-L.3nt, absent
the EPA doing its joos, a.s sometimes it
has failed to do. aria to meet the dead-
lines of u’us Cor.gress. absent meeting
the r requirements to promulgate reg-
ulations wich n I believe 18 months.
the full weight of RCRA requiremen
would fall upon the small generator,
the full regulatory burden of the Fed-
eral Government would fail upon the
small generators.
Now, the gentleman from Alabama
(Mr. Si EY and the gentleman from
New York (Mr. Lmrr) have cured triat.
The hammer of the fuji wetght of the
P.CRA requ:rements failing on small
generators has been removed by
Shelby-Lent, and I hope we support it
for that reason.
Additionally. Shelby-Lent makes
sure that in regard to those regula-
tions that would fail on small gener-
ators. including the separation of ma-
terials and intricate regulations of
that nature, are not imposed upon the
smaU generator from 100 kilograms
down to 25. The limit is 100, and r ap-
plaud the Shelby-Lent effort in that
regard.
What the gentleman from New
Jersey, (Mr. Ftoazo) is suggesting is
that in this ininut m area of notice. in
this minimum area of provid:ng :nac a
generator simply notice the dispos:-
t:on of hszarcous materials zoose 25
k: ograms a mnontn. in this minimum
area tr,a: would be the only case be-
t’ een 100 kilograms arid 25 kilograms
of generation that the EPA regula-
tions would apply.
The the gentleman from New
Jersey. (Mr. FLORro) does one addi-
tional thing. He does mandate the
EPA promulgate regulations in
to the most toi ic of all chemicals that
have been identified unoer RCR.A. He
does require that that be done.
The opponents of the Florio amend-
ment will tell you that that means
that EPA must therefore regulate
down to zero in these categories. That
Is not so.
It means that EPA must In fact p’o-
rnulgate regulatior.s and the current
law allows EPA to go to zero.
But the Florio amendment, as I un-
derstand it, does not mandate that
EPA regulate down to zero. It can reg-
ulate anywhere En between, but it
must promulgate regulatIons in regard
to the most toxic of chemicals identi-
fied, and must do so. and has the au-
thority to go to zero 11 I I. so chooses.
That is our Interpretation of the
Florio amendment arid I believe that is
correct.
Let me say something . n regard to
why I think this simple requirement
of notice on the generation of materi
als. 25 kilograms or more, Is impor-
tant. -
-------
.4ugusf 4. 198.:?
Lou:siana has an act similar to
RCRA. We are a qualified State under
the Federal program, which means
that we have a program which is as
sirir.ger.t or more stringent than the
Federal program.
Our laws requ:re notice at that level,
and our laws require even additional
regulations below the level .of 100 kilo.
grams.
How well that law is being enforced
is something we hare been debating in
Louisiana at this time. But no one has
appealed to the Louisiana Legislature
to change that law. No one has asked
us to raise those iimit.s because it is
driving them out of business. No one
has asitea us. n eflec: to repeal that
law that would protect the public by
simply gi -.ng notice of what chemicals
are being produced and where they
are being sent.
The chairman of the subcommittee
has made an awfully valid point and
that is when an underground aquifer
is polluted tt Is polluted forever. We
have iost it forever.
We in Louis ana nave several Impor-
tant u.nderground aquifers. Some of
them flow from Arkansas into our
St.ate. Some flow from Mississippi.
One of the largest ones flows from
Mississippi.
It is important, in my view, and in
the view of many of us here that we
have a national stanicaru in regard to
knowing where hazardous wastes are
going. It does not matter whether the
hazardo.is a.sze is accumulating in
large gro cs or small groups. Lf t is
accumuia: ; son ewaere and l as the
potent.al pro— -en: . o permanently
poUut g or co minating invaluacle
water supplies in our Nation then It
deserves azt onal attent on: it deserves
a program that insures in every State
surrounding a State with a program.
that there will be similar requirements
and similar protections for the public.
That is why the Flono amendment
is important.
0 1550
Let me say again, the Florio amendS
merit added to the Shelby amendment
will not impose a whole generation of
regulations upon the small generators.
It will not do so. If it did so, I could
not support It. because that would cer-
tainly be unreasonable and certainly
that would probably require small gen-
erators to hare less than the proper
respect for the law. But all we are
doing is saying if Shelby-Lent passes
that massive regulation is not applica-
ble to small generators , If it passes
with the F)orio amendment, the small
generator simply has to notice. Let me
snow you the form.
The CHAIRMAN The time of the
gentleman has expired.’
(On request of Mr EcKART and by
unanimous consent, Mr. TAUZIN was
allowed to proceed for 1 additIonal
minute.)
Mr. TACZLN. This is a form, a one-
page form.. It requires the name of the
company, an identification of the
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
chemical that is being disposed of and
generated from that facility. It is not
as complicated as an IRS form, not
even the simplest of IRS forms, it is
the simple paper that identifies haz-
ardous waste going out somewhere in
somebody’s community and may in
fact 1 day accumulate to damage
someone’s environment or their LiZ e.
because we have lost life in our State
at a hazardous waste site. There is
nothing more Impressive, I think, to
the people of our State and this
Nation when a young boy had to die
when we did not do our job in past
years in regulating this area. It does
not matter whether it accumulated in
large groups or small groups, that
young cia’ died because we did not do
our iob. I think we have to do our job
toda ’. :n doing our 1 ob by requiring a
small notification it seems to me is the
least we can do.
Mr. RIT ER Mr. - Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. TAUZIN. I yield to the gentle-
mar l.
Mr. R i i .R. I thank the gentle-
man.
Is the gentleman aware of the cover-
age that is extended when the thresh-
old is lowered rorrn L.000 to 100?
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman has expired.
(On request of Mr. Rrrrza and by
uiia.r.imous consent. Mr. Ti zxr was
allowed to proceed for 2 additional,
nuriutes.l
Mr. RITTER. Mr. Chairman, .ill
the gentleman ::ied?
Mr. TA ZIN. I y eid to the ger t e
man.
Mr. Rui R. I thar.k the gentleman
for yleicing further
I,s the gentleman from Louisiana
aware of the extent of coverage of
businesses and organizations, rist1tu-
LIons that are covered by the decrease
in the threshold from 1.000 to 100
kilograms?
Mr. TAUZIN. If the question is, if I
am aware of the number of businesses
that would be affected, yes. Indeed, I
am. We have those businesses in our
State. We have had no threshold limit
In our State.
Mr. RIi t. OK. There is 130.000
to 140.000 new InstItutions that are
covered.
Now, that in an EPA that Is trying
to get its act together, to move for-
ward. to do the job. that is a po-verful
and substantial addition to their work-
load.
Is the gentleman aware, with the ad-
ditional number of covered institu-
tions under the 1.000 to 25 and really
to zero, Is the gentleman aware of the
numbers that we are talking about
there, that we are talking 5 to 600.000
additional covered insututions just to
go to 25 kilograms and, Lord knows.
what we are talking about go from 25
to 0.
Mr. TAUZIN. Let me reclaim my
time.
Not only does the Lord know what
we are talking about, I think this
H 6527
House knows what we are talking
about. We are talking a,bout the notice
requ rement, not the full application
o1 the EPA regulation.. So. if you want
to cite numbers to me. which generate
between 1.000 and 25 kilograms of haz-
ardous materials who are not now no-
tifying us of the fact that they are
do ng tt. my answer is we ought to
know, this House arid this country and
citizens of this country ought to know.
Earing them f i ll out a one-page
form saying who they are and what
they are sen ing into our communi-
ties, t seems to me not a difficult
burden for EPA to adnunister.
Mr. RITTER. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr TAUZIN. I yield to the gentle-
man.
Mr. HITTER. I thank the gentle-
man.
We are talking here now, to go down
to 25 kIlograms. talking about retail
stores, grocery stores, hardware stores,
photofirushing. colleges and universi-
ties. elimentary and high schools.
amusement parks, horse tracics. -
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman has expired.
(On request of Mr. R i-r and by
unanimous consent, Mr. T. tyzzx was
allowed to proceed for 2 adaitional
minutes.)
Mr. RIi i t, WW the gentleman
yield further?
Mi- TAUZIN. I yield to the gentle-
man.
M.r. P ..ITTER. I thank the gentle-
man.
Eo;ling alleys, car wa.snes. auto
body shops, printers, copying services.
barber shops, beauty salons, carpet
cleaners. drycleaners, construction and
paint contractors, landscaping and
horticultural ser. ices. I think what we
are talking about every month, if it is
just to 25 kilograms, is an add tional
haLf-million forms. Now the forms go
from the generator to the shipper,
they go from the shipper to the dls-
posal. We are talking, just to go to 25
kilograms cf a humongous new impact
of forms. This is just a hal!-rrujjjor,.
But If you go from 25 to zero, what
happens in the household, what hap-
pens with your kid’s chemistry lao’
Mr. TAI7ZIN. Reclairnin.g my time.
Mr. RITTER. If we are going to
have 1 million forms a month,
Mr. TAUZIN. If you are asking me
to consider the fact that we are talk-
ing about 500.000 new forms that will
travel between the generators of haz-
ardous waste, the transporter and the
disposer of hazardous Waste, I would
ask you in turn to consider the 500.0-00
tImes 25 kilograms of hazardous mate-
rial that is now at least. 25. maybe up
to 1.000. times 500.000 generators that
Is now flowing through out society
from generators through transporters
to heaven knows where. We simply do
not know about them, Multiply
500.000 times 100. 150. perhaps 999
k.ilogra.ms of hazardous mat.erzalsithat
is now floating through our s9cietY
-------
H 6528
that we do not know how it is being
generated or where it Is being gexierat-
ed, more Importantly where it is being
disposed of and may ultimately do
damage to our citizens.
Then I am more concerned. I a.ssure
ou, than I am worried about 500.000
,ieces of paper.
‘The CHAIRM.A.N. The time of the
gentleman has expired.
(On request of Mr. Pt.oaio and by
unanimous consent, Mr. TAUZIN was
allowed to proceed for 1 addItional
minute.)
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. TAU ’ZIN. I yield to the gentle-
man.
M i’. FLORIO. I think we have to
come back to reality. If the cutoff
point for the notification is 100 kilo-
grams. I defy anyone in this room to
describe the barber shop as a business
that is generating a ton a year of has.
ardous waste, or the small mom and
pop drycleaner that Is generating a
ton a year of hazardous waste. That Is
just a fantasy, that is just not happen-
ing. -.
Mr: TT! , Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. TA UZIN. I yield to the gentle-
man.
Mr. HILEB.. In terms of the mom
and pop drycleaner today, the average
dry cleaner generates 125 kilograms
per month. So there would be no ques-
tion that they wou.ld fall under this
•• “-orlsion.
fr. BROWN of California. Mr.
iairman. I move to strike the requl.
:e number of words and I rise in sup-
port of the Florio amendment.
(Mr. BROWN of California asked
and was given permission to revise arid
extend his remarks.)
Mr. BROWN of California. Mr.
Chairman. I am not enthusiastic about
getting into this debate because I do
not have the expertise of the previous
speakers who are mainly members of
the committee. But I have listened In-
tently to the facts recited here, to the
fact that we are talking about possibly
another 500,000 to 600.000 small busi-
nesses that might be involved in a re-
porting requirement, and to the rather
substantial amount of wastes involved
which I think probably is i ii the order
of several hundred thousand tons per
year of toxic chemicals of one sort or
another that would be regulated. I
want to make Just a couple of points:
Of this 500.000 to 600.000 small busi-
nesses that would be invOlved, this sev-
eral hundred thousand tons of toxic
chemicals that would be Involved, 10
percent of those are in the State of
California, 50.000 to 60.000 of those
businesses and a very large number of
tons of toxic waste are being disposed
of in California, which I have the
‘ivilege to represent.
can assure the gentlemen who have
Iressed conce’ii about the adverse
.act upon small business, that Call-
. , .nia. which has this program in
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
effect now, Is not experiencing that
kind of results,
Of all of the problems that small
businessmen came to me with, this Is
the least. I have had zero complaints
from small business about the applica-
tion of these regulations.
We are very sensitive to this kind of
regulatory problem In California. Just
as we are sensitive to the problems of
environmental contamination.
I will speak on that point a little bit
later on in the debate.
So. I would say to my friends who
are concerned about the possible polit-
ical Impact stemming from this over-
reaching of regulation that 11 our ex-
perience in California is any Indica-
tion, you have nothing to worry about
here. Small businessmen have other
things far mo’re important to worry
about, such as whether they stay in
business or not, than whether or not
they have to report the amount of
toxic waste which they are generating,
-. - 01600 -
There Is one other point that I
would like to make. Some of the
speakers on this subject have acted as
If they were resisting an unnecessary
regulatory evil, that they had to main-
tain the sanctity of the right of small
business to dispose of a certain
amount of toxic waste on Into the
future. ____
Believe me, that Is not the case. We
are not going to be able to continue to
dispose of toxic chemicals into the en-
vironment. no matter how small the
quantities, for very much longer into
the future. We are now in the process
of developing the technologies which
are involved In neutralizing or dispos-
ing or handling these wastes In more
satisfactory ways than disposing of
them into the environment.
There are new businesses, new In-
dustries, being created to do this and
It is absolutely essential that we pre-
pare to face the fact that we are no
longer going to be able to dispose of
these toxins into the environment.
There are just too many facts indicat-
ing that this is one of the factors
which is endangering the future of
America’s health arid that we are not
going to be able to continue to do It.
So for these reasons I am urging
that we support the Florlo amend’
ment. I do not think It is onerous. I do
not think it has political penalties. I
think It Is inevitable that we move
down this course and I would think
that this rather modest step, which
the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
FLoaro) is proposing, is the next rea-
sonable step to take,
Mr. LEVITAS. Mr. ChaIrman. I
move to strike the requisite number of
words, and I rise in support of the
Florio amendment.
(Mr. LEVITAS asked and was gwen
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. LEVITAS. Mr. Chairman; I have
studied this amendment and I am as
concerned as others here are about
August 4, 198
what additional burdens there may be
imposed in terms of filling out the
short, one-page form that the gentle-
man from Louisiana has called to our
attention.
On the other hand, after he made
his comments, I did a little calculation.
And found out that what we are talk-
ing about Is not knowing where
12.500.000 kilograms of hazardous
waste material would be going In this
country. -
And 11 that is the case I really
wonder what the debate is about.
What is the alternative that the oppo-
nents of the Florio amendment offer
us’ Is it to remain in doubt; is It not to
know: is it to let these hazardous ma-
terials accumulate until they explode
or become ignited or poison our com-
munities? I do not think anybody
wants that. Small businessmen are at
least as concerned about their commu-
nities as anyone else. I am sure nobody
wants that. -
I could not support this bill without
the Shelby-Lent amendment attached
thereto because it significantly strikes
a balance between relieving the bur-
dens on small business and providing
adequate regulation of the disposal of
hazardous waste. But for us to adopt
the policy, a conscious and deliberate
policy of saying we do not want to
know where 12,500,000 kilograms of
ho9 ordous waste go each year, borders
on the absurd. - - - -
And It is for that reason and for the
reason that on balance the burden of
filling out a form saying where the
waste comes from and what it Is, is not
onerous when compared to the deadly
consequences on the basis of burden
and risk assessment, I come out in
favor of the Florio amendment and in
strong support of the Shelby-Lent
amendment. And I urge my colleagues
to adopt both of them.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from New Jersey (Mr. FLoiuo) to
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Alabama (Mr. S .sy).
The question was taken and the
Chairman announced that the ayes
appeared to have it. - -
- RZCORD VOT!
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman. I demand
a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic
device, and there were —ayes 236, noes
180, not voting 17. as follows:
- (Roli No. 3241
AYES—236
Ackerrrtail Blaggi Carper
AddabbO Boettlert Cart
Albotla Boris Clarke
Ander Ofl Boland Clay
Andrel.l. (TX) Bonior Coelho
AnnunzIO Bonker Coleman (MO)
Appftgale Borskl Coleman (TX)
Bosco Collins
AUCOIn Bouther Conle
Barnard Boxer Conycra
Barrios Breaux Courter
Bales Brooks Coytte
Bedeil Bream (CA) Croc (ceLt
BetlerulOn Bryant D’Amours
Ber tft n Burton (CA) Davis
-------
August 4, 1988
Kogcvsek
Kolter
Kostutayer
LaFalee
Lanios
Lest!,
LehmaA (CA)
Lehman (FL)
Lelarid
Levin
Levine
Leritas
Livingst on
Long (LA)
Long (MD )
Lowry (WA)
Lundine
Madigan
Markey
MartIn (NC)
Martinea
Matsu i
McCloskey
Mccurdy
MeDade
McGrath
McHugh
McKer iso
McK inney
McNulty
Mikuiski
Miller (CA)
Mineta -
Minish
Mo ak iey
- Mohinan -
- .Md l lohan .
Moody
Moore
Morrison (C l ’)
Mzszek
— Murphy
Murtha -
Matcher
Neal
Nelson
Nowek
Obcrna.r
Obey
Or.
Ott iger
ens
Panetta
Patman
Patterson
Pease
- Pepper --,
Perkins
Pickle
-Pursdll
NO — 180
Deachie Raicher
Daub Heftier
Den’tsk liller
Dickinson . Hall -
Dingeil - Rotikins -
Dorgan Hubbard
Dowdy Runier
Dicier . Huno
Duncan Hyos
Dyson Ireland
Edwards (AL) JOnci (TN)
Edwards (OK) Ranch
Emerson Karen
English Kemp
Erdre iCfl Klti dnese
Erlenborn Kramer
FIedIeT Lagomarelno
Fields Lat&i
Flippo Leath
Pr anicilS
F’renzcl Lea,s (CA)
Fucus Lewis P I
Gaydos L iptr_ ki
Gee_as Lloyd
Gingr i ch Lneffler
Gridiron • Lea
Grim m Lower ir(CA)
Oundereon Lujan
Hail. Ralph Luken
HemmeTschmldt ungrefl
Hansen (ID) Mack -
Hansen (UT) M cKa7
iarthett Marienev
Quiflen Solomon
Spence
Ray Stangeland
Ridge Stenhoim
Ritler Stratton
Roberts Stump
Robinson Sundquist
Rogers Teflon
Rose Taylor
Roth Tha mes (CA)
Rowland Thomas (GA)
Rudd Torres
Sawyer Valentine
Schaefer Varider JagL
Schuize Vandergnft
Sensenbrezmer Vucanovich
Shelby Walker -
Shumway Whltehurst
Shuster WhItley
Sdjander Whittaker
S insky Whitten
Skeen Williams (OH)
Skelton WInn
Smith (Nt) Wolf
Smith. Denny Wortley
Smith. Robert Yatron
Sny der Zschau
NOT VOTI}IG—17
Early Mitchell
Ford(TN) . SiGerma in
Grrgg Stokes
Heftel - Weber
mg lnower - Young (AK)
McCoLlum
The most important aspect of L’ leinent-
izig this provision”—and we are ta.lking
about the notice provision—”is fostermgvol-
untary compliance through a broad educa-
tional campaign, working with the trade as-
sociations to alert tile affect communities of
their duties and responslbilltles We believe
that many of the affected generators will
likely be small businesses which in the past
have had little familiarity with the RCRA
regulations. These bustnesses may not even
be aware that they are generators of haz-
ardous waste, much less be able to identify
their waste sufficiently for purposes of com-
pleting the notice.
We will depend heavily on education to
obtain compliance ’ with this requirement.
We envision taking enforcement actions
when we receive reports of noncompliance
from waste handlers. To conduct occasional
Inspections of even a small percentage of
small quantity generators will be very re-
source-Intensive for EPA and the States.
given the enormous size of the regulated
commuiuty. Some States may. of course.
have the capability to undertake a more ag-
gressive enforcement program.
01630
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
Marriott
Martin (IL)
Martin (NY
Mamoli
McCain
McCand le
McDonald
McEwen
Miehel
Miller (Off)
Montgomery
Moorbeed
Morrison (WA)
Myers
Nichols
Nielson
O’Brien
Olin
Oxley
Packard
Pains
Peahayan
Paul
Penny
Petit
Porter
Pnlcflard
Alexander
Bliley
Boner
Cooper
Crane. Daniel
Bymaily
Rangel
Ratcflford
Regula
Reid
Richardson
Rinaldo
R.odino
Roe
Roemer
Rostenkoaski
Roukema
Roybal
Russo
Sabo
Savage
Scheuer
Schneider
Schroeder
Sctiumer
Seiberling
Shannon
Sharp
Shaw
Siltoiski
Simon -
Slattery
Smith (FL.)
Smith IA)
Smith (NT)
Snowe
Solazz
Sprart
Staggere
Stark
Studds
Swat
Synar -
‘fauke - —
Tai
Torncell l
Towne
Traxler
Udall
Vento
Volbnei
Wa lgren
Watkins
Waxman .2
‘Weaver
Weim
Whe s
Wilson
Wir.i i
Wire
Wolpe
Wngbl
Wyden -
Wylie
Yates -
Young (Pt.)
Young (MO)
Zablocki
H 6529
There was no oblection.
Mr. HILER. Mr. Chairman, what
this amendment does is enable the
small business community a sufficient
amount of tune to become aware of
the regulation and to become aware of
what the requirements of the regula-
tion are. It does not chang the
amendment that was just passed in
the sense that the 25 kilogram notice
requirement is maintained.
What the amendment does is phase
in the notice requirements over a
period of 810 days, as opposed to the
180 days in the Florio amendment as
just passed.
What would happen is that those
generators of hazardous waste that
exceed 250 kilograms but are less than
1.000 kilograms would have 270 days
to begin compliance. Those generators
of between 100 and 250 kilograms
would have 540 days, and those gener-
ators of greater than 25 kilograms and
less than 100 kilograms of hazardous
waste would not come into effect for
810 days. - -, -
The reason this amendment is of-
fered. is because to a very substantial
extent It Is going to require voluntary
compliance for this measure to be met
by small business. -
I would once again like to read a
statement that was given by Lee
Thomas, the Assistant Administrator
for Solid Waste and Emergency Re-
sponse, in a hearing on July 26 before
the Subcommittee on Energy and the
Environment on special issues affect-
ing small business:
de Ia Garsa
Dellums
DeWlne
Dicks
Dixon
Donnelly
Downey
urbin
)wyer
Eckart
Edgar
Edwards (CA)
Evans (IA)
Evans (IL)
Pa scefl
Faz. io
Peighan
Ferraro
Fish
Plorio
Foglietta
Foley
Ford !vill
Forsythe
Fowler
Prank
Garcia
Ge densou
Oephardt
Gibbons
Oilman
Gilekinan
Oonralea
Goodllng
Gore
Gray
Green
Guartni
BaJ l(I2 ) -
Hall (OH)
Halt Sam
Hamilton
Bance
Hsrkln
Harrison
Hawkins
Eertel
HilUs
Horton
Howard -
!lo,er
Hucx.aDy
iiu mhea
J econs
JeUords
Jenkins
Johnson
Jones (NC)
Jones (OK)
Kaptur
Kastenmeler
Kennelly
Kildee
Akak
Andrewi (NC)
Anthony
Archer
- Badhars
Bartlett
Baleman
Bea”ett
Bereuler
Bethune
Devil)
Blitrakis
Snu
Broomlield
Brown ICO)
Broyhill
Burton (IN)
Byron
Campbell
Carney
Chandlir
Chatinell
Chappie
Chefley
Clinger
Coats
Conable
Corcoran
Coughhn
Craig
Crane Philip
Daniel
Dannemeyer
- . .01620
Mr. STRATTON and Mr. HYDE
changed tir votes from “aye” to
“no...
• Mr. MOOr changed his vote from
“no” to “aye.” -
So the amendment to the amend-
ment was agreed to. - - -
- The result of the vote was an-
nounced as ai.ove recorded.
ae roM r ory un By ca. ISILxa ro mx
AtN M (T O??!R BY MR. SREt.BY. AS
Mr. HU . Mr. Chairman. I offer
an amendment o the amendment, as
amended.
The Clerk :-aa as follows: -
Amendiser - oifered by Mr. H .z to the
amendment offe?ed by Mr. S .3T as
amended: P’i e 4. after Line 22. Insert:
‘(45) Not! -,rithstanding paragraph (4)—
(A) no latrr than 270 days after the enact-
ment of thc azardous Waste Control and
Enforcement Act of 1983, any hazardous
waste which Is part of a total quantity gen-
erated by a generator generating greater
than 250 kiLograms but less than i,ooe kilo-
grams dur.ng one calendar month and
which Is abipoed off the premises on which
- such waste is gc.ierated shall be accompa-
med by a copy of the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency Uniform Hizardous Waste
Manifest form signed by the gencrator
(B) no later than 540 days after the enact-
ment of such itt, the same requirement
shall apply to generators generating greater
than 100 kilograms but less than 1,000 kilo-
grams during ne calendar montb2 amid’
(C) no laer than 810 days after the enact-
ment of sucn Act, the same requirement
shall apply t’r generators generating greater
than 25 kilograms. but less than 1,000 kilo-
grams during one calendar month.
Mr. HILER (during the reading).
Mr. ChaIrman, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the amendment be COflSld-
ered as read and printed In the
Rzcoiw.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Indiana?
What my amendment would do
would be to allow a sufficient amount
of time for that educational process to
take place. I think It Is an amendment
that is necessary If we are to have any
measure of compliance with the 25
and 100 kilogram notice requirement-s.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. I -rise
L u OpposItion to the amendment. . -
1’
ii - —
4
-------
L Uuu
(Mr. PLORIO asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
mark.s.)
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. I think
it is sufficient to my that the gentle-
man is going to su axitially modify
the terms of the agreement that has
been entered into with the gentleman
from Alabama (Mr. S ’ svi . the gen-
tleman from New York (Mr. LrN’r),
and all of the varimss groups that have
signed on to the Shelby-Lent agree-
ment. the gentleman is stretching out
the delay for nc ificaaion from 180 to
270 days. all the way up to 1.000 kilo-
grams.
I think it is appropriate to note that
everyone who is a .Uected by this has
already signed on and agreed that 180
days is feasible.
Mr. Cbaimtan. I am happy to yield
to the gentleman from New York (Mr.
LErfl. who I trust feels his agreement
Is something that is not required to be
modified in the way the gentleman
from Indiana Is modifying It.
Mr. IZNT. Mr. Chairman. I thank
the gentleman for yielding, since my
mine was mentioned as one of the
coanthors of the Shelby-Lenr . amend-
ment and 1 have not spocen to my cal-
league from Alabama but I can say
that with the passage of the Flario
amendment, the Shelby-Lent amend-
merit insofar as the notice -provision,
as opposed to regulation. is completely
- modified. -.
I want to commend the gentleman
from indiana. I think this is a very
reasonable approach. It gives the
small businessmen more tune to work
ot t their problems.
Mr., FWRIO. Reciaunir.g ray time.
Mr. Chairman, the gentleman knows
that my amendment had nothing to
do with 250 kilograms to 1.000 kilo-
grams, and yet th Is what Is being
modified, among other things. and
stretching out the compliance time
from 180 days to 2 0 day so the
amendment of the genr.leman drama.d-
cally modifies the essence of what the
Shelby-Lent agreement Involves.
Mr. HILER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield at that point?
Mr. FLORIC. I am happy to yield.
Mr. 115 Now. I certainly cannot
speak for probably any of the groups
that worked to put this Shelby-Lent
amendment togeiher but when one of
the groups appeared before our Small
Business Committee—that is, the
Chamber of Commerce—they were
categorically opposed to the 25 kIlo-
gram notice.
Now, the gentleman has added that
into the Shelby ’Lent with this amend-
ment It would seem to me that as
soon as that provision was added, the
house of cards is going to start to fall.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, if I can
reclaim my time, the point of the gen-
tleman’s amendment is that the vast
majority of toxic waste that is covered
by the full small business general ex-
emption modifIcation is in the range
of 250 kilograms to 1.000 kilograms. A
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
thousand kilograms, by the way, is a
ton a month.
What the gentleman is doing Is sub-
stantially expanding the Shelby-Lent
amendment by allowing an extension
of time far that category of the great
est volume of waste covered by this
whole subject.
Mr. EE R. Mr. Chau-man, if the
gentleman will yield once again, It
would seem to me that the agreement
that was reached on Shelby-Lent fell
apart when it was offered by the gen-
tleman’s amendment, because of the
25 kilogram notice, and somehow to
say that now tIns amendment is
against the spirit of Shelby-Lent is to
defy the fact that the gentleman’s
amendment is against the spirit of
Shelby-Leni ,.
Mr. FLORIO. Well. I would reclaim
my time and just indicate that that is
not my perception. I-do not think that
under any reasonable view that what
was done In any way violates wbat
Shelby-Lent accomplishes from 100 to
1,000 kilograms.
The gentleman’s amendment does,
in fact, substantiafly modify what
Shelby-Lent has done between 100 and
1.000 kilograms; accordingly, I oppose
it.
Mr. WTT R, , Mr. ChaIrman, will the
gentleman yield further?
Mr. ORIO. Certainly.
Mr. TII . Reasonable men van
disagree.- -
Mr. FLOItIO. Yes.
Mr. aI -r .. Mr. Chairman. I move
to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, thiric we should all
recognize the rcny here. To cr.vicize
the gentleman from Indiana for iolat.
ing the spirit of Shelby-Lent, when
the Fiorio amer.drnent completely
changes the mea! ’ ’ng and the accept-
ability ol Shelby-Lent. I would rust
like to point out to the Members who
are here and those watching an televi.
sion that if they think that their small
busmess eon.ahity is beyond Shelby-
Lent as modified by Tlorio, I think
they have got another guess coming. I
urge them to check, because what
Florio does to Sbelby4..ent is to com-
pletely change Its emphasis by adding
the new requirements.
Let me point this out that -while the
-amendment does change the amount
of time that smafl business has to deal
with certain quantities above the 100-
kilogram threshold, those businesses
&lso deal with suintances below 100
kilograms arid 25 kilograms and below
as well.
I say to the gentleman from New
Jersey that small businesses are going
to be boilixed up by his amendment
and perhaps the amendment of the
gentleman from Indiana is relevant to
simply give some time and additional
capacity to deal with what Is a very,
very different charge coming out of
Shelby-Lent as amended by Florlo.
Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman. I
move to strike the requisite number of
words.
August . , 29&?
I will not take my entire 5 minutes,
but I do want to cla.ufy one major
point of disagreement in this amend-
ment.
I think in light of the Florio amend-
ment, which passed, but which no one,
at least not this Member, had strong
opposition to the intent of—what we
are now saying in the Eller-Stenhoim
amendment is that we need additional
time in order to implement the amend-
ment of the gentlemnasi from Missouri,
which I certainly will support, in rec-
ognizing the need for education of our
small businesses in order to comply
with the much-needed enviromnent.al
rules of this country today. -
This amendment purely says that we
have additional time for those mom’
thousands of additional businesses
that must now come into compliance
with the Florio amendment to the
Shelby-Lent amendment.
All we are saying is recognize the
needed extra time to gain compliance
and then everyone will comply wz t
Shelby-Lent, as amended by Florth. It
is strictly saying give Lime to the all
businesses to come into comnp anee
after being educated to the law. -
Mr. ECKART. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike the requisite number of
words. and I rise in opposition to the
amenth t t.
Very briefly, what ia trying to -be
passed off here as an amendment -to
protect small businesses really Is a
giant trapdoor througn which the
ent:re protection envisioned by this
‘sect cn would disappear. By extending
waivers and extending time lirazr .s to
over 2 years to a business that can
generate over 1 ton of hazardous waste
a month, no longer Is the debase
around a few kilogr rnc of -paste a
month, but generating almost I ton of
waste a month would allow thousands
of businesses that are generating
untold amounts of hazardous waste to
slip through a gigantic loophole for
which this provision was never intend.
ed. -
This Is a mischievous amendment. It
would do untold harm to the section. 1
urge its rejection. -
The CHAIRMAN. ’The -question is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Indiana (Mr. uttER) to the
amendment offered by the gentleman
from Alabama (Mr. SHEI.BY), as
amended.
The question was taken; and the
Chairman announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
RZCOR.DI VO
Mr. HILER. Mr. Chairman. t
demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic
device, and there were—ayes 218. noes
192. not voting 23. as follows:
(Roli No. 3253
AYES- -213
Mbosta
Barmrd
Be,euI . r
AnthOny
B&rfJeI
Be lhune
Archer
Biternan
. Bevul
.
Badhazn
Benneu
BIlU liLi
‘
-------
Au st 4, 1983
Boet’.lert Holi
BnL l Hopkins
Sroomfleld Horton
Broivn (COi Hubbard
Sroy h .!I Hunter
Burton (INI Huuo
Byron Hyoe
Cainobell Irels .rid
Carney Jacoba
Chandler Jenkins
C happeU Johnson
Chappi, Jones (TN)
Chene’ K azicb
Clinger azen
Coats Kemp
Conable
Con.ers Koiter
Cooper Kramer
Corcoras i Lagomarsino
Cra:g Latta
Crane. Philip Loath
0 Ainours Leash
Dane) Lent
Dannemeyer Irr .as
D&schie Le w isCA)
Daub Lewis (FL)
Da is Lipir.ski
de Is Gsra Uo d
DsW!ne Loe(fler
Dicv.inzon Loet
Dorinei1 Lo ery (CA)
Dorgan L ,uja
Dov .dy Lukun
Dreier L&ingren
Ounnsn Mace
Durbin Madigan
Dyson Mar lene.
Ed ards (AL) Marnott
Ediiards(OK) Martin (EL)
Emerson Martin (NC)
Er.giis )i M.ar. .n(NY)
Erdreich Msotl
Erienoorn Mccwi
Fn-di,r McC.ndje sa
Fields McDade
Fish McEwen
Flippo McGrath
Mci inziey
McNu ILy
Frer.zdi Mj: ’ iei
P s:c ja Mille ‘OHi
Oa dos MoUchan
G ”ica i. Mot ,(omery
Gingr lcn Moody
Gooding Moore
Gradison Moorhead
Oramm Morrison (WA)
Qunderson Muzthy
HalL Ra iDh Myers
Hall, Sam Neal
Hammcrachmjdt Nelson
Liance Nic ’ols
Hansen ( ID) Nielson
Han.sen)UT) Nosak
Hartn.tt OBnen
Hatcher Olin
Hetner Osley
Hiler Packard
Milks Fame
NOFS—192
Carper
Carr
Clarke
Clay
Coelho
Coleman (MO)
Coleman (TX)
Collins
Con?..
Cou .hiin
Courter
Co> flC
Crockett
Dellums
Derrick
Di k.a
OirtgeU
Dixon
Dox nec
O s er
Ed’ art
Edgar
Es aria (La .)
Es arts CILI
Pasceil
Pizio
Frighan
Ferraro
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
Molinan Seiberling
Morrison (CT) Shannon
Mraze lc Sharp
Murtha Sikorski
Natcher Simon
Oa lcar Slatiery
Oberstar Smith (FL)
Obey Srnith(!A)
Ortiz Smith (NJ)
- Ouinger Snowe
Owens Solars
Panetca S. .ugers
Patman Star lc
Patterson Studds
Pease - Seift
- Pepper Synar
Perkins Tauzin
Price Torres
P’,tchard Torricelli
Rangel Towns
R.a?.chford Traxler
Reid V e to
Richardson Voii,mer
• Rinalda Waigren
Rodino Waxjnan
Roe Weaver
Roemer Wei
Roetenkowelu Wheat —
Roybal Withams (MT)
Russo Wise
Sabo Wolpe
Savage Wright
Scheuer Wyoen
Scnneider Yates
Schroeder Yatron
Scliumer Zanlocici
NOT ‘VOT1NG—23
Gregg Rose
Heft .) Smith. Oem )
Highr.ower St (}erinain
Jones (NC) Stokes
Luridine Weber
- McCollum Wirth
McDonald - Young (Alt)
MitcheU
Huekaby
Hughes
Jellords
Jones (OK
Kaptur
itastenmeter
Kenneily
Kildee
Kogossek
Kos tn iayer
LaFaice
Lantos
Lehman (CA)
Lehman (FL)
Leland
Levine
Livingston
Long (LA)
Long (MD)
Lowry (WA)
MacKay
Mazkey -
Martinez
Matsui
Mat reulea
McC loskey
McCurdy
McHugh
Mc l ternuz i
Miez
Mikulsid
Miller (CA)
Mme ta
Mirush
Moa l tley
Anderson
Bliley
Boner
Crane, Daniel
Dymally
Early
Edwards (CA)
Pasha) an
Paul
Penny
PeU,
Pickle
Porter
Purseil
Ouillen
Rahall
Ray
Regula
Ridge
Ritter
Roberts
Robinson
Rogers
Rotl
Roukema
Ros land
Rudd
Sawyer
Scr.aefer
Schuize
Sensenorenner
Shaw
Shelby
Shumway
Shuster
Sdjander
Sisisky.
Skecn
Skeiton
Smith (NE)
Smith. Robert
Snyder
Solomon
Spence
Spratt
Slangeland
Scennoim
Stratton
Stump
Sundguist
Tallon
Tauke
Taylor
Thomas (CA)
Thomas (GA)
Udsil
Valentine
‘Jander .zgt
Vancgr
Vumnoticn
Walker
Watkins
WhiLehur t
WhiLley
WhU .taker
WhlL tefl
Williams (OH)
Wilson
Wins
Wolf
Wortle
Wylie
Young (FL)
Young (MO)
Zsthau
Piano
Foglietta
Foley
Ford (Ml )
Ford (TN)
Foaler
PranP
P ost
Garcia
Geidenson
Gephardi
Gibbons
Oilman
O)ickman
Gonzalez
Gore
Gray
Green
Guanni
Hall (IN;
Hall CON)
Hamilton
Hartin
Harrison
Has kins
Hers.)
Hosard
Hoyer
H 6531
ered as read and printed in the
RECORD.
- The CHAIRMAN. Is there object Ion
to the request of the gentlernan from
Missouri’
There was no objection.
Pa.RLIAMENTARY INQOIRY
Mr. LENT (during the reading). Mr.
Chairman. I have a parliamentary in-
quiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
will state it.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, have we
had a vote on the Shelby-Lent amend-
ment?
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will
inform the gentleman that that vote IS
still pending.
Mr. SKELTON. Very briefly. Mr.
Chairman, tht deals with the authori-
zauon of 5500.000 to support the edu-
cation.
I would like to propose two amend-
ments to Mr. SH ELaY and Mr. LENT’S
compromise.
I would like to amend that section
requiring EPA to develop and imple-
ment a program to educate waste gen-
erators about their responsibilities.
During a hearing held last week in my
small business subcommittee, we
found that all small businesses were
concerned about the health of our en-
vironment and are willing to assume
the responsibilities of proper disposal.
Since most of these small quantity
generators are mom arid pop shops
such as paint stores. drycleani.-ig es-
tablishments. and service statons.
most do not know they proc ce haz-
ardous waste or how to properly ths-
pose of it. Most wdl not know until
they are either educated or caught for
noncompliance and fined. That is why
the education of waste generators is so
important. I commend Mr. SIEE.3Y and
Mr. LENT for including lnstruc:ions to
the Administrator to educate these
s ’rnall businesses. But. I feel that. in
the case of small businesses, Just
having someone available is not
enough. You have to publicize the re-
quirements, you have to reach out and
Instruct them on what Is required of
them. For this reason I feel that
5500,000 should be authorized to EPA
for the establishment of a sinai ] quan-
tity generator education program.
With this money they could start a
small program perhaps with seminars
or newsletters or some effectIve means
to inform small quantity generators
about what will be expected of them
and how to comply ith the law.
Without this program I am afraid that
EPA will be unable to allocate staff
and resources to get the job done.
While asking for compliance of laws
placed on small businesses I feel it Is
equally our responsibility to provide
for education of those requu’ements
since most do not have easy access to
the Information they need to meet the
requIrements. The only time they will
lear-n that they are breaking the law Is
when they are caught and punished. If
we are going t,o hold them to these
0 1650
Messrs. McCLRDY. VOLKMEP..
and SCHEt. ER changed their votes
from ‘a e’ to ‘no.”
Messrs. ALBOSTA. LEVITAS.
MOODY, BARNARD. and ZSCHAU
changed their votes from “no’ to
“aye,”
So the amendment to the amend-
ment, as amended, was agreed to,
The result of the v ote was an-
nounced as above recorded.
The CHAIRMAN. For what purpose
does the gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr, FLORXO) rise?
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, for the
Information of the body, it is the In-
tention of myself and Mr. LENT to
complete section 3. which would entail
two or three, I believe, noncontrover-
sial amendments, and at that point to
rise.
I thank the Chair,
AMENDk1 (T OFTER By MR. SKELTON TO THE
AMENDMENT O?FERED BY MR. SHELBY. AS
AMENDED
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman. I
offer an amendment to the amend-
ment, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered ‘by Mr. S)CELTDN to
the amendment offered by Mr SHELBY, as
amended Page 5. line 20, after the period in
paragraph 9 of the Shelby.Lent amendment
insert. ‘There is authorized to be appropri-
ated for purposes o this paragraph,
5500000 (or each of the fiscal years 1984
through 1986”.
Mr. SKELTON (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the amendment be consid-
AckerT n an
Ad4abbo
Akalsa
Alexander
Aridress (NC)
Andrea a
£ifluZ lZio
Applegale
Aspun
AuCoin
Barn e s
Sates
Rrde’ll
bi’ iiefl3On
brr -an
Bores
Roiand
Son,or
Borsicu
Boucher
rOnkJ
iroan ‘CA)
Br) ant
Burton (CA)
-------
H 6532
strict standards we cwe it to them to
provide them with the knowledge of
what they are going to be expected to
do.
01700
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, will
he gentleman yield?
Mr. S LTON. I yield to the gentle-
man from New Jersey. - -
Mr. FLORIO. I thank the gentleman
fOr yielding.
Mr. Chairman, the gentleman’s
amendment is very important. It has
already been referred to in previous
discussions about educational opportu.
nities for r’ I1 businessmen.
Mr. Chairman, I accept the amend.
ment.
Mr. BEDELL. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. S ELTON. I yield to my friend
from Iowa.
(Mr. BEDELL asked and was given
permission to revise and extezi his re-
marks.)
Mr. BEDELL. Mr. Chairman, for
quite some time now, I have been in-
volved with the Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act. Throughout
my Involvement, I have worked to seek
a reasonable balance between environ-
mental protection and the special con-
cerns of small generators of certain
hazardous wastes.
In February of last year, the Small
Business Coixiniittee’s Energy and En-
rlronment Subcommittee, which I
haired at that time, held hearings on
-- e subject of waste oil recovery. We
to learn why more used oil is
put being recovered in this country. A
- great amount of used oi.1 is being
burned indiscrrnir tel.y, emitting
h2r f%.Ll pollutants into the environ-
ment. This js particularly distressing
considering the incredible potential
for conservation by recycling this
waste oil.
Recognizing the significant health
and safety prob1e caused by improp-
er disposal of waste oil, we investigat.
ed just v.hat EPA was doing about this
problem. Unfortunately, we discovered
that EPA had not yet formulated cer-
tain waste oil regulations that were re-
quired by law to haa’e been iisued by
Cctober 1.981. As you all know, EPA
has yct to issue these regulations a.nd,
in fact. not be required to imue
them until 24 more months after this
legLti.aLor we ar dicussing is en-
acted. That is 4 years later than the
regulations were supposed to have
been issued. In the meantime, EPA’s
ilure to act promptly has left those
ii ’. the waste oil reprocessing and lubri-
cant m.a.-iu!acturutg industries in
Lbo. Thcs of rniiLons of dollars in in-
testm( nts are being held up i?u1e the
industry a .s for EPA to issue its reg-
•L.ttions. these buamess can play a
a] role in c.u.r efforts to encourage
— recycLing of uaste c..L it is a shame
they are being p n ’ ed by
5 tardiness.
‘er;body wa.riLs these regulations—
the used oil recycling industry, the
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
waste oil generators, State and local
regulators, the Congress, and even
other Federal agencies —everyone
wants EPA to issue regulations and
clarify what will be the Federal rules
for proper handling and disposal of
waste oil.
From our hearing, I became aware of
a very important program at the Na-
tional Bureau of Standards -which is
necessary for the encouragement of
the recycling of waste oil in the United
States. I feel it is in our best Lnterest.s
to continue the funding for this pro-
gram.
Working together with Mr. WAz..
GR. ’S Science and Technology Sub-
committee, I sought the continuation
of the program at NBS to set uniform
test standar’ds for re-refined waste oil.
Recent environmental disasters, In-
cluding the one involving dioxin in
Missouri. demonstrated that the worst
can happen if waste oil remau s unre-
gtilate&
Last year, the adm ictration pro-
posed to discontinue the NBS research
even though it was in Its final and
most crucial phase. Completion of this
research, which includes base stock
consistency, equivalency and verifica-
tion studies, is of vital importance to
the oil recovery industry and to the oil
consuming public. Unless verification
of crucial engine sequence tests is com-
pleted, past research and development
tests will not be proven and past fund-
ing of $6.2 million will have been
wasted.
I am pleased to report that the
House Science and Technology Corn.
mittee approved the NBS funding for
the p -ugram until the end of fiscal
year 1934. which Is when the program
is expected to be completed.
During the consideration of the
RCRA bill last year. I engaged in a col-
loquy ‘with ML FLORSO about the need
to encourage the recycling of certain
wastes with Inherent value. At that
time, we agreed That when used oil col-
lected by service stations Is properly
recycled and adequate invoice records
are kept, these stations are not intend-
ed to be subject to additional report-
ing requirements imder RCB.A. I am
pleesed to see that this year’s bill also
recognizes the value of recyclable
wastes and encourages their collection
to the fullest extent possible.
The record last year showed that
service stations do not function as gen-
erators in the usual sense with regard
to med batteries and solvents. Many
ser.’.ce stations employ commercial
cleaning services that in most cases
retain title to the materials and sol-
vents that they use in cleaning the
serri,e station. As is the case with
waste nil, it is the collectors of these
waste products that will be deemed re-
spor .sLnle for cornp ying ir.h the rules
of RCR.A. The service station need
only keep a copy of the contract it has
with a licensed collector or reproces-
sor, plus records of v. lien and how
much of the waste actually changes
August 4. 198J
hands. I am glad to see that this is
also the case in this year’s bilL
I have been working on RCRA this
year with Mr. Fz.oaio’s subcommittee
of the House Energy and Commerce
Committee.. It is important that we do
not discourage the important role in
the recycling process of service station
operators by imposing burdensome
recordkeeping requirements on them.
Service stations, acting as collection
points for used waste oil, batteries,
and solvents, have shown their good
faith by properly recycling these
wastes and not disposing of them In an
improper manner.
Additional pressure should be put on
EPA by the committee to issue their
long-awaited waste oil regulations. It is
simply outrageous that we have had to
wait this long.
I would al.so like to commend my col-
league, Congresswoman Mixui.s&z
from Maryland. for her efforts regard-
ing section 2 of this bill. Her efforts
to encourage the recycling of used
motor oil, while at the same tune,
minimizing the regulatory burden
the small generator who contracts for
its proper disposs.l, are greatly appreci-
ated. This constructive approach won
the support of many in the small busi-
ness comimmity.
I must say that I am quite pleased
with the rial version of H.R. 2867..
The bill strikes an appropriate balance
between environmental protection and
the needs of small r generators of cer-
tain wastes. I would expect that EPA’s
rules for small quantity generators
will induce a short. one-page manifest
requirement to minimize small busi-
nesses’ notziication requiren-’ezits.
I want my colleagues to know that I
plan to enter into a colloquy with Mr.
FLoiuo during the debate on the
reauthorization of aCRA. We hope to
clarify certain provisions of the oiU re
garcing soirents, waste containers, and
onsite burning of waste oil by service
stations,
At present., some service stations -use
commercial space heating units to
burn waste oil on premises. Two years
after enactment of H.R. 2887, the EPA
is required to: One, promulgate stand-
ards regulating facilities which burn
hazardous c.-aste; and two, develop
standards for commercially marketed
equipment like those space heaters In
the meantime, existing equipment can
remain on the market. Once the stand-
ards are issued, older units may have
to be upgraded or replaced.
We will also clarity the intent of
H.R. 2867 to exclude the weight of
containers ‘which carried the waste
when calculating the weight of the
hazardous ‘a.ste for regulatory pur-
poses. Thi is a very Important issue
with many small quantity generators,
and I am particularly thankful to Mr.
Ftoaxo and his subcommittee staff for
their cooperation on this and other
matters.
In summary, there are three points I
would like to make. First, we realize
-------
.4ugzLst 4, 1 .983
that the materiaLs we are discussing
here have already been denti.fied as
hazardous. Second. it. is reasonable to
expect in the final RCRA bill that all
hazardous waste are to be disposed ef
.n federally permitted Th.cihties. And
third. recordkeeping requirements
must be kept at a minimum for small
generators. Some degree of regulation
is in the best interest.s of small quanti
ty generators. Without a doubt, in the
next decane, there will be many law-
suits against hazardous waste gener-
ators. It is important for small busi-
ness to satisfy some Pederal require-
ments to prove they have been com-
plying with state-of -the-art methods
to dispose of their waste.
Mr. Chairman. I urge the support of
R. 2867 because it provides an excel-
lent vehicle by which this country can
govern the disposal of hazardous
waste in a safe and sensible manner
from “cradle to the grave”. This bill
shows that it is possible to balance en-
vironmental controls on the h&aardous
waste from small generators with ac-
ceptable regulatory and financial cost
to small busmess.
Mr. SH BY. Mr. Chairman. will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. S LTON. I yield to the gentle-
man from Alabama.
Mr. SHELBY. Mr. Chairman. I have
no objection to the amendment to my
amendment.
I urge its support.
Mr. LENT Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield’
Mr. SKELTON. I yield to the gentle-
man from New York..
Mr. LENT. I thank the gentleman
r yielding.
Mr. Chairman, we hare no objection
C.i this side and support the amend-
meat. -
PARLi. i&EN’rAAY IYQCTRT
Ms. FIEDLER. Mr. Chairman; I
have a parliamentary inquiry. -
The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman
will state her parliamentary inquiry.
Ms. FIEDLER. Mr. Chairman, some
of the Members are on very tight
schedules trying to catch planes and
they were, wondering whether or not
the comments made a moment ago by
the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Ft.oiuo) meant they do not expect any
further recorded votes between now
and the conclusion of the session
today.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will
advise the gentlewoman that that is
not an inquiry the Chair can ansa’er.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amt ndment offered by the gentle-
man from Missouri (Mr. SICELT0N) to
the amendment offered by the gentle.
man from Alabama (Mr. Snm.3Y). as
amended.
The arn ndment to the amendment.
as amended, was agreed to.
A CJ .LIME T OritPm BY MR. SI’.ZLTO ’I TO THE
AV.Z4DMEN ’T OITERCD BY MA. SHEI.3Y. AS
AM EN DEL
Mr EKELTON. Mr Chairman. I of-
ered ar’ amendment, to the amend-
rrwnt as t. .-iended.
The Clerk. read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr SiczLTox to
the amendment offered by Mr. SHELBY, BS
amended. Add the following new paragraph
to the Shelby amendment:
‘ ( I The Administrator shall cause to be
studied the existing manifest system for
b.aza.rdous wastes as it applies to srnal.l
quantity generators and recommend within
30 months of The date of enactment of the
Hazardous Waste Control and Enforcement
Act of 1983 ahether the current system
shall be retained or whether a new system
Should be introduced.’ The study shall in-
clude an analysis of the cost versus the
benefits of the systems studied as well as an
analysis of the ease of retrieving and collat-
ing information and identifying a given sub-
stance. Pinally. any new proposal shall in-
clude a list of those standards that are nec-
eszary to protect human health and the en-
vironinent.”.
Mr. S i ..TON (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman. I ask unanimous con-
sent that the amendment to the
.mendment be considered as read and
printed in the Racoim.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Missouri?
There was no objection.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman. I am
offerring an amendment to the
Shelby-Lent amendment that I believe
should be acceptable to most everyone.
My amendment calls for the EPA to
study and make recommendations
whether to keep the current manifest
system or establish a new manifest
system.
I think this Is vitally important to
the integrity hazardous waste control.
At the moment, we are creating so
much paper and so much confusion
that no one will know what to fill out,
how to fi’g it out, and then who to give
it to. Once they are fUed, my. subcom-
mittee has found in Its investigations
that it is virtually .impossible to dig
the information out of t ie hundreds
of thousands of papers that are stored.
Keeping track of these wastes is very
important. My subcommittee has
heard front State governments, wit..
nesses, and the CRS that there- are
better ways to keep track of such in-
formation. They are easier, less expen.
sive, and provide the capability to re-
trieve and collate the required infor.
ination quickly. Most importantly,, if
we are asking small busincsses to
comply with these new reporting re-
quiremerit -s. we must come up with a
system that they can use e. ..sily and
that we can get information from
quickly when needed.
I do not pretend to have the exper-
tise to pick the best system for EPA.
My amendment, a hich does not. au-
thorize any funds. merely directs the
Administrator to conduct a search. if
you will, for a better system that is
easier to use. pro ides more benefits
relative to the cost and still protects
human health and the environment,
There are such systems out there.
This is not beyond our capability.
Mr. SHELBY. Mr. Chairman. will
the gentleman yield’
H 6533
Mr. SKELTON. I yield to the gentle-
man from Alabama.
Mr. SHELBY. I thank the gentle-
man for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, we have no objection
to the amendment. We have read it.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. SKELTON. I yield to the gentle-
man from New York.
Mr. LENT. I thank the gentleman
for yielding.
Did I understand the gentleman to
say his amendment provides for a no-
cost EPA study of the manifest
system?
Mr. SKELTON. It calls for a study
of the manifest system—i car.not say
it is a no-cost.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman. I have no
objection. I think tt is- a good amend-
ment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Missouri (Mr. Sscm.T0N) to
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Alabama (Mr. Sirsisy), as
amenaed.
The amendment to the amendment.
as amended, was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Alabama (Mr. Slrsi ..3Y as
amended.
The amencixrieat. as amended. aas
agreed to.
A MIN1 O?7 BY MRS. COLi.INS
Mrs. COLLINS. Mr. Chairman. I
offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows.
Arnendme”i: offered by Mn Cou.: s
Page 9. line 11. strike out the closing quotaS
tion marks and period.
Page 9, alter l Ine 11 insert:
“(9) Not iar.er than 18 months after the
enactment of the ilazardous Waste Control
and ‘Jorcement Act of 1983. the Admisus-
trator. in conlunction with the Secretary of
Transportation, shall prepare and submit to
the Congress a report on the feasibility of
eas.ng the administrative burden on small
quantity generators, increasing compliance
with statutory and regulatory requirements.
and simplifying enforcement efforts
through a program of licensing hazardous
waste transporters to assume the responsi.
bilities of small quantity generators relating
to the preparation of manifests and associ-
ated recordke pL1g and reporting require-
ments, The report shall examine the appro-
priate Licensing requirements under such a
program incluaing the need for financial as-
surance b licensed transporters ard shall
make recomrnendat:ons on pro isions and
requirements for such a program including
the appropriate division of responsibilities
between the Department of Transportation
and the Environmental Protection Adminis-
tratiOn.”.
Mrs COLLINS (durrnrthe reading).
Mr. Ci-tairma ’i, I ask unantmous con-
sent that the amendment be consid-
ered as read and printed in the
REcoeD.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentlewoman
from Illinois?
There was no objection.
Mrs. COLLINS. Mr. Chairman. Mr.
FLORIO and his subcommittee are to be
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
H 6534
commended for attempting to address
the improper disposal of h rdous
waste by unregulated companies and
Individuals.
The Government Activities and
ansportatlon Subcommittee, which
chair and of which Mr. McGaa rn is
‘ranking minority member, has been
holding oversight hearings on the en-
forcement of hazardous materials -
transportation regulations. We are
aware of the grave need that exists for
regulation of smaU quantity waste
generators.
As currently written. R.R. 2867, re-
duces the threshold for manifest re-
quirements from 1,000 kilograms-per-
month to 100 kilograms-per-month.
Now, this may sound like the easy
answer, but in fact, It is not. This pro-
vision in H.R. 2867 is flawed because It
is unenforceable.
Currently. 50,000 generators are reg-
ulated under RCRA. The proposed
ECRA reauthorization would bring an
additional 200,000 companies under
regulation., a 400-percent increase in
the size of the regulated community.
The proposed legislation for regulat-
ing small-quantity generators gives no
Indication as to how the law is to be
carried out. -- . -
My judgment is that the new class of
regulated generators would clog the
manifest system with an avalanche of
paper. H.R. 2867. if unf ’h .nged, could
hamper enforcement efforts. The
nanllest system Is a valuable tool to
ie EPA and should be protected. -
Studies have shown that In. States
aich have laws with lower small-
innLity thresholds on their books,
compliance Is lax. Most s -naiI-quanuty
generators are not even aware of the
law. Those few who have no fear of It
because enforcement Is so weak. -
Compliance with this bill’s provi-
sions will be difficult primarily be-
cause there is no industry in existence
which Is capable of the wastes of
small-quantity generators that exists.
If the small-quantity generator pro-
vision Is passed without amendment,
thousands of additional Inspectors to
enforce the .]aw will be needed. If.
these newly regulated companies com-
plied with the law, the Government
would be inundated with millions of
notifications, ni nlfests, annual re-
ports. exception reports, inspection re-
ports, et cetera.
Do we really Intend to give EPA not
only thousands of Inspectors but also
an. army of clerks and a computer
budget equal to that of the Social Se-
curity Administration? Are we really
going to allow our many n 11 busi-
ness constituents to be harassed with
the complex RCRA regulations with
which even the largest corporations
have difficulty In understanding and
.omp ly lng?
I am sure we intend nothing of the
d. We want to avoid writing yet an-
er meaningless law—one that cre-
s 200.000 vIolators and does nothing
Tbr the environment. —
CONGRESSIONAL P ECORD — HOUSE
This amendment will help to make
HR. 2867 workable,
The amendment mandates the study
of the feasibility of creating a class of
licensed hazardous waste haulers to
specialize In handling the waste of
small-quantity generators. These li-
censes would be issued by EPA which
would write regulations governing
their issuance and withdrawal. These
regulations would cover: First, the
character of the hauler second, bond-
ing to assure compliance with the law’
third, the condition of the vehicle: and
fourth, requirements for knowledge of
hazardous waste and the law,
The program I envision Es that
small-qua.ntity generators would not
be required to turn Its waste over to a
licensed hauler. However, by doing so.
it would be relieved of complying with
all other provisions of RCRA. Notifi-
cations, m riifests, annual reports, and
all other reports would be handled by.
the licensed hauler who would make
the decision as to where to bring the
waste. Re would be responsible for
keeping all records ordinarily main-
tained by the small-quantity gener-
ators. -. ..: -. -
This amendment Is the necessary
first step In creation of a class of II-
censedhaulei-s who will have a vested
interest In seeing that crn i1- uantity
generators comply with the law. Haul-
ers in turn will be bonded to insure
that they comply with the law. In this
way we regulate a few thousand haul-
ers Instead of a few hundred thousand
small businesses. Although the srnail
businessman will have to pay the cost
of adequate disposal of hLs hazardous
waste, he will be spared any other
hassle.
I urge niy’colleagues to support the
Collins-McGrath amendment.
Mr. McGRATH. Mr Chairman, will
the gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. COLLINS. I yield to the gentle-
man from New York.
(Mr. MCGRATH asked and was
given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.) -
Mr. McGRATH. Mr. Chairman, I
thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr; Chalrman, :I wish to echo the
sentiments expressed by the distin-
guished chairwoman of the Govern-
ment Activities and Transportation
Subcommfttee. The efforts of the gen-
tleman from New Jersey, to Improve
public health and safety, through this
legislation are commendable. I fully
realize the difficulties In seeking the
broad consensus necessary for approv-
al of this legislation. Chairman
FLORIO, and my coUeague from New
York. have persisted in. this difficult
task, to produce this Important bill.
I would like to briefly comment, on
the findings of our Government Oper-
ations Subcommittee, as they relate to
the Issue before us today. In a hearing
held July 18, In New York. on hazard-
ous materials transportation, which
Includes hazardous wastes, the fire
marshall of Nassau County, made a
comment I found most troubling. He
August 4, 198 ’
stated that his office had been con-
tacted on several occasions, to assist in
handling spills, or other emergencies
involving hazardous wastes. When
asked to recommend a qualified firm
to remove the material, he was at a
loss to name one, and he replied.
“There are ‘people’ in New Jersey who
‘take care’ of those problems.”
In testimony provided by the ‘Na-
tional Tank Truck Carriers, for our
Washington hearing on hazardous ma-
terials transportation, the Department
of Transportation, is criticized for fail-
ing to enforce authority, over intra-
state carriers of hazardous materials,
particularly hazardous wastes, which
are often handled by small firms, with
lax safety compliance, and sometimes
total disregard, for Federal transporta-
tion and environmental laws and regu-
lations. Closer investigation—would
probably show—that these firms do
cross State lines.
Congress has given the Department
of Transportation, authority to regu-
late these intrastate carriers, in
Hazardous Materials Transportation
Act of 1975, however, It Is not exer-
cised. By designating the Department
of Transportation as the enforcement
arm for certain sections of the Re-
source Conservation and Recovery
ct, the Enth-oximental Protection
Agency at least recognizes that a po-
tential for serious environmental con-
sequences exists if hazardous wastes
are improperiy haled, or !iiega]iy
disposed, during trar.zportation. A
sound knowledge of the transportation
industry, and azntharit7 with shipping
dccumer.ts. are neeceo to traci the
movement of hazarious wastes. Our
staff investigators, have seen firar.-
hand, the manner in which unscrupu-
lous firms take wastes from a gener-
ator acting In. good faith. Ulegally
dump them, and substitute similar ma-
terials, which are disposed under the
original generator’s manifest. This
type of abuse must be halted, and a co-
ordinated effort by DOT and the EPA.
must be undertaken to address the sit-
uation. - .. .•. --
Until our Investigation was initiated,
EPA had not even provided Its list of
waste carriers to DOT, even though
the latter agency was supposed to play
a major role In enforcement effort.
This failure to provide the most basic
Inforcement tool, a list of regulated
firms, was inexcusible. -
Our amendment Is aimed at estab-
lishing a higher standard in the waste
disposal industry to protect the public.
The language before us, is not strong
as I would have liked; but It Is an at-
tempt to get the EPA and DOT to re-
alized and address their responsibil-
ities to protect the public, while haz-
ardous wastes are transported.
While both agencies will say that
the States have enforcement capabili-
ties, and regulations, to bolster Feder-
al efforts, a look at the Industry, and
compliance with State laws, Indicates
a strong Federal presence Is necessa.ry,
-------
August 4,1983
if we are serious about solving the
problems caused by illegal transport-
ers.
Again, referring to our subcomrnit-
e hearing, the chairman of the New
•ork State Senate Select Comniittee
‘on Crime, brought out a typical exam-
pie of the interstate natui-e 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
overtw-ned with the hatch covers
opened, in the middle of the night.
The chemical pollutea Long Island’s
aquifer, the sole source of drinking
water for nearly 3 million people. For
those of you unfamiliar with the geog-
raphy 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--
gmia.
This Is only one example, of inci-
dents uncovered during our investiga-
tions, which covered Baltimore. Chica-
go, and the New York me opo1itan
area, and It underscores the need for
continued Federal lnvoivemerlt.
No enlorcement mechanism Is per-
‘ect, however, the A and DOT have
lot of work to do, to improve the cur-
int s Luation. I hope our amendment
ill emphasize—what I see as a need
- ir greater supervision ot er t-arzsporv-
ers of hazardous astes.
Mr FLORIO Mr. Chairi an. 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 important. 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. Mi-. Chairman. I thank
the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr Chairman, we have no objection
and accept the amendment.
Mrs. COWNS. 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 CHAIRMAN. Are here further
amendments to section 3’
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, -I have
further amendments to section 3.
atr. CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will
read section 4.
The Clerk read as follows:
INTERIM CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS WASTS
INJECTION
Ssc. 4. cal Nsw SEc-lioN 7010 —Subtitle..O
Is amended by adding the following new sec-
tion at the end thereof
‘INTERIM CONTROL 0? HAZARDOUS WASTE
INJECTION
“Ssc. 7010. al UNDERGRoUii SOURCE OF
DRINKING WATER.—NO hazardous waste may
be disposed of by unaerground injection—
“(1) into a foi-rnation wnich contains
(within one-quarter mile of the well used for
such underground injection) a-ri under-
ground source of armkzng waiei- or -
“(2) above such a formation
The prohibition established under para-
graph (2) shall not apply if the person in-
jecting such riazardous waste establishes to
the satisfaction of the Administrator, or the
State in the ca.se of a State which has as-
sumed primar, enforcement responsibility
under the Sale Drinking Water ACt (title
XIV of the Public Health Sernce Act) for
enforcement of such prohibition, that the
injection will not cause hazai’dous waste to
migrate into drinking water sources or 0th-
er ise enoanger arL ’ king water sources.
The prohibit,iozis established under this sub-
section shall take effect six montlu after
the enactment of ttus section except in the
ca-se of any State in which identical prohibi.
lions are in effect before such date under
the Safe Drinking Water Act.
“b ENroac ZNT.—Excepc as provided In
subsection (ci, the proh bihons established
under subsection (a) shall be enforced by
the Administrator under section 3008 and
7003 of this Act and shall be treated (for
purposes of section 7002) as requirements
which have become effective pursuant to
this Act.
“(C) SAra DRINmci rc WATER Ac-r—The pro-
lilbitions establ isried unaer paragraphs (1)
and (2) of su section (a) shall be enforce-
able only unoer trie Safe Drinking Water
Act in ari State—
(1) which kia.c adopted indenucal prohibI-
tions under part C of the Sale Drinking
Water Act and which has assumed primary
enforcement responsibility under that Act
for enforcement of sucn prohibitions: and
“(2) in which the Administrator has
adopted identical prohibitions under the
Safe Drinking Water Act and s exercising
primary enforcement responsibility under
that’ktt for enforcement ‘of such prohibi-
tions.
“(d) The terms ‘primary enforcement re-
sponsibility’, ‘underground source of drink-
ing water’. ‘formation’ and ‘well’ have the
same meanings as provided in regulations of
the Administrator under the Sale Drinking
Water Act.”.
(b Tascs or CONTENTS —The table of con-
tents for such subtitle G is amended by,.in-
serting the following new item at the end
thereof:
‘See. ‘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 R co .
The CHAIRMAN. 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 6535
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.
APPOINTMENT AS MEMBERS OF
DELEGATION TO ATTEND CON-
FERENCE OF INTERPARLIA-
MENTARY UNION IN SEOUL.
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
The SPEAKER. Pursuant to the
provisions of 22 U.s_C. 276A—1, as
amended by Public Law 95-45, the
Chair appoints 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 October 12. 1983,
the following Members on the part of
the House: -
Mr. PEPPER of Florida, chairman;
Mr. HAMILTQN of Indiana, vice chair-
man. —
Mr. HAWKINS of California:
Mi’s, Bo os of Louisiana
Mr. LEVITAS of Georgia;
Mr. HAu. of Ohio;
Mr. SMITH of Florida;
Mi-. PRITCHARD of Washmgton
Mr. HYDE of E]Jinois
Mr. MCGRATH of New York;
Mr. BATEMA of Virginia; and
Mr. Bozrn..zar of New York,
ADDITION OF NAME OF
MEMBER AS COSPONSOR TO
H.R. 1758
Mr’CLAY Mr. Speaker, I ask unani-
mous consent that my 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
permission to acldress the House for I
minute and to revise and extend his
remarks,)
Mr. EDGAR. Mr. Speaker, on
Monday, August 1, 1983, I was unavoi.
dably absent when the House was con-
sidering H . p .. 1646, the Railroad Re-
tirement 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 in
voting for it.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
-:• ‘ .“
118896 CONGRESSTONAL RECORD - HOUSE
• .. z. . - ; , The eit announced the following
Owei - svags - St fton ,- . i .
Oak, T . . Sawyer Stamp P iIQ. •if .. - .
P acWd StMefer . . 8und u1st On this wok: .. -.
- SJm*r —• -- Mr. MIRoT of CalifornIa 1 i ’, will) Mr.
&hun r ?sflon
Mr. BWmkls for. wIth Mr. Lowry of Wuh.
— _uWea S lwm p Vaz er .Imgt II% 5tOfl galnat.
• Raball ShuMer VaMergrlfr • Mrs. Eo” for, with Ma, Katur
Raniel Walker & against .
1ala• i• - So the Judiciary Committee amend.
R III II4O £mIt 0 ) WhLUakeT inent was agreed to. •. -.. -
Ruler • Stntth (la ) The result of the vote was an-
Dobu*m . S Ii Denny Wian ...
RObIIaOn Smith. Ro t Waif - £Iuu&u.w as MwV ecorucu.
- . Snowe • Wort i l . - - • , .... . , .— - . -
Roemer : Sii der W7He - - •.-.—.• -,i’pq.i. . - ---
Ro eis — •‘ oangtLK - - .1.1 £ 6W - -... . -
Mr. FLORIC. SIr. Chairman, I move
(MOP - -
Roth ‘Rangetand 7 u - -
- - -.-‘ s-.. (Mt PLORIO asked and was gtvea
.. . 14 -: -- -. permission to revise and extend his re-
- ., . - . . - . marks) -
Oephudt . Q n r 7 rlDTrl %R
Ad btio • • . Olbbwa . — - • - • •‘• • r J•F•# â • & • l.L1 L1 £iJ iI , OUT
-- • . colleague,, Bwaxr Bxnxi.z, has
Alexander Oo ‘.. • brought to our attention several quca-
An mnn fld11 14 - tions that have been raised by service
. station operators and other ama !! busi-
• Anthmy . Wall Wft ‘naeeeloea .. nesses. I would like to clarify the
— AI’P M III (OMI. • Maid -. record with regard to these questions.
B* mllton - Bichardeon • ,, ., .a.
£d .U O l amen n .,
• __ r which constitutes mctlou 22 of this
Bedell • Hoam , - . Royaai . :-T: bill, we encourage the recycling of
Belle aye, -: used motor oil while, at the same time,
Pe um - ‘• • • m1nimI ing the regulatory burden on
.....“ J (T N) - Betutelder - : . the small g ieraUx who contracts for
BO I&nd 11 - SI r . Its proper disposal. The service station
- ____ . . dealers obligation Is simply to Insure
ç .. &um ,p • ‘ - that the people to whom the waste oil
Beaux . Eo e tmuer - •. Is given are propeily licensed, and to
I (CO) - . . keep records of the ansactIon.
,., . -. - Some people have asked about waste
Sa line Smith u.&i. - oil that in retained by the generator
‘ and which in burned on premises In a
eouuw ( ) )) • commermal space heating unit.
Cools - ‘‘‘ - Luken Stu i n . , The burning or blending of any bar.-
Cooper -. .;. Liindutt - Swift ardous waste for the purpose of
IOAP energy recovery Is covered by sectLon 6
Mr: I1Z - s ,e, - of R.R. 2867. Withln 2 years after en-
DeUum l. ‘ Milsul Torrimili Sctment. the Administrator of EPA Is
Dingell -. . required to promulgate standards reg-
• - ulating facilities which burn hazard-
Dowony ‘ - - McHUgb yenta ous wastes. We also expect the EPA to
Durbis ;• Volkxner ..; -. develop standards for commercially
• .- marketed equipment like those space
- . Eck ait wn a - We e, -‘. beaters., -
MoIInszt - . Wheat - If the -user has equipment that
) pgUeh . meets those standards, and uses the
‘? equipment according to directions, and
yledler . Murpar WIrth 1 :- -. - records bow much waste oil in
piano Murtha• Wile . - -j - . sumed and so forth, then there should
PogUetta 1 het - not be any problem. - - - -.
• . . I • Nelane - - , The existing equipment could
- - . • Yatea f remain in use until those standards
Oaydo, - • 0 1kw , • YItYUfl .. are Issued 2 or 3 years from now. Older
- , - - ‘° units would not have to be upgraded
MOT VOTINO- .53 . , . -- or replaced until after the new stand.
AuCoin • Oregg - - : r Otamtar ‘ ards aie set. We would expect the EPA
Bates • RatcheT - . to allow for an orderly translUon
- - - ;- Service station dealers also have In-
Bases Jetforde peppe, quired about the recordkeeptng re-
Boar: Kaptur - Pickle - quirenients fOr solvents which they
‘• -‘ - - use. Solvents, of coufl-se, are the ai-che-
Clerke - - Leath - -‘, - - Simon typk*! hazardous waste contaminant.
Cl ii , -• - Lehman (CAl Smith The committee recognizes, though.
- Li land • SOi llt , — that certain arrangements regarding
- , - SM solvent recycling may well provide the
- McCondlen • Vuasnov i n ce ry level of public health and
- , Miller (CA). - -. Waxmao - - ‘ environmental protection while mini-
• • —. - - -, mizisig p .dinlnlstratlve burden -on the
Gr ay -- MooI omeey -: -- - :- - - - - - - -‘-.- -, —
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 gentleman from
Iowa for his longstanding interest In
this legislation and for his help In
Identifying those concerns which I
have just addressed. - - - -
• Mr. 000DLING. Mr. Chalnnan, I
rise in support of HR. 2867, the Haz-
ardous Waste Control and Enforce-
ment Act of 1983, and the Bi-eaux-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
HR. 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 conSideration
the long-term uncertainties associated
with land disposal, the goal of manag-
ing hazardous waste hi 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 mci-c 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 at-c
unlined, or that are not meeting
RCRA gound water monitoring or con-
tainrnent standards. wIlj.elther be up-
grad d 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 p tentla! to con.
taminate ground water. Compliance
with a Clean Water Act NPD
permit is not relevant to whether the
Impoundment Itself leaks. The Clean
Water Act regulates surface water dis-
charges, while RCR.A regulates haz-
ardous wastes to protect the total en-
vironment. Compliance with the Clean
Water Act does not assure compliance
withRCRL • s ---
AlternatIves to lend disposal exist. I
know, because In York, PL, In my dis-
trict, Envirite Corp. operates a state-
/
-------
H 9168 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE
tioiis br underground hazardous ‘(B) Por purposes of subparagraph (A
waste storage tanks. . “(1) The term ‘joint resoh Uon ’ aiaaio *
Tb. genUeman’s *aendment lair IS t uOtuU@ui of the ngr which
and makes good sense In terms of piw’ Of&tei the following after the resOlvise
r4&,t . Tbat the Cvngress approves the
lecting public health and the eivu flnal rule P mulgated by the Administratos
nient. I support the amendment . Agency under
Mr. GORE. Mr. Chairman. I “-‘ *i tlUe C of the Solid Waste Dlsp l net
my colleague, the gentleman frun e iect1ng tiaw ous waste from a unafl
New York. for his support. . quantity geseralor referred to in section
The CHAIRMAN pro ternpore. The 3001(d) of the Solid Wa.fle Disposal Act sad
question Is on the amendment offered tranSmitted to the Congre., . on .. with
by the genUeman from Tennesaee (Mr. the blank spam belnj filled In appropriate-
Goas). -. 17. - -.. -
- th) The tesm majer nile’ nisana a Yule
The amendment was agreed £0. $ ,roniulgated by the Ailn3tniga*tor under
‘The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. subtitle C of tue Solid Waste Disposal Ad
there further a n,i, ents to section with from g
• . 4? . - . - small QusZit ty geneutor refer-red to in see-
if not, the Clerk will read. . , tlon OQ1(d) of the &ilid Waste D a Act
The Clerk read as follows: . and which baa on $dWie.I nom ic Isepise
- of $100,000,000 or more.
Sec. 25. (a) Swnois 3001b).—Sectlon “(C)U) Enactment of a joint resolution
3007(b) Is amended by tr’.aerting u follow. with respect to a final nile of the Adrolnis-
ing after the word “Information’: ‘linciud- ti ’sIor sh..ll not be construed to create any
lug records, reports, or lntorinaUori presumplion of validity with j wt (
.Mlned by tepaesentatfves of the ___ -
mental ProtecUon Agency)”. rule under chapter 701 title 5, UnIted States
(b) 8 rsos 2006.—Section 2006(1) Code. .
amended by striking out “detail” and su U- CO! ssIonal Inaction on. or rejec-
Inting ‘ detaI1ed ”. . - UDO of. a joint resolution under this subsec-
(c) Sacrioti 4005(a)—Section 4005 (a) disapproving a final nile of the *4mm.
Isaended by Inserting a closing parentheti- Istrator shall not be construed as an exores-
cal mark before the period at the end these. non of approval of such final rule and shall
0! . • .. . - - not be construed to ereate any yr uwptlOfl
id) Secrios 400$(d).—The second pog , • of validity with respect to such final-rule.
graph (2) In section 4008(d) ______ “(3KA) Any final nile of the Adn iimW rs.
as paragraph (3).. lo T referred to in paragraph (1) which is not
(e) Sec’rioic $004(c).—Sectton 8004(c) is major rule shall become effective In ac
amended by Inserting ‘(1)” hnmedmateiy cOrdance with subsection (b) unless—
after “Coer Smuszma.—.-. ‘- . “ C I) before the end of the period of tb.tsty.
Mr. PLORIO (during the 4 ) live calendar day, of continuous session of
Mr. Chairman. I ask unanimous con- Congress alter the date auth final rule is
submitted to the Coytgyvss. a joint resolu.
sent that sectIon 25 be considered a.s such final rule is Intro-
read and printed in the RECORD. duced in either Rouse, and
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is “cii before the end of the period of ninety
iere objection to the request of the calendar days of continuous session alter
entleman from New Jersey? - the date such final rule Is submitted to the
There was no objection. ‘ COngre 5s. a joint resolution disapproving
The CHAIRMAN pro teinpore. Are final ride E 4
there amendments to section ‘(BKU Per purposes of this paragraph,
• Are there further amendments to matinulty of session I, broken only by—
“CI) an adjournment sine die at the end of
the bill? - the second regular session of a Congress.
£ D T Oersa Sr LSVITA5 and
‘Mr. LEVITAS. Mr. Chairman, I offer W) an adjournment by either Rouse of
an amendment. ‘ eren of e than five days. to a date
The Clerk read as followr - - ‘ .
-(IIIU-.. ‘-- -. - -
Amendment offered by Mr. LLwn ’a “(1) . ‘ of Con.
Page 59. Insert sfter lIne 4 the follow- gress which breaks the continuity of session
- - Ing , “ ‘ - (as specified in subparagraph (BXl)) occwu
suau. QUaNTITY I m -ros warn *vz alter the Administrator has submitted a
Sac 26. (a) Ooaoszssiopss. final rule under paragraph Cl), but before
SectIon 3010 is amended (1) by striking out any action nec ry to the final
‘The in subsection (in and Insel-ting in lieu T i I p’aeted under this paragraph, and
thereof ‘Except as provided in subsection “ W I such adjournment occurs (1) before
• . ‘Cc). the”, and (2) by adding at the end tue the end of the period specified In zubpara-
,iallowing: - ‘ ‘ , XTSDh (A Mi), iiis case In which a joint ram-
“(C) s” ” QUANTITY Omuarea lutlon disapproving such fipal has not been
Rui.ss.—(i) The Administrator ab,JL after Introduced before such adjournment, or (II)
promulgating a final rule under this subtitle before the end of the period specified In
respecting bas is- ib m e Item a small aaibsmrsg,sph (Axill. in a mar in which
quantity panerator f ,ed t in such a John resolution baa been introduced
1001(d). submIt such final rule to the c . in either House before such adjournment,
grese for review in accordance with this sub- then the Administrator shall resubmit such
section. Such final rule shall be delivered to final rule at the beginning of the first regu
each Mouse of the Congrma on the same isr session of the next Congrom. The peel-
y and to oath House 0! Congren while it Oil specified In subparagraph (A) shall
Is hi asmion. - - , - - ‘ - begin on the date of such resubmlsslon.
• “(2XA) A final rule referred to in pars- ‘ (C ) For purposes of this parwaph. the
graph (1) which Is a major rule shall be — term ‘joint resolution’ means a joint resolu-.
treated, for purposes of section 3001(d). as lion the matter alter the resolving clause of
not having been promulgated and may not which Is as folloai ‘That the final rule pro-
‘effect unless I joint resolution appruv- eaulgsted by the Administrator wider subti-
ich suit has bape esmetod. - - . .,- Lie C of the Solid Wte Dbe,, 1 Act i v.
November 3 1983
specting hazardous waste from a small
quantitg =Wr referred to in oecuon
3001(d) of the Solid Waste D.p’—. ’ Act and
b’ansmltted to the igima on
disappro ed, with the blank being filled
with the date of submitlal of the nile So the
Congrma.
‘(D) Ifs final rule of the Administrator is
disapproved under this paragraph, the Ad.
mtniscrat.or may promulgate another final
nile which relates to the same subject as
the nile which was disapproved, Such other
final rule— --
(I) the rulemaking record c i the d p’
pained final rule: co
‘Cfl) math ruie’- ” tmng g r y arid the
record established In any supplemental rule.
. iaklng i,rnccedings w’.,d by the Ad’
ministrator in sccoTianee with section 553
of title & United States Code. In any cs.se In
which the Administrator determines that it
is necessary to supplement the existing rule-
making record; and
“ UI) may contain audi than es as the Ad.
ednistrator . Titi .Ys — ..iy or appropri-
ate.,
“(E) The Administrator, slier promulgat-
ing a final rule under subparagraph (D).
shall submit the fInal rule toCongress In ac-
cordance with paragraph Cl).”.
(b) E,rrc’rmvr Dare—The amendment
made b subsection (a) shall apply with re-
spect to final rules promulgated by the Ad-
uthustrator of the 5 wbunmentil Protec.
lion Agency wider the Solid Waste Disposal
Let after the date of the enactment of this
- -.
- D1840’’ ‘
Mr. LE’iTlTAS (during the reading),
Mr. Chairman. I ask unanimous con-
sent that the &mendment be consid-
ered as read and pi-Isited in the
RecoRD,
The CHAIRMAN pro teanpore. Is
there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Georgia!
These was ma objection-
(Mr. LEVITAS asked and was gwen
pernussion to revise and extend ins se-
marks.)__
Mi, L vriAS. Mr. Chairman, this
amendment, I think is one which is
deserving of the attention of the Mom-
hers because It deals with two very Im-
portant Issues that are addressed by
tins legislation—protection of the en-
vironment and protection of 1-he
health and welfare of this Nation
small businesses.
This bill, as amended by the Shelby-
Lent amendment, and as further
amended by the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. FLmuo) has now extended
the level of coverage over small genes’-
atoru of hazardous waste below 1.000
kilograms por mnnth
In short, what we have dene with
this legislation, which I strongly sup-
port, is to Include an entire area of
small business and small generators
that have not been heretofore covered
hV4hIs type of regulation.
I think we need to account for the
$azardous wastes In this country, I do
not think there is any question about
It. -
And It ta true that approximately I
percent of the tot*l hazardous wastes
produend in this country are produced
2i1
-------
Nouember S ISU
by small generators. But what we lie
doing under these changes hi the law
now covering approximately 1.4mfl-
on new small businesses that have
oot heretofore been covered by this
type of regulation.
In many Instances we are talking
about small bttct -, s of the mma
and pop” vsrlety we are talkfTig about
• tutobody repafr shops, hospitals, gro-
cery stores, beauty and barber thom.
small machlnei -y smnufacturers we
are talking about bowling alleys. esr
washes, auto body shops painting eon-
aetors. We ue kMg about (he
rner ‘f-Eleven or Magic Market type
of operation, photofinlshing oper-
ations, and hardware stores.
We are not talking any longer lint
about the Dow Chemicals or the At.
bntlc Rlthflelds, we aie talking about
small business In America and we need
to be concerned about the regulatory
framework which Is Imposed on them.
Now, It was contemplated that the
small generator—the person who oper-
ates a small business in your neighbor-
hood shopping center or who operates
the corner store—the bustn sma1
who frequently produces less basard-
•uS waste a month than you do In
your own home—this small business
person, would be subjected to a differ-
cot type, albeit effective, but a differ-
ent type of regulation than that. Im-
posed on Allied Chemical or Dow
Chemical or Monsanto.
But a e have since learned that not
ly does the ! wlronmental Protec-
£00 Agency believe that they have au.
thority to impose the same regulations
on the small generator as Is Imposed
on the lsmgv generator, but the groups
involved In the lobbying effort on the
Shelby-Lent amendment and the
Florlo amendment have told me and
other Members repeatedly that there
Is no doubt what those regulations on
ns1I generators are going to look like.
There Is no uncertainty, there Is no
doubt, same regulatory scheme that is
Imposed upon the large generators,
major producers of hazardous waste
(Dow Chemical or Monsanto) will be
Imposed on the
- -
And I suggest to my colleagues that
It L. not only unneoossary. It Is unrra-
sonsble to Impose this type of regula-
tory framework upon the small gener-
ator. -
And so what I have proposed ii an
mpnflniPYlt consistent with the recent
Supreme Court decision hi the Chadha
Immigration case, that says when the
Environmental Protection Agency pro.
poses the new regulations for the
small generators, and the small g r-
ators only, and that regulation has an
Impact of $100 million a year on the
Amerlcaxi consumer, that we In the
Congress will be given the opportunity
examine those regulations and
ke certain they ase appropriate for
• .e small generators. The regulations
wuld assure that. hazardous waste Is
ii ported, but my amendment W i ll
*smu that smreasonable, arbitrary.
and onn.’eded regulation will not be
Imposed on small businesses. If such
burdensome regulation was Imposed It
would force totally out of business lit.-
erally hundreds of thousands of small
business people across this Nation.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
time of the gentlemen from Geomgta
(Mr. IzvrrAs) has expired.
LBy “ us consent, Mr. Izvzsaa
was allowed to proceed for 3 additIonal
minutes.) .‘ -
Mr.. LaxaiAS. Mr. Chairman, let me
mate It cI r.r that I am not opposed to
regulations of the r s .i generators.
What I an. interested In Is assuring
that the regulation does not oppress
the small generator unnecessarily.
And we have now been told very
clearly that that Is what the segula-
on under this bill would
When I discussed this matter with
the advocates of this legislation and
the people who worked out the
Shelby-Lent compromise—mem en of
the ,-csl]ec1 environmental conzmunl-
ty-.-what did I hod out? They said,
“we don’t need a regulatory review by
Congress because there Is no loubt
what the regulations will look hke.
Only If uncertainty exists would we
need l glai t lve review. And In this
mae there Is no uncertainty,” they
told me, they assured me, these regu-
lations for “ fl quantity generators
will be the same regulations as those
that apply to large generators, such as
Dow Chemical Co. or Du Pont.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. LEVI’lAS. I yield to the gentle-
man from New Jersey.
Mr. FLORID. I thank the gentleman
for yielding.
Would the gentleman be willing to
convey to us who It Is that Is mnkiTlg
these assurances in tei-ms of the intent
to violate what It Is that is In section 3
of E.R. 2867? We have dearly dated
hi the previous debate on the Shelby-
Lent amendment that EPA could pro-
mulgate regulations which would be
less burdensome than the full gener-
ator regulations. Moreover, there Is
the limited hammer provision which
wells out the basis structure of the re-
quirements to be applied to the small
generators.
The gentleman clearly was very
much Impressed by whoever it was
who told h un that that Is going to be
disregarded at EPA. And I think ft
Iwormant that be awaiw of
who it Is who is fI.nnting the clear
Intent of the Congress.
Mr. LEVITAS. If the gentleman will
permit me, I will get to that In just
one moment. I think the t)eman a
question Is appropriate.
- .1 just want to point out that we are,
not talking any longer about waste
such as PCWs and Dioxin, and we axe
not talking about generators such as
Du Pont and Dow, we are talking
about pnllLhpa antiIreeze drain
deaners and Inaeet.icldes, cerosol mas
and cosmetics. We are talking about
kake cleaner and badg filler. We are
(19163
lking about paint hardeners arid.
indeed, tires and air filters and all of
this we are talking about comes from
small generators, small businesses.
- Now. I would say this to my good
friend from New Jersey.
First of au, I will take hark eat tono
hi my support for strong regula-
tion In the environmental area. 1 have
vigorously pursued the Envfroumenial
Protection Agency driving them to do
a good Job In esi-rying out their man-
date, But what I am concerned about
is that by Imposing an arbitrary. un-
neoesmry framework on thi. small gen-
-orator, YOU are not only not going to
put them in a position where they are
unable to comply, you are going to pe-
nalize unnecessarily those who would
endeavor to comply.
Now I want to ti.nivCt ray friend
from New Jersey. The legislation that
was already considered does not limit
the type of regulation that can be im-
posed upon the aT,iI,.II generator.
My amendment has nothing to do
with the hamyner provision, The
ksmmer provision days in effect with-
out change.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
time of the gentleman from Georgia
(Mr. LEVITAS) has again expired.
(At the request of Mr. Fioslo arid by
unanimous consent, Mr. LEVTTAS was
allowed to proceed lot 2 additional
minutes.)
Mr. LEVITAS. Mr. Chairman, the
hammer provision is left unchanged.
The rest of the provision of the sec-
tion, however, dealing with small gen-
erators, does not limit the scope of au-
thority of what EPA can require,
either In terms of reccrdkeeping. or in
terms of compliance with regulations,
It says these thing will be required,
but It also goes on to say That the Ad-
ministrator can require anything else
be believes Is n ry in the public
Interest, which opens It back up for
what EPA has construed their author-
fty to be and that Is the full range of.
regulations.
Now. I will, If my friend from New
Jersey would like, name the names of
the organizations that I met with. I
think It Inappropriate to name the
names of iMividuals on the floor of
this House. but 11 the gentleman from
New Jersey wants to know who these
people were and what organizations
they zeZx’omnt, I will be glad £0 Sell
They are the organications who par-
ticipated In working out the compro-
mise that was known as Shelby-Lent
and then the Florlo aildon, and they
were groups that have been In the
forèf root on these negotiations.
- D1650
Now, if the gentleman would like m oe
to name the names of those organiza-
Lions, I will be glad to do so, and even
the nnwt of the individuals Involved.
All I am saying to the gentleman is
that the compromise that v-as agreed
to has been fruken by one of -
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
H 9170
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
major parties who participated In that, more annually, a major rule. an the
and the irgislatlon ttaelt does oat - snerIcan ubhc, ‘then inely we, the
gu’aln EPA ‘om imposing the regula. elected representatives of the people.
tions that I have deselibed. The small ought to hive some role In deciding
generator exception is not an camp- whether that type p1 regulatory
tion at all, and we have been told by burden I i proper or not. That is all I
the EPA. as well as by the groups who am suggesting to the gentleman from
have been negotiating In this legisla- Tern-
tion. that they axe talking about the Let me ‘ust say one further thing: I
large generator regulations, -. Just bed brought over to me the ‘regu-
The CHA MAN pro tewpore. The tattoos and tTlteypgetations that apply
time of the gentleman from Georgia with respect to the large quantity gen-
(Mr. Lxvnu) has expired. . . - - . eritors and which could be Imposed on
(On request of Mr. SAM B. Hair,, Is., the small quantity generator In yaw’
- sad by unanimous consent, Mr. Lev i- shopping center or down the street
e is was allowed to proceed for 3 addl- The stack that 1 hold in my hand Is
tional minutes,) approximately I Inches thick. And I
• Mr. S 3, 33 )jr, Chafr- suggest to the Members that that type
nan, will the gentleman yield? . . of regulatory regimen is not necessary
Mr. LEVITAS. I yield to the gentle- for the small generator and It Is not
man from Texas. -, -. - . necesmry to protect the public health
Mr. SAM B. HAIL. JR. In reference or the environment. All I am ask Ing
to what my dear .1 r d from Gemgta ronarstant with the Supreme Cowl’s
baa been told, lam looking at page 8. Chadha decision, Is that the Congress,
lIne 22, paragraph (8) of H.R. 2867. you and I, have the opportunity to
where It says thin -. look at those regulations before we
The AdminIstrator mey premulgite . impose a $100 million a year burden
Istlons under this subUtle which estabhth on the American public.
eciil .tandards for, or exempt from regu- Mr. PLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I rise
lazions. bawdoui wastes which tie senor. In opposition to the amendment.
sted by any generator who dom not ., - (Mr. FLORIO asked and u given
° permlssinn to revise and extend uare.
It appears to me that It may be that Mr. EDWARDS of California. Mr.
some people or persons or Organixa Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
tions have told the gentleman from Mr. OR1O. I yield to the gentle-
Georgia that they are not going to man from California.
abide by what is In the law: but I do (Mr. EDWARDS of California asked
not believe that. in itself, would and was gwen permission to revise and
change the statutory provisions of this extend his remarks.)
Mr. EDWARDS of California. Mr.
Mr. LEV’ITAS. Let me say to my Chairman., I rise in opposition to the
rlend from Texas two things. First of amendment and will focus my remarks
all, even the language that the gentle- on one aspect of my concerns, that of
man from Texas has just referred to the Impact on judicial review. Under
does not prohibit the nvlronmental this amendment, regulations which
Protection Agency from doing what I close the current small-generator cx-
have already described, It does not emption could not become effective
prevent It. It says he “may” set up a until both Houses of Congress pass a
separate category. It does not require joint resolution approving those regu-
him to. . lations and the President signs It Into
But the small generator language, law. If those regulations axe subse-
the new coverage, applies not just to quently challenged In court, the court
those generating from 100 kilograms Is not supposed to interpret the con-
of waste per month and down. The gressional resolution as having created
new category starts at 1,000 kilograms. a presumption of validity for gtj.
and on generators of between 1,000 1&tlons,
• kilograms and 100 kilograms of waste Mr. Chairman, we roust give ves’y se-
per month Is where the thrust of the slow consideration to the Impact such
small generator provisions will fall. In an amendment will really have on the
that group we are talking ibout the judicial review of such regulations.
generators of approxImately 1 percent What court In this country Is really
of the hazardous waste produced in going to ignore the fact that Congress
this country, but we are also talking has approved the regulation the court
about bringing wider this net’ regime Is reviewing? It seems to me that pta-
approxlnmtely-1.4 ielfllnn small busi- mae of such a resolution by Congress
nesses iii this country, with an attend’ would inevitably Create a presumption
ant paperwork and regulatory burden of validity in the court. It would
that is unnecessary to protect the an- become nearly impossible for a petI
itroninent and public health. tloner to demonstrate In a court of law
I era suggesting only that Congress that ft regulation was outside the
have an opportunity to see whether scope of agency authority or that It
the Environmental Protection Agency was arbitrary and capricious. Thus, If
lives up to what the gentleman from this amendment Is passed, Congress
Texas thinks this legislation says. My will be under the extranrdinziy
odment does not prohibit the meg- burden to do essentially as thorough a
on.lt simply says If you axe going Job reviewing a regulation as a Co
noose a burden of $100 or Appeals would do, We know that
November 3, 7982
Congress simply does not tave the me-
sources to do this and I think lea of
ea would believe that thik Is an appro-
in-late role for the Congress In the
first —.
The full effects of the amendment
currently before us are simply not
known, I do appreciate the concern 0!
those who want a oonv.- ’ ’nt
ve to the now banned legislative veto
and I understand that this is one of
the reasons the amendment was of-
fered. However, In the aftermath of
the Chadha decision, Congress must
approach this usue with the utmost
caution. A careful: systematic study of
alternatives to the iegislajve veto is
necessary. The Rules Committee has
already agreed to study the far-reach-
ing implications of the Supreme Court
Chadha decision. Pending the commit-
tee -report, we should yefram from
rushing to adopt sit amendment such
as this, particularly on a regulatory
statute of such critical importance to
the health of our environment and all
.bose who ocerapy it. . -
I urge you to vote against this
amendment. -
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I
strongly urge my colLeagues 10 retect
this amendment -
RB. 2867 addresses the loophole In
current law that allows unsafe dispos-
al of hazardous waste generated by
businesses in quantities between 1 and
12 tons per year—the so-called small
generator exemption. This 4.million
ton loophole was closed on August 4.
when kLR. 2867 was first considered
by the House. Now, Mr. Lrtm.s wants
to reopen the Issue.
The portion of RB. 2887 targeted by
Mr. Izvrms pecilically requires an
hazardous waste generated in quariti-
ties between 1 and 12 tons per year to
be disposed of In permitted hazardous
waste facilities. Only permitted facili-
ties are constructed and operated to
protect public health and the environ-
ment, Under current law, small genes ’
alor waste can be snd .is dumped in
unsafe facilities. Including landliflz In
residential neighborhoods.
The House should be aware of one
paramount fact. Under the Lie rlt,ag
amendment. delay mply threaz
public health, allowing millions of
tons of waste to poison our environ.
merit.
There Is no doubt that hazardous
waste problems are plaguing comniun].
ties across America b ’*use EPA failed
to Issue regulations implernentn
RCRA amid then failed to enforce
those regulatIons. The problem baa
clearly been one of too little, not too
thucb, regulation. The Levlus amend-
1n it would further protect the poliut-
‘ at ’the expense of public health,
It should also be emphasised that
H,R. 2867 sets narrow atatotory guide-
lines for EPA regulations closing the
small generator loophole. Congr
has yet to set a clear policy for EPA.
The Acency t’Ill only be di’r’4dlng small
tcchT lt 1 quegtfr ‘Therefore, the
-------
Nouem rS, L9&t
content of any future A regulations
‘ lear to Congress today. There is no
id for Corigess to revisit the issue.
The CHAIRMAN pro teinpore. The
time of the gentleman from New
- Jersey (Mr. PLoluol has expired.
(By unanimous consent. Mr. Fi.oluo
• was allowed to jn ed for 5 add1t1ona
minutes.)
Mr. PLORTO. EPA already regulates
l rdous waste generators producing
greater than 12 tons a year of waste,
According to EPA. the regulations pro-
posed for smaller generators will be
very similar to those currently In place
except that paperwork requirements
• may be eased for small generators.
Thus Mr. lzvrras’ amendment may
- cery well become more of a burden
than if section 3 were left alone.
The Levitas amendment is not a vote
for or against reinstating the appropil.
ate balance between the Executive and
the Congress. Instead, It is a vote for
or against the public health. It is a
vote for or against subjecting the
public to the risks associated with de-
laying the sale disposal of 4 million
tons a year of unregulated poisons.
This Is an Ill-advised, regressive
measure: it deserves to be overwhelm-
Ingly rejected.
When the Mouse first Look up R
2867 on August 4, I was persuaded to
port the Shelby-Lent amendment
ause—It was argued—the additional
‘..ne afforded to EPA would be sniff-
Ient to allow the agency to develop
regulations suited to the administra-
$Lve capabilities ol “ts-II busm .
Now, some elements of the all
generator mm unity are arguing (ap-
parently) that they should not be sub-
ject to any regulations—no matter
bow carefully they ore drafted; no
matter how many accommodations are
made to the.needs of sinai] business.
They know that Congress does not act
swiftly In conducting Its normal busi-
ness; it will ac1 even less expeditiously
when ft takes on the function of a reg-
ulatory agency. Thus. It Is a safe bet
that small generator regulations under
the Levitas endmeiit will never
become effective.
I wo dd also like to emphasize that a
so-called small generator is not neces-
sarily a small business. It Is a company
that produces up to 12 tons of hazard-
ous waste each year.! think the House
has carefully co dered and dealt
with this matter already. It does not
need to be revisited. In fact, to adopt
the Levztas amendment will only pet-
petuate the loophole which allows 4
million tons of hazardous waste to be
disposed of in municipal landIlll.s In
residential neighborhoods.
Mr. LEV1TAS. Mr. Chairman, will
- - Le gentleman yield?
tr. FLORIO. I would be happy to
eld to the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. LEVFtAS. 1 thank the gentle.-
tan for yielding.
“Mr. Chairman, first of all, let me say
this to my g d friend, the gPnti n
WNGRESSIONAL 1 ECORD — HOUSE
from Bew Jez cy . The question of
delay, that be expressed concern
about, could not possibly occur be-
ci ’ e the decision to bring the approv-
a] resolution to the floor will be total-
ly In the hands of the gentleman from
New Jersey because the resolution to
* zvt the regulations will be ve-
ferred to his subcomz jttee. If he does
not -want to move the resolution to the
floor, then presumably It will not
move to the floor arid there would be
delay. But the delay would not. be a
delay eauaeu by anybody other than
the gentiemi..n from New Jersey. - -
Mr. PLOItTO. Mr. Vhairman. If I
piay reclaim my time, the gentleman Is
obviously talking about what is hi
effect a legislative veto process, and
we have seen It around here on a regu-
tar basis. If we are going to fight the
legislative veto Issue, let us fight It in
the Committee on Rules, let us fight It
on appropriate legislation, the FTC
authorization or whatever, but this Is
not the place, at the 11th hour. to
come In and offer an amendment that
effectively provides the opportt nity to
veto regulations that are technTc& vg-
ulatlons that EPA will be submitting
to close this loophole that today
allows generators of up to 12 tons a
year of hazardous waste to dispose of
them improperly.
The CILA.TRMAN pro tempore. The
time of the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. ftoaso) has again expired.
(On iiquect of Mr. LEvITAS and by
unanimous consent, Mr. FL0RIO Was
allowed to proceed for 3 additional
minutes.) -.
___ Yr. Lr.vr AS. Mr. Chairman, if the
gentleman will yield further, the
amendment that I offer In no way
would preclude or prevent reasonable
regulation. I do not understand why
the gentleman from New Jersey and
others do not want to assume responsi-
bility for ;egulations that will be im-
posed upon small business In America
that will cost over $100 iflhIn a year.
Why should we let unelected bu-
reauei’ats make that decision instead
of you and me and the others who
were -
‘Mr. FLORID. Mr. Chairman, If I
may reclaim my time, the same argu-
ment could be made for any regula-
tions. Let me just say that the particu-
lar irony, as I understand the gentle-
man’s amendment, Is that the big
P”- generators, that is 12 tons a year
of toxic waste, are subject to the ap-
proval approach to the veto resolu-
tion. That means that nothing goes
Into effect until the Congrem, both
Houses, aiflrmatlvel.y approve and the
President signs a law that effectively
says we are now regulating.
Pu t this Issue for a moment. That
Is not the way this Mouse thould con-
duct its buslness that we ase effective-
the nile.kig entity and nothing
happens to protect the American
people from toxic waste unth we go
through the whole legislative process
with the President now ‘r g
H 9171
irolved md passing upon every group
of regulations that comes out.
- La I said. If the gentleman has an or-
jument that he W rit to make on the
substantive questions of legislative
veto, let us make it. Let us make it In
the appropriate place, In the appropri-
ate forom. ‘This Is not the place to
makelt.
Mr. L1!vrrAS. Tf the gentleman will
yield further. I think In his last re-
marks the genUeman got to the philo-
sophic issue, which Is secondary In this
particular Instance. I am concerned
about what Is gnlng to happen to small
business.
Mr. PLORIO. Mr. Chairman. re-
eIsftning my time for a minute, I
would just say It is not philosophic to
have 4 million tons of toxic waste cur-
rently being dumped without any reg-
ulations.
Mr. LEVITAS. If the gentleman will
yield further, the difference Is that
when we are going to impose a law on
the people of the United States, the
Issue Is, as the gentleman has stated,
who should do it? Me prefers to let the
unelected bureaucrats do It; I prefer to
let those who have been elected by the
people and are accountable to them do
It-
Mr. FLORIO. I know the gentleman
is a constitutional scholar, and he cer-
tainly appreciates the distinction be-
tween La s and regulations.
Through the gentleman’s committee
on oversight, through my own commit-
tee in our oversight responsibilities, we
have the capability, and have demon-
strated It time and time again; we have
the capacity to rev*w and make ap-
propriate modifications of regulations
that are Inappropriately overzealous
or underzealous, as the case may be.
To now change this process so we
say that we will have no regulations,
such that we cannot have these regu-
lations until the Congress acts, is
counterproductive.
Mr. 5 L y, Mr. Chairman, I move
to strike the requisite number of
words.
(Mr. S T. Y asked and was given
permissIon to revise and extend his re-
marks)
Mr. S ,.BY, Mr. Chainnan, I rise
In support of the Levitas legislative
review amendment. As the sponsor of
the small generators language adopted
by the House, the &ie1by Lent amend.
ment earlier. I believe this is on emin-
ently valuable amendment,
guarantee that the will of the House
,,regarding new regulations for small
guantity generators be respected and
pot misinterpreted.
ôoncerns have arisen since passage
of the Shelby-Lent amendment which.
unfortunately, raise questions as to
the body and scope of future EPA-pro-
mulgated rn ll quantity generator
iegulaUonL It vital that the small
quantity generators’ legislative lan-
guage not he translated in new regula-
tion any more or less stringently than
Congxem jflt .d This Is what the
-------
119172
Ievftas arnendmeil means—ft ‘Is the
will of Congrno that fair and
regulations governing hundreds of
thonsands of sinafl businesses ahou
be Issued by EPA.
S does not mean that anal
atom will somehow be lot o t
book” or t!mt the legislative viuw -
quirement will be used as a delayI
tactic by those who would want no
‘ w regulatana on small generatcrs
imposed. To the contrary, the . tn.i .
mere provides protect ns that both
waste generat nod those Mr 1 e
icr stronger waste regulation sbou
spplaud Legislative review of onb
major regtilatiom provides a
v1ss whereby Orn.a can mrantse
that the new regulations do not over-
burden small business, at the same
time Lnswing that those regulations
are environmentally sound. The House
has made clear Its SzWport of er
and balanced small generator rrgula-
tions—to permit EPA to issue rules
beyond these periznetem does a, great
disservice to millions of small
as and the public health as a whole.
Some have said this amendment wDl
threaten the environment and will cx-
‘acerbate bara.rdoua waste dispesal
problems by allowing “millions of tons
of waste to poison our envuonmeat,”
through congressional inaction or
delay. Some claim the nteni1meflt a-UI
decrease EPA ’s aomuntabllity, seduc-
tog that agency to merely an advisory
body. Still others would have you be-
ileve that legislative review violates
the Int of the compromise reached
•tween major business groups and
. iv ironnientallsts In the Shelby-Lent
gmaU generators’ amendment These
Claims are rn-based and entirely mij.
represent both the original Shelby-
I t agreement and the Levitas
amendment.
It cannot be uv .i phastzed today
that at the heart of the now modified
Shelby-Lent small generators amend-
ment. are provisions requiring the pro-
niulgati on of new regulat1 ns for some
bOO.000 small busthem. These are
small businesses which generate, in
total. percent or less, of all the haz-
ardous waste generated In this coun-
try. The other 97 percent of the waste
Is produced by Just (0.000 of the total
number of genemtors. se h- k, ,
yet somehow not out of character,
that this Congress is exerting an bar-
‘dinate amount of energy on establish-
ing the extent of Federal regulation
over a body of generators whose waste
output iprWes just $ or l
of the total quanthy of hawdo
waste generated. Millions of tons of
hazardous waste from small gener-
ators is not now poisoning our envtron .
ment—and this amendment does not
ercate such a altuatlon.
As far as the delay argument goes. I
uest1on Its validity and do so based
on the opponents’ øwn claims, if ft
,“rtath that EPA will promulgate
U generator regulations which see
orerly berdeasome, in &eepfrw
a oongi ona1 Intent, then what
have opponents to fesi- of a leglalatt,e
review ? The Levftas amendment ca-
plickly states that n val of the
final rides shall not be construed to
create any presumption of validity,
merely that the rules are in e cert
with songiesebcoal Intent. So If the
psales promulgated by EPA are In keep-
ing with congressional statute, then
they will be approved In a timely fash-
ion; If they do not meet congressional
standards, then they will be e cted ,
as they rightly should be. -
The EPA will not be subor inted So
an advisory role In this c s&—they
bore extraordinary responsibility in
admmisterb* monemna aeardom
wade managelnee! itatutes mandated
by Congress. What Members must
bear in mind is that for the first time,
the legislation before m seein in
ose new hnsardouis waste ‘ -
t r ulatlous on ever one-half niL
lion small generators. EPA determined
Its resources would be most effective
in the regulation of large generators.
Email generators see therefore lem
stringently regulated. The Levitas
amendment would merely focus c ci
this very erftlcal. new congressional
mandate inder RCEA—lenixlng that
EPA pyrsanigute small generatt rrega-
MUons which are realistic.
As a final word to those who would
cay this amendn ’rTt violates or undoes
the ef ally era! led Shelby-Lent
compromise,” I should ask bow loyal
they remained in the spirit of the
original SheIb,-L t eon- pronthe’ A
great deal boa franspued since the
agreement of small business and envi-
ronmentalist interests In the original
Shelby-Lent compromise. While the
substance of our amendment ‘ “
hitart , an-talc amendments adopted
by this body have dissolved the coala-
Lion that once stood steadlast behind
reasonable regulation upon small bun-
em In the Interests of environmental
protection. Those who once agreed
that excessive regulation of small bud-
posed a greater threat to the
public health than less stringent con-
trols now decry any attempts to Insure
balanced regulations, as a “Breach of
Taltb” or a ‘Postponenment Tactic.”
In my mind. It Is the former propo-
of the Shelby-Lent agreement
who have broken the faith—for a
belief In the spirit of Shelby-Lent.
keeping small generator regulations
wnsthle, would only lead one to sup-
port the Levitas amendment, as I dc. I
strongly u e its aicoikm
.‘ •‘ “ 17II
r. SROTHILL. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike the requisite number of
words, and I rise In support of the
amendment offered by the gentleman
from Georgia. Mi-, Levrns.
Mr. Chairman. I view this amend-
ment that has been offered as a hal.
aricing amendment. an amendment
that would be balanced between the
protection of public health from the
potential dangers that me associated
with the disposal c i rdous waste
n the one hand and the protvetiui 01
ever a mithon small budnemes ti
Am rlea ‘from burdensome. muieces.
sary regulation and paperwork.
What this amendment does a to pro-
vide for a legislative review mechanism
over the final rules that are promul-
gated by EPA to regulate smafl busi-
nesses. those which are disposing of
small quantities of ‘waste. 1 view this -
amendment as an amendment that
carries out the intent of this boc
when ft passed the Shelby-Lent
amendment on August 4 of thIs year,
That amendment said that small gen-
erators need to be regulated, but they
med to be regulated In a ay that is
reasonable and that Lv realistic.
So the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Lsvrras) has offered an amendment to
assure that that takes place. By pro-
riding for a legislative review ci the
final regulations before they take
effect. Congress will have the final say
oier whether these new regulations
a-ill have the full Soi and effect of
Ian. . -
I would call the attention of the
Members again to the huge stack of
regulations that the gentleman from
Georgia brought with . The people
who will be regulated by this bill see
not going to be following this very
thin several pages of paper which Is
the law.
They air going to have to abide by
the regulattans We as lawmakers have
delegated to the bureaucracy our law-
making azithoiity, We have given away
our law-making function to these on-
elected bureaucrats, and we have pre-
cious little proper control, If any, over
that agency. In many in t rw .es in the
past—and we have all seen thIs—
delegations of authority have been too
broad. and there has aiway been a
frustration of Members of Congi ,
Including myself, as these agencies
have not only grown In size but have
prmnulgated regulations that boie
little or no resemblance to the statutes
we thought we bad enacted.
As I see it, this amendment recog-
nizes the need to take some action and
also recognizes the intent of this
‘when It passed the Shelby-Lent
amendment cc August 4 ci this year,
that small generators need to be regu-
lated ,ut In a way that is reasonacie
and In away that Is realistic.
There was an Implication by the
gentleman from New Jersey contend-
Ing that this proposal would in same
way delay the Implementation of the
tmali generator rules and thus endan-
ger public health, I submit that a clom
examination of not only the Rzcowa
but of the amendments does not bear
that out. It Is important to point out
Jirat that those who generate below
1,000 kilograms per month of hawd-
sos a-aste srr ti, t for only 1 to 4 per-
cent of the hazardous waste generated
In this cosmuy.
Fwiher m jesitas amend .
ment does not touch the oncalled
hammer v l 1Qci which is called for
.‘ thNGRESSIONAL RECORD _ HOUSE
‘ Tc,vcrnberj 798
I
-------
No uembcr I, 1S81’
In the Shelby-Lent amendment and as
- - ovlded In the Shelby-Lent proposaL
final regulations have not been put
o effect within 30 months after en-
.,etment of this legislation, then Inter-
im regulations would go Into effect.
That Is the so-called hammer provl-
alon In the bill, These Interun.regula-
tions would go Into effect to assure
that waste generated by small quanti-
ty generators Is disposed of In proper
facilities and that there Is a notifica-
tion of disposal of these wastes and
regulation over the small 4uanUty
So It Is only the final regulations,
not these Interim regulations, that
would be subject to the legislative
review procedures that are established
nuder the Levitas amendment.
The Levitas amendment. I point out
again, would not prevent Interim regu-
lations from tnkmg effect. There
would be no delay in Implementation.
Mr. SAM B. HALL, JR. Mr. Chair-
man. I move to rlke the requisite
number of words.
Mr. Chairman, I rise fri opposition to
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Georgia.
The specific Issue presented by this
amendment Is whether the EPA will
have the authority to Issue regulations
for the disposal of hazardous wastes
“v sniaii generators. The amendment
vides that EPA sill have no su-
rlty to Issue major regulations sf.
cting small generators. instead, EPA
will merely recommend such regula-
tions to Congress. These regulations
would take effect only if approved by
both Houses by joint resolution and
signed by the President. The agency
would have authority to Issue non-
major rules affecting small generators.
However, these rules could be nullified
by a joint resolution of disapproval
which is signed by the President.
This amendment Is just one of many
similar amendments that. this House
may face In the corning days. These
imendmenta are offered in response to
the Supreme Court decision In the
Chadha ease which held that most
forms of legislative veto are unconsti-
tutionaL -
The Issue of legislative veto as It a!-
fect,s the relationship of the executive
and legislative branches goes to the
core of how this Government operates.
It Involves the concept of sepsraUon
of powers which Is the basis of the
Constitution. The delicate balance of
power and authority between the two
branches should not be tampered with
lightly.
In my view. It Is premature to begin
adopting new types of legislative veto
devices. Both the Judiciary Committee
and the Rules Committee are inider-
‘Ing serious reviews on the Issue of
slaUve veto and the proper rela-
,nshtp between the executive and
gislative branches. I mie my col-
!agues to resist the pressure to react
I a the Cliadha d et inn without aerl-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
mm and ful consideration of the
Institutional consequences. We should
not apprcoeb this Issue in a p1e eal
fashion. Instead, we should allow these
committees to complete their
nation of the Issue.
I urge that this amendment be de-
fe& . - -
Mr. WRIO. Mr Chairman, will
the gentleman yield? . -
Mr. SAM B. BALI JR. Yes; I yield
to the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr FLORIO. Mr Chairman, would
the genUeman s expertise allow him to
mat en cp ”1 ” sm the question as to
‘whether nuder the approval procesa
that Is provided for by the gentleman’s
amendment, U one House falls to ap-
prove. obviously the process Is short.
clrnuited because It requires both
Rouses to approve end the Preddent
to sign before a regulation goes In. Ef-
fectively, one House Sailing to approve
*3 effectively a veto.
It would be my opinion—and I know
the gentleman has some expertise In
this area—it Is my opinion that that Is
clearly unconstitutional. The court
has already said that Is unconstitu-
tional. So what we are being asked to
do Is to acquiesce In a process that has
clearly been ruled unconstitutionaL
Mr. SAM B. ALT . JR. 11 the
Ctnadha decision means what It says,
that would be clearly unconstitutional.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I
thank the gentleman. -
Mr. LEV1TAS Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. SAM B. HALL, JR. Yes; I cer-
tainly yield to the gentleman from
Georgia. ’ -
Mr. L vx rAS. r. Chairman, I
would like to make three points. first
with respect to the last question
asked. With regard to the particular
mechanism that has been put Into this
amendment, and which Is also part of
a bill that has been Introduced by a
number of Members, the Justice De-
partment, which prevailed in the
Chadha ease. has said It Is a constitu-
tional method, and that Congress can
act in this fashion,
Now, on the Question of prematurity
that the gent1 mnn raises, I would be
perfectly willing not to deal with this
matter until a new legislative review
mechanism Is In place; but this matter
Is on the floor. We are talking about
regulations that will have an impact of
$100 million or more on our Nation’s
small businesses, and the genie Is out
of the botUe. . -
When your small business communi-
ty comes to you next year and says,
‘Why did you let them do this?,” your
only answer would be. “Because the
bill passed before we bad a chance to
do anything about the overall question,
of legislative review.”
I suggesting, on the question of
prematurity, we cannot let the genie
out of the bottle without some controL
Ploafly. I would ply say this to
the gentleman, yes ft does take away
the right of the regulators, the une-
Inrt.d offidals, to Issue rules that all]
M9173
have so economic frnpaat of $100 rail-
lion or more annually without Con.
vem having a say-so. But I dare say
there are people In this mom who
have made speeches about why we
should not turn over to the unelected
bureaucracy so much power that we.
the Congress. ought to be exm’cising.
No one seems to be addres.smg or de-
sires to address that Issue, We seem to
say simply that the unelected off iclals
zhniiid continue to write the laws for
I would like the gmtleman’a cora-
on tb se pn ntz
The CHAiRMAN .ro tempore. The
time of the gentleman from Texas has
expired.
(At the request of Mr. Lxvn *s. and
by em.r4 i U consent, Mr. L i x 5.
Usi.z., Ja., was allowed to proceed for S
additional minutes.)
Mr. SAM B. BALL, JR. I am not at
all in favor of the unelect.ed officials
writing the laws. As a matter of fact,
that Is one of the reasons that we are
having a regulatory reform bill that
we have been wui-i, g with and work-
ing with for several years now, because
I think that Is one of the problems. I
think that Is the main reason why we
must have legislation In the area of
regulatory reform to prevent the rifle-
lected officials from writing In the
laws from what they think the Con-
gress means.
I think It is a delicate process that
must be done in such a aay that you
preserve the rights of the Executive
and the legislative.
I think the Chadha deriqip goes a
long way in doing just that and, hope-
fully, when the regulatory reform gets
back Into swing in February—and that
Is our target date—we are going
come up with a bill which I think will
be seeptable to this House on both
sides of the aisle, to try to keep that
delicate balance between the legisla-
tive and the j%iIlU ’I )
Mr. BOVcistrt. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr SAM B, HALL. JR. I yield to the
genUenian from Virginia.
(Mr, BOUcliart asked and was
given permls Ion to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. BOt3Ctii it. Mr. Chairman,
want to thank the gentIem from -
Texas for yielding. I concur in the re-
marks the gentleman has made p,
want to commend hmi th a se.
marks.
Mr. Chairman. I rise in opposition to
the amendment offered by the gentle-
n from Geo a.
This amendment would provide that
all EPA regulations regarding small’
generators of hazardous waste be sub-
ject to a form of the legislative veto,
in fact, this amendment would actual-
ly divest EPA of any authority to Issue
major regulations to cover small gen-
erators and would Instead require Con-
gress to enact such regulations before
they would have any eff
-------
119174
This amendment deals with wnie ’
thing t more significant than small
generators. It des -wtth the constitis-
tionsi relationships of the executive
and IegLslatlve branches of Govern-
merit. ft affects the esestitutional
principle of eepstion of powers and
has substantial ramifications for the
effective functioning of both Houses
at Congress. - - -
The Supreme Court decision in the
Chadha case has held most forms of
legislative veto to be unconstitutional.
&noe the Chadha decision was handed
down, this House has been faced with
amendments to various bilic whIch
have contained new, and ft argued.
constitutional. tarsus ol the legislative -
veto. -. .
• Both the Judiciary Cnmmittee anà
the Rules Committee have undertaken
serious reviews of the legislative veta
*nd of the pioper rQ .t the execo-
• Live and legislative branches under the
ConstituLion. I bel ve that these s-a-
views should be completed before we
- take any action In this area. These are
• serious iic They should he ad-
dressed Lu the context of the funds-
WPnIDJ annstltaUional ues they
itise.
I urge that this amendment be do.
fested. -
Mr. SHARP. Mr. Chairman. I move
to s i the requisite nnmh. s - g
words.
(Mr. SHARP asked and was given
permission to rec ce and extend his re-
.marks.)
dr. BERMAIQr. Mr. Cbalrn . will
gentleman yield’
aIr. SHARP. I am happy to yield to
ie gentleman f rum California.
(Mr. BERMAN asked and was given
emisskm to vv and ex jd ha to-
marks.) -
Mr. BE1 A N. Mr. Chairman. I rise
In opposition to Iha aznendnient. On
August 4 we toted to require hazard-
ous wastes from small generators to be
disposed of safely, hi permitted waste
farfflti We ve very specIfic
Instructions to EPA to draft regula-
tions to thswe that these wastes re h
the intended facilities, I presume we
gave this autharit.y to EPA because
that Agency has a acientilic and tech-
nical capability that Members of Con-
gress lack. If that is the case, then
why should we be cafled on later t i
pass judgment on EPA 6 expertise sa
this amendml ’nL would have us do’
I do not believe It Is the role of this
body to be a giant appeals court for
dissatisfied industries looking for a
way to overturn Agency regulations
they fInd objectionable. Anyone wish.-
log to challenge an Agency rule on the
grounds ft doesnot conform toi law
passed by Congrem can go to court. fl
we pass this amenthufut. we are either
admitting we should not have given
EPA the responsibility to the first
place or we do not trust judicial
e are aba practical dfffwnlties
1 by this sm in t . fustead of
og EPA conduct the rulemaking
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE
a’roceed , oti iet, , all t!flvT ted
parties have the opportunity to make
their views part of the official reeortt
we essentially shift the burden to Con-
geese. If we are going to have the final
my on whether these regulations go
Into effect, why should anybody care
what goes Into EPA’s rulemaking
record? Congress win become the
forum fox debating and analyzing
technical and sciefrtlfic data, despite
the fact that we have an agency set op
for exactly that purpose. - -
Passage of this amendment will ns
ve to delay regulations uee ed to
implement an act of Congress. Imped-
oar won Tk On this rie is one
iea.son to It; the greatest
danger, however, Is in postponing the
sale disposal €4 certain hazardous
wastes and subjecting our citizens to
further. annecesmry danger.
I m’ge my colleagues to vote no on
this amendment.
Mr. SHARP. Mr. Chairman, many
times over the last several years I have
supported cofleague the gentle-
man from Georgia, hr his eftcrt to
bring Issues back to the Congress far
sevew when reg atory agencies ad
on important matters hi this k ’qJlmtl7
and have supported the one House leg-
islative veto on many, many occasions.
The court has found me and many
others to be wrong in the use of that
toof. ‘ - - .• -
I must say that today I am not pre-
pared to vote with the gentleman for
several reasons. First, I think the Issue
has been raised about whether or not
this is legally questiongble , and I hope
that will be resolved and I hope we
will ultimately have a procedure that
we can devise and use that will he
erpiable to the courts.
Second, as a member of the Energy
arid Conunerce Committee, which has
to deal with matters relating to the
environment, I would hope that other
colleagues in this Chamber would nfl ’
derstend the importance of what this
is going to do to a compromise that
was being made. I think the ramifica-
tions are far larger than the hone
before us. -
I am certain It is not the Intent of
the. gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Izvrrss) to jeopardne a.fl eiit
that was made and a process that is
slowiy,being developed In this country
whereby -we try to bring together
those who fervently believe we have
got to have stronger regulations to
protect the public health and the envt-
ronment and those who inuSt ‘ ‘ &
those regulations and deal with those
regulations in i. financial and daily
way; namely, the business community.
Now, a compromise was reached on
This ie whIch hoped to recognize
something that many of us think. Is
important and that Is that our small
business men and womeu do have’
managerial dilTiculiles and they do
have financial difficulties In dealing
with the Fedenaf Ov ecinnent, not to
mention the competWon troni large
businmaca fir this but an
Nooember?, 1988
was reached to provide
mare time; an a 6 1 ent was reached
to treat them quite differ-emly. and
there is a great deal of sesisitfrsty on
tIre Energy and Commerce Committee
and throughout this House to the
needs of small business, and should
the EPA act in a way that we think is
act fair and Is not reasonable,many of
us will rIse up and seek to change
those regulations. - -
- D1730 -
An agreement was made, Mr. Chair-
man, between the business community
and the envirocntnl ommunity on
this Issue amid we thought among lead-
ers of that issue here In the House of
Representatives. Now, that agreement
is clearly being violated and make no
mistake about It, If you think there
has been distrust In the past over
these kinds of Issues, this Is another
time that the distrust Is going to be
heightened. We are not going to get to
a position here we can count on
having any trust on this kind of an
Issue—where the two sides can come
together, acknowledge each other’s
concerns amid come to some kind of
eenient. if we have to, ladies and
gentlemen, we can go on litigating
these Issues. I do not think that is in
the public Interest,, It costs everybod)
unnecessarily in this country. We can
go on hzwng st.alemates to the Energy
and Commerce Committee oier
changes In the Clean Air Act in this
country. This Is Important today as to
whether or not the processes of legis
lation are going to be able to work and
be able to reach comprrwm
Make no mistake about this: Adop-
tion of this am ” t violates a -
promise which was very difficult for a
Jot of, people to make and whatever
the legit1mac of Mr. LcvITAs’ amend-
ment. whatever the reasonable con-
cerns, violation of that agreement is
going to have ramifications that a lot
of people are not going to like, and I
would suggest It Is the very people
who think they may be winmung on
this Issue, who win lose In the end.
Mr. LEVITA& Chafrma will
the gentleman yielL’
Mr. SHARP. I yield to the gentle.
man from Georgia.
Mr. LEVITAS. I th.nk the gentle-
man for yIeldi ig
Pii . Mt me my o thin The
first point. as to the legality g
mech ni”. Is very simple. It is jp
boggling to hear anybody suggest that
it might not be legal for Congress to
take action by passing a resolution
through both Houses and having a.
rigneb by the President. That Is pass-
ing legislation in the way set forth by
the 5tItIItfr n — -
That Is precisely what the Supreme
Court said we should dO
Mr. SHA .I am e!y to end up
agreeing fth the gentleman from
Georgia. - -.
-------
Noventher JS& CONGRESSIONJI RECORD — HOU5
The CHAIRMAyj pro tempore. The me than the rguJatlo on large
time of the gentieman from T1 1 iR b in sz and the regulaUon are sent
‘r. SHARP) has expired. ... p here for review and are not liked by
)n request, of Mr. 1zviyi and by the coznmui fty• they
.animous coxi e t, , Mr. En*itp was a)- onuJ be bottled up in the 1ttee
wed to proceed for 2 additional mm- and then, the hammer provisiona trig-
utes.) . ger In. and they will be tougher than
Mr. L Vfl ’A.S. Mr Chainnan, will the origa i.l regulafihn
the gentleman yield? That M not an gu t, here,
Mr. SHARP. I ield * the gentle- When they thInk they are doing one
• man from GeOrgiL thing, they con end up having th(
Mr. LEVITA 1 ihank the genue- opposite or perverse result. -
man for 1elding. We have a serlom problem. It one
- Let me say something else. I do . . ut which many, many Ameri
thsa,gree with the gentleman. He has _ —
the 5hoe on the wrong loot with the ag ta become vezy agitated the
subject of breaking the Compromise. A minute they find It In their neighbor.
eomproznjse was reached. M amend- bixid, In the school yard or somewhere
meat does not undo whatever re ula,. ise—thLc toxie waste, and I con assme
tory framework would come out. ft a compromjse wes made, and
mp!y 3! let Congress say - many of us believe that this Congress
going to have different rules for ought to stick with It and 11 ft Is going
generators than for large generators, to be vlolatedi , we are going to have
and I will tell you that some 01 th ter difficulties dealing with these
people who negotiated (hf compro- environnienta regulatory Issues
mise were these e amental in the future.
that you mentioned, and I have sat I n ECKART. Ms. a ah ’man , I
the Rayburn room and talked (0 thC2fl move to s ike the requisite amaber of
within the last 2 weeks. And. I words and I rise In opposition the
told this by the lobbyists for the u amendment.
dubon Society: you do not need a leels- (Mr. ECKART asked and was given
lative review mechanLv,i, because we pes’ 1on to revise and extend Lila re-
know what the regulations are g ng marks,) . - -
to be. They are going to be the some Mr. ECK r, It Is very possible
regulations that apply to the large that under the provisions before us we
generators. Could create greater uncertelnty In the
Now, If thai individ aJ was a pi.rty
that compromjs , then regulatory process, As a lawyer who
the people who broke the corn- USed to represent about 75 a1] busi-
..mise were not members of the nesses In my practice, and a member
iall business.coin upJty who of this body’s Small Business Commit-
. o make sure that there is reasonable tee, let me construct a scenario con-
regulation, but the obt 4 t 0 for the what may uaUy
exwironmentaj community, the people the Levitas amendment prevails.
who are the elitists, who say we ma 1e The provlsioii that would provide
the compromise but the reguiatjo for Interim rules could very well set
are going to be the same. Ofl of standards. Interim rules go into
The CHAIRMA1 pro tempore, The efIecL Time passes, and all of us In
time of the gentleman from Indlaus this Hall are femll r with the process;
(Mr. Sru nr) has expiredi. . It may take at least 4 months. The
(By unanlmoin consent, Mr. Snajip business person out there wonders, do
was allowed to proceed for 2 add1U I rn ke that investment? Will the In-
Thmutes,) tOrim rule become permanent? Will
Mr. sa p. i esnnot speak to tt Congress veto the rule? What Is going
words that the gentleman heard from to happen?
the bead of the National Audubon So- I hess my ll bnaln. people tell-
ciety in the other ioom. I’ wou wie -
simply say to that side as well, that I alin do not care j much what you do
the intent of this compromise is to see to me. bnl when you do It, p ee make the
that small business Is treated differ- 1U1ca dear, meke the rules clean and do sal
ently, recognizing the managerla3 and 1C the mica on me every half-bow’,
financial difficulties that small busl- Under the LevIta , amendment, we
ness faces. I think that will be the ioo the rcak of caibjectjng, emnhl bust-
result of this legislation, -, tees Person In the United States today
U this administration which cJaim o no r es izite n s, (0 .
to be so probusinesa, so concerned gremionaj rules and to the so-called
about regulation, would get off the . harn y rules, four dIffer t sets of
dane and get the regulations In place, rules deznandhig dlffezenig Invest,-
there would not be a problem. merits, dilferci t persomniej practices
I might suggest to the gentleman and wholly dWerent ways of conduct-
from Georgia and others who think lag bn, i,w
they are doing something good for I submit to you that the Levltas’
‘I business, that Lhls amendment amendment Dilly Inserts uncertainty,
have the perverse result, a result and in that process makes It more di !-
tent from what they want, be- ficult (or the ‘uly smsii busln
- Sc mdeed U the ‘A should mmder - actltIoiier to deal with the niorass of
come up with Tules and zeguJatI that my friend
neth.Lng substantially less burden- h Oeorgza so fully
1191Th
Give them one set of rules very
cleanly, very dearly, and very specif i-
esIly. Let us not Inject even greater
uncertainty in a difficult set of cirewn-
stances for our small business, Let me
deal with the other set of eireuni-
stances that we should Consider on
this bilL
The language that we have was the
result of a very carefully crafted
amendment, IL was vigorously tad .
I was part of that deimle,
The Let’ftas amendment strikes at
that balance, and at a esajoy question
that we debated as part of the Shelby-
Lent amendrrment. The Levitas amend-
ment really Is not a vote for or against
Congress or the rights of the Execu-
tive, The Levitas amendment does not
bring any greater certainty to the
sinai ] business person’s life. Instead It
Is really a vote for or against public
health, U Is an amendment to subject
the public once sg.I to the risks of
opening up a 4 million ton hazardous
waste loophole. This body decided on
the 4th of August by a mmbstsnt jj
margin to reject that loophole,
An act of Congress does not weaken
the toziclty of anyone’s waste, We
would love to legislate away PCB’s or
vinyl chloride or thcthloyoethylene or
any one of the other serious cancer.
causing agents, but we cannot do IL If
we could do It, we would.
What we are a ’1tnemni here Is
really a second bite at the apple. Not
only do we run the risk of making it
more difficult for small business
people to live hi a predmctai esivir n.
nient but we give to those who have an
economic Incentive to poUut e our com-
munities a greater Opportunity to do
ao.
What does that mean’ It means that
once again those who wW pollute our
neighborhoods will prof t from lziac-
tion. They will profit from Inaction by
encouraging the stymieing of the legma-
lative process that we have experi-
enced with the funeral rule, wtt
stockbrokers, with used cars, and
f” t uaUon leglslaUon, S iinply be-
cause the polluters are given a chance
to paralyze this Congress, and the con-
sequences of that paralysis Is either a
change of rules or Continued pollutj ,
I am a supporter of the gentleman’s
segulslory reform Ieg1sl.ail for the
very simple reason that I do not want
a patchwork quilt that draws a single
set of standards for an Individual
agency and changes those standards
bs ed on the whim or will of the Can-
gi’ess”at the time that we are debating
& particular piece of legislati ,
What I think we need to do Is to get
the gentleman’s bill out of the Rules
Committee, and I bare cosigned yota’
letters and u onaore your bill so
that there will be a single Imifm
standard that deals with the entire
regulatory proc in the some way.
-------
H 9176
D1740 —.
The CHAIRMAN tcmpoie. he
- time of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
EcaAr T) has expired.
• (On request of Mr. Lavrru and by
Unanimous consent Mr. ECKART was al-
lowed to proceed for 2 additional mm-
Sites.) . -.
Mr. ECK.AIIT. The gentleman has
raised a fundamental question here. I
thInk ft would be hi the Nation’s Inter.
est and in the interests of my friend if
we used the leverage that this legisla-
tion will create for us to bring about a
uieanlngM regulatory ref orm bill. -
Mr. LEVITAS. Mr Chairman. vfll
the gentleman yield?
Mr. ECKART. I an. sppy to yield.
Mr. LEVITAS. I tns ik the gentle-
roan for yielding, a, ..
First let me say that while I respect
the gentleman’s right to his opinion as
to what serves the best interests of
small businem, I would call to the ges-
tleman’s attention that small business
through Its associations support my
arneodnient because they think my
amendment Is In the interest of unall
business. My amendment Is supported
by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce,
the National Federation of Independ-
ent Business, the National Association
of Manufacturers, the American Tea.
tile Manufacturers Institute, the Na.
Uonal Automobile Dealers Associ t,nri.
the Synthetic Organic Chemical Man.
ufacturers, the National Association of
Furniture Manufacturers, the Printing
Industries of America. and others.
The second point I want to make Is
bat It Is very clear that my amend.
sent would In no way prohibit the
tegulation of small generators in the
disposal of hazardous wastes. It will
not contribute to a public health prob.
Not only are there the )mmmer p ’e-
visions which would regulate small
business, but I think It is quite clear
there would be regulation that is ap.
propriate for the small generator with
my amendment It would not do away
with regulation over this group alto-
gether. -
Mr. ECKART. I sp date the gen-
tleman’s expression of concern and I
•Ji nk him for graiitfr’.g me •tbe extra
time.
Mr. Chairman. I yield bark the ha).
*Ia of my time. . -
Mr. LOTT. Mr. Chairman. I move to
strike the requisite number of wurd ,
and I rise In support of the amend-
ment. - .
(Mr. LOTT asked and was given per-
mission to tense and extend his so-
wks.l
Mr. LOTI’. Mr. ChaIrman, ‘I am
amazed at those who do not trust the
Congress apparently to retain the tdt1.
mate control o cor escatitotiOnsI
lawmaking responsibilities. And make
no mistake about It,. rulemaking is law-
making.•-•
As I understand it, the Levttas
-“iendment does not do away with
agreement reached earlier. ft just
a the igrsm an epportimfty to
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
remain In the loop. It gives the small
bndnmses on opportimity. If they are
dealt with bg the regulators hi an
unfair rule that Ueats them fiat like
big businesses, that they have an up-
pertuufty to have their ease made
or 1 be enmidered by the
So I do think that the amendment
by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
IZvtias) Is a goo4aniendment and we
should support It on Its merits.
But I really want to speak more to
the legislative veto side of this thing. I
want to emphasize that, as I under-
stand It, the Congrtsslonal Reseamh
Sesi*e. American Law Division, baa
mid that a joint resolution of approval
would be conauwtlonal and we also
have that indication from the Justice
Department. -
There are those here and In the ad-
ministration. idte honestly, that
oppcoe this provision. This administra-
tion. the previous administration,
always want to apply It to the next ad-
ministration but not this one. They
have confidence In their regulators,
their bureaucrats. I contend they are
the same no matter who Is in the
White House. and we ia argued
about that before. ‘ - ‘I’.,
But I am concerned about these reg-
ulators at EPA and, as a matter of
fact, they will continue on the seine
track no matter who Is In the Office of
President The legislative veto Is
bigger than this particular Incident
end Issue, which I think L very linpor-
tant. -
I would l!ke to talk about what Is
going to happen In the Judiciary Com-
mittee and In the Rules Committee. As
a matter of fact, last session of Con-
gresa. the last ( ngi-em we did bait $
regulatory reform bifi reported out
of the Judiciary Committee and It Lan-
guished until the end of the Congress
In the Rules Committee. And I might
add, many of the provisions Included
In this Levltas amendment here were
In that bill.
As far as what Is going to happen In
the Rules Committee, ladies and gen-
tlemen, I do not want to prejudge. But
having been’ there for several years, I
can tail you there Is no predisposition
to get such a legislative veto bill out of
the Rules Camm , even $fter
Chadhs.- . ‘ s -
So I think this is a well thought out
provision.. I would like to ask the gen.
tieman from Georgia a couple of ques-
t lons.IfIcoult
Ffr . tie you a 2utely convinced
much as you can be that this doe,
eoinpiy, and have you had legal coun-
sel that says that this compiles with
the provisions of what we should do in
the Congress as far as the esldent’s
role and the way we proceed with con-
stitutional requirements?
Mr. IZVITAS. Will the gentleman
yield?- . • . -
Mr. LOTr. I will be glad to yield.
Mr. LEV ITAS. I can tell the gentle-
man we have been assured both by the
3t J ,Department and by the I A ’
November 3 1982
hThTF of ngress that this is fully
consistent with the decision hi the
Oa.ifh . case.
Mr. LOIT. Does the gentleman’s
amendment hi any way e1imii Ie the
knguage In the bill dealing with small
quantIty generator vsste rules?
Mr. L .vuAS. If the gentleman will
yield further, absolutely not.. I tried to
make that point very clear.
We, In fact, will have regulation.
This would simply make certain that
the regulation Is reasonable regulation
for small generators. ‘ —
Mr. LOTT. Was congi lonal review
a part of the bill that was reported by
the Jtwi v.4 y zn1ttee last year and
languished endlessly ta the Rules
Committee?
Mr. LavrrAS. The congressional
review provisions were precisely at the
heart of the legislation that - . _
made It out of the Rules Committee.
And I might add this, that with s.ll of
the effort that. y good friend from
Tesas wall put Into regulatory reform
In the Judiciary Committee this time.
If I had to guess, there will be no regu-
latory reform bW reported even out of
the Judiciary Committee In this Con-
Mr. WIT. flaw long have we been
waiting on regulatory reform legisla-
tion? . -
Mr. LEVITAS, My tecollectlon hi
about 6S4 years now, and In terms of
legislative veto almost 9 years.
11 the gentleman would yield fur-
ther. I think the gentleman made a
very Important point that I a-ant the
Members of this body to focus on.
What Is It that says that some unelect.-
ed bureaucrat at the Environmental
Protection Ag y Is better able to de-
termine what laws are Imposed upon
the small business people in your corn-
anunity than the people In Congress?
Who Is accountable around here? We,
the elected Members of Congress. are.
I think that a lot of people just want
to pass the buck to the Uneleeted offi-
cial so that we do not have to face up
to their responsibilities. And next pear
when the small business people come
jaying ‘ Who made this possible,” then
I think they are going to look at a list
of the people who voted against this
amendment and they will know.
Mr. WTr. Again we should empha-
size to our colleagues, while you have,
made thIs comply with the Cha ha .
quirements. I would like to ask the
gentleman from Georgia bow many
tImes baa the Congress passed
meats like this, e though there
have been some changes to comply
with the requirements of that new de-
cision by the Supreme Court? I m sn ,
it baa been hundreds of times?
&r. LavssAS. This Is not the first
time. There have been a number of
provisions LITIIIIQI ’ to this already
adopted by this Congress.
Mr. MOODY. Mr. Chairman. I move
I. strike the r uIsiW romiber of
words. and I rise In epoo.ttlon the
- ,
-------
November
(Mr. MOODY asked and was giv
‘ermissiozi to revme and extend his so-
rk&)
s. MOODY. Mr. Dialr . *
Ji some hesitation that I take the
Ioor to speak against tills amend.
snent ,. since I do have so much respect
for the gentleman from Georgia..
It soems as though we are talking at
cam purposes here. The gentleman is
quite right when he says this House
should never give away ita right to
thaw regulations to aome unele ed
bureaucrat. But Vie way we maintain
that rigrit I think is the key tense, t
that we should have the zighL
Let me just briefly speak from my
experience In the Wlseonsm State Leg.
Islature. We med this sort of thing.
We carefully umsadered what you
might rail a 1.evttos-type approach bat
It fell of Its own weight. It meant, In
fact, everything bad to be passed
twice. We would have bad to go
through a double track system for
every measure reQuiring regulations:
first the bill Itself, then the reguk-
tion. .
‘We came up with a better way. final-
ly, and that was to give each House a
time certain during which It could
review—the committees of authori ’—
could review specific proposed regula-
lIons. If they interpomd no obj on,
then the regulations would go into
effect. So each House of the kgtsla.
‘n bad a window of tune to react to
e regulations which came to their
.ntion as being onerous or frupossi-
e or unwise. Both Houses would
ve to act in order to suspend and re.
.....‘lte reuInti n
But neither House was Ieq nred to
act on each one of the voluminous
body of administrative law, much of
which was line. That seemed to be for
us in Wisconsin a much better way. It
lightened the load tremendously.
I W I just Imagine what would
happen to the length of congressional
sessions 11 we had to double tract
every Issue twice through both Houses
and through the While House.
But the more Important point I
would like to raise with the gentleman
from Georgia.. and I hope he will so-
spond to a question. Is this: It seems to
me there Is an Inherent logical contra-
diction to what the gentleman is pro-
posing. If we take as given that we
cannot have a one-House veto, and we
agree that once we pass legislation to
both Houses sad It ii ngned the
White House and becomes the will of
the full Congress, thon under the Levi-
las approach one House could svbse-
quently on this second track arcam
thwart the will of the entire Congr
and of the Executive Branch by
simply refusing to act,
You therefore are back In the box of
‘inc-House veto. A one House veto by
- - -
would ask the genUemasi Is so-
fond to this internal logical ecotro.
Iclion that would be set up by his
____ - — - .
Mr. teivaiAS. Wfl I the gentleiun
-. -
Mr. MOODY. 1 yIeld to the gentle.
man fl m Georgia.
Mr. Le.-vrrAS. .1 t) rik the gentle-
man h*s made the ease very well and I
would simply say 1 do not disagree
with him bei-auge the second Lime
‘ound, as the gentleman refers to 11.-.-
and this would have the effed of a
one-House Tea, von &re Quite nor-
fJi time around we
would not be looking at the came
thing we e looking at lbs fA’st time
- -.
Then we would be looking at the
specIfic regulatory framework pro-
posed to Implement what we have
pnmej The purpose of the legislaUve
review is to Ins ure that proposed regu-
jat.jons are ed&h what the
Congress has passed. • -,
0 1750 •/ - -
*nd the question I would address to
my very good friend from Wisconsin Is
this: Why should you, as as elected
Member of the Congress of the United
States, not make the decision as to
whether a particular regulaLx z , ,that
will cost the Aznenean people 1100
million goes Into effect? Why should
you pass that decision to someone who
has never suffered the inconvenience
of running for public office and Is an-
onuntible to nobody except the Office
of Pursonnel Management and his im-
mediate supervisor? A $100 million
Impact, why should not are be involved
In that decision? -
Mr. MOODY. Let me try to respond,
III could reclaim my time: I agree, we
Ahl uld he involved so this pr The
question is how. -
The huge dollar figure the gentle-
man cites is irrelevant. Ths issue of
bow we assert our authority over ad-
ministrative regulations is the key. Of
course, we should never gwe away that
authority and we should always have
the right to review those regulations,
but reviewing it does not require actu-
ally passing It back through each
House a second tune, as the Levilas
amendment would require. As I say. In
Wisconsin we accomplished the same
vial with r less difficulty by simply
giving each House the specific time
limit In which to react to proposed
regulations. If either House did react.
then ft could suspend them until they
were dealt with. Again, there would be
a certain time linift to deal with them.
and both Houses would have to deal
wIth them, If neither Rouse did react.
did not object. then they would go into
The legislature retained the right to
suspend them. It give no bureaucrat
that right, which Is what you fear and
what I fear, but It did not. require that -
every House laboriously double-track
every legislative measure that. would
involve regulaticin ’ ‘ . -
.& I do not disagree one Iota with
what the gPnhi., ,inn is trying to so-
eomplmJi. But I suggest that be Is
kiiig this House to put hi counUess
119177
needless extra houm floor aetimi on
regulations. —
But, I , again, ask you to respond to
the internal illogic of the point I
raised earlier U we agree that one-
Rous&s vetoes are not acceptable, how
would you respond to that pomt that
your amendment would have the
sheet of reinstituting one-Rouse veto.
I think. In fact, the gentleman agreed
w1th that a moment ago, but be did
net elaborate on atiy that would ever
he a good thing.
The CHAIRMAN pro tesapore. The
of the gentleman from Wisconsin
(Mr. Moonr has expired. -
(By unanimous consent, Mr. Mooor
was allowed to proceed for 2 additional
m lnutes)
Mr. Lr.vs.iAS. Mr. Chairman, will
The gentleman yield?
M i -, MOODY. I yield to the gentle-
man from Georgia.
Mr. LEVITAS. I thank the gentle-
man for yielding.
In order to answer the gentleman’s
question, Mr. Chairman, I have to
revert very briefly to a ‘ i - ” on of
the Chadha decision, The Chadha de-
cision, hi addressing the one-House
and other legislative vetoes said, that
Congress could not establish a mecha-
nism which was legislaUve In nature—
and there Is some Question as to
whether a legislative veto is legislative
In nature—unless It was a mechanism
that passed both Houses and was
signed by the President.
Now, going back to the doctrine of
Chadha and under article I, section 1
of the Constitution, with all legislative
power being vest in the Congrem,
what this mecthanLcin. the son-oI-Ieg-
Islative veto” does, Is say that we will
act legislatively. We will take away the
delegation to the bureaucrat for to
pass rules that have an Impact of more
than $100 million a year and let them
propose them to the Congress, and
they will become effective only wt
approved by a joint resolution passed
by both Houses and signed by the
P ent
So while It Is, In effect, a one-House
veto &t the end of the line, It Is a vct,
thet jt te through a two-
House action signed by the President,
which Is perfectly consistent with tj
Chadlia decision and does preciseflj.
what the gentleman from Wis i
would like to see doe,
I am imply saying this appros
the only game In town. If we do not
adopt this amendment, the genie is
out of the hattie, the EPA will be j.
log regulations that have a $100 cail-
lion impact per year. and we are going
.to fiave to alt back and look at them
and just say. “Isn’t that great?” We
can do little if they are not great.
If I may just conclude, there was a
recent op-ed piece so the New York
Times, written by Robert Utan sj
WflhInm Nor haiir. , which says Lhu Is
the only way we can maintain coflij-ui
over the unelected bureaUcracy. 1
- - NGRESSIONA1 RECORD — }IOUSE
-------
.119178
• would, at this point, like to Insert that
article Into the R no: • - : • -
D’mm the lieu Test TImes. July S. 1*13]
- ‘.. • Wzrw .VmoOos n.
• - ‘thy BobertE. Utan sad WIlliam 0.
• .- . I tord l iwu s) - -
WISIUPGTOL—The United elates &i’
petne Court’s dec5ion sulling down tbe
legislative weto norrects a longstanding
defect in the Federal legislative process.
Since the veto device was introduced In
the 1930’s, Qingress lisa grown progressive.
Li sloppy in writing laws. Instead of the
• careful erafthug envisioned by the Pounding
• Pithers, Congress often gave a blank check
to the executive or to an independent
ajency. Sut It sometimes reserved the nght
to put a “stop” order on these checks, by
the oov-umconstitutional veto. should it
later (spurred by a speeia -thterass giasp’
change Its ceind,
- liow here is the excessive delegation of leg•
Iglative functions more extreme than In eco-
nomic and social regulation,
Even though regulation is *niportam a
part of the legislative 5 5, u3.Tsis ca
and spending revenues. many regulatory
statutes are egregiously vague, simply di-
recting an agency to regulate in the ‘public
interest.” Nalural .gaa prices became regu-
lated under a ene?al “public Intereer
standard. not because Congress decided it
was sound energy policy. Cities aae required
to make subways arid buses accessible to
handicapped people even though Congi
never entialoned this outcome.
f ri other cases, statutes are specific but
place no limits on the amounts that regula.
tore can require firms to spend. Businesses
spent $32 bUlloa In 1981 centrollsog ir and
water poliutIon because Cong — rca delegated
to the 1 uvtronnaental Protectiun Agency a
legislathe function of taxing arid spending
on pollution control. Nuclear power is dying
nder the weight of safety regulations. Rag-
sting everything from teddy bears to
Ti. OUT fourth brsnth of Oovernnient leg-
.elatcs more prebaslvely, and more autocra.
ticaily, than King George IlL
In the last few years. many in Congress
- have beco conoeuiied about this o ei-.del.
eguuon. LeglslaUie vetoes are now in place
(but Iii peril) for a few regulatory statutes —
In seat-belt regulation, in Federal Trade
Commission rules and In some natural.gas
In y nt reform proposals, moreover,
many members of Congress hoped to re-
verse the problem of ezcesslie congleesional
delegation by an omnibus legislative veto
provision for all major Federal regulaUon.
This ioute is now clearly closed.
In the wake of the decision nullifying the
legislative veto, the nation should pause to
consider fundamental issues at who should
legislate, and bow,
Some think that Congress wIll now have
to write highly detailed st. tutes: others
thLIik that, like an oberburdened mule, Con.
gress will simply balk and bring the legisla-
tive process to a bait.
In the reguJatory arena, some worry that
the first aitemati%e vW lead to overly pe.
Bbcis regulatory decisions eradluocauy
fit to agency “sxperta. Others, noting
that good legislation requires time and
effort, fear that Congressmen will devote
peither and instead retreat to a haven or
noncontroversIal isuntivlty. . -
These is a middle way. The central prob.
lain for Congress, with no legislative veto as
a crutch to lean on, Is to structure its con-
alderation of the issues. auth as regulatory
policy, hi such a way that precious Congres-
1 Lime Is devoted to major questions,
execution sod imDlementation are
ased to s inbaUve u.--- ---
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOIJSE
-We believe that there Is a mechanism
through which Oougrma can itrucuwo ha
regulatory decusioninaking in a fashion that
meets both these objectives
Specifically, we suggest adoption of a ‘leg-
Wated regulatory calendar” under which
the President would present to Congrom
year all of the 50 or so malor Podorul
regulatory proposals. 3 ch propoml would
be accompanied by an analysis of costs sad
benefits. An act of Congress would then be
required before agencies could IMIt their
rules In final tormnThe calendar proposal
resembles the Congrcuionaj budget process,
which . sInce 1974. allowed Congrom to
threct the broad pattern of Its spending.
Such a proc . could serve well as a caodcl
fur regulation, - _ ‘ - - -
£ regulatory calendar would reme e l
unceetalnuies about rules touch as t,P ’e
mobile aw’bLg rule. still tmresobwd ‘3 years
after it -was first p opored’ Ti would permit
Congrun and the executive to set reg la.
tory prinflues- task nowhere periormed
today. - -
But most hupartam, It would provide a
constttuttouall? sound mechanism by which
central issues, such as the quality of our air
and water or the safety of our highways.
could be directly decided not. by unelected
regulators but by elected representatives,
(Robert E. Uteri practices law in WacP lng.
ton and William I). Noidhaus is professor of
economies at Tale University. They are 00-
authors of the forttyrwviiqg book “Reform-
ing Federal Regulation.”) - •
The CHAIRMAN pyo tempore. The
time of the gentleman (Mr. Mooni’)
has again expired, -
(By unanimous consent, Mr. MoonT
was allowed to proceed for 2 additIonal
minutes.) -i’’ ‘ • -
Mr. MOODY. Mr. Chalrlr.an, I
would not disagree with what the grit-
Uemsn says, but I strongly disagree
with his conclusion, I do not think we
want to be back in the one.House veto
situation. The gentleman agrees that
what we would end up with If we
adopt the gentleman’s amendment
would be the situation where the will
of the Congress—in fact both Houses
and the executIve branch—expressing
Itself, would ‘be thwarted In its ixnple-
enentatiori simply by inaction of either
Rouse. In fact, one chairman, or per.
hips, one strategically placed Indlvldu-
ii refusing to move on the regulation.
could thwart and veto the implemen-
tation of the law. I think that Is some’
thing we never want to be in, because
then we are going to have legal chal ’
lenges by plaintlffs, such as temporary
restraining orders, all over the place.
causing chaos, because you cannot
keep dumping waste or doing other
dangerous things that would happen
In a regulation vacuum. We would be
In a terrible fix, I maintain, U we let
that happen.
There us a better way to handle the
problem that you and I agree Is impor-
tant to deal with.
Mr. FRANK. Mr. Chairman,! move
to strike the requisite number of
-words,’Itnd I rise In opposition to the
amendment. - - ‘ ‘“ -
Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the
amendment because I think It Is un-
workable as well as unneceamry.
We have , ,nnual appropriations and
authos tIons ci’ ,, ng before us. If
November .9 1982
and when both House feel that a per.
ticular regulation has been untoward.
we biow we1 how to deal with it, we
have done that. I do not think the ar-
gument that absent this, I think.
rather unwieldy procedure we will be
the helpleso prey of intelectad bureau-
er%ts, Is accurate.
I would also like to just say a word
isi d’ fense of the trneleeted , And it
may be prudent since there are many
more of them than of us, I would soy
to the gentleman from Georgia, and
we-ought not to forget that.
Rut election is a very Important and
useful process In a democracy. It does
t, In mj experience., coaler on those
who par.iefpnte in the process quite
the monopoly of wisdom that my
fri*tiid from Georgia suggests.
I would add that this Is also an irtstl-
tution which calls on the unelected.
Seated In some of the places of respon-
sibility around us are members of our
staffs who are unelected except for
their ability to contribute.
And I would go a little softer on the
unelected bureaucrat.
And in a minute I will yield to the
gentleman, the elected gentleman,
from Georgia. But all of us here rely
very heavily on some very able people
who are not elected,
I think a mix of elected and an-
elected Is a very usef UI way for a do.
mocracy to function. -
So let me return to my main point:
If v.e have to approve every regula-
tion. I think we will not function. 11
people ar-c opposed to the regulatIons.
then they ought to vote against the
programs. U they find specific regula-
tions obnoxious, we regularly in
annual anthoriratlons and
atlons have a shot it It, And the one
point I would like to make, and I have
made It before with regard to market-
ing orders, nothing in the logic of the
gentleman from Georgia suggests tru
should be restricted here. So I assume
It will apply to BVD, I a.ssurne it will
apply bill by bill to public housing, It
will apply to OSHA. It will apply in in,
ternational trade. Certainly there Is
nothing logically dividing this subject
matter from any other.
So I would a&sume We are shout, If
we adopt this amendment, to emb r-
on a new regime In which we will be
dealing with every major regulation by
every government agency and then, in
fact, the uneleeted buresues-ats wiu
have a wonderful time because us poor
elected slobs will be spending
working hours here and they wui
really be free to run the town.
Mr. LEVITAS- Mr. Chairman, win
the gentleman yield?
‘Mr. FB.ANX. I yield to the gentle-.
vein from Georgia, - . -
• Mr LEV1TAS. thank the gentle-
man for yielding, ‘ -.
Mr. Chairman, let me just pick up
where the gentleman left off, because
the gentleman will probably wp.z t to
extend that litany of measures to such
things as foreign arms sales. Oeilalnly
-------
A lbcwla
Andre w, (NC)
&nthany
AppJeg ai
Archer
Bs4ha
BartleIt
B u -
Beth e
Bev lll
BWrüi ,
- Bliley
Breo d
Brown (CD)
Broyhill
(m)
B c
befl
CUnser
C 1m
o ( ND)
Coe Pn P
Denlel
Deub
Dewim
Th
Bd.arda (AL)
Edwar (OK)
Foppo-
—
fl4I
Olagfld%
Whflehm
WhiUey
A erman
ka
DeUeneoo
Bennelt
‘ Ier an
BOnkeT
Bor ,kA
Bozer
Brook.,
Brown (CA)
B aM
Burton (CA)
Clarke
Clay
coleman (TX)
collie
Conable
Coma
Con e a
Courtcr
Coyne
Crookett
DAmouru
Dasehie
Dellumi
Dingell
Dixon
D o nneUy
Dwye
Edwards (CA)
E sne ( IA)
Bran, (fl.)
P ,aoeU
TWo
Felgban
PUh
Pioflo
P o U eUa
Pnley
Ford ( M l)
Pvwler
Chappell
CoelhO
Dajweineyer
k Ozma
DmT
Dowdy
flown,?
Ford ( TN)
• braJ1he
.?tan J1n
119179
Tows (AX)
TowN (FL .)
Tonn, (NO)
Wolf
Wortky
Wright -
WyMe
NO —1a5
b ank - Mrazek
Garcia MWM
GeJd ,on I(atd,er
Gephazd% -
Glbbcne Obbar
OlIck.inan Obey
OoWo -
Do er O1tb ar
OradWo IwLia
Gray .
Green
naU W!
Ball lOB) Ve,tin,
Ball. Sam Pidsie
Ramilwn Pile
Barkin Rangol
Harrison Raiclilord
Reid
Bkye
Eerie)
Borion Rodino
Boward Roe
Boyer
Mughe Roukowa
Jacobe - Roytsi
Jeff ords
Job nuoa Rebo
Jn,e (NC) Bth .w
lone (OX) tmI b
.70 (TN) &Lb
g a
KeflnellJ 5dberlmg
Elidee
Kolter . Sharp
Koetmayer ElkoWo
Oboon
Lenin. Roith (FL)
Leech Bn,IU NJ)
Lehman (CA) Sno.e
Lehman C ? J Si Germ
Wand
L ent Stoke.
Levia
Levine Biudda
Long (LA) Swift
Rostey
Tey
aiToule Town.
M.a= oU
McCloeke ? VdaII
McOraLb Vowo
McHugh VoiWor
BaKeren Waigre,
MeNufty Weerr
Mine Webrr
MIku Wele
Miller (CA) Whet
Kbirta WiltI ,
orm .
MLtdNil Wolpe
Mnekley Wyden
Moody Vain.
MoerWo (CT) M . okJ
NOT VO NO—4O
Onarini Pertard
Reman (UT) Paul
I Bee
ith (IA)
Kocovek. Buith. Dow
Lowry (WA) Solsn
I.azken Sundqukt
Iamdbie Whl itgr m
Marrt WWIami ( NT)
M dy William. (ON)
Molmarl
Ow
CX)NGRESSIO1 AL RECORD — HOLJS
¶‘he CB.AIRMAN pro tempore. The
me of the gPTitl lei.i from Mn hU .
tta (Mr. Fas ) has expired.
M i. LEVITAS. Mr. Cbaimmn. I ask
nnaiumous consent that the gentle-
man from Massachusetts (Mr. Faaaic)
may proceed for 2 addItional minutes.
The cRAmMAN. pro tempore. Is
there objection to th request of the
gentleman froan Georgia?
Mi. LANTO& Mr. Chairman, I
object- -
The cRAi MA2I pro tempore. Ob-
jection Is he
The question Is on the amendment
offered by the gentleman from Geor-
gia (Mr. LsvrrAs).
The question us taken and the
Chairman pro tempore announced
that the noes appeared to have It.
a A,isuan TOTS
Mr. LEV1TAS. Mr. Chairman. I
demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic
device, and there were—ayes 198. noes
195, not voting 40. as follows
ZEol] No. 4511 . -. -
£TE —1I8 •
November 2,1982
gentleman would like to play mese
hi a decision to ll F-16 s to
Mr FRANK. I will take taxi my
time, and I point unt that this Con-
gross has just acted very effectively to
prevent the administration from
- aiming a Rapid Deployment Force to
Jordan. How? Through the anthorisa-
L ion and appropriations process.
We did not reed ion-of-legIslative
veto, mother-In-law of legislative veto.
third-cousin once-removed of legtsia-
tive veto: we did it b 1eg 1.rng
through the authorizatlons and appro-
priations process In a very brief period
of time. We have prevented the admin-
Istration from sending arms to Jordan
and we retain thai. ability.
M LEV1TAS. Mr. Chafrrnan, will
the gentleman yield further? -
Mr. FRANK. I will yield again to the
gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. LEVZTAS. thank the gentle-
man agas n .
I do not take that as advocacy of
elIminating the restri , tInnc on foreign
military arms sales. It does not on ap-
propriation to sell foreign arms and
therefore we could not stop arms isles
by cutting off appropriations. No ap-
propriation Ii needed to allow a isle of
arms to a foreign government.
I do want to comment on the point
‘mat the gentleman put forth that we
e a very expert professional staff.
do. But no one suggests that they
. ght to be voting on the policy issues
hat affect the American people.
Yet the regulations that are Issued
by the unelected bureaucracy have the
force arid effect as the laws passed by
Congress. People go to jail for violat-
ing those regulations. just as they go
to jail for violating statutes passed by
Congress.
• Mr FRANK. I will take back my
time, and I will say to the gentleman
that the rules of the Rouse do apply
to those of us who are elected.
The gentleman Is repeating the ii ’-
gu.ment made before. -
First, I was not arguing against ve-
strietloos on foreign military arms
I was pointing out that with Chadha
Sn force, with the legislative veto dead.
we have the ability, as Congress. to
prevent foreign military arms sales to
which we object , - ., ,
c1100
We just did It. We just frustrated an
fll.advlsed attempt by this admazustra-
tion to send arms to Jordan In an Inap-
propriate way. - —
The fact Is that we do n have t
revert to a procedure where nothing
happens untU we have acted.
WIth regard to the unelected, yes,
have professional staff and, no,
p are not the final say. We have a
esident of the United States who Is
iso elected. ?Jot the one I wish was
Lccted. but he was elected. He Is
ered to naike his judgment. We. as
Members of Congress. then have the
r ans1bUtytostaMup. ‘ . -
Oreeg Nichols
Ounderow Nielson
BalL Ralph Nowak
Reetetnoidi OBmian
Hansen (ID) Obera,sr
Refner Olin
Befid Ogloy
B ghiower Ferris
Burr Patman
MiWi
Belt Petit
Hopkins Puree,
Hubbard Pritchard
Huakaby Pursell
Quulian
Raball
Hyde Ra y
Irc i and
Jenkins Ridge
Bitter
___ Rober ia
Kemp Robzn ,on
R n
AegowerWo Roth
l&Ue Rowland
loath Rood
Le ilila . Sawyer
leela(CA) Reboafer
Lewis (Ti .) Schuise
lAptnek I
llv .g . Bhaw
L loyd Sheik?
Loef (let Shionway
Long t ) 6he
Lo l l 8Wa
Lowrm7 (CA) Sislaky
L i i lan Skeeo
&ungron Skeiton
SLack
____ &nith (NE)
) L ad Ig an Roith. Roket
Marlenee &iyder
harem (U) O
Msztln (NC) Spauoe
MacUn (NT) aU
M in
MtCondI Blangesand
)IcCollum Blenheim
McDsd e Stump
- Inline
Itoike
Miller (OR) fli ‘
MoUchan Taylor
Me2iti 7 Th ’ (CA)
Moore Theels (GA)
M.,41s4 ValentIne
I Lorriep (WA) Tinder Jagi
Murphy Vsz idergTtIT
Myers Tun,nov lc u i
___ -- Walkur
1.310
The Clerk announced the following
pa
Onthkv
Mr. Cbag,pefl to. Wflb Mr. tomy
Washington ae” -
Mr. Rance for, with Mr Ouartnl agaisrst.
Mr PraokL tsr. with Mr. Osea. &ge
-------
119182
regulating the generation and land dia-
- posal of hazardous waste lii ER. 2867
Si well os with the additional regula-
tory and enforcement authority swell-
ble to the Erwn-onmental Protection
gez y under this bill the oresuon of
uthre uin Lagoons wilt be prevent-
ed and ground water quality will be
protected.
• Mrs. COLLINS. Mr. Chairman. I
use in support of ER.. 2867. the Baa-
rdous Waste Control and Enforce-
meat Act of 1983
CongrP .n12fl FLoaro has correctly
responded to the threats posed to
safety by the explosl e growth ‘a the
2mount ol hazardcus materials in our
transportnt irin zyst . ER. 2867
allows for the regulation of a host of
new materials. Including waste oiL The
bill further defines the reg ilations
covering the docum itat!uu. packag-
Lug. and labeling of dangerous cargoes.
In short, the transportation Inthistry
wW have to carry a justifiably heavier
regulatory burden. An additional
burden, therefore, will have to be
borne by regulatory agencies.
My Subcorwnlttee on Government
Aetnitles and Tranzpoiiation has
• spent the pest 6 months performing
oversight of the U.S. Department of
7 ’ansportations Bureau of Motor
Carrier Safety. One of the major tha i-
lenges facing the Bureau is the trans-
portation of hazardous materials, In-
eluding nuclear waste.
My subcommittee research ad-
°&sed the effectiveness and efficien.
4 the Bnreau. The BMCS is the
.ary agency responsible for en
.cement of truck safety regulations,
As our upcoming Investigative report
wlU detail, the Bureau of Motor Can ,-
Safety Is a paper tiger. ft Is not an
adequate deterrent to the unsafe
transport of hazardous cargoes. As
more and more nuclear waste moves
along our roads, the Bureau’s meager
resources will be strained. BMCS has
fewer than 200 asiditors nationwide.
Its prosecution rate Is poor. The
Bureau does not keep track of carr rs
in Its own records. It is poorly coordi-
.. ted with State highway agencies
and with the EPA.
The Bureau lacks the expertise
seeds to be effective with the tediri.
cal problems posed by radioactive ma
terials. —
I could give a much longer list of
shortfalls In the Federal enforcement
of transportation regulations. These
standards will be very Important when
wgcea sa volatile as hawdoiw s’a.
are involved.
Congress has got to react to the in-
creased movement of hazardous mate-
flats. The agencies responssble for
pubbe safety have to be given sal 11-
aent resources Isece the law
which HR. 2867 strengthem•
• Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman. I rise
todaj In support of BR. 2867. the
us Waste Control and En-
m l Act of 1983. Tbe bill
4or and makes extensive
theelIts to strengthen the 1k-
sourea-Consesvation and Recovery ‘t
(R .A). which mandates Federal and
State regulations for control of haz-
ardous waste. This legislation provides
Important new safeguards for buman
health and our envirooment.
Passage of HR. 2867 will close sever-
al loopholes that exist In RCRA which
have enabled hazardous waste to
escape regulations and endanger the
bealth of our peop . This legislation
will do the fpllowtng Ban any under-
ground injection of hazardous wastes
hi or around drinking waier snpphes
ban the moSt toxic wastes from land
disposal: prohibit expansion of any In-
tenm status facility by more then 10
percent: require EPA to list waste
which contain dioxins: require strfcte.r
penalties for those who deliberately
violate RCRA and, broaden the rights
of citizens to sue If they believe a h-
m’dous waste facUlty presents an eswi-
ronmental threat. -
Most of the disposal of hazardous
waste Is currently unregulated. Not
only does Improperly dispns d waste
threaten os air. rerface water and
drinking water. but It also endangers
American lives. A Z-year study by the
Office of Technology Assç ssment
found that EPA regulations nder
RCRA do not assure consistent nation.
wide levels of protection for human
health. It Is quite apparent that cur-
rent regulations must be strengthened
to insure the safety of our citizen.s.
Mr. Chalnnau. liE. 2867 Is one of
the most Important environmental
bills that the House will consider. By
strengthening the current hazardous
waste regulation we can begin to re-
store the trust of the American
people. We can thow a concerned and
fearful p uiaoe that Congress is
staunchly committed to protecting
them from hazardous waste. I urge my
colleagues to join me in support of the
Hazardous Waste Control and En-
torcement Act.,
• Mr. .IEFFORDS. Mr. Chairman. I
rise in support of the Florto amend-
ment to ER. 2887.
In the past. States like Vermont
which have taken a strong initiative in
instituting tough hazardous waste
laws, have been frustrated In their j .
piementatlon by the EPA. In requiring
that a State’s regulations be substan-
tially equivalent to the Federal regula-
(Ions. the EPA has often overlooked
the environmental effect of the State’s
provisions an4 concentrated solely on
tt hT1IPaI differences between the two
mis of regulanon , On ocmsion. the
gevisions required by EPA have dciii’
anstrated a lack of serious Interest In
providing the best possible protection
for the environment. These require-
PfltL have ranged from saud sugges-
tions to requirements which demon-
strite a total lack of understanding of
the State,s particular problems. For
instance, Vermont’s regulations were
faulted for not containing a provision
which covered ocean disposal barges.
Par a 1and -lo ted State. this n
a relevant-conceen. Other ouch lecbni.
)Jóuember 3, 1983
ea.lities have been raised, having the’
effect o.f discouraging creative In ills’
stves above and be) ond Federal re-
jurexncnts. The problem of waste du’
posal Is too serious to allow good pro-
grains to be dropped.
In sum. It Is very Important that the
State’s judgment and authority to ira-
plement stronger controls on hazard-
ous waste disposal not be frustrated by
the EPA. We must have a working
partnership, with proper acknowledg
ment on each aide of the nature and
us-gency of controlling this threat to
our environment. I, therefore, urge
strong support for the Federal/Slate
partnership encouraged b this
amendment.•
Thy CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
questIon is on the committee amend-
n-tent In the natwe of £ substitute, as
amended.
- The committee amendment In the
nature of a substitute, as amended.
was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore.
Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly the Committee ruse:
and the Speaker pro teinpore. (Mr.
FOLeY) having assumed the chair. Mr.
E:iI.ncE, Chairman pro teinpore of the
Committee 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, pursuant to House Resolu-
tion 274. be reported the biil back to
the House with an amendment adopt-
ed by the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under
the rule, the previous question or-
dered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any
amendment to the Committee amend-
ment in the nature of a substitute
adopted by the Committee of the
Whole?
Mr. PLORIO. Mr. Speaker. I
demand a separate ‘sate on the so-
called Ievltas amendment.
The SPEAKER pro tenupore. The
gentleman from New Jersey cur,
Fi.oaio) demands a separate vote on
the Leills-s amenthnient. and the Clerk
will report the amendmt ,ut.
The Clerk read as blows’
Amendment- PP . 5! 59. insert afler line 4
the folios tng
SMALL QOSITiTY CritnATOs WAST E suiss
SY . 56. (a) Coacamsioa*i. rre. j,.—
&cUuti 30)9 ii smsnthd UI b Sti-i
In su eCtJOfl (b) and in rung to lieu
thereof “Except as provined in nibGectI n
(c i, the”, and (21 by adding as the
SoiIos’ u ig
‘ (ci SMALL Q1IASTIT! 0 aroa
Rotiji. -..(t) The Administrator shall, alter
pronuncatuig a final rule under Itus subtitle
reipedung hazardous a isle iror a - small
uanttt$ generator Tefei’red to In section
.3 1(d). rubinit nich final rule to the Con’
gress for review In accordance with this sub-
tj udt flial rule shall he drlieer to
carlu Itouie gresi on the e
day and to Boim c i Congrea while it
I i to seislOn. , - .
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
4-i
-------
NoveaiberJ 19iS
2XA1 £ final rule iefewed to In pare-
ph Il wtuch a essior rule shall be
aled. for purposes of gecL on Olith. a
• 1 ot having been promulgated and may not
take effect unless a joint resolution approv.
Ing such rule has been enacted.
‘ iS) For purposes of subparagraph (AL
• ti) The term jolnt resoluUon means a
joint rssohiUon of the Congress which
‘States the following after the rgsoh’tyig
clause: That the Congress approves the
final rule promulgated by the Adininlstiator
si Stwtronmeutal Protection Agenc) wider
subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Mt
respecting hazardous waste from a wall
uantiLy generator referred to in section
3001(d) of the Solid Waste Disposal M and
transmitted to the Congress on
with the blank space being filled in app,v-
iiateIy.
“(II) the tern major rule’ means. rule
omul ated by The Administrator w r
subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
with respect to hazardous waste from a
small quantity generator referred to In sec-
tIon 3001(d) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
and ahich has an annual economic unpact
of $100000000 or more. -
‘iCXI Enactment of a foint resolution
with respect to a thai rule of the Adinissa-
trator shall not be construed to create any
presumption of asildity with respect to h
rule and shall not affect the Ie!jew of the
rule wider chapter 7 of tItleS. United Stases
rode. -
‘iii) Congrnalosal fraction on. or rejec-
tion of. • joint resolution under this subsec-
tion disapprot Ing a final nile of the Adrnin-
istrator shall not be eonstrue’d is an e cprt ’i-
Ion of approval of such final rue and shall
it be coratrued to create any prevumpt ion
validity with respect to such final rule
‘13XA) Any final rule of the Admlmstra-
tor referred to In paragraph (1) which is not
a major rule shall become effecttie In ac-’
cordanor with sainrcuon (a) onlees—
(I) before the end of the period of th,rt-
fire calendar days of continuous aee.ion of
Con$!ress after the daLe such final rule is
submitted to the Congress a join! resolu.
lion disapproving such final rule is intro-
duced in either Rouse, and
‘iii) before the end of the period of ninety
calendar days of ntInuous session after
the date such frnal rule is submitted to the
Congren, a joint resolution disapproving
such final rule is enacted.
“( 5 )1 1) For purposes of this paragraph.
cantbimtyof a 1on is broken only by—
“Ill an adjournment sine die at the end of
the second regular session of a Congress,
and
“( II) an adjournment by either Rouse of
Csmgren of more than five days to. dsie
certain. •
“(Uhf—
“ (I) an adjournment sine die of the Con-
a Puch bleats the coceinuit) of session
(as spec’LI ied In subtarw’aph (51411) ws
after the t,nIm4raWr baa submitted a
final rule under paragraph (1), but before
any action necessary to disapprove the final
rule Is completed wider this paragraph, and
ll such adjowninent oceura (11 before
the end of the period specUlrd in
graph tAXi). In a ease In which a joint reso-
InUOIi disappzoi.ing such lAnai has not been
introduced before such adjournment, or WI
before the end of the perIod specified in
subparagraph (AXIfl, In a case In which
nich a joInt resolution has been Introduced
Si e4U lloiae ure such .djowtizcent,
then the , ,Admtugittor shall resubmit ch
final rule at the begumlng of the toss rreu-
lar sslon of the nest Congresa. ‘ite pen-
ape Jsad L paragrapb (Li aiJ
besinon sAc Use sf rx i ,naik..__..
LONG RESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
“(C) For porpo of this paragraph, the
term joInt resoluUon’ means a joint resolu-
tion the matter alter the resolrfng clause of
which is as fdUoa That the final rule pm-
mulgated by the Admtnirti ’ator under subu-
lie C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act re-
specting hazardous waste from a small
Quantity generator sefened to in section
300tid of the Solid Waste Disposal Act and
transmitted to the Coni ’gresa on is
disapproved, with the blank being filled
with the date of submittal of the rule to the
Cwigr ‘1’. - ‘
D) U a Thai r ule of the AdnWusu-azor Is
disapproved under this paragraph, the Ad-
salnistrator nay promulgat, another final
i’ule winch relates 1 The same subiect as
the rule which ass disapproved. Such other
n a irule- ,• - -
“ii ) shall be based upon—
“(1) the T11kk Ing record of the disap-
proved final naic or
“(11) such rulem’ ing record and The
record established In any supplemental rule-
making proceedings conducted by the Ad-
ministrator In accordance wIth aec’tion 553
of title 5, UnIted States Code, in any case In
a hich the Athmntztrator determines that it
Ia necemery to supplement the existing ‘rule-
making ye prd , and -
‘ (Ii) may contain such ebanges s the Ad.
mizusUwtor ‘ “ “ ‘a ne ’ .ry or prupn-
ate.
“(E) The AdmInistrator, after promulgat-
ing a final rule wider subparagraph (Dl.
shall submit the final rule to Congress in ac-
cordance with paragraph (1)”,
Ib) nt-rIv! D*ra ,—T%ie amendment
made by subsection (a’ shall app!) wish re-
spect to final rules promulgated b the Ad-
minislzator of the Eni ironmerital Protec-
tion Agency under the Solid Waste Disposal
Act alter the date of the enactment of this
Mr. FLO IO (awing the reading I,
Mr. Speaker, I ask imanirnous consent
that the amendment be considered as
i-cad and printed in the Reconn.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is
there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New Jersey?
There a-as no objection,
P*RLiAW (TASY iiOU T
Mr. LEVITAS. Mr , Speaker, I hat’e a
parliamentary inQuiry, -
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
gentleman will sLate his parliamentary
baquiry.
Mr. LEVITAS. Mr. Speaker, the par- AndeTlon
I encary Inquiry Is Lhis Is the
amendment that we are about to vote * in
on the same amendment that the £uColn
C rnlttee last adopted?
The SpEA ps-o t pore. The neotu
Chair will ELate that the amendment Bctla sn
we are now voting on Is the so-called
Levltas amendment, since & separate Buce
vote was demanded by the gentleman Boenisil
from New Jeroey (Mr. FL io. -
The question Is on the amendment.
The Question was taken and the Bonker
Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have It. -
Mr. CA BELL Mr. Speaker, on Boxer
that I “ “ the ‘ess and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered. Bryant
The vote was taken by electronic
device, and there were—yeas 189. nays
304, Dot votIng 40. as follows’
• fRolltIo4$21
YEAS-IS9
Aliceta Hansen (U))
Al,xa , Helner
An5rrv is4Ci Higtitaiec
£nL I Suer
App gaW Hi liii
Archer Bolt
Bop Jns
Bartleti )tubbNd
Bitesiui Hu sbi
nereucer Hunter
BeUai Hutto
Smiii Hyde
B iloaha
Bli1e
nI(
Broomtold Kramer
Bryan (COa l.,sgomaraeio
Broytijil Latta
Burtoa 4151 Leaik
form Lcii iae
3 a ( CA ’
Chandles Liplniki
Chappi, Ll Ineston
Chenci L lo d
Cinger LeeS IIet
Coals LolL
Coleman tMO) Lowrry (CA)
Cougtilis Lungres
Crane, Daniel Macgag
Crane. Piulsi Madigan
Daruci Ma rlsnet
Daub Martin ( iLl
Davis Martin (NC)
DeWine Martin ( 2 (T)
Dorgin
Dre. ,’r McC and lcss
Duncan MeCoC,i,
Dim McDade
EflaarthiAL) McEara
Edeaxd,c ’OK ) Midel
Emerson Miller tOSi
MoUo lian
Erdr.reh Montgomery
trienborii Muort
Fiedler Moorbead
Ucn n (WA I
?lippo Mroi
P i ’rniei hleison
P ocus
Nielson
Gilinan
clinriith O’Brien
Oeodlms Olin
Oz ley
Gregi Psnis
OunOre n rarwin
Sail. Ralph Petit
2(ATS—204
clay
Colemin (TXP
Ca l ms
Conabie
Cai ne
Cooper
Coin er
Cairn,
Cicck t
D Amewa
Ds.ctlt
Dthmu i s
D4n(eU
them
misarde (CA)
nvan tA)
t an. ( IL)
P o
Pe aro
11 9z 3
Prn ara
Purred.
Quilan
Rahail
Rat
Resuls
Ridis
Hitter
Rohen
Robinson
Roth
Roe lana
Rude
Sawyer
BcharIr
Schulz,
Sensrnhreruirc
Shea
Shelbi
Shusesal
Sii iaailrr
lieu-ti
S ern
Stelim
Statler)
Smith (NE
Smith, Robert
Solseton
Sprui
Sange w
Bierthoin
Slump
Tahoe
Taut,
‘i-ayior
Thonisi. !CA
Thomsi iGA.
Vaieni Inc
Vanoer Ja r
Vanoerrnf I
Vur-anou Sit
Walker
Whitenursi
WhIth-’
Whnu Su:
Wilson
Woll
WorIlc
Wrt hi
Wylie
Yatron
Yom tAXi
Young (i-Li
Young (MO’
Zarhau
Void (M I.
Poe, k’r
Prank
G&rcia
Oa t
Geldetuon
Gph,.rdt
Gibbons
OIictman
Gowaisi
Oraduom
H aJ I(IN,
Na !! (OH’
Ran Bim
MarLin
Harrison
Haiet)ns
Hays
Heitri
Horton
Hoper
H i aha
—4
-------
The clerk announced the followiog
On this v
Mr. Ctiwpefl fm’. with Mr. Larry of
Washzngton ram i
Mr. Hance for. with Mr. Ousrini against.
• Mr. Franklin for. wtI.h Mr. Owens ag,Jnes.
‘Mr. STAGGERS thanged his vote
- bvm ‘nay” to “y ’.
Mr. STAGGERS changed his vote
- from ‘yea” y. -.
So the aniendznent was rejected.
The result of the vote was an-
nounced as above recorded.
The SPEA PTO tempote. Is a
separate vote demanded on any other
aiw’ndment to the committee amend-
osent In the nature of a substitute
adopted by the Committee of the
Whole? If not, the Question Is on the
The amendment was agreed to. -
The bill was ordered to be engrossed
and read a third time, was read the
third time, and passed, and a motion
to reconsider was laid on the table.
1 )7 -850
GENfl?.AL LEAVE
‘r. WRlO. Mr. Speaker, I ask
ilmous consent thai all Mwb’$
legIslative days in whEh
zetlse and extend their vemests on the
lust po t . -
The SPEAKER pro tempore.’ Is
theme objection to the request of the
gentieman from New Jersey?
Theme was no objection,
AUTHORIZING TUE CLERK TO
MAKE (X) RECT1ONS D I EN-
GROSSMENT OF ILR 1234. HAZ-
- ARDOUS WASTE CONTROL AIW
ACT OF 14 -
Mr. PLORlO. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous enn-c it that the Clerk be
authorIzed to make tectuucal and con-
forn,.tng changes, changes In section
numbers, paragraphs and punctuation
In the engrossment of the bill (H.R.
2867) to amend the Solid Waste Dia-
posal Act. to sothorise ap. , atioua
for the fiscal years 1984 through 1986,
and for other purposes.
The SPEAKER pro texnpore. Is
there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New Jersey?
There was no obj. 4Am
PERSONAL LANATION
Mr. GARICA. Mr. Speaker, I mistak-
enly voted for funding for the M X
during Tuesdays consideration of
DOD appropriations. I voted against
Chairman .DDABBO’S amendment that
would have deleted funds for the MX.
roll call vote No. 439.
2 have consistently voted against
MX funding, and it was not my inten-
tion to change my position. I believe
the MX Is an Inappropriate way to
maintain our defenses. I am also a sup
porter of the nuclear freeze. In addi.
tion, It Is my firmly held belief that
money intended for the MX would be
better used to help the needy of this
Nation.
- One final point It stru me that
my vote on Tuesday was a result of
human error. Luckily, It was not the
decisive vote, and that my record will
bear out my statement But the point
Is clear, we are all capable of making
errors, This makes me wonder what
happens if, by human error, a nuclea ’
device is detonated. I pray this will
never be the case, and I am certain
there are ample safeguards against
such an accident. I do not think we
need necessarily o home tonight and
worry about lt
I do. however, believe we must take
into consideration human erTOr and
the possibility of auth a disaster as we
continue to develop and deploy nude-
IT arms. I may made a mistake In my
vote, but I have not thanged my p .•
Uon the nuclear arms sane must end
now. Further funding for the MX Is
the real mistake.
- ,, _., . . , ,.s. -
,. ‘ ‘:
November 3. 198;?
PROVIDING FOR CONSiDERA-
TION OF H.R. 2114. AUTHOR-
IZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR
MARITIME PROGRAMS OF DE-
PARTMENT OF TRANSPORTA-
TION. 1984
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, by direc.
tion of the Committee on Rules, I call
up House Resolution 352 and ask for
Its immediate consideration,
The Clerk read the resolution, as fol-
loww
H. Ras.352
Resolved. That at any time after the adop
lion of this resolution the 6pea. es may
pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule X II1. de.
cla.ra the House resolved Into the CommIt-
tee of the Whole House on the Slate 01 the
Union for the consideration of the bill (HR.
2114) to authorize appropriations for the
fiscal year 1984 foe certain maritime pro-
irams of the Depanmest of Transporta-
tion, and for other purposes, and the first
reading of the bW shall be dispensed with.
Alter general debate, which shall be con-
fined to the bill and shall continue not to
exceed one hour. to be e uslly divided and
controlled by the chairman and ranking mi-
nority member of the Committee en Mer-
- chant Marme md Fisheries, the bill shall be
read for amendment under the five-ininuts
rule It shall be In order to consider the
amendments recommended by the Commit-
tee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries now
pruned in the bill InseTting new sections
and 3, and all points of orde? against mid
amendments for failure to comply wit.h the
provisions of clause 7. rule XVI are hereby
waived At the conclusion of the considera.
lion of the bill for amendment, the Commit-
tee shall rise and report the bill to the
House with such amendments as may have
been adopted, and the previous question
shall be considered as ordered on the bill
and amendments thereto to final possagr
without tntervenin motion ex
motion to lecommit, After passage of HR
2114. the Committee on Merchant Marine
arid Fisheries shall be dlschar ed from the
further consideration of the billS. 1037. end
It shall then be In order In the House to
move to strike out all after the enacting
clause of the said bW and to Insert in iwu
thereof the pruvialotis Conisined In H.E..
2114 as passed by the House.
The SPEA pro temnpore. The
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Faosr) Is
recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield the
eustomary 30 minutes to the gentle-
man from Mississippi (Mr. Lo7’r), for
purposes of debate only, pending
which I yield myself such time as I
may consume. -
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, House
ResolutIon 352 Is an open rule provid.
trig for the considerauon of Lit. 2114
which provides authorization for ocr-
taip maritime programs of the Depart-
tnent of Transportation.
• l ’tie rule provides for I hour of ten-
ej-al debate to be equally divided and
c ittrolled by the chairman si -id rank.
- log minority member of the Commit-
tee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries.
The rule also provides that during
consideration of the bill for omend-
merit under the 5-minute rule, It shal;
be in order to consider the amend-
ments ‘n ed by the Commit-
tee on Merchant Marine and Fisbersea
— _., —
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
119184 - “
Johnson lSftchefl &tium.r
Jones (NC) - MoskIe, - -
Iwm’O ) Maser
Jones (TN) Morr (CT) liwxp
Laetur BIk ukl -
Lsztenmeler Murph7 Sl on -
Lermelly Murtha ItZi 171.1
Kildee Pa2 er ltd (NJ)
Loiter
Oskor - 8t0e,a I n
- • o
IAfltm — .Obey - elan -
teith
- I.k ,an (CA). Wiger eLra&mo
Ishnian (F !.) Paneus
- Patt dt - , -
-. - J mt I ae Oynsr -.
I “Pamy
tees aAJ Pe*ns Towes -:
Loes D) F!ekl, - -
Mankey - Pr
Mont - -. tame) - Vsiflo
Naimi R& ii-fifesE Vot me,
Vavvoube Reid - Waltresi
Richardson Waxmsa
M I ey - Rinaido Weave, -.
— MeOi Xh Rodino Webes’ -
McHugh R.
- W a.mi WhasL
McKmiey Roukcme WWia ( W I’)
MeNulty Roybal - Wlrth
Mikutaki 5. 50 ‘ Waive
Miller (CA) Ocheuer Wydes
I Sin et s Oclineidre Yates -
I .Ma ,.-‘ - Mluwedrr Zs51
- -. - SlOT VO G-4O
- -
chappeD - Ouar lni
cheiho - flame Piahajan
sa m n raai’
de Ia Gaim Hanneu Mass
• Hatcher Sarsam
Dirtinson Lasen RolLS ( IA)
Dowdy Ko owek RollS. Denny
Downer LCwTVWA) Solass
laM, tALkeD 8 tcid u1
Edga- Li indine Whitten
F lab Marnoti WUiivz , . (OH)
Pond (TN) MeCurd,
FW ythe . ‘ ‘i
• ‘ ‘- 1)1840 -
-------
September 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 will 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.o
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman. I have no
further requests for time.
Mr HAMMERSCIIMIDT. Mr.
Chairman, I have no further request.s
for time.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. I yield
1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. SEIBrRLING).
(Mr. SEIBERLINO asked and was
Iven permission to revise and extend
s remarks.)
ir. SEIBERLINO. Mr. Chairman. I
uld like to commend the gentleman
ram New Jersey (Mr. Fz.oRio) for his
leadership In this field of storage and
disposal of toxic wastes. I commend
and thank hun, 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 maximum 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 faculty a good exam-
ple of a hybrid system that was a com-
bination storage and disposal facility
for ‘- ) ich there really Is not a clear
ulatory system that has been
50 the gentleman Is correct.
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. SEIBERLINO. I thank the gen-
tleman and I commend him and also
the other gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. ROE) for the work that he has
done in connection with this legisla-
tion.
The CHAIRMAN. 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 RacoRn of August 3,
1982. by, and if offered by, Repre-
sentative Ros of New Jersey In lieu of
the amendments recommended by the
Committee on Public Works and
Transportation now printed In the re-
ported bill.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows
E.R. 6307 -
Be it enacted by the Senate and Hou.ie of
Representatives of the United States of
America in Congress assembed,
£WTUORIZATIOR OP APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL
TEARS 1983 AKH 1984
A DMD(T U I THE NATURS 07 A SVBSTITUTE
OF)’ERED BY MR. FLO 1UO
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman I offer
an amendment in the nature of a sub-
stitute.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment in the nature of a substitute
offered by Mr. Fz.oRio: Strike out all alter
the enacting clause and Insert in lieu there-
of:
SHORT TITLI
Sacriois I. This Act may be cited as the
“Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Reauthorization Act of 1982”.
AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL
YZABS 1983 AND 1984 -
Sm. 2. (a) O WL Ao ’aoRIzAnox.—Sec-
lion 2007 (a) of the Solid Waste D’sposal Act
Is amended by striking out “and 880.000.000
for the fiscal year ending September 30.
1982” and substituting “$80,000,000 for the
fiscal year ending September 30. 1982,
$44,520,000 for the fiscal year ending Sep-
tember 30, 1983, and $44,520,000 for the
fIscal year ending September 30. 1984”,
(b) STArs Hwiuious Wss’rS PROGRAMS.—
Section 301 1ia of such Act Is amended by
striking Out “and 340 ,000.100 for toe f zca1
year 1982” and substituting “$40000.DO.) for
the fiscal year 1982. $40,000,000 for the
fiscal year 1983. and 840.000,000 for the
fIscal year 1984”.
(C) HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE INVENTOR?.—
Section 3012 of such Act (relat.ng to the
hazardous waste Inventoryi Is amended by—
(1) redesignating such section (and the
corresponding reference theretO in the tabie
of cOntent.s) as “Section 30 lÀ.”: and
(2) by striking out “$20,000,000” in subsec-
tion (c)(2) and Inserting in lieu thereof
“$10 000 000 for the fiscal year 1983. and
$10,000,000 for the fiscal year 1984”.
(di DEVEI.OPMENT M.D IItp1.g?eEaTA’rloi, As-
sisrAxcL—Section 4008(a)U) of such Act is
amended by striking out “and $20,000,000
H 6757
for fiscal year 1982” and substituting
“$20000000 for the fIscal year 1982,
$10,000,000 for fIscal year 1963, and
$10,000,000 for fiscal year 1984”.
(C) IMPLEMENTATION Assis’r*Ncs.—Sectlon
4008(aR2)C) of such Act is amended by
stnking out “and $10,000,000 for fiscal year
1982” and substituting ‘82.000,000 for the
fiscal year 1982. $2,000,000 for fIscal year
1983, and $2,000,000 for fiscal year 1984”.
(f) SPECIAL CoMvuxrnEs.—Sectlon
4008(eM2) of such Act Is amended by strik-
ing out “and $1,500,000 for each of the fiscal
years 1981 and 1982” and ubstItutmg
$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) ASSISTANCE TO STATES rca RECYcLED
OIL PRoGauss.—Section 4003 of such Act Is
amended—
(1) by redesignating subsection If) (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 (I) (re-
laUng to assistance to States for discretion-
ary programs for recycled oil) by striking
out “and $5,000,000 for fiscal year 1983” and
substituting “$5,000,000 for fiscal year 1983
and $3,000,000 for fiscal year 1984”.
(h) D ARTMERT OF COMPEIICE Pmtc-
TrnlIs.—Sectlon 5006 of such Act L i amended
by inserting after “1982” the following
“$1,500,000 for flscal year 1983. and
$1,500,000 for fiscal year 1964”.
SMALL QUANTITY GENseATORS
Sac, 3. SectIon 3001 of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act Is amended by adding the fol-
lowing at the end thereof:
“(di S i.t Q0a’rrrrT GENERATOR WASTE.—
(1) After the date twenty-four months after
the date of the enactment of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act Reauthort.
zation Act of 1982. no hazardous waste
which Is generaved by any generator in a
quantity greater than one hundred kLio-
grams during any calendar month shall be
exempt. by reason of the small quant:ty
generated, from standards under this subti-
tle.
“(2) Not later than twenty.four months
after the date of the enactment of the Re-
source Conservation and Recovery Act
Reauthonzation Act of 1982 the Adminis-
trator, alter opportunity for notice, com-
ment, and public hearings, sl’all promulgate
standards under sections 3002, 3003, and
3004 for hazardous waste ahich Is generated
during any ca’ ’ndar month by any gener-
ator in a quantity greater than one hundred
kilograms but less than one thousand kilo-
grams, Such standards may vary as provided
In this paragraph from the sta ndards appli-
cable to hazardous waste gen ’raied in larger
quantities to the extent t iat the Adminis-
trator deems such variation nececsary by
reason of the smaller capa’itv of the facib.
iii’s concerned. The Athi1 jLrat r Is direct-
ed to provide sariaaces in st.ch standards
which—
‘IA) in the case of standards under section
3002, pror de Ihat—
“(1) a determination cor.cerning whether
or not hazardous wae’e Is belrg generated
may be made through testing, or process
ide .tLficatlon. or appiyirg kno’s ledge of the
characteristics of the waste based upon ma-
terials or processes used, or genenc testing
for an Lridu .try a here waste streams of gee-
eralors within the industry have the same
or similar charlwtenstlca
“(ill requirements for waste identification
on manifests may be modifted so that such
requirements may be satisfied on the basis
of Information obtained by testing, or proo-
R 1 - ( 3 7 s 4
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
II 6758
ess identificatIon. or applying knowledge of
the characteristica of the waste based upon
materials or processes used, or generic test.
Ing for an industry where waste streams of
generators Slihin the industry have the
same or similar characteristica•
“iii labeling requirements prior to waste
shipments may be modified so that such re.
quiremen may be satisfied on the basis of
information obtained through testing, or
process identification, or applying knowl-
edge of the charac(eriszj of the waste
based upon matenals or processes used, or
• , generic testing for au industry where waste
streams of generators within the industry
have the same orslr,aar chV’U. stl
• “(B) in the case of standards under sec-
tioin 3003. provIde that transpOi-t t ion re-
quij’ements for smaller quantities of hazard.
ous wastes may vary from those applicable
to hazardous waste generated in excess of
one thousand kllogra during any calezi-
dar month, and
“(C) in the case of standar(Is under section
3004, provide that Storage requirements
shall be modified to allow on-site saste stor-
age for up to 180 days without the require-
ment of a permit,,
The variances as specified in subparagrapbs
(A), (B), and (C) shall apply to all hazardous
waste generated during any calendar month
In a quantity of less than one thousand kilo.
grams unless the Administrator demon.
strates that other standards are necessary
to protect human health and the environ-
ment. In addition, the Administrator Is dl.
reeled to examine the requirements in
effect under section 3003 and, in coopers.
tion with the Secretary of Transportation
modify regulatio in effect on the date of
the enactment of this paragraph to the
extent appropriate to conform such require-
ments to the scale of the operatiOrts In-
volii’d, The acUoris of the Administrator
under this paragraph shah be treated as a
flOndLscretlo! aj’y duty for purposes of sec-
tion 7002.
“(3) The Adlnfriistrator may promulgate
regulatio under this subtitle which estab.
lished special standards for, or exempt from
regulation, hazardous wastes which are gen-
erated b3 any generator in a quantity less
than one hundred kilograms during any cal-
endar month.
“(4) Nothing In this subsection shall be
Construed to affect or lznpaij- the validity of
regulatio of the Administrator prOmulgat .
ed prior to the date of the enactment of the
Resource Conservation and Reco ery Act
Reauthorization Act of 1982 a-fib respect to
hazardous waste generez by generators of
less than one thousand kilograms per
month of hazardous waste, except that after
the date eighteen montha after such date of
enactment, such prior regulations shall not
apply to hazardous waste generated by gen.
erators which generate more than minimal
quantities (one hundred kilogi-a or less)
of hazardous waste per month.”,
HAZARDOUS WASTE XED Wifli DOMZSTK
SEWAGS
&c 4 The Administrator of the Envfj-on.
mental Protection Agency Shall, not later
than one year after the date of the enact.
ment of this Act, submit a report to the
Congress concerning hazardous w astes Iden-
tified or listed under sectIon 3001 of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act which are ex-
cluded from regulation pursuant to subtlt e
C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act under
regulations exempting mixtures of domestic
sew age and other wastes that pass through
a sewer system to a publicly os-ned treat-
ment works for treatment, Such report shall
specify the types and quantities of such haz-
ardous wastes which are exempted pursuant
to such regulations and shall include recoin-
mendations respecting whether or not exist-
ing lax applicable to such mixtures are ade-
quate to protect human health and the en-
vironnient from the hazards associated with
such wastes Not later than six months after
the date of the enactment of this section.
the Administrator shall submit to Congress
a notice setting forth the progress made on
the report required under this section,
HAZARDOUS WASTE INJEcTiON; UQUIDS IN
LANDFILLS
SEC. 5. Section 3004 of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act is amended by inserting “in) lii
OENga L- .,” after “3004,” and by adding the
following at the end thereof:
“(b) HAZARDOUS WASTE INJECTION, . .41)
months alter the enactment of
the Resource Conseriatlon and Recovery
Act Reauthorization Act of 1982, the dispos-
al of hazardou.; waste by Injection through
a class IV well into an undeTgrou source
of drinking water is prohibited. Twelve
mnontha after the date of enactment of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Reauthor tion Act of 1982, disposal of
hazardous waste by injection through a
class IV well whIch is above an underground
source of drinking water is prohibited until
Such practices are regulated by State pro.
grains or by the Administration pursuant to
section 1422 of the Safe Drinking Water
Act, In those States that have not undertak-
en administrative resl5onsibflity for the un-
derground injection program with regard to
injection into an Underground source of
drinking water by January 1. 1983, the Ad.
inmistrator shall asSume such responsibility
at that time. For purposes of this Subsec-
tion, the terms ‘underground source of
drinking Water’ and ‘class IV well’ shall haie
the same meaning as pro idt-d in regulatio
of the Administrasor under the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act.
“(2) NothIng in paragraph (1) shall affect
Afl well which injects fluids:
“(A) which are brought to the surface In
eonne(-tijon with conventional oil or natural
gas Production;
“(B) which are brought to the surface in
connection with the withdrawal of natural
gas from underground storage reservoirs;
“(C) which are brought to the surface In
Connection with the production of geopres-
sw-ed methane;
“(Dl for enhanced recovery of oil or natu-
ral ga
“CE) for storage of hydrocarbons which
are liquid or gases at standard temperature
and pressure.
“(3) Nothing In paragraph (1) shall affect
any w’elj which injects fluids for extraction
of minerals or energy, including, but not
limited to:
“(A) mining of sulfur try the Prasch Proc.
es
“(B) solution mining of minerals;
“(C) in-situ combustion of fossil fuel: and
“CD) reco ery of geothermal energy to
produce electric pow-er.
“(C) LIQUIDS IN Lswnyrtzs —Not later than
one year after the enactment of the Re-
source Conservation and Recovery Act
Reauthorization Act of 1982, the Adn,inis.
trator shall promulgate final regulatio
which minimize the disposal of liquid haz-
ardous waste, and free liquids contained in
hazardous waste, in landfills Pending pro-
mulgation f such regulations, the Admuu,-
trator shall maintain the current require.
ments In regu1atio under this section re-
specting the disposal In landfills of liquid
hazardous waste and free Uquids contained
in hazardous Waite.
“(dl L,ura Dispossa REPORTS —‘The Adnun.
Istrator shall, not later than one year after
the date of the enactment of this subsec-
tion, and after notice and Opportunity for
&ptembe,- 8, 1982
public comment, publish and submit to the
Congre a report listing those hazardous
wastes for which one or more types of land
disposal may not be protecti e of human
health and the en , Ironment based upon the
toiilcity mobility, persistence and ability of
the waits to bloaccumulate The report
shall also identify hazardous wastes for
which there exists one or more technologi.
cally feasible means of treatment, recovery.
or disposal (Including incineration, neutral,
ization, fixation, chemical destruction, or
any Other means of thermal, chemical.
ph)slcal or biological treatment, recovery.
or disposal) other than land dIsposal which
will protect human health and the environ-
ment. The report shall Include an assess-
ment of the costs of such other means of
treatment, reco%ery, or disposal The report
shall also include an assessment of other
hazardous wastes which are unsuitable for
other means of waste treatment or disposal,
The report under this subsection shall be
modified and supplemented from tune to
time after its initial publication as new in-
formation becomes available,
“Ce) RES?RIC ’TIONS Ox Lum DisPos*z _Not
later than 9 montbs after the date on which
the repo is required to be published under
subsection (d), and from time to time there-
after, the Administrator shall promulga
regulalio respecting those hazardous
wastes for which land disposal may not be
protective of human health and the envi-
ronment based upon the toxicity, mobility,
persistence, and ability of the waste to
bioaccumu late Such regulations shall con-
tain effective dates that take into account
the Administrator’s best estimate of the
amount of time necessary to install nation-
wide sufficient capacity of alterriati , e treat-
ment. recovery or di5posal methods identi-
fied pursuant to section (d). After any dice-
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 disposit is not reasonably avail-
able Factors to be considered in determin.
Ing reasonable a ailability shall include, but
shall not be limited to, geographic proxiin.
ity and the nature of particular wastes For
purposes of such regulatio the Adminis.
ti-ator 5hall—
“(I) consider the ability of land disposal
facilities to contaui hazardous wastes over
time;
“(2 consIder- alternati,’e treatment meth.
ods:
“(3) examIne the actions taken by State
goverm en with regard I -c such controls;
and
“(4) revle , ’ all halOgeflated organic
wastes”,
Sr-c, 6. (aJ Normcx,__(I) Section 3010 of the
Solid Waite DiSPOSal Act is amended by in.
serting the follo ,ng after the first sentence
thereof ,•” later than twelve mon t
after the date of the enactment of this sen.
tence—
“(I) the owner or operator of any facility
which produces a fuel (Ai from an hazard.
otis waste Identified or listed under section
3001 (B) from such hazardous waste identi-
fied or listed under section aooi and any
other material, (C) from used oil, or (D
from used oil and any Other material.
“(2) the Owner or Operator of any facility
which burns for Purposes of energy recov-
ery any fuel produced as pro ided in para-
graph (1) or any fuel which Othera- con-
tains used oil or any hazardous was ,e identi.
lied or listed under section 3001: and
“(3) any person who distributes or mar-
kets any fuel which is produced as provided
In paragraph (I) or any fuel which other-
wise contains used oil or any hazardous
waste identified or listed under section 3001
- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
H. 1 M 7
12 SMALL QUANTITY GENERATORS
13 SEc. 3. Section 3001 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
14 is amended by adding the following at the end thereof:
15 “(d) SMALL QUANTiTY GENERATOR WA5TE.—(1)
16 After the date eighteen months after the date of the enactment
17 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Reauthoriza-
18 tion Act of 1982, no hazardous waste which is generated by
19 any generator in a quantity greater than one hundred kilo-
20 grams during any calendar month shall be exempt, by reason
21 of the small quantity generated, from standards under this
22 subtitle.
23 “(2) Not later than eighteen months after the date of the
24 enactment of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
25 Reauthorization Act of 1982, the Administrator shall pro-
-------
5
1 mulgate standards under sections 3002, 3003, and 3004 for
2 hazardous waste which is generated during any calendar
3 month by any generator in a quantity greater than one hun-
4 dred kilograms but less than one thousand kilograms. Such
5 standards may vary from the standards applicable to hazard-
6 ous waste generated in larger quantities to the extent that the
7 Administrator deems such variation necessary by reason of
8 the smaller capacity of the facilities concerned.
9 “(3) The Administrator may promulgate regulations
10 under this subtitle which establish special standards for, or
11 exempt from regulation, hazardous wastes which are generat-
12 ed by any generator in a quantity less than one hundred
13 kilograms during any calendar month.
14 “(4) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to
15 affect or impair the validity of regulations of the Administra-
16 br promulgated prior to the date of the enactment of the Re-
17 source Conservation and Recovery Act Reauthorization Act
18 of 1982 with respect to hazardous waste generated by gener-
19 ators of less than one thousand kilograms per month of haz-
20 ardous waste, except that after the date eighteen mont/is after
21 such date of enactment, such prior regulations shall not apply
22 to hazardous waste generated by generators which generate
23 more than minimal quantities (one hundred kilograms or
24 less) of hazardous waste per month. “.
HR 6307 RH
-------
7o, T1+ &&& . ecc.
SectionS. Small quantity generator8
The Committee has included this provision to correct a current regu-
latory exclusion from the Act that was not envisioned by the Congress.
Under regulations promulgated on May 19, 1980 (40 CFR 261.5), the
Agency excluded, from most RCRA requirements, generators who
generate 1,000 kilograms/calendar month (kg/mo) of hazardous waste
or less. As a consequence of this exclusion, such generators are allowed
to dispose of their wastes into permitted sanitary landfills, or into
sewer lines that are connected to publicly owned treatment works—
facilities that frequently are not suited to manage or treat hazardous
wastes. Such generators are also not required to manifest, transport, p. 3
treat or maintain proper records for the wastes they generate.
The Committee believes that this exclusion is unwarranted and
allows substantial quantities of otherwise hazardous waste to be dis-
nosed of in an environmentally unsound manner. In fact, the Office of
!1’echnology Assessment has estimated that an amount equal to 10 per-
cent of the 40 million metric tons of hazardous waste that are currently
regulated under the Act may be escaping proper controls through this
exclusion. The Agency estimates that only 1 percent of total hazardous
wastes escape coverage. Futhermore, the Agency in its May 19, 1980,
regulations committed to lowering the level of this exclusion from
1,000 kg/mo (one ton) to 100 kg/mo (% of one ton). By enacting this
provision, the Committee is ensuring implementation of the Agency’s
previous commitment to lower the present small quantity generators
exclusion by 10 fold within 18 months.
The Committee recognizes that the hazard of a given waste is im-
parted by its intrinsic toxicity and other inherent properties such as
ignitability, corrosivity and reactivity, and is not a function of the
pecific volume in which the waste is produced by a given generator.
The Committee also recognizes that the handling, transport and dis-
posal of hazardous wastes are important factors in controlling the
magnitude and extent of the health and environmental hazards posed
by such wastes. With these considerations in mind, it is the Commit-
tee’s intention that the wastes produced by this class of newly covered
generators (those who produce more than 100 kg/mo but less than
1000 kg/mo) will be manifested, transported, stored, treated and dis-
posed of in a manner consistent with the current requirements for
generators of greater than 1000 kg/mo, while at the same time limit-
ing the administrative burden. Nothing in Section 3 of these amend-
ments shall be construed to give the Administrator the discretion to
allow wastes generated by this class of generators to dispose of their
wastes at facilities other than those which are permitted under See- , /
tion 3005(c), 3005(e), or Section 3006 of RCRA. Similarly, nothing
in these amendments shall be construed to prohibit the applicability
of any of the requirements of Section 3002—3006 to this class of gen-
erators. The Committee is particularly concerned that the require-
ments of Sections 3002(2), (4) and (5); 3003 and 3004 be applied to
this class of hazardous wastes. The Committee recognizes, however,
that accommodations are in order regarding certain elements of haz-
ardous waste management for this class of generators in light of
the smaller scale of these operations. The Administrator should con-
sider modifications to the storage, recordkeeping. reporting. accumu-
lations and container requirements so as to conform the administrative
burden to the scale of operation. The Administrator may also want
to consider modifications such as monthly or quarterly manifest re-
quirements where appropriate.
For those generntors which generate 100 kg/mo or less of hazardous
waste, the Administrator may promulgate requirements. in addition
to those that apply under current regulation (40 CFR 261.5). as may
be necessary to protect public health and the environment.. Nothing
in this provision shall he construed to remove the current disposal re-
quirements for generators of acutely hazardous wastes as listed in
40 CFR 261.33(e) or to impair the Administrator’s discretion to im-
pose disposal requirements on other individual or categories of acutely
or chronically hazardous waste. irrespective of the quantities in which
they are generated. The Committee also believes that it. would be both
prudent and reasonable for generators of 100 kg/mo or less of haz-
ardous waste to be required to notify the disposer of such wastes of
its qualitative content. so as to minimize the hazards to personnel in-
volved in the disposal of such wastes.
-------
Wj2 1 ,, ( J 6 . Cj7ç7 T7 tC C .( 24 ((qg.)
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF HON. BARBARA A. MIKTJLSKI
AND HON. RON WYDEN
We wholeheartedly concur with the intent of HR 6307 to “shorten
the leash” which Congress gives to the Environmental Protection
Agency when it feels that the policies of the Agency may not truly
reflect the concerns of the Congress.
Such a case is the “small quantity generator issue.” EPA has ex-
empted generators of less than 1.1 ton of hazardous waste a month
from any requirement except that those wastes be directed to some
approved facility—no matter that the facility might not be engi-
neered to receive hazardous wastes or that the transporters or dis-
posal facility operators might not want to accept the risks of ‘han-
dling these wastes. We applaud the identification of this problem in
HR 6307 and the obvious concern expressed to bring these small
quantities under regulation wherever possible.
We take strong exception, however, to the language of Section 3
of the bill which addresses “Small Quantity Generator Waste.” That
section, though intended to tighten this regulatory loophole, could be
misinterpreted to permit EPA to continue its present “exemption”
substantially as it presently operates (or fails to operate) and it
would establish legislative authority where none presently exists, al-
lowing EPA to totally exempt quantities smaller than 100 kilograms
a month. We should not accept ratification of the small generator ex-
cinption which has so demonstrably failed to protect the public health
and which unnecessarily exposes transporters and disposal facility
operators to occupational safety threats and invites environmental
contamination from facilities not engineered or operated to assure
the safe management of hazardous wastes. The Office of Technology
Assessment presented strong evidence that this problem has been
swept under the carpet too long. The National Solid Wastes Manage-
ment Association (NSWMA) testified as to the threat and injuries
incurred because of the present exemption.
The present language of Section 3 is a false promise and should
either be eliminated or strengthened. To leave it unchanged is to de-
ceive the American public that the Congress has dealt meaningfully
with this important issue.
We do not want to have the language removed; far better would be
to substitute language clarifying a minimum standard (different
from the full set of RCRA regulations) which all generators of less
than 1,000 kilograms should be required to meet. We suggest that
such a minimum standard must include an absolute, mandatory re-
quirement that generators of small quantities of hazardous wastes
must notify the transporter of the existence of hazardous wastes.
In this we need not insist on any elaborate system to fully identify the
types and quantities of the wastes, but rather a simple statement that
the wastes being disposed of contain hazardous wastes. This will en-
able the transporter to take whatever special precautions he feels ap-
propriate in managing such wastes. The transporter of such wastes
who is notified of the existence of hazardous wastes in his cargo
should also be required to so notify the treatment or disposal facility
where he delivers them.
The federal hazardous waste program is of critical importance. It
enjoys the full support of the American public. Now is no time to try
to fool the public that we are dealing with this important problem if
we are only willing to pay lip service to these public concerns.
BARBARA A. MIKULSK!.
RON WYDEN.
2-?-)
-------
(J
MINORITY VIEWS ON H.R. 6307—RESOURCE CONSERVA-
TION AND RECOVERY ACT REAUTHORIZATION OF 1982
We are submitting these views in opposition to H.R. 6307, the Re-
source Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) amendments of 1982,
which was ordered reported by the Full Committee on May 11, 1982.
Our objections to this bill fall into two different categories—objec-
t ons to the procedural manner in which this legislation was handled
and objections to some specific provisions contained in the bill.
With respect to the first objection, we feel that the approximately
12 changes to RCRA, now substantially embodied in H.R. 6307, were
not properly aired during the hearing process. In some instances, the
issues involved in these changes were not discussed during the hear-
ings. In some cases they were, but only one side of the issue was heard.
We believe that each of the changes should have been addressed
fully during the hearing process. All parties who would be signiti-
cantly affected by the changes should have had an opportunity to t.es-
ti ty. Unfortunately, this did not occur. In fact, many of these parties
are only now becoming fully aware of the changes contained in }I.R.
6307. We are hopeful that some of the concerns of these parties will
be considered before H.R. 6307 goes to the House Floor.
Our second category of objection goes to specific provisions con-
tained in H.R. 6307. But first, we would like to voice our approval of
Full Committee action to delete the attorney’s fees section of the Sub-
co,uiniittee reported bill. We believe it is clearly inappropriate to
statutorily provide courts with the discretion to award attorney’s fees
for litigants seekiui judicial review of final regulations in the U.S.
Couuit. of Appeals. ft is ill-advised provisions like this which encour-
age frivolous lawsuits, permitting anyone who is deemed an appro-
pmiate recipient to obtain attorney’s fees—even those who may have
brought suits for the purposes of harassment or vindication. Fortu-
nately, the Full Committee deleted this objectionable provision.
Of the remaining sections of H.R. 6307, the provision that we are
particularly concerned with is Section 3, which alters the current
RCRA. small generator exemption of 1000/kg/mo. Specifically, the
RCRA. regulations now provide that all those who generate less than
1000/kg/mo of hazardous waste and who dispose of that waste in -
either a licensed sanitary landfill or an interim status facility, are gen-
erally exempt from the RCRA regulatory regime. Section 3 of H.R.
6307 reduces the small generator exemption to 100/kg/mo and requires
EPA to regulate those who generate between 100 and 1000/kg/mo, but
gives EPA discretion to promulgate standards for those generators
which vary from the standards applicable to hazardous waste gen-
crated in larger quantities. Further, Section 3 gives EPA discretion
to exempt from the RCRA regulations generators which produce less
than 100/kg/mo of hazardous waste.
(88)
-------
39
As we understand it, this statutory change will bring for the first
time up to 150,000 small businesses under the purview of the RCRA
regulations. These small businesses include gas stations, drycleaners,
secondary schools, hospitals and painting contractors, just to name a
few. It is these businesses which are among those which were not
provided an opportunity to testify at the Subcommittee’s RCRA over-
sight hearings. We think there should have been more extensive hear-
ings before these businesses were made subject to the i igors of the
RCRA regulatory system. In our opinion, rather than statutorily
changing the small generator exemption, H.R. 6307 should have di-
rected EPA to initiate a rulemaking on this issue at the earliest pos-
sible time. Had EPA gone through a rulemaking on the small genera-
tor issue, all interested parties would have been able to state their
cases before any changes were made to the existing small generator
exemption. In addition, a rulemaking would have permitted EPA
to bring its institutional knowledge to bear on this very important
issue.
Further, the changes made by Section 3 will mean a dramatic in-
crease in the enforcement responsibilities of either EPA, or the States
if they asume responsibility for their own hazardous waste regulatory
programs. As we mentioned earlier, this change in the small generator
exemption will bring up to 150,000 more facilities under the RCRA
regulatory system. And this will be in addition to the existing re-
sponsibility to regulate the hundreds of thousands of larger facilities.
This is not the only provision we are concerned with in H.R. 6307;
we are also concerned about the numerous studies EPA will be re-
quired to perform which will duplicate other work now underway in
other program areas such as Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water.
Further, we believe that many of the deadlines imposed on EPA by
HR. 6307 are unachievable. In many instances, EPA will be rushed
to meet these deadlines, and will produce inadequate and/or indefen-
sible regula.tions which will be litigated for years in the courts. Setting
more realistic deadlines could perhaps help in reducing this endless
stream of litigation.
In sum, we would only reiterate our belief that H.R. 6307 provides
an excellent example of how our laws should not be made. We hope
that most of the problems we have outlined in these views will be
corrected on the House Floor or in conference.
Jmm T. BROTBILL.
CLARENCE J. BROWN.
JAMES M. Cou.nis.
ED MADIOAN.
ToM ConcoiLaN.
Wn.UAM DANNEMETER.
Boa WmTrAKER.
H aou Roozns.
DAN COATS.
-------
&ptember 8, .1982
leagues. Mr. Ros and Mr. Eussssii-
scsu.tznv for their contribution as well.
I believe that the substitute that will
be before this committee today Is far
superior to our original 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 envl-
ronmental 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 H.R.
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
RCRA. 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 ECRA 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 Is
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-
tional priority, it should not, in my
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 ahich are
determined to be harmful to public
health and the environment. Once
these practices are regulated, a major
gap In the RCRA regulatory program
will be closed.
Mr. Chairman, I do not want to mo-
nopolize the time the minority has
available on this measure but suffice it
4 , ( 7
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
to say that sections 3 and 6 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-
marksJ
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. FL0RI0). the gentle-
man from New York (Mr. Lzx ) and
also the gentleman from Arkansas
(Mr. H MzRscHalnrr). 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 amendments 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, this
bill, after being reported by the Com-
mittee on Energy and Commerce. was
sequentially referred to the Commit..
tee on Publlc Works and Transports..
tion for consideration of section 4 and
section 9. These sections direct & study
by EPA of mixtures of sewage and
hazardous wastes and establish a Na.-
tional Groundwater Commission 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 rnonument.al
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 Lu the substitute.
Section 4 dIrects the Administrator
of the Environmental Protection
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 accozn•
pUshed 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-
H 6747
mendations 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 lIst ,s
submitted by various groups and the
Director of the Office of Technology
Assessment.
The commfczion 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. 1986, The amendment to
sect!on 9 expand.: 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 overdralting
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 contami-
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 Lssessment 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 four
House Members, two would be from
the Energy and Commerce, and two
from Public Works and Transporta-
r.13n. EI’ ttt. Members would be ap-
pointed by the President, four from a
list submitted by the National Gover-
nors Association, and four from
submitted by other organIzatIo and
groups.
The commission would be directed to
utilize on & reimbursable basis person-
nel from the U.S. Geological Survey
and from the Corps of Engineers,
Finally. Mr. Chairman, the date for
ubmlssIon of the report to Congress
would be changed from October 30,
-------
H 6748
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
1986. to October 30. 1985. and the also summarized the provisions of the
amount authorized to be appropriated different versions reported by the two
for this Indepth Commission review committees reporting this legislation.
and study of the Nation’s ground- I would like to emphasize just a few
waters will be $7 million, matters in my statement.
The substitute includes an addition- First, I would like to recognize and
SI provision directing the Ground- thank the leadership Chairman
water Commission to submit a sepa- PLoalo and Mr. Lx?rr of the Energy
rate preliminary study to Congress and Commerce Subcommittee and
concerning grourid•water contamina- their staff for their willing coopera-
tion from solid and hazardous waste, tion in fashioning the compromise Ian-
and this study would be submitted guage that reconciles the differences
wIthin 1 year as an exigency to deal In sectIons 4 and 9 between the bills
with this vitally Important measure, as reported by the two committees.
was mentioned by the subcommittee Second, the Public Works Commit-
chairman (Mr. F’wsro). - tee received sequential referral of HR.
In addition, the final conclusions 6307 only for consideration of section
and findings of this study would be 4 (dealing with publicly owned treat-
corporated in the Commission’s report meat works) and section 9 (dealing
as a separate chapter. with the Groundwater CommLssion.
May I conclude, Mr. Chairman, by In testimony received on the bi IZ
complimenting the dlsUnguished gen- during the Water Resources Subcotn-
tlemnan, ray colleague, the gentleman mittee’s hearings, concerns were raised
from New Jersey Mj ’, j with reaped to other sections but the
having joined his subcommittee with Committee limited its amendments
our subcommittee In the t,v.o major only to those areas covered by the se-
elements of our concern and responsi- quential referral, Two of the concerns
bility In this legislation, and also par- expressed Include the small generator
ticularly compliment him on the Joint provision and the Federal common law
work we did In the State of New provision. The committee discusses
Jersey—If our other colleagues ij jhese concerns In its committee report.
pardon us that provincial observa- Regarding section 3. the small gener-
tlon—coming out of the Joint hearings ator provision, there was concern cx-
we held in the county of Morris In the pressed that reducing the exemption
State of New Jersey. particularly for small generators from 1.000 to 100
Rockaway Borough, relating to solid kilograms per month would add sig-
waste and hazardous waste disposal In nificantly to the number of those
so-called dumps and land disposal of people regulated without substantial
that nature, which brought forth benefit in control of hazardous wastes.
many of the problems that our Nation Section 10 mIght, according to those
is faced with in this vfl.afly testifying, subject those who are in
Issue. full compliance with the act to addi-
Take Into consideration, my col- tional undefined Federal liabilities and
leagues, that 50 percent of the drink, be an invitation to plaintiffs to reverse
lag water supply of this country 1sf legitimate 8dm inhtratlve determlna-
ground ater supply affecting the very I tions. -
life and health and safety of the ‘Third. Mr. Chairman, the Public
people of our Nation. Works Committee amendments to sec-
Mr. HAMMERSCHMIDT. , tlons 4 and 9 of the bill reported by
Chairman, I yield myself such time as the Energy and Commerce Committee
I may consume, were designed to improve those provi-
(Mr. HAMMERSCKMIDT asked slons while maIntaining the ba-sic
and was given permission to revise and thrust and intent of the Energy and
extend his remarks.) Commerce Committee. Our amend-
Mr. HAMMERSCHMIDT. , meat to section 4 maIntains the Clean
Chairman, I wish to associate myself Water Act focus of EPA’s pretreat-
with those remarks Just made by our meat study and calls for the results of
very able Chairman of the Water Re- the study In 1 year rather than 2
sources Subcommittee. Mr. Rox of sears. The shorter time frame is sp-
New Jersey. propriale b cs use much work has al-
Mr. Chairman, there are two p j. ready been done and data collected
slons of H.R. 6307, As reported by the concerning EPA’s pretreatment pro-
Committee on Energy and Commerce, grain and because the 1-year period
which involve matters under the Juris. will better dovetail with future con-
diction of the Public Works Comn nft,- gressional legislative schedules. Our
tee. These two provisions relate to reg. amendment to section 9 expands the
uiation of hazardous substances In scope of the Groundwater Commis-
publicly owned treatment works and sion’s duties to deal with ground-water
creation of a national ground ater contamination of all types, not Just
commission. The two committees have that associated with hazardous waste,
resolved their differences with respect and to make a number of other
to these two provisions, and I rise In changes to the structure and charter
support of this compromise on sec- of the Commission. The compromise
tioris 4 and 9 of the bill, that has been agreed to by the two
Others have explained the process committees Is Identical to the Public
whereby H.R. 6307 was sequentially Works Committee amendments,
referred to the Committee on Public except that an additional paragraph
Works and Transportation. They have has been added to subsection 9(f) of
&ptember8, 1982
the bill calling for EPA to submit after
1 year a preliminary study concerning
ground.vater 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 HR. 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 H.R. 6307 are ha.
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. Cz.ausEmf).
(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 H.R. 6307’s provisions relat-
ing to hazardous wastes entering pub-
licly owned treatment works and for-
mation of a National Groundwater
Commission.
Our Committee on Publlc 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 Groundv.atey 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. re5trUCtured 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 95 ground water commission
charter wa.s amended to call for an ex-
amination of all types of ground water
contamination rather than just that
resulting from hazardous wastes, In
addition, the due date for the report
was advanced from 1986 to 1985, the
authorized funding reduced from sio
million to $7 million, a requirement
added that the Chairman of the Com-
mission will be selected from among
the House-appointed Comnimico
L..
-------
September 8,, 1982
members, and a number of other
changes made to Improve the organi-
zation and effectiveness of the Com-
mission.
After 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 waLer 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
drinking 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 publlc 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. NY., 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 contarnina.
tion was only 900 feet from the well
field that supplies Atlantic City, N.J.
These are just a few examples that
illustrate 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
llshinent of this ground water comxnls.
sion v.’iil 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. FLOR IO. Mr. Chairman, I yield
such time as she may consume to the
gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. M i-
Rm.sicz), a very valuable member of
our subcommittee.
(Ms. MIKULSKI asked and was
given permission to revise and extend
her remarks
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. Chairman, the
tesource Conservation and Recovery
CONGRESSIONAL 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 allowihg me to hold those hear-
Ings. They were invaluable.
As the hours went by I 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 pa.ss
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. PLORIO. Mr. Chairman. I yield
1 minute to the gentleman from Iowa
(Mr. Bmrw.
(Mr. BEDELL asked and was given
permission to revise and extend 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
subcornjnlttee 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
116749
hazardous wastes currently are
exempt from most RCRA regulation
and may dispose of their wastes at
sanitary landfills. SectIon 3 of H.R.
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 smala
quantity generator provision by modi-
fying the managerial and admlnLstra.
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 substantially
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.
terlals. 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, has 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 u’ ed 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 Uses 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 R.R. 6307 to serve as an addi-
tional Impetus in this regard by bring.
ing the appropriate incentives and
-------
H 6750
control to this segment of the waste
stream.
If I may digress. It should be noted
that the gentleman from Iowa and his
subcornmltt.ee have been very belpful
In bringing the public’s attention to
the fact the EPA has not acted yet on
this Important matter. The Small
Business Committee has correctly
pointed out that EPA’s failure in this
regard has impeded development of
the used oil recycling Industry.
Mr. BEDELL I thank the gentleman
for his kind comments.
In regards to HR. 6307. Is it the gen-
tleman’s understanding that service
stations which collect used motor oil
would be considered hazardous waste
storage facilities?
Mr. FL .ORIO. It is certainly not the
committee’s intention to categorically
require that service stations become
permitted hazardous waste storage
facilities under RCRA. particularly
when waste oil is the sole or primary
component of their waste stream and
when such material is properly recy-
cled. Nor is It the committee’s intent
to categorically exempt all service sta-
tions from storage requirements Irre-
spective of the nature and quantity of
the waste stream and the manner of
waste management. This will depend
upon how much of what type of waste
Is generated, and upon the ultimate
disposition of the waste material.
One of the RCRA’s basic purposes is
to insure that all forms of hazardous
waste treatment, storage, and disposal
are controlled as may be necessary to
protect public health and the environ-
ment. It Is the intent of this amend-
ment to stem the disposal of hazard-
ous wastes into solid waste landfills, a
practice which has contributed to un-
paralleled envLronrnental harm. In
light of these concerns, and given the
general nature of operations at service
stations, ho ever, the committee does
not intend or expect that such facifi-
ties will be substantially affected for
the foilcaing reasons.
First, waste oil is covered by the
Used Oil Recycling Act of 1980 ahich
direct.s’the EPA to develop regulations
that create incentives for used oil recy.
cling. While some waste oil may ulti.
inately be determined to be a hazard-
ous waste, it is expected that the
Agency will take into account the
nature of the a.ste oil management
practice and the need to encourage
such recycling when Implementing
any waste oil standards.
Second, under current EPA regula-
tions, car batteries are not included
even in the 1.000 kg/month count, and
would not be subject to regulations, or
Included in the monthly generator
count prior to recycling. The commit-
tee believes this approach to be appro-
priate.
Third. with specific reference to po-
tential permitting for hazardous waste
storage at service stations and other
previously exempt generators, the
committee has included specific statu-
tory language which allows the
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
Agency to accommodate the particular
storage needs of such facilities, where
appropriate, including extension of
the current 90-day limit.
And fourth, the committee has also
clarified the recycling provision of the
legislation such that certain recycling
practices may not be regarded as haz
ardous waste management, or riced not
be subject to regulation where the
Agency determines that such a distinc-
tion is appropriate and will not endan-
ger public health and the environ-
ment. Recycling of hazardous wastes
under RCRA, however, connotes much
more than oil recycling. The use of
hazardous wastes as landfill covers
and the air emissions of hazardous
wastes through boilers also constitute
waste recycling. Such practices must
be subject to the same health and en-
vironmental standard as all other
forms of hazardous waste manage-
ment,
In summary, used oil collected by
aei-vice stations which Is properly recy-
cled, is not intended to be subject to
substantial additional requirements
under RCRA. However, If this same
material or other hazardous waste
generated by such facilities is discard-
ed rather than recycled, the amend-
ments should not be construed to
allow the disposal of such wastes by
generators of more than 100 kilograms
per month to occur at facilities other
than subtitle C hazardous waste facili-
ties.
Mr. BEDELL. In fact, In many areas,
including my home State of Iowa,
service stations have actually added to
the cleanup of environment by serving
as collection potht where do-it-your-
sellers can bring in waste oil for
proper disposal,
Mr. FLORIO. That Is correct. This is
an activity that Is beneficial to all par-
ties concerned.
Mr. BEDELL RCRA requires those
who generate hazardous wastes to
keep various records regarding its dis-
posal. If waste oil becomes listed as a
hazardous waste, this could impose a
significant burden on service station
operators. They frequently sell used
motor oil to several different, compet-
ing collectors who then transport It
hundreds of miles to reprocessing
facilities. It would be Impractical for
the service station operator to meet
the present RCRA requirements in
such eases.
Mr. FLORIO. The committee recog-
nizes this problem. We have included
specific Instructions to EPA that
smaller generators of hazardous
wastes should be relieved of as much
administrative burden as possible.
Is It our understanding that most
States require waste oil collectors to
be licensed to operate, and that this
includes a showing that they are dis-
posing of the product in an approved
fashion. Consequenlly, we feel it
would be sufficient for a service sta-
tion operator to merely keep receipts
from waste oil collectors, showing that
particular quantities of specific sub-
September 8, 1982
stances were sold to properly licensed
collectors for subsequent disposition.
Mr. BEDELL That would place the
primary burden on the waste oil col-
lector or transporter, which I believe
Is where it properly belongs. Thus the
transporter or collector would assume
the bulk of the responsibility for the
generator’s manifesting requirements,
Would you envision a similar disposi-
tion of recordkeeping requirements for
used batteries and solvents that are
sold for reuse?
Mr. FLORIO. Yes, this type of ar-
rangement Is appropriate for waste oil
and could be appropriate for slovents
depending upon the type of recycling
arrangements and degree of continu-
ing control over spent solvent exer-
cised by the generator. Solvents, how.
ever, are the architypical hazardous
waste contaminant, which readily ml.
grate and solubiize additional hazard-
ous waste contaminants, particularly
when placed into landfills. It Is those
type of wastes when so disposed that
have been the specuic focus of this
legislation and much recent controver-
sy.
The committee recognizes though.
that certain arrangements regarding
solvent recycling may well provvie the
necessary level of public health and
environmental protection, while mini-
mizing administrative burden to the
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-
vents, so that the shop owners are not
functioning as generators in the usual
sense of the word. The specifins of
such complex determinations, howev-
er, require the exercise of Agency dis-
cretion.
These are all spent materials which
have commercial resale value, and
which are already being recycled. It is
my feeling that service station opera-
tors are already behaving in a very re-
sponsible fashion. Imposing an added
paperwork burden on them would not
produce any further Improvement In
environmental protection.
Our concern Is for what happens to
the products after they have been sold
for reuse, and I believe showing proof
of sale to licensed collectors or re-
processors, and requiring the man]-
festing responsibility to be borne by
the collector and/or transporter
should be sufficient to satisfy the re-
quirements of RCRA as It would be
amended by H.R. 6307,
Mr. BEDELIL. I thank the gentle-
man, and I commend him for his con-
tinuing awareness of this potential for
energy savings and environmental pro-
tection from encouraging the recycling
of used motor oil, and for his aware-
ness of the special circumstances of
the service station Industry. I believe
the gentleman seeks an appropriate
balance between environmental pro-
tection and the needs of smaller gener-
ators In section 3 of this legislation.
f3 (
-------
September 8, 1982
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chainnan, I yield 3
minutes to the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. H0LLENBECa).
(Mr. HOLLENBECK asked and was
given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. HOLLENBECIC. 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 Nation’s fight
against 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-
grams effectiveness through the clos-
ing of loopholes In the system of
tracking hazardous waste and the
streamlining of EPA disposal permit
processing.
Final]y, I favor the work done to
‘arrow the hazardous waste exemp-
on for small quantity generators.
/Iith about 10 percent of all hazard-
ous wastes, about 8 billion pounds, the
responsibility of small quantity gener-
ators. I think the need to control this
waste Is sel1 evldent. Currently, I un-
derstand that these wastes are
dumped into sanitary landlills or
public sewage treatment systems—nel-
ther of which are designed to safely
contain hazardous materials. I find
this unacceptable. -
I hope that my colleagues will join
me In support of this legislation to
help preserve our environmental qua]-
Ity of life.
Mr. ROE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 8
minutes to the distinguished gentle-
man from Pennsyl ania (Mr. Eu).
(Mr. EDGAR asked and w is gi en
permission to re ise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. EDGAR. Mr. Chairman. I rise In
strong support of HR. 630? and com-
mend the chairman of our subcommit-
tee. the gentleman 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.
FLc xo); the ranking Republican mem-
bers of both Commerce and Public
Works, particularly the gentleman
from Arkansas Mr. Jour PAI L H ai-
‘ScHMiDT). for their work In putting
ther this reauthonzation of
A .
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
I commend all of these who have
talien the time to look at the way in
which resource recovery arid 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 lxnpor-
(ant to the whole Nation, North, East,
South. and West.
Mr. Chairman. I rise in support of
H R. 6307, the bill 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-
gion’s history of heavy industrializa-
tion. our States have been the sites of
numerous horror stortes 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.
virorzmeiital and health Impacts of
hazardous .substanceL 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 1000
kilograms per month of hazardous
wastes. Eight States in the Northeast-
Midwest region already have regula-
tions which establish a 100-kilogram
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. It Is p03-
sible that, due to a lack of uniformity
In he treatment of small quantity
waste generators by the States, certain
areas will suites’ a competitive disad-
vantage with businesses that are con-
cerned about waste disposal require-
rnents.
Other provisions of the bill which
all] help control one of the most seri-
ous threats to environmental quality—
that is, the contamination of ground
water With hazardous substances.
These pro lsions will restrict the dis-
pos&l of hazardous waste liquids In
landfills and the injection of hazard-
ous wastes into ground u.ater,
SectIon 9 of H.R. 6307 authorizes
the creation of the National Ground-
water Commission. As an author of
the original legislation to create the
116751
Commission Included In Mr. FI.ORIO’S
bill and modified by the Public Works
Conunittee 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-
half of all Americans depend on
ground water for drinking water, you
can begin to realize the magnitude of
this problem.
According tea 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, 19
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 vontainination. Thirty square
miles of the shallow aquLfer under the
Rocky Mountain Arsenal In Denver
have been contaminated by chemical
byproducts troni the manufacture of
pesticides and herbicides. A May 6,
1982 survey by the General Account-
ing Office points out as a major nap .
tional issue Impep.dlng water shortages
In the West and Southwest caused by
continual shifting 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 Superfund Act all address
Issues concerning ground water con.
Lamination and related health haz-
ards. The Northeast Midwest Congres-
sional Coalition held an Informal field
hearing on this subject last fall at
Greenvale, L.I. At that hearing 11 wit-
nesses told Senator PAT Moywuuu . js
and Representatives Lzrrr, PEI(rtsuO,
and CASUSAN 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 Northeast-Midwest Coalition con-
ference In January, which was attend-
ed by our distinguished subcornm ttee
chairman. Mr. ROE, Pro!. David Mar-
reEl of Princeton University strongly
advocated the need for a hlgh-level
Commissio)i to lOCUs on ground aater
problems. Subsequentiy, Dr. Moi-rell
wrote to me:
While local areas already taco serious dan-
gers, at the national Ie eI e still ha’e suffi-
cient time (perhaps two or three yearsi to
fonnuiate responsible and et!ecthe public
policy. Moreover, this is an area of DubIl
policy which. abtie national in scope, re-
quires a great deal 0 f action au the state
and local level ‘‘‘. In addition, ground-
-------
September 8,, 1982 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
landfills less than secure. Peter Mon. nides, halogenated organics, and
tague, the administrator of Princeton nonhalogenate volatile organics,
Universitys hazardous waste research As the gentleman from New York,
program, recently reported that four Mr. LENT, knows, the Department of
New Jersey landfills that employed Environmental Conservation has de-
state-of.the.art technology to prevent veloped a plan to selectively ban land-
leakage actually leaked. These were filling of hazardous wastes. CECOS In.
not landfills Constructed In the 1950’s ternational and SCA Services, Inc.,
or 1960’s; they were landfills that were New York’s two licensed hazardous
less than 4 years old, waste disposal companies, are working
A recent report in Civil Engineering, with the State to phase in alternative
the journal of the American Society of treatment technologies.
Civil Engineers, concludes that low Several other States, Including Iowa,
permeability clay used to contain haz. Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Minneso.
ardous astes can be rendered highly ta, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and
permeable by certain chemicals, And Vermont, have or will implement plans
EPA, in the introduction to its reguia. to encourage the development and uti.
tions for hazardous waste landfills, bzat&on of alternative technologies for
notes, “any liner will begin to leak the treatment, recovery, or disposal of
eventually•’ “ EPA concludes, “thus hazardous wastes,
it can be assumed that a hazardous Mr. Chairman, in 1977, a small corn.
waste land disposal unit presents some munity in N agara Falls, N.Y., in my
risks to groundwater well Into the congressional district, achieved nation.
future • ..“ al prominence. Love Canal, a neat
Secure hazardous waste landfill working class community, became syn.
design features include: Liners to onymous with the problem of hazard.
block or impede movement of leachate ous waste disposal. Today over 237
out of the waste containment area; homes have been demolished, and
subsurface and groundwater monitor, dioxin, the most toxic substance
Ing wells; caps which do not allow known to man, still poisons area
rainwater to Infiltrate the landfill, yet creeks and sewers.
remain sufficiently moist to support Love Canal is but one of the thou.
vegetation; drainage control facilities; sands of toxic time bombs that dot the
and features to collect any leachate or American landscape. The Congress has
gas produced In the waste disposal committed $1.6 bill on to clean up
area, these sites, and we are becoming pain.
These features minimize, but do not fully aware that billions more may be
prevent, the escape of materials from needed to complete the job. We will be
secure landfills, Perpetual monitoring, paying for yesterday’s nistakes tomor.
maintenance, and cleanup are requL-ed row and for years to come.
even at the most modern, secure land. Passage of RCRA 8 years ago
fill, marked the beginning of our commit.
The growing concern throughout ment to Insure that hazardous waste
the United States regarding the ade. landfills are designed, operated, and
quacy of landfills for the safe disposal maintained to fully protect human
of hazardous wastes reflects a belief, health and the en%ironjnent. If we are
shared by EPA, that these require. to avoid a second generation of Love
rnents simply cannot be met. Canals, we must manage hazardous
Given these real problems, we must wastes with the same vigilance. Mr.
exercise care In the selection of haz- Chairman, the compromise amend.
ardous wastes for landfill disposal. If me’n is a first, necessary step toward
the landfill disposal Option Is to that goal. I urge Its adoption by the
remain viable—and I believe it will for Rouse.
the foreseeable future_we cannot The second necessary step is to
allow the indiscriminate disposal of all insure that most, If not all, hazardous
hazardous wastes in landfill disposal wastes generated in this country each
facilities. It Is this end, Mr. Chairman, year are disposed of In a manner
which the compromise amendment Is which protects public health and the
designed to achieve, environment,
This Nation generates Over 60 mU. ‘ RCRA currently regulates gener.
lion metric tons of acids, corrosive ma- ato.s that produce more tli n 1,000
terials, toxic chemicals, and other has. kilograms of hazardous wasze per
ardous wastes annually. The volume of month, The exemption afforded the
such wastes grow at an annual so-called small quantIty generators
rate of 3.5 percent. exceeding 80 md. allo s them to dispose of their hazard.
lion metric tons annLally by 1990. 1 be. ous wastes in solid waste landfills and
lie e that the time has come to phase municipal dumps,
out the landfill disposal of hazardous There can be no doubt, Mr. Chair.
wastes for hich landfill disposal may man, that this exemption poses a po-
not be protective of human health and tentially serious threat to human
the environment. health and the em ironment. Solid
Several States have moved ahead ag. waste disposal facilities and municipal
gressively to achIe e just this end. dumps are simply not designed to con-
California ill, over the next several tam hazardous wastes. There are no
years, phase out the landfill disposal facilities to monitor, control, or clean
of priority hazardous astes including up hazardous wastes that might ml.
PCB’s, pesticides, toxic metals, cya- grate from these nonsecure landfills,
H 6753
According to EPA’S own data, over
one-half of the 115 Superfund priority
sites identified by the Agency for
cleanup were solid waste facilities or
municipal dumps that accepted both
hazardous and solid wastes.
The substitute being offered today
by Mr. FLORIO and Mr. Lzsri- includes a
responsible solution to this serious
problem. The substitute lowers the
level of the exemption from 1,000 kIlo.
grams-per-month to 100 kllograins.per.
month. It gives EPA the flexibility
necessary to modify the administrative
and managerial requirements on these
smaller operations prior to actual dis-
posal or treatment of the waste. And,
the substitute requires that small gen-
erators take their waste to a proper
hazardous waste management fac lity. ,
and not a sanitary landfill or munici-
pal dump.
Mr. Chairman, those of us who stl
port this provision of the substitute,
recognize that compliance with regula-
tions that will be amended to take into
account the particular conditions af-
fecting small business will be costly,
But we also recognize that the cost of
noncompliance will be greater.
The subcommittee substitute being
offered today by Mr. Pi.ORzo and Mr.
LENT moves us several steps closer to
Insuring that all hazardous wastes are
properly managed.
Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of
the subcommittee substitute and the
provisions therein to restrict the land-
fill disposal of hazardous wastes for
Which land disposal may not be protec-
tive of human health and the environ-
ment, and to bring most. if not all, of
the 60 million metric tons of hazard-
ous waste generated In this country
each year under RCRA’s regulatory
umbrella,
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I
thank the gentlem for his support
and I wish to pay recognition for the
gentleman’s role as an environmental.
ly oriented person who Is Particularly
Concerned for small business,
Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 mInutes to
the gentlem from New York (Mr.
Scxzum).
(Mr. SCREUER asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. SCHEI’ER. Mr. Chairman I rise
in strong support of HR. 6307 and I
especially want to commend the ef-
forts of the two gentlemen from New
Jer5ey, Mr. FLoi o and Mr. ROE, I feel
like I am reciting a Shakespe play,
but they have done a fine job In bring-
ing this responsible and essential legis-
lation to the floor
Mr, Chairman, H.R. 6307 addresses a
serious problem that deeply concerns
many Americans, the problem of haz-
ardous aste.
This legislation authorizes $109 mil-
lion In fiscal year 1983 for EPA’s pro-
gram on hazardous waste and takes
positive and essential steps in the
management of hazardous waste,
-------
116754
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 La 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
State 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 1, therefore,
strongly urge its adoption by the
House.
• Mr. ZEFERsi-ii. 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 State 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 im-
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 administra-
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 1111.5 million In
fiscal year 1984. These figures are
more than $30 million ir re than the
President had originally requested for
the Resource Conservation arid 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 lay, 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
&ptember 8, 1982
are inadequate to protect the environ- will provide certainty in this complex
ment from contamination In that _ gulatory area.
those regulations permit the free dis- I At the same time, I also support the
posal of untreated bulk liquid wasteS( , amendment that wiU be offered by our
in landfills. The regulations ignore the colleague. Congressman Piw. GRAMM,
fact that toxic chemicals can migrate dealing with small generators of has-
through the ground and into the ardous wastes. I agree that there
groundwater. ‘ should be some consideration given to
Prohibiting the injection of hazard- the regulation of generators of hazard-
ous wastes into underground sources otis wastes in quantities of less than
of drinking ater arid restricting the 1,000 kilograms per month. Ho ever,
injections above present and potential the immediate applicability of the
underground water supplies, pending RCRA regulations on small gener-
the development of State programs tO ators, as provided for in section 3 of
regulate this practice. EPA has vacil- the bill, will have a significant eco-
lated on whether to regulate under- nomic Impact on those generators, the
ound injection ‘ells Jo’ the disposal majority of which are small businesses
of hazardous wastes under RCRA of such as gas stations, dry cleaners, auto
the Safe Drinking Water Act. Thus repair shops, laboratories, arid so
the regulation of class IV underground forth. I favor the approach taken by
injection wells used for the disposal of Congymsinan PHIL GRAMrs which di-
toxic and radioactive liquids into and reefs the Environmental Protection
above underground sources of di’iflk Agency to conduct a comprehensive
thg aater has been sorely neglected. study on small generators to assess the
Requiring the EPA l.a set standards problem they present and to analyze
for industrial boilers that burn haz-
ardous wastes as fuel. . the regulatory alternatives available
Requiring that interim status facfli- to deal with these hazards. In this --
ties wanting to expand by more than way, different options can be studied
10 percent obtain permits in accord- that % Lll achieve the desired purpose
ance with the standards that apply to without being onerous on the small i
new facilities, generators that will be regulated. ,....-.J
Establishing a timetable for the EPA I urge my colleagues to vote in favor
to review permit applications to accel- of the Gramm amendment and will
erate the issuance of final permits also support the prompt enactment of
which spell out specific environmental this bill.•
protection measures for existing haz- S Mr. MOi”k’i 11. Mr. Chairman, I
ardous waste management facilities, rise in strong support of H.R. 6307.
All of these Issues—my concerns, the First, let me thank Mr. Fz.onzo and
concerns of the Nation, the concerns Mr. ROE for their leadership on this
of my congressional district, and the issue and congratulate them on this
people of Staten Island—are addressed excellent reauthorization bill.
by HR. 6307. The national hazardous Over 80 bIllion pounds of hazardous
waste problem has reached a crisis wastes are dumped each year, creating
stage in many of our communities. If a serious threat to the land, to drink-
we fail to act now, we may very well the water supplies, and to the health
lose the opportunity to develop a pre- and well being of our citizens. H.E.
ventative approach to future hazard- 6307 Is an important and essential step
ous waste problems. We need a strong in providing a solution to this problem
Federal law now more than ever to re- and in reaching the goal of protecting
store public confidence. We need to the public from significant environ-
put teeth In the Resource Conserva- mental and health damage. -
tion and Recovery Act. We need HR.
6307, and I call upon my colleagues In particular, I would like to empha-
give their wholehearted support t•• size the importance of the creation of
• Mr. CORRADA. Mr. Chairman, j the National Ground Water Comnijs-
ri.ce In support of H.R. 6307. the sion. The Subcommittee on Environ-
RCRA Reauthorization Act of 1982. merit, Energy and Natural Resources,
This legislation provides a 2-year which I chair, undertook a year-long
reauthorization for a major law that investigation into the ground water
established our Nation’s basic hazard- problem. Our investigation culminated
ous waste system. in a report of the full Government Op.
RCRA represented a milestone in erations Committee which urged, in
our efforts to regulate and monitor the strongest terms, the development
the problem posed to the environment of a national strategy to protect our
by the increasing amounts of hazard- ground water resources.
ous wastes which are generated annu- Over 100 million Americans depend
ally. If unchecked, these wastes would on ground water. Over 40 percent of
create enormous environmental and our citizens En my State of Con cti.
health problems for generations to cut obtain their water from wells.
come. Ironically, as the dependence on
This legislation seeks to provide ad- ground water is growing, so is the de-
ditional guidelines for the Implemen- struction of precious undergrou
tation of the law. The establishment dririkthg water supplies. In Connectj-
of specific deadlines in the legislation cut alone, some 25 percent of the
dealing with the issuance of hazardous towns have suffered from hazardous
waste disposal permits Is an additional waste and toxic chemical contarnJzi .
step in the right direction and which tion of ground water.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
&ptember 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-
ministration 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. Ftoaxo
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
u asteful and unnecessary ambiguity In
the Superfund legislation. I believe
this amendment clearly expresses the
intent of the Congress that only mu-
nicipaily owned and operated sites
should be forced to pay 50 percent of
the cleanup costs.
I believe that H.R. 6301 deserves the
full support of the House. I look for-
‘ard to working with ray colleagues in
future efforts to protect our essential
and irreplaceable underground drink-
ing water supplies S
o Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Chairman, I rise
in support of H.R. 6307, leg slatlon to
reauthorize the Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act. This statute
has been most effective In addressing
the hazardous 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 d imp sites littered across
America. and the continued illegal
dumping of wastes down se ers, storm
drains. and in tacant lots. It is discon-
certing to realize that the public still
relies on land disposal facilities for the
most deadly and persistent chemicals
despite c erahel’r.ing evidence that
most landf’Ils e e’,t’ially leak.
The Resource Cnnservation and Re-
covery Act of 1976, which sought to
correct these egregious problems, was
modeled on California’s 1972 hazard-
ous naste law. California, 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
so’i and water surrounding these areas
has been contaminated with danger-
ous pollutants and are a profound
threat to human health and the envi-
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 5ites are only the first to be
discovered, and it is expected that flu.
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 co tami-
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 pre erit 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 drinking 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 waste gen-
erated within its borders Is close to 18
million tons, rather than the 5 million
tons previously estimated. Most re-
cently, we have witnessed the Santa
Clara Valley’s citizens contend with a
critical ast problem. Thls prod’ictibe
a.Aa, hleh is the ca; r 1 of the
State’s electronics inddstry. has been
plagued by a ser!cs of massive Ieaas In
Lnderground storage tanks contairw
toxic solvents, The event’s potential
for damaging the integrity of the
area’s ground ater supplies was sig-
nificant and Is indicative of the need
for society’s greater vigilance in the
d ’:pcsiLc n and lor.g terrn management
of hazardous waste.
Notuithstanding the numerous haz-
ardous aaste problems encountered by
the State, Califcrr ..ia has been in the
vanguard of the battle to reclaim
these-poisoned sites, Our State’s haz-
116755
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-
servation 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 ray
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 H It,
6307, the reauthorization of the Re-
source Coriser 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. FLoaxo) 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,oaio and will benefit communities
across the country suffering the re-
sults of poor or illegal dumping prac-
tices, The Resouri’e Conserdation 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 ray col-
leagues and tell known to most Mem-
bers are very real. They certainly are
found In my o n SLate of California,
long kno n for its aggressi%e efforts to
protect it.s rich environmental re-
sources. In my oan district, the com-
munity of Gen Avon in the Jurupa
hills has suffered sears of turmoil and
uncertainty regarding a liquid hazard-
ous waste site ieachii;g toxic chemicals
Into underground streams feeding the
community, The Stringfellow 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-
vlsior.s contained In Superfund which
can help alleviate the problems of
sites like Str ng!ellow across the coun-
try, But I am also rnterestvd in insur-
ing that communities do not have to
face problems like this In the future.
CalIfornia’s hazardc .s 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 g each of the Ia,st 10 3 ears as
the t-xtcnt of the ha.zardoi 1 s n’ ste
probiem became more fully tinder-
stood. I believe that a few poin . about
California’s program are re1e ant to
our debate today.
O SMAIJ,CD.ERATOR txEMp’rlON
California has never exempted
smaller generators from hazardous
waste controls. Many of the mast p31-
-------
September 8, 1982
Ised to make grants to local government au-
thorities to construct demonstration recy-
cling intermediate processing centers. Such
grants may also be used for the acquisition
of lanQs necessary for such centers, notwith-
standing subsection (a)(21(A).
“(2) Grants under this subsection may be
made only to a local government unit which
demonstrates a successful past experience in
multimaterlal curbside source separation
programs at the municipal level. Grains
under this subsection may be made only to a
local government unit ahich has approved.
and expressed Its Intention to carry out, a
plan for a recycling Intermediate processing
center ahich— -
(A) is part of a county-wide recycling
program thst includes curbside collection of
recyclable materIal and central processing
at the intermediate processing center:
‘IS) 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 within 3 years
after commencement of operatIon.
“(3) No grant may be made under this
subsection to the local goiernment of any
political subdivision having a population of
less than 175.000 or greater than 225.000.
Not more than $9u0.000 of the funds made
available under subsection (a)(3)(Cl may be
used to make grants under this subsection.
“(4) Section 8004 shall not apply to any
pants made pursuant to this subsection?’.
Mr. FLORIO (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 Rgcoao.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey?
There as no objection.
(Mr. FLORIO asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. I
would at the outset publicly express
my appreciation to all ho have been
involted in fashioning this compro-
mise proposal.
The substitute makes several techni-
Cal and substantive changes to HR.
6307:
j ’ Regarding small generators, the bill
explicitly modifies the administrative
and managerial requirements for these
generators prior to the actual disposal
or treatment of the a.;tes. However,
when wastes are taken to be treated or
disposed of, the wastes must go to a
proper hazardous waste facility, and
not a sanitsry landfill or municipal
dump. For e’cample, the maximum
storage period for smaller generators
is extended to 180 days from 90. This
means that sri er generators would
only be required to dispose of their
wastes t ice a year. but that it. be done
properly.
SectIon 4 of the substitute Incorpo-
rates the Public Works Committee
amendment on the disposal of hazard-
ous wastes Into sewer systems.
Section 5 makes a number of techni-
cal changes to the underground Injec-
tion prohibitions, and incorporates a
requirement to impose restrictions on
the land disposal of certain hazardous
wastes as may be necessary to protect
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
human health and the environment.
This latter amendment embodies the
approach of the LaPalce amendment,
and Is a much needed addition to the
bill.
Section 8 is amended to require that
only hazardous wastes listed or Identi-
fled under the regulations will be con-
sidered for controls when burned In
boilers. This section also requires that
12 months postenactment, 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 assurances for such actions
are specified in the permit.
Section 9 Incorporates the Public
Works and Energy and Commerce
Committee amendments to the Na-
tional Groundwater Commission.
Section 11 requires the Agency to
promulgate standards for hazardous
waste recycling practices as necessary
to protect public health and the envi-
ronment.
Section 12 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 decisions remain
at the local level.
AMENDMSNT OFTCRED By MR. CRAMU TO THT
AMtNDMENT IN THE i AT1JR.5 or £ SOBSTITUTI
OFFERED ST MR. FLORIO
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. GRM M to the
amendment in the nature of a substitute of-
fered by Mr. Ft.oiuo: Page 3. strike out Line
22 and all that foliows down through line 16
on page 7 and substitute:
The Administrator shall, not later than
three years after the date of the enactment
of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Reauthorization Act of 1982. complete a
study and submit a report to the Congress
concerning shether the pro sions of regu-
lations promulgated under this Act respect-
ing hazardous aa te generated by small Sen.
erators 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 include—
-tA) A profile of the generators, hazard-
otis wastes, and waste ma.a gernent practices
to such provisions:
‘tB) an assessment of the hazards a.ssocl-
.ated with sueb aastt-s and practices; and
‘ IC) 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.-effectlveness of such
alternatives.
“(3) At intervals of riot more than one
year, and not more than iwo years. after the
date of the enactment of the Resource Con-
servation and Rcco cry Reauthorization Act
of 1982. the Administrator shall submit an
116761
Interim report to the Congress setting forth
a detailed statement of the status of the
study required under this subsection.”.
Mr. ORAMM (during the reading),
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the amendment be consid-
ered as read and printed In the
Racoiw.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Texas?
There -was no objection.
(By unanimous consent, Mr. GR.s.XIM
was allowed to proceed for an addI-
tional 5 minutes.)
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from Texas (Mr. UnasiM) is recognized
for a total 0110 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 imposed on the small generator
under existing law and under existing
regulations issued by the Envlronmen-
t a-i Protection Agency.
I would like to talk about the rnoun-
tam of paperwork that they are cur-
rently exempt from under existing
regulations at EPA.
I would like to talk about the confu-
sion that exists concerning scientific
data and Its evaluation concerning the
small generators, 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 regulations and redtape,
and I believe rightly so, on those gen-
erators that produce more than 1,000
kilograms of hazardous waste a
month. There are about 75,000 of
those generators and, according to
EPA. they generate about 99 percent
of all the hazardous waste generated
In the country.
Small generators that generate less
than 1.000 klIo rams per month are
not burdened with the restrictions Ian-
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 hazard-
ous wastes.
The existence of small and large
generators, according to EPA. basical-
ly breaks down as follows:
Those that generate more than 1,000
kilograms a month make up about 9
percent of the total generators nation-
wide and they generate about 99 per-
cent of the waste. Those that generate
less than 1,000 kilograms per month
compose about 91 percent of the gen-
erators and they generate about 1 per-
cent of the waste.
Small generators are not exempt
from regulations. 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
-------
II 6762
or at a faculty approved by a State to
receive municipal or Industrial wastes.
0 1445
Small generators are subject to pen-
alties if they do not comply with exist-
Ing regulations.
I think It is also Important to note
that we are talking about hazardous
waste, not acutely hazardous waste.
Under existing procedures, acutely
hazardous waste under RCRA is reg’j-
lated and the full RCR.A requirements
are Imposed on anyone who generates
more than 1 kIlogram of acutely haz-
ardous waste.
Finally, the small generator Is cur-
rently subject to regulation by the
States which have the power under
RCRA and under EPA regulations to
go far beyond those regulations tin-
posed by EPA, -
Now, what is the small generator
exempt from If he Is not exempt from
regulations concerning the deposition
of hazardous waste?
Be is exempt from an avalanche of
paperwork—paperwork from es’adle to
grave, a paper trail in multiple copies,
all signed, all returned, all reported.
all kept for at least 3 years: storage
permits if he holds the waste for oser
90 days, labellng, ID numbers, mani-
fests, and logs.
Under the Carter administration,
EPA considered whether to lower the
cutoff point for RCRA compliance
from 1,000 to 100 kilogram generations
‘ier month. They rejected that propos-
at least until 1986 for two reasons:
rst, the enormous number of small
.merators in the country, and second,
he costs that the restrictions would
impose on small business,
I thuik It is important to note that
EPA has the power to lower the exclu-
sion to 100 kilograms per month If and
when they find It feasible to do so.
HR 6307, however, mandates that the
administration take action that was
not taken under the Carter adminis-
tration and that has not been taken
under the Reagan administration.
What our amendment to this substi-
tute does Is, quite simply, seek to get
the facts. It seeks a study by the Envi-
ronrnental Protection Agency to gen-
erate a profile of those hazardous
waste generators that produce be-
tween 1,000 and 100 kilograms per
morth. It seeks a study of their waste
management practices under existing
procedure. It seeks a study of the has-
ardc us waste associated with those
.prac tices.
It asks for an analysis of regulatory
altcrnat1 es to full RCRA or partial
RCRA Implementation. And finally,
and I think most importantly. it man-
dates an analysis of the cost effective-
ness of various alternatives,
It mandates that EPA report to the
Congress at the end of 1 year. 2 years,
and In a final study at the end of 3
c the results of this study and the
rs to the questions posed in this
ltute.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
We do face genuine uncertainties.
When the Office of Technology As-
sessment testified before the Florio
subcommittee, they testified that 91
percent of small generators generated
around 10 percent of the hazardous
waste generated in the country. When
they submitted their testimony In
writing, they reduced that percentage
to 6 percent. EPA concludes that the
91 percent currently exempt from
RCRA generate less than 1 percent of
the hazardous waste.
I would submit to this body that It
behooves us, if we are going to impose
regulations on hundreds of thousands
‘of small businesses, that we do It
knowing what the facts are: that we
get data to allow us to determine:
First, is there a problem: second, what
the extent of the problem is: and
third, what options we have In trying
to deal with it.
I think It Is also important to note
that the Environmental Protection
Agency supports the amendment that
I offer with my colleague on the full
committee, the gentleman from Vir-
ginia (Mr. Btn.s L
I read from a letter to the Honorable
Tuoinas P. O’Nxxu., Ja., dated August
1. from Mrs. Anne Gorsuch:
The Environmental Protection Agency
supports the amendment introduced by
Representative Phil Gramxn
S S S S S
Mr. Gramm’s substitute Is s far more con-
sidered and careful approach to addressing
the small quantity generator Issue than sec-
tion 3 of H R 6307 It would permit a care-
ful assessment of what wastes from which
sinai] quantity generators should be regulat-
ed and how these wastes might best be con-
trolled. It fits In well with the Agency’s
plans to analyze these Issues in detail during
the next few years.
• S S S S
Purther abrupt and across-the.board regu-
lation of a huge number of additional gener-
ators of hazardous zaste is likely to encour-
age ifiegal disposal practices. The result
could have a serious detrimental net impact
on the environment.
Mr. Chairman, I think It is Impor-
tant to note that we are talking about
a considerable amount of money in
costs imposed on small business under
the proposal made in HR. 6307.
I have here a letter from the Inter-
national Fabricators Institute, the
trade a.csoclation of the American dry
cleaners, which indicates that their
studies show that the full Implementa-
tion of RCRA would impose a cost of
$4,200 per laundry in the country, an
amount roughly equivalent to the net
profit after taxes earned by the family
laundry last year,
I think It is also Important, Mr.
Chairman, to note that we are talking
about support from American small
business. We are not talking about an
amendment that is going to benefit
the petroleum industry or the cherni-
cal industry. We have had 72 trade,
professional, and educational groups
endorse this amendment, and I am not
talking about just the chamber of
commerce or the National Association
September 8, 1982
of Manufacturers; I am talking about
the American Hospital Association,
the American Retail Federation, the
Association of American Railroads.
the Automobile ServIce Council, the
Launderers, the American Association
of Community and Junior Colleges,
who would be affected and would bear
the burden of costs from the adoption
of H.R. 6307 unamended, the Associ-
ation of Jesuit Colleges and Universi-
ties. the National Association of Uni-
versity and Land Grant Colleges, the
National Odd Jobbers Council.
Mr. Chairman, we have proposed
change in the amendment that is of-
fered in the nature of a substitute. I
have met with representatives of those
groups who have endorsed my amend-
ment. They do not believe that this
substitute basically deals with the con-
cerns of small business.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Texas has expired.
(By unanimous consent, Mr. Gazssrs
was allowed to proceed for 1 additional
minute.)
Mr. ORAMM. Mr. Chairman. I be-
lleve that we have here a compromise
between existing law’ and practice
under the Carter administration and
the Reagan administration and a pro-
posal made by the committee. it is a
compromise that proposes a study to
get the facts and, on the basis of those
facts, to have EPA either act on Its
own or be mandated to act by the Con-
gress.
I ask my colleagues to vote for this
amendment.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I rise
In opposition to the amendment.
(By unanimous consent. Mr. PLORIO
was allowed to proceed for an addi-
tional 5 minutes.)
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Ftoaxo) Is rec-
ognized for a total of 10 minutes.
Mr. FLORIO, Mr, Chairman, we
have perhaps the most Important ele-
ment to date on this matter In this
amendment.
The small generator loophole was
the most serious deficiency In the ex-
isting RCRA system. Present EPA reg-
ulations, by the way, In opposition to
the clear legislative language of the
statute, have been drawn in such a
way as to unequivocally exempt 92
percent of the Nation’s hazardous
waste generators from virtually all
hazardous waste controls on the basis
that they are small generators.
The net effect of this exemption is
to explicitly allow generators of up to
2.200 pounds per month—that Is, over
a ton of hazardous waste per month—
to dispose of their hazardous wastes
Into solid waste landli.lls or local
dumps.
I distinguish between hazardous
waste landfills and solid waste landfills
that are not capable nor prepared to
accept these types of materials.
These facilities are not designed to
contain hazardous wastes, are Incapa.
bIt of protecting ground water sup.
-------
.
September 8, 1982
piles, and are the leading cause of the
Nation’s abandoned and leaking dump-
site problems.
According to EPA’s own data, over
50 percent of the priority Superfund
sites are such solid waste landfills or
Local dumps that have previously ac-
cepted hazardous waste materials.
The Office of Technology Assess-
ment, the independent bipartisan arm
of the Congress, estimates that this
exemption allows up to 2.7 millIon
tons, or 6 billion pounds per year of
hazardous waste to be disposed of In
sanitary solid waste landfills. This
amount of waste is equivalent to 6.6
percent of the total waste stream In
this Nation.
The Battelle Institute, a study that
was also undertaken by EPA. has
Issued a similar estimate. They say it
Is 7 percent of the solid waste stream
that goes under this exemption. The
OTA report also states that “the scope
and severity of the generation of haz-
ardous wastes by small generators
were greatly underestimated by the
EPA.”
While the gentleman from Texas
emphasizes EPA’s estimate, which has
been criticized by OTA. Is 1 percent of
the national waste stream, the exact
percentage. in my opinion, Is irrele-
vant. Whatever percentage is put Into
the equation, we are still talking about
billions of pounds of hazardous aa.stes
potentially being put into our drinking
water supplies.
Moreover, EPA in May of 1980 com-
mitted to a lowering of the small gen-
erator exemption based upon the very
1 percent estimate that the gentleman
now refers to as the basis for his pro-
posal of inaction.
The only thing that has really
changed is EPA’s policy on this very
Important Issue, EPA now believes
that the exemption Is not a significant
problem, despite the overwhelming ad-
ditional evidence to the contrary.
EPA has even denied the waste dis-
posal industry’s petition to close this
loophole. The agency also asserts that
Its previous study of the small gener-
ator exemption is sufficient, yet they
support this amendment which does
nothing more than to study the prob-
lem for an additional 3 years.
This Is really a classic example of a
calculated policy of inaction, groping
around for a justification.
Earlier this year the public arid the
Congress were outraged, and appropri-
ately so, when EPA lifted the ban on
the disposal of containerized liciu d
hazardous wastes into hazardous
waste landfills, that Is, landfills that
are supposed to be prepared 1,0 accept
those materials.
Other provisions of this legislation
deal with needed restrictions on the
types of wastes that can be placed into
hazardous waste landfills. However.
unless similar restrictions are placed
on hazardous waste disposal at solid
‘taste landfills, the environmental con-
‘uences will be disastrous. This Is
ause 92 percent of the hazardous
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
waste generators can now freely dis-
pose, under this exemption, of their
hazardous wastes at local dumps,
which are totally unsuited for receiv-
ing this type of material.
Consider the Irony of the following
situation: The current small generator
exemption of 12 tons per year trans-
lates roughly into a volume of 60
drums. If a nonexempi big generator
were to dispose of a load of 60 drums
Into a sanitary solid waste landfill,
there would be public outrage. Howev-
er. If a small generator, as defined by
EPA, disposed of 60 drums of the same
material, it is legal, although the fact
of the matter Is that the harm to the
environment would be indistinguish-
able.
In devising a remedy for this serious
loophole, the committee examined the
report and the recommendations of
OTA and the policies of 20 individual
States that have already restricted or
totally eliminated the small generator
exemption.
I am going to, for a specific purpose.
read the List of the State& Arkansas,
California, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas,
Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan.
Missouri, Minnesota, New Hampshire,
New Jersey, New York, North Dakota,
Ohio. Oregon. Rhode Island. South
Carolina, Vermont, and Washington.
Parenthetically. I note that the State
of Texas Department of Health Is on
the verge of lowering Its own small
generator exemption, according to in-
formation that we have from the Asso-
ciation of State and Territorial Solid
Waste Management Officials.
I took the time to read this list for a
very important reason: I do not know
how any Congressperson from any of
those States can support the amend-
ment of the gentleman from Texas
and then go home to his constituents
and say that “We In our State have re-
moved this exemption.
0 1500
But I voted against making this a na-
tional standard such that State X,
which is Immediately adjacent to us,
allows these 12 tons per year to be
dumped In their landfill, infiltrating
into the aquifer that knows nothing
about state boundaries, which Is now
polluting our ater.”
This Is a totally indefensible posi-
tion. In addition, the Ashland Chemi-
cal Co., Is already operating a small
generator and waste collection and
treatment service in 34 of its 60 major
markets, many of which are in states
that already restrict this loophole.
Let me deal finally with one of the
arguments that I know Is superfically
very persuasive, the question about
small business and the Impact on
small business of removing this loop-
hole. The argument Is that this Is
somehow antismall business That Is
pure nonsense. I would ask any of the
Congresspersons from those States
that have already taken this action if
they have had a whole lot of small
business people beating down their
II 6763
doors, prior to the initial consideration
of HR. 6307, saying that retail clean-
ers are going out of business, gasoline
stations are going out of business, be-
cause these 20 States have already
taken that action. The answer Is, they
have not.
The reasoning is, we are not talking
about “mom and pop” retail oper-
ations generating 12 tons a month of
dioxin, of PCB’s, or phosgene, or
phenol. We are not talking about
small businesses, average neighbor.
hood stores. We are talking about rela-
tively large generators of these wastes.
Now Is the time to act on this matter,
and not to sanction, as the gentle-
man’s amendment would, a fourth
study on thIs issue, one that would
take 3 years to boot.
The committee provision steers a
moderate course based upon the expe-
rience of the States by lo erlng the
level of the exemption within a 2-year
period to one•tenth of a ton per
month, while reducing the administra-
tive and maliagerlal’ requirements
prior to disposal.
I would strongLy urge support of the
bill as presented, and opposition to the
amendment of the gentleman from
Texas.
Mr. liAM?w RSCHMIDT Mr.
Chairman, I more to strike the requi-
site number of words, and I rise In sup-
port of the amendment,
(Mr. RAMMERSCHMIDT asked
and as given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. HAMMERSCHMIDT. Mr.
Chairman. I rise In support of the
amendment. There are many provi-
sions of this legislation that I believe
serve important environmental needs.
and the Committee on Energy and
Commerce is to be complimented for
supporting many Improvements in the
legislation. Unfortunately, the provl
sion before us on small generators cre-
ates more problems than it solves. By
agreeing to the Gramm amendment,
we will be able to answer some of the
remaining questions on the extent of
this problem.
Others aill discuss in greater length
the difficulties the provision presents
to thousands of small retail and sri-v-
ice establishments across the country.
There will also be discussion, with
widely differing claims by opponents
and proponents of the provision, of
the volumes of material involved. In
fact, the potential problems with the
exisling protision were discussed In
the report of the Committee on Public
Works and Transportation, Although
not an Issue we could act on within the
scope of our referral, the difficulties
with the provision that came out
during the public works hearings were
important enough to be detailed In the
report.
I would like to make just a couple of
related points. First, the goal of this
legislation La to protect the health of
the American people and prevent
abuse of waste disposal practices. The
-------
the businessmen and women involved.
was an Issue that they want legislation
on this matter now. They tell me they
cannot organize themselves and make
the appropriate Investments or even
seek those kinds of mechanisms if
they do not know what the rules of
the game are; whether It Is the com-
munity that Is affected by the poten
hal of hazardous waste or the
businessperson who wants to be a good
corporate citizen, they want to know
what the rules of the game are and
they do not need another EPA study.
Right down the street from one of
the manufacturers of hazardous and
toxic wastes was a little landfill called
Monument Street Landfill. It is in my
district, and ft has been used to ha-
properly dispose of hazardous and
toxic wastes. Much of the material
that we are concerned with has come
from small generators. These are
called small generators; they have
been unnoticed. unn,onltored. and un-
regulated, and have caused In my own
community substantial concern about
pollution and poison, so much so that
the people of that community orga-
nized to take their case to the Gover-
nor of the State of Maryland in order
to have some type of resolution done.
Because of the accumulation of the
disposal of small generation we know
might constitute a danger In that com-
munity, and if the studies Indicate
what we fear, we might even have to
apply to Superfund for It, not because
there Is one big dirty that dumped in
Monument Street. but because there
were a lot of little dirties over a
number of years. They have said to
the people of the community, “Don’t
worry, It won’t hurt a little bit.”
Now, we are afraid It Is going to hurt
a lot. Rather than be engaged in Su-
perfund cleanup. I believe that an
ounce of prevention here and now in
the regulation of the small generator
Issue will save us a lot of heartbreak
and community concern in the future.
Mr. SEIBERLING. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. MIKU1SKI. I yield to the gen-
t]eman from Ohio.
Mr. SEIBERLING. Mr. Chairman, I
certainly support what the gentlewom-
an has just said. During the recess a
small generator of toxic waste In my
district, who had gone bankrupt, sold
some of the facilities that he had. The
people who bought some of these facil-
ities decided to open them up a tank
and find out what in it. They
turned one valve, and the fumes that
came out nearly knocked them out.
They managed to get away, but a toxic
cloud of such magnitude ensued that
the police had to evacuate 20 cIty
blocks of a residential area.
- 01510
Afterward when the toxic gas cloud
had been dissipated by the wind so the
people could come back to their homes
the authorities found almost a hun-
dred barrels of various types of toxic
waste that had been accumulated over
&ptember 8, 1982
a period of time and stored on this
man’s Property. EPA grunted $50,000
In Superfund money to help clean it
up because the generator was bank-
rupt and the city had no funds for
that purpose.
The 100 kilograms of waste of some
degree of toxicity might be enough to
poison a whole city. So even the 100-
kilogram limit Is a compromise.
Mr. Chairman. I strongly commend
the gentleman for introducing this
100-kilogram limit, and I concur in the
statement the gentlewoman from
Maryland (Ms. MIKuLSKI) has just
made.
Mr. BLILEY. Mr. Chairman, I move
to strike the requisite number of
words, and I rise In support of the
amendment. - - -
Mr. Chairman. there have been
statements made to the effect that the
bill before us merely fine tunes the
basic RCRA law and that it represents
a “delicate balance” between environ-
mental and economic Interests. That Is
simply not true. The bills as reported
represent a major and even radical de-
parture from the original act and from
common respect for administrative
and judicial decisions. In many ways It
turns back the clock on the kind of
reasonable regulatory reform that
many of us have been working so hard
to achieve. -
We should recognize that the care-
fully crafted regulations which would
be totally overturned without the
pending amendment were not written
by the much-maligned Reagan EPA,
but by the Carter EPA which some of
our colleagues hold up as a shining ex
ample of environmental sensitivity
and concern.
The chairman of the subcommittee
reporting the bill has charged that the
EPA has now abandoned a commit-
ment to regulate small .generators
wIthin 2 to 5 years. Yet I have a copy
of a letter from the EPA Assistant Ad-
ministrator to the Speaker stating the
Agency’s intention to come up with a
regulatory scheme for small gener-
ators within 3 years. Those plans fit
very well with the pending amend-
ments as offered by my colleague from
TeXas and myself.
So the question before us Is whether
we are to put the EPA in a legislative
straitjacket or whether we are going
to let reason and normal procedure
prevail to come up with a workable ap-
proach to the problem of regulating
small generators of hazardous waste.
U section 3 passes In its present
form, a regulatory scheme designed
for large manufacturers would be in-
flexibly applied to thousands of small-
er businesses In vastly different cir-
cumstances. By any account, most of
the aa.ste generated is now fully regu-
lated. The EPA says 99 percent. the
OTA says 93 4 percent In their prelimi-
nary study. That is an Important dif-
ference, but we need to nail It down to
see the rnagltude of the problem. Our
amendment would allow Ut to do that
H 6764 - : , -- .: - % - - CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --IiOUSE.
Committee on nergy and Commerce
is to be commended for their efforts
toward this goal. Everything reason-
able should be done to go after the Il-
legal dumper and those disposing of
large volumes of material. The provi-
sion on small generators diverts us
from this effort. We are all too aware
of the fiscal limitations of the Federal
Government, local arid State govern-
ments, as well as private industry and
the public. Let us put forth the funds
and effort toward the major and illicit
pollutors. rather than spending limit-
ed resources on creating additional bu-
reaucratic redtape for the small busi-
nessman.
Second, there Is still disagreement
over the scope of the problem. There
are claims that small generators may
contribute anywhere from 1 to 10 per-
cent of hazardous waste. When there
Is suth a wide range of uncertainty,
and so many thousands of companies
affected, we had better make sure.
The Gramxn amendment does exactly
this, by directing EPA to study and
report on the scope of the problem
and means for addressIng It.
I want to close by again compliment-
Ing the Committee on Energy and
Commerce for being willing to modify
several provisions to improve the legis-
latIon. This small generator provision
deserves similar modification. The
changes made In the substitute offered
today do not address the problem as
well as the amendment. With the
Orarnm amendment language, I be-
lieve the legislation goes a long way
toward meeting the Nation’s environ-
mental protection needs by Improving
the existing legislation without creat-
ing new bureaucratic complexities.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. Chairman. I
move to strike the requisite number of
words, and I rise to speak against the
amendment. -
Mr. Chairman, I rise In opposition to
the Gramm amendment. During the
district work period. I used that oppor-
tunity to go Into my congressional dis-
trict and to talk to smaU generators. I
visited an Industrial’ Laundry employ-
ing 100 minorIty personnel, jobs that
we want to save and keep In our com-
inunity. I went to another smaU gener-
ator in my district that processes
metal finishings, again an employer of
50 or 60 people, many of them uomen
and other minorities, status people.
There are Jobs that both my mayor
and I want to keep.
They raised substantial questions In
terms of the disposal of hazardous and
toxic wastes as contained in our origi-
nal proposal, but the arguments that
they raised about their own concerns I
believe have been dealt with In the
Florlo substitute: The reduction of pa-
perwork, the different form of storage.
the whole range of other items that
the chairman of the committee has
outlined I believe substantially re-
duces their concerns. -
However, one of the things that
‘nerged, whether one talks to the
umunity or whether one talks to
-------
while continuing to regulate far over
90 percent of all hazardous wastes.
What kinds of effects would section
3 have If passed? According to the
EPA 130.000 small businesses would be
added to the program, tripling its pres-
ent work load. Some proponents of
section 3 have claimed that 700.000
businesses would be added. It Is hard
to believe that the supporters of a
clean environment would choose to
divert the EPA’s resources from the
60.000 companIes that produce over 90
percent of our waste to 10 tImes as
many who cause less that one-twenU-
eth of the problem. -
EPA estimates that the businesses
and groups that would be affected in-
clude: 56,000 gas stations. 14,000 auto
repair garages, 6.000 dry cleaners and
2,000 hospitals as well as most high
schools and virtually every college and
university In the Nation. - -
‘Several of the Members of this body
from time to time express a concern
for small businesses Well, there is
nothing worse you could do for a small
business than to add a m [ nlnium of
$3.000 every year to their costs, yet
that is what section 3 would do.
Finally, some proponents of section
3 have raised concerns about small
Quantities of toxic wastes. Yet the
EPA already has a 1-kilogram limit for
highly toxic wastes. I even read about
threats of Kepone dumping In open
landIlils. Well, let me assure my col-
leagues speaking from the State that
made Kepone a household word, it Is
no longer manufactured in the United
States and Its use has been banned for
many years.
In short, sectIon 3 represents a
bludgeon approach against untold
numbers of small businessmen and
schools to solve a problem the magni-
tude of which we are not certain, but
which, certainly, could be addressed In
a more humane and cost-effective way.
I urge my colleagues to support the
pending amendment.
Mr. MOLINARI. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike the requisite number of
words, and I rise In opposition to the
Gramm amendment.
Mr. Chairman. I had not planned to
get up and speak today, but I sat here
throughout the debate listening to
those who spoke for and against the
various amendments, and It brought
me back to about a month or so ago to
a hearing that was held In New York
City by the Subcommittee on Irivesti-
gauons and Oversight of the Commit-
tee on Public Works and Transporta-
tion.
At that hearing, Mr. Chairman, the
General Accounting Office was asked
to estimate how many Illegal toxic
dumps there might be In this country,
and the answer was 50,000. Now, If
that answer Li anywhere close to a ball
park figure, if we were to appropriate
all the money that we spend on de-
fense each year, we would not have
enough money to clean up the mesa—
dangerous mess, I might add—that
eurringintliLicountry. ,‘
We are not going to cure this prob-
lem by having more studies. We In this
House are going to have to look at this
problem seriously, knowing that
almost every neighborhood in this
country in almost every congressional
district is being Impacted by Illegal
toxic dumps that are poisoning the
people and perhaps even t ng the
lives of many of our citizens,
So when we have on one hand the
question of paperwork that Is being
created by the amendment offered by
the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
FLoaso) and the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Lawr) and, on the other
hand, the serious question of public
health. I think the decision Is easy.
I do not want to see the matter stud-
ied any more, Mr. Chairman. I think It
has been studied enough. I think we
have to stop the dumping that i s going
on. I think the Initial bill, with the
amendment offered by the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Fi.oiuo) and the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Lmrr)
will do the job, and I th’ge my col-
leagues to oppose the Grainrn amend-
nient.
Mr. FWRIO. Mr. Chairman. I move
to strike the requisite number of
words, and I rise In opposition to the
amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objec-
tion, the gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. FLoiuo) Is recognized. -
There was no objection.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, r rise
Just to correct a few of the points that
have been made. One Is the question,
to put it in perspective, of the small
quantity generator. We are talking
about 12 tons a year qualifying as a
small quantity generator by which
someone is able to just randomly
dump into a solid waste landfill, and
that goes effectively unregulated. I
think that Is a serious point.
The question was asked, and the
point was raised by one of the support-
ers of the Gramm amendment that we
are talking about imposing upon the
smaller people the full scope of RCRA
regulations. We are not. We are spe-
cii ically directing EPA to put together
a second tier of regulations designed
to take into account the unique prob-
lems associated with generating small-
er amounts. -
What we are saying Is that they
cannot dump It anywhere, but EPA
has the discretion to come up with a
lesser regulatory system. The provi-
sion In the bill Is clear and unequivocal
on this point. EPA has stated that
that is what they committed to do
prior to their change of policy. -
I think It Is also Important to note
that I heard someone say that by pas-
sage of this provision, that L i, by non-
passage of the Qraznm aniendment.’we
are encouraging illegal dumpIng. 1 fInd
this bOth specious and dlslngenlous be-
cause what Is happening now Is that
the equivalent of midnight dumping Is
taking place under full regulatory
sanction. It Is legal but inappropriate;
It Is legal but hazardous t the envi-
H 6765
ronment and the public health, and.
therefore, we are going to try to pro-
hibit that. - - -
Does that make It illegal? I suppose,
.. . , , .
L.
D 520 -. - . . -
But 11 you follow the logic of the
proposal or suggestion about illegal
dumping you might conclude that if
we did not hive a law against murder
and we passed a law against murder
one would say by virtue of ps- Ing
that law we hive converted ordinary
citizens Into lawbreakers: therefore,
we should not have the law and we
would have no lawbreakers.
Isuppose we could get rid of crime
by just repealing all of the criminal
statutes and then we would have no
violations of the Criminal Code, -
I am stating that this Is a serious en-
vironmental health problem. We are
talking about massive amounts of
waste. When you are talking about a
few bIllion pounds vc zus a multiple of
a billIon pounds going Into drinking
water supplies, you are talking about a
serious problem, a serious loophole
that should be plugged.
Therefore I ask that we reject the
Graram amendment and go forward
trying to plug these loopholes.
It Is Important to note that this
country generates close to 100 millIon
tons of hazardous wastes and 40 mil-
lion tons of hazardous waste is regu-
lated. About 40 mIllion tons of hazard-
ous wastes per year go through these
loopholes. It Is not regulated and is
just scattered across the country. -
This cannot continue.
Mrs. SCHNEIDER. Mr. Chairman.
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. FLORIO. I yield to the gentle-
woman from Rhode Island.
Mrs. SCHNEIDER. I would just like
to point out In the State I represent,
the State of Rhode Island, we have no
exemptions whatsoever for any
amount of hazardous waste that Is
generated.. Yet my district is the bome
of numerous small Jewelry industries
and chemical manufacturing plants,
We have a situation In the State of
Rhode Island where we have the State
department of environmental manage-
ment implementing these laws and In-
dustry working hand In hand becau
Industry has come to realize that It Is
only by following the laws of disposing
of hazardous wastes that we are able
to protect No. 1, the Jobs within our
State arid. No.2, the public health.
So we have an example that Is al-
ready working which is the kind of ex-
ample that I think lends credence to
the gentleman’s argument,
Mr. FLORIO. I thank the gentle- -
woman for that contribution. I think
it Is very Important that she be in a
position, and I know she Is, to verify
the fact that even though you go far
beyond what EPA has done, we do not
have dry cleaners closing, we do not
have gas stations going cut of busi-
ness. AU of thçse horror stories that
Sëptembe 198S •- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE.
-------
The bill and Its clarifying floor amend-
ment will: lower the exemption level from
one tOn/month (1000 kilograms) to one-
tenth of that amount (100 kIlograms);
extend the proiision’s effective date to two
years filter enactment of the bill and con-
currently provide self1xnplementing vaj-
lances from administj-a and managerial
requirements prior to disposal; (I.e.. extend
the Permissible storage period so that these
generators could dispose of their hazardous
waste only twice a year arid require that
such generators dispose of their haza.rdoua
wastes at hazardous waste treatment or dis-
posal facilities, not solid waste facflities or
municipal dumps.
BASIS FOB OOMMflTes APPI 1OACE
20 States had undertaken similar, or more
stringent action to restrict this loophole in-
cludmr Arkansas. California, Guam, fll-
nols. thdiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachu-
setts, Michigan, Missouri, Minnesota, New
Hampshire, New Jersey. New York. North
Dakota. Ohio, Oregon. Rhode Island, South
Carolina. Vermont, and Washington.
In May. 1980 the EPA committed to
reduce the exemption to 100 kilogramg/
month, the level sought by the provision,
Moreover EPA’S commitment a as based on
u.s estimates that the volume of exempt
wastes amounted to 1 percent of the nation-
al waste stream (45 FR 331031.
The OTA Report concluded that, “the
scope and severity of the generation of baa-
ardous wastes from small genereto were
greatly underestimated by the EPA, ’ OTA
,voes Ofl 10 recommend the precise remedy
that is contained In BR. 8307..
116766 ‘• ‘.‘ - . . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— HOUSE .
are being talked about are merely the •‘ armoRsu.. .
figments of someone’s lmag1natio - The foflowirig Is a partial list of the associ-
I thank the gentlewom and would ations and firms that endorse H.R. 8307 In
like to Insert In the R c a at Its entirety or support the provisIons of
stated interest to them:
time a factaheet on the “sinali genei—, American Association of University
ator” Issue, and a ,psztlaj list of the Women. - .
- bill’s endorse ‘ “‘ ‘- - Amerlca Public Health Association, -
‘ Sasau, Ozsxaavoa” FACTSEU? Association of Petrolewn Rereflneys,
PROBL - . S
— Association of State arid Territorial Solid
Waste,
Present EPA regulation exempt so Called Management Officials.
“small generators” from virtually all ‘e- s() lation of Slate and Teffltorlai
quirernents to properly manage and dispose Health Officials.
of their wastes. A “small generator” i& de- At-Sea-Incineration, Inc. - -.
fined as anyone who generates up nc Audubon Society,
ton (100 kilOgrams) per month. 700 000 1’ California Oil Recyclers, Inc.
92% of the hazardous waste gener (o ID Center for Urban Environmentaj Studies,
the Country presently qualify for this as- Chesapeake Bay Foundation, . . .
emption (45 FR 33120). ‘ Chicago and Suburban Refuse Disposal
This exemption means that 92% of the
generato are not required to manifest Citizens Clearinghouse for Hazardous
their waste, keep any records, and most un- Waste Information,
port antly are specifically allowed tO d iSpOSC Coalition for Sale Waste (Boston, Massa-
of their hazardous wastes at solid waste
landfills and municipal dumps, These land- CoIo o O npoace,
fIlls and dumps are frequently noting more Concerned Citizens of Pennsylvania,
than open pits which are Incapable of eon- CiUzen Action Group.
taming hazardous wastes (parti: .2ar13 aol- Conservation Council of North Carolina. -
Vents) They have none of the design arid EMPAC, Inc. (Texas),
monitoring safeguards for the protection of . (COfl thW, Pe ylva a,
groundwa r as would be found at a hazard- Ohio, flhlnois),
ow waste treatment or disposal facility. En onmen Action Foundation. -
In fact, according to EPA’S own data EnvIronmen .aj Defense Fond.
milLed to the Congress. a majority qf the Environmental Information Center
priority sites that have been identified for (Winter Park. Florida).
cleanup under the “Superfund” program Environmental Policy Center.
are solid aa.ste facilities or municipal dumps Environmental Waste Removal (Connecti-
that accepted hazardous wastes.
The Office of Technology Assessment The Fertilizer Institute.
(0Th). an independent. bl ’partisa n arm of Flowen Oil Recycling (Camden, New
the Congress. estimates that this exemption Jersey).
alloaa up to 2.7 mIllion tons (6.0 bIllion Garden State Paper Company, Inc.
pounds) of hazardous waste to be disposed Governnien Refuse Collection and Dis-
of into sanitary landfills This volume of posal Association,
waste Is equal to 6.6% of the national has- Hazardous Waste Treatment Council,
ardous waste stream, Natural Gas Association.
- Institute for Chemical Waste Manage
ment (NSWMA)
IT Corporation,
League of Cities.
league of Women Voters.
Legal.Environxnen al Assistance Founda-
tion (Alabama, Tennessee. Florida),
Massachusetts Pair Share.
Michigan United Conservation Clubs.
National Association of Attorneys Genes-
aL -
National Association of Counties.
National Association of Oil Recycling
Coordinators,
National Conference of Mayors.
National Solid Waste Management Associ-
ation including the State chapters of Cob-
redo, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan. Missou-
ri. New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Penn-
6 Ivania, Texai arid Virginia,
National Wildlife Federation.
Natural Resources Defense Council.
Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers Union.
Petreon, Inc.
SCA Services. Inc 5
Solid Tec. Inc. (Georgia).
Stabler Corporation,
- Tennessee Environmental Council.
Tn-Country Alliance on Chemicals (Pitts-
bore, NC,),
Urban Environment Conference.
Voting Ohloans Initiating a Clean End-
ronment,
Mrs. SCH]JEIDER. Mr. Chairman, I
rise in strong support of H.R. 6307 and
In opposition to all weakening amend-
ments. Rhode Islanders are acutely
sensitive to the threat that hazardous
wastes pose to the public health, and
&ptember 8 1981
with good reason—our State has the
Unfortunate distinction of having 3 of
the 114 worst duxnpsltes In the Nation,
The Resource Conservation and Re-
covery Act was established to protect
the public safety by regulating the
generation, transportation, and stor. -
age of hazardous wastes, HR. 6307
would strengthen the act and help us
make hazardous dumpsites.,_threaten.
Ing our neIghborhoo and destroying
valuable residential property—a thing
.ofthepast. -- -
I would particularly like to express
my support of the provision In H,R.
6307 that would extend RCRA safety
standayd -to companies generating be-
t een 200 and 2,000 pounds of hazard-
ous wastes per month, which are now
exempt under current law. I know that
some have argued that small business.
es w’ould be subjected to an unreason.
able burden of regulation by this re-
quirement. I would ask that Members
_Conslder three Points, . - — -
First, HR. 6307 reduces the report-
ing burden fcir small businesses by al-
lowing them to batch hazardous
wastes for twice a year disposal, This
Is a reasonable compromise worked
out by members of the committee, and
It desert es our support,
Second, Members may be interested
to know that my State of Rhode
Island provides no exemption whatso-
ever from regulation for any amount
of hazardous wastes, Whether you
generate 10 pounds or 1.000. under
Rhode Island law you are liable for
the safe handling and dlspotaJ of haz-
ardous wastes,
Has this forced our small businesses
to shut down, or at least driven them
out of the State? In fact, It has had no
such effect,
Rhode Island Is home to hundreds of
small jewelry manufacturers and to
large and small chemical processing
firms, Both Industries, which provide
valuable employment In our State,
bave developed a positive working re-
lationship with Rhode Island’s De-
partment of Environmental Manag.
nient. In fact, the State repoi’t no
complaints, It seems that both indus-
tries are working responsibly under
State laws to control a problem that
everybody in Rhode Island—no matter
where they are employed_recog .. . .
as serious. -
Finally, although the amount of
hazardous waste that would be cov-
ered by the new requlreme In H.R.
6307 may seem small_somewhere be,
tween 1 percent and 7 percent of the
total volume, depending on Whose sta-
tistics you care to believe_..the Corise-
quences of exempting that volume of
waite from any regulation can be very
serious. After all, It only takes a few ir-
responsible lndivjduaj to create a
dump site dangero to the Public’s
health, and requiring the expenditure
of millions of dollars for
tion, Existing law, Without the fliodifl..
cation proposed by H.R. 6307 Would
exempt up to 8 b11lio pou of haz-
-------
September 8, 1982
ardous waste from any effective Feder-
al regulation. Can we really afford a
loophole of that size when the publlc’s
health Is at stake? I hope not.
Two amendments that will be of-
feted to H.R. 6307 today deserve spe-
cial notice. The first would increase
the criminal penalties for the violation
of statutes pertaining to the safe han-
dling and disposal of hazardous
wastes. I strongly urge the adoption of
this amendment. If the criminals who
play with the public’s health for profit
do not think we are serious about
cracking don n on hazardous waste rlo-
lations, It is time they learned.
The second amendment would make
it virtually impossible for States,
cities, and private citizens to sue the
EPA for nonenforcement of hazardous
waste statutes. This amendment need-
lessly restricts the individuaI s and
State’s rights, and deserves to be de-
feated. If a citizen or State contends
that an agency is trying to sabotage a
law through administrative means, the
courts should be available to resolve
the dispute. That is a basic right that
we should be protecting, not trying to
weaken.
I ask my colleagues to support HR.
6307, and to reject all weakening
amendments.
Mr. BROYHILL. Mr. Chairman. I
mote to strike the requisite number of
words and rise In support of the
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, there have been ar-
guments already made here with re-
spect to the economic impact that
these proposed changes in law are
going to hate on these small gener-
ators. I will not argue that fact at this
time.
Most of these generators are small
businesses, schools, dry cleaners, hos-
pitals. retailers, gasoline stations, and
so forth.
I must concede that bringing them
under RCRA Is going to mean a tre-
mendous economic hardship. It is
going to mean time-consuming paper
work requirements, sophisticated test-
ing procedures ano so forth.
But I want to talk for just a
moment. If I could, about the problem
that this is going to bring to the
agency Itself that has been charged
with the responsibility and the duty of
regulating under the la v.
The Environmental Protection
Agency in a letter to Members of Con-
gress has said that the lowering of the
small generator exclusion to 100 kilo-
grams per month would substantially
dilute its efforts to insure that waste
produced by large generators is han-
dled and disposed of properly.
I do not think that is what we want
to occur as a result of the amendments
that are being considered here today.
We must face the fact that the large
ger.erators account for 95 percent-plus
of the hazardous waste generated an-
nually in this country.
When we consider that fact then
his statement by the EPA Is not a
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
statement that we would dismiss
lightly.
The gentleman from New Jersey was
talking about the argument that was
made about this amendment passing
and thus encouraging illegal disposal
practices. I think what the gentleman
was referring to who made that argu-
ment is that we are going to be giving
the EPA such a tremendous regula-
tory burden that many of the activi-
ties here are going to escape whatever
regulatory scheme the EPA may come
up with.
What the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. GRAMM) Is suggesting is a more
constructive and sensible way to ap-
proach this small generator problem,
and that Is let us step back from ii. for
just a moderate period of time and let
us take a look at it; let us study and
determine the feasibility and the
methods of regulating these small gen-
erators.
He would require a report to Con-
gress on this study prior to the issuing
of standards.
I might point out in conclusion. Mr.
Chairman, that the EPA already has
the authority to regulate under the
law these small generators. They have
not chosen to do so.
I might point out that should the
EPA choose under the Administrative
Procedures Act to regulate small gen-
erators. it would seem to me that the
small generators at least would have
more ample opportunity to come for-
ward in a rulemaking process, to be
heard, to state theu- side of the case as
to how such a regulatory scheme
should be designed and to bring what-
ever krion ledge they have to bear on
the particular problem.
It seems to me that would be a far
better way to approach this problem
than the language that is in the bill.
That is why I support the amendment
offered by the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. ORAasM).
Mr. IRELAND. Mr. Chairman. I
move to strike the requisite number of
words, and I rise in support of the
amendment. -
(Mr. IRELAND asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. IRELAND. Mr. Chairman, I rise
in support of the amendment offered
by the gentletran from Texas (Mr.
GiuiasM. and would like to associate
myseLf with the remarks of the gentle-
man from North Carolina (Mr. BaoY-
HILL), who Just spoke.
The small busIness community is
overburdened by regulation. If there is
a problem here, we need to take a look
at it and study It.
M a very strong exponent of the
small business community I would In-
dicate one more time that the small
business community- had little or no
opportunity to express itself In regard
to this matter.
We support the amendment offered
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Gasacic. We a-ill have a considerable
opportunity to study the Issue and
H 6767
treat it in the way that it should be
treated.
Mr. GRAMM. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. IRELAND. I would indeed,
Mr. GRAMM. I thank my colleague
from Florida for yielding.
I would like to answer two points
that have been raised in the debate.
First is the point about State action.
that somehow If one’s State has taken
or contemplates taking action to set
different standards for that State
than the Nation mandates, that some-
how that binds the Member of Con-
gress in question to vote for imposing
the State standards as Federal stand-
ards. That is a fallacious argument. I
reject that argument and, quite frank-
ly, I, (no. have done a survey of the
States which have imposed restrictions
beyond the national standard. Exactly
what one would expect to be the case
is the case.
Most States that have in fact set
more stringent standards have done so
to meet specific State needs and in the
process have carefully crafted exemp-
tions which vary greatly from State to
State.
Second, the points raised about the
deserted dump site In Ohio and the
question raised about illegal dump
sites are interesting but irrelevant.
0 1530
What we are talking about here is
how we are going to deal with waste
generated by laundries, by filling r;ta-
tions. by colleges, and by garages, and
whether or not we are going to put on
them the very heavy burden of RCRA.
That is the issue, and it has nothing to
do with existing waste sites that came
into existence in the past, before
RCRA nas ever law, and now pose
problems which we are trying to clean
up.
Mr. IRELAND. I thank the gentle-
man for his comments.
Mr. Chairman, I would conclude by
urging the adoption of the amendment
offered by the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. GasMM).
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Texas (Mr. ORAMM) to the
amendment in the nature of a substi-
tute offered by the gentleman from
New Jersey Mr. Floato).
The question was taken: and on a di-
vision (demanded by Mr. OaArns)
there were—ayes 11, noes 13.
Mr. ORAMM. Mr. Chairman,
demand a recorded vote, and pending
that, I make tne point of order that a
quorum is not present.
The CHAIRMAN. Evidently a
quorum is not present. Pursuant to
the provisions of clause 2, rule Xxi i i,
the Chair announces that he will
reduce to a minimum of 5 minutes the
period of time within which a vote by
electronic device, U ordered, will be
taken on the pending question follow-
ing the quorum call.
-------
H 6768
Mr. GRAMM. Mr. Chairman. I ask
unanimous consent that I might
demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will
advise the gentleman that his request
Comes too late.
Members will record their presence
by electronic device.
The call was taken by electronic
device. -
The following Members responded
to their names:
tRoll No. 3071
September 8, .1982
Tau n
Taylor
Thomas
Vender Jagt
Volkiner
Roe
Roetrier
Rogers
Rose
Rosenthal
Roslenkor ski
Roth
Roukeiria
Rouseelot
Roybal
Ruoso
Savage
Schneider
Schroeder
Seiber l ing
Sensenbrenner
Sheman akj
Shannon
Sharp
Shaw
Shuster
• aillander
Simon
Skeca
*kello
mtth (AL)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (OR)
Smith (PA)
Snowe
Snyder
Solar!
Solomon
Spence
Si Germain
Stangeiand
Stanton
S utton
Slenholse
Stokes
Stratton
Studda
Sail
- SyT lar
Tauke
Tauz In
Taylor
Thorns.
Trailer
Vender Jagt
Volkmer
Wa lgren
Walker
Wampler
Wat.kina
Waxnsan
Weber (MN)
WeberOR)
Whitley
Whitten
Williams (OR)
Wirth
Wolf
Woipe
Wright
Wyden
Wylie
Yates
Yatmoo
Young (FL)
Young (MO)
ZeieretU
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
l ikak a
Albosta
Alexander
Andrew,
Annunzio
Asp in
AuCoin
Bailey (PA)
• Barnes
Hodeli
Betlenson
Btnghazn
• Bolsed
• Bolime
Boner
Bonior
Brodhead
Brooks
Brown (CA)
D 1540 Burton Phi lip
Chiahoim
Clauxco
Clay
Coats
Coe lho
Coleman
Colhne (IL)
Conte
Coughhn
Courter
Come. William
Crockett
DAmours
Daschle
Deckard
Detlu ms
DeNardla
Drck.i
DingeU
Diion
Dorgan
Dowdy
Downey
Dwyer
tRo l l No. 308]
Edgar
Edsards (CA)
ery
Diane (DE)
Etani (LA)
Evans (IN)
Fary
Fascell
Paz o
Fanwick
Ferraro
Fib
Pithian
Flono
Foley
The CHAIRMAN. Three hundred
nineteen Members have answered to
their names, a quorum Is present, and
the Committee will resume Ita busi.
ness.
IJ ORDED VOTE
The CHAIRMAN. The pending busi-
ness Is the demand of the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Gm ) for a record-
ed vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will
remind the Members that this Is a 5-
minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic
device, and there were—ayes 148. noes
183, answered ‘present” 1. not voting
100, as follows:
Walker
Wampler
Watkins
Whifley
Whiuen
NOES—183
Ford (M D
Ford (TN)
Foaler
Frank
Frost
Gaidos
G, densan
Oilman
Gingrich
Gum
Gonzalez
Ooodlu ig
Gore
Green
Ouarsnl
Hall iO U)
Hamilton
Martin
Hawkins
Heckler
Belie)
Hertel
Ila ler
Hilts
Eo!’enbeck
Horton
Hoaard
Bo)er
Hughes
Jacobs
Jet fords
Jones (TN)
Kastennseier
Kemp
Kenneuy
Kildee
LaPalce
Lantos
Leach
Lent
Lewftas
Long IMD)
Lowr> (WA)
Luken
Madigan
Markey
Martin (IL)
Martin (NY)
Martinez
Mat.sji
Mamoll
McDade
McHugh
McK inney
Mikuiski
Mineta
Mitchell ( NY)
Moskiey
Molinarl
MoW
Wolf
Young (FL)
Young (MO)
Murphy
Mwtha
Natcher
Neal
Nelson
Roast
dater
Obey
Ottinger
Panetta
Patterson
Pease
Perkins
Porter
Price
Bailaback
Rangel
Ra Ichford
Regina
Reuse
Roe
Rose
Rosenthal
Rostenkowaki
Roukema —- -—
Roybal
Russo
Sat age
Scheuer
Schneider
&hroeoer
Seiberling
Sharnaneky
Shannon
Sharp
Simon
Smith (NJ)
Smith (PA)
Snowe
Solan
St Germain
Stark
Stokes
Stratton
Sludde
Swift
Bynar
Trailer
WIlgren
Waxinan
Weber MN)
Weber 0H)
Wllliam tM -r I
Williams tOil)
Wirth
Wolpe
Wyden
Wylie
Yates
Yatron
Zr! erew
Akika
Albosla
Anderson
Andresi
Annunzlo
Applegate
Archer
Ashbrook
AuCo in
Rodham
Bailey (MO)
Bailey (PA)
Barnes
Bedell
Beilenson
Benedict
Bennett
Bereuler
Bethune
Ringriam
Silley
Bogga
Boland
Boner
Bortior
Bouctuard
Howen
Brinkley
Brodhead
Brooks
Broom! leld
Brown (CA)
Brown (CO)
Bro )hill
Burgener
Burton. Philip
Byron
Campbell
Carm e n
Cerney
Ch ishoim
Clausen
Claw
Clinger
Coats
Coeliso
Coleman
Collins (IL)
Corvoran
Coughlin
courter
coytie. Jetties
Coy:ie Yiilluam
Crane. Daniel
Crockett
DAlnow,
Di. .uel. R. W.
Dannerr.ei er
Dasehle
Daub
Deliwos
DrNard is
Derainsli
Dickinson
Dick.
Duigeli
Dixon
Dorgen
Dorrtan
Dos fly
Downey
Dreter
Duncan
Dunn
Dayer
,nslly
Dyson
caart
edgar
Edwards rAL
Edaantv (CA)
Edeards (OK)
Smer,on Leach
Doery - loath
Rogliah - LeBout llh e r
Bedaltl Lent
Evans (DE) IenItsS
Evans ( IA) Lewis
Etana(IN) IJvIngitOlt
Fary Loe(fler
Pkscell Long (LA)
Facto Long (MD)
Penwick Lots
Parrans Loaery CA)
Pledler Lowry (WA)
Fields Lwan
Flab Litter.
Ptth lsn Luxsd ine
Flippo Lungren
Plono Madigan
Foley Markey
Ford (MI) Martin (IL)
Ford (TN) Martin (NC)
Fountain Martin (NY)
Fowler Martinez
Prank Mateul
Fleniel Mamoll
Fu ua McClory
Oaydoe MrCo l lum
G,jdenzon Mt -Curdy
Oilman McDade
Gingrich McEwen
Otnn MeOrath
Gonzalez McHugh
Goodling M.Kianey
Gore
Oradison Mit ulskl
O,amm Miller (OS)
Green Mineta
Ousrin l Mirush
Oundereon Mitchell (NY)
Hall IO U) Moatley
hail. Ralph Molinarl
Ball. Sam Moliohan
Hamilton Montgomery
Baznmerachrnldt Moore
Hansen (UT) Moorhead
Martin Morrison
Haitnell MotU
Hatcher Murphy
Baa km Murtha
Helner Myers
Belie) Watcher
Hertel Heal
Hightoser Nelson
Hller Nichols
Billie Nowak
Hoilenbect OBnen
Bolt Oaks,
Hopkins Obey
Horton Ottr.cer
Howard Oxiey
fluckab Panetia
Hughes Pam.
Hunter Palman
Hutlo Patterson
Hyde Paul
Ireland Pease
Jacobs Perkins
Jeffords Pew
Johnston Porter
JoneeNC) Price
Jones (OK) Quillen
Jones (TN) Rahall
Kastenmeler Railsoack
Karen Rangel
Ker.nelly Ratchlord
Kildee Regula
Klndnosa Reuse
I transer Rhodos
LaFalce Rinaldo
Lagorr.arzlno Sitter
L anto s Robert. (SD)
Latta Robinson
Anderson
Applegate
Archer
Aahbrook
Rodham
Bailey (MO)
Benedict
Bennett
Bereuter
Betbunc
Bllley
Bogga
Bouquard
Bowen
Brinkley
Brooir.field
Brown (CO)
Bro)hLll
Burgener
Byron
Campbell
Carmen
Corney
Clinger
Corcoran
Crane. Daniel
Daniel. Dan
Daniel R W.
Dannemeyer
Daub
Derwlnskl
Dickinson
Dornan
Dreler
Duncan
Owin.
Dyson
Edaards (AL)
Edwards (OK)
Smeraon
Ddahi
Pledler
Fields
PIlppo
ANSWERED PR EN’r’—1
AYES—148
Forsythe UcCurdy
Fountain McDonald
Prvnzel McEwen
Fuqua McGrath
Oradison Michel
Gramm Miller (OH)
Ounderson Moflohan
Hagedorn Montgomery
Hall, Ralph Moore
Ball, Sam Uoorhesd
Uammerschmsdt Morrison
Hansen (UT) Myers
Bartziett Nichols
Hatcher 0 BrIan
Befoer Osley
Hightower Pants
Bolt Paunan
Hopkins Paul
Huctiby Petrl
Hunter Quillen
Hutto Rahall
Hyde Rhodes
Ireland Ritter
Johnston Roberts (SD)
Jones (NC) Rob nsOn
Jones OKP Roemer
Kasen Rogeri
Kindnese Roth
Kramer Rousselot
Lagonsaralno Sensenbrenner
Laita • Shiv
Loath Shuster
LelloutlUier Silisoder
l ewis . Steen
Livingston Skelton
Loe lfler Smith (AL)
Long (LA) Smith (NE)
Lo ll Smith (OR)
Lowery (CA) Snyder
Lujan Spence
Lundin. Stangeland
Lungien Stanton
Martin (NC) Staten
MeClory Stenisolns
McCollum Tiuke
Addabbo
Arithony
AtLnsOn
Hal the
B an
— Beard
Bevill
Blaggi
Blanchard
honker
Breaux
Brown lOB)
Burton. John
Butler
Chappell
Chapple
Cheney
Collins (TX)
Conable
Conyer .
Craig
Crane Philip
Davis
de Is Oarza
Derrick
Donnelly
Come. James
NOT VOTING—lOo
Dougherty Mark.
Early Marlenee
Belenborn Marriott
Betel Mattox
EtansGA) )davroules
Findley McCloskey
Poglietta Mica
Garcia Miller (CAl
Gephardt Mitchell (MD)
Gibbons Mol lett
Olic )inan ?Japier
Goidsater Nv4igan
Gray Ob.rttar
Greeg Puhayin
Grisham Pepper
Ranee Feyser
Hansen (ID) Pickle
Rendon Pritchard
Holland Purrell
Rub ard Rtna 4o
Jefines Roberta (ES)
Jenkins Rodino
Kogoviek Rudd
Lee Sabo
lehman 8 ant l l
L iasid Sawyer
-------
H 6776 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
tieman has no objection to the modifi- a matter of fact. Congress provided an
cation to the language of his amend. easier standard for that pursuit. stnct
inent. It is certainly agreeable to the liability. EPA is charged with going
minority, after those people.
Mr. DANNEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, The gentleman is probably making
I ha’ e no objection to the language. reference to what it Is I have been
Mr. Chairman. I yield back the bal- seeing in the newspaper, where, as
ance of my time. EPA comes upon a site and finds a
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on number of generators and it appears
the amendment offered by the gentle- that some of the wealthier generators
man from California (Mr. Dsi cE. are allowed to enter into settlement
MEYER). as modified, to the amend- contracts, thereby absolving them
ment In the nature of a substitute of- from any further responsibility. EPA
fered by the genueinan from New then goes and expends its money and
Jersey (Mr. PLOR.ZO).. the residual number of generators
The amendment, as modified, to the that are left that EPA can pursue
amendment in the nature of a substi- under st-ict L’. bihty may not have the
tute. was agreed to. • wherewithal to provide for reimburse-
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any ment, the result being that the fund is
other amendments to the amendment depleted.
In the nature of a substitute offered So I am very concerned about that
by the gentleman (rein New Jersey apparent initiative that. Is being pus-
(Mr. FLORIO)? sued by EPA. It is my intention and
Mr. LEVITAS. Mr. Chairman. I my committee’s Intention to pursue
move to strike the requisite number of and look into this practice that ap-
words. pears to be followed by EPA.
Mr. Chairman. I do so to take this Mr. LEVITAS. I thank the distin-
opportunity to engage in a colloquy guished chairman of the subcomznit-
with the distinguished chairman of ,
the subcommittee. Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, will the
I serve as the chairman of the Sub- gentleman yield to me so that I may
committee on Investigations and Over- engage in a colloquy with the chair-
sight of the Committee on Public man of the subcommittee?
Works and Transportation. ahich has Mr. LEVITAS. Let me complete this
joint jurisdiction In certain areas with one comment, and I would then be
the subcommittee that has presented happy to yield to the gentleman.
this bill. I appreciate the chairman’s re-
There Is one ares and one problem sponse. I think it is a very, very serious
that recently has come to our atten- problem because I think the American
tion that I would like to get some people, the American taxpayers and
opinion and view of the distinguished the American public may get jerked
subcommittee chairman on. and that around to a very expensive tune If
Is this. The Environmental Protection EPA does not vigorously go after the
Agency, hich has the responsibility people who have created the problem
of identifying certain sites a hich con- and make those responsible pay for it.
tam hazardous and toxic wastes, has Mr. Chairman, I aould be happy to
the responsibility of trying to identify yield to the gentleman from New
the generators of that material in York.
these abandoned sites and require Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman. I thank
them, rather than the fund and the the gentleman for yielding.
taxpayers, to pay for the cleanup. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask
They created the problem: they have the distinguished chairman of the sub-
the responsibility of paying for it. Yet, committee with respect to sectIon 3 of
based on preliminary Information, It the substitute, am I correct In my Un-
appears that the Environmental Pro- derstanding that for purposes of satis-
tection Agency Is not vigorously pursu- fying waste identification, manifesting
ing these types of identifications tol- and labeling requirements, that It
low up, and in many instances are let- would be sulficient to make such iden-
ting the large generators string them tificatlon on the basis of process iden-
along for periods of time, and in many tificatlon such as dry cleaning solvent’s
instances end up aith sweetheart-type and metal plating wastes?
settlements rather than full responsi- Mr. FLORIO. Yes, the gentleman is
bility. correct In his understanding. Gener-
I aonider 11 the chairman of the sub- atom may even make presumptions
committee has any information or that their wastes are hazardous and
view on this problem, treat them accordingly, thereby allevi-
Mr. FL&,RIO. Mr. Chairman. will sting any requirement to Lest the
the gentleman yield? waste. However, generators are respon
Mr. LEVITAS. I yield to the gentle. sible for knowing whether or not they
maxi from Nea Jersey. are hazardous waste generators.
Mr. FLORIO. I thank the gentleman Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman. If the
for yielding. gentleman will yield further, I have a
Mr. Chairman, the gentleman is cor- question with respect to section 11,
rect a ith regard to the responsibilities the recycling provision of this bill.
under the law. EPA, for any moneys Mr. Chairman, Is this provision hi-
that are paid out of this fund, is tended to apply to recyclers who do
charged with the responsibility of pur- not deal with hazardous waste?
suing those who cause the problem. As Mr. FLORIO. The answer is no.
September8, 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. FLoalo). 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) hating assumed the Chair, Mr.
MOAKLEY, 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 (HR. 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.
D 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. DANNEMEYER. 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 4ot 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:
tRoU No. 3111
YEAS—3 17
Akaka
Bellenson
Brinkley
Alboala
Benedici
Brodhe,4
Alexander
BenneiL
Brooka
Anderaou
Dereuicr
Broontheid
.
Andrewe
Bethune
Brown CA
Annunzio
Appiegale
Aepin
Atkinson
AuCoin
Bailey (PA)
BedeU
Bingha.m
Boges
Boi&nd
BoUuig
Boner
BOIIIOT
Bouquard
B o en
Brown (CO)
BroThil l
Burton, Pt Wip
Byron
Can ipbeU
Ca ine
Chishoi i
Clausec i
-------
U 1O(C -f. b n”
USTING AND DEUSTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
Sec. 222. (a) Section 3001 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by inserting the following new subsections at the end
thereof:
“(el SPECIFIED WrEs.— 1) Not later than 6 months after the date
of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of
1984. the Administrator shall, where appropriate, list under subsec-
tion IbN U. additional wastes containing chlorinated dioxins or chlor-
tnated-dibenzofurans. Not later than one year after the date of
enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984,
the Administrator shall, where appropriate. list under subsection
bM 1) wastes containing remaining halogenated dioxins and haloge-
nated-dibenzofurans.
2 Not later than fifteen months after the date of enactment of
the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984. the Adminis-
trator shall make a determination of whether or not to list under
subsection ‘b’ U the followrng wastes: Chlorinated Aliphatics,
Dioxin. Dimethyl Hydrazine. TDI (toluene diisocyanate. Carba-
mates. Bromacil. Linuron. Organo-brornines, solvents, refining
wastes, chlorinated aromatics. dyes and pigments. inorganic chi rni-
cal industry wastes, lithium batteries, coke byproducts, paint pro-
duction wastes, and coal slurry pipeline effluent.
“(f) DELISTING PROCEDURES ‘—U) When evaluating a petition to
exclude a waste generated at a particular facility from listing under
this section, the Administrator shall consider factors (including
additional constituents) other than those for which the waste was
listed if the Administrator has a reasonable basis to believe that
such additional factors could cause the waste to be a hazardous
waste. The Administrator shall provide notice and opportunity for
comment on these additional factors before granting or denying
such petition.
‘i2) A) To the maximum extent practicable the Administrator
shall publish in the Federal Register a proposal to grant or deny a
petition referred to in paragraph (1) within twelve months after
receiving a complete application to exclude a waste generated 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 complete application. -
“(B) The temporary granting of such a petition prior to the
enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of’ 1984
without the opportunity for public comment and the full consider-
ation of such comments shall not continue for more than twenty-
-------
H. R. 2867—32
four months after the date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984. If a final decision to grant or deny such
a petition has not been promulgated after notice and opportunity for
public comment within the time limit prescribed by the preceding
sentence, any such temporary granting of such petition shall cease
to be in effect.
“(g) EP Toxxcrry.—Not later than twenty-eight months after the
date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments
of 1984 the Administrator shall examine the deficiencies of the
extraction procedure toxicity characteristic as a predictor of the
Leaching potential of wastes and make changes in the extraction
procedure toxicity characteristic, including changes in the Leaching
media, as are necessary to insure that it accurately predicts the
leaching potential of wastes which pose a threat to human health
and the environment when mismanaged.
“(h) ADDITIONAL CHARACTERISTICS.—Not later than two years after
the date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amend-
ments of 1984, the Administrator shall promulgate regulations
under this section idetitifying additional characteristics of hazard-
otis waste, including measures or indicators of toxicity.”.
(b) Section 3001(bKl) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by adding the following at the end thereof: “The Administrator, in
cooperation with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry and the National Toxicology Program, shall also identify or
list those hazardous wastes which shall be subject to the provisions
of this subtitle solely because of the presence in such wastes of
certain constituents (Such as identified carcinogens, mutagens. or
teratagensi at levels in excess of levels which endanger human
health.”.
-------
OIQ T T,) pl°’ -1
SECTION 222—LISTING AND DELISTING O I{AZARDOUS WASTE
House bill.—The House bill directs the Administrator to list,
where appropriate, additional wastes containing chlorinated diox-
ins or chlorinated-dibenzofurans within two months after enact-
ment and polycholorinated biphenyls (PCBs) within ten months
after enactment. In addition, within one year of enactment the re-
maining halogenated dioxins and dibenzofurans are to be listed
where appropriate.
With respect to delisting of hazardous wastes, the House bill di-
rects the Administrator to consider factors (including additional
constituents) other than those for which the waste was listed if he
has a reasonable basis to believe such additional factors could
cause the waste to be hazardous.
With respect to a petition requesting delisting submitted after
enactment, the Administrator is directed to decide within 12
months of submission whether or not to grant it. With respect to
-------
105
petitions submitted before enactment, the Administrator is directed
to make a decision within 18 months of enactment.
Senate amendment.—The Senate amendment directs the Admin-
istrator to identify wastes to be considered for listing within 2
years and additional wastes within 5 years after enactment. Within
2 years after enactment the Administrator is directed to promul-
gate standards regarding additional characteristics of hazardous
waste (including measures of toxicity), and list additional wastes or
publish reasons for not listing them.
In addition, the Administrator is directed to change the extrac-
tion procedure toxicity characteristic to predict the leaching poten-
tial of wastes upon exposure to more aggressive leaching media
than the media presently used. In cooperation with the Agency for
Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, the Administrator is also
directed to identify or list those hazardous wastes which solely be-
cause of the presence of certain constituents warrant regulation
under Subtitle C.
With respect to delisting, the Senate amendment directs EPA to
consider factors other than those for which the waste was listed, if
the Administrator has a reasonable basis to believe that such addi-
tional factors could cause the waste to be listed as hazardous. To
the maximum extent practicable, the Administrator shall grant or
deny a delisting petition within 24 months after receiving a com-
plete application. In addition, the temporary granting of a delisting
petition filed prior to enactment of this Act shall cease to be in
effect for more than 24 months after enactment if a final decision
to grant or deny such a petition has not been made.
Conference substitule.—The Conference substitute adopts the
House provision regarding listing with the following modifications:
first, the requirement that the Administrator list PCBs as a haz-
ardous waste within 10 months is omitted; second, the deadline for
listing waste containing chlorinated dioxins or chlorinated dibenzo-
furans is extended from two to six months after enactment; and
third, the provision in the Senate amendment directing the Admin-
istrator, in cooperation with the Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry, to list wastes solely on the basis of certain con-
stituents is included.
The omission by the Conference substitute of the requirement in
the House bill that PCBs should be listed as a hazardous waste
under Subtitle C should not be construed as a directive not to con-
tinue with the Agency’s current plans to list PCBs as a hazardous
waste. The Conferees recognize the grave dangers associated with
PCBs, are aware of the Agency’s regulatory proceedings regarding
PCBs and urge the Administrator to bring PCBs under the regula-
tory structure of Subtitle C as expeditiously as possible to the
extent such coverage is appropriate.
With respect to delisting, the Conference substitute adopts the
Senate amendment.
The Conference substitute modifies the provision of the Senate
amendment directs the Administrator to change the extraction pro-
cedure (EP) toxicity characteristic to more accurately reflect the
leaching potential of wastes. The modification is not intended to
alter the substance of the directive. The Conference expect the Ad-
106
ministrator to take all necessary action to expeditiously revise the
EP toxicity characteristic.
-------
ri 1 ,c ‘I , & “•
Section 18. Listing and delisting of hazardous waste
This provision is intended to deal with the deficiencies in the cov-
erage of EPA’s hazardous waste program. There remain wastes
which may be hazardous to human health and the environment
that are not currently listed as hazardous under EPA’s regulations,
and thus are not subject to Subtitle C control.
Under the Agency s present regulations, to be a hazardous waste,
a waste must exhibit a characteristic of hazardous waste or be
listed by name (for example, distillation bottoms from the produc-
1 tion of vinyl chloride). None of the characteristics of hazardous
waste promulgated so far—ignitabiity, corrosivity, reactivity, or
extraction procedure toxicity—identifies wastes on the basis of or-
ganic toxicity. Some wastes containing organic toxicants have been
listed as hazardous, but their number is insufficient, and no new
wastes have been listed for nearly three years.
The result is that many obviously hazardous wastes are not con-
sidered to be hazardous under EPA’s regulations and so are not
subject to Federal control under the Subtitle C program. For in-
stance, virtually no wastes from the production of pesticides for
which there is a rebuttable presumption against registration under
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act are listed as
hazardous; very few wastes containing toxicants found to present
substantial evidence of human carcinogenicity by EPA’s Carcino-
gen Assessment Group (CAG) are listed as hazardous. In fact, it
was not until April of this year that the Agency even proposed to
list certain wastes containing chlorinated dioxins and -dibenzofur-
ans as hazardous.
Section 13(a), therefore, directs the Administrator to list, where
appropriate, waste containing clorinated dioxins, chiorinated-diben-
zofurans, or polychlorinated biphenyls. The Administrator is also
directed to list, where appropriate, the remaining halogenated diox-
ins and chlorinated-dibenzofurans. Regarding polychiorinated bi-
phenyls, where the Administrator has developed regulations under
Section 6(c) of the Toxic Substances Control Act and, where there is
an inconsistency between TSCA and RCRA standards, the more
stringent regulations shall govern.
Section 13(b), directs the Agency to use its existing authority to
adopt a common-sense approach to resolving (or partially resolving)
-------
57
this situation. EPA is to list or is to develop a characteristic which
would identify as hazardous wastes, those solid wastes with high
levels of known toxicants, such as CAG carcinogens, pesticides for
which there is a rebuttable presumption against registration and
known mutagens, teratogens, or other dangerous, chronically toxic
pollutants. The Agency is to develop this characteristic based on
the levels of toxicants contained in the waste and in designating
these concentration levels is to select levels in excess of levels
known (or reasonably believed) to adversely affect human health
and the environment. For example, wastes containing concentra-
tions of toxic constituents several orders of magnitude greater than
exposure levels specified in EPA’s Water Quality Criteria could
well be judged to pose the potential to harm human health and the
environment if mismanaged (Section 1004(5)), and so should be reg-
ulated as hazardous wastes.
The provision leaves EPA the discretion as to which’ toxicants
and which concentration levels should be used as a basis for devel-
oping characteristics or listing but mandates that EPA begin doing
so promptly. The Committee emphasizes that in implementing this
provision, EPA is not to become enmeshed in controversy and
delay as to what the threshold adverse effect level is for toxic con-
stituents contained in wastes. EPA is to use the logic that whatever
the minimum level of the toxicant is, this group of wastes contains
so much more that they should be regulated as hazardous. EPA of
course is not precluded from developing characteristics or listing
wastes with lower concentrations of toxicants and is encouraged to
do so. Such characteristics or listing, however, would be based on
the more particularized criteria for developing characteristics and
listing contained in EPA’s present regulations.
Section 13(c).—T his provision closes a loophole presently con-
tained in EPA’s delisting regulations (40 CFR 260.22). This loophole
allows hazardous wastes produced by individual generators to
become exempt from regulation under Subtitle C, even though they
may contain constituents that adversely affect human health and
the environment.
As mentioned earlier, one way that wastes can be identified as
hn rdous is by EPA’s listing them. The listing process is a general
screening to determine that a kind of waste typically can cause
harm to human health and the environment if mismanaged. The
dehsting process allows petitioners (usually individual hazardous
waste generators or treatment facilities) the opportunity of show-
ing that their wastes are significantly different—because of treat-
ment, or because they are generated in a different process—from
listed wastes of the same type. Consequently, their wastes should
be excluded—i.e. delisted—from the hn wdous waste lists. Under
the Agency’s regulations, EPA will delist those wastes which do
not, or no longer, meet the criteria for which the waste was listed.
Delistings are granted or denied after procedures patterned after
informal rulemaking, appropriate to the quasi-adjudicatory nature
of the delisting proceeding.
EPA’s delisting regulations do not fully address the fact that
wastes are frequently composed of numerous hazardous constitu-
ents. In some instances, because listing is a general screening proc.
ess, EPA may not have taken all the hazardous constituents in a
-------
58
waste into consideration when the waste was originally listed. It
may be apparent of evaluataing a petition, or based on subsequent-
ly developed data, however, that the petitioner’s waste may contain
significant levels of hazardous constituents in addition to those for
which the waste was originally listed. Although EPA has authority
under RCRA to reject a delisting petition based on the presence of
these additional constituents, EPA’s regulations currently do not
allow the Agency to do so. This is not merely a potential danger; it
historically has resulted in some wastes which are still hazardous
being exempted from the hazardous waste lists and consequently,
from all RCRA regulation.
Under this amendment, there would no longer be a risk that de-
listing a waste means releasing waste which may still be hazardous
from regulation. The amendment expressly directs EPA to consider
additional constituents or other relevant factors when evaluating a
delisting petition. If the Agency has a reasonable basis to believe
that there are additional hazardous constituents present in the
waste in potentially significant concentrations, it can present the
basis for its finding and ask the petitioner to demonstrate that this
is not the case. After allowing an opportunity for comment by the
petitioner and other intersted persons, EPA can grant or deny a de-
listing petition (including petitions for temporary delisting) based
not only on the original constituents but on any additional hazard-
ous constituent present in significant concentrations.
Section 13(c) does three things. First, it directs the Administrator
upon evaluation of a petition to delist a waste to consider factors
other than those for which the waste was listed if he has a reason-
able basis to believe that such additional factors could cause the
waste to be hazardous. The Administrator must provide notice and
an opportunity to comment on the additional factors and its rea-
sonable basis finding, before granting or denying such a petition.
Second, the section directs the Administrator to decide upon any
petition to delist a waste filed after enactment of this subsection
within 12 months. Regarding petitions filed before or on the date of
enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall decide upon
the petition within 18 months after granting a temporary exclusion
from regulations for such waste. This subsection is designed to
eliminate the practice of failing to make a final decision after
granting a “temporary” delisting. We recognize, however, that the
Administrator has granted a number of temporary delisting al-
ready and must have a reasonable period of time to complete proc-
essing of these delistings. Therefore, the Committee has allowed 18
months from the date on which the temporary delisting was grant-i
ed to make a final decision.
Finally, this subsection requires that these be no new temporary
delisting unless the Administrator first provides notice and an op-
portunity for public comment.
-------
SUP1 - 1 (;
LISTING/DELISTING MODIFICATIONS
Section 3001 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act requires the Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency to list and identify wastes that are to
be managed in accordance with the hazardous waste provisions of
the Act. Until a waste is so listed or identified, it is not subject to
regulation as a hazardous waste under the Act, regardless of how
harmful it may actually be. Once a waste has been listed as haz-
ardous, a company may petition the Administrator to exempt from
regulation (“delist”) a specific waste from a particular facility be-
cause that waste is significantly different from the listed or identi-
fied waste and is not hazardous.
The listing, identification and regulation of hazardous wastes has
not proceeded as rapidly as the law contemplated. At the same I
time, exemptions from regulation have been granted for particular’
wastes without assurance that they do not constitute hazards. To
clarify the intent of section 3001 in current law, this bill includes
provisions to prescribe in greater detail the responsibilities of the
Agency with respect to listing and identifying hazardous wastes
and granting exemptions from regulations.
The bill adds a new paragraph (4) to section 3001(b) to correct
several deficiencies in the exemption, or delisting, process. In judg-
ing whether to delist a waste, the Agency’s practice has been to
consider only the constituents given as the original justification for
the Agency’s decision to list a waste. In many, if not all instances,
the hazardous constitutents enumerated by EPA as a basis for list-
ing specific wastes do not exhaust the universe of constituents
which would justify such a listing. Thus, the petitioning company’s
waste could be nonhazardous with respect to a constituent used as
a basis for listing and be exempted from regulation under recent
EPA practices, but still constitute a hazard with respect to con-
stituents not evaluated.
Before making a decision to delist waste from a particular facili-
ty, the Administrator is required by the bill to consider criteria,
constituents and other factors which, in addition to those used as
the original basis for listing, he has reason to believe could cause
the waste to be listed as hazardous. If the Administrator denies the
petition for exemption on the basis of additional constituents, he is
required to amend the basis for the listing of such waste to indicate
the additional constituents.
In the recent past the Agency has granted so-called “temporary”
delistings without notice or opportunity for public comment and
with no deadline for a final decision. The bill requires that every
decision on a petition to exempt a waste—whether classified as
temporary or final—must be preceded by notice and opportunity
for public comment.
Temporary delisting decisions made before enactment of these
amendments will cease to be in effect 12 months after they were
made or six months after enactment, whichever is later, unless,
within that period, a final decision to grant the delisting petition
has been made after notice and opportunity for public comment. In
making final determinations on these petitions, the Administrator
must comply with the provision of the bill that requires him to con-
sider all potentially hazardous constituents.
The Agency currently adheres to no standard as to what consti-
tutes adequate information upon which to base a delisting decision.
In particular, the Agency has no standardized procedure to assure
that waste samples, which are taken by the petitioner and from
which data are derived, are representative of the waste stream for
which an exemption is. sought. In order to provide a sound informa-
tion base and one that is consistent for different petitioners, the
bill directs the Agency to develop guidelines for the collection and
submission of delisting information and requires that the informa-
tion be certified by a responsible official of the petitioning compa-
ny.
The bill adds a new paragraph (5) to section 3001(b) which speci-
fies ways by which the Administrator is to improve the process for
identifying and listing hazardous wastes.
New paragraph (5)(A) directs the Administrator to identify
within six months of enactment those wastes for which a decision
whether to list as a hazardous waste will be made within time peri-
ods of two and five years. It is expected that the schedule will be
-------
34
an ambitious one. While the wastes should include those currently
being studied by the Agency, this provision is intended to acceler-
ate Agency action and commitment of resources beyond the inad-
equate level of the past several years. The Agency should also indi-
cate those wastes and waste characteristics which may be hazard-
ous but will not be listed, identified or studied within the next five
years. Additionally, the Agency should identify any industries it in-
tends to study and provide a general schedule for completing these
studies.
New paragraph (5)(B) directs the Administrator to promulgate, in
accordance with section 3001(b)(1), regulations listing as hazardous
those wastes containing chlorinated dioxins and those containing
dibenzofurans. The Agency proposed listing such wastes in April
1983; final action on this proposal, after review of public comment,
is contemplated by this section. The bill requires the Agency to
issue a regulation listing these wastes within six months. In light,
of the potency of these toxicants, the Agency should assure that
these wastes are not excluded from regulation under the exemption
provisions for small quantity generators or that for recycled haz-
ardous wastes.
The Agency is also encouraged to list, where appropriate, addi-
tional wastes containing halogenated dioxins and dibenzofurans,
again based on the listing criteria set forth in section 3001(b)(1),
and to do so within two years of enactment.
Under the Agency’s present regulations a waste must exhibit at
least one of several specified characteristics or be listed by name
before it may be regulated as a hazardous waste. The characteris-
tics of hazardous wastes currently specified in regulations—ignita-
bility, corrosivity, reactivity, or extraction procedure toxicity—are
not comprehensive.
One serious deficiency is the lack of any characteristic which
identifies wastes that pose a problem due to toxic organic constitu-
ents. Among the toxic compounds that have been found to cause
serious damage to human health and the environment are haloge-
nated solvents, pesticides, and vinyl chloride. All of these are or-
ganic compounds, and none of the existing characteristics would
necessarily identify as hazardous those wastes which contain sig-
nificant concentrations of these materials.
In order to improve the regulation of hazardous wastes, especial-
ly those containing hazardous organic constitutents, the bill adds a
new paragraph (5)(C) to section 3001(b) directing the Administrator
to promulgate regulations identifying additional characteristics of
hazardous waste. There’ will be some technical problems involved
in establishing regulatory thresholds for the broad group of toxic
organic substances. However, the deficiencies in current regulatory
coverage are severe enough to require action by the Agency. Where
technical questions cannot yet be definitively answered, EPA
should not delay but should make reasonable assumptions based on
the need to protect human health and the environment. The
Agency should give priority to expanding the identified hazardous
waste characteristics to bring under control those wastes which
pose a carcinogenic, teratogenic, mutagenic, reproductive or neuro-
toxic hazard. New subparagraph (C) also requires the Administra-
tor not later than two years after enactment, either to promulgate
ZLL
-------
35
regulations listing each of the wastes identified under paragraph
(5)(A) as candidates for listing decisions within two years or to pub-
lish a statement as to why a particular waste so identified does not
warrant listing as a hazardous waste.
A new paragraph (5)(D) is added to require the Administrator to
detemine in which situations use of the extraction procedure toxic-
ity characteristic may be in sufficient to protect human health and
the environment. The extraction procedure, which simulates the
mobility of certain toxicants in a municipal landfill disposal situa-
tion, does not, in many cases in which it is used, represent a likely
mismanagement situation, or may represent only one of several
reasonable mismanagement scenarios. For example, the test does
not address potential air emissions or surface water contamination
from run-off. In addition, certain wastes which are inherently of
moderate to high alkalinity, or which are placed in highly alkaline
sites, may exhibit higher levels of leaching than the extraction pro-
cedure indicates.
In some instances involving wastes containing metals, the
Agency has relied solely on the extraction procedure to evaluate
delisting petitions. Because of the Agency’s reliance on the proce-
dure and its clear limitations, the bill directs the Agency, to deter-
mine, within six months, the appropriateness of continuing to use
its current extraction procedure to evaluate delisting petitions.
Short and long-term measures in lieu of or in addition to the exist-
ing procedure are needed. Possible corrective measures include re-
vision of or supplements to the existing extraction procedure to
represent more adequately the mobility of toxicants under a wider
variety of specific conditions. Methods to estimate potential air and
surface water contamination resulting from reasonable mismanage-
ment scenarios may also be required. Furthermore, a pre-test may
be appropriate to determine the specific leaching procedure to be
followed, e.g., acid or alkaline. Finally, the extraction procedure is
not very effective for evaluating the mobility of organic toxicants.
The Agency should continue its policy of not using this test proce-
dure in evaluating the leaching potential or organic contaminants.
Rather, until the Agency develops, after notice and comment, a
procedure for measuring the leaching potential of organic toxi-
cants, any decision to delist wastes containing these toxicants
should be based on their concentration in the waste.
The bill also requires that, within two years, EPA revise its ex-
traction procedure toxicity characteristic where necessary in order
that it reflect more accurately the concentrations of toxic metals
that will leach from wastes subject to more aggressive leaching
media than those used in the present test.
Pending development of new tests to determine the leaching po-
tential of wastes, the Agency should, for waste identification pur-
poses, continue to employ the extraction procedures currently used.
The bill also adds a new paragraph (6) to section 3001(b) to clari-
fy the Agency’s authority and specifically direct it to identify
wastes which are hazardous solely because they contain constitu-
,ents at levels in excess of those which adversely affect human
‘health and the environment. Health data on substances that are
carcinogenic, mutage&c, or pose other hazards are constantly up-
dated and improved and will continue to be for the forseeable
36
future. It is necessary, however, to begin immediately to regulate
on the basis of the best available information. As additional data is
developed, by EPA and others, the Agency should use this informa-
tion to revise its regulations, lowering concentrations where neces-
sary and adding new toxicants to the characteristic.
-------
p412. zu - , A P
-io s .
7 LISTING AND DELISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
8 SEC. 17. (a) SPECIFIC WAsTEs.—Section 3001 is
9 amended by inserting the following new subsections at the
10 end thereof:
11 “(0 SPECIFIED WA8TES.—(1) Not later than two
12 months after the date of enactment of this subsection, the
13 Administrator shall, where appropriate, list under subsection
14 (b)(1), additional wastes containing chlorinated dioxins or
15 chlorinated-dibenzofurans. Not later than ten months after
16 such date of enactment, the Administrator shall, where ap-
17 propriate, list under subsection (b)(1) additional wastes con-
18 taming polychiorinated biphenyls. Not later than one year
19 after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Adminis-
20 trator shall, where appropriate, list under subsection (b)(1)
21 wastes containing remaining halogenated dioxins and -diben-
22 zofurans. In the case of polychiorinated biphenyls, the stand-
23 ards promulgated under this Act shall be consistent with the
24 standards promulgated under section 6(e) of the Toxic Sub-
25 stances Control Act.
HR 2S67 RFS
-------
74
1 “(2) Not later than fifteen months after the date of the
2 enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall make a
3 determination of whether or not to list under subsection (b)(1)
4 the following wastes: Chlorinated Aliphatics, Dioxin, Di-
5 methyl Hydrazine, TDI (toluene diisocyanate), Oarbamates,
6 Bromacil, Linuron, Organo-bromines, solvents, refining
7 wastes, chlorinated aromatics, dyes and pigments, inorganic
8 chemical industry wastes, lithium batteries, coke byproducts,
9 paint production wastes, and coal slurry pipeline effluent.
10 (b) LISTING ON THE BASIS OF CONSTITUENTS.—SeC-
11 tion 3001(b)(1) is amended by adding the following at the end
12 thereof: “The Administrator shall also identify or list those
13 hazardous wastes which shall be subject to the provisions of
14 this subtitle solely because they contain hazardous constitu-
15 ents (such as identified carcinogens, mutagens, or teratagens)
16 at concentration levels in excess of levels which adversely
17 affect human health and the environment.”.
18 (c) DELISTING PEocEDuI Es.—Section 3001 is amend-
19 ed by adding the following new subsection at the end thereof:
20 “(g) DELISTING PROcEDuRES.—(1) When evaluating a
21 petition to exclude a waste generated at a particular facility
22 from listing under this section, the Administrator shall con-
23 sider factors (including additional constituents) other than
24 those for which the waste was listed if the Administrator has
25 a reasonable basis to believe that such additional factors
HR 2867 RFS
-------
75
1 could cause the waste to be a hazardous waste. The Athninis-
2 trator shall provide notice and opportunity for comment on
3 these additional factors before granting or denying such
4 petition.
5 “(2) Paragraph (1) shall apply to petitions filed before,
6 on, or after the date of the enactment of this subsection. In
7 the case of petitions submitted after such date of enactment,
8 the Administrator shall make a final decision on each such
9 petition within twelve months after the date of such submis-
10 sion. In the case of petitions submitted before such date of
11 enactment, the Administrator shall make a final decision on
12 each such petition within eighteen months after such date of
13 enactment. In the case of any waste for which a petition has
14 been submitted under this section, no temporary exclusion
15 may be granted from listing under this section unless there
16 has been notice and opportunity for comment prior to the
17 issuance of such temporary exclusion.”.
-------
R 5 - /& T A £ ()
LThTINU/DLLI JItVU MWJII’ICAI 1UN -
SEc. 8. Section 3001(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the following
new paiagraphs:
“(4)(A) The regulations promulgated under para-
graph (1) shall provide that, when evaluating a petition
to exclude a waste generated at a particular facility
from being regulated as a hazardous waste, the Admin-
vstrator shall consider criteria, constituents, or other re-
lated factors, other than those for which the waste was
listed, if the Administrator has information that pro-
vides a reasonable basis to believe that such additional
criteria, constituents, or other related factors could
cause such waste to be listed as a hazardous waste.
The Administrator shall grant or deny such petitions
only after notice and pportunity for public comment.
To the maximum extent practicable the Administrator
shall publish in the Federal Register a proposal to
I 2
-------
32
grant or deny such a petition within twelve months
after receiving a complete application to exclude a
waste generated at a particular facility from being reg-
ulated as a hazardous waste and shall grant or deny
such a petition within twenty-four months after receiv-
ing a complete application. If the basis for denial of
such petition is the presence of additional constituents
which could cause such waste to be hazardous, the Ad-
ministrator shall, after notice and opportunity for
public comment, amend the basis for the listing of such
waste to indicate the additional constituents.
“(B) The temporary granting of such a petition
prior to the enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
Amendments of 1984 without the opportunity for
public comment and the full consideration of such com-
ment shall not continue for more than twenty-four
months after the dale of enactment of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act Amendments of 1984. If a final decision
to grant or deny such a petition has not been promul-
gated after notice and opportunity for public comment
within the lime limit prescribed by the preceding sen-
tence, any such temporary granting of such petition
shall cease to be in effect.
“(C) Any petition to exclude from regulation a
waste generated at a particular facility shall be accom-
HR 2867 EAS
-------
33
panied by adequate information to evaluate such pcfl-
lion, including information on samples of such waste
determined to be representative on the basis of guide-
lines for the development and submission of such in for-
mation published by the Administrator. Such informa-
tion shall be certified by a responsible official of such
facility (as determined under regulations promulgated
under section 3005) to be accurate, complete, and rep-
resentative, within the knowledge of employees or con-
tractors of such facility.
“(5) For the purpose of assuring the timely com-
pletion of regulations identifying the characteristics of
hazardous waste and the listing of additional particu-
lar hazardous wastes, as required by paragraph (1) of
this subsection, the Administrator shall—
“(A) not later than six months after the date
of enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
Amendments of 1984, identify those particular
wastes for which the Agency intends to decide
whether to list as hazardous waste within lu-o
years after such date of enactment, and those par-
ticular wastes for which the Agency intends to
decide within five years after such dale of enact-
men I;
HR 2867 EAS——3
-------
34
“(B) not later than six months after the date
of enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Ac!
Amendments of 1984, promulga ’e regulations list-
ing chlorinated dioxin- and diben:ofuran-conlain-
ing wastes as hazardous wastes in accordance
with paragraph (1) of this subsection; and
“(C) not kiter than two years after the date
of enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
Amendments of 1984, (i) promulgate regulations
identifying additional characteristics of hazardous
waste, including measures or indicators of toxici-
ty; and (li) reach decisions on all wastes identi-
fied in accordance with subparagraph (A) for de-
cision within two years and for each such waste
either promulgate regulations listing such particu-
lar hazardous waste or publish a statement as to
why such waste should not be listed as hazardous
waste; and
“(D) not later than twenty-eight months after
the date of enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act Amendments of 1984, make such changes as
are necessary in the extraction procedure toxicity
characteristic to predict the leaching potential of
wastes upon exposure to leaching media more ag-
HR 2867 EAS
-------
35
gressive than the media utilized in the regulation
in effect as of such date of enactment.
“(6) The Administrator, in cooperation with i/ic
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
and the National Toxicology Program, shall al3o iden-
tify or list those hazardous wastes which shall be sub-
ject to the provisions of this subtitle solely because of
the presence in such wastes of certain constituents
(such as identified carcinogens, mulagens, or terato-
gens) at levels in excess of levels which endanger
human health.”.
-------
Ii6C. 1/’ P i7 s Tz o’2-rC-O
6 LISTING AND DEL1STING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
7 SEC. 13. (a) SPECIFIC WASTES.—Section 3001 is
8 amended by inserting the following new subsections at the
9 end thereof:
10 “(f) SPECIFIED WASTES.—(1) Not later than Iwo
11 months after the date of enactment of this subsectin, the Ad-
12 nzinistrator shall, where appropriate, list under subsection
13 (b)(1), additional wastes containing chlorinated dioxins or
14 chlorinated-dibenzofurans. Not later than ten months after
15 such date of enactment, the Adrninistralor shall, where appro.
16 priate, list under subsection (b)(’l) additional Wastes contain-
17 ing polychlorinated biphenyls. Not later than one year after
18 the date of enactment of this subsection, the Administrator
19 shall, where appropriate, list under subsection (b)(i) wastes
20 containing remaining halogenated dioxin e and -dihen:of!lr-
21 ans. in the case of polychlorinated biphenyls, the standards
22 promulgated under this Act shall be consistent with the
23 standards promulgated under section 6(e) of the Toxic Sub-
24 stances Control Act.
HR 2867 RH
-------
43
1 “(2) Not later than fifteen months after the date of the
2 enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall make a
3 determination of whether or not to list under subsection (b)(1)
4 the following wastes: chlorinated Aliphalics, Dioxin, Di -
5 methyl Hydrazine, TDI (toluene diisocyanate, , carbamates,
6 Bromacil, Linuron, Organo.bromines, solvents, refining
7 wastes, chlorinated aromatics, dyes and pigments, inorganic
8 chemical industry wastes, lithium batteries, coke byproducts,
9 paint production wastes, and coal slurry pipeline effluent.
10 (b) Lisrm’a OY THE BAsis OF CONST1TUENTS.—Sec-
11 lion 3001(’bE’i) is amended by adding the following at the
12 end thereof: “The Administrator shall also identify or list
13 those hazardous wastes which shall be subject to the provi.
14 sions of this subtitle solely because they contain hazardous
15 con ti1uenls (such as identified carcinogens 1 mulagens, or ter-
16 atagen& at concentration leveis in excess of levels which ad-
17 ver.selu affect human health and the enz.’ironrnenl. ‘
18 (c) DELIST!.VG PRO CEDURES.—SeClion 3001 is
19 amended by adding (he following new subsection at the end
O thereof:
21 “g) DELISTL.VG PROCEDURES.—C’l) 1’V en evaluating
22 a petition to exclude a waste generated at a particular facility
23 from listing under this section, the Administrator shall con-
24 sider factors (including additional constituents) other than
25 those for which the waste was listed if the Administrator has
HR !S67 RH
-------
44
1 a reasonable basis to believe that such additional factors
2 could cause the waste to be a hazanlous waste. The Adminis-
8 qrator shall provide notice and opportunity for comment on
4 these additional factors before granting or denying such
5 petition.
6 ‘12) Paragraph (1) shall apply to petitions filed before,
7 on, or — the date of the enactment of this subeection. in
8 the case of petitions submitted after such date of enactment.
9 the Administrator shall make a final decision on each such
10 petition within twelve months after such dote of enactment
11 In the case of petitions submitted before such date of enact-
12 ment, the Administrator shall make a final decision on each
18 such petition within eighteen months after granting a tempo-
14 rary exclusion — regulation for such waste. In the case of
15 any waste for which a petition has been submitted under this
16 section. no temporary exclusion may be granted from listi:. ;
17 under this section ‘unless there has been notice and opportuni.
18 ty for comment prior to the issuance of such temporary
19 ezclusion.’t
-------
- poa7q1-Lt 7 v
13 LISTING/DEL1ST1NG MODiFICATIONS
14 SEc. 8. Section 3001(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal
15 Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the following
16 new paragraphs:
17 “(4)(A) The regulations promulgated under para-
18 graph (1) shall provide that, when evaluating a petition
19 to exclude a waste generated at a particular facility
20 from being regulated as a hazardous waste, the Admin-
21 istrator shall consider criteria, constituents, or other re-
22 laled factors, other than those for which the waste was
23 listed, if the Administrator has a reasonable basis to
I believe that such additional criteria, constituents, or
other related factors could cause such waste to be listed
S 757 p
-------
51
1 as a hazardous waste. The Administrator shall grant
2 or deny such petitions only after notice and opporluni-
3 ty for public hearing. If the basis for denial of such
4 petition is the presence of additional constituents which
5 could cause such waste to be hazardous, the Adminis-
6 trator shall amend the basis for the listing of such
7 waste to indicate the additional constituents.
8 “(B) The temporary granting of such a petition
9 prior to the enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
10 Amendments of 1983 without the opportunity for
11 public comment and the full consideration of such corn-
12 ment shall not continue for more than twelve months
13 after the date such petition is granted or six months
14 after the date of enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal
15 Act Amendments of 1983, whichever is later, if a final
16 decision to grant or deny such a petition has not been
17 promulgated after notice and opportunity for public
18 comment within the time t imit prescribed by the pre-
19 ceding sentence, any such temporary granting of such
20 petition shall cease to be in effect.
21 “(0) Any petition to exclude from regulation a
22 waste generated at a particular facility shall be accom-
23 panied by adequate information to evaluate such peti-
24 lion, including informalion on samples of such waste
25 determined to be representative on the basis of guide-
S 757 RS
-------
52
1 lines for the development and submission ot such in for-
2 mation published by the Administrator. Such informa-
3 tion shall be certified by a responsible official of such
4 facility (as determined under regulations promulgated
5 under section 3005) to be accurate, complete, and rep-
6 resentative, within the knowledge of employees or con-
7 tractors of such facility.
8 “(5) For the purpose of assuring the timely corn-
9 pletion of regulations identifying the characteristics of
10 hazardous waste and the listing of additional particu-
11 lar hazardous wastes, as required by paragraph (1) of
12 this subsection, the Administrator shall—
13 “(A) not later than six months after the date
14 of enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
15 Amendments of 1983, identify those particular
16 wastes for which the Agency intends to decide
17 whether to list as hazardous waste within two
18 years after such date of enactment, and those par-
19 ticular wastes for which the Agency intends to
20 decide within five years after such date of enact-
21 ment;
22 “(B) not later than six months after the date
23 of enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
24 Amendments of 1983, promulgate regulations list-
25 in 9 chlorinated dioxin- and dibenzofuran-contain-
S757RS
-------
53
1 ing wastes as hazardous wastes in accordance
2 with paragraph (1) of this subsection; and
3 “(C) not later than two years after the date
4 of enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
5 Amendments of 1983, (i) promulgate regulations
6 identifying additional characteristics of hazardous
7 waste, including measures or indicators of toxic-
8 ity; and (ii) reach decisions on all wastes identi-
9 fied in accordance with subparagraph (A) for de-
10 cision within two years and for each such waste
11 either promulgate regulations listing such particu-
12 lar hazardous waste or publish a statement as to
13 why such waste should not be listed as hazardous
14 waste; and
15 “(D) not later than six months after the date
16 of enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
17 Amendments of 1983, determine the appropriate-
18 ness of using the extraction procedure toxicity
19 characteristic for evaluating petitions to exclude a
20 waste generated at a particular facility from being
21 regulated as a hazardous waste, and not later
22 than two years after such date of enactment, make
23 such changes as are necessary in the extraction
24 procedure toxicity characteristic to predict the’
25 leaching potential of wastes upon exposure to
S 757 RS
-------
54
1 leaching media more aggressive than the media
2 utilized in the regulation in effect as of such date
3 of enactment.
4 “(6) The Administrator, in cooperation with the
5 Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registr ,i
6 and the National Toxicology Program, shall also iden-
7 tify or list those hazardous wastes which shall be sub-
8 ject to the provisions of this subtitle solely because of
9 the presence in such wastes of certain constituents
10 (such as identified carcinogens, mutagens, or terato-
11 gens) at levels in excess of levels which endanger
12 human health. “.
-------
Atri
17 LISTING AND DELISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
18 SEC. 14. (a) SPEcIFIC WASTES.—Section 3001 of the
19 Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by inserting the follow-
20 ing new subsections after subsection (d):
21 “(e) SPECIFIED WAsTEs.—(1) Not later than ten
22 months after the date of enactment of this subsection, the
23 Administrator shall, where appropriate, list under subsection
24 (b)(1), additional wastes containing chlorinated dioxins, chior-
25 inated-dibenzofurans, or polychiorinated biphenyls. Not later
-------
42
1 than one year after the date of enactment of this subsection,
2 the Administrator shall, where appropriate, list under subsec-
3 tion (b)(1) wastes containing remaining halogenated dioxins
4 and -dibenzofurans. In the case of polychiorinated biphenyls,
5 the standards promulgated under this Act shall be consistent
6 with the standards promulgated under section 6(e) of the
7 Toxic Substances Control Act.
8 “(2) Not later than six months after the date of the en-
9 actment of this subsection, the Administrator shall make a
10 determination of whether or not to list under subsection (b)(1)
11 the following wastes: Chlorinated Aliphatics, Dioxin, Di-
12 methyl Hyd.razine, TDI (toluene diisocyanate), Carbamates,
13 Bromacil, Linuron, Organo-bromines, Solvents, Refining
14 wastes, Chlorinated aromatics, Dyes and Pigments, morgan-
15 ic Chemical Industry wastes, Lithium batteries, Coke by-
16 products, and Paint Production wastes. -
17. (b) LIsTING ON THE BASIS OF CoNs’rITuENTs.—Sec-
18 tion 300 1(b)(1) of such Act is amended by adding the follow-
19 ing at the end thereof: “The Administrator shall also identify
20 or list those hazardous wastes which shall be subject to the
21 provisions of this subtitle solely because they contain hazard-
22 ous constituents (such as identified carcinogens, mutagens, or
23 teratagens) at concentration levels in excess of levels which
24 adversely affect human health and the environment.”.
HR 2867 III
-------
I 43
1 (c) DELIs’rING PR0cEDuRES.—Section 3001 of such
2 Act is amended by adding the following new subsection at
3 the end thereof:
4 “(d) DELIsTING PE0cED!mEs.—(1) When evaluating a
5 petition to exclude a waste generated at a particular facility,
6 the Administrator shall consider factors (including additional
7 constituents) other than those for which the waste was listed
8 if the Administrator has a reasonable basis to believe that
9 such additional factors could cause the waste to be a hazard-
10 ous waste. The Administrator shall provide notice and oppor-
11 tunity for comment on these additional factors before grant-
12 ing or denying such petition.
13 “(2) Paragraph (1) shall apply to petitions filed before,
14 on, or after the date of the enactment of this subsection. In
15 the case of petitions submitted before such date of enactment,
16 the Administrator shall make a final decision on each such
17 petition within 12 months after such date of enactment.
18 In the case of petitions submitted before such date of enact-
19 ment, the Administrator shall make a final decision on each
20 such petition within eighteen months after granting a tempo-
21 rary exclusion from regulation for such waste.”.
-------
October 5 1, 1984
consistent with requirements for per-
mitted facilities.
MINIMUM TECHNOLOGICAL REQUIREMENTS AND
PERMIT LIFE
Delayed promulgation of final regu-
lations to Implement RCRA and pro-
longed use of Interim status permits
by EPA has aUow ed some facilities to
operate without assurances that
design and performance standards will
utilize adequate and available control
technology. The application of avail-
able technology, at a nilnimum, is nec-
essary to minimize releases of hazard-
ous wastes into the environment.
Minimum standards of double liners.
groundwater monitoring and leachate
collection are required for landfills
and surface impoundments permitted
after date of enactment. Modifications
of this requirement are allowed upon a
showing that an alternative design is
at least as effective as the liners and
Jeachate collection systems.
The conference report contains the
Senate provision excluding facilities
within the State of Alabama from the
alternative technology provisions con-
tamed in the minimum technological
requirements. By adoption of this
Senate provision, the conferees do not
imply that any facility within the
State of Alabama could, or c ild not.
- comply with any minimum tec’hnologt-
cal variance requirements envisioned
by this provision. This Alabama exclu-
sion does not prejudice or affect con-
sideration of pending or future permit
applications by facilities In Alabama to
the extent that such applications may
comply with this and other Federal
and State statutes and regulations.
This provision solely affecting facili-
ties within Alabama extends only to
the alternative technology demonstra-
tion otherwise available regarding
minimum technology requirements
and does not affect other alternative
operating or design options available
to owners or operators of Alabama
land disposal facilities under this or
other Federal or State statutes or reg-
ulations. For example, if pretreated
wastes under other provisions were ex-
pressly permitted to utilize land dis-
posal facilities of differing technologi-
cal design or operating requirmenLs,
this Alabama exclusion would not
apply to that alternative authority.
Minimum standards for incinerators
are to require destruction and removal
efficiency consistent with regulations
In effect on the date of enactment.
Equally Important Is the require-
ment that EPA modify its regulations
to specify criteria for the acceptable
location of new, as well as exIsting, fa-
cilities. Recent studies show that
proper location is at least as important
as application of Improved technol-
ogies. Too many existing facilities are
located in areas that aren’t arcH swted
to management of hoiard nis wastes.
It Is Important that theae sites be shut
down as quickly as is possible.
Fixed term permits not to exceed 10
‘ears are established for land disposal
iacilities, storage facilities, inciner-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
S 13819
ators. and other treatment facilities. sideratlon of the cost. or noniwater
Permits for land disposal facilities quality environmental impacts associ-
shall be reviewed at least every 5 ated with’ surface Impoundments In
years. light of the newly enacted sections
An amendment Is included to make 3004(o) and 3005(j).
clear that the Administrator—or the OGHTINUINC RELEASES AT PERMI I’ItD
State In the case of a State with an au- FACILITIES
thorized program—Is not to consider Current regulations do not require
the incremental cost attributable to facilities receiving permits under
sections 3004(o) and 3005(j) In first, is- RCRA to address all releases of haz-
suing effluent limitations guidelines, ardous wastes from solid waste man-
new source performance standards and agement units at the facility. A facility
pretreatment standards under the which is causing, for example, ground-
Clean Water Act in the next 12 water contamination from inactive
months; second, issuing NPDES per- units could, therefore, seek a permit
mits based on the previously promul- under RCRA for active units and re-
gated guidelines and standards and ceive the permit without having to
any guidelines and standards promul. clean up the contamination.
gated under the Clean Water Act with HR. 2867 will require that all treat.-
in the next 12 months; or third, estab-
ment, storage, and disposal facilities
lishing effluent limitations based ° i which apply for a permit under sub-
best professional Judgment (BPJ] °“ title C and which release hazardous
or before October 1, 1986.
In the past several years, EPA has waste or constituents from any solid
promulgated the majority of the ef flu- waste management unit at the facility
ent limitations guidelines, pretreat- must remedy such releases as a condi-
ment standards, and new source per- tion of permit issuance. Where correc-
formance standards required by the tive action cannot be completed prior
Clean Water Act and the Clean Water to issuance of the permit, schedules of
Act Toxins Consent Decree, NRDC compliance for such corrective ‘action
Ruckelshczus, ERC 2120 (D.D.C, and financial assurances may be re-
1976), as modified 12 ERC 1833 quired,
(D.C.C. 1979), as modified by orders Rather than delay the issuance of
dated October 26, 1982, August 2, 1983, RCRA permits until sufficient infor-
January 6, 1984, and July 5, 1984. The mationi is acquired to specify in coas-
Agency has done substantial work pliance schedules the corrective action
the other effluent limitations guide- required arid the financial assurances
lines and standards covered by this needed to assure Its completion, per-
decree. The agency has also made sub- ‘ mits may be- Issued where owners/op-
stantial commitments to issue NPDES erators commIt in a compliance sched-
permits implementing these effluent ule to obtain the information neces-
limitations guidelines and standards sary to determine the extent and cost
and NPDES permit establishing efflu- of corrective action. To do otherwise
ent limitations based on best profes- would prolong the period during
sional judgment (BPJ] In eases ahere ahich facilities are not subject to the
there are no applicable effluent lirnita- more stringent part 264 standards.
tions guidelines, LISTINO/DELISTING MODIFICATION
Some of these effluent limitations The listing process is a general
guidelines and standards and EPJ screening to determine whether a kind
permit limitatIons rely on surface im- of waste typically can cause harm to
poundments as part of the model human health and the envIronment if
treatment technology: In other cases, mismanaged. The. dellsting process
industry has chosen to use surface im- allows petitioners—usually individual
poundments to achieve compliance hazardous waste generators or treat-
with nationally applicable effluent nient facilities—the opportunIty of
limitations guidelines and standards showing that their wastes are signufi-
despite the fact that such impound- cantly different—because of treat-
ments are not part of EPA’s model intent, or because they are generated in
treatment technology. Since EPA different process—from listed ‘aastes
could not have foreseen the require- of the same type. Consequently, their
ments imposed by sections 3004(o) and wastes should be excluded—that is de-
3005(j) of the Hazardous and Solid listed—from the hazardous wastes
Waste Amendments of 1984, EPA did lists. Under the Agency’s regulations,
not always include as part of the base- EPA will delist those wastes which do
line or Incremental co ,t of those regu- not, or no longer, meet the criteria for
lations or BPJ ’ limItations, the coat of which the waste wac listed.
facilities to meet the rei uiremcnts of EPA’s delisting regulations do not
sections 3004(o) or 3005(j). The pur. fully address the fact that wastes are
pose of this amendment is to assure frequently composed of numerous has-
that there is i o delay In promulgation ardous constituents. In some In-
of the remaining effluent itmitations stances, because listing is a general
guidelines and standards, implernenta- screening process, EPA may not have
tion of the categorical pretreatment taken all of the hazardous constitu-
standards, or EPA’s ability to Issue ents in a waste into consideration
NPDES permits either through Imple- when the waste was originally listed.
mentation of the effluent limitations Although EPA has authority under
guidelines amid standards or develop- RCRA to reject a delisthig petition
merit of BPJ limitations, pending con- based on the presence of these addi-
-------
S 13820
tional constituents, EPA’s regulations
did not allow the Agency to,do 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, to be a hazardous wa.ste, a waste
must exhibit a characteristic of haz-
ardous wastes or be listed by name.
None of the characteristics of hazard-
ous wastes promulgated so far—Ignit-
ability, corrosivity, reactivity, or ex-
tract ion procedure—identifies wastes
on the basis of organic toxicity. Fur-
thermore, EPA’s llstln process has
been virtually stalled icr several years.
This bill will direct EPA to consider
criteria, constituents, or other factors,
.in addition to those for which a waste
was listed, when evaluating petitions
to delist or exclude from regulation a
hazardous waste generated at a par-
ticular facility.
EPA is to consider additonal hazard-
ous constituents and criteria when de-
ciding whether 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 lias-
ardous. EPA Is specifically empowered
to obtain Information from the peti-
tioner relevant to this reason ble basis
determination. The bill thufprovides
- that the Initial petition must be ac-
companied by information adequate to
evaluate the petiton. This includes in-
formation necessary in determining
whether there is a reasonable basis to
believe the waste could still be hazard-
ous. Examples of informatIon that can
appropriately be requested In an ini-
tial application are data on constitu-
ents used as raw matci ials. catalysts,
solvents, or ingredients In the process
generating the waste.
Once EPA obtains this data, the
Agency must determine—based on the
information in the petition and on
other relevant information available
to the Agency—such as industry stud-
les 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 3001 of RCRA, as lrnple-
merited 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 pins-
ence of constituents such as carcino-
gens or teratogens at levels that will
endanger human health.
BURIcING AND CLENDING
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
arc burned each year in boilers; over
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
one-half of all hazardous wastes gener-
ated are burned in facilities not flow
regulated under RCRA. EPA has as-
knowlcdged 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 blend ng 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 undcr
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 notified 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 years 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 En fuel.
MAm oRT ir:sprctio ;s AND FEDERAL
FACILiTIES
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
conducte I 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.
FEDCRAL ENFORCEMEST
RCRA provides criminal penalties
for transporting waste to an unperinit-
ted facility and (Or 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-
mcnts. Portions of the knowing endan-
germent provisions are redundant and
unnecessarily restrictive.
Criminal penalties are pràvlded In
H.R. 2857 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-
tics are increased and redundant pro-
visions in the knowing endang ’r!nent
section are removed. By specifically
adding criminal liability for causing
wastes to be transported to sri wiper-
mitted facility or without a man fcst.
there is no intent to affect the applica-
tion of title 18. United States Code.
section 2 to all provisions of RCRA,
ORT OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
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 HR. 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 att chcd
to the manifest accompanying each
shipment,
Where there exists an International
agreement between the United 2t4te5
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.
-------
S9178
the material Is acceptable on the basis of
performance tests should be also be used.
The operating guideline pertaining to the
relatite quantities would, therefore, be di-
rettly ba . ed on test results used to evaluate
perforrrance,
EPA should specify standards for per.
Iorm’ng and e aluatirtg tests for absorbent
elaltiatton and acceptability. As experience
and correlations v.ith performance are de-
veloped iLh time on gnen products, the
specific surface area of the absorbent and
degree of saturation or fluid content v.hich
control soil suction may be Used in lieu of
actual tests to produce and, hence, evaluate
performance.
AMENDMENT TO ScBSTITOTE THE PHRASE “OILY
MATEPiALS” FOR THE MORE NARROWLY as-
FINED TERM ‘USED OIL”
The statutory definition of “used oil’ In
RCRA makes use of that phrase Itt this sec-
tion of the b!ll inappropriate, The defined
term Is, for the purposes of this section, too
narrow and use of it v.ould result in less re-
cycling of valuable petroleum materials.
Several types of oily materials are recov-
ered but would not be Included in the term
“used oil”. For example:
On off-chore platform’s crude is some-
times spilled and caught in a v.aste v.ater
system. This is skimmed and put Into the
crude line to the refinery;
Gas pipelines ha e lIquId condensates
v.hieh may be drawn off and put Into the
crude line, and
A yell may be treated or flushed v.ith
aater or oil and the oily material can be re-
covered and sent to the refinery via a crude
line,
Use of the term “oily materials”, in com-
binatiori v.ith the existing restrictions (“re-
suiting from normal petroleum refining,
production, and transportation practices’)
v.ouid be broad enough to encompass she re-
cycling of appropr!ate materials and set re-
stricLive enough to prevent undersirable
practices.
AMENDMENT TO DEtrYx DEADLINE FOR EPA TO
DETERMiNE APPROPRiATENESS OF USING LX-
TRALT:0N PROCEOuRL TOXICITY CHARACTER’
ISTIC FOE EVALUATING DELISTING prrIrIoNs
8. 757 adds a new paragraph (51(D) to sec-
tion 3001(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act New subparagraph (D requires EPA to
evaluate, within 6 months, the appropriate-
ness of using the e’ctracclon procedure toxic-
ity characteristic (EP) v. hen determining
whether to exclude a v.aste generated at a
particular facilit from regulation a haz-
ardous v.aste, The new subparagraph also
requires EPA to modify, within 2 years, the
EP.
A statutory requirement that EPA evalu-
ate the appropriateness of using the EP
within 6 months after enactment is no
loni er necessary, particularly in lIght of the
recently announced Agency position to re-
quest add:ttonal information from petition-
ers prior to taking action on petitions to e’c-
elude, or deilst, a v.a,ste generated at a par-
tici.I,ir facil,ty. The Agency r ow recog9 c ,
thAt the EP should only be used in e aluat-
ing e ciusion petitions to the e’ctent the
protedure is toLail appropriate, In those
ca ,ses here, for example the oily nature of
a v.asse might impair the effectitene,ss of
tue E?. another procedure is used that
rnra,aures the metels in the v.aste. For irior-
gaitic v.a,stes that are treated to retard the
in L:lity of inorganic constituents, a multi-
ple exirac-Ston procedure is applied to simu-
late the poter,t:al for release that might
occur o er thousands of years For the or-
ganic-containing v.asres ahere the EP may
riot be an effectite tool, the Agency uses the
total concentration of the contaminant in
the v. ,ste, rather than in the extract, alien
considering the petition, EPA’s recent adop-
lion of a policy to request Information on
additional constituents in the waste, a
policy codified in this bill, assures that the
Agency v.111 base Its decision on all poten-
t laUy harmful constitu nts, Finally, because
each petition must be separately evaluated
on the merits and data from each facility,
looking at such things as volume of waste
and planned disposition, the Agency must
go beyond looking at Just the wastes’ con-
stituents and mobility in reaching Its deci-
sion.
This amendment will, therefore, delete
the requirement that EPA evaluate, aithin
6 months, the appropriateness of using the
EP ahen determining ahether to exclude a
aaste generated at a particular facility from
ri-gulation as a haEardous waste. The re-
qutrement that EPA make such changes as
are necessary in the EP to predict the leach-
ing potential of wastes upon exposure to
leaching media more aggressive than the
media currently utilized is retained in the
bill. The only change this amendment
aould make to that requirement Is an ex-
tension of the deadline from not later than
2 years after enactment to not later than 28
months after enactment, The extension was
requested by EPA aith assurances from the
Agency that 28 months Is a reasonable and
adequate amount of time to complete the
task.
AMENDMENT TO MIKE LOCATIONAL CRITERIA AP’
FLICABLE IF ADMINISTRATOR FAILS TO MEET
LAND DISPOSAL LIMITATION DEADLINES
New subsection (bt9) of section 3004 pro-
vides that if the Adm:nlstrator fails to pro-
mulgate regulations establishing land dis-
posal limitations ihin the time frames es-
tablished by subsection (b) for certain
wastes, the v.astes In question may continue
to be land disposed pending promulgation of
such regulations, pro ided that disposal of
such v wes in landfills or surface impound-
ments occurs only at landfills or Surface im-
poundments that are in compliance with the
requirements of new sect:on 3004UK1). New
section 3004tf’l establishes minimum
technologies requ,rement.s for new landfills
and surface impoundments. As such, only
landfills and surface impoundments that
are equipped aith the technology required
for nea facilities can be used to satisfy new
subsection bK9 of section 3004.
A key component of new section 3004( 1) is
the mandate that EPA specify criteria for
the acceptable location of new and existing
facilities. Adding technology to land dispos-
al facilities is not the cure-all many aould
hace us betide. AU liners will eventually
leak and, as such, locational criteria are a
much more Important and effective method
to protect human health and the enairon-
ment, Indeed, such criteria are a necessary
component of any program designed to
assure Such protection.
This amendment aill modify new subsec-
tion itO) of section 3u( 14 to make it clcar
that a IacilIt fizted aith dot,ble liners and
leachate culleetlon syst. ’ms, or some ap’
pro ed alternati e technology, aill not nec
essariiy sat sfy new subsection ibi(PP. In ad-
GiliOn to being equipped with acceptable
technology, such landlills and surface un-
poundments must satisfy EPA S locational
criteria.
As Stated in the Committee Report at
page 21. this protision is intended to provide
temporar protection againsL the migration
of particularly dangerous wastes However.
it should not be considered a substitute for
the land di,spo al prohibitions Intended by
Section 5 of the bill. The Agency is expected
and required 10 meet Its statutory deadlines,
July 25, 1.984
AMENDMENT TO CLARIFY At1THORITY OF ADssaN .
ISTRATOR TO ESTASLI5H TREATMENT STAND.
AACS APPL ICIiSLE TO LAND DISPOSAL PRAC’
TICES
Vnd-r S. 757, land disposal of hazardous
wastes, particularly in landlills and surface
impoundments, should be the management
method of last resort New section 3004(b)
pros ides for the prohibition of land disposal
of certain hazardous wastes unless It is de-
termined to be protective of human health
and the environment.
For certain wastes, such as metals and in-
organics. there are no practical treatment
technologies at this tune that permanently
eliminate their toxicity. Also, residues of
other treatment processes must be land dis-
posed. S. 757 rnakcs Congressional Intent
clear that land disposal without prior treat.
ment of these wastes aith significant con-
centrations of highly persisteiit. highly
toxic, highly mobile and highly bioaccumu-
latisre constituents Is not prouct;ve of
human health and the ens Ironment. Under
pa’agraph C?) of new section 3004(b) as re-
vised by this amendment, In order to allow
land disposal of these restricted wastes with
metals and inorganics, EPA is authorized to
specify lesels or methods of treatment to
assure that when the treated wastes Is
placed in the ground, its toxicity or mobilI-
ty, or both, are substantially minimized,
Pre-disposal treatment standards are nec-
essary for wastes containing metals and
other inorganic consLituents because .known
treatment technologies cannot destroy
these hazardous constituents, The migra-
tion of metal finishing and other hazardous
Inorganic wastes may be presented or minI-
mized through treatment processes that im-
mobilIze the constItuents. Hazardous wastes
that are organic a inch have significant con-
centrations of organics in combination with
slgrulicant concentrations of tnorgazucs that
are highly toxic or highly mobile should be
treated so that land disposal Involves pre-
dominantly inorganic constituents, and only
those for which mobility is substantially re-
duced,
Treatment should substantially diminIsh
the toxicity of the waste or substantially
reduce the likelihood of migration of haz-
ardous constituents from the waste so that
short-term and long-term threats to human
health and the ens ironment are minimized,
This test cannot be satisfied through the
use of absorbent material as a sole means of
treatment prior to land disposal Treatment
Is required not only for purposes of protect.
ing ag;inss the short-term or acute risks as.
sociated with the land disposal of hazardous
wastes, but more importantly focuses on the
long-term hazards associated with migration
of the wastes and subsequent contamination
of ground or surface water.
The requisite lesels of methods of treatS
ment established by the Agency should be
the best that has been demonstrated to be
achiesabie. This dot’s not require a HAT.
type process as under the Clean Air or
Clean Water Acts a hich contemplates tech-
nolog -forcing standards, The Interit nere is
to require utilization of asailable technolo-
gy in lieu of continued land disposal without
prior treatment, It Is not intended that
every aRste recei e repetitive or ul’i!I’ate
levels of methoas of treatment, nor must all
inursanic constituents be reclaimed In es
tabllshing particular levels or methods of
treatritnt, EPA may, for example, c aDli$
a performance standard for leac ’uiaeiIity of
inorganic constituents. EPA Should a’so re-
quire the maximum reduction of certain
toxic constituents, for example, the reduc-
tion of hexavalent chromium to its less
tocic form of trivalent chromium D ’rue-
lion of total e anides should be r.q’i r,-d as
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
S 9190
ucts purchased by the Federal Govern-
ment must continue to meet JCP spec.
ifications. and, most Importantly,
lowcst 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 piodu.cts 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. This 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.
Mi-. CHAFEE. Mr. President I also
ask unanimous consent there be added
the following cosponsors to the
Kasten amendment: Senators Pxu,,
SARBANE5. and DEC0NcINI.
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. CHAPEE. 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.
AMD4DM iT NO. 3413
(Purpose: To amend the listing/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 Si’Ec’rETt 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.
Cju,rr. for Mr. Spec’rm, proposes an
amendment numbered 3413.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
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:
SEC I. LISTi’ G/DELiSTI’ 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 taelve months after 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 application,,”.
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,” ira-
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 SPEc-
iu deals with setting time limits, to
the maximwn extent possible, on EPA
consideration of listing and delisting
petitions. It also provides for a public
comment and provides for the clarify-
ing the basis on which factors not or-
ginally coLlsidered 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
AME?4DMENT NO. 3414
(Purpose: ’To provide that funding for reme-
dial action for a release at a facility o ned
by a State or political subdivision but op-
erated pri ately shall be the same a.s fund.
ing for remedial action for a release at a
pTii ately owned facility)
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President. on
behalf of Senator LUGAR. for himself
and Mr. BSADLEY. I send an anicncl’
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
Cxsrexl. on behalf of Mr. LucAs and Mr
BRADI.sY. 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 Is so ordered,
The amendment Is as follows:
At the end of the bill add the foilo ing
new section:
FUNDING OF REMEDIAL ACTION AT FACILITY
OWNED BY A STATE OR POLITICAL SGSDZV I.
5IO I BUT OPERATED PRIVATELY
Ssc. 30 Section l04(c)(3) of the Compre-
hensive Cn ironmental Response. Compen’
sation. and Liability Act of 1980 Is amend-
ed—U) by amending section 104(cfl3) 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, storrn
age, or disposal, that was owned and operat.
ed by the State or a political subdi ismon
thereof at the time of any disposal of has.
ardous substances in such facility. For the
purpose of subparagraph (c)(ii) of this para.
graph, the term “facility” does not include
na%igable waters or the beds underlying
those waters.”, and
2) by adding at the end thereof the fol.
lowing: “In the case of any State which has
paid, at any time after the date of the en-
aetment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
Amendments of i983. in excess of 10 percent
of the costs of remedial action at a facility
owned but not operated by such State or by
a political subdivision thereof, the President
shall use money in the Fund to pro ide re-
imbursement Lu such St te for the amount
of such excess.”.
Mr. LUOAR. Mr. President, I rise to
offer an amendment to provide for a
more equitable State and local share
requirement for the cleanup of haz.
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 5O percent miniS
mum-share requi;ement for a Super.
fund cleanup. Sites like the Seymour
site, which are owned but not operated
-------
II i
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUS E H 6519 -.
allowed to proceed for 2 adthtional
minutes.) -
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman,
would the gentleman yield to me?
Mr. FLORIO. I yield to the gentle-
T ’2i1
Mr. VOLKMER. I would just like to
ask a couple of questions so I under-
stand completely what the gentle-
man’s amendment applies to as small
generators of hamTdous waste. This
means that they have to keep a record
grO. Let rue respond to the of who they give the hazardous waste
question with regard to to. to transport?
BC3Ch. And I will defer to those _____ Mt. FIORIO. My pa.rflcuiar amend-
State of Missoun who wi merit would require there be cotihes-
that the whole problem in the tion as to what it is that was sent,
,if Mitsoun io ed frcm what hazardous wastes were given and
of dioxin that was mixed in who they were gwen to.
3.s:e cU m.nd spread across the roads - VOL L R. Right.
t a z n er o f aifferent towiis. So this ___ Mr. FICRXO. And that is alL
nount that we are talking about cer- Mr. VOLKMBR. So. if I can follow it
.inly would be under the threshold of up. later we would know in tlie event it
lthl k icgrams-per month and there- Q 1450. became necessary to determine where
are there would be a need for notifi-
that hazardous waste went to. we
cat:on under my amendment. In other words, It is my understar.d- could determine that? . -
Mr. LENT. TI the gentleman will ‘iing that dioxin. assus,mg that A Mr. That is correct. I
yield further, the 42 pounds of dioxin goes through what they are doing, think it is important to say that it
was mixed in with over 100,000 kilo- would not. be sabject tO’ RCR.& may ‘very ‘well ‘be some ‘would say
grams of waste from the production of 1.fli ’ waY.. . - - ‘Does that mean we are .notified
2,4,5 TCP is that not corr.ect2 Mt. FLO IO. If ‘the gentleman where - it went to; bnt if somebody
Mr. FLORIO. The waste oil per se is Wotild yield, the gentl m n IS pointing wanted to dump It in the street you
not hazardous. What we are t i inj out a very important thing. As of this woiñd not know aborrtitT
about. arid mother pa.-t of the ‘bill moment while we stand here dioxin is The a.nswer is, unfortunately. this
deals with that particular problem, we I not a h 7 rdoUs waste according tO provision from 100 ograms per
are taTkiug about hazardous wastes— I EP A. The regulatory -process hOS month down does not require appro-
and no one disputes the fact that I zone forward. I think that violates pilate dJs osai. All Yt requires is that
din,cin is a hazardous waste—not being (comri n sense and medical and scren- we ñ5w where t is going.
-nired to be reported were in fact I tific knowledge.. - ? L7 mat is neeessa.-y
ed m’ this zrastc oil and spread That mares all the more important because is you mentioned in my State
bss the rcads. the fact that ,.‘e have these natifica the d:cxin pr aiem, the dioxin occu.
r. WYDEN.Mr. ChaL -man, will the tiori provisions, not iust for dioxin bUt not caly .n Times Beach, thatis wnere
gentleman yield? . for all the other materials that are it got a lot of notoriety, but it is
Mr. FL,ORIO. I yield to the gentle- .defmitton hazm’dnus end aerrimental spread all over varions and sun± y
man from_Oregon. - to the en’vironment and tO public parts of Missouri, that dioxin..
( r. W i uEN asked arid was given health. That is what the amendment
permission to rense-and extend his re- would do. would notify us. For that reason I ‘think we should
marks.) Mr. SEELBY. Mr. Chairman, would have your amendment because we
Mr. WYD N. Mr. Chairman. I rise the gentleman yield further? - need to know. That has been one of
in support of the emendnient offered Mr. FLORIO. I yield to the gentle- tl big problems In the Sto.te of Mis-
by the gent2eman from New Jersey. man. - , souri because we cannot find out
This amendment simply calls far Mr. Would th where all of it went to. It has been like
sirmil generators of ha.zardoiis waste tu regulation on dioxin go ahead anti pre- looking for a needle in the haystack to
notify the waste disposer that they aie .empt this? In other words, would any find out where the dioxin went. So I
In fact disposing .of hazardous waste, sniall generator notice requirement svould support the gentleman’s amend-
albeit a small quantity. ‘ not apply tç dioaln 1 con rn,nated merit.
Small quantities do riot lessen the Mr. FWRIQ. I thank the gentleman
potP’ !i hazard to the public and in lvfr. FLO i&). In fact that re .uw for his coxnnier1 . .Andiagain, I would
particular to the waste disposcra. If tion ever goes into effect aust ainclude by saying that this is an
the waste disposer knows that It is case with regard to dioxin. .s the extremely modest amendment, that is
hazardous waste beIng disposed of, gentleman knows there is a very long the mimnium amount of awareness
then he or she can take the necessary J.ist of equally and in some respects that we should have with regard to
precautions. Absent any simple notlfl- more hazardous contaminants that where these materials are going.
cation requirement, the horror stories not covered by regulation that we M.’r. VOLKMER. I would like to
of explosions, £u es, acid spills, and would have some ability to know point.out that in my own State of Mis-
water contamination in ordinary sam- where It Is that they are going t . sow-i. the State of Missouri right now,
tary landiulis will continue. Mr. SHELBY. If the gentleman wriJ for this purpose, for notification, is
This amendment does not impose yield further, I believe it is going into zero. In other ords. In our State we
recordkeepirig or reporting require- effect at EPA. we have some real lead- say if you do any, you have to notIfy
merits on small generators. It simply ership in EPA now. ‘- ‘ ‘ -
requires that offsu.e shipments of haz- Mr. FLORIO. Well. I am sure you
ardous v.a.ste be accompanied by the do. Arid that is why I am inclined to
EPA uniform hazardous waste mani- support the gentleman’s amendment if
ct form. we can have this additional provision
he information required of the in it.
dl generator only requires the gen- (On request of Mr. VoucslIR and by
_Lor ’s name and address, a descrip- ananimous consent. Mr. Fs.oruo was
were ritily
woxin at
eXiSts in
wastes
2.4.5 T .
OO OIT
rime of the
Ne Jersey (Mr.
— expired.
•‘ Mr. LmT and by
aseflt. Mr. FL0RI0 Was
;roceed for 3 additional
tion of the waste, the number arid
type of containers arid the quantity of
the waste being transported. There is
certainly nothing onerous in that.
The amendment proposes what most
of us must certainly consider an ernm-
ently reasonable expectation—that
those generating waste Inform those
who are disposing of It what it is they
are handling.
I urge adoption of the gentleman
from New Jerseys amendment.
Mr. SEELBY. Mn Chairman, will
the gentleman yield? -
Mr. .FWRIU. I am happy to yield.
Mr. S T Y. I know the distin-
guished chairman of the subcommit-
tee is familiar with the EPA proposed
rule that was first nuticed in the April
4 Federal ‘Register that would list
dioxin-contaminated waste as an
acutely h rdous waste, and it would
be strictly regulated In quantities
greater than 1 kilogram per month.
Mr. FLORIO. Let me close by saying
I would like to emphasize that point.
Some would say this is a radical new
thing. There are 20 States in the
Union that already ‘have regulatioes -
far in excess in terms of ‘restrictions.
more than EPA does. -
-------
‘a
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE 814205
count on one piece of legislation to ac-
count for another’s deficiencies. If we
do not act to strengthen RCRA now,
we wifi only pay—many times over—
through Superfund cleanup in the
future.
This year’s House-passed bill reau-
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED thorizing RCRA worked to close many
BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS of the loopholes to which I have re-
By Mr. DODD: ferred. But at least two major weak-
nesses remain. My bill addresses them.
• S. 3087. A bill to amend the Solid The first is that EPA regulations do
Waste Disposal Act to insure protec- not cover many hazardous wastes:
tion of public health and environmen- EPA has either not listed them as has- I
tal safety in the Environmental ardous or they do not exhibit any of
tection Agency’s regulations for the the established l azardous waste char-
________ delisting of hazardous wastes, and to
INTRODUCTION require the Environmental Protection acteristics. The second is that due to a
JOINT RESOLUTIONS Agencyto establish a timetable for dc- regulatory lapse, wastes that still con-
termining whether additional wastes tam hazardous constituents in signifi.
The following bills and joint resolu- are hazardous wastes which should be cant concentrations can become
tions were introduced, read the first subject to the requirements of eh exempt from RCR.A regulations
and second time by unanimous con- act; to the Committee on Environment through a so-called dellsting proce-
sent, and referred as indicated: and Public Works. dW .
Mr. President. it is my hope that by
ItAZAIIDOUS WASTE mD 1’iF1CATION
8. 3081. A bill to amend the Solid Wate 1 z ROV T “( closing these loopholes we can make
By Mr. DODD:
Disposal Act to Insure protection of pubIl. • Mr. DODD Mr. President, ted i RCRA live up to its legislated purpose:
health and em’ironmefltal safety In the En
vlroruneiltal Protection Agency’s regula- am introducing the Hazardous waste “To promote the protectiOn of health
lions for the delisting of hazardous vastes, Identification and Improvement Act, and the environment by.. • regulat-
and to require the Environmental Protec- to amend the Resource Conservation ing the treatment, storage, transporta-
tion Agency to establish a timetable for do- nd Recovery Act (RCRA) in an effort tion aitd disposal of hazardous
tenrnnlng whether additional wastes are to correct serious deficiencies In that wastes. • •“
hazardouS wastes which .should be subject act’s ability to readily Identify hazard- Under RCRA, it Is EPA’s responsibti-
to the requirements of such act; to the Corn- ous substances and prevent their 1t3’ to identify, characterize, test and
mittee on Environment and Public Works.
By Mr. CHAFEE (for himself and lutton of the environment, ultimately list all wastes that pose a
Pn. I.): Hazardous waste Is a byproduct threat to public health or the environ-
s. 3088. A bill to create competitive condi- many industrial processes. Today, over ment. So far, the EPA has developed
Lions in natural ,gas pricing by prohibiting ‘150,000 facilIties produce hazardous four maJor tests for characterizing a
certain nticoinpet1tiVe clauses in natural waste In some fo ., waste as hazardous, and has produced
-as contracts: to the Committee on Energy , ,ln 1act eatW ’day American industry a catalogue of several waste types.
I Natural Resources. produces enough .waste to Jill the New This Is a good beginning. But the
___________ Orlean’s Superdome—f or to cell. Agency has not gone far enough.
SUBMISSION OF CONCURRENT ing—five times over: at 90 percent Many demonstrably dangerous wastes
AND SENATE RESOLUTIONS of this waste Is hazardous. Prom Love remain unlisted or unidentified and
The following concurrent resolutions Canal to the Valley of the Di-un , iris- consequentiy unaddressed by RCRA
and Senate resolutions were read, and tory has shown us that the safe dis- regulations, and the characteristics, or
referred (or acted upon), as indlcat.e& posal of hazardous waste Is a problem tests, developed to Identify wastes as
we cannot affford to Ignore. hazardous entirely ignore many of our
S Res. 504. An original resolution waiving In fact we have not ignored it. most dangerous Industrial products,
By Mr. THURMOND:
IcdUOn 402(a) of the Congressional Bud t 1976, Congress passed the RCRA with The result Is that many wastes con- I
Act of 1974 with respect to the considers- the intention of providing “cradle to taining, for example, significant levels
lion of S. 2863. from the Committee on the grave” guidelines for the treatment of dioxins, chlorinated organics, or
Judiciary: to the Committee on the Budget. and storage of hazardous wastes. But pesticides, are not even considered
S Res 505. An original resolution waiving not. 6 years later, the act’s original in- hazardous under EPA’s regulations.
SeCtion 402( 5) of the Congressional Budget tentions are still not fulfilled by its ThJS lack of adequate coverage has
Act of 1974 with respect to the considers- regulations. Although RCRA’ S baslc endangered both public health and
lion of H IL 5858. from the Committee OS regulatory framework Is in place, some the environment. ThIs year it was dis .
the Judiciary to the Committee on the
Budget . key final regulations remain unpro- covered that it was possible—and even
By Mr. BA (for himself and Mr. mu lgated. Others contain loopholes legal—for dioxin-laced waste-oil to be
Roaexr C. Bynal that allow dangerous waste to go u - used for dust control in Missouri.
S. Res. 506. A resolution authorizing the checked. - a cancer-linked chemical re-
printing of a compilation of materials enti- As pointed out in the House Ener Y nowned as a component of agent
lied “Oulde to Research Collections of and Commerce Committee report Ofl orange, has since been discovered in at
Former United States Senators. 1789-1982” RCRA, as much hazardous waste on- least 15 and as many as 50 addItional
as a Senate Document; considered and
egreed to. capes proper control today through sites In that State. It has also ap-
BY Mr. CRANSTON (for himself. Mr. regulatory loopholes as receives peared in fish in the Hudson River
Baocvs, Mr. Csiri oii. Mr. Ciwu, proper attention under RCR.A. That and In Lake Ontario. Cleanup costs
Mr. CircLEs, Mr. DEC0NCnn, Mr. amounts to the staggering total of may approach $30 million, according
DODD. Mr. Hcnri.. Mr. Isiouvi. Mr. almost 40 mIllion metric tons of wastes to one source.
Knnimy, Mr. Lsvziq. Mr. Marsuic- which escapes every year—the result I respect EPA’s need to move with
Las. Mr. MzTzEwsAux. Mr. MiTclm.L, of deficiencies RCRA. scientific caution In determining
k ! MoTwi}(Mi, Mr. R,JrnOLni, Mr. Yet If RCRA Is not adequately con- whIch wastes are hazardous. But cau-
Rracz.z. Mr. Siuiwim and Mr.
Ssssc ar trolling wastes, then we are only crest- tion should not mean paralysis: EPA
S Con. Rca 132 Concurrent resoluUon ing new hazardous waste sites which has not listed any new wastes since
CS pressing the sense of the Congress that will ultimately require future cleanup. July of 1980, and has missed Its own
‘he United States should maintain effective Congress did pass the Superfund, published deadlines for completing dc- ,
tO(TPJY 3 10 assist In pro idInR disabled per- which can finance the cleanup of has- terminations for listing some hazard-
Pfls with opportunities for full. productive ardous waste sites. But we cannot ous wastes. I ask unanimous consent
,jece,nber8, 1982
Florida Tele. Corp. ( plOYee3 Uniting for
Better Govt Florida).
(The above nominations were report-
I from the Committee Ofl Foreign Re-
ions with the recommendation that
p be confirmed, subject to the
iinees’ commitment to respond to
, uests to appear and testify before
any duly constituted committee of the
Senate.) -
BY Mr. DOLE, from the Committee on Fi-
nance:
Manuel B. Johnson, Jr., of Virginia. to be
an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, to
shich he was appointed during the last
recess of the Senate.
lives and to protect such persons from
unfair discrimination In Federal and Feder-
jated programs and activities and that
disabled persons should receive fair treat-
ment in the idminlstratlofl of disability
benefits: to the Committee on Labor and
Human Resources.
-------
S 14206
that appen Ix I of House Report No.
97-570 be printed In the REcoRD at this
point to make clear the full record of
the missed deadlines. -
There being no objection, the appen•
dix was ordered to be printed In the
RECORD, as follows:
N B(D1X I
-
l_oail
OVUC w dTu.
, ievvs b
—
ai
Odmiid
.m rd d . ., .J .-d
156* 1 ) ia5
--
s rt d
-
.
15 aitmma!t ces
P açaiuI d
lg ai1 iiaiul
S
w ’rdiSt
a1) dW Sai vc —
— j’ mvaiI
w
e 111
— M
wCr flIII d
d I M i 5
c rr itsfaird•
# — 1)TwI$
— rm
-- f —
lOt
-
aa u ... Plsa c i Itkd5 .
w ’w
•j I S1lU 51 iai 5 au YIaI
— 6* di I t
v a 1)wg_ L ’i b aud
I r 1,aI
‘
%iu rd p q qi 56n
g * (56* flY d
kSi i a u aid
d
r
k*it, pt Sr*t Side
.56* u iy
. =J taiI = 1t
• 101
1Ot
.
-
es (Td JuIg
‘,e*
sa
ai d sidd
,
.
5IKI)V 5 5
1) ir d
1)
ps (I st ai Sit Si
— i U
his Ill. 51 I hi S aid uiq U u
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, the bill I
am introducing requires EPA to devel-
op Plan for Its Overall work on
the Identification and listing of wastes.
II requires EPA to Include tour deter-
mlnatIQn3 In this plan. Including:
flrst, any decisions or plans for list-
ing those wastes not as yet listed by
the agency as hazardous
Second, any plans by EPA for ex-
pandmg or revising existing character.
bUm, or tests, used to detemine If I
waste Is hawdous:
Third. a final detennination on the
bating of dioxin and the organic and
Inorganic waste streams listed In the
Ippendix listed above. and
Fourth, a determination by SPA as
to ‘hat corK traUOn levels of known
hawdou.s constftuents-,..to be chosen
by the ageflcy—woul render a waste
haru&pr . reports on this
pIa will to the submission of
the EPA be et every year In order to
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
Insure adequate budgetary considera-
tion for the relevant EPA programs,
It Is my hope that requiring EPA to
draft a 2-year plan will aid the agency
Is setting priorities and allocating re-
sources for Its programs on the Identi-
fication and lI fng of hazardous
wastes. It Is also my hope that EPA
wifi include In Its report to Congress an
indication of reasonable timetables for
much of the work which remains to be
done In this area.
It Is essential that known or suspect-
ed hazardous wastes be brought under
the scope of RCRA as quickly as possi-
ble. With 57 mIllion metric tons of
hazardous waste produced by industry
each year, we need to make the best
use of EPA resources to determine
which wastes are hazardous and to
bring them under regulation.
The second section of my bill ad-
dresses those wastes which are cur-
rently regulated by RCRA but which
can elude the RCRA regulatory
system. It now Is possible for a facility
to exempt this waste from regulations
through .a process known as delisting.
In many Instances, hazardous wastes
are slipping through this delisting
process and escaping regulations,
As I mentioned earlier, SPA lists
wastes as hazardous. Generally, the
listing process is a general screening to
deteremine that a kind of waste typi-
cally can cause harm to human health
and the environment If mismanaged.
The delisting process allbws petition-
era, and/or Individual hazardous waste
generators, the opportunity of show-
ing that their wastes are slgniflcantiy
different—because of treatment, or be-
cause they are generated In a different
process—from listed wastes of the
same type. Consequently, they should
be exciuded—delisted—from the haz-
ardous waste lists. Under the agency’s
regulations, EPA will delist those
wastes which do not, or no longer,
meet the criteria for which the waste
__ was listed.
What the regulations do not address
Is the tact that wastes are trequentiS’
composed of numerous hazardous con-
stituents. In some instances, these ad-
dltional constituents may not have
been taken Into consideration when
the waste was originally listed. Or In,
some treatment -process, these addi-
tional wastes may not have been suffi-
clently rendered nonhawdous. or
these wastes contain dangerous ele-
ments which have still not been listed
by EPA as hazardous. In either case.
EPA’s regulations do not allow the
agency to reject a dellstlng petition If
the petitioner’s waste contains hazard-
ous constituents In addition to those
for which It was originally listed. This
Is not merely a potenUal danger. It.
historically has resulted In wastes
which are still hazardous being
exempted from hs ’*rdous waste lists,
and consequently, from RCRA regula-
tons.
The consequences of this loophole
are frightening.
December 8, 198
In my own home State of Connecti-
cut, for example, a temporary deflating
was granted to a facility for a sludge
pile resulting from a treatment proc.
ess at a facility. Although the tempo-
rary delisting was ultimately revoked
on technical grounds, it since has been
discovered that the, sludge contained
PCB’s and organics. Neither was the
reason why the sludge pile was origi-
nally listed. If the pile bad been given
a final dellstlng, these hazardouzwastea
possibly could have ended up In a Con-
necticut sanitary landfilL —
In certain atalzilesa steel operations,
the resulting waste Is listed as hazard-
ous - for containing the heavy metals
chromium and lead. But this waste
also contains nickel—a heavy metal—
which would go untreated If this waste
were dellsted.
Some petroleum Industry treatment
processes produce an oil-sludge mix
which Is listed as hazardous for con.
taming heavy metals. Yet the process
also contains certain organic com-
pounds. Organlcs as yet are not covered
by RCRA regulations. Even If they
were, they are not the factor which
caused the waste to be listed as haz-
ardous. Consequently, they are not
covered by RCRA regulations, and, if
delisted, could be released untreated
Into the environment at large.
I do not cite these examples to point
an accusatory finger at the Industries
concerned,, They are living up to the
letter of existing regulations. But the
regulations contain a dangerous loop-,
hole which must be closed.
Under the legislation I am Introduc-
ing, we would no longer take the risk
that delisting a waste means releasing
additional hazardous wastes from reg-
ulation, Instead, EPA will have the au-
thority to consider additional constitu-
ents or other relevant factors when
evaluating a delisting petition. It the
agency has reason to believe that
there are additional hazardous con.
stltuent.s present in the waste In p0-
tentlally significant concentrations.
they can ask The petitioner to demon-
strate that is not the case. After suffi-
cient comment period for the petition-
er EPA has the right to grant or deny
a dellating petition based not only on
the original constitutent for which the
waste was listed, but also on any addi-
tional hazardous constituents.
I believe this approach will better
protect public health and environ-
ment. It may also simplify matters for
the Industries concerned. If a delisted
waste proves to remain hazardous, the
responsible Industry could still be
liable under common law for any
damage to health and the environ-
ment. Zn fact, for just that reason,
many industries will not even use the
dellstlng procedure. In some States, In-
dustries prefer to use the State delist-
big procedure, as ft. is frequent.ly
stricter than EPA’s.
No matter what approach we take to
the safe handling of hazardous wastes,
there are costs Involved. There Is cost
-------
,Deeember 1952
or industry, forgovernn,ent, for hid ]-
vidual citizens. Our only choice is
when to Incur those costs, and how to
int’est money to insure protection of
both health and the enilronment ,
I believe the time for that Invest.
t Is now, not later. It will be far
re cost effective to work to insure
at our existing regulations are
sound than to postpone their solu-
Lion—and charge its costs to some
future account. If we do not act now to
close the loopholes in RCRA, we are
only creating future superfund sites.
The choice is our. fly investing now
In a more credible delistlng procedure
and in a plan to identify and list haz-
ardous wastes, I believe we are maldng
a sound investment for the years
ahead.
Mr. President, hazardous waste is
the Inevitable by-product of an Indus-
tralized society. Protection from Its
dangers are the concomitant responsi-
bility of a civilized society. 1 believe
our society is both. This bill is an at-
tempt to help us better play that dual
role.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the bill be printed In the
RECORD.
There being no objection, the bill
was ordered to be printed In the
Rzcoan, as follows:
S. 3087
Be U enacted by the Senate end Rouse of
prnlativu of (lie United States of
america in Congress assembled, That (a)
t!tis Act may be cited as the Ilazardous
Waste Identification Improvement Act”.
fbI Section 3001 (b) of the Solid Waste
‘‘posal Act (42 U.S.C. 6921) Is amended by
Ing at the end thereof the following new
‘graphs:
(4) The regulations promulgated under
paragraph (1) shall provide that, when evil.
uating a petition to exclude a waste generat-
ed at a particular facility from being listed
as a hazardous waste, the Admm - trator
shall consider criteria Other than thoab for
which the waste was listed if the Adminis-
trator has a reasonable basis to believe that
auth eddlUona) criteria could cause such
waste to be listed as a hazardous waste.
The Administrator shall grant or deny such
p ,UUon only alter the petitioner and all in-
1cr ted parties have been given notice and
CVpor unlty for public hearing with rasped
So auth IddlUona l criteria end to demon.
iate whether such waste meela such crtte.
“SIP Pot the purpose of ensuring the
Izw ’iy reslsion of the charac g for
riiuj ng hazardous waste as requlr
Wider lubsecuon (a), and the list1 g of par-
tk’ulay hazardous wastes as required under
Paragraph (1) of this subsccuon , the Adznln.
btrit y shall deielop, and submit to the
Congress nol later than July 1, 1983, a two.
)ear plan for (A) reusing or adding new
cMr ct,r1gt for Identifying hazardous
Sesi (Si the iliting of those hazardous
Cut,. %hlch are not so listed on the date of
the enactment of this paregTapb with a de.
I ’?m rtaUoC with respect to the listIng of
dloiI me the orgs je end Inorgapic wastg
wntme In ApDendIz I of souse
Doi’ fl- S l it 0 be made pslor to March 1,
l W. ) end tC an eniuation of posilbie do-
as So the Icu 1i of Certain bar.
i Jtu,n which may cause wastes
‘be hazardous pe es. The Administiatni’
‘ ss n peogr reports on such pro
gram on January 1, 1984. and January 1,
1985. In conjuncUor i with the submittal of
the proposed budget for the Environmental
Protection Agency, to the Committee on En.
wironmeni and Public Works of the Senate
and the Committee on Energy and Corn.
eserce of the House of Representatives .”,
(a) The amendment made by subsection
(b) shall become effective on the date of the
enactment of this Act, and regulations re-
Quired to be promulgated by reason of such
amendment shall be promulgated within
180 days after such date of enactment..
By Mr. CRAPEE (for himself
and Mr. Pzu)
8. 3088. A bill to create competitive
conditions in natural gus pricing by
prohibiting certain anticompetitive
clauses In natural gas contracts; to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Re-
sources.
PATURAL CAS Plt1cX2(O
• Mr. CHAFEE, Mr. President, I am
pleased today to join my distinguished
colleague, the senior Senator from
Rhode Island. In Introducing a bill
that would create competitive condi-
tions in natural gas pricing by prohib-
iting certain anticompeutive clauses In
natural gas contracts,
As we approach the coming winter.
we face an extraordinary, perhaps un-
precedented. situation. Simultaneous-
l.y. we are experiencing a surplus of
natural gas, a surplus so large that
excess supplies are being flared, at the
same time, the prices that gas tonsuni-
era must pay are rising, particularly in
the Northeast and the Midwest, at
dramatic rates. Clearly market forces
In natural gas are not functioning.
This situation forces us to confront
the cause of such a drastic malfunc.
tion.
To find the cause, we look Immedi-
ately to the 1978 Natural Gas Policy
Act. I voted for this act because I be-
ileved that phased decontrol of natu-
ral gas would iead to greater supplies,
and ultimately to an end of Govern-
ment control of this market. While It
stimulated new supplies, the act con-
lamed requirements which have again
caused a distortion of the gas market.
The first, step in the history of Fed-
eral Government regulation of gas was
In the 1938 Natural Gas Act. It and
successive legislation and court Inter-
pretations created a growing disincen-
tive to production. Supplies began to
grow short, Indications of supply
shortfalls began to appear In 1968
when, for the first time in 50 years,
more natural gas was consumed In 1
year than was added to Inventory. By
the end of 1973, the deficit between
new inventories and consumption had
grown to 16.1 trIllion cubic feet. The
handwriting was clearly on the walL
But Congress continued to Ignore the
warnings until in the harsh tinter of
1976 and 1977 extreme shortages oc-
curred, forcing the closing throughout,
the Northeast and Midwest of lao-
tories and businesses and resulting In
the temporary loss of millions of jobs,
Finally, Congress responded to the
c Isli In the 1978 act. That act, of
- - S 14207
course, provided phased decontrol of
new gas. ncenUves were created
which resulted In large new supplies,
particularly of so-called deep gas. At
the same time, however, the act, by
setting ceflings n the prices of certain
categories 01 new gas and by providing
tha’t Increased prices may be passed
through the distribution stream to ul-
timate consumers, forced a situation in
which prices to consumers have risen
sharply In the face of oversu ply, In
part, this effect Is achieved through
what are called take-or-pay clauses in
the pipelines’ cpntracts with produc-
ers, and in contract provisions which
mandate automatic increases In price.
So-called take-or-pay clauses require
natural gas pipeline companies to pay
for a large percentage of the gas they
have under contract, whether they are
able to sell that gas at the mandated
price or not.
Price escalator clauses in many con-
tracts provide that, upon decontrol in
1985, the price of natural gas n be
linked to the price of Imported fuel oil
In given markets, and that under so-
called area pricing escalator clauses,
prices of cheaper gas can be raised to
match higher priced gas emanating
from wells in related producing areas.
Mr. President, in my view the cor-
rect response to this problem is not to
attempt now to halt the gradual de-
control of gas. This one element of
certainty should be maintained be-
cause under decontrol, even limited In
nature, there has been a rush of
supply. We do not wish to take steps
now that would create such uncertain-
ties amongst producers that would
cause them to cease exploration and
potentially again result in severe
supply shortages. It is my strong belie,!
that now that we have set out on the
course of decontrol, we should permit
the decontrol process to unroll.
Rather, Mr. President, I believe that
we should now, as an Immediate step.
look to the contracts between the
pipeline companies and the producers.
These contracts, which require that
pipelines buy gas at high prices while
ignoring lower priced gas which is sub-
sequently wasted or stored, have
forced serious hardship. I belleve that
we should pass emergency legislation
that would permit pipeline companies
to abrogate their take-or-pay and esca-
lator clauses In their contracts with
the producers. This does not mean
that the pipelines will simply walk
away from the suppliers. It does mean
that we would be giving the pipelines
the power to renegotiate their con-
tracts with the producers In much
more realistic price terms,
- This legislation Is of an emergency
nature. What. Is really required Is a
review of the Natural Gas Policy Act
of 1978 which I hope we will begin
early next year. Therefore, the bill
that the senior Senator from Rhode
Island and I are Introducing today pro-
vides that pipeline companies may ab-
rogate take-or-pay and automatic price
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
• (4i7..’ V i4 l iA1 )
CLAIUFICATION OF HOUSEHOLD WASTE EXCLUSION
SEC. 223. (a) Section 3001 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by adding the following new subsection at the end thereof:
“ii? Ci aincArioN OF HoI.sEH0LD WASTE ExcLusIoN.—A resource
recovery facility recovering energy from the mass burning of munic-
ipal solid waste shall not be deemed to be treating, storing, disposing
of. or otherwise managing hazardous wastes for the purposes of
regulation under this subtitle, if—
“(1) such facility—
“(A) receives and burns only—
Ii) household waste (from single and multiple dwell-
ings, hotels, motels, and other residential sources), and
“ (ii) solid waste from commercial or industrial
sources that does not contain hazardous waste identi-
fied or listed under this section, and
“(B) does not accept hazardous wastes identified or listed
under this section, and
“(2) the owner or operator of such,., facility has established
contractual requirements or other ippropriate notification or
inspection procedures to assure that hazardous wastes are not
received at or burned in such facility.”.
12.Pl - IO
SECTION 223—CLARIFICATION OF HOUSEHOLD WASTE EXCLUSION
House bill.—No provision.
Senate amendment.—The Senate amendment clarifies that an
energy recovery facility is exempt from hazardous waste require-
ments if it burns only residential and non-hazardous commercial
wastes and establishes procedures to assure hazardous wastes will
not be burned at the facility
Conference substitute.—The Conference substitute is the same as
the Senate amendment.
-------
- -i r-jrn S?
CLARIFICATION OF HOUSEHOLDl STE EXCLUSION
The reported bill adds a subsection (d) to section 3001 to clarify
the coverage of the household waste exclusion with respect to re-
source recovery facilities recovering energy through the mass burn-
ing of municipal solid waste. This exclusion was promulgated by
the Agency in its hazardous waste management regulations estab-
lished to exclude waste streams generated by consumers at the
household level and by sources whose wastes are sufficiently simi-
lar in both quantity and quality to those of households.
Resource recovery facilities often take in such “household
wastes” mixed with other, non-hazardous waste streams from a va-
riety of sources other than “households,” including small commer-
cial and industrial sources, schools, hotels, municipal buildings,
churches, etc. it is important to encourage commercially viable re-
source recovery facilities and to remove impediments that may
hinder their development and operation. New section 3001(d) clari-
fies the original intent to include within the household waste ex-
clusion activities of a resource recovery facility which recovers
energy from the mass burning of household waste and non-hazard-
ous waste from other sources.
All waste management activities of such a facility, including the
generation, transportation, treatment,’ storage and disposal of
waste shall be covered by the exclusion, if the limitations in para-
graphs (1) and (2) of subsection (d) are met. First, such facilities
must receive and burn only household waste and solid waste from
other sources which does not contain hazardous waste identified or
listed under section 3001.
Second, such facilities cannot accept hazardous wastes identified
or listed under section 3001 from commercial or industrial sources,
and must establish contractual requirements or other notification
or inspection procedures to assure that such wastes are not re-
ceived or burned. This provision requires precautionary measures
or procedures which can be shown to be effective safeguards
against the unintended acceptance of hazardous waste. If such
measures are in place, a resource recovery facility whose activities
would normally be covered by the household waste exclusion
should not be penalized for the occasional, inadvertent receipt and
burning of hazardous material from such commercial or industrial
sources. Facilities must monitor the waste they receive and, if nec-
essary, revise the precautionary measures they establish to assure
against the receipt of such hazardous waste.
2 3
-------
‘ S
CLARIFICATiON OF HOUSEHOLD WASTE EXCLUSION 7’
SEC. 23. (a) Section 3001 of the Solid Waste Dispo8-
al Act is amended by adding the following new subsection:
“(d) CLARIFIcATION OF HOUSEHOLD WASTE Ex-
CLWSJON.—A resource recovery facility recovering energy
from the mass burning of municipal solid waste shall not be
deemed to be treating, storing, disposing of, or otherwise
managing hazardous wastes for the purposes of regulation
under this subtitle, if such facility—
“(1) receives and burns only (A) household waste
(from single and multiple dwellings, hotels, motels, and
other residential sources) and (B) solid waste from
commercial or industrial sources that does not contain
hazardous waste identified or listed under this section,
and
“(2) such facility does not accept hazardous
wastes identified or listed under this section and the
owner or operator of such facility has established con-
tra dual requirements or other appropriate notification
or inspection procedures to assure that hazardous
wastes are not received at or burned in such facility. “.
c 3
-------
z - . (rlcy iL7 qi--z..v’/J 45 b v-i
13 CLARIFICATION OF HOUSEHOLD WASTE EXCLUSION
14 SEC. 22. (a) Section 3001 of the Solid Waste Disposal
15 Act is amended by adding the following new subsection:
16 “(d) CLARiFICATIoN OF HOUSEHOLD WASTE Ex-
17 CLUSION.—A resource recovery facility recovering energy
18 from the mass burning of municipal solid waste shall not be
19 deemed to be treating, storing, disposing of, or otherwise
20 managing hazardous wastes for the purposes of regulation
21 under this subtitle, if such facility—
22 “(1) receives and burns only (A) household waste
23 (from single and multiple dwellings, hotels, motels, and
24 other residential sources) and (B) solid waste from
25 commercial or industrial sources that does not contain
85
1 hazardous waste identified or listed under this section,
2 and
3 “(2) such facility does not accept hazardous
4 wastes identified or listed under this section and the
5 owner or operator of such facility has established con-
6 tractual requirements or other appropriate notification
7 or inspection procedures to assure that hazardous
8 wastes are not received at or burned in such facility. ‘
-------
WASTE MINIMIZATIO14
Sic. 224. (a) Section 3002 of the Solid Waste Dispoeal Act is
amended by— . . Z b
(1) inserting “(a) IN O EIuu..—” after “3002.”;
(2) adding the following new subsection at the end thereof:
“(b) WAsTE M INIMIzA ’noN.—Effective September 1, 1985, the
manifest required by subsection (aX5) shall contain a certification by
the generator that—
“(1) the generator of the hazardous waste has a program in
place to reduce the volume or quantity and toxicity of such
waste to the degree determined by the generator to be economi-
cally practicable; and
“(2) the proposed method of treatment, storage, or disposal is
that practicable method currently available to the generator
which minimizes the present and future threat to human health
and the environment.”; and
(2) amending subsection (aX6) to read as follows:
“(6) submission of reports to the Administrator (or the State
agency in any case in which such agency carries out a permit
program pursuant to this subtitle) at least once every two years,
setting out—
“(A) the quantities and nature of hazardous waste identi-
fled or listed under this subtitle that he has generated
during the year;
“(B) the disposition of all hazardous waste reported under
subparagraph (A);
“(C) the efforts undertaken during the year to reduce the
volume and toxicity of waste generated; and
“(Dl the changes in volume and toxicity of waste actually
achieved during the year in question in comparison with
previous years. to the extent such information is available
for years prior to enactment of the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984.”.
ib) Section 3005 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by
adding the follo ing nev subsection after subsection g:
“(hi V. sTE M1N1 t1zATto —Effective September 1. 1985. it shall
be a condition of any permit issued under this section for the
treatment. storage. or disposaL of hazardous waste on the premises
where such waste was generated that the permittee certify, no less
often than annually, that—
“U) the generator of the hazardous waste has a program in
place to reduce the . olume or quantity and toxicity of such
waste to the degree determined by the generator to be economi-
cally practicable; and
“(2) the proposed method of treatment, storage, or disposal is
that practicable method currently available to the generator
which minimizes the present and future threat to human health
and the environment.’.
(c) Section 8002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by
adding the following new subsection after subsection (g):
“(r) MINIMIzATION OF HAzARDoUS W*srx.—The Administrator
shall compile, and not later than October 1. 1986, submit to the
Congress. a report on the feasibility and desirability of establishing
standards of performance or of taking other additional actions
under this Act to require the generators of hazardous waste to
reduce the volume or quantity and toxicity of the hazardous waste
they generate, and of establishing with respect to hazardous wastes
required management practices or other requirements to assure
such wastes are managed in ways that minimize present and future
risks to human health and the environment. Such report shall
H. R. 2867—34
include any recommendations for legislative changes which the
Administrator determines are feasible and desirable to implement
the national policy established by section 1003.”.
-------
H1 z ’ (oh’? IIPT p jOrb
SECTION 224—WASTE MINIMIZATION
House bill.—No provision.
Senate amendment.—The Senate amendment provides that, effec-
tive September 1, 1984 {sic}, manifests must contain a generator
certification that his waste volume has been reduced to the maxi-
mum degree economically practical, and the proposed method of
treatment, storage, or disposal is the one currently available to the
generator which minimizes the threat to health and the environ-
ment. Biennial reports of generators must indicate efforts to reduce
waste volume and toxicity, and report the reductions achieved. Fur-
thermore, beginning September 1, 1984 {sic}, it shall be a condition
of on-site RCRA permits that the generator annually certify: (1)
that he has program in place to reduce waste generated to the
extent economically practicable, and (2) that the proposed method
of treatment, storage, or disposal is the one currently available to
him that minimizes the threat to health and the environment.
EPA shall submit a report to Congress by October 1, 1986, on the
feasibility and desirability of requiring generators to reduce the
volume and toxicity of their wastes, and of establishing Federally
required management standards.
Conference substitute.—The Conference substitute adopts the
Senate provision, except the September 1, 1984 date is changed to
September 1, 1985.
-------
65
WASTE MINIMIZATION
A statement of national policy is added to section 1003 of the
Act, and a requirement that hazardous waste generators certify
that they have programs to reduce the amount and toxicity of their
waste and that they are using methods to minimize the threat of
their wastes to human health and the environment is added to sec-
tions 3002 and 3005 of the Act.
The national policy statement emphasizes two concepts. First,
Congress declares that, wherever feasible, the generation of hazard-
Gus waste is to be reduced or eliminated as expeditiously as possi-
ble. Second, waste that is nevertheless generated should be treated,
stored or disposed of so as to minimize the present and future
threat to human health and the environment.
Current laws emphasize the need to properly treat, store, and
dispose of hazardous wastes. While this continues to be a primary
element of the Solid Waste Disposal Act and other pollution con-
trol laws, additional emphasis must be directed toward (1) minimiz-
ing the generation of hazardous wastes and (2) utilizing the best
treatment, storage and disposal techniques for each waste.
According to preliminary estimates from recent studies, 150 mil-
lion metric tons of hazardous waste is generated each year in the
United States, and currently subject to subtitle C regulations. This
is an enormous volume of pollution requiring the continuing devel-
opment of environmentally sound treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities.
Regardless of the care with which such facilities are managed
and the regulatory or legal responsibilities imposed on these facili-,
ties, assuring protection of public health and the environment long’
after the active phase of a facility’s existence has ended is a diffi-
cult task. The need to minimize the volume and toxicity of all haz-
ardous waste is clear and is made an explicit national policy in this
bill. Recycling pollutants contained in effluents, emissions, wastes.
or other pollution streams is one, but by no means the only, way of,
implementing this national policy.
For wastes that are generated, the need to employ technologies’
that minimize present and future threats of harm is reflected in
other provisions of this bill (e.g., those that regulate small quantity
generators, place limitations on land disposal, establish minimum
technological requirements, and regulate the burning and blending 1
of hazardous waste). The statement of national policy broadens and i
— makes explicit the intent of Congress that is implicit in this bill
and in existing law.
In addition to the statement of national policy, the Committee
adopted several provisions regarding waste minimization: (1) A pro-
vision requiring on the manifest required by section 3002 of the Act
a certification by the generator that he has a program in place to
reduce the volume or quantity and toxicity of hazardous waste to
the degree determined by the generator to be economically practi-
cable and that the proposed method of treatment, storage, or dis-
posal is that practicable method currently available to the gener-
ator which minimizes the present and future threat to human
health and the environment; (2) modifications to the reporting re-
quirement of section 3002, and (3) a requirement for similar self-
-------
66
certification regarding waste minimization as a condition for on-
site storage, treatment, or disposal facility permits after September
1, 1984.
These sections are designed to encourage generators to voluntar-
ily reduce the quantity and toxicity of all waste. While these provi-
sions encourage the reduction of hazardous waste generated, they
are directed at the generators of such waste and do not authorize
the Environmental Protection Agency or any other person or orga-’
nization to interfere with or intrude into the production process or
production decisions of individual generators. To assure this, it is I
important to explain in detail the meaning of key elements of the
new provisions.
First, both of the certification requirements refer to a certifica-
tion by a generator that it has a program to minimize waste and as
to its treatment, storage or disposal practices. While the require-
ment to make this certification is mandatory, the nature of the cr1-
teria for the certification and the determination of compliance with
those criteria are to be made solely by the generator.
Second, the provisions include the term “economically practica-
ble.” This is a concept that has been used or alluded to in several
laws. However, in this instance, other than defining the phrase, in
the statute, the determination of “economically practicable” will be
made by the generator and is not subject to subsequent re-evalua-
tion. The generator has the flexibility to determine what is “eco-
nomically practicable” for the generator’s circumstances. Whether
this determination is made for all of its operation or on a site-spe-
cific basis is for the generator to decide.
Third, explanation of the phrase “the proposed method of treat-
ment, storage or disposal is that practicable method currently
available to the generator . . .“ is essential. This language is not
intended to require the retrofitting of existing facilities, nor is it
intended to require the installation or use, either on-site or off-site,
of new technologies as they become available. A generator may, of
course, choose to retrofit or otherwise utilize new technologies. Use
of the term “practicable” in conjunction with the term “currently
available” should result in generators choosing alternative treat-
ment, storage, or disposal methods (beyond those generally re-
quired to comply with subtitle C), when they are economically prac-
ticable. Again, these judgments are to be made solely by the gener-
ator.
Fourth, the two determinations that must be certified can be bal-
anced in differen1 ways by a generator. For example, some gener-
ators may develop programs that first minimize waste that is gen-
erated and then identify and utilize a disposal technology that sat-
isfies the second test. Others may find that the reduction of waste.
volume would result in increased toxicity. They may find that the
present and future threat to human health and the environment is
better addressed in the use of treatment, storage, and disposal
methods than in the employment of certain waste reduction meth-
ods. Moreover, these provisions are ntt intended to discourage the
recycling of materials. A fundamental premise of the Act is and
continues to be to encourage reuse of materials.
There are substantial differences among hazardous waste gener-
ators that must be considered. For example, there are important
-------
67
differences between a manufacturer whose process creates hazard-
ous wastes that are capable of being recycled in the process and a
generator who performs a service using products manufactured
elsewhere, the residue from which is a hazardous waste. Clearly,
the opportunities to minimize waste can be vastly different be-
tween these types of generators. The bill does not require waste
minimization programs where such programs are not practicable,
such as for those generators that are merely utilizing material
where there is no practicable method for recycling the residue.
The difficulties in developing waste minimization programs also
can be greatly exacerbated with regard to small quantity gener-
ators. The waste minimization requirements are not intended to
result in a significant paperwork burden for small quantity gener-
ators. Prior to the promulgation of additional regulations for small
quantity generators required by other provisions of the bill, the
waste minimization requirements do not apply to generators of less
than 1000 kilograms per month. The special manifest requirement
for small quantity generators is imposed by section 3002(b), not by
section 3002(a)(5). In developing regulations under the small quanti-
ty generator regulation and study provisons of this bill, the Admin-
istrator is directed to give special consideration to minimizing any
unduly burdensome aspects of these requirements. The Administra-
tor may conclude that neither the reporting or certification re-
quirements of the waste minimization section should be applied to
small quantity generators, or specific classes or categories of small
quantity generators.
With respect to the certification requirement, this section does
not create civil or criminal consequences. Thus, for example, such
certifications are not to be treated as a “material statement” under
new section 3008(dX3) of the Act. Nor is the content of these certifi-
cations to be cause for challenge regarding the issuance of permits.
In keeping with the concept of these provisions, judgments made by
the generators are not subject to external regulatory action.
In implementing the biennial reporting requirement, the Agency
should not require reports that duplicate the Agency’s existing bi-
ennial reports. In particular, to the extent that the existing report
will provide all or some information required by this subsection,
submission of that report should be deemed sufficient to comply
with some or all reporting requirements of this subsection. Addi-
tionally, it is recognized that the volume and quantity and toxicity
of wastes can vary significantly with respect to the production
levels of the producis associated with the waste and that this can
certainly distort the implications of information presented under
new section 3002(a)(6)(D).
This section of the reported bill includes two provisions intended
to assist Congress, during the next reauthorization of this Act and
of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980, in considering further measures to achieve
the national policy established by this section.
The first provision would add a new subsection 8002(r) to the Act,
requiring the Administrator to submit to Congress by October 1,
1986, a report on the feasibility and desirability of expanding the
subtitle C program to include requirements for generators of haz-
ardous waste to reduce the volume or quantity and toxicity of the 1
-------
68
waste they generate. One such type of requirement which the
Agency should evaluate in this report would be substantive stand-
ards of performance, similar to those under the Clean Air Act,
which would require all generators in a certain category to reduce
the volume or quantity and toxicity of their hazardous waste at
least as much as could be achieved through the application o
measures that are available to generators in that category. The
Agency should also evaluate other methods of requiring generators
to reduce the volume and toxicity of their hazardous waste, includ-
ing possible changes to the requirements established by this sec-
tion’s amendments to section 3002 and 3005 of the Act.
The report to Congress also is to include an assessment of the
feasibility and desirability of standards prescribing particular man-
agement practices that must be followed with respect to particular 1
hazardous wastes. Such required management practices, or similar 1
measures, would be a step beyond the prohibitions on certain meth-
ods of land disposal which will be established under section 3004(b)
of the Act, as added by this bill; instead of just prohibiting certain
management practices because they are not protective of human
health and the environment, establishing preferred or required
management practices might assure that hazardous wastes are
managed only in those ways which the Agency determines are
most protective of human health and the environment.
The report addressing these possible changes in the nature of the’
subtitle C program is to be submitted to Congress by October 1,
1986—one year before the expiration of the authorization for ap-
propriations for the program.
For similar reasons, the second provision accelerates by six
months the deadline for the President’s comprehensive report to
Congress on the initial implementation of the Superfund program
and possible changes to it. That report, required by section 301(a)(1)
of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA), is currently required to be submitted
within four years of the enactment of CERCLA, or by December 11,
1984. The bill would require the report to be filed within forty-two 1
months of the enactment of CERCLA, or by June 11, 1984. This
will assure that Congress has adequate time to review the report in
advance of making decisions on revising or extending the Super-
fund program.
The Superfund report is to include an assessment of the feasibil-
ity and desireability of revising the taxes levied under CERCLA
they are based on the likelihood of a release of a hazardous sub-
stance and the degree of hazard and risk resulting from any suchi
release, so that the taxes create incentives for proper handling, re
cycling, incineration, and neutralization of hazardous wastes an
disincentives to improper or illegal handling or disposal of hazard
ous materials. The Agency should consider the potential fo
“waste-end” taxes to create such incentives and disincertives, as
well as the revenue such taxes would produce, when studying the
feasibility and desirability of revising the Superfund tax schedule.
-------
p
WASTE MINiMIZATION
SEC. 27. (a) Section 1003 of the Solid Waste Dispos-
al Act is amended by adding ‘ AND NATiONAL POLICY” to
the title, by inserting “(a) OBJEcTIvEs.—” after “SEC.
1003. ‘ and by adding the following new subsection:
“(b) NATIONAL POLICY.—The Congress hereby de-
dares it to be the national policy of the United States that,
u,herever feasible, the generation of hazardous waste is to be
reduced or eliminated as expeditiously as possible. Waste
that is nevertheless generated should be treated, stored, or
r 2j ’
-------
78
disposed of so as to minimize the present and future threat
to human health and the environment. “
(b) Section 3002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended as follows:
(1) by adding the following new subsection:
“(c) WASTE MINIMIzA TION.—Effective September 1,
1984, the manifest required by subsection (a)(5) shall con-
lain a certification by the generator that—
“(1) the generator of the hazardous waste has a
program in place to reduce the volume or quantity and
toxicity of such waste to the degree determined by the
generator economically practicable; and
“(2) the proposed method of treatment, storage, or
disposal is that practicable method currently available
to the generator which minimizes the present and
future threat to human health and the environment. ‘
and
(2) by amending subsection (a)(6) to read as fol-
lows:
“(6) submission of reports to the Administrator
(or the State agency in any case in which such agency
carries out a permit program pursuant to this subtitle)
at least once every two years, setting out—
HR 2867 EAS
-------
79
- “(A) the quantities and nature of hazardous
waste identified or listed under this subtitle that
he has generated during the year;
“(‘B) the disposition of all hazardous waste
reported under subparagraph (A);
“(C) the efforts undertaken during the year
to reduce the volume and toxicity of waste gener-
ated; and
“(D) the changes in volume and toxicity of
waste actually achieved during the year in ques-
tion in comparison with previous years, to the
extent such information is available for years
prior to enactment of this subparagraph. ‘
(c) Section 3005 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by adding the following new subsection:
“(‘h) WASTE MINIMIZATION. —Effective September 1,
1984, ii shall be a condition of any permit issued under
this section for the treatment, storage, or disposal of hazard-
ous waste on the premises where such waste was generated
that the permittee certify, no less often than annually,
that—
“(1) the generator of the hazardous waste has a
program in place to reduce the volume or quantity and
toxicity of such waste to the degree determined by the
generator to be economically practicable; and
HR 2867 EAS
-------
80
“(2) the proposed method of treatment, storage, or
disposal is that practicable method currently available
to the generator which minimizes the present and
future threat to human health and the environment. “.
(d)(1) Section 8002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
is amended by adding the following new subsection:
“(r) MINIMIZATION OF HAZARDOUS WAsTE.—The
Administrator shall compile, and not later than October 1,
1986, submit to the Congress, a report on the feasibility
and desirability of establishing standards of performance or
of taking other additional actions under this Act to require
the generators of hazardous waste to reduce the volume or
quantity and toxicity of the hazardous waste they generate,
and of establishing with respect to hazardous wastes re-
quired management practices or other requirements to
assure such wastes are managed in ways that minimize
present and future risks to human health and the environ-
ment. Such report shall include any recommendations for
legislative changes which the Administrator determines are
feasible and desirable to implement the national policy es-
tablished by section 1003. ‘
(2) Section 301(a)(1) of the Comprehensive Environ.
menial Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
is amended by striking out ‘your years” and inserting in
lieu thereof “forty-two months “
-------
A
19 WASTE MINIMIZATION
20 SEC. 26. (a) Section 1003 of the Solid Waste Disposal
21 Act is amended by adding ‘ AND NATIONAL POLICY” to the
22 title, by inserting “(a) OBJECTIVES.—” after “SEC.
23 1003. ‘ and by adding the following new subsection:
24 “(h) NATIONAL POLicY. —The Congress hereby de-
25 dares it to be the national policy of the United Stales that,
S 757 KS
-------
87
1 wherever feasible, the generation of hazardous waste is to be
2 reduced or eliminated as expeditiously as possible. Waste
3 that is nevertheless generated should be treated, stored, or dis-
4 posed of so as to minimize the present and future threat to
5 human health and the environment. ‘
6 1) Section 3002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
7 amended as follows:
8 (1) by adding the following new subsection:
9 “(c) WASTE MINIIIIzATI0N.—Effective September 1,
10 1984, 1/ ic manifest required by subsection (a)(5) shall con-
11 tam a certification by the generator that—
12 “(1) the generator of the hazardous waste has a
13 program in place to reduce the volume or quantity and
14 toxicity of such waste to the degree determined by the
15 generator economically practicable; anl
16 “(2) the proposed method of treatment, storage, or
17 disposal is that practicable method currently available
18 to the generator which minimizes the present and
19 future threat to human health and the environment. ‘
20 and
21 (2) by amending subsection (a)(6) to read as fol-
22 lows:
23 “(6) submission of reports to the Administrator
24 (or the State agency in any case in which such agency
/
S 757 RS
-------
88
1 carries out a permit program pursuant to this subtitic)
2 at least once every two years, setting out—
3 “(A) the quantities and nature of hazardous
4 waste identified or listed under this subtitle that
5 he has generated during the year;
6 “(B) the disposition of all hazardous waste
7 reported under subparagraph (A);
8 “(C) the efforts undertaken during the year
9 to reduce the volume and toxicity of waste gener-
10 ated; and
11 “(D) the changes in volume and toxicity of
12 waste actually achieved during the year in ques-
13 tion in comparison with previous years, to the
14 extent such information is available for years
15 prior to enactment of this subparagraph.”
16 (c) Section 3005 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
17 amended by adding the following new subsection:
18 “(ii) WASTE MINIMIZATION.—Effeclive September 1,
19 1984, it shall be a condition of any permit issued under this
20 section for the treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous
21 waste on the premises where such waste was generated that
22 the permittee certify, no less often than annually, that—
23 “(1) the generator of the hazardous waste has a
24 program in place to reduce the volume or quantity and
-------
89
1 toxicity of such waste to the degree determined by the
2 generator to be economically practicable; and
3 “(2) the proposed method of treatment, storage, or
4 disposal is that practicable method currently available
5 to the generator which minimizes the present and
6 future threat to human health and the environment. “
7 (d)(1) Section 8002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
8 amended by adding (lie following new subsection:
9 “(r) MINiMIzATION OF HAzARDous WASTE.—The
10 Administrator shall compile, and not later than October 1,
11 1986, submit to the Congress, a report on the feasibility and
12 desirability of establishing standards of performance or of
13 taking other additional actions under this Act to require the
14 generators of hazardous waste to reduce the volume or quanti-
15 ty and toxicity of the hazardous waste they generate, and of
16 establishing with respect to hazardous wastes required man-
17 agement practices or other requirements to assure such wastes
18 are managed in ways that minimize present and future risks
19 to human health and the environment. Such report shall in-
20 dude any recommendations for legislative changes which the
21 Adminis’rator determines are feasible and desirable to imple-
22 ment the national policy established by section 1003. “.
23 (2) Section 301 (a) (1) of the Comprehensive Environ-
24 mental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
90
1 is amended by striking out “four years” and inserting in lieu
2 thereof “forty-two months’
-------
October 5, 1984
IMMINENT HAZARD AND CITIZEN SUITS
Section 7003 of RCRA currently au-
thorizes suit to immediately restrain
‘any person contributing to handling.
I 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 expilcity in section ‘1003, the
Congress, most courts and every ad-
ministration which has administered
the act has contrued the section to
apply to such sites. Notwithstaxfding
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 ‘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-
per! und 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
1mm ii-ient 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
quantity generato; 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
eOUnt potential for such facilities re-
Civing hazardous waste in household
Wastes or from illegal dumping.
)Witlmin 42 months. Statea 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 landfiils 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 pi otect 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 migm ate
into ground water even if the facility
is located entirely above the seasonal
high water table. Sirnilariy, if an in-
spection shows a liner is cracked, the
owner or operator is required only to
repair the crack, not to detect and
clean up any releases that may have
occurred before the crack v as discos’-
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 monitoling standards
other than deleting the indicated cx-
emptions.
WASTE MiNIMIZAtION
Current laws emphasize the need to
pioperly heat, store, and dispose of
hazardous wastes. While this contin-
ues to be a plirnary clement of RCRA
and other pollution contiol 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 OP HEATING On, 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 orisite and of Isite facilities;
direct action provisions of Superfund;
and healt.h asscssments.
PLRMITI’ING OF MOBILE TREATMENr UNITS
The EPA, in order to fulfill its legis-
lative mandate, should continually be
looking at innovative, advanced tech-
nological methocis 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
generally as a disposal option of fiist
resort.
For many waste generators, the
availability of mobil treatment units
would make proper aste 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 sateliite treat-
ment area where waste from scverai
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 regulations, as promul
gatccl, have stymied the development
of MTU technology. I have reviewed
the vor k completed in September 1983
‘2 (‘
a - i .
-i .) ,. /
-------
July 25, 1984
I Inquire of them especially of the
chairman of the Committee on En ,i-
ronment and Public Works. If there is
a likelihood that he could finish this
bill today, say, by the normal recess
— - hour of 6 o’clock, or if it Is likely that
we will have to go until tomorrow to
do that.
Mr. STAFFORD. If the Senate
could suffer a temporary case of lock-
jaw. we could do it in the next hour. I
am very optimistic that we can com-
plete It by 6 o’clock, from reports on
both sides of the aisle.
Mr. BAKER. I thank the Senator.
In view of that, I announce that we
will try to finish; and if it is necessary
to stay a little past 6 o’clock, the lead-
ership on this side is prepared to ask
the Senate to do that.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. BAKER. I yield the floor, and I
hope the Chair i1l then recognize the
distinguished Senator from West Vir-
ginia.
Mr. RANDOLPH. I thank the Sena-
tor.
Mr. President, I hate just come into
the Chamber, and I did not hear all
that was said, except that I under-
stand there will be an effort to pass
this bill in approximately 1 hour. Is
that correct?
Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mr. RANDOLPH. I yield.
Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I have
not been privy to the conversations be-
tweeri the two managers, but the ques-
tion I put was whether or not the
manager on this side thought it possi-
ble that we could finish the bill this
afternoon, by 6 or thereabout, and the
answer as in the affirmati e.
The leadership on this side is pre-
pared to devote whatever reasonable
time is required in order to complete
this measure.
Mr. RANDOLPH. I say to the major-
ity leader and the chairman of our
committee that Senator Mircnsu.,
who will handle the measure on behalf
of the minority, will be most coopera-
tive in doing what the majority leader
desires, as will others. However, It Is
my understanding that if we cannot
complete it by 6 o’clock. it is to go
over. Is that so?
Mr. BAKER. Yes. I announced that
I would be illing to ask the Senate to
stay a little past 6 in order to finish.
Otherwise, it is the intention to go
over until tomorrow.
Mr. RANDOLPH. All of us on the
minority will work closely with the
able chairman of our committee.
Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, the Sen-
ator from West Virginia always does
that, and I am always grateful.
He was once chairman of the En i-
ronment and Public Works Commit-
tee. I have often said that my first ex-
posure to Senate procedure and the es-
serice and substance of Senate delib-
erations was while he was chairman. I
learned a great deal from him, and I
continue to do so. I ne’ er tire of ex-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
pressing ray appreciation to him for
his good service to the Senate.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
Mr. RANDOLPH. The majority
leader Is very kind.
Mr. STAFFORD, Mr. President, I
should like to echo %hat the majority
leader has said.
During the early years I served on
the Committee on Environment and
Public Works, the Senator from Vest
Virg nla (Mr. RAND0I.px] v as an ex-
ceptionally able chairman; and hat-
ever I have learned of committee work
I learned at his side. So I am also
grateful for all the guidance he has
given to our committee and to me over
the years In the work of the commit-
tee.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. STAFFORD. I yield.
Mr. RANDOLPH. I could speak at
greater length to the majority leader
and to my friend the present excellent
chairman, but I will say only this:
Thanks very much.
Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. President, the
manager on our side for this bill will
be Senator CHAFES. If the Senator will
indulge me for a moment, I will turn
over that task to him. Senator CHAFES
is the chairman of our Subcommittee
on Pollution, which has handled this
measure, and It is appropriate that he
be the manager for this side of the
aisle, just as Senator MITcHELL, the
ranking minority member, will be the
manager on the minority side. Senator
RAND0I.PH and I will be here for what-
ever backup we can offer,
Mr. President, the Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act Amendments of 1984 have
been a long time in the making.
The Committee on En ironment and
Public Works began oik on these
amendments in the 97th Congress. We
reported S. 757, the pending bill, on
October 28, 1983. Refinements and ad-
justments have continued to be made
since then and will be part of the com-
mittee’s proposals today.
The bill reflects intensive delibera-
tion by the committee, extensive con-
sultations with current officials at the
Environmental Protection Agency,
with the whole spectrum of outside in-
terests. and with Members of the
Senate who are not on the Environ-
ment and Public Works Committee.
The product of this exhaustive proc-
ess is a balanced bill that will enhance
protection of public health and the en-
vironment against harm from the
toxic wastes so pervasive in our socie
ty.
By clarifying existing law In several
respects, the bill closes some major
gaps in the Nation’s hazardous waste
disposal program—gaps created. In
some instances, by overly lenient regu-
latory interpretations.
It sets realistic—and I emphasize the
word “realistic”—schedules according
to which both regulators and those
who generate or handle hazardous
waste must take specific, protective ac-
tions.
S9H7
The distinguished chairman of the
Environmental Pollution Subcommit-
tee. Mr. Ci AFEE. has outlin ,d what we
know at this time to be the dimensions
of the hazardous v aste problem in this
country. I would likc simply to note
that the more we learn, the bigger we
find the problem to be.
In this bill we are putting into place
measures to reduce the likelihood of
future tragedies such as those at Lo e
Canal, Times Beach. and Woburn. MA.
Investments made as a result of this
legislation will, I believe, not only
reduce future human suffering but
also the tremendous costs of respond-
ing to releases of toxic substances into
the environment alter they have oc-
curred.
The statement by the distinguished
subcommittee chairman has also pro-
vided a clear and comprehensive de-
scription of the bill before us. There is
only one section of the bill I would
like specifically to discuss.
Section 26, the waste minimization
pros ision, amends the Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act In several ways. First, It sets
out as natIonal policy that hazardous
wastes are to be reduced or eliminated
as expeditiously as possible and that
wastes that are nonetheless generated
are to be disposed of in the most envi-
ronmentally sound manner.
Second, it requires generators of
hazardous waste to certify that they
are reducing the quantity or toxicity
of their wastes to the maximum
extent they determine is economically
practicable. Generators must also cer-
tify that they are employing those
practicable methods of disposal that
mlnimize threats to health and the en-
vironment and must report every 2
years on their production and manage-
ment of hazardous wastes.
Finally, the bill requires the Admin-
istrator to submit to Congress a report
on methods In addition to those In cur-
rent law to reduce the quantity and
toxicity of wastes generated In this
country and to assure that the wastes
that are generated are managed so as
to minimize their threats to human
beings and the environment.
Mr. President. I believe v.e are
making some headway in protecting
this Nation from the harm caused by
hazardous wastes. But the fact re-
mains that neither existing law nor S.
757 guarantees anything like truly
safe disposal of the vast quantities of
hazardous waste generated in this
Nation.
We need to find ways to greatly
reduce the amount of harmful wastes.
At the Federal level we must look for
ways to encourage the development of
alternative production processes, the
substitution of less hazardous materi-
als for more toxic ones, and other
means to reduce both the quantity
and toxicity of wastes.
We must also provide incentives for
development of treatment and disposal
practices that minimize threats from
-------
S9148
those hazardous wastes that continue
to be produced.
The waste minimization provisions
In S. 757 are a step in that direction.
They represent a starting point, not
the last word.
It Is my hope that the certification
required of hazardous waste genera-
tots ill elicit from them serious and
successful reduction efforts.
It Is my expectation that the report
required from EPA. together with In-
formation from the biennial reports
submitted by generators, will provide
the basis for sound future changes in
the direction and emphasis of a na-
tional hazardous waste program.
Those changes will, I believe, empha-
size taste reduction, with the goal of
eliminating disposal of hazardous
wastes where they might in any way
harm public health or the environ-
ment.
Mr. President, as I said at the start
of my remarks, action on S. 757 Is
needed now. The bill Is a good and bal-
anced one. I urge my colleagues to
pass It quickly so that conference with
the House can proceed and a bill can
be sent to the President before sum-
mers end.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the following staff members
be granted floor privileges:
Stete Shimberg, Bob Hurley, Curtis
Moore. Vic Maerki. Phil Cummings.
Charlene Sturbltts, Jimmie Powell,
Bill Pay. Boyd Holllngsworth, Brent
Erickson, Jim Curtiss, and Jon Jewett.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
SPEctER). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. President, I
yield the floor to the manager on this
side. Mr. CHAFEE.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. Piesident, I am
pleased to present an amendment to S.
7 7, the Solid Waste Disposal Amend-
ments of 1984.
The Committee on Environment and
Public Works has been working on leg-
islation to amend the Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act and as part of that law the
so-called RCRA. the Resource Conser-
vat ion and Recovery Act, we have
been attempting to do this for the past
4 years. We have held numerous hear-
ings, meetings, and markups in an
effort to perfect this important meas-
ure, and I can now confidently and
wholeheartedly recommend it to my
colleagues.
On July 28, which was nearly a year
ago, the Committee on En ironmcnt
and Public Works reported this meas-
ure favorably and recommended by a
vote of 14 to 1 that the full Senate
pass this bill.
Mr. President, let me begin by
noting that the title of this bill and
the law that Is the primary focus of
these amendments to RCRA are to
some degree misleading.
Yes, there are pro Isions dealing
with solid waste, and, yes, there are
pros isions dealing with resource con-
servation and recovery. But that is not
the focus of this bill,
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
What we are reafly talking about
today Is the control of hazardous
wastes.
In 1976 RCRA was enacted as an
amendment to the Solid Waste Dispos-
al Act.
Subt t1e C of RCRA established this
Nation’s basic hazardous waste man-
agement system.
That law and the amendments we
are considering today are designed to
assure the people of this Nation that
the generation, handling. Storage.
treatment, transportation, and dispos-
al of hazardous wastes In this country
Is regulated and controlled In a
manner that protects both the human
health and the environment.
We are getting down to a pretty fun-
damental matter here. We are dealing
with hazardous s astes in e ery aspect
of them, not only the generation but.
as I said, the handling, the storage,
the treatment, the transportation, and
disposal of them.
Obviously the public of this Nation
believes In this. The Importance of
this law and the need for such assur-
ances can only be fully accomplished
after we examine just how much haz-
ardous waste is being generated each
year In the United States. The num-
bers are staggering.
When the EPA developed its regula-
tory program and when e first began
working on this legislation, It was esti-
mated that 11 billion gallons. that is
400 mIllion metric tons of hazardous
waste are produced in the United
States each year.
In August 1983, a year ago, EPA
upped this estimate to roughly 40 bil-
lion gallons, 1.500 millIon metric tons.
almost four times the previous esti-
mate.
On April 20. of this year. the EPA
released the results of the national
survey of hazardous waste generators
and treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities regulated under RCRA In
1981. ThIs will be referred to as the
national survey.
It Is now estimated that there are
not 11 billion gallons nor 40 billion
gallons: It Is now estimated that more
than 71 billion gallons of hazardous
waste are generated in the United
States every year. That is 264 million
metric tons. It Just staggers the imagi-
nation.
According to news reports, that Is
enough to flood the District of Colum-
bia to the depth of 5 feet.
Mind you, this is annual, annual dis-
posal. enou h to supply every man.
woman, and child in the Nation with
six 55-gallon drums of hazardous
waste e ery year.
Sadly, the actual number we beli€ve
even exceeds the 71 billion gallon e ti-
mate.
EPA’s national survey that I Just re-
ferred to did not include mining
wastes, some of which is clearly haz-
ardous. It did not include household
hazardous wastes such as discarded
pesticides, paint thinners, and clean-
ing solvents. It did not include hazard-
July 25, 1984
ous waste generated by Individual
businessmen that produce less than
1.000 kilograms of waste a month.
A thousand kilograms, by the way, is
no tiny amount, That Is 2.200 pounds,
over a ton of such aaste a month, and
that is what e call small quantity
generators. It did not inch:de hazard-
ous waste that is discharged through
sewers Into publicly owned waste aLer
treatment works. IL did not include
hazardous waste that Is illegally gener-
ated or managed. And it did not in-
clude those hazardous wastes destined
for cycling.
The survey and estimate only Includ-
ed those wastes and activities that are
regulated under the existing RCRA
program.
There is no question, Mr. President.
that we have given the EPA an enor-
mous responsibility. In 1981 EPA re-
ceived nearly 60.000 notices from gen-
erators of hazardous waste, The
agency has roughly 8.500 applications
on file f.r permits for treatment, stor-
age. and disposal facilities.
This just gives you some idea of the
tremendous job that EPA has under
this program.
The permit applications and sources
of hazardous waste come from a wide
variety of Industries. Each one of
these industries poses a separate prob-
lem.
Add to the problem of household
waste and aste from the truly small
quantity generator. All of that you put
together and we can conclude that
EPA’s task is indeed a difficult one. It
is almost absolutely essential that It be
done right and that it be done soon.
This program is closely related to
the much talked about Superfund pro-
gram. What this program is meant to
do is assure the public that although
we may be discovering some new Su-
perfund sit. s on a daily basis, at the
least e are taking steps to prevent
the creation of new Superfund sites.
In other words, as you know, there
are some 6.000 Superfund sites, some
sites that are needing of the Super-
fund cleanup In the Nation, and there
they are. We are working on those
through the Superfund. But the whole
purpose of this bill we are considering
today is to prevent the creation of new
such sites.
Hazardous waste can and must be
handled In a manner that Is safer than
it was in the past. That is what RCRA
is suppc.sed to be about.
Now, we often hear the refrain from
those ho were revpcnsibile for disas.
ters li!;e Lose Canal, the Stringfellow
acid pits in California, and in my home
State the Western Sand & Gravel, and
the so-called Potello dump, that we
shou!d not hold them responsible be-
cause hat they did was legal at the
time.
Weil. using the word “legal” to mean
not specifically prohibited by RCRA
or by regulatIons under RCRA, let us
see what they mean, let us look at
-------
A Z ebd. r 5L 1
BASIS OF AUTHORIZATION
Sec. 225. Section 3006 (b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by adding the following at the end thereof: “In authorizing
a State program, the Administrator may base his findings on the
Federal program in effect one year prior to submission of a State’s
application or in effect on January 26, 1983, whichever is later.”.
SECTION 225—BASIS OF AUTHORIZATION
House b 1L—The House bill amends section 3006(b) by authoriz-
ing the Administrator to evaluate the equivalency of a State’s haz-
ardous waste program based on the Federal program which was in
effect one year prior to the submission of the State’s application or
in effect on January 26, 1983, whichever is later.
Senate amendment.—The Senate amendment has no comparable
provision.
Conference substitute.—The Conference substitute adopts the
House provision.
-------
H ‘2tF fl7 9 ’ ’ v 1
Section 15. State authorization -
One of the conditions for authorization of a State hazardous
waste program under section 8006 is that the State program be
equivalent to the Federal program. EPA currently requires that
the State’s program be equivalent to the Federal program in effect
on the date the State is authorized. This requirement presents a
major obstacle to State authorizations since a State applying for
fmal authorization could be forced to repeatedly amend its applica-
tion in order to keep up with new EPA requirements.
Section 15 is designed to solve this problem by fixing an effective
date for the Federal program to which the State program must be
equivalent. The section clarifies EPA’s authority to approve a State
program equivalent to the Federal program in effect one 7 ear prior
to the submission of the State’s application of the State s applica-
tion or on January 26, 1983, whichever is later. It prevents a situa-
tion where- a State would need to continually revise its program
and application to respond to Federal changes that occur while the
State’s application is being developed and processed. However, it
does not relieve the States from the requirement to adopt changes
made to the Federal program. Once authorized, all States must
cqmply with 40 CFR 123.13(e) which establishes specific deadlines
by which authorized State programs must be revised to reflect Fed-
eral requirements.
Pursuant to this section, all State programs must be equivalent
to the Federal program in effect on Januar ’ 26, 1983, even if this
date is less than one year prior to the state s submission of its ap-
plication for final authorization. This is necessary to ensure that
all State programs which receive final authorization are equivalent
to the Federal program that includes the permitting standards for
land disposal facilities which became effective on January 26, 1983.
-------
*, Pi4-5 ’ib
9 STATE AUTHORIZATION
10 SEc. 20. (a) BASIS OF AuTHORIZATION.—Section
11 3006(b) is amended by adding the following at the end there-
12 of: “In authorizing a State program, the Administrator may
13 base his findings on the Federal program in effect one year
14 prior to submission of a State’s application or in effect on
15 January 26, 1983, whichever is later.”.
16 (b) INTERIM AuTHoRIZATIoN; 1983 AMENDMENTS.—
17 (1) Section 3006(c) is amended by striking out “twenty-four”
18 and substituting “thirty-six”.
19 (2) Section 3006 is amended by inserting the following,
20 at the end of subsection (j)(2) (as added by section 5 of this
21 Act): “The Administrator shall, by rule, establish a date for
22 the expiration of interim authorization under this paragraph.
23 “(3) Pending interim or final authorization of a State
24 program for any State which reflects the amendments made
25 by the Hazardous Waste Control and Enforcement Act of
-j c-
-------
P .
1 1983, the State may enter into an agreement with the Ad-
2 ministrator under which the State may assist in the adminis-
8 tration of the requirements and prohibitions which take effect
4 pursuant to such amendments.
5 “(4)(A) In the case of a State permit program for any
6 State which is authorized under subsection (b) or (c), until $
7 such program is amended to reflect the amendments made by
8 the Hazardous Waste Control and Enforcement Act of 1983
9 and such program amendments receive interim or final au-
10 thorization, the Administrator shall have the authority in
11 such State to issue or deny permits or those portions of per-
12 mits affected by the requirements and prohibitions established
13 by the Hazardous Waste Control and Enforcement Act of
14 1983. The Administrator shall coordinate with States the
15 procedures for issuing such permits.”.
-------
T Pi, -i 7 J , r -7c
45
1 STATE AUTHORiZATiON
2 SEC. 15. Section 3006(b) is amended by adding the
3 following at the end thereof. ‘ In authorizing a State pro-
4 grain, the Administrator may base his findings on the Feder-
S a! program in effect one year prior to submission of a State s
6 application or in effect on January 26, 1983, which ever is
7 later. ‘
-------
7 ; • i u o1 c t .L
3 STATE AUTHORIZATION
4 Sec. 16. Section 3006(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal
5 Act is amended by adding the following at the end thereof:
6 “In authorizing a State program, the Administrator may base
7 his findings on the Federal program in effect one year prior
8 to submission of a State’s application or in effect on January
9 26, 1983, whichever is later.”.
-------
November 1983
oral factore could cause the waste to bet
“ .srdous waste. The Adrnuustrator shall
ilde notice arid opportunity for comment
these ddiuonal hems before vanimg
j denying such petlUon.
“(2) Paragraph (1) shall apply to petitions
filed before, on, or alter the date of the en-
actment of this w.ibeecuon. hi the case of
petitions submitted alter such date of enaet
the Adminlstretor shall make a final
decision on each such petition within twelve
months after such date of enactiuenL In the
ease of petitions submitted before such date
of enactment, the Admunlstrator ahaB mate
a final decision on each such peucion within
eighteen months alter granting a temporary
eacluswn from regula for such waste. In
the case of any waste lot which a petition
has been submitted under ttus section. no
temporary exclusion may be granted from
listing under thus section unless there has
been notice and opportwifty for comment
piior to the be”-”ee of such temporary es-
elusion.”.
Mr. FLORIO (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman. I ask unanimous con-
sent that section 13 be considered as
read and printed In the Recono.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is
there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New Jersey?
There was no objection.
I7 D T OFFUIin 31 lIP .. IPZAVX
Mr. BREAUX. Mr. Chairman. I offer
an amendment.
The Clerk read as foUows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Baa*vz Page
44. after line 19, Insere
H52AaD00 5
c. 13A. Section 3005(hX3). as added by
don 5 of this Act, is amended by insert.
j the following immediately alter siibpar-
.igraph (H) thereof’ “For the purpose of
making any demonstration under subpara.
graph (B). the term ‘har.ardoim constituent’
does not include those hazardous constitu-
ents hich the owner or operator demon.
atrates to the satisfaction of the Adrainis.
trator and the Administrator determines at
the thne of permitting will not migrate inro
grninid or surface water in concentrations
which may adversely affect human health
or the envlronment. ”.
Make the necenary emforining changes
to the table of cont & -
(Mr. BREAUX asked and was given
verimssion to revise and eatend his re.:
marks.)
Mr. BREAUX. Mr. Chairman. I have
discussed my amendment with both
the chairman of the subcommittee and
also the ranking minority member.
The amendment Is simple, in that It
is a clarifying amendment. As Mem-
bers may remember the inst time we
were at this section. 1 offered an
amendment which was adopted by a
voice vote which dealt with surface Im-
poundments. My amendment simply
said that all surface impoundments.
that have an Interim permit, that
when they went to EPA to get their
final permit, that they had to be retro-
fitted, and retrofitting would require
that these surface impoundments be
‘ible-lined and also have monitoring
‘s to monitor what was In the sur-
e impoundments.
5r. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, all!
, ,..e gentleman yield?
Mr. BREAUX, I yield to the gentle-
man Irv in New Jersey.
‘Mr. PLORIO. IThank the gentleman
for yielding. -
Mr. Chairman.! support the amend-
ment offered b the gentleman from
Louisiana. -
This amendment clarifies which con.
stftuents are of concern in a permit
proceeding where the ,,awner or opera-
tor seeks to avoid the retrofit require-
ment on the basis of no migration 0!
hazardous constituents into ground or
surface water. The smenthnent mesns
the migration of concern is rthted to
those constituents which may adverse-
ly affect human health and the envi-
ronment. The term “may” Is intention-
ally chosen to avoid the nee ssity of
quantifying precise effects. The poten-
tial or actual presence of constituents
to certain concentrations to grmmd or
surface water would be sufficient for
the Administrator to conclude an ad-
verse effect may occur. -
The full burden of demonstrating
the concentrations of waste which is
migrating—or will migrate In the
future—is on the owner or operator at
the time of permitting. Simila4v. the
fuil burden of proving no adver e
human health or environmental effect
Is on the owner or operator. Thus, sci-
entific uncertainties are to be resolved
against the attempt to demonstrate no
adverse effect on human health and
the environment. -
I urge my colleagues to adopt this
amend ment.
Mr. BROTIfiLL. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield’
Mr. BREAtIX. I yield to the gentle-
man from North Carolina.
Mr. BROY’HILL thank the gentle-
man for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, there has been con-
siderable consultation on this amend-
ment, and ‘we ‘will agree with the
amendment as presented.
Mr. ER.EAUX. I thank both sides for
agreeing to the amendment.
As I said, It Is basically a clarifying
amendment which tends to track what
I indicated in my initial words on the
floor as to what my first amendment
was Intended to do. This clarifies it.
and I think the language Is an appro-
piiate matter, and I ui-ge adoption of
the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
question is on the amendment offered
by the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr.
BRzanx).
The amendment was weed to.
Mr. RODINO. Mr. Chairman, the
Committee on the Judiciary also ap-
proved an amendment of a technical
nature to an Energy and Commerce
Committee amendment to section
3008(d) of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act. The purpose of the Judiciary
Committee’s amendment is to make ft
clear that there Is no congressional in-
tention to change the culpability re-
quirement of present law.
Section 3008(dK2 presently nisices It
a criminal offense tnowingly” to
teat. stole, or dispose of hazardous
waste “In knowing violation” of any
aIerlal condition a permit Issued
119155
tmdeI sectIon 3005 or 3006 of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act or under title I of
the Marme Protection and Sanctuaries
Act. The Energy and Commerce Corn-
nilttee amendment revises section
3008(d)(2) and, in so doing, does not
rri’ forward the phrase “ In knowing
‘v Iolation.”
Prom a drafting standpoint, that
phrase is redundant. El this legislation
were the initial enactment of section
3008(d)(2), there would be no harm In
dropping the phrase, for the use of the
lerm “ku w’mgl-” ii the ia gmn1ng of
oect!on 30 td::2) would modify all
that follows, so that any violation of a
material condition would have to be
done knowingly. However, in the
present situation, where there is al-
ready language on the books, the
dropping of the phrase might be seen
by some as an expression of congres-
sional intent to change present law.
Those who see It that way would
argue that there must have been a
purpose behind dropping the phrase.
Since the Energy and Commerce Corn’
mittee’s report does not indicate what
that purpose is, they would be able to
argue that the purpose was to change
the culpability requirement of section
3008(d(2. If their argument were an-
cepted, the result could be a substan.
tial change from present law, for there
could be the imposition of strict crimi.
nal liability. Whether there would be
strict criminal liability in any particu-
lar instance would depend upon how
the condition was drafted.
The Judiciary Committee amend-
ment restores the phrase “in knowing
violation” to section 3008(dX2. The
use of this phrase from present law
will Insure that the culpability provi-
sions of current law are carried for-
ward unchanged.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
Clerk will read,
The Clerk read as follows
amovear aim amymnuc or yam on,
Sw. 14. SectIon 3012 (relating to restric-
tions on recycled oil) is amended by striking
out the period at the end thereof and substi-
tuting “, eonslsteti% sfth the protection of
human health and the environmenL”.
The CHAIRMAN pro teLipore. Are
there any amendments to secUon 14?
If not, the Clerk will read. -
The Clerk read as follows:
S Tare aViwO rmor
S w. 15 Section 3006(bI n amended by
adding the following at the end thereof- “In
authorizing a State program, the Adminus.
tj’ator may base his findings on the Federal
program In effect one year prior to submis-
sion of a State’s application or hi elf rca co
Janifary 26, 1983, hiche er Is later.”.
Mr. FLORIO (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
sent that section 15 be considered as
read, printed In the Rscorto and open
to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN pro teznpore, Is
there objection to the request af the
gentleman from New Jersey?
There was
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
H9156
The CRAIRMAW pro tenlpore. Are
there amendments to sectIon 15? -
PT . 1T
r. LENT. Mr. Chairman. I otter an
axnendmenL
The Clerk read as foflowc
amendment offered by Mr. Lxa Page 1$.
Pne 2. after “lZ. Znseit “ Ia) Basis or An-
THORI7AT!OW —“
Page 45. after tine 7.
(b) 1- . AVTBo *l’1OW l9 A
aIewTs.—41) SecUon 3006(c) fr amended by
dzlklng ty.f uy’ 4 substituting
thirty-s tx ”.
(2) Section 3006 amended by inserting
the following at the end of subsection (g)(2)
(u added by sectionS of this Act)’ •j ’ j Ad-
nsuxtar a11, by rule. ISL.bilah a &e
the ra of Interim author - ‘ t’ —
der tins Dsn.grWb.
‘(3) Pending Inter im or final authoriza-
tion of a State program for any Sa.te h ch
reflects the amendments by the Baa.
ardous Waste Control and Enforcement Act
of 1983, the Slate may en frito .
ment with the Amniniztrator under which
the State may amist in the administratIon
of the reotnrementa and prohibitions which
take effect pursuant to such
*(4xA) In the case of a State permit pro.
w for any State which is authorized
under aubeectiosi (b) Or (C), witfi suCh pro-
pam Ii amended to reflect the amendment.
made by the Hazardous Waste Control —
ibforeement Act of 1983 and such
amendments Interim or final author-
ha.tion. the Administrator shall have the
authority In such State to lame or deny per-
rUts or thme portions of permits affected
by the req ufrement and prohibitions ertab-
fished by the Hazardous Waste Control and
I Zor eiiL Act of 1983. The Admlnistra-
v ihill coordinate with States the poor-
m for issuing sr h permits.”,
r. LENT (during the r -d1ng). Mr.
airman I ask w anlznous eoneen&
_t the amendment be considered as
read and printed In the Ranono.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is
there objection to the request of the
gentleman train New York?
There was no objection.
(Mr. LENT asked and was given per-
mission to revise and extend his re-
marks)
Mr. L (T. Mr. Chahunan. I rise to
off or an amendment to sectIon 15.
This amendment will do a n ber of
things. FIrst It wlfl insure that the
States have adequate time to fulfill
the necessary requirements to become
fully authorized. Without my amend-
maid., the Btates interim authoriza-
tions will expire on January 26. 1985.
It Is my undersr n ing that approz_i-
mately 7 to 14 States will not be able
to meet this deadline. and so would
lose their interim authorizations.
Therefore, my amendment gives the
States until January 26, 1984 to ftthll
their reqiurements before they lose
their interim status.
Second. this amendment ratifies the
curTent practice of using State-EPA
agreements to enable States to partici-
pate as much as possible In the Imple-
inentatlon of RCRA prior to their au-
thorization. For example, States that
do -“it yet have adequate authority to
authorization may still have
nt State .iithrwity to be able to
f r ito agreements to e .na upf hi-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
qsectlem and draft permits for .
Other States may have made the ose-
emery stat utory and regulatory
changes to implement an Independent
State regulatory program foe email
guantity generators between 100 and
1.000 kflograms that EPA can an
knowledge in an agreement. In those
cases, the Admlnit rator may well
wish to arrange to4vote his priorities
and resources to other areas where
there Is not already considerable State
activity and/or to other States.
The agreement or existence of an
operating State program does not
mean that the Administrator’ aelin-
his authority or responsibility.
a State receives Interim or final
authorization for a program compo-
nent, the Administrator alone Is
charged with the legal responsibility
under subtitle C. The Coagrem dose
not Intend agreements to be viewed as
a de facto, more lenient type of au-
thorization,.
Third, my amendment gives the EPA
Athninktzator disoretlon to establish
realistic de .ullIiwr by which Slates
must achieve final authorization for
the requirements mandated the
1983 amendn . te ‘ ‘is. , ,
Fourth. my amendment gives the
EPA authority to Issue permits in con-
formance with Implementation of the
permitting requirements of the 83
amendments, -
My amendment has the support of
the distinguished subcommittee chair-
man. Mr. Ftoato, and I ask yotu ’ sup-
portfor lt. -S;. - --
1620
Mr. 1 7 ..ORIO. Mr. Chairman. will
the gentlemen yield?
Mr. I . (T. I a-ill be happy to yield
to the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I com-
mend my colleague from New York for
offering this amendment. In addition
to extend g the denztIine by which
States—In order to be finally author-
ised—must obtain EPA approval foe
their RCRA programs, the amend-
ment would make a number of minor.
but very useful, improvements to the
State authorization process. These im-
provements are Important because of
the need to amist the States In obtain-
ing final authorization not just for the
existing RCRA program, but also Lot
S.he new program components which
would be required under this legisla-
tion (R.R. 2867h -
Z’hIs amendment also be s wtse
that the deadlines l. t hl( h1 ’d by ft.
2867 are met—not on a. piecemeal
basis—but In every State at the same
time. A contrary result would under-
mine the effectiveness of R.R, 2867—
particularly the restrictions on land
disposaL
I commend Mr. LasT for offering
these carefully drafted provcnta
to the State authorization provision.
The C AlRMAN pro tempore. The
question is on the amendment offered
by the gentleman from Slew Tort (Mr.
ZIL -
November 1983
Tbe amendment was agreed be,
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
Clerk will read.
-TheClerkreadasfoflo
yW4ól ’S oats or
16. Section 3010(b) is smetided by
adding the following at the end thereof: “At
the time a regulation is promulgated, the
A tnIstra1or may provide for a shorter
period prior to the effective date, or art Im-
mediate effective date fon
a regulation with which the Adminis-
hater finda the regulated does
uot nerd six months to come frito coinpil-
‘(2) a regulation which to an
t T 5aiiC1 iltuat*o or
“(SI other good cause found and published
with the regulation”,
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. I know
of no amendments to any sections up
to section 21.
I ask tmanhnous consent that all sec-
tions up to 21. not Including 21. be
considered as read, printed In the
Rxcoxa and open to amendment at
any point. -
The CHAIRMAN pro ternpore. Is
there objection to the request of the
gentleman from new J y ?
There was no objection.
SectIons 17 through 20 are as fol-
lows:
rasol
Sm fl Section 3004 Is amended by adding
the following new su” ’- ’on at the end
thereof:
“U I Pazoa pr,r.rre Iasue
under this section shall addram releases of
hazardous constituents attributable to the
migration of waste from all solid waste man-
agement units at the facility, whether waste
was pliced in such units before or alter the
date of permit imiance. Where cleanup of
such releases serinot be enmpleted prior to
permit imuance, the ataridards inued wider
this section shall provide for compliance
schedules arid financial assurances to ensure
adequate cleanup of such relessea”,
STAtZ’O?flATin wuarns&
IS Section 300’Z is wneni3 d by . A”+’ig
the following new ii .e% .,fl at the er
th :
“Cc) Brara-Orussan Lasornta ,..—Tbe Ad-
ministrator shall annually undertake a that.
ough inspection ci each landflfl fanlity
which Is operated by a State or local govern-
ment which is subject to regulation wider
this subtitle. The . ..- ..J of such L. .p . ,ctjon
shall be available to the public as pro ided
In subsection tb).’
£vanAan.TTT Or pcon*tiou -
Sec. 19. (a) Section 3006 Is Linended by
adding the following new snstJmj aZ (be
and thereni.
9li £van.mmszyy or
state prugi-an may be authorized by the
Administration under this section unless—
“(I) such program provides for the pubis
availabIlity of Information obtained by the
State regarding lacillUes and sItes for the
treatment. storage, and disposal of hazard-
ouswsste.and
“(2) such informitton Is available to the
public in substantially anne marries’,
and to the same degree, as would be the ease
If the Administrator .aa . .,- yIxg mit
provisions of this pubsisie in a Slate.”.
(b The - ‘-- “.“nees made by ma
(a) shall apply with tt So State pro-
grams authorized - 3006 brAise.
eLC
-------
, s 1 Luh S 6 l) c ’l
AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION
SEc. 226. (a) Section 3006 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by adding the following new subsection after subsection (e)
thereof:
• 1 (f) Av*Ii. aiLrrv OF INFORMATION—No State program may be
authorized by the Administrator under this section unless—
“(i’) such program provides for the public availability of infor-
mation obtained by the State regarding facilities and sites for
the treatment. storage. and disposal of hazardous waste: and
“(2) such information is available to the public in substari-
tially the same manner, and to the same degree, as would be the
case Lf the Administrator was carrying out the provisions of this
subtitle in such State.”.
(b) The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply with
respect to State programs authorized under section 3006 before. on.
or after the date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 19 4.
CoA.71i ., .Pi .) )l 6
SECTION 226—AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION
House bill. —The House bill amends section 3006 to provide that,
as a condition of authorization, States must make available to the
public information obtained by the State regarding facilities and
107
sites for the treatment, storage or disposal of hazardous waste. The
State is obligated to make such information available to same
extent that the Administrator would be if EPA were carrying out
the provision of Subtitle C in such state.
Senate amendment—No provision.
Conference substitute.—The conference substitute is the same as
the House bill.
The purpose of this provision is to assure that citizens have
access in authorized States to information obtained by the State
concerning facilities that treat, store, or dispose of hazardous
waste. Such information shall be available in authorized States
under this provision in substantially the same manner and to the
same degree as it would be available if the Administrator were
running the hazardous waste program in the state.
This provision shall apply in those States that have already re-
ceived interim authorization prior to enactment, as well as states
which are granted interim or final authorization after enactment.
In those States which have received interim authorization prior to
enactment, the requirements of this provision may be phased-in in
the same manner that changes in the Federal regulatory program,
made after a State is authorized, are phased-in by authorized
States (pursuant to EPA regulations). This is intended to allow
States sufficient time to make any changes to their regulations or
statutes necessary to implement this provision.
This provision is not intended to be used in any way that would
delay, impair or obstruct any ongoing criminal investigation or
prosecution or other enforcement action.
-------
AVAS.ABRJTY OP INPORMATION
Sm. 19. (a) Section 3006 is amended by adding the following new subsection at the
end thereof:
“(I) Av u.AsiuTv OF INF0RMArI0N.—No State program may be authorized by the
Adminu trator under this section unless—
“(1) such program provides for the public availability of information obtained
by the State regarding facilities and sites for the treatment, storage, and dispos-
al of hazardous waste, and
“(2) such information is available to the public in substantially the same
manner, and to the same degree, as would be the case if the Administrator was
carrying out the provisions of this subtitle in such State.”.
(b) The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply with respect to State pro-
grams authorized under section 3006 before, on, or after the date of the enactment
of this Act.
Section 1 Availability of information
The purpose of this section is to assure that citizens have access
in authorized States to information obtained by the State concern-
ing facilities that treat, store, or dispose of hw7-ardous waste. Such
information shall be available in authorized States under this pro-
vision in substantially the same manner and to the same degree as
it would be available if the Administrator were running the has-
ardous waste program in the State.
This provision shall apply in those States that have already re-
ceived interim authorization prior to enactment, as well as States
which are granted interim or final authorization after enactment.
In those States which have received interim authorization prior to
enactment, the requirements of this provision may be phased-in in
the same manner that changes in the Federal regulatory program,
made after a State is authorized, are phased-in by authorized
States (pursuant to EPA regulations). This is intended to allow
States sufficient time to make any changes to their regulations or
statutes necessary to implement this provision.
-------
PA ’5 1 9l
1 AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION
2 SEc. 24. (a) Section 3006 is amended by adding the
3 following new subsection at the end thereof:
4 “(f) AvAIL ILITY OF INFORMATION.—NO State pro-
5 gram may be authorized by the Administrator under this sec-
6 tion unless—
7 “(1) such program provides for the public avail-
8 abilty of information obtained by the State regarding
9 facilities and sites for the treatment, storage, and dis-
10 posal of hazardous waste; and
11 “(2) such information is available to the public in
12 substantially the same manner, and to the same
13 degree, as would be the case if the Administrator was
14 carrying out the provisions of this subtitle in such
15 State.”.
16 (b) The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply
17 with respect to State programs authorized under section
18 3006 before, on, or after the date of the enactment of this
19 Act.
-------
) fle oP1 . 4i-4 J p 4 ,
AS ‘iVZ b
16 AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATiON
IT SEC. 19. (a) Section 3006 is amended by adding thc
18 following new subsection at the end (hereof:
19 “(f) A V4ILABILITY OF 1NFORMATION.—No State pro.
20 gram may be authorized by the Administrator under this sec-
21 Lion unless—
22 “(1) such program provides for the public avail-
23 abUly of information obtained by the State regarding
24 facilities and sites for the treatment, storage, and dis-
25 posal of hazardous waste; and
HR 2867 RH
1 “(2) such information is available to the public in
2 substantially the same manner and to the same degree,
3 as would be the ca.se if the Administrator was car-r1 ,ling
4 out the provisions of this subtitle in such State. ‘ -
5 (b) 7’he amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply
6 with respect to State programs authorized under section 8006
7 before, on, or after the dale of the enactment of this Act.
-------
46 -
1 AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION
2 SEc. 20. (a) Section 30Q6 of the Solid Waste Disposal
3 Act is amended by adding the following new subsection at
4 the end thereof:
5 “(f) AvAILABLITY OF INFORMATION—No State pro-
6 gram may be authorized by the Administrator under this sec-
7 tion unless—
8 “(1) such program provides for the public avail-
9 ability of information obtained by the State regarding
10 facilities and sites for the treatment, storage, and dis-
11 posal of hazardous waste; and
12 “(2) such information is available to the public in
13 substantially the same manner, and to the same
14 degree, as would be the case if the Administrator was
15 carrying out the provisions of this subtitle in such
16 State.”.
17 (b) The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply
18 with respect to State programs authorized under section
19 3006 before, on, or after the date of the enactment of this
20 Act.
W4
-------
4 6AJ -b
INTERIM AUTHORIZATION OF STATE PROGRAMS
SEC. 227 Section 3006ci of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amend-
ed by—
‘1) striking out “twenty-four month period beginning on the
date six months after the date of promulgation of regulations
under sections 3002 through 3005” and inserting in lieu thereof
“period ending no later than January 31. 1986”;
(2) inserting “(1)” after ‘Interim Authorization.—”; and
(3) by inserting the following at the end thereof:
“(2) The Administrator shall, by rule, establish a date for the
expiration of interim authorization under this subsection.
“(3) Pending interim or final authorization of a State program for
any State which reflects the amendments made by the Hazardous
and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, the State may enter into an
agreement with the Administrator under which the State may assist
in the administration of the requirements and prohibitions which
take effect pursuant to such Amendmenta1
“(4) In the case of a State permit program for any State which
is authorized under subsection (b) or under this subsection, until
such program is amended to reflect the amendments made by the
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 and such program
amendments receive interim or final authorization, the Administra-
tor shall have the authority in such State to issue or deny permits or
those portions of permits affected by the requirements and prohibi-
tions established by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of
H. R. 2867—35
1984. The Administrator shall coordinate with States the procedures
for issuing such permits.”.
-------
SECTION 227—INTERIM AUTHORIZATION OF STATE PROGRAMS
House bill.—The House bill directs the Administrator to estab-
lish, by rule, a date for the interim authorization of a State pro-
gram. The House bill also authorizes the Administrator to enter
into an agreement with a State under which the State may assist
in the administration of the requirements and prohibitions which
take effect pursuant to the 1984 reauthorization and prior to the
interim or final authorization of a State program.
With respect to States which have authorized permit programs
(but which have not been amended to reflect the changes of this
bill) the Administrator is authorized to issue and deny permits (or
portions of permits) affected by the bill. The Administrator is di-
rected to coordinate with States regarding the procedure for issu-
ing such permits.
The House bill also extends by one year the deadline by which
States’ interim authorizations for the current program expire.
Senate amendmenL—The Senate amendment modifies section
3006(c) by deleting the provision that established a two year limita-
tion on the duration of a State’s interim authorization and estab-
lishing in lieu thereof a specific date of January 31, 1986, by which
interim authorization for the current subtitle C program will
expire.
Conference substitute.—The Conference substitute adopts portions
of the House bill and the Senate amendment. It adopts that portion
of the Senate amendment which extends the deadline for interim
108
authorization for the current program. This provision should im-
prove the process by which States obtain authorization under the
current program and facilitate authorization of State programs af-
fected by this bill. It also adopts the House provisions requiring the
Administrator to establish a date for the expiration of interim au-
thorization and allowing agreements between the Administrator
and States pending interim or final authorization.
-------
141t V -
9 STATE AUTHORIZATION
10 SEc. 20. (a) BASIS OF AUTHO1 izATIoN.—Section
11 3006(b) is amended by adding the following at the end there-
12 of: “In authorizing a State program, the Administrator may
13 base his findings on the Federal program in effect one year
14 prior to submission of a State’s application or in effect on
15 January 26, 1983, whichever is later.”.
16 (b)II TERIM AUTHORIZATION; 1983 AMErIiMENTs.—
17 (1) Section 3006(c) is amended by striking out “twenty-four”
18 and substituting “thirty-six”.
19 (2) Section 3006 is amended by inserting the following
20 at the end of subsection (g)(2) (as added by section 5 of this
21 Act): “The Administrator shall, by rule, establish a date for
22 the expiration of interim authorization under this paragraph.
23 “(3) Pending interim or final authorization of a State
24 program for any State which reflects the amendments made
25 by the Hazardous Waste Control and Enforcement Act of
HR 2867 RFS
-------
77
1 1983, the State may enter into an agreement with the Ad-
2 ministrator under which the State may assist in the adminis-
3 tration of the requirements and prohibitions which take effect
4 pursuant to such amendments.
5 “(4)(A) In the case of a State permit program for any
6 State which is authorized under subsection (b) or (c), until
7 such program is amended to reflect the amendments made by
8 the Hazardous Waste Control and Enforcement Act of 1983
9 and such program amendments receive interim or final au-
10 thorization, the Administrator shall have the authority in
11 such State to issue or deny permits or those portions of per-
12 mits affected by the requirements and prohibitions established
13 by the Hazardous Waste Control and Enforcement Act of
14 1983. The Administrator shall coordinate with States the
15 procedures for issuing such permits.”.
-------
i a_ p ’
INTERIM AUTHORIZATION OF STATE HAZARDOUS WASTE
PROGRAMS
SEC. 35. Section 3006(c) of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act is amended by striking “twenty-four month period be-
ginning on the date six months after the date of prom ulga-
lion of regulations under sections 3002 through 3005” and
inserting in lieu thereof ‘ eriod ending no later than Janu-
ary 32, 1986’
-------
5 C. ’U.-E.-O / )b S 6i -b
APPLICATION OF AMENDMENTS TO AUTHORIZED STAT
Sgc. 228. Section 3006 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by adding the following new subsection after subsection tfl:
“(g) AMENDME ’ris MADE BY 1984 Acr.—41) Any requirement or
prohibition which is applicable to the generation, transportation,
treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous waste and which is
imposed under this subtitle pursuant to the amendmenr. made by
the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 shall take
effect in each State having an interim or finally authorized State
program on the same date as such requirement takes effect in other
States. The Administrator shall carry out such requirement directly
in each such State unless the State program is finally authorized (or
is granted interim authorization as provided in paragraph 2)) with
respect to such requirement.
“(2) ny State which, before the date of the e’nactment of the
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 has an existing
hazardous waste program which has been granted interim or final
authorization under this section may submit to the Administrator
evidence that such existing program contains or has been amended
to include) any requirement which is substantially equivalent to a
requirement referred to in paragraph (1) and may request interim
authorization to carry out that requirement under this subtitle. The
Administrator shall, if the evidence submitted shows the State
requirement to be substantially equivalent to the requirement re-
ferred to in paragraph U). grant an interim authorization to the
State to carry out such requirement in lieu of direct administration
in the State by the Administrator of such requirement.”.
-------
62
REQUIREMENTS IN AUTHORIZED STATES
Several new requirements in the bill are scheduled to take effect
upon enactment or by specific dates following enactment. The bull
adds a new section 3006(f) to the Act to assure that, for the listedi
provisions, the requirements apply simultaneously in every Statei
whether or not a State has been authorized to administer and en-
force a program under section 3006.
The States that are currently authorized to administer their own
programs under section 3006(b) retain that authority with respect
to existing program elements. The Environmental Protection
Agency will implement the new statutory requirements in each
and every State until such State is authorized, in accordance with
section 3006, to operate its own equivalent program with respect to
those new requirements.
Section 3006 should be administered so as to encourage each
State to assume or continue primary responsibility for program ad-
ministration and to recognize and accommodate the various means
by which States may choose to conduct their programs. In this
regard, the term “equivalent” as used in section 3006 should not be
interpreted to mean “identical”, thus requiring an absolute like-
ness between the State and Federal program requirements. State
program requirements and procedures which achieve the same
result intended by the requirements of subtitle C should be deemed
“equivalent”. State provisions can differ as long as they address
the Federal program requirements and include State requirements
at least as stringent as those of the Federal program. Where the
results of different State requirements and procedures cannot be
readily measured reasonable judgment should be used to avoid im-
peding the authorization of State programs by requiring that those
programs bear an absolute likeness to the Federal program. Sec-I
tion 3006(a) requires the Administrator to make findings regarding 1
the standards for program approval. Therefore, an analysis more!
sophisticated than merely requiring verbatim reproduction of Fed- 1
eral provisions is required.
Prior to States’ being authorized to administer these new provi-
sions as part of their own programs, the administrator is to work
with those States that already have authorized programs to devel-
op, as expeditiously as possible, cooperative agreements to delegate
enforcement of these new Federal program elements. As provided
in section 3009, nothing in these amendments shall be construed to
prohibit any State from imposing any requirements which are
more stringent than those imposed by Federal regulation. There-
fore, in working with States to develop cooperative enforcement
agreements the Administrator is to delegate and accept adequate
enforcement of compliance with equivalent State requirements
that are more stringent than the new Federal requirements as ade-
quate enforcement of compliance with such new requirements.
The new requirements to be directly applied in every StatA are
those contained in the following sections as amended by this bill:
section 3002(b)(1) (notification by small quantity generators of ship-
ments containing hazardous wastes); section 3002(b)(7)(C) (require-I
ment for disposal after March 31, 1986, of hazardous wastes from I
small quantity generators only in facilities permitted under section
3005); section 3004(b) (deadlines for limiting or prohibiting land dis-
posal of certain wastes); section 3004(d) (ban on dust suppression);
section 3004(e) (ban on injection of wastes into certain underground I
formations); section 3004(f) (minimum technological standards for I
landfills, surface impoundments and incinerators); section 3 OO 4 g)
(requirement for correction of continuing releases of hazardous
wastes at permitted facilities); section 3004(i) (labeling require- I
ments for fuels produced from hazardous wastes or used oil); sec- I
tion 3005(c) (permit review and renewal requirements for hazard-
ous waste treatment, storage or disposal facilities); section 30 05(e)
(requirements for owners or operators of land disposal facilities I
under interim status authorizations); and section 3007(b)(1) (manda-
tory inspections of treatment, storage or disposal facilities). I
-------
fVWh ( AJF. 1Zt ’7, pl
SECTION 228—APPLICATION OF AMENDMENTS TO AUTHORIZED STATES
House bill.—The House bill mandates that any Subtitle C re-
quirement or prohibition imposed by the (1984) reauthorization of
the Solid Waste Disposal Act will take effect in interim or finally
authorized States on the same date as it takes effect in other
States, and shall be carried out unless the State has interim or
final authorization with respect to such requirement or prohibition.
Pending modifications of the state hazardous waste programs to in-
corporate such requirements, State may enter into cooperative
agreements with the Administrator to implement and assist in the
enforcement of the federal program.
Any state which, at the time of enactment, has an authorized
program may submit evidence to the Administrator that such pro-
gram is substantially equivalent to the federal program. The Ad-
ministrator shall grant interim status to states which demonstrate
that their programs are substantially equivalent to the federal pro-
gram.
Senate amendment.—The Senate amendment includes a list of
specific new requirements that shall apply directly in all (including
authorized) States until the State is authorized to operate in lieu of
the Federal program with respect to the particular requirement.
The list includes: the small quantity generator manifest require-
ment; the statutory requirements that apply to small quantity gen-
erators if EPA regulations are not promulgated by March 31, 1986;
land disposal prohibitions; ban on dust suppressants; ban on injec-
tion wells near underground drinking water sources; minimum
technological requirements for new or expanded facilities; correc-
tive actions at permitted facilities; labeling of fuels; fixed term for
permits; and minimum technological requirements for existing sur-
face impoundments and mandatory inspections.
Conference substitule.—The Conference substitute is the same as
the House provision. The list in the Senate amendment serves to
highlight the new requirements and prohibitions that will go into
effect upon or shortly after enactment. The list is not exhaustive,
for example, the ban on liquids in landfills should be included, but
it does draw attention to the fact that this bill makes a number of
significant changes to the existing program Those who generate,
transport, store, treat and dispose of hazardous waste should care-
fully review this legislation to assure that they are familiar with
their new responsibilities.
-------
AS
‘/ 7 H° 2 -
4 (e) APPLICATION OF AMEImMENTS TO AUTHORIZED
5 STATES.—Section 3006 is amended by adding the following
6 new subsection after subsection (f):
7 “(g) AMENDMENTS MADE BY 1983 AcT.—(1) Any
8 requirement or prohibition which is applicable to the genera-
9 tion, transportation, treatment, storage, or disposal of haz-
10 ardous waste and which is imposed under this subtitle pursu-
11 ant to the amendments made by the Hazardous Waste Con-
12 trol and Enforcement Act of 1983 shall take effect in each
13 State having an authorized State program on the same date
14 as such requirement takes effect in other States. The Admin-
15 istrator shall enforce such requirement directly in each such
16 State unless—
17 “(A) the State program is authorized (or is grant-
18 ed interim authorization as provided in paragraph (2))
19 with respect to such requirement; or
20 “(B) the State has entered into a cooperative
21 agreement with the Administrator under which the
22 State will enforce the requirement in that State pend-
23 ing amendment of the State hr zardous waste program
24 to incorporate such requirement.
HR 2867 RFS
-------
36
1 “(2) Any State which, before the date of the enactment
2 of the Hazardous Waste Control and Enforcement Act of
3 1983, has an existing hazardous waste program which is au-
4 thorized under this section may submit to the Administrator
5 evidence that such existing program contains (or has been
B amended to include) any requirement which is substantially
7 equivalent to a requirement referred to in paragraph (1) and
8 may request an interim authorization to carry out that re-
9 quirement under this subtitle. The Administrator, if the evi-
10 dence submitted shows the State requirement to be substan-
11 tially equivalent to the requirement referred to in paragraph
12 (1), grant an interim authorization to the State to carry out
13 such requirement in lieu of direct enforcement in the State by
14 the Administrator of such requirement.”.
-------
REQUIREMENTS IN AUTHORIZED STA TES
SEC. 24. Section 3006 of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act is amended by adding the following new subsection:
“(f) IMMEDIATE IMPLEMENTA TION.—The require-
ments of sections 3002 (b) (1), 3002(b)(7)(C), 3004 (b), (d),
(e), (f), (g), and (i), 3005 (c) and (e), and 3007(b) (1) shall
apply directly in all States, including each State with a
program authorized under this section, until the program of
such ‘State is authorized to operate in lieu of the Federal
program with respect to such requirement. Pending authori-
zation under this section of a State program which reflects
the amendments made by the Solid Waste Disposal Act
Amendments of 1984, the Administrator may enter into an
agreement with the State under which the State may assist
in the administration of the requirements and prohibitions
which take effect pursuant to such amendments. ‘
-------
c?c-. V i c,i
9 REQUIREMENTS iN AUTHORIZED STATES
10 SEc. 23. Section 3006 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
11 is amended by adding the following new subsection:
12 “(f) IMMEDIATE IMPLEMENTATION.—The require-
13 ments of sections 3002 (b) (1), 3002 (b) (7) (C), 3004 (7), (d),
14 (e), (f), (g), and (i), 3005 (c) and (e), and 3007(b) (1) shall
15 apply directly in all States, including each State with a pro-
16 gram authorized under this section, until the program of such
17 Slate is authorized to operate in lieu of the Federal program
18 with respect to such requirement. ‘
e2 - 12
-------
ha ZV ? AS l 5 6A.)(.-t3 p5
FEDERAL FACIUTIES
SEC 229 Section 3007 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by adding the following new subsection after subsection b thereof:
“(C) F Ea.&L FAcIUrY INSPECTIONS—Beginning twelve months
after the date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984, the Administrator shall, or in the case of a
State with an authorized hazardous waste program the State may.
undertake on an annual basis a thorough inspection of each facility
for the treatment. storage. or disposal of hazardous waste which is
owned or operated by a Federal agency to enforce its compliance
with this subtitle and the regulations promulgated thereunder. The
records of such inspections shall be available to the public as
provided in subsection (b).”.
coL)r ra i Io
SECTION 229—FEDERAL FACILITIES
House bilL—The House bill requires that beginning 1 year after
enactment EPA or authorized States must annually inspect all
Federal treatment, storage, and disposal facilities.
109
Senate amendment.—The Senate amendment directs that begin-
ning 12 months after enactment EPA shall (and authorized States
may) inspect each Federal treatment, storage, and disposal facility
at least every 2 years.
Conference substitute.—The Conference substitute combines the
House bill and Senate amendment. It requires that, beginning 12
months after, enactment, EPA shall (and authorized States may) in-
spect each hazardous waste facility owned or operated by a Federal
agency on an annual basis. -
-------
c 12 -i w g
FEDERAL FACILITIES
This section of the bill contains provisions dealing with Federal
facilities and Federal inspection of State and local facilities. Exist-
ing information on facilities owned or operated by agencies or de-
partments of the Federal government and by State and local gov-
ernments indicates that there are large numbers of such facilities
at which hazardous waste are treated, stored or disposed.
The bill requires the Administrator of the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency to inspect every facility at which hazardous wastes are
treated, stored or disposed and which are owned or operated by an
agency or department of the Federal government. The Administra-
tor is required to conduct this inspection at least once every two
years. While State officials in States with authorized hazardous
waste programs are authorized by the bill to conduct such inspec-
tions, the Administrator’s duty to conduct the inspection is manda-
tory. The Administrator may not delegate his responsibility outside
the Environmental Protection Agency. The Administrator must in-
spect the Federal facilities and determine their compliance with
the requirements of this subtitle and regulations promulgated
thereunder.
The bill also requires the Administrator to inspect every treat-
ment, storage and disposal facility which is operated by a State or
local government and which is required by section 3005 of the Act
to have a permit.
It is extremely important that the Administrator, as the Federal
official designated to implement the hazardous waste laws of this
Nation, assure that the facilities owned and operated by agencies
and departments of the Federal government are in compliance•
with those laws. Section 6001 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act speci-
fially provides that all branches of the Federal government owning
or operating a solid waste management facility are subject to and I
must comply with Federal, State, and local hazardous waste laws
including permitting and inspection requirements. This new inspec-
tion requirement will assure that the Administrator compiles com-
pliance data on all Federal facilities, thereby enabling the Agency,
States and private citizens to assess the performance of the Federal
government in meeting its obligation under the hazardous waste
laws.
It is also important that there be a thorough and objective evalu-
ation of conditions at State and locally operated hazardous waste
sites. The bill requires EPA, as the Federal agency with responsi-
bility for overseeing hazardous waste disposal, to conduct such an
-------
44
inspection and evaluation, and to make the results of its inspec-
tions available to the public.
This section of the bill also amends the Solid Waste Disposal Act
by adding a new section 3015. This new section provides that all
agencies of the Federal government undertake a continuing pro-
gram to compile, publish and submit to the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, and to authorized States, an in-
ventory describing all sites owned or operated by such agencies
where hazardous wastes have at any time been treated, stored or
disposed. The inventory is to include sites where hazardous wastes
were treated, stored or disposed at time other than when said agen-
cies owned or operated the sites. It would be helpful if the inven-
tory could include information on sites previously but no longer
owned or operated by a Federal agency, such as reported under sec-
tion 103(c) of CERCLA.
Some of the information required by the inventory may current-
ly be available to the Administrator pursuant to the notification re-
quirements in section 3010 of the Act or section 103(c) of the Com-
prehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA). While these notification requirements ap-
plied to active (section 3010) as well as inactive (section 103(c)) sites,
these notifications have been considered to be one-time require-
ments. The section 3015 inventory establishes an ongoing require-
ment to compile and continuously update the inventory.
Since the time the original notifications under section 103(c)
were prepared, several agencies have established programs to de-
termine further the existence and nature of hazardous waste sites
on Federal lands. The Environmental Protection Agency also has
begun an initiative to inspect facilities to evaluate identified sites
and determine if additional unreported sites may exist. The section
3015 inventory will provide a statutory framework for these efforts
assuring that as more detailed investigations reveal additional sites
or information on previously identified sites, this information isi
routinely added to agency inventories which are forwarded to the
Administrator.
The duty to compile and submit the inventory to the Administra-’
tor is a mandatory, nondiscretionary duty. Should an agency fail to
carry out the inventory requirements, section 3015 requires the Ad- I
ministrator to compile the inventory. The Administrator’s duty is’
also nondiscretionary. Either a noncomplying agency of the Admin-
istrator, if he fails to act, are subject to the citizen suit and penalty
provisions of section 7002. To assure that there is no confusion as,
to this, the amendments to section 7002 continue to use the current’
statutory language to specifically authorize a suite against “any
person, including the United States. . .“.
These new inspection and inventory requirements also will pro-
vide documentation as to the condition or existence of hazardous
waste sites on Federal lands. Such documentation, which there is
reason to believe has not been adequately developed in the past,
will be extremely useful in determining the need for response
action under CERCLA.
The Comprehensive Emergency Response, Compensation and Li-
ability Act established a program for responding to releases of haz-
ardous substances on Federal or non-Federal lands. Section 107(g)
-------
45
of CERCLA makes clear that the provisions of the law apply to all
branches of the Federal government. However, the President, in
Executive Order 12316, delegatd to various Federal agencies the
authority to assess whether a release has occurred on their lands
and what actions, if any, are necessary to respond to such releases.
This delegation of authority has resulted in the disturbing situa-
tion in which the potentially liable agency is also the agency juding
the existence and extent of its liability. The inspection and inven-
tory requirements of this bill will serve the function of “shining a
light” on these sites and providing the Administrator and the
public with essential information to assess the need for CERCLA
response at Federal facilities and the extent of Federal agency lia-
bility at such sites.
Except where the government is expressly singled out for prefer-
ential treatment, it is to abide by the requirements of this law as
would any private citizen.
-------
23 (d) FEDERAL FACILITY INSPECTIONS; REPORT - TO
24 C0NGREss.—Section 3007 of such Act is amended by
25 adding the following new subsections after subsection (d):
1 “(e) FEDERAL FACILITY INSPECTIONS.—Beginning
2 one year after the date of enactment of this subsection, the
3 Administrator shall, or in the case of a State with an author-
4 ized hazardous waste program the State shall, undertake no
5 less often than every year a thorough inspection of each fa- i
6 ciity for the treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous
7 waste which is operated by an agency or instrumentality of
8 the Federal Government to enforce its compliance with this
9 subtitle and the regulations promulgated thereunder. The
10 records of such inspections shall be available, consistent with
11 section 1006, to the public as provided in section 3007(b).
-------
p (1 1 -
FEDERAL FACILITIES
SEC. 11. (a) Section 3007 of the Solid Waste Dispos-
al Act, as amended by section 10 of this Act, is further
amended by adding the following new subsections:
“(d) FAcILITiEs OPERATED BY A FEDERAL
AGENcY.—Beginning twelve months after enactment of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1984, the Ad-
ministrator shall, and the State, in the case of a State wit1
an authorized hazardous waste program, may undertake no
less often than every two years a thorough inspection of each
facility for the treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous’
waste which is operated by a Federal agency as to its com-
pliance with this 8ubtitle and the regulations promulgated
thereunder. The records of such inspections shall be avail-
able to the public as provided in subsection (c).
-------
7?
19 FEDERAL FACILITIES
20 SEC. 11. (a) Section 3007 of the Solid Waste Disposal
21 Act, as amended by section 10 of this Act, is further amended
22 by adding the following new subsections:
23 “(d) FACILITIES OPERATED BY A FEDERAL
24 NCY._Be9mnmng twelve months after enactment of the
25 Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1983, the Admin-
63
1 istrator shall, and the State, in the case of a State with an
2 authorized hazardous waste program, may undertake no less
3 often than every two years a thorough inspection of each fa-
4 cility for the treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous
5 waste which is operated by a Federal agency as to its compli-
6 ance with this subtitle and the regulations promulgated there-
7 under. The records of such inspections shall be available to
8 the public as provided in subsection (c).
-------
I4TZ 2’ * S , b 6AJ
STATE OPERATED FAC TIES
SEc. 230. Section 3007 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by adding the following new subsection after subsection (C):
“(d) STAltOPEIUTEI) FAcIuTIES.—The Administrator shall annu-
ally undertake a thorough inspection of every facility for the treat-
ment. storage, or disposal of hazardous waste which is operated by a
State or local government for which a permit is required under
section 3005 of this title. The records of such inspection shall be
available to the public as provided in subsection ib).’.
1Z wL 101
SECTION 230—STATE OPERATED FACILITIES
House bilL—The House bill directs the Administrator to conduct,
on an annual basis, a thorough inspection of each Subtitle C land-
fill facility operated by a State or local government. The record of
such inspection shall be made available to the public.
Senate amendment—The Senate amendment is similar but re-
quires the Administrator to inspect all treatment, storage and dis-
posal facilities. The Senate amendment does not direct that such
inspection be on an annual basis.
Conference substttute.—The conference substitute adopts the
Senate amendment with the additional requirement that each fa-
cility owned or operated by a State or local government be inspect-
ed on an annual basis.
The purpose of this provision is to require EPA to undertake
annual inspections of Subtitle C facilities that are owned or operat-
ed by State or local governments. For purposes of this provision,
inspections may be conducted by any officer, employee, or repre-
sentative of the EPA duly designated by the Administrator.
The Conferees intend for EPA to conduct such inspections at all
state or locally owned or operated Subtitle C facilities regardless of
whether the landfill is located in a State with interim authoriza-
tion, final authorization, or in a non-authorized State. The purpose
of the annual inspection is to provide for a Federal presence at
State and locally operated Subtitle C facilities and to assure com-
pliance with all applicable regulations and permit conditions.
g—30
-------
Section 18. State operated landfills
The purpose of this provision is to require EPA to undertake
annual inspections of Subtitle C landfills (i.e., those landfills oper-
ating under interim status or a Subtitle C permit) that are operat-
ed by State or local governments. For purposes of this provision,
inspections may be conducted by any officer, employee, or repre-
sentative of the EPA duly designated by the Administrator.
The Committee intends for EPA to conduct such inspections at
all State or locally operated Subtitle C landfills regardless of
whether the landfill is located in a State with interim authoriza-
tion, final authorization, or in a non-authorized State. The purpose
of the annual inspection is to provide for a Federal presence at
State and locally operated Subtitle C landfills; the provision does
not necessarily compel any Federal enforcement action.
The amendment also mandates that the record of each annual
inspecion be made available to the public to the extent provided by
Section 3007(b).
-------
S’ ’1 4c
15 STATE-OPERATED LANDFILLS
16 SEc. 23. Section 3007 is amended by adding the follow-
17 ing new subsection at the end thereof:
18 “(c) STATE-OPERATED LAiwnLLs.—The Administra-
19 tor shall annually undertake a thorough inspection of each
20 landfill facility which is operated by a State or local govern-
21 ment which is subject to regulation under this subtitle. The
22 record of such inspection shall be available to the public as
23 provided in subsection (b).”.
-------
c?- , sPA55c p
“(e) Sm TE- OPERA TED FACILITIES. — The Adm in is-
trator shall undertake a thorough inspection of every facility
f r the treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous waste
which is o’perated by a State or local government for which
a permit is required under section 3005 of this title. The
record9 of such inspection shall be available to the public as
provided in subsection (c). “
L3c
-------
-. P’- . 4
4ç
7 STATE-OPERATED LANDFiLLS
8 SEc. 18. Section 3007 is amended by adding the fol-
9 lowing new subsection at the end thereof:
10 “(c) STATE-OPERATED LANDFILLS.—The Adminis-
trator shall annually undertake a thorough inspection of each
12 landfill facility which is operated by a State or local govern-
13 men( which is subject to regulation under this subtitle. Thq
14 record of such inspection shall be available to the public as
15 provided in subsection (b, . ‘
-------
ç -c - (ñtR’rLl .-i iJ
9 “(e) STA TE- OPERA TED FACILiTiES. —The Adminis-
10 trator shall undertake a thorough inspection of every facility
11 for the treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous waste
12 which is operated by a State or local government for which a
13 permit is required under section 3005 of this title. The
14 records of such inspection shall be available to the public as
15 provided in subsection (c). ‘
16 (b) Subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
17 amended by adding the following new section:
c23O
-------
,IATh b
H. R. 2867—36
MANDATORY INSPECtiONS
SEC. 231. Section 3007 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by inserting the following new subsection after subsection (d)
thereof:
“(e) MANDATORY INsPEcTIoNs.—41) The Administrator (or the
State in the case of a State having an authorized hazardous waste
program under this subtitle) shall commence a program to thor-
oughly 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 compliance with
this subtitle (and the regulations promulgated under this subtitLe).
Such inspections shall commence not later than twelve months after
the date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amend-
ment.s of 1984. The Administrator shall, after notice and opportunity
for public comment, promulgate regulations governing the mini-
mum frequency and manner of such inspections, including the
manner in which records of such inspections shall be maintained
and the manner in which reports of such inspections shall be filed.
The Administrator may distinguish between classes and categories
of facilities commensurate with the risks posed by each class or
category.
‘i21 Not later than six months after the date of enactment of the
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984. the Administrator
shall submit to the Congress a report on the potential for inspections
of hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal facilities by
nongovernmental inspectors as a supplement to inspections con-
ducted by officers. employees, or representatives of the Environmen-
tal Protection Agency or States having authorized hazardous waste
programs or operating under a cooperative agreement with the
Administrator. Such report shall be prepared in cooperation with
the States, insurance companies offering environmental impairment
insurance, independent companies providing inspection services,
and other such groups as appropriate. Such report shall contain
recommendations on provisions and requirements for a program of
private inspections to supplement governmental inspections.’.
-------
Hp ,Cau rLVT. i’’°
SECTION 23 i—MANDATORY INSPECTIONS
House bill—The House bill requires that, beginning 12 months
after enactment, every hazardous waste treatment, storage, or dis-
posal facility required to have a permit under Section 3005 shall be
inspected at least every two years.
In addition, the Administrator is directed to report to Congress
within 6 months on the potential for a program of private inspec-
tions to supplement governmental inspections of hazardous waste
facilities.
Senate amendment.—The senate amendment contains a similar
provision.
Conference substitute.—The conference substitute adopts the
House provision. The Conferees believe that regular inspections of
facilities that treat, store, and dispose of hazardous wastes are a
vital component of any comprehensive hazardous waste control
program that adequately protects public health and the environ-
ment. Current law, however, does not mandate that these facilities
110
be regularly inspected. Although officers, employees, and repre-
sentatives of the States and EPA are authorized by section 3007(a)
to enter and inspect any facilities where hazardous wastes are han-
dled, at present, far too few inspections are being conducted to ef-
fectively monitor compliance with RCRA and the applicable regula-
tions at treatment, storage, and disposal facilities. Moreover, most
inspections that do take place are conducted under widely varying
state-formulated criteria for the qualifications of inspectors as well
as the scope of the inspection. A mandatory program of frequent
periodic inspections to uniform minimum standards should provide
substantial incentives for voluntary compliance thus promoting
greater protection of human health and the environment.
With respect to the report on the potential for private inspec-
tions as a supplement to governmental inspections, the Conferees
encourage the Administrator to explore the possibility of inspection
programs which would utilize the technical skills of the private
sector. Such programs could provide an important and valuable
means of supplementing Federal or State inspection and enforce-
ment efforts, if there is assurance that such private action can be
relied upon to present objective, unbiased results.
-------
I Ff2 Pr q1°i p I,
Section 24. Mandatorj inspection of treatnwnt storage and disposal
facilities
Regular inspections of facilities that treat, store, and dispose of
hazardous wastes are a necessary component of any comprehensive
hit rn .dous waste control program that adequately protects the
public. Current law, however, does not mandate that these facilities
be regularly inspected. Although officers, employees, and repre-
72
sentatives of the States and EPA are authorized by section 3007(a)
of RCRA to enter and inspect any facilities where hsw s rdous wastes
are handled, at present, too few inspections are being conducted to
monitor effectively compliance with RCRA and applicable regula-
tions at treatment, storage, and disposal facilities. Moreover, most
inspections that do take place are conducted under widely varying
State formulated criteria for the qualifications of inspectors and
the scope of the inspection. A mandatory program of periodic in-
spections to uniform minimum standards should provide substan-
tial incentives for voluntary compliance.
To improve the monitoring of compliance with RCRA and appli-
cable regulations, the amendment requires that every facility that
treats, stores, or disposes of hazardous waste within the purview of
section 3005 (whether or not a permit has already been issued) be
thoroughly inspected on a regular basis and no less frequently than
once every two years. The Administrator is directed to prornulgate
regulations governing the frequency and manner of inspections and
may distinguish between classes and categories of facilities corn-I
mensurate with the risks posed by each class or category.
The Administrator is also directed to prepare and submit to Con-
gress within six months after enactment of this legislation, a report
on the potential for using non-government inspectors as a supple-
ment to the inspections being conducted by officers, employees or
representatives of EPA and authorized States. The report is to be
prepared in cooperation with States, insurance companies offering
environmental impairment liability insurance, independent compa-
nies that might be interested in offering such inspection services,
and other groups as the Administrator shall deem appropriate. The
report is to contain recommendations on provisions and require-
ments for a complete program of private inspections, including
safeguards necessary to protect against conflicts of interest and ap- I
propriate provisions for the establishment of an inspector certifica-
tion program such as necessary trnining and e minations.
The Committee expects that the report will evaluate the public
costs of the mandatory inspection program required by this section
and the desirability of reducing such costs through the option of in-
spection by certified non-governmental personnel. The report
should also discuss the establishment of a schedule of fees which
would be charged for examination and certification of inspectors so
as to make the program self-sufficient.
-------
1UM • “ ‘J ?“
MANDATORY INSPECTIONS
Regulatory inspections of treatment, storage and disposal facili-
ties are a necessary element of an effective hazardous waste con-
trol program. Officers, employees and representatives of the States
and EPA are authorized by section 3007(a) of the Act to enter and
inspect any facility where hazardous waste is being handled. How-
ever, too few inspections are being conducted to effectively monitor
compliance with the Act and applicable regulations at treatment,
storage and disposal facilities, and the Act does not currently re-
quire regular inspections. In addition, the nature of the qualifica-
tions of inspectors and the scope of the inspections vary widely, de-
pending to an extent on the State where they are conducted.
The reported bill adds a new subsection (b) to section 3007, re-
quiring inspections at least every two years at all treatment, stor-
age, and disposal facilities. The purpose of this amendment is to in-
crease the numbers of inspections and improve the quality of the
inspections. A mandatory program assuring frequent, periodic and
uniformly high quality inspection is necessary to assure the public
that hazardous waste facilities are operating safely and that health
and the environment are being protected. The amendment requires
that every facility that treats, stores or disposes of hazardous waste
(whether or not a permit has already been issued by EPA or an au-
thorized State) be thoroughly inspected on a regular basis and no
less frequently than once every two years. The Administrator must
-------
42
promulgate regulations governing the frequency and manner of
spections and may distinguish among classes and categories ofi
facilities, commensurate with the risk posed by each class or cate-I
gory.
This provision authorizes the Administrator to require that all
inspections be conducted by an inspector certified as competent and
qualified by the Administrator. Unless the Administrator deter-I
mines that the problems of unqualified inspectors and inspections I
of uneven quality being conducted throughout the United States
can be remedied more effectively by other means at his disposal he I
should establish such a certification program.
EPA’s current goal of inspecting land disposal facilities and in-I
cinerators once a year, storage facilities once every four years, and I
remaining generators and transporters once every ten years is in-I
adequate. The proper minimum frequency is to be decided after a
rulemaking process which should begin as soon as possible. If addi-
tional resources are required to perform the requisite number of in-I
Spections, EPA should inform the Committee about such resource 1
needs. EPA is not to assume that existing resources cannot be in-
creased for the purposes of conducting this rulemaking, but rather I
should determine what is necessary to protect human health and
the environment.
The Administrator must also prepare a report on the potential I
for using non-government inspectors to supplement the inspections
being conducted by officers, employees or representatives of EPA
and authorized States, and submit this report to Congress within 6
months after enactment of this amendment. The report is to be I
prepared in cooperation with States, insurance companies offering
environmental impairment liability insurance, independent compa-
nies providing inspection services, and other groups that the Ad-’
ministrator determines are appropriate.
The report is to examine the validity of an idea presented during
hearings: utilizing non-government inspectors to supplement the
enforcement work of EPA and the States. EPA should examine the
pros and cons of this idea, including, but not limited to, the role of
such inspectors in enforcement procedures, whether the govern-
ment or the owner/operator should choose who will inspect a par-
ticular facility, whether the use of non-governmental inspectors
will present potential conflict-of-interest problems, and whether
other mechanisms can better provide additional inspection capabili-
ty, such as a fee. system to fund PA and State enforcement activi-
ties. Other areas of interest involve questions of confidentiality and
the latitude which non-governmental inspectors would have to
withhold the results of their inspections from the public and the
Agency.
The report is to contain such background information as well as
recommendations on provisions and requirements for a program of
private inspections, including safeguards necessary to protect
against conflicts of interest or the appearance of such conflicts and
appropriate provisions for the establishment of an inspector certifi-
cation program such as necessary training and examinations. The
report should also discuss the establishment of a schedule of fees
which would be charged for examiniation and certification of in-
spectors that would make the program self sufficient.
The study the Administrator performs should be focused on the
issue at hand: how to procure uniform, high quality inspections of
treatment, storage and disposal facilities at little or no cost to State
and Federal governmen . The product of the Administrator’s
study should be a complete report, evaluating alternative solutions
to the problem and containing recommendations as to the most ap- I
proprjate solutjo . It should contain detailed recommendations for I
legislation or regulations necessary to implement the recommended
alternative.
-23/
-------
1 -
Y 14U- 4OQ ’1
15 MANDATORY INSPECTIONS
16 SEc. 29. Section 3007 is amended by inserting the fol-
17 lowing new subsection at the end thereof:
18 “(d) MANDATORY INSPECTIONS.—(1) The Administra-
19 tor (or the Sta.te in the case of a State having an authorized
20 hazardous waste program under this subtitle) shall commence
21 a program to thoroughly inspect every facility for the treat-
22 ment, storage, or disposal of hazardous waste for which a
23 permit is required under section 8005 no less often than
24 every two years as to its compliance with this subtitle (and
25 the regulations promulgated under this subtitle). Such inspec-
-------
93
1 tions shall commence not later than twelve months after th
2 enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments
3 1983. The Administrator shall, after notice and opportunit
4 for public comment, promulgate regulations governing the
5 minimum frequency and manner of such inspections, includ-
6 ing the manner in which records of such inspections shall be
7 maintained and the manner in which reports of such inspec-
8 tions shall be ified. The Administrator may distinguish be-
9 tween classes and categories of facilities commensurate with
10 the risks posed by each class or category.
11 “(2) Not later than six months after the enactment of
12 the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1983, the Ad-
13 ministrator shall submit to the Congress a report on the po-
14 tential for inspections of hazardous waste treatment, storage,
15 or disposal facilities by nongovernmental inspectors as a sup-
16 plement to inspections conducted by officers, employees, or
17 representatives of the Environmental Protection Agency or
18 States having authorized hazardous waste programs or oper-
19 ating under a cooperative agreement with the Administrator.
20 Such report shall be prepared in cooperation with the States,
21 insurance companies offering environmental impairment in-
22 surance, and independent companies providing inspection,
23 services, and other such groups as appropriate. Such report
24 shall contain recommendations on provisions and require-
94 1
1 ments for a program of private inspections to supplement
2 governmental inspections.”.
-------
55aL j 11
MANDA TORY INSPECTIONS
SEC. 10. Section 3007 of the Solid Waste Disposal
Ac! i s amended by inserting the following new subsection
after subsection (a) and by redesignating succeeding subsec-
tions accordingly:
“(b) MANDATORY INSPECTJONS.—(1) Beginning
twelve months after the enactment of the Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act Amendments of 1984, every facility for the treat-
ment, storage, or disposal of hazardous waste for which a
permit is required under 8CCtiOn 3005 of this title shall be
thoroughly and regularly inspected no less often than every
two years as to its compliance with this subtitle and the reg-
ulations promulgated thereunder. The Administrator shall,
after notice and opportunity for public comment, promulgate
regulations governing the minimum frequency and manner
of such inspections, including the manner in which records
of such inspections shall be maintained. The Administrator
may distinguish between classes and categories of facilities
-------
43
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 Amendments of 1984, the Ad-
ministrator shall submit to the Congress a report on the po-
tential for inspections of hazardous waste treatment, storage,
or disposal facilities by nongoveriimental inspectors as a
supplement to inspections conducted by officers, employees,
or representatives of the Environmental Protection Agency
or States having authorized hazardous waste programs or
operating undor a cooperative agreement with the Adminis-
trator. Such report shall be prepared in cooperation with the
States, insurance companies offering environmental impair-
ment insurance, and independent companies providing in-
spection services, and other such groups as appropriate.
Such report shall contain recommendations on provisions
and requirements for a program of private inspections to
supplement governmental inspections. “.
23/
-------
Tt. 234- Pofl.1. ‘1 ’ ?
3 MANDATORY INSPECTiONS
4 SEc. 24. Section 3007 is amended by inserting the fol-
5 lowing new subsection at the end thereof:
6 “ ‘d ) . IfANDATORY INSPECTIONS.—(’l) The Adminis-
7 trator (or the State in the case of a State having an author.
8 ized hazardous waste program under this subtitle) shall corn-
9 inence a program to thoroughly inspect every facility for the
10 treatment, Storage, or disposal of hazardous waste for which a
11 permit is required under section 3005 no less oftcn than
12 erery two years as to its compliance with this subtitle (and
13 the regulations promulgated under this subtitle .). Such in-
14 spections shall commence not later than twelve months after
15 the enaclmcn! of the Solid TVaste Disposal Act _4mendrnen(s
16 of 19.93. The Admini 1ra1or shall, after notice and opportun-
17 ily for public comment, promulgate regulations gorerning t e
18 minimum frequency and manner of such inspections, includ-
19 ing the manner in which records of such inspections 3hall be
20 maintaii ed and the manner in which reports of such inspec-
21 lions shall be filed. The Administrator may distinguish be-
22 Iween classes and categories of facilities commensurate with
23 the risl:s posed by each class or category.
24 “(2) Not later than six months after the enactment of
25 the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1983. the Ad-
HR 2S67 RH
-------
58
1 rninistrator shall submit to the congress a report on the po-
2 tential for inspections of hazardous waste treatment, storage,
3 or di3posal facilities by nongovernmental inspectors as a sup.
4 plement to inspections conducted by officers, employees, or
5 representatives of the Environmental Protection Agency or
6 States having authorized hazardows waste programs or oper-
7 ating under a cooperative agreement with the Administrator.
8 Such report shall be prepared in cooperation with the Stales,
9 insurance companies offering environmental impairment z-
10 surance, and independent companies providing in. pcct ion
11 services, and other svch groups as appropriate. Such repcr
12 shall contain recommendations on provisions and require-
13 ments for a program of private inspections to supplement got ’.
14 ernmenlal inspections. ‘
-------
C’T 1’Ow ‘7’1 ’
9 MANDATORY iNSPECTIONS
10 SEC. 10. Section 3007 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
11 is amended by inserting the following new subsection after
12 subsection (a) and by redesignating succeeding subsections
13 accordingly:
14 “(b) MANDATORY JNSPECTIONS.—(1) Beginning
15 twelve months after the enactment of the Solid Waste Dispos-
16 al Act Amendments of 1983, every facility for the treatment,
17 storage, or disposal of hazardous waste for which a permit is
18 required under section 3005 of this title shall be thoroughly
19 and regularly inspected no less often than every two years as
20 to its compliance with this subtitle and the regulations pro-
21 mulgated thereunder. The Administrator shall, after notice
22 and opportunity for public comment, promulgate regulations
23 governing the minimum frequency and manner of such in-
24 spections, including the manner in which records of such in-
25 spections shall be maintained. The Administrator may dis-
S 757 RS
-------
62
1 linguish between classes and categories of facilities commen-
2 surate with the risks posed by each class or category.
3 “(2) Not later than six months after the enactment of
4 the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1983, the Ad-
5 ministrator shall submit to the Congress a report on the po-
6 tential for inspections of hazardous waste treatment, storage,
7 or disposal facilities by nongovernmental inspectors as a sup-
8 plement to inspections conducted by officers, employees, or
9 representatives of the Environmental Protection Agency or
10 States having authorized hazardous waste programs or oper-
11 ating under a cooperative agreement with the Administrator.
12 Such report shall be prepared in cooperation with the States,
13 insurance companies offering environmental impairment in-
14 surance, and independent companies providing inspection
15 services, and other such groups as appropriate. Such report
16 shall contain recommendations on provisions and require-
17 ments for a program of private inspections to supplement gov-
18 ernmental inspections. ‘
-------
i •;ni
S 13820
tional constituents, EPA’s regulations
did not allow the Agency to.do so. This
has resulted In some wastes ‘ ‘hich are
still hazardous being exempted from
the hazardous wastes hsts and, conse-
quently, from all RCRA regulation.
Under the Agency’s present regula-
Lions, to be a hazardous waste, a waste
must exhibit a characteristic of haz-
ardous wastes or be listed by name.
None of the characteristics of hazard-
ous wastes promulgated so far—Ignit-
ability, coriosivity, reactlvlty, or ex-
traction procedure—identifies wastes
on the basis of organic toxicity. Fur-
thermore. EPA’s listing process has
been virtually stalled for several years.
This bill will direct EPA to consider
criteria, constituents, or other factors.
In addition to those for which a waste
was listed, when evaluating petitions
to delist or exclude from regulation a
hazardous waste generated at a par-
ticular facility.
EPA Is to consider additonal hazard-
ous constituents and criteria when de-
ciding whether to delist a waste. The
threshold test is that EPA have tnfor-
ination reasonably indicating that
presence of additional constituents
could cause the waste to still be fLaz-
ardous. EPA Is specifically empowered
to obtain Information from the peti-
tioner relevant to this reasonable basis
detenninatlon. The bill thus provides
that the Initial petition must be ac-
companied by information adequate to
evaluate the petiton. This Includes in-
formation necessary En deternlnlng
whether there is a reasonable basis to
bclleve the waste could still be hazard-
ous. Examples of information that can
appropriately be requested in an Ini-
tial application are data an corist.itu-
erits used as raw materials, catalysts,
solvents, or ingredients In 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 2001 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.
UUflNINO * 5.) ELENDXNG
Currently, EPA exempts facilities
that burn hazardous wastes for the
primary purpose of energy recovery.
EPA has estimated that 10 or 15 niil
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 facilitics not now
regulated under 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 blendlng is one of several areas
where EPA’s failure to promulgate
regulations has led to direct threats to
human health arid the environment.
Hazardous wastes have been 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 notified 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 yean 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 icr facilities which burn de
minimis quantities of hazardous
wastes in fuel.
WJ(DA Oitv U1SPECTIOzS £ 50 FZDSRAI.
rAciurics
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-
tics 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.
FSDcRAL ENVORCCMEZ4T
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 wast& 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 requ ire-
ments. Portions of the knowing er.dan-
germent pro isions 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 arid redundant pro-
visions In the knowing endangerment
section are removed. By specifically
adding criminal liability for causing
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 OP JiAZARDOUS WASTS
Current regulatIons allow hazardous
wastes to be exported from the United
State 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 ER. 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 arid 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 shell
not be required.
C l ’ 2- i
-------
4 ,j.Q
FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT
SEc. 232. (a) Section 3008d’i of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended as follows:
(1) in paragraph (1)—
(A) insert after ‘knowingly transports” the following: “or
causes to be transported”. and
(B) strike out “sectIon 3005 (or 3006 in case of a State
program)” and substitute “this subtitle”;
(2) in paragraph (2)—
(A) strike out “either”;
(B) strike out “section 3005 (or 3006 in the case of a State
program)” and substitute “this subtitle”; and
(C) strike out subparagraph (B) and substitute:
“(B) in knowing violation of any material condition or
requirement of such permit: or
“(C) in knowing violation of any material condition or require-
ment of any applicable interim status regulations or stand-
ards;”; and
(3) strike out all after paragraph (2) and substitute:
H. R.2867—37
“(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, main-
tained, or used for purposes of compliance with regulations
promulgated by the Administrator (or by a State in the case o ’
an authorized state program under this subtitle;
“(4) knowingly generates, stores, treats. transports, dispose i
of, exports, 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, conceals, or fails to tile any record, application, manifest
report. or other document required to be maintained or tiled for
purposes of compliance with regulations promulgated by the
Administrator (or by a State in the case of an authorized State
program) under this subtitle;
‘ia) knowingly transports without a manifest, or causes to bE
transported without a manifest, any hazardous waste required
by regulations promulgated under this subtitle (or by a State id
t Ie case of a State program authorized under this subtitle) to
accc..npanied by a manifest;
shall, upon conviction, be subject to a tine of not more than £50.000
for each day of violation, or imprisonment not to exceed ts o years
(five years in the case of a violation of paragraph (1) or (2)), or both.
If the conviction is for a violation committed after a first conviction
of such person under this paragraph, the maximum punishment
under the respective paragraph shall be doubled with respect toj
both fine and imprisonment.”.
bi Section 3008(e) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended tol
read as follows:
••( ) K owt c ENDANGERME rr —Any person who knowingly
transports. treats. stores. disposes of, or exports any hazardou ”s
waste identified or listed under this subtitle in violation of para. 1
graph (1. 12, 13), 4), i5 . or ‘61 of subsection (d) of this section whoi
knows at that time that he thereby places another person in irnmi-
nent danger of death or serious bodily injury, shall, upon conviction.l
be subject to a tine of not more than £250,000 or imprisonment for’
not more than fifteen years. or both. A defendant that is an organi.I
zation shall, upon conviction of violating this subsection, be subject I
toa fine of not more than £1,000,000.”.
(C) Section 300&d)(2)IA; of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by striking out ‘having obtained”.
-------
-f-rz -Lc , t2.P ii
SECTION 232—FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT
House bilL—The House bill expands the list of prohibited actions
which may constitute criminal offenses and raises the maximum
criminal penalties. The statutory definition of “knowing endanger-
ment” is rewritten.
Senate amendment.—The Senate amendment contains a similar
provision, except the Senate amendment includes “exports” in vio-
lation of the Act as a potential criminal offense and clarifies that
the criminal provisions of RCRA extend to any individual who
knowingly and illegally handles hazardous waste.
Conference substitute.—The Conference substitute is the same as
the Senate amendment.
-------
p t. d7 -L 1 C i - —
FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT
The reported bill amends section 3008 in several ways to improve
hazardous waste enforcement. The amendment to section 3008(d)(1)
clarifies the criminal liability of persons, including generators of
hazardous waste, who knowingly cause hazardous waste to be
transported to an unpermitted facility. Because the generator is in
the best position to know the nature of his waste material, the reg-
ulatory scheme established by subtitle C places a duty on the gen-
erator in the first instance to make appropriate arrangements to
transport and dispose of his waste properly. The Federal govern-
ment’s ability to obtain criminal penalties against generators and
other persons who knowingly cause the transportation of hazard-
ous waste to an unpermitted facility is essential to the regulatory
scheme.
The amendments to section 3008(d)(2) add violations of interim
status standards to those violations of subtitle C for which criminal
penalties are available. A large number of hazardous waste man-
agement facilities currently are operating under interim status
standards, rather than final permits. Knowing violations of interim
status standards can present significant human health and envi-
ronmental problems. In .the most serious situations, the govern-
ment’s ability to obtain criminal penalties for such violations will
be a necessary enforcement tool.
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 operation), where States do
have such standards, violation of those standards will also be sub-
ject to this section.
Section 3008(d)(3) provides criminal penalties for the submittal of
false information in documents required to be filed under the Act.
However, the statute presently does not specifically address materi-
al omissions or the failure to file required reports. These actions
may have significant impact on the regulatory process. The con-
duct can be as serious in nature as falsification of information sub-
mitted. These amendments are proposed to clarify that criminal
penalties are provided for this conduct.
c,232
-------
46
Only “material” omissions, i.e., omissions which will have a tend-
ency to influence Agency action, are included, assuring 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 or incom-
plete filing due to accident or mistake is not covered by this provi-
sion.
The amendments also clarify the fact that section 3008(d)(4) ap-
plies to records or other documents required by State regulation in
a State with an authorized subtitle C program. Finally, the amend-
ments affirm that this provision apply to exporters of hazardous
waste, as well as generators, storers, treaters, transporters, dispos-
ers and other handlers of hazardous waste.
A new paragraph (5) is added to section 3008(d) by these amend-
ments to 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
conduct resulting in the unmanifested transportation of hazardous
waste unless the waste is subsequently delivered to an unpermitted
facility, a violation of section 3008(dXl).
These amendments are intended to simplify the current lan-
guage of section 3008(e) and to extend its coverage to all criminal I
violations specified in section 3008(d).
Section 3008(e)(1)(B)(ii) is deleted from the “Knowing Endanger-
ment” provision in the statute because that paragraph is redun-
dant once violations of interim status standards are included in
subsection (d)(2). Rather than reiterate those actions which consti- I
tute the predicate for the crime of knowing endangerment, section
3008(e) is amended to reference paragraphs (d)(1)—(5). The further
effect of this change is that the making of false material state-
ments or representations; the destruction, alteration or conceal-
ment of or failure to file, records, applications, manifests, reports
and other documents; and the transportation of hazardous waste
without a manifest, have been added to those actions subject to the
knowing endangerment provisions of section 3008(e).
In addition, this amendment eliminates the language of subsec-
tion (e)(2) (A) and (B) from section 3008. In the past, there has been
confusion over the meaning of and the distinction between (e)(2)(A
and (e)(2)(B). This element of proof renders section 3008(e) unduly
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. With the deletion of this language the provision re-
tains numerous safeguards and there still remains a sufficiently
strenuous burden to prove knowing endangerment to prevent un-
warranted prosecutions.
Finally, the increased maximum prison sentences for violations
of section 3008(e) and section 3008(d) (1) and (2) reflect the Con-
gress’ explicit intention that criminal violations of this Act should
not be treated lightly. As the implementation of other provisions of
this bill restrict land disposal of hazardous wastes and require
safer methods of handling and treatment, there will be a signifi-
cantly greater incentive to dispose of toxic waste illegally. These
improved criminal provisions and enhanced penalties are intended
to provide EPA and the Department of Justice with the necessary
47 .
enforcement tools to combat increased criminal activity in this
c23c2.
-------
- -5 4 , i s -O ?‘
FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT
SEC. 12. (a) Section 3008(d) of the Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act is amended as follows:
(1) in paragraph (1)—
(A) insert after “knowingly transports” the
following: “or causes to be transported’ and
(B) strike out “section 3005 (or 3006 in the
case of a State program)” and substitute “this
8Ubtitle ‘
(2) in paragraph (2)—
(A) strike out “either”;
(B) strike out “section 3005 (or 3006 in the
case of a State program)” and substitute “this
subtitle ‘ and
-------
47
(C) strike out subparagraph (B) and
substitute:
“(B) in knowing violation of any material condi-
tion or requirement of such permit; or
“(C) in knowing violation of any material condi-
tion or requirement of any applicable interim status
regulations or standards; ‘ and
(3) strike out all after paragraph (2) and
substitute:
“(3) knowingly omits material infonn ation or
nakes any false material statement or representation
in any application, label, manifest, record, report,
permit, or other document filed, maintained, or used
for purposes of compliance with regulations promulgat-
ed by the Administrator (or by a State in the case of
an authorized State program) under this subtitle;
“(4) knowingly generates, stores, treats, trans-
ports, disposes of, exports, 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,
conceals, or fails to file any record, application, man
test, report, or other document required to be main-
tained or filed for purposes of compliance with regula-
tions promulgated by the Administrator (or by a State
HR 286? EAS
-------
48
in the case of an authorized Stale program) under this
subtitle;
4 1(5) knowingly transports without a manifest, or
causes to be transported without a manifest, any haz-
ardous waste required by regulations promulgated
under this subtitle (or by a Stale in the case of a State
program authorized under this subtitle) to be accompa-
nied by a manifest
shall upon conviction, be subject to a fine of not more than
$50,000 for each day of violation, or imprisonment not to
exceed Iwo years (five years in the case of a violation of
paragraph (1) or (2)), or both. If the conviction is for a vio-
lation committed after a first conviction of sue/i person
under this paragraph, the maximum punishment under the
respective paragraph shall be doubled with respect to both
fine and imprisonment. “
(b) Section 3008(e) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended to read as follows:
“(e) KNOWING ENDANGERMENT. —Any person who
knowingly transports, treats, stores, disposes of, or exports
any hazardous waste identified or listed under this subtitle
in violation of paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of subsec-
tion (d) of this section who knows at that lime that he there-
by places another person in imminent danger of death or se-
rious bodily injury, shal4 upon conviction, be subject to a
HR 2867 EAS
-------
49
fine of not more than $250,000 or imprisonment for not
more than fifteen years, or both. A defendant that is an or-
ganization shall, upon conviction of violating this subsec-
tion, be subject to a fine of not more than $1,000,000. “.
-------
i-- . •, :- j .: d
CLARIFICATION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
SEC. 32. Section 3008(d) (2) (A) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act is amended by striking out “having obtained “
-------
-CTzc DnT ‘ J cf
sr?€-r vr2-1 .P r
12 FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT
13 SEC. 12. (a) Section 3008(d) of the Solid Waste Dis-
14 posal Act is amended as follows:
15 (1) in paragraph (1)—
16 (A) insert after “knowingly transports” the
17 following: “or causes to be transported ‘ and
18 (B) strike out “section 3005 (or 3006 in the
19 case of a State program)” and substitute “this
20 subtitle ‘ -
21 (2) in paragraph (2)—
22 (A) strike out “either’
23 (B) strike out “section 3005 (or 3006 in the
24 case of a State program)” and substitute “this
25 subtitle “ and
-------
66
1 (C) strike out subparagraph (B) and
2 substitute:
3 “(B) in knowing violation of any material condi :
4 lion or requirement of such permit; or
5 “(C) in knowing violation of any material condi-
6 lion or requirement of any applicable interim status
7 regulations or standards; ‘ and
8 (3) strike out all after paragraph (2) and
9 substitute:
10 “(3) knowingly omits material information or
11 makes any false material statement or representation
12 in any application, label, manifest, record, report,
13 permit, or other document filed, maintained, or used
14 for purposes of compliance with regulations promulgat-
15 ed by the Administrator (or by a State in the case of
16 an authorized State program) under this subtitle;
17 “(4) knowingly generates, stores, treats, trans-
18 ports, disposes of, exports, or otherwise handles any
19 hazardous waste (whether such activity took place
20 before or takes place after the date of the enactment of
21 this paragraph) and who knowingly destroys, alters,
22 conceals, or fails to file any record, application, mani-
23 fest, report, or other document required to be main-
24 tamed or filed for purposes of compliance with regula-
25 lions promulgated by the Administrator (or by a State
S 757 RS
ol3c -
-------
67
1 in the case of an authorized State program) under this
2 subtitle;
3 “(5) knowingly transports without a manifest, or
4 causes to be transported without a manifest, any haz-
5 ardous waste required by regulations promulgated
6 under this subtitle (or by a State in the case of a Slate
7 program authorized under this subtitle) to be accompa-
8 nied by a manifest
9 shall upon conviction, be subject to a fine of not more than
10 $50,000 for each day of violation, or imprisonment not to
11 exceed two years (five years in the case of a violation of para-
12 graph (1) or (2)), or both. If the conviction is for a violation
13 committed after a first conviction of such person under this
14 paragraph, the maximum punishment under the respective
15 paragraph shall be doubled with respect to both fine and
16 imprisonment. ‘
17 (b) Section 3008(e) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
18 amended to read as follows:
19 “(e) KNowiNG ENDANGERMENT. —Any person who
20 knowingly transports, treats, stores, disposes of, or exports
21 any hazardous waste identified or listed under this subtitle in
22 violation of paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of subsection
23 (d) of this section who knows at that time that lie thereby
24 places another person in imminent danger of death or serious
25 bodily injury, shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of
1 not more than $25 000 or imprisonment for not more than’
2 fifteen years, or both. A defendant that is an organization
3 shall, upon Conviction of violating this subsection, be subject
4 to a fine of not more than $1,000,000. ‘
-------
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE 116775
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection amMENT orream W V WR. bAi 1I Y TO
to the request of the gentleman from ni THE ATUP.Z OP B SOBSTh
New Jersey? orrzam ar HE. VWRIO
There was no objection. Mr. DANNEMEYER. Mr. Chairman.
(Mr. RINALDO asked and was given I offer an amendment to the amend.
permission to revise and extend 1 ment in the nature of a substitute.
marks.) The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. RINALDO. Mr. Chairman. u, Amendment offered by Mr. D1unceaerm
to the amendment In the nature of a substi-
amendment will strengthen the Re- offered by Mr. .oiuo: Page 30. alter
source Conservation and Recovery e 6, Insert
Act’s criminal penalties for the Illegal ATTOVU!!T’B -
disposal of hazardous wastes. Sec. Ii. Section 7002(e) or the Solid Waste
Many of us know from problems In Disposal Act Is amended by strIking out ••to
our districts the serious danger posed p. p j ,y’ and substituting in lieu thereof
by Illegal disposal of hazardous wastes the prevading or substantially prevail-
to the pubLic health and environment. ln& party”.
We all know about Love Canal. In my Renumber .the following section accord.
district, the name Chemical Control ingly.
calls forth the same dangers from un- (Mr. DANNEMEYER asked and was
proper disposal of hazardous wastes. I given permission to revise and extend
believe RCRA’s criminal penalties his remarks.)
should be strengthened and brought Mr. DAJTNEMEYER. Mr. Chairman,
Into Line with other Federal felony I yield to the gentleman from New
penalties. Thus. the amendment In- Jersey (Mr. Ftoitio).
creases the law’s maximum felony Mr. FLORIO Mr. Chairman. I have
penalty from the present 2 years to 5 reviewed this amendment with the
years, which Is, typically, the maxi- gentleman from New York (Mr. Lxsrr)
mum Federal felony penalty. In addi- and I would now offer a unanimous-
tion, the amendment changes to 10 consent request to modify it as fol-
years from 5 years the maximum pen- lows, and It would then be acceptable,
alty for a violation that places another and It would be acceptable to the gen-
person In danger of death, provided tieman from California (Mr. Dar-
the circumstances manifest an ex- asma) as well.
treme Indifference to human Life. Page 30. ,.fter lIne 6, tr.sert
We know from the experiences of Sec. 13. Section 7003 (e) Is amended by In-
Love Canal, Chemical Control and serting the folios Ing after the first sen-
other now Infamous names that felony tence: ‘Nothing In the preceding sentence
violations of RCRA are more serious shall be construed t o affect the OR er of
than many other crimes and should an court tO award costs or fees under any
other authority of law.’
carry the same penalty.
This amendment has been endorsed With that provision, making that
by leading environmental groups, 1w unanimoUs-consent request—
eluding the Environmental Defense The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would
Fund, the Sierra Club, and the Natu. Insi st that the gentleman submit the
ml Resources Defense Council. modification to the Clerk for its perus-
Improve the deterrent value of the law p.1.
and thereby safeguard the public Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. I
health. I urge Its adoption to make the would make that unanimous-consent
Resource Conservation and Recovery request and then the gentleman’s
sirable, and I think It is a healthy ad-
Act a more effective means of cu: )amendment. as so amended, is fine. de-
the illegal disposal of hazardous d.ition to this legislation.
wastes.
The CWAIRMAN. The Clerk will
- 0 1710 now report the modification.
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, will The Clerk read as follows:
the gentleman yield? Page 30. alter line 6, Insert
Mr. RINALDO. I would be glad to ThGS PROViSION
yield to my friend, the gentleman Sec. 11. Section 1003(e) of the Solid Waste
from New Jersey. Disposal Act Is amended by hi ,senlng the
following after the first sentence: “Nothing
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman. I am In the preceding sentence shall be construed
pleased to have worked i,lth the gen- to affect the power of any Court to auard
tleman on this amen&uc.ni.. It is a. de- costS or fees under any other authority of
slrable amer 1 clment. and I would accept, law.”
it. The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
Mr. RINALDO. Mr. Chairman, I to the request of the gentleman from
thank the gentleman. . New Jersey (Mr. Ft.onso) to modify
I yield back the balance of my time. the amendment offered by the gimtle-
The CHMR .(AN. The question Is on man from California (Mr. D ris-
the amendment offered by the gentle- MrrER)?
man from New Jersey (Mr. RINALDO) There was no objection.
to the amendment In the nature of a Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, will the
substitute offered by the gentleman gentleman yield to roe?
from New Jersey (Mr. FLORIO). Mr. DANNEMEYER. I yield to the
The amendment to the amendment gentleman from New York,
in the nature of a substitute was Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, we have
agreed to. examined the aniendmenL If the gen.
&ptember 8,1982
rise to state my opposition to the
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I am very sympathet-
ic to the plight of my colleague, the
gentleman from Indiana, with respect
to this particular site that he 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-
erated by murticpality or a State, may
exist. There may be scores of then
There may be hundreds of them
Perhaps, most Importantly, the
effect of this amendment If it is adopt’
ed will be to dissipate the available
funds In the Superfurid and make less
funds available for cleanup of other
sites, privately owned sites, sites where
no owner can be found or if 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 illegal hazardous dump
sites In this country; so I would say to
my colleagues, before you vote “yes”
on this amendment, you had better re-
alize that IL could have the effect of
delaying the date on which some other
dump site in your district or State will
Je eligible for cleanup under this Su-
‘perfund program.
The CHAIRMAN. The question Is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Indiana (Mr. FiTnI iN) to
the amendment in the nature of a sub-
stitute offered by the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Ftoiuo).
The amendment to the amendment
in the nature of a substitute as
agreed to.
£ !DML’iT OYTVIED BY 101. RINALDO TO THI
£E DMn,T IN THE NATURE 01 * SUBSTITuTE
orrniiu su MR. # 1.0 510
Mr. HINALDO. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment to the amend-
ment In the nature of a substitute.
The Clerk read as foll3ws:
Amendment offered by Mr Ra’Ji o to
the ani .’ndment in the nat’%re of a substi-
tute of( red by Mr £i.oaco. Page 33, after
line 7. insert:
CRIMINAL PEYAl.iflT
Sec. 12. cal Su nection (di of section 3008
of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by strilting out “iso years” In each place It
appears and substitu’ log “fiie years”.
- (bi 5i bsectiOn Ce) of section 3008 of such
Act Is amended by striking out ‘2 years”
and substiPuting ‘(Lie years’ and by slrIktng
Out 5 years” and substituting ten years”.
Mr. RINALDO (during the reading).
Mr. Cha.rtnan. I ask unanimous con-
sent that the amendment be consld-
•d as read and printed in the
0Rn.
-------
ft l , 4 .%c r?o -f D
INTERIM STATUS CORRECTIVE ACTION ORDERS
SEC. 233. (a) Section 3008 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by adding the following new subsection after subsection (g)
thereof:
“(h) INTERIM STATUS CORRECTIVE ACTION O RDERS.—{]) Whenever
on the basis of any information the Administrator determines that
there is or has been a release of hazardous waste into the environ-
ment from a facility authorized to operate under section 3005(e) of
this subtitle, the Administrator may issue an order requiring correc-
tive action or such other response measure as he deems necessary to
protect human health or the environment or the Administrator may
commence a civil action in the United States district court in the
district in which the facility is located for appropriate relief, includ-
ing a temporary or permanent injunction.
H. B. 2867—38
“(2) Any order issued under this subsection may include a suspen-
sion or revocation of authorization to operate under section 3005(e)
of this subtitle, shall state with reasonable specificity the nature of
the required corrective action or other response measure, and shall
specify a time for compliance. If any person named in an order fails
to comply with the order, the Administrator may assess, and such
person shall be liable to the United States for. a civil penalty in an
amount not to exceed $25,000 for each day of noncompliance with
the order.”.
(b) Subsection b) of section 3008 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by inserting “issued under this section” immediately after
“Any order”.
- 33
-------
7L
SECTION 233—INTERIM STATUS CORRECTIVE ACTION ORDERS
House bzll.—No provision.
Senate amendment.—The Senate amendment authorizes EPA to
issue an order requiring corrective action or to commence a civil
suit whenever there is a release of hazardous waste from an inter-
im status facility, subject to a civil penalty of up to $25,000 per day
for noncompliance.
Con ference substztute.—The Conference substitute is the same as
the Senate amendment.
The purpose of this section is to provide EPA with another tool
to achieve effective corrective action at interim status facilities.
Under EPA’s current regulations the Agency does not attempt to
impose ground-water corrective action requirements on owners and
operators of land disposal facilities through the self-implementing
interim status requirements. Instead such corrective action is only
imposed through an individual permit issued to the facility. EPA’s
professed reason for this approach is that effective corrective action
measures can be highly complex and generally need to be tailored
to site-specific conditions. Such measures often require significant
33
-------
fr 1 OA) TZ.’P )l
SECTION 233—INTERIM STATUS CORRECTIVE ACTION ORDERS
House bill.—No provision.
Senate amendment.—The Senate amendment authorizes EPA to
issue an order requiring corrective action or to commence a civil
suit whenever there is a release of hazardous waste from an inter-
im status facility, subject to a civil penalty of up to $25,000 per day
for noncompliance.
Conference substitute.—The Conference substitute is the same as
the Senate amendment.
The purpose of this section is to provide EPA with another tool
to achieve effective corrective action at interim status facilities.
Under EPA’s current regulations the Agency does not attempt to
impose ground-water corrective action requirements on owners and
operators of land disposal facilities through the self-implementing
interim status requirements. Instead such corrective action is only
imposed through an individual permit issued to the facility. EPA’s
professed reason for this approach is that effective corrective action
measures can be highly complex and generally need to be tailored
to site-specific conditions. Such measures often require significant
-------
111
interaction between EPA and the regulated parties. Since such
interaction is not compatible with the self-implementing nature of
the interim status rules, EPA has concluded that corrective action
should be addressed during the permit process.
While this approach to corrective action is generally rational, the
permitting program may not always be an effective mechanism for
dealing with significant contamination problems at interim status
facilities. EPA’s experience with RCRA permitting indicates that
the issuance of a land disposal permit can be very time-consuming,
often for reasons that do not involve the complexities of ground-
water cleanup. For example, delays may occur in the issuance of a
permit because EPA is working out appropriate conditions for a fa-
cility’s contingency plan or its cap or its procedures for handling
free liquids. While such issues are being resolved, the permit will
not be issued and thus no ground-water cleanup will occur.
EPA should have the power to deal directly with an ongoing en-
vironmental problem without awaiting issuance of a final permit.
Accordingly, this section has been added to the statute to allow
EPA to seek corrective action for release of hazardous waste into
the environment through an administrative order or through a
civil action in Federal district court. Such relief may include seek-
ing a temporary or permanent injunction but is not limited to
those forms of relief.
The use of orders and civil suits overcomes the slowness of the
permit process without sacrificing the need for interaction between
the Agency and the owner or operator in developing appropriate
corrective action measures. For example, the first stage of Agency
action under this provision might very well be an order requiring
the owner or operator to characterize the extent of contamination
of the ground water by hazardous constituents and to submit a cor-
rective action plan. The Agency and the owner or operator could
then confer on the plan and make modifications that would be in-
corporated specifically in an amendment to the order.
The Agency will have considerable discretion to craft the content
of the order. The Agency may, for example, impose civil penalties
(up to $25,000 per day) or terminate the interim status of the facili-
ty. Where interim status is terminated in this manner EPA is not
required to take final administrative action on the permit applica-
tion for the facility. As another example, the Agency may use the
order to gain access to any funds which have been set aside for cor-
rective action through a financial assurance mechanism required
by the hazardous waste regulations.
In authorizing the Agency to issue interim status corrective
action orders were “necessary to protect human health or the envi-
ronrnent”, this provision does not alter existing law as to the scope
of situations that may be addressed by EPA’s “imminent hazard”
actions under section 7003. EPA should continue to use that au-
thority expansively and no implication should be drawn from this
section of the bill that the Congress intends to narrow the existing
section 7003.
This amendment is a supplement to EPA’s power to impose cor-
rective action through permits. EPA will generally use these orders
to achieve the environmental standards promulgated under section
3004, although the Agency can use this authority to control those
112
releases (e.g. certain air emissions) that are not fully addressed by
existing section 3004 standards. Examples of where such orders
might be needed include ground-water contamination from tanks
(where the current regulations do not appear to require cleanup),
from units subject to limited exemptions (e.g., wastewater treat-
ment units) or from “non-regulated” units (i.e., units not subject to
current corrective action requirements) at land disposal facilities.
2 3
-------
c 7. L
97
INTERIM STATUS CORRECTIVE ACTION ORDERS
SEC. 39. (a) Section 3008 of the Solid Waste Dispos-
al Act is amended by adding the following new subsection.
“(Ii) iNTERIM STATUS CORRECTIVE AcTIoN
ORDERs.—(1) Whenever on the basis of any information
the Administrator determines that there is or has been a re-
lease of hazardous waste into the environment from a facili-
ty qualifying for authorization to operate under section
3005(e) of this subtitle, the Administrator may issue an
order requiring corrective action or such other response
measure as he deems necessary to protect human health or
the environment or the Administrator may commence a civil
action in the United States district court in the district in
which the facility is located for appropriate relief, including
a temporary or permanent injunction.
“(2) Any order issued under this subsection may in-
clude a suspension or revocation of authroization to operate
under section 3005(e) of this subtitle, shall state with rea-
sonable specificity the nature of the required corrective
action or other response measure, and shall specify a time
for compliance. if the person or persons named in an order
fails to comply with the order, the Administrator may assess
and such person or persons shall be liable to the United
States for a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed
$25,000 for each day of noncompliance with the order. “.
(b) Subsection (b) of section 3008 of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act is amended by inserting “issued under this
section” immediately after “A fly order”.
-------
July25, 1984
perntit. Under TSCA, the process for cbt in-
ing EPA ap rcsal of an :rclnerator Ls r tr.
ally to cons(rui t tie fse lity, seek ; ro r.l
of a trial burn plan. cotauct the tr r.l bt rn
anc th’-n ce -e a TSCA “ rr o at”
— (the analugue of a R A pir’ni ). Thus a
CCt’pdit3 ss’ ,:r : to C ttUruet an r.cii erasor
cap 1e td burni ; P(’k s ani othtr lr ,z..rd.
ous as os rc u!atid unu r is p a rj
in the r,iioniolaus pQsiuo’i ot L .h io;c.ed to
ch oost bi twet eifi ier s ”k’r; a RCRA
pcrrnit lot tie fs’u!icy, a air , cone’usion
of the ECRA permit p occer.ing, then begin-
ning coi structlon and the st4r f the TSCA
epprosal procc-.s or a gtd ’: i’ 2 its p’a .s to
use the facz.1t3 for Rc! tA asti s, bcgiiiimig
cons’ructiort r ,f the incinerator and seehing
TSCA apprcvaL Where the prirr ry purpose
In builthng the incu erasor is to eszab ish or
augment PCB d:’posal capabi!it,, the corn-
paiy aiU choose the ‘f.st tra,k” second al-
ternause. A de”is ori to forgo p!anz to inv ’in.
erate RCllt ‘s tes at such a fa: 1.;y wcu d
enable a company to chiese their primary
goal In a greatly e’peditcd tints frame b..tt
anuld be at odds aith the coires5i lai
policy of cncouragin the deveopment of
altematises to land disposal of ha.a.raous
wastes.
For this rea. on. the original amendment is
modificd to correct this Incer.a&.s:ency.
Where an Incinerator has been constructed
and approved pursuant to T !CA for the
burning of PCBs. the owner or operator
haIJ not be precluded from a pl ’ng for a
RCRA permit solely because a RCRA
permit sas not obtained prior to eo’ts ue-
lion. The EPA regulation beuig codified by
this amendment was des’gn d to assure
that, alien it has been unable to Influence
the location. design and construt’tlon chosen
by the applicant, the permitting arency
would not face a choice between apprming
an inc nera!or or ‘forcing the abandnnrnpnt
or de aluacion of the prematur Irneat.
ment.” Here, however, If a co:npany pro.
ceeded aith construction, ob:ataed TSCA
appro aJ and then soubht, a RCRA permit,
1 1w company would not have to abandon or
suffer a detaluat on of Its Insesiment if It
was ultimately darned a RCRA permtt (or
the inclru’rator. The company wou d still
has e a PCS incinerator.
aMENDMLnT TO ADTRORIzE TISS AD55i5I5TF TQR
TO 1 5 5 cr INTnUM sTAsva coRRrcrxvr
*cri n osacis
Section 3005(e) of the SolId Waste Dic os.
al Act authorizes certaus facilities that are
required to have a permit to operate, on an
interim status basis. pending the review and
issuance of a final permit. In May of 1980,
the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) issued stasidards and minimum re-
quirements for the operation of interim
atatu.s facilities.
As of December 1923 there were approsi.
mately 8.000 interIm status fae:flt!es. It has
becn estimated that IL v.tll take ten ears to
make final permtt determinations on all of
the interim status faeUities.
T!’e EPA estimates t: ,at beta etm 53’ and
6C1 of the interim rtews land d ; “a) fii.
cilitie.s hate le .ked or are leaking ani a:tl
require corrective acL ari Hoaeser there a
no current requirement thit eorrresjs
action be takcn at interim Status faeiltt , ‘a.
Instead, when 11w EPA dt errnnes that
there has been or Is a leak at an ‘ntenirn
status facility, the agenc3 inrn —tcately
brings such a Iacil.ty under its p’rmtt
re iew proccis and reqj ’res corrective
action as a conlitron of lss,iing a iina l
pcrmit Hc eter. It now takes thc EPA oter
a year to go through the process of pcrTriut
ret iea’ ai.d issuance. As a rest.ls, there are
likeiy to bc a nunber of lea. at interim
Status facili:tes that alli go uncorrected for
some time,
This amendment Is desIgned to correct
thnt situa ’on. It adds a new sub ”ction h)
to Section 3033 to pros ide the Adrn ‘ustra-
tot with authcr’ry to is’ue en adrr’nnstra-
tlte O ier reç Ining Correetlsr a’ ion or
a ich other response measures a he ecems
aopropriate at Interim ztatus ftculiti”s
a here thi,re is or has been a rtrea-e of has-
aroctus v sate. The .dr ir. ,: rator “ : ta
thorjzvj tO cornmcr.ce act.! a.t’oii in !eder.
al dIstrict court for appropr:ate re t :ef. In-
cluding a temporary or permanent Ir junc.
Lion. The Actjuin’rrator has smiler author.
Ity now uitdcr other subsections of section
3008 to ret u:re corect:se aci:on at permit.
ted fac lilies ‘The a ’nenctincnt direc’s mat
an adnur:tctrative order shall specify the
nature or tn correctite act:—n and a time
for compi ance. Civil penaities of up to
825.0O per d..y may be asae ed st lien there
is nonco i irIia .sce auh the order Iii addi-
tion, any order Issued under this new suo.
se:t.on may include a SUSPCfl!iun or re’.cc’a-
lion of the authority to operate as an inter.
im status faiillty witheuL a final permit,
The procedures set forth in subsccu.ion tb)
are made applieable to orders Issued under
this new subsection.
This amendment provides the Adroinistra.
tot aith a mechar,isrn for pi-otectirig human
health and the enviornment at interim
status facilities similar to that which is pres-
ently available aish respect to permitted fa-
c 1 llties. Since there are some 8.OJO interim
status facilities, compared to 115 permitted
facilities, it is mv’st appropriate and nieces-
sary to eatend the correctite action require.
ment to Interim status facilities and to pro-
tide the Adnunisu-n’or with the authority
to lmpoae such requirements quickly.
• Mr. RANDOLPH, The deadline for
required notification under the pros’i-
sions for the control of burnIng or
blending hazardou.s aastes has been
modified. The Agency is authorized to
determine admtnistratively V. hich enti-
ties must give notification, and the Ad-
ministrator has a.cked that the notifi-
cation deadline be postponed until the
regulatory pattern is determined. In
this way, notification can generally be
required from those the Agency pro-
poses to regulate.
Since petroleum coke Is exempted
from regulation under these provi-
sions, the Agency would not be requir-
ing notification from purchasers or
consumers of petroleum coke.
ZYCTERIM STATUS CORRCCTIV! Acr!orn osagas
• Mr. MOYNIHAN, Mr. Prestdent. I
join my distinguished colleagues, Sen-
ators CHAFEE, STAFFon , RAxeDOI.px,
and MITCHELL, in offering an amend-
meut to S. ‘157 to provide the Adminis-
trator of the Environment Protection
Agency (EPA] wtth authority to issue
an adnuni. trauve order, or to ccm-
menco a cit il action in the LLS. dktrict
court, to require cor:c-etis’e action at
interim status (:.e:liti€a a here there is
or has been a relca.’e of ho. ardous
waste. This amendrr ent adds a new
s. bection (hI to section 3308 of the
Resource Cor.sers’atiun and flc-cos ery
Act LRCRAJ. The Adznin:strator has
the author!ty currently unc er other
s’ibsections of 3003 to take the shme
steps to ret u re corrective action at
perm!tted facilities,
The amendment also provides that
the administrative order shall specify
the nature of the corrective action and
S 9l7 5
a time for compliance, as veIl as for
cisil penalties of up to $25.0 0 per day
when there is noncompliance ‘ ith the
cldcr. In auci,Ucn, any oro’r i.. ucd
u idcr rh’, net eutnsecttou tray ii.Ju,
a cu . ension or revoccliw: of trie 2 ’ i-
thorIt:. to op mate an mt r’r staIns (a-
c:lity.
Section 30 5c of tl stat i’
pro -ides that any facili , for tt.
tr”atmtnt. storage, or csposej of haz.
ardous aa ie that is required to hate a
pc-mit to operate, In accordance with
section 3005, and has made an
tien for such a permIt, Eh il be
deemed to have a permit to o;cra’e,
on an Interim status basis, pen ng ti.e
revie ’. and issuance of a final permit.
As of December 1983 there vere
8.000 Interim status facilities, Iii May
of 1980, the Ens’irorirnental Protection
Agency (EPA] issued standards and
minimum requirements for the oper-
ation of Interim status facilities. As a
result, some 2.000 of the interim status
facilities are required to perform
ground ‘aLter monitortng because they
conduct activities capable of polluting-
groundwater,
As of February 1984, only 115 finn]
RCRA permits had been issued by the
EPA. It a tll Lake an estimated 10 years
to make f.nal permit determinat:ons
on the remaining Interim status fac li-
ties.
The EPA estimates that bet een 50
and 60 Percent of the interim status
land disposal facilities are lealung and
will require corrective action. Hot’ev.
er, there Is no current requirement
that corrective action be taken at in-
terim status facilities. Instead, when
the EPA determines that there has
been or is a leak at an interim status
facility, the agency immediately brings
such a facility under its permit review
process and reQuires correctIve action
as a condition of issuIng a final permit.
However, it now takes the EPA o er a
year to go through the permit review
and issuance process. As a result, there
are likely to be a number of leaks at
Interim status facilities that still go
Uncorrected for some time,
This amendment simply provides the
Administrator with the same mecha-
nism for protecting human health and
the environment at interim status fa-
cilities as is now provided for perns l(-
ted facilities. Since there are some
8,000 interim Status facilities, com-
pared to 115 perm!tted facilittes, it. Is
most appropriate and necessary to
extend Itte corrective action require-
ment to interim status facilities
a’ ItxDMvrr TO cLARiFY ThE
AUTHORITY TO RCQt’IRE £ViDtji - or ru s .
ciam prspornsia:Lisy ICR cJnrLrr % A ION
Section 3004 of the Solid Waste D’s posai
Act diri.cts the Admlnis:rator to
performance standards for the ossners a j
uperators of tiaz’irdous aa.ste tr -,irrt,
s ’t’ragc and disp ’aI facilities Tl’e
langt.ege mcludcs a requirement for esi-
dv c’e of “financIal responsibility as may be
necessary or desIrable.’ current EP,% regu-
lations reqt ire financial respons,b.l,, as-
auranees for closure and P 0 8t’closure main-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
4 4S 1 £° -f-b
EFFECTIVE DATE OF REGULM Q 3
SEC. 234. Section 3010(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by adding the following at the end thereof: “At the time a
regulation is promulgated, the Administrator may provide for a
shorter ‘eriod prior to the effective date, or an immediate effective
date for:
“(1) a regulation with which the Administrator finds the
regulated community does not need six months to come into
compliance;
“(2) a regulation which responds to an emergency situation;
or
“iS) other good cause found and published with the regula.
tion.”.
c Wl p 12 -
SECTION 234—EFFECTIVE DATE OF REGULATIONS
House bilL—The House bill authorizes the Administrator to pro-
vide for an immediate effective date or an effective date of less
than six months for regulations when: (1) the regulated community
does not need six months to come into compliance; (2) the regula-
tion responds to an emergency situation; or (3) when the Adminis-
trator finds other good cause.
Senate amendment.—No provision.
Conference substitute.—The conference substitute is the same as
the House bill. The Conferees are aware that the Administrator’s
authority to establish an effective date of less than six months has
been challenged in litigation and therefore regard the clarification
of EPA’s discretion in this area to be appropriate.
For those provisions of this Act which are immediately effective,
it would be contrary to the public interest and impracticable for
EPA to engage in the time-consuming rulemaking procedures re-
quired by Section A of the APA, 5 U.S.C. Section 553, to carry out
swiftly it statutory mandate. Therefore, for such immediately effec-
tive provisions, EPA appropriately may invoke the “good cause”
exemption of 5 U.S.C. Section 553 (b)(B) and (d)(3), in issuing final
substantive or interpretative rules to implement those provisions.
This will enable the Agency to put into place swiftly the enacted
requirements. .
-------
Section 16. Effective date of regulations
This amendment, to Section 3010 makes clear that the Adminis-
trator may provide for an immediate effective date or an effective 1
date of less than six months for regulations when: (1) the regulated
community does not need six months to come into compliance; (2)
the regulation responds to an emergency situation; (3) when the
Adininstrator finds other good cause. This authority has been chal-
lenged in litigation and the Committee believes it is worthwhile to
clarify the Administrator’s discretion in this area. The Committee
expects that the Adminstrator will exercise his authority consistent
with his overall duty under RCRA to protect human health and
the environment.
-------
16 EFFECTIVE DATE OF REGULATIONS
17 SEC. 21. Section 3010(b) is amended by adding the fol-
18 lowing at the end thereof: “At the time a regulation is pro-
19 mulgated, the Administrator may provide for a shorter period
20 prior to the effective date, or an immediate effective date for:
21 “(1) a regulation with which the Administrator
22 finds the regulated community does not need six
23 months to come into compliance;
24 “(2) a regulation which responds to an emergency
25 situation; or
1 “(3) other good cause found and published with
2 the regulation.”.
-------
‘c
8 EFFECTIVE DATE OF REGULATIONS
9 SEc. 16. Section 3010 (b) is amended by adding the
10 following at the end thereof: “At the time a. regulation is pro-
11 mulgated, the Administrator may provide for a shorter pcriod
12 prior to the effeclice date, or an immediate effective date for:
13 “c’l) a regulation with which the Administrator
14 finds the regulated community does not need six
15 months to come into compliance;
16 “ ‘2 a regulation which responds to an emergency
17 situation; or
18 “(3) other good causc found and published with
19 the regulation. ‘
-------
4 7 r .o e.4. ‘. .j
10 EFFECTIVE DATE OF REGULATIONS
11 SEC. 17. Section 3010(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal
12 Act is amended by adding the following at the end thereof:
13 “At the time a regulation is promulgated, the Administrator
14 may provide for a shorter period prior to the effective date, or
15 an immediate effective date for—
16 “(1) a regulation with which the Administrator
17 finds the regulated community does not need six
18 months to come into compliance;
19 “(2) a regulation which responds to an emergency
20 situation; or
21 “(3) other good cause found and published with
22 the regulation.”.
HR 2867 IH
-------
SUBTrrLE D—NEw SEctioNs IN SuwrrriE C
MANAGEMENT OF USED OIL
SEC 241 a Section :J014 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act relating
to restrictions on recycled oil as redesignated by section 502 of this
Act ‘relating to technical and clerical amendments) is amended by
inserting “‘as l GENERAL.— ’ after •3014. and by adding the
following at the end thereof
“(b) IDENTIFICATION OR LISTING OF USED OIL AS HAzARDous
WASIt.—Not later than twelve m nths after the date of enactment
of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 the Admin-
istrator shall propose whether to list or identify used automobile
and truck crankcase oil as hazardous waste under section 3001. Not
later than twenty-four months after such date of enactment. the
Administrator shall make a final determination whether to list or
identify used automobile and truck crankcase oil and other used oil
as hazardous wastes under section 3001.
“(c i USED On.. WHICH Is REcvci D.—41) With respect to generators
and transporters of used oil identified or listed as a hazardous waste
under section 3001. the standards prQrnulgated under section
300 1(d), 3002. and 3003 of this subtitle shall not apply to such used
oil if such used oil is recycled.
“(2XA) In the case of used oil which is exempt under paragraph (1),
not later than twenty-four months after the date of enactment of the
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984. the Administrator
shall promulgate such standards under this subsection regarding
the generation and transportation of used oil which is recycled as
may be necessary to protect human health and the environment. In
-------
H. R. 2867—39
promulgating such regulations with respect to generators, the Ad-
ministrator shall take into account the effect of such regulations on
environmentally acceptable types of used oil recycling and the effect
of such regulations on small quantity generators and generators
which are small businesses (as defined by the Administrator).
“(B) The regulations promulgated under this subsection shall
provide that no generator of used oil which is exempt under para-
graph Il) from the standards promulgated under section 3001(d),
3002, and 3003 shall be subject to any manifest requirement or any
associated recordkeeping and reporting requirement with respect to
such used oil if such generator—
“U) either—
“(I) enters into an agreement or other arrangement
(including an agreement or arrangement with an independ-
ent transporter or with an agent of the recycler) for deliv-
ery of such used oil to a recycling facility which has a
permit under section 3005(c) (or for which a valid permit LS
deemed to he in effect under subsection id), or
“(II) recycles such used oil at one or more facilities of the
generator which has such a permit under section 3005 of
this subtitle (or for which a valid permit is deemed to have
been issued under subsection (d) of this section);
“(ii) such used oil is not mi.xed by the generator with other
types of hazardous wastes: and
“(iii) the generator maintains such records relating to such
used oil. including records of agreements or other arrangements
for delivery of such used oil to any recycling facility referred to
in clause iXI), as the Administrator deems necessary to protect
human health and the environment.
(3) The regulations under this subsection regarding the transpor-
tation of used oil which is exempt from the standards promulgated
under section 3001(d). 3002. and 3003 under paragraph iii shall
require the transporters of such used oil to deliver such used oil to a
facility which has a valid permit under section 3005 of this subtitle
or which is deemed to have a valid permit under subsection id) of
this section. The Administrator shall also establish other standards
for such transporters as may be necessary to protect human health
and the environment.
“(d) PERMn ’s.—(l) The owner or operator of a facility which
recycles used oil which is exempt under subsection cX1), shall be
deemed to have a permit under this subsection for all such treat-
ment or recycling (and any associated tank or container storage) if
such owner and operator comply with standards promulgated by the
Administrator under section 3004; except that the Administrator
may require such owners and operators to obtain an individual
permit under section 3005(c) if he determines that an individual
permit is necessary to protect human health and the environment.
11(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any generator
who recycles used oil which is exempt ‘inder subsection (c*1) shall
not be required to obtain a permit under section 3005(c) with respect
to such used oil until the Administrator has promulgated standards
under sect Ion 3004 regarding the recycling of such used oil.”.
(bXl) Section 7006(b) is amended by inserting after “3005” the
following “(or in modifying or revoking any permit which is deemed
to have been issued under section 30 12(dX 1))”.
H. R. 2867—40
(2) The third sentence of section 3006(b is amended by inserting
after hazardous waste’ the following “(and to enforce permits
deemed to have been issued under section 3012(dXl))”.
-------
fri tL. —l-i ‘ i P
SECTION 241—MANAGEMENT OF USED OIL
House bill. —The House bill requires the Administrator to decide
whether or not to list or identify used automobile and truck crank-
case oil as a hazardous waste within 12 months of enactment and
to make a final determination within 24 months of enactment.
Within 24 months of enactment, the Administrator must promul-
gate standards for the generation, transportation and recycling of
used oil, including burning and land application of used oil. In set-
ting the standards, EPA is to take into account the effect of the
regulations on environmentally acceptable types of used oil recy-
cling, and on small quantity generators and on small businesses.
The provision exempts used oil generators and transporters who
meet certain requirements from manifesting and associated record-
keeping and reporting. Owners and operators of used oil recycling
facilities would be deemed to have a permit if they comply with ap-
plicable standards set under this provision, unless EPA determines
an individual permit is necessary to protect health and the envi-
ronment.
The provision also amends section 7006(b) to provide for judicial
review of permit provisions of this provision and amends section
113
3006(b) to provide for authorized States’ authority regarding permit
provisions of this section.
Senate amendment.—No provision.
Conference substitute. —The Conference substitute adopts the
House provision, except that rules promulgated under section 3004
of the Solid Waste Disposal Act will apply to facilities which recy-
cle used oil.
This provision supplements but does not overrule existing Sec-
tion 3014 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (added by the Used Oil
Recycling Act of 1980). It requires the Administrator to determine
within two years of enactment whether certain types of used oil
should be identified or listed as a hazardous waste and to develop
management standards for all used oil that is so identified or
listed. EPA retains authority under Section 3014 to regulate all
used oil that is not identified or listed as a hazardous waste. Any
regulations adopted under this section should not discourage the
recycling of used oil, consistent with protection of human health
and the environment.
The Congress is including this provision because of EPA’s failure
to promulgate regulations in regard to recycling of oil as directed
in the Used Oil Recycling Act of 1980. There is abundant evidence
of harm due to improper recycling of used oil, such as incidents at
Times Beach, Missouri, involving dioxin-contaminated used oil
sprayed onto roads; incidents of used oil contaminated with other
hazardous wastes being burned in large quantities for heating pur-
poses; and the many used oil recycling sites on the list of Super-
fund National Priority Sites. At the same time, however, used oil,
when properly recycled, can be a valuable resource, although there
is at present little incentive for investment in safe recycling tech-
nologies because of existing regulatory uncertainty and inadequate
regulatory coverage. This provision is designed to reduce the uncer-
tainty and the gaps in the regulatory treatment of used oil by man-
dating a regulatory scheme that will assure that used oil is proper-
ly recycled. The provision sets new deadlines for promulgation of
standards and provides more detailed direction for the standards
than is contained in the current Section 3014.
The major change in this provision as adopted by the conferees
from the provision passed by the House is the deletion of the refer-
ence to Section 3004 in Section 3014(c)(1). The effect of the deletion
is to assure that facilities which recyle used oil will need to comply
fully with the standards applicable to owners and operators of any
hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal facility.
-------
I-Ii2 PT q ’_ ’
64
may, however, modify the requirements for incinerators, and for
landfills and surface impoundments as well, if such modification
provides for equivalent or greater waste destruction and removal,
or containment.
These design requirements shall apply to all new landfills and
surface impoundments) including replacements and expansions of
units at existing facilities) for which a permit application certified
complete has not been received by EPA as of the date of enact-
ment. The incinerator standards apply to all permits issued after
enactment since the amendment merely retains the existing regu-
lations; thus complete permit applications already submitted are
not affected by this amendment.
In focusing on new landfills, surface impoundments and all incin-
erators, the Committee is not indicating, implicitly or otherwise, its
approval of EPA’s re ulations concerning other new facilities or ex-
isting landfills and impoundments. In fact, the Committee notes
that existing impoundments need not be lined at all; thus no bar-
rier preventing or minimizin waste releases into the environment
is required. The Committee is concerned that the absence of any
liner requirements may not be protective of hunlRn health and the
environment.
Section 2 Management of used oil
These provisions require EPA to act within two years of enact-
ment to determine whether certain types of used oil should be iden-
tilled or listed as a hazardous waste and to develop management
standards for all used oil that is so identified or listed. These provi-
sions supplement but do not overrule existing Section 3012 of
RCRA (added by the Used Oil Recycling Act of 1980). Thus, EPA
retains authority under Section 3012 to regulate all used oil that is
not identified or listed as a hsa,.s rdous waste and must conduct an
analysis of the economic impact of regulation of used oil recyling
on the oil recycling industry, whether or not the used oil is identi-
fied or listed as a hazardous waste. Further, regulations under Sec-
tion 3012 regarding recycle used oil, whether or not identified or
listed as a hw nrdous waste, should not discourage the recycling of
used oil consistent with protection of human health and the envi-
ronment.
The Committee is taking this action for a number of reasons.
There is mounting evidence of harm being caused by improper re-
cycling of used oil. Obvious examples are Times Beach, Missouri, as
well as other incidents involving dioxin contaminated used oil, the
large quantities of contaminated used oil being burned as fuel in
inefficient combustion units. and the many used oil recycling sites
on the list of Superfund Proposed National Priority Sites. Congress,
in the Used Oil Recycling Act of 1980, directed EPA to promulgate
regulations to guard against hazards associated with used oil recy-
cling, but EPA has failed to comply with the mandated deadlines.
Thus, a further prod to the Agency is needed. The Committee also
believes it necessary to provide EPA with more detailed direction
than are contained in the Used Oil Recycling Act as to how to pro-
ceed with its regulatory task. Moreover, used oil properly recycled
can be a valuable resource, but there is at present little incentive
for investment in safe recycling technologies because of existing
-------
65
regulatory uncertainty and inadequate current regulatory cover-
age. This legislation is designed to remover the uncertainty and
gaps in oil coverage by setting in motion a regulatory scheme that
will ensure that used oil is sent to environmentally acceptable re-
cycling facilities and is properly recycled. The legislation also as-
sures that used oil that is a hazardous waste and is disposed of
(rather than recycled) will be sent to hn rdous waste management
facilities.
The bill takes the form of amendments to Section 3012 of RCRA,
in keeping with the philosophy of the Used Oil Recycling Act that
recycled used oil should be regulated under a single body of regula-
tions. Under the bill, used oil that the Administrator identifies or
lists as a hazardous waste and that is recycled would be subject to
cradle-to-grave management under standards to be developed by
the Administrator under Section 3012 (rather than Section 3002—
3004). Hazardous used oil which is mixed with other hazardous
waste may be regulated under either Section 3012 or Section 3002-
3004 and other provisions of Subtitle C but in no instance may fa-
cility and transporter standards for burning, blending and distribu-
tion of hazardous waste mixed with waste oil be less stringent than
those promulgated under Section 6 of this Act.
Except for generator standards, EPA’s standard-setting authority
under Section 3012 is coextensive with that in Section 3002—3004,
and so the regulatory standards could (but need not) be identical to
those now contained in the regulations implementing those sec-
tions (or to be contained in forthcoming regulations to implement
those sections, such as the regulations on hazardous waste-derived
fuels that EPA is to develop under Section 6 of this legislation). As
with Section 6, regulations for facilities and transporters under this
provision shall be sufficient to protect humAn health and the envi-
ronment.
The Committee stresses that it is imperative that EPA have
these standards in place at the time it lists or identifies any used
oils as hazardous, and the bill in fact requires that recycling stand-
ards and listing be issued simultaneously. Unless standards are
issued simultaneously with a listing, there would be no (or greatly
insufficient) legal recycling capacity available for used oil. This
could discourage safe recycling and even lead to wholesale dump-
ing of used oil, thus defeating the purposes of this legislation.
Identification and Listing of Used Oils.—Section 22 amends Sec-
tion 3012 of RCRA to require EPA to determine within two years
whether certain used oils should be identified or listed as hazard-
ous wastes under the criteria for identification and listing con-
tained in Section 3001(a). Under this provision, the Committee is
mandating an outside date for final EPA action, but leaving the
Agency with the discretion to make the necessary technical deci-
sions. If EPA determines that any used oils are hazardous wastes,
then it must issue final regulations to this effect within 24 months.
In addition, EPA must propose whether to list or identify one
of used oil—used crank-case oil from automobiles or trucks—within
12 months. Any such proposal would have to be fmalized within 24
months of statutory enactment.
If EPA lists all or some used oils as hazardous wastes, this action I
will have several effects. First, such used oil bemg disposed of
-------
66
(rather than recycled) will have to go to Subtitle C management
facilities. Second, used oil that is a hazardous waste and is recycled
will also have to be managed at Subtitle C facilities operating pur-
suant to special standards established by EPA. The Committee
stresses that it is imperative that EPA have these standards in
place at the time it lists or identifies any used oils as hazardous.
Pmuisions ReLating to Generators.—The standards EPA is to es-
tablish apply to generators, transporters, and recycling facilities’
(potentially including ultimate users). Section 22 also amends Sec-
tion 3012 to provide that generators of used oil that is a hazardous
waste (including collection centers for used oil such as service sta-
tions and automotive service centers) are exempt from recordkeep-
ing, reporting, and manifest requirements provided that such used I
oil is delivered to one or more permitted used oil recyclers who are
in compliance with the special standards adopted pursuant to this
legislation. The recycler could, of course, be the generator itself, in
which case the generator would need to comply with the standards
for used oil recycling facilities.
A second condition precedent to the exemption is that generators
are not to mix other hazardous wastes (i.e., hazardous wastes that
are not used oil) with used oil that they send to a recycler. The
Committee recognized that generators serving as collection centers
for used oil cannot prevent people form whom they collect from
adulterating used oil, and the legislative language does not require
used oil generators to do so. The language does, however, prevent
service stations, for example, from themselves adding their hazard-
ous spent solvents to used oil, if they wish to be exempt from the
recordkeeping, reporting, and manifest requirements.
Subparagraph (3) states that EPA may impose recordkeeping re-
quirements on generators of used oil that is a hazardous waste, as
may be necessary to protect human health and the environment.
Copies of contracts showing the destination of the used oil are one
example of a recordkeeping requirement that may prove necessary.
EPA also has the authority to impose additional standards, such
as standards pert-nining to generator accumulation and container
labeling and placarding, on generators of used oil that is a hazard-
ous waste as may be necessary to protect human health and the
environment. Before imposing such standards, however, EPA must’
take into account their effect on environmentally acceptable types
of used oil recycling and the effect of such regulations on small
quantity generators and generators that are small businesses.
(“Small businesses” in this context is not necessarily to be inter-
preted as narrowly as for Small Business Act purposes.)
These types of considerations are not only appropriate but are
practical necessities if used oil is to be recycled and not dumped
illicitly. Many used oil generators, such as service station centers,
will be reluctant to collect and recycle used oil if it means incur-
ring excessive regulatory responsibilities. Used oil ordinarily han-
dled by these entities certainly will be dumped if regulations are
unduly stringent. Any regulatory scheme for generators should
consequently be structured to avoid this result, and to encourage
these generators to send used oil to facilities having permits. EPA
may, however, regulate generators in a way that discourages unac-
-------
67
cept.able used oil recycling practices, such as unsafe storage, or po-
tentially hazardous burning or land application.
One last point with regard to generators. The bill exempts gener-
ators of hazardous used oil from the small quantity limits for other
generators of hazardous waste contained in section 8 of this legisla-
tion. The Committee expects the Adznini trator to establish special
small quantity generator standards for generators of used oil. One I
approach that the Administrator might decide to adopt is to ex-
clude hn rdous used oil that is sent to an appropriate recycling fa-’
cility from the total used in computing the small quantity gener-
ator limitation.
Provisions Relating to 7) ansporter —Section 22 also amends Sec-
tion 3012 to provide that, within two years of enactment, EPA;
must amend its transporter regulations to provide that transport-
ers must deliver used oils that are hazardous wastes to permitted
facilities (permitted under either Section 3012 or 3005(c)). The Ad-
ministrator also has authority to establish additional standards for
transporters as may be necessary to protect human health and the
environment.
The Committee expects that EPA will need to develop special
manifest standards for transporters. Ordinarily, a hazardous waste
generator initiates a manifest, and EPA regulations for transport-
ers require that a transporter receive a manifest from the gener-
‘ator. As explained above, however, generators of hazardous used oil
may be exempt from a manifest requirement. Thus, some revision
of these regulations will be necessary. EPA has discretion to re-
quire (as may be necessary to protect human health and the envi-
ronment) that the transporter initiate a manifest, or may not re-
quire a manifest in certain circumstances (possibly where the gen-
erator and transporter, or the transporter and recycler, are the
same person).
Among the additional standards that the Administrator may
wish to adopt are further controls allowing a recycler to determine
the source of the hn jirdous waste used oil, a prohibition on trans-
porters commingling used oil with other hazardous wastes, and pos-
sibly a prohibition on transporters using the same trucks to trans-
port hazardous waste that are used to transport used oil. Used oil
often is heavily adulterated before it reaches a recycling facility,
and much of this adulteration results from haphazard mixing
during transit. This provision of the bill expressly gives the Agency
the authority to address these situations.
Provisions Pertaining to Used Oil Recycling Facilities.—Section
22 also amends Section 3012 to require the Adrrtinistrator to pub-
lish facility standards for hazardous waste used oil recycling facili-
ties. Recycling facilities that comply with these standards will be
deemed to have a permit for purposes of used oil recycling and gen-
erators sending hazardous used oil to these facilities are eligible for
the exemption described above.
These standards are to apply both to the initial facility that
treats used oil and also may apply to the end user, particularly
where the end user is burning the used oil as a fuel (or burning aI
fuel derived from hazardous used oil) or applying the used oil to I
the land (for example, as a dust suppressant). In the Committee’s
view, the Agency needs to exercise special care when a recycling
-------
68
end use for hazardous used oil or used oil.derived material is envi-
ronmentally analogous to incineration or land disposal.
This is not to say that these Section 3012 standards must neces-
sarily apply to all end users of hazardous used oil or used oil-de-
rived products. (Indeed, it is the Committee’s view that standards
are most appropriately applicable to the initial treater of hazard-
ous waste used oil since, if contsrnini nts are not removed at this
point, total pollutant loadings from end use will not be reduced,
even if the used oil is diluted before end use.) EPA has the authori-:
ty to say that treated used oils are no longer hazardous wastes sol
that any end user of such materials is not subject to Section 3012
standards. The Administrator may in fact consider treated usedi
oils whose end use is not burning or land application to be prod-
ucts, not wastes, and so end users (as well as intervening transport-,
ers and distributors) would not be subject to any of these regula-
tory requirements. Similarly, end users of hazardous used oil-de-
rived fuels meeting composition standards specified by the adminis-
trator might not be subject to Section 3012 standards provided they
burn the fuel in a specified type of boiler.
The standards EPA is to establish may include any of the re-
quirements enumerated in Section 3004(a) (including stan&.. ds per-
taining to storage ancillary to recycling) and any other section 3004
requirements (such as those for hazardous waste-derived fuels con-
tained in Section 6 of this legislation), as may be necessary to pro-
tect human health and the environment. To the extent that the
standards are self-implementing, most facilities probably will not
have to receive a site-specific permit to mpnage used oil hsw.nrdous
wastes.
The standards must address the problems of used oil burned as
fuels (and hazardous used oil-derived fuels) and hazardous used oil
recycled by being applied to the land. The Committee emphasizes
that the standards may specify particular toxicant concentration
levels for used oil recycled in particular ways.
Provisions Pertaining to Facility Permit Standards.—The final
section of the bill indicates that facilities that recycle used oil that
is a hazardous waste are deemed to have a permit for used oil recy-
cling provided they comply with the regulatory standards promul-
gated by the Administrator. (Since this type of permit is granted by
statute, not by the Administrator, it is not subject to the public
participation requirements in Section 7004(b) of RCRA.) Recyclers
storing hazardous waste used oil in surface impoundments would
not be deemed to have a permit and would have to obtain an indi-
vidual permit under Section 3005. EPA may require individual per-
mits at any time, including the time Section 3012 standards are ini-
tially issued. A facility that manages other hwzardoua wastes in ad-
dition to used oil would be subject to the Section 3002 and 300
standards and permitted requirements for those other hn,.rndous
wastes.
A hazardous waste used oil recycling facility, or classes of such
facilities, could be required to obtain an individual permit under
section 3005(c) if necessary to protect human health and the envi-
ronment. An individual permit could include any applicable Sec-
tion 3004 regulatory requirement. A reason for issuing an individu-
al permit could be failure of a particular recycling facility to
-------
69
comply with applicable Section 3012 requirements. A class of used
oil recycling facilities which have caused environmental harm a]s
could be appropriately required to obtain individual permits. An
other reason for requiring individual permits could be that stand-
ards for a class of recycling facilities cannot be expressed in seif
implementing form. Standards for hazardous used oil stored in sur-
face impoundments prior to recycling are an example.
These permit provisions are a key part of the bill. Because of the
large volume of used oil that is recycled, the impossibility (in the
short term) or issuing individual permit.s to used oil recycling facili-
ties in numbers sufficient to handle the volume of used oil generat- I
ed, and the ineligibility of many used oil recyclers for RCRA inter- I
im status, the Committee believes that the approach to permitting
adopted in the bill—whereby used oil recyclers are deemed to have
permits if they comply with applicable standards—is essential. The
Committee also stresses the EPA can adopt the same approach in I
regulating recycled used oil that is not identified or lists as a haz-
ardous waste.
The following examples show how the Committee expects these
provisions to operate. Generator A generates a used oil that EPA’
lists as a hazardous waste. He enters into a contract with transport-
er B to take this used oil to two used oil recyclers C and D. C is a
fuel blending facility who takes the used oil and processes it to
remove some contaminants. The processed fuel oil is transported to
a retail fuel dealer and sold for burning as a fuel supplement at an
industrial facility. D is a used oil re-refiner who restores the used
oil for use as a lubricant. -
Generator A would be eligible for an exemption from the Section I
3002 manifest, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements (so long
as he does not adulterate the used oil with other ha’-nrdous wastes).
Transporter B would have to deliver the used oil to facilities I
having a permit (including a Section 3005(g) recycling permit). Fa-
cility C would be deemed to have a permit if it complies with stor-
age standards and if the fuel it derives from used oil meets compo-
sition or other standards established by EPA. Persons subsequently
handling the used oil-derived fuel could be subject to standards, but
need not be. Facility D would be deemed to have a permit if it’
meets storage standards. The re-refined oil probably would not be
deemed a hazardous waste (or a waste at all) and would not then
be subject to any further regulatory control under RCRA.
State Authorization.—Because EPA regulations under Section
3012 would be part of “the Federal program under Subtitle (C)”,
the provisions of Section 3006(b) of RCRA (prtaining to final au-
thorization of state programs) would apply to state used oil pro-
grams.
-------
p1L A 1%O p
17 MANAGEMENT OF USED OIL
18 SEc. 27. (a) h GENERAL.—Section 3012 (relating to
19 restrictions on recycled oil) is amended by inserting “(a) IN
20 GENERAL.—” after “3012.” and by adding the following at
21 the end thereof:
22 “(b) IDENTIFICATION OR LISTING OF USED OIL AS
23 }IAZARDOUS WAsTE.—Not later than twelve months after
24 the date of the enactment of this subsection, the Administra
75 tor shall propose whether to list or identify used automobile
HR 2867 RFS
-------
1 and truck crankcase oil as hazardous waste under section
2 3001. Not later than twenty-four months after such date of
3 enactment, the Administrator shall make a final determina-
4 tion whether to list or identify used automobile and truck
5 crankcase oil and other used oil as hazardous wastes under
6 section 3001.
7 “(c) USED OIL WHICH Is RE0YCLED.—(1) The stand-
8 ards promulgated under section 3001(d), 3002, 3003, and.
9 3004 of this subtitle shall not apply to used oil identified or•
10 listed as a hazardous waste under section 3001 if such used
11 oil is recycled.
12 “(2)(A) In the case of used oil which is exempt under
13 paragraph (1), not later than twenty-four months after the
14 date of the enactment of this subsection, the Administrator
15 shall promulgate such standards under this subsection regard-
16 ing the generation, transportation, and recycling of such used
17 oil as may be necessary to protect human health and the
18 environment. In promulgating such regulations with respect
19 to generators, the Administrator shall take into account the
20 effect of such regulations on environmentally acceptable
21 types of used oil recycling and the effect of such regulations
22 on small quantity generators and generators which are small
23 businesses.
24 “(B) The regulations promulgated under this subsection
25 shall provide that no generator of used oil which is exempt
-------
84
1 under paragraph (1) shall be subject to any manifest require.
2 ment or any associated recordkeeping and reporting require-
3 ment with respect to such used oil if such generator—
4 “(i) either—
5 “U) enters into an agreement or other ar-
6 rangement (including an agreement or arrange.
7 ment with an independent transporter or with an
8 agent of the recycler) for delivery of such used oil
9 to a recycling facility which has a permit under
10 section 3005(c) (or for which a permit is deemed
11 to be in effect under subsection (d)), or
12 “(II) recycles such used oil at one or more
13 facilities of the generator which has such a permit
14 under section 3005 of this subtitle (or for which a
15 permit is deemed to have been issued under sub-
16 section (d) of this section);
17 “(ii) such used oil is not mixed by the generator
18 with other types of hazardous wastes; and
19 “(iii) the generator maintains such records relating /
20 to such used oil, including records of agreements or
21 other arrangements for delivery of such used oil to any
22 recycling facility referred to in clause (i)(1), as the Ad-
23 ministrator deems necessary to protect human health
24 and the environment.
0 ’
-------
85
“(3) The regulations under this subsection regarding the
-‘ transportation of used oil which is exempt under paragraph
(i) shall require the transporters of such used oil to deliver
such used oil to a facility which has a permit under section
3005 of this subtitle or which is deemed to have a permit
jnder subsection (d) of this section. Th Administrator shall
]so establish other standards for such transporters as may be
to protect human health and the environment.
• “(4) The regulations under this subsection regarding the
owners and operators of facilities which recycle used oil
which is exempt under paragraph (1) may include require-
12 ments respecting any of the matters listed in section 3004(a)
i1 and may vary according to whether the facility is permitted
14 under section 3005(c) or deemed to have a permit under sub-
15 section (d) of this section. At a minimum, the Administrator
I& shall establish such standards for used oil recycled by being
I burned for energy recovery or by being applied to the land as
lB the Administrator determines are necessary to protect human
19 health and the environment.
“(d) PERMITs.—(1) The owner or operator of a facility
31 which recycles used oil which is exempt under subsection
(c)(1), shall be deemed to have a permit under this subsection
(or all such treatment or recycling (and any associated tank
Or container storage) if such owner and operator comply with
standards promulgated by the Administrator under subsection
-------
86
1 (c)(4) of this section; except that the Administrator may re-
2 quire such owners and operators to obtain an individual
3 permit under section 3005(c) if he determines that an individ-
4 ual permit is necessary to protect human health and the
5 environment.
6 “(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any
7 owner or operator of a facility which recycles used oil which
8 is exempt under subsection (c)(1) shall not be required to
9 obtain a permit under section 3005(c) with respect to such
10 used oil until the Administrator has promulgated standards
11 under subsection (c)(4) of this section regarding the recycling
12 of such used oil.”.
13 (b) CoNFoRMING AMENDMENTs.—(1) Section 7006(b)
14 is amended by inserting after “3005” the following “(or in
15 modifying or revoking any permit which is deemed to have
16 been issued under section 3012(d)(1))”.
17 (2) The third sentence of section 3006(b) is amended by
18 inserting after “hazardous waste” the following “(and to en-
19 force permits deemed to have been issued under section
20 3012(d)(1))”.
14//
-------
R - ° ’
,ofl7t b
3 M.4NAGEMEXT OF USED OIL
4 SEC. 22. (a) l x GENER.4L.—Section 3012 ‘relating to
5 restrictions on recycled oil) is amended by inserting “(a) L’
6 GENERAL.—” after “3012. “and by adding the following at
7 the end thereof:
8 “th) IDENTIF1c.4T10N OR LiSTING OF USED OIL AS
9 H.4z.4RDOUS W4STE.—Not later than twelve months aflei
10 the date of the enactment of this subsection, (he Administrator
11 shall propose whether to list or identify used automobile and
12 truck crankcase oil as ha:ardous waste under section 3001.
13 Yot later than twenty-four months after such da of enact-
14 men!, the Administrator shall make a final determination
15 whether to list or identify used automobile and truck crank-
16 case oil and other used oil as ha:ardous wastes under section
17 3001.
18 “c 1 c) USED OIL WHICH Is fiEcrcLED.— ’1) The
19 standards promulgated under section 3001(d), 3002, 3003,
20 and 3004 of this subtitle shall not apply to used oil identified
21 or listed as a ha:ardous waste under section 3001 if such
22 used oil is recycled.
23 “(‘2XA) In the case of used oil which is exempt under
24 paragraph (1), not later than twenty-four months after the
25 date of 11* enactment of this subsection, the Administrator
HR 2S67 RH
-------
50
1 shall promulgate such standards under this subsection re-
2 garding the generation, transportation, and recycling of such
3 used oil as may be necessary to protect human health and the
4 environment, in promulgating such regulations with respect
5 to generators, the Administrator shall take into account the
6 effect of such regulations on environmentally acceptable types
7 of used oil recycling and the effect of such regulations on
8 small quantity generators and ,generators which are small
9 businesses.
10 “(‘B) The regulations promulgated under this subsection
1 shall provide that no generator of used oil which is exempt
12 under paragraph (1) shall be subject to any manifest require-
13 men! or any associated recorcTheeping and reporting require-
14 men! with respect to such used oil if such generator—
15 “(1) either—
16 “(1) enters into an agreement or other ar-
17 rangemeT 1 (including an agreement or arrange-
18 men! with an independent transporter or with an
19 agent of the recycler) for delivery of such used oil
20 to a recycling facility which has a permit under
21 section 3005(c) (or for which a permit is deemed
22 to be in effect under subsection ( ‘d ,) ,), or
23 “ (71 , ) recycles such used oil at one or more
24 facilities of the generator which has such a permit
25 under section 3005 of this subtitle (‘or for which a
HR2867R11
-------
51
1 permit s deemed to have been issued under sub-
2 section (ci) of this section);
3 “(ii) such used oil is not mixed by the generator
4 with other types of hazardous wastes; and
5 “(iii) the generator maintains such records relat-
6 ing to such used oil, including records of agreements or
7 other arrangements for delivery of such used oil to any
8 recycling facility referred to in clause (i)(l), as the Ad-
9 ministrator deems necessary to protect human health
10 and the environment.
11 11(3) The regulcn’ions under this subsection regardiiig the
12 transportation of used oil which is exempt under paragra ih
13 (1) shall require the transporters of such used oil to delirer
14 such used oil to a facility which has a permit under section
15 3005 of this subtitle or which is deemed to have a permit
16 under subsection (d) of this section. Th Administrator shall
17 also establish other standards for such transporters as may hc
18 necessary to protect human health and the environment.
19 14(4) The regulations under this subsection regarding the
20 owners and operators of fadlities which recycle used oil
21 which is exempt under paragraph (1) may include require-
22 ments respecting any of the matters listed in section 3004 ‘a)
23 and may vary according to whether the facility is permitted
24 under section 3005’c ) or deemed 10 have a permit under sub-
25 section (‘d) of this section. At a minimum, the Administrator
HR 2S67 RH
-------
52
1 shall establish such standards for used oil recycled by being
2 burned for energy recovery or by being applied to the land as
3 the Administrator determines are necessary to protect human
4 health and the environment. -
5 “d.) PER. nrs.—W The owner or operator of a facility
6 which recycles used oil which is exempt under subsection
7 (cXi’), shall be deemed to have a permit under this subsection
8 for all such treatment or recycling (and any associated Lank
9 or container storage) if such owner and operator comply with
10 standards promulgated by the Administrator under subsee-
11 lion (c,) ’4) of this section; excevl that the Administrator may
12 require such owners and operators to obtain an indiLidual
13 permit under section 3005 c ) if he determines that an mdi-
14 vidual permit is necessary to protect human health and the
15 environment.
16 “(2) Yotwithstanding any other proiision of law, any
17 owner or operator of a iacthty which recycles used oil whici
18 is exempt under subsection (c)(1) shall not be required to
19 obtain a permit under section 3005(c) with respect to such
20 used oil until the Administrator has promulgated standards
21 under subsection (c)(4) of this section regarding the recycling
22 of such used oil.’
23 ) C0”FORMING AMENDMENTs.—(’l) Section 7007(b)
24 is amended by inserting after “3005” the following “(‘or in
HR 2S6 RH
aWl
-------
53
1 modifying or revoking any permit which is deemed to hare
2 been issued ander section 3012(d) (1)) ‘
3 (2) The third sentence of section 3006(b) is amended by
4 inserting after “hazardous waste” Size following “(and to en-
5 force permits deemed to have been issued under section
6 3012(d)(1))”.
-------
H 6532
strict standards we c e it to them to
provide them with the knowledge of
what they are going to be expected to
1o.
01700
dr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, will
he gentleman yield?
Mr. S ELTON. I yield to the gentle-
man from New Jersey.
Mr. FLORIO. I thank the gentleman
for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, the gentleman’s
amendment is very important. It has
already been referred to in previous
discussions about educational opportu-
n.it es for ! r” fl bus rn r
Mr. Chairman, I accept the amend-
me r it.
Mr. BEDELL Mr. Chalrnmri. will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. S TON. I yield to my friend
from Iowa.
(Mr. BEDEIL asked and was gwen
permission to revise arid extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. BEDELL. Mr. Chairman, for
quite some time now. I have been in-
volved with the Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act. Throughout
my involvement, I have worked to seek
a reasonable balance between environ.
mental protection and the special conS
cerns of small generators of certain
hazardous wastes.
In February of last year, the Small
Business Committeeh iergy and En.
‘ironment Subcommittee, which I
aared at that time, held hearings on
! subject of waste oil recovery. We
aught to learn why more used oil is
or. being recovered in this country. A
great amount of used oil is being
burned indJscrirnin r.ely, emitting
h urnfuJ pollutants into the environ-
ment. This Js particularly distressing
considering the incredible potential
for conservation by recycling th
waste oiL
R.ecoguizing the significant health
and safety prob1en caused by improp-
er thsposal of waste oil, we mvesngaa.
ed just what EPA was doing about this
problent. UnfortunateLy, we diaco ered
that EPA had Dot yet Iormulazed cer-
tain waste oil regulations that were re-
quired by Jaw to ha.ve been i ued by
October 1981. As you all know, EPA
has yct to issue these regulations and,
in fact, will not be required to Issue
ni until 24 more months after this
legisLat.on we are dlsc1Lc trig is en-
arted. That is 4 years later than the
ragular.iocis were supposed to have
been issued. In the meantime, EPA s
to act promprjy has left those
in the waste oil reprocessing and lubri-
cant manufacturing industries In
bo. Tens of mii1 ons of dollars
iestrcrnts are being held up ihiie the
indu. try . a .s (or EPA to issuie Its reg-
u t on.t. .nese businesses can play a
role in cur elorts to entourage
recycling of waste c..J. tz is a shame
they are being p r- h 7.e ,d by
Is tardintss.
yboc y wants these regulalions—
the used oil recycling industry, the
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
waste oil generators, State and local
regulators, the Congress, arid even
other Federal agencies—everyone
wants EPA to issue regulations and
clani.fy what will be the Federal rules
for proper handling and disposal of
waste oil.
From our hearing, I became aware of
a very important program at the Na.
tional Bureau of Standards .which is
necessary for the encouragement of
the recycling of waste oil in the United
States. I feel it is in our best interests
to continue the funding for this pro-
gram
Wor g together with Mr. W u.-
GR.EN’s Science and Technology Sub-
committee, I sought the continuation
of the program at NBS to set uniform
test st,andards for re-refined waste oil.
Recent enviromuentaj disasters, in-
cluding the one Involving dioxin in
Missouri, demonstrated that the worst
can happen if waste oil remains unre-
gu l ave&
Last year, the pro-
posed to discontinue the NBS research
even though it was in Its final and
most cruciaL phase. Completion of this
research, which includes base stock
consistency, equivalency and verifica-
tion studies, is of vital importance to
the oil recovery industry and to the oil
consuming public. Unless verification
of cucial engine sequence tests is com-
pleted, past research and development
tests will not be proven and past fund-
ing of $6.2 million will have been
wasted.
I am pleased to report that the
House Science and Technology Com-
mittee approved the NBS funding for
the program until the end of fiscal
year 1984, ‘winch Is heri the program
is expected to be completed.
During the consideration of the
RCRA bifl last year. I engaged in a cal-
loquy ‘with Mr. Fr.ogxo about the need
to encourage the recycling of certain
‘wastes with inherent value. At that
time, we agreed That when ‘used oil co]
lected by service statlo s Is properly
recycled a-nd adequate invoice records
are kept, these stations are not intend-
ed to be subject to additional report-
ing ,‘equ’ireine-nts imder RCRA. I am
pleesed to see that this years bill also
recognizes the -value of recyclable
wastes and encourages their collection
to the fullest extent possible.
The record last year showed that
service stations do not function as gen-
erators in the usual sense with regard
to used battenes and solvents. Many
ser.ice stations employ cornnieraial
cleaning services that in roost cases
retain title to the materials and sol.
vents that they use In cleaning the
s r e station. As is the case with
waste oil, it is the coLlectors of these
waste produc .s that will be deemed re-
spor.s oie for complying with toe rules
of RCR,A. The service station need
only keep a copy of the contract it has
with a licensed collector or reproces-
sor, plus records of when and how
much of the waste actually changes
August 4. 198J
hands. I am glad to see that this Is
also the case in this year’s bill.
I have been working on RCRA this
year with Mr. Fr.oaio’s subcommittee
of the House Energy and Commerce
Com ,rn.zttee It is important that we do
not discow-age the important role in
the recycling process of service station
operators by Imposing burdensome
recordkeeping requirements on them.
Service stations, acting as collection
points for used waste oil. batteries,
arid solvents, have shown their good
faith by properly recycling these
wastes and not disposing of them in an
Improper mariner.
Additional pressure should be put on
EPA by the comm ittee to issue their
long-awaited waste oil regulations. It is
simply oun-ageous that we have had to
wait this long.
I would also like to commend my col-
league, Congresswoman Mtxm.s z
from Mary la.nd. for her efforts regard-
ing sectIon 22 of this bill. Her efforts
to encourage the recycling of used
motor oil, while at the same time,
mizuxnizirig the regulatory burden on
the small generator who contracts for
its proper disposal, are greatly appreci-
ated. This constructive approach won
the support of many in the small busi-
ness comxn.szuty.
I must say that I am quite pleased
with the ffnal version of H.R. 2867..
The bill strikes an appropriate balance
between environmental protection arid
the needs of smail r generators of cer-
tain waste& I would expect that EPA’s
rules for small quantity generators
will .ncluce a short, one-page manifest
req uiremeor. to oummize small busi-
nesses’ nou. ication requiren’ents.
I want my colleagues to know that I
plan to enter into a colloquy with Mr.
Ftoaio during the debate on the
reautharizasson of RCRA. We hope to
clarify certain provisions of the blU re-
garoing solvents, waste containers, and
onsite burning of waste oil by service
stations.
At present, some service stations ‘use
commercial space heating units to
burn waste oil on premises. Two years
after enactment of H.R. 2867. the EPA
Is required to: One, promulgate stand-
ards regulathig facilities which burn
hazardous waste: and two, develop
standards for cornm -cially marketed
equipment like those space heaters. In
the meantime, existing equipment can
remain on the market. Once the stand-
ards are issued, older units may have
to be upgraded or replaced.
We will also clarify the intent of
R. 2867 .o exclude the weight of
containers which carried the waste
when calculating the weight of the
hazardous waste for regtdatory pur.
poses. Thi is a very Important issue
with many small quantity generators,
and I am particularly thankful to Mn
Ftoiuo aria his subcommittee staff for
their cooperation on this and otl’ier
matters.
In summary, there are three points I
would like to make. First, we realize
-------
Aug i.st 4, 1983
that he materials we a.re discussing
here hare already been tdenujjed a.s
hazardous, Second. it is reasonable to
expect in the final RCRA bill that all
hazardous waste are to be disposed of
in federally pennuttecj aetlities, And
third. recordkeeping requirementa
must be kept at a minimum for sinai!
generators. Some degree of regulation
is in the best interests of small quanti
ty generato , Without a doubt, in the
next decace, there will be many law-
suits against hazardous waste gener-
ators, it is importar for small busi-
ness to satisfy some Federal require.-
merits to prove they have been com-
plying with state’of-the.art methods
to dispose of their waste,
Mr. Chairman. I urge the support of
E.R. 2867 because it provides an excel-
lent i .ehic ie by which this country can
,gorern the disposal of hazardous
waste in a safe and sensible manner
from “cradle to the grave”. This bill
sho ts that it .s possible to balance en-
l’lronznentaj controis on the haz rdou
waste from small generators with ac-
ceptable regulatory and financial cost
to small ou r1ess,
Mr. SHELBy, Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman s’ie1d ’
Mr. S LTON. I yield to the gentle-
man from Alabama.
Mr. SHELBY. Mr. Chairman, I have
no objection to the’ amend ient to my
amendment.
I urge its support.
Mi-. LENT. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield’
Mr. SICELTON, I yield to trie gentle-
man from New York.
Mr. LENT, I thank the gentleman
ft yielding.
Mr. Chairman, we have no objection
t this side and support the amend-
merit. -
PAR IA TARY IYQt’TRT
Ms. FIEDLER. Mr. Chairman; I
hare a parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewom
will state her parliamentary inquiry.
Ms. FIEDLER, Mr. Chairman, some
of the Members are on very tight
schedules trying to catch planes and
they were wonder-tog whether or not
the comments made a moment ago by
the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
FLORIO) meant they do not ex eet any
further recorded votes between now
and the conclusion of the session
today.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will
advise the gentlewoman that that is
riot an inquiry the Chair can answer.
The CHAIRMAJ . The question is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Missouri (Mr. Sistroer) to
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Alabama (Mr. Snxi..ay). as
amended.
The amendment to the amendment,
as amended, was agreed to.
Mt i3Mt’4T O?7tPp BY MR. SMLLTO’I TO THE
AMZ’4OMEMT OfltaCD BY ML SKEL_By, AS
fv r SKELTON. Mr Chairman. I of-
fered ar amendment, to the amend.
merit as :.iended,.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. SKxz.TOM 1.0
the amendment offered by Mr. Sr x,ay, as
amended: Add the following new paragraph
to the Shelby amendment:
( I The Administrator shall cause to be
SU idjed the existing manifest system for
ba.za.rdous waste.I a.s it applies to small
quantity generators and recommend wIthin
30 months of the date of enactment of the
Hazardous Waste Control and Enforcement
Act of 1983 ahether the current system
shall be retained or whether a new system
should be introduced. - The study shall in-
clude an analy i of the cost versus the
benefits of the systems studied as well as an
analyais of the ease of retrieving and collar,-
ing information and identifying a given sub-
stance. Finally, any new proposal shall in.
elude a list of those standards that are flee.
essamy to protect human health and the en-
“iro nment.’.
Mr. s c j, TON (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the amendment to the
2.mendmen t be considered as read and
printed in the Rrcopj,.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Missow-i?
There was no objection,
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I am
offeri-mg an amendment to the
Shelby-Lent amendmnenf that I believe
should be acceptable to most everyone.
My amendment calls for the EPA to
study and make recornlflendallons
whether to keep the current manifest
system or establish a new manifest
System,
I think this Is vitally important to
the integrity hazardous waste control.
At the moment, we are creating so
much paper and so much confusion
thai. no one will know what to fill out,
how to fi it out, and then who to give
it to. Once they are fUed, my subcom-
mittee has fot.md in it.s investigations
that it is virtually ampossible to drg
the information out of the hundreds
of thousands of papers that are storea.
Keeping track of these wastes is very
Important, My subconuriittee has
heard from State governments, wit-
nesses, and the CRS that there- are
better ways to keep track of such in.
formation, They are easier, less expen-
sive, and provide the capability to me-
tr-ieve and coll ’te the required infor-
mation quickly. Most importantly, if
we are aslung small businesses to
comply with these new reporting re-
quirements, we must come up with a
system that they can use e ..i ily and
that we can get information from
quickly when needed.
I do not pretend to have the exper-
tise to pick the best system for EPA.
My amendment, which does not au-
thorize any funds. .rnerely directs the
Administrator to conduct a search, if
you will, for a better system that is
easier- to use. pro’.ides more benefits
relative to the cost and still protects
human health and the env1ronmera
There are such systems out there,
This is not beyond our capability.
Mr. SHELBY, Mr. Chairman, iJI
the gentleman yield’
H 6533
Mr. SKELTON, I yield to the gentle-
man from Alabama.
Mr. SHELBy, I thank the gentle-
man for yielding.
Mr. Chau-rnan, we have no objection
to the amendment, We have read it.
Mr. LENT, Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield
Mr. SKELTON. I yield to the gentle-
man from New York.
Mr. LENT. I thank the gentleman
for yielding.
Did I understand the gentleman to
say his amendment provides for a no-
cost EPA stuny of the manifest
system?
Mr. SKELTON. It calls for a study
of the manifest system—I cannot say-
it is a no-cost.
Mr. LENT. Mr Chairman, I have rio
objection. I think tt Is - a good amend-
ment.
The CE,A M j , The question is on
the amendment, offered by the gentle-
man from Missouri (Mr. SF.rLroN) to
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Alabama (Mi-. Ssn r). as
amenc ied..
The amendment to the amendment.
as amended, was agreed to,
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Alabama (Mr. SlizLBy) as
amended,
The amenorrient. as amended, was
agreed to.
Ag DM1NT OrFin BY lOS. COLLINS
Mrs. COLLINS. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amenoment.
The Clerk read follows.
Aznendrner: offered cy Mrs Coti.: s
Page 9, Line 11. srniie out the closing quota-
tion mints and period,
Page 9. alter line ii insert:
“(9) Not later tlia.n 18 months after the
enactment, of the Eazardous Waste Control
and Jorcement Act of 1983. the Admian-
trator. in conjunction with the Seeretai- ’ of
Transportation, shall prepare and submit to
the Congress a report on the (easibility of
easing the aazninistrative burden on small
quantity generators, increasing compIian
with statutory and regulatory requirements
and simplifying enforcement efforts
through a program of licensing hazardous
waste transporters to assume the responsi-
bilities of small quantity generators relating
to the preparation of manifests and associ.
sled recordkeeping and reporting require.
rnents. The report shall examine the appro.-
priate licensing requirements under such a
program inducing the need for financial a .
surance b . licensed transporters ard shall
make recommendat.ons on pro 5Ions and
requirements for such a program including
the appropriate division of responsibilities
between the Depai-trnent of Transportst 1 o
and the Ent ironmenc.aj Protection Adminis.
tration,’,
Mrs. COLLINS (durtng’the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanImous con-
sent that, the amendment be consid-
er-ed as read and printed in the
Rncoiw.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentlewoman
from Illinois?
There was no objection.
Mrs. COLLINS Mr. Chairman, Mr.
FtoRlo and his subcommittee are to be
-;
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
/ 3 .v D 5 6,)E-b
RECOVERY AND RECYCUNG or USED OIL
SEc. 242. Section 3014(a) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (entitled
“Restrictions on Recycled Oil”), as redesignated by section 502 of this
Act and amended by section 241 of this Act. is amended by striking
out the period at the end thereof and substituting “, consistent with
the protection of human health and the environment.”.
12.Pi1 p h 3
SECTION 242—RECOVERY AND RECYCLING OF USED OIL
House bill—The House bill amends that final sentence in section
3012 (relating to restrictions on used oil and redesipated by these
amendments as section 3014) by adding the words consistent with
the production of human health and the environment.”
Senate amendment.—No provision.
Conference substitute.—The conference substitute adopts the
House provision. The purpose of the provision is to clarify the
intent of section 3014 in order to assure that EPA’s regulations in
this area are protective of human health and environment. As now
114
written, the sentence states that the regulations governing used oil
“shall . . . not discourage the recovery or recycling of used oil.” It
was never Congress’ intent that protection of human health and
the environment be subordinated to the continuation of used oil re-
cycling activities. The agency can and should prohibit or control
used oil recycling practices that it determines will pose a potential
hazard to human health and the environment even though such
regulations would impede recycling.
The intent of the provision is to make it clear that Congress’
paramount interest in regulating used oil is to assure protection of
human health and the environment. Where protection of human
health and the environment can be assured, however, the Adminis-
trator should make every effort not to discourage recycling of used
oil. For example, if there are several alternative controls that
would be environmentally acceptable, the Agency should allow
those which would be least likely to discourage used oil recycling.
-------
H”- i’’” p
(I
-tv,
Rscovaay AND RECYCWIG or USED OIL
Sac. 14 Section 3012 (relating te restrictions on recycled oil) is amended by striki
ing out the period at the end thereof and substitut
tion of human health and the environment.”. mg ‘, consistent with the protec. /
Section 14. Recovery and recycling of used oil
Section 14 of the bill amends the last sentence of Section 3012 of I
RCRA (a provision from the Used Oil Recycling Act of 1980) to clar-
ify the intent of that section. As now written, the sentence says
that the regulations governing used oil “shall. . not discourage
the recovery or recycling of used oil.” It was never Congress’ intent
that protection of human health and the environment be subordin-
ated to the continuation of used oil recycling activities. Some of’
these practices—such as road oiling contaminated oil (as at Times
Beach, Missouri) and burning contaminated oil as fuel—are poteri-
tially dangerous, and should be appropriately regulated or, in some
cases, prohibited. The Agency can prohibit or control such used oil i
recycling practices that it determines to pose a potential hazard to
human health and the environment even though such regulations’
would impede recycling. To do otherwise, the Agency would be sub-
ordinating protection of human health to promoting recycling. I
Accordingly, the Committee is amending the last sentence of Sec- I
tion 3012 to make it clear that Congress’ paramount interest in!
regulating used oil is to assure protection of human health and the I
environment. Where protection of human health and the environ-
ment can be assured, however, the Administrator should make!
every effort not to discourage recycling of used oil. For example, 1f
there are several alternative controls that would be environmental-
ly acceptable, the Agency would use those which would be least
likely to discourage used oil recycling.
-------
- s - 1 N r;j’, -o..’”-
4 RECOVERY AND RECYCLING OF USED OIL
5 Si c. 19. Section 3012 (relating to restrictions on recy-
6 cled oil) is amended by striking out the period at the end
7 thereof and substituting “, consistent with the protection of
8 human health and the environment.”.
/
-------
H fl
p
20 RECOVERY AND RECYCLiNG OF USED OiL
21 SEc. 14. Section 3012 (‘relating to restrictions on recy-
22 cled oil) is amended by striking out the period at the end
23 thereof and substituting “, consistent with the protection of
24 human health and the environment. ‘
HR 2867 RH
c,2 2
-------
22 RE-REFINING OF USED OIL
23 SEC. 15. Section 3012 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
24 (relating to restrictions on recycled oil) is amended by strik-
44
1 ing out “recovery or recycling of used oil” and inserting in
2 lieu thereof “re-refining of used oil”.
c,24
-------
rz. 2_j r’ r1.,ii C’L’ p 4 ’
16 RECYCLING OF USED OIL
17 SEC. 23. (a) AMENDMENT TO SECTION 3012.—Section
18 3012 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (relating to restrictions
19 on recycled oil) is amended by inserting “(a) IN
20 GEI RAL.—” after “3012.” and by adding the following at
21 the end thereof:
22 “(b) TREATMENT OF USED OIL AS HAZARDOUS
23 WAsTE.—After the date twelve months after the date of en-
24 actment of this subsection, all used oil shall be considered to
25 be a hazardous waste within the meaning of section 1004(5).
HR 2867 IH
-------
49
1 The Administrator shall, promptly after the date of the enact-
2 ment of this subsection, include all used oil on the list estab-
3 lished under subsection (b) of section 3001.
4 “(c) ExEMPTIoN FOR CERTAIN RECYcLED OIL.—(1)
5 The standards promulgated under sections 3002, 3003, and
6 3004 of this title shall not apply to used oil generated by a
7 person who enters into a contract with a used oil recycler
8 (including used oil refiner) permitted under section 3005(g) if
9 the Administrator determines that—
10 “(A) under such contract, all used oil generated
11 by such generator will be delivered to such recycler,
12 and ownership of such used oil will be transferred to
13 such recycler at the time of delivery,
14 “(B) used oil generated by such person is not
15 mixed with other hazardous wastes, and
16 “(C) the generator maintains such records relating
17 to the used oil generated as the Administrator deems
18 necessary (including records of the contract with the
19 used oil recycler).
20 The exemption provided by this paragraph may be suspended
21 or revoked by the Administrator at any time following a de-
22 termination that the requirements of subparagraph (A), (B),
23 or (C) are not met. The, exemption under this paragraph shall
24 not apply to used oil recycled for use as road oil. The stand-
HR 2867 IH
-------
50
1 ards under this subtitle shall be deemed to prohibit this use of
2 used oil as road oil.
3 “(2) Not later than twenty-four months after the date of
4 the enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall pro-
5 mulgate standards under this section regarding used oil
6 which is burned on the premises of the generator in a burner.
7 Such standards shall be promulgated only after consultation
8 with the Administrator of the Occupational Health and
9 Safety Administration.
10 “(3) In any case in which a used oil recycler permitted
11 as required in section 3005(g) is not available in any region,
12 the Administrator may promulgate such regulations under
13 this section as may be necessary to protect human health and
14 the environment.”.
15 (b) AMENDMENT TO SECTION 3005.—Section 3005 of
16 such Act is amended by inserting following at the end there-
17 of:
18 “(g) USED OIL REcYcLERS.—(1) Any person engaged
19 in the recycling of used oil may apply to the Administrator
20 for a permit under this subsection. The Administrator shall
21 issue such a permit if he determines that such person—
22 “(A) meets the requirements promulgated under
23 subsection (a) of section 3012 and such other require-
24 ments as the Administrator deems equivalent to the Fe-
25 quirements applicable under section 3004 to facilities
HR 2867 IH
-------
51
1 required to obtain a permit under subsection (c) of this
2 section;
3 “(B) demonstrates an ability to re-refine used oil
4 as follows:
5 “(i) with regard to automotive lubricants, the
6 re-refined product is commercially acceptable; and
7 “(ii) with regard to used oil to be burned as
8 a fuel, the product is substantially equivalent,
9 prior to blending, to its virgin counterpart;
10 “(0) demonstrates that the facility and operations
11 of such person which are used with respect to the re-
12 ceipt, treatment, processing and other handling of used
13 oil are designed, constructed and maintained to protect
14 human health and the environment;
15 “(ID) provides an operating bond which will assure
16 financial responsibility for closure and which takes into
17 account the value of equipment and oils remaining and
18 be in the amount of any additional amount deemed
19 necessary to insure proper closure and cleanup; and
20 “(E) maintains satisfactory records of all contracts
21 entered into under section 3012(b) and the amounts of
22 used oil removed pursuant to such contracts, and oth-
23 erwise complies with applicable provisions of law, re-
24 specting the disposition of all products, byproducts, and
25 waste products of the used oil recycling operations.
HR 2867 IH
-------
52
1 “(2) For purpose of paragraph (1XB)(ii) a product is sub-
2 stantially equivalent, prior to blending, to its virgin counter-
3 part if it has no more than—
4 “(A) twenty-five parts per million of lead; and
5 “(B) fifty parts per million of PUBs;
6 The concentrations of lead and PUBs specified in subpara-
7 graphs (A) and (B) shall not apply if the Administrator pro-
8 mulgates alternative concentrations which are adequate to
9 protect human health and the environment.”.
-------
,4 Qrw c ..c..) j ,.t:;
EXPANSION DURING INTERIM STATUS
SEC. 243. (a) Subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by adding the following new section after section 3014:
“EXPANSION DURING INTERIM STATUS
“Sec. 0I5. (a) W *srE Puis.—The owner or operator of a waste
pile qualifying for the authorization to operate under section 3005(e)
shall be subject to the same requirements for liners and leachar.e
collection systems or equivalent protection provided in regulations
promulgated by the Administrator under section 3004 before Octo-
ber 1. 1982. or revised under section 3004(o) (relating to minimum
technological requirements, for new facilities receiving individual
permits under subsection IdI of section 3005. with respect to each
new unit, replacement of an existing unit, or lateral expansion of an
existing unit that is within the waste management area identified in
the permit application submitted under section 3005. and with
respect to waste received beginning six months after the date of
enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984.
“(b) LANDFIu.s AND SURFACE IMPOUNDMENTS—I 1) The owner or
operator of a landfill or surface impoundment qualifying for the
authorization to operate under section 3005 (e) shall be sub ect to the
requirements of section 300-loi (relating to minimum tec inological
requirementsi, with respect to each new unit, replacement of an
existing unit, or lateral expansion of an existing unit that is within
the waste management area identified in the permit application
submitted under this section. and with respect to waste received
beginning 6 months after the date of enactment of the Hazardous
and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984.
“(2) The owner or operator of each unit referred to in paragraph
(1) shall notify the Administrator (or the State, if appropriate) at
least sixty days prior to receiving waste. The Administrator (or the
State shall require the filing, within six months of receipt of such
notice, of an application for a final determination regarding the
issuance of a permit for each facility submitting such notice.
“(3 In the case of any unit in whicb , the liner and leachate
collection system has been installed pursuant to the requirements of
this section and in good faith compliance with the Administrator’s
regulations and guidance documents governing liners and leachate
collection systems, no liner or leachate collection system which is
different from that which was so installed pursuant to this section
shall be required for such unit by the Administrator when issuing
the first permit under section 3005 to such facility, ezcept that the
Administrator shall not be precluded from requiring installation of
a new liner when the Adminixtrawr has reason to believe that any
H. R. 2867—41
liner installed pursuant to the requirements of this section is leak-
ing. The Administrator may, under section 3004, amend the require-
ments for liners and leachate collection systems required under this
section as may be necessary to provide additional protection for
human health and the environment.”
(b) The table of Contents for such subtitle C is amended by adding
the following new item after the item relating to section 3014:
‘Sec 3015 Expansion during Interim status.”.
(c) Section 3005 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by
adding the following new subsection after subsection (h):
“(ii INTERIM STATUS FAcru -Irs RECEIVING WAS’ItS AFrER JULY 26,
1982. —The standards concerning ground water monitoring, unsatu-
rated zone monitoring, and corrective action, which are applicable
under section 3004 to new landfills, surface impoundments, land
treatment units, and waste-pile units required to be permitted under
subsection c shall also apply to any landfill, surface impoundment,
land treatment unit, Os’ waste-pile unit qualifying for the authoriza-
tion to c.perate under subsection e which receives hazardous waste
after July 26, 1982.”.
-------
hrl ’L1G C wV . ri ’1.) II’.I
SECTION 243—EXPANSION DURING INTERIM STATUS H L $
House bill. —The House bill requires that expansion of a treat-
ment, storage, or disposal facility in excess of 10 percent of the ca-
pacity specified in the permit application requires a permit. EPA
may issue regulations for expansions of 10 percent or less.
If the facility continues to receive waste, after July 26, 1982, in-
terim status facilities (including replacements and expansions) are
subject to the same ground water monitoring and corrective action
standards as now facilities.
If the facility continues to receive waste, six months after enact-
ment interim status facilities (including replacements and expan-
sions) are subject to the same standards concerning liners and
leachate collection systems as are new facilities.
In the case of any facility in which a liner and leachate collec-
tion system has been installed pursuant to the above and in com-
pliance with EPA regulations and guidance, no different liner or
leachate collection system shall be required by EPA when issuing
permits.
Senate amendment.—The Senate amendment provides that
after July 26, 1982, interim status facilities are subject to the same
ground water monitoring, unsaturated zone monitoring, and correc-
tive action provisions applicable to new facilities.
Six months after enactment new units, replacement units, and
expansions are subject to the same standards concerning liners and
leachate collection systems as are new facilities. Owner-operators
of such units must notify EPA 60 days prior to receiving wastes,
and submit completed permit applications within 6 months of such
notice.
The Senate amendment also clarifies the Administrator’s author-
ity to order the installation of new liners if he suspects that those
installed during interim status are leaking.
Conference substilute.—The Conference substitute provides that
any expansion of a land disposal facility (landfills, surface im-
poundments, waste piles) shall be subject to minimum technology
requirements promulgated by the Administrator. Owners and oper-
ators of such facilities shall notify the Administrator (or the State,
115
if appropriate) at least 60 days before receiving hazardous waste.
The Administrator (or the State) shall require the filing of a Part B
application within 6 months after receiving such notification.
The Conference substitute adopts the Senate provision regarding
good faith compliance with minimum technology requirements.
-------
!C ..1 ri7 qv—z i tt .j
Liners and leachate collection and removal systems at interim 1
status facilities
The current hazardous waste land disposal regulations require
liners at landfills, surface impoundments, and waste piles, and lea-
chate collection and removal systems at landfills and waste piles
after permitting, unless exempted or waived. The bill amends sec-i
tion 3005(e) to require interim status facilities to install liners and
leachate collection and removal systems prior to permitting at each
new unit, each replacement unit, and at lateral expansions. Waste I
pile units must meet the liner and leachate collection system re-I
quirements of current regulations for new facilities. Landfill and
surface impoundment units must meet the requirements of newl
section 3004(0. New units, replacement units, and lateral expan-:
sions are defined for purposes of the requirements of this amend-I
ment as those units or lateral expansions within the waste man-
agement area of a facility defined in the Part A permit application
which first receive waste after enactment of these amendments.
The requirements then apply to all such facilities which will re-
ceive waste after the date six months after enactment of the Solid,
Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1983. Landfill trenches or cells,
impoundments, or waste piles not operational by the date of enact-
ment are required to meet standards for new units (including the
new standards for landfills and impoundments) if the units will
continue to receive hazardous waste six months after enactment.
After that date, waste may still be received at units in existence at
the time of enactment, but all new units, replacement units, and
lateral expansions must have the required liner and leachate col-
lection system to receive wastes after that date.
A replacement unit includes a surface impoundment that is
taken out of service and emptied by removing all or substantially
all the liquid and solid waste in it. Before this impoundment may
be reused, it must be lined or otherwise designed according the new
minimum technological requirements mandated in this bill. Simi-
larly, a replacement unit can be a waste pile that is taken out of
service and all or substantially all waste is removed from it. Before
the pile may be reused, it must meet the liner and other design re-
quirements of EPA’s permit regulations.
Since the liner and leachate collection and removal system (or
the possible demonstration of equivalent protection) may be imple-
mented outside the permit process for interim status facilities, of
the rules may not be adequately complied with. The Agency should
not require retrofitting at the time of first permitting for units that
were lined during interim status provided the liner and leachate
collection and removal s ,stem were in compliance with the law
and the Agency’s regulations and guidance and were installed in
good faith. (This does not preclude the Agency from requiring in-
stallation of new liners at some later time if, for example, the unit
is in violation of the ground-water protection standard or liner re-
quirements are strengthened.) Anyone who follows the EPA techni-
4L 3
-------
25
cal guidance documents for surface impoundments, landfills, or
waste piles is presumed to have acted in good faith. Retrofit should
be required in cases of fraud or gross noncompliance. Examples of
fraud or gross noncompliance includes cases where: a liner was not
installed or a liner not in compliance with EPA guidance document
specifications was installed; a leachate collection and removal
system was not installed or was not designed according to the for-
mula presented in the technical guidance documents to meet the 30
cm (one foot) leachate depth requirement; or there is grossly inad-
equate documentation of any major design feature or construction
activity.
The owner or operator of a new unit or lateral expansion is re-
quired to provide sixty days notice to the Administrator before the
unit receives waste, so the unit can be inspected by EPA to assure
compliance with the requirements of this subsection or so that
EPA or the State can require full permitting before operation. Fail-
ure to provide EPA with the requisite notice will result in the
elimination of the “good faith” protections of this provision.
The amendment to section 3005(e) of the Act requires liners,
leachate collection and removal systems or, in the case of waste
piles, a demonstration of equivalent protection. The reference to
‘equivalent protection” is to authorize the application of variances
to the liner and leachate collection system that exist in current
EPA regulations (other than the “existing portions” variance), to
these units. For landfills and surface impoundments, new section
3004(f) allows the demonstration of the adequacy of alternative
practices. However, waivers to the liner and leachate collection
system requirements at new units, replacement units, and lateral
expansions of all interim status facilities cannot be self implement-
ing, i.e., there must be a mechanism for advance approval by EPA
of a waiver demonstration. The Agency is directed to establish a
mechanism for reviewing such demonstrations. No unlined new or
replacement units or lateral expansions may take wastes after the
date six months from the date of enactment unless they have an
EPA-approved waiver.
It is recognized that EPA may revise the liner and leachate col-
lection and removal system rules from time to time to increase pro-
tection for human health and the environment, and wording has
been added to provide for this. Any such changes must apply equal-
ly to new units, replacement units, and lateral expansions at inter-
im status facilities after the six month period and prior to permit-
ting as well as after permitting.
Monitoring and corrective action
This amendment adds a new subsection (g) to section 3005 to cor-
rect a serious deficiency in land disposal facility regulations which
allowed waste managenent units or entire facilities to escape mon-
itoring and cleanup requirements simply by not accepting wa t e
after January 26, 1983. Reference to “units’ as opposed to “facili-
ties” is designed to assure that partial closures of facilities are sub-
ject to monitoring and clean-up requirements.
The new subsection applies the requirements for corrective
action, groundwater monitoring, and unsaturated zone monitoring,
now applicable to new facilities, to all units of landfills, surface im-
26
poundments, land treatment facilties, or waste piles which rec
hazardous waste after July 26, 1982, the promulgation date o
land disposal regulations.
r, 4<3
-------
7c7 &sc4
18 h
such contaminated ground water is treated to substantially
reduce hazardous constituents prior to such injection. ‘
(b) Section 3005(e) of the Solid Wa3le Disposal Act is
amended by adding the following: “The owner or operator of
a waste pile qualifying for - tith authorization to operate
under this subsection shall be subject to the same require-
ments for liners and leachate collection systems or equiva-
lent protection provided in regulations promulgated by the
Adm nistrator under section 3004 before October 1, 1982,
or revised under section 3004(f), for new facilities receiving
individual permits under subsection (c) of this section, with
resped to each new unit, replacement of an existing unit, or
lateral expansion of an existing unit that is within the
waste management area identified in the permit application
submitted under this section, and with respect to waste re-
ceived beginning six months after the date of enactment of
the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1984. The
owner or operator of a landfill or surface impoundment
qualifying for the authorization to operate under this subsec-
tion shall be subject to the requirements of section 3004(f),
with respect to each new unit, replacement of an existing
unit, or lateral expansion of an existing unit that is within
the waste management area identified in the permit applica-
tion submitted under this section, and with respect to wa -ste
- - received beginning six months after such date of enactment.
HR 2867 LAS
-------
19
The owner or operator of each SUCh unit shall notify the Ad.
ministrator (or the State, if appropriate) at least sixty days
prior to receiving waste. The Administrator (or the State)
shall require the filing of a completed permit application
within six months of receipt of such notice, for each facility
submitting such notice. In the case of any unit in which the
liner and leachate collection system has been installed pur-
suttnt to the requirements of this subsection and in good
faith compliance with the Administrators regulations and
guidance documents governing liners and leachate collection
systems, no liner or leachate collection system which is dif-
ferent from that which was so installed pursuant to this sub.
section shall be required for such unit by the Administrator
when issuing the first permit under this section to such fa-
cility: 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 the requirements of this subsection is leaking.
The Administrator may, under section 3004, amend the re-
quirements for liners and leachate collection systems re-
quired under this subsection as may be necessary to provide
additional protection for human health and the environ-
ment. ‘
(c) Section 3005 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by adding the following new subsection:
HR 2847 LAS
-------
20
“(g) The standards concerning ground water monitor-
ing, unsaturated zone monitoring, and corrective action,
which are applicable under section 3004 to new landfills,
surface impoundments, land treatment units, and waste-pile
units required to be permitted under subsection (c) shall
also apply to any landfill, surface impoundment, land treat-
ment unit, or waste-pile unit qualifying for the authori:a-
lion to operate under subsection (e) which receives ha:ard-
ous waste after July 26, 1982. “.
MINIMUM TECHNOLOGICAL REQUIREMENTS AND PERMiT
LIFE
SEC. 6. (a) Section 3004 of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act is amended by adding the following additional new sub-
section:
ld(f) MiNIMuM TECHNOLOGICAL REQUIREMENTS.—
The regulations under subsection (a) of this section shall be
revised from time to time to take into account improvements
in t e technology of control and measurement. At a mini-
mum, such regulations shall require, and a permit issued
after the date of enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
Amendments of 1984 by the Administrator or a State shall
require—
d(1) for each new landfill or surface impound-
ment, each new landfill or surface impoundment unit
at an existing facility, each replacement of an existing
,24 3
-------
S9168
cation to locate a hazardous waste dis-
posal site in Noxubee County. In my
oninirn, th!s 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 which 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-
fort.s 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 oyt
the violators of hazardous waste dis-
posal regulations. By tightening the
monitoring of hazardous waste genera-
tors, we take preventive measures
which ill 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 S. 757
and the members of the Committee on
Environment and Public Works for
their work in fashioning this conseri-
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 DunENBERGER 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 amendment.
Ground water is the primary source of
drinking water for about 50 percent of
the population in Michigan. Accept-
ance of this amendment can assure
the citizens in Michigan that the Fed-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
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.i
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. Dun.zNBENGENJ.
The amendment (No. 3408) was
agreed to.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I move
to reconsider the vote by which the
amendment was agreed to.
Mr. DURENBERGER. I move to lay
that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to.
AMENDIIEI (T 1(05, 2194, 2795, 2796, 2797. 2800,
2801. 2803, 2805, AND 2806
Mi-. CHAFEE. 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 bill clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Rhode Island. Mr.
Cnsrzz (for himself, Mr. STaFFoRD. Mr. RaN-
aoz.pu. and Mr. MzTcxm.z.), proposes amend-
ments numbered 2794. 2793. 2796. 2197,
2800, 2801. 2802. 2803. and 2806, en bloc.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that further read-
ing of the amendments be dispensed
with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it Is so ordered.
The amendments are as follows:
ANENDMEN ’r No. 2 94
(Purpose: To make conforming amendments
to title and short title)
AI NDMDiT TO TITLS
Amend the title to read as foliows
“To amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act
to authorize funds for fiscal years 11*85.
1986, 1987, 1988. and 1989. and for other
purposes.”.
SHORT TIThS
Strike the phrase “Solid Waste Disposal
Act Amendments of 1983” each place It ap.
July 25, 1984
pears and insert In lieu thereof “Solid
Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1984”.
AMENDMENT No 2795
(Purpose: To malce conforming amendments
to change years and amounts of authori-
sations for appropriations)
AUTSORIZAflON
Amend S. 757 by striking sectIons 2 and 3
and Inserting in lieu thereof the following:
•‘S 2. SectIon 2007(a) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act is amended by striking ‘and’
immediately following 198L’. and by insert-
ing immediately before the period at the
end thereof’. 370,000.000 for the fiscal year
ending September 30. 1985, and 880,000.000
per fiscal year for fiscal years ending Sep-
tember 30. 1986, September 30, 1987. Sep-
tember 30, 1988, and September 30, 1989’.
“Sec. 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: ‘. 855,000,000 for the fiscal year 1985.
and 860,000.000 per fiscal year for fiscal
years 1986, 1987, 1988 and 1989’.”
Asareesv No. 2796
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”.
ANTsa *v 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-
tions)
On Page 39, line 13, insert “(Proposed
EPA Hazardous Waste Nos. P020, P021,
P022. and P023)” immediately alter “dioxin
containing hazardous wastes”,
AlrDareiqv No. 2800
(Purpose: To make technical and clarifying
amendments to Section 13 regarding
export of dangerous waste)
On page 68. line 22, Insert “and the ship-
ment conforms with the terms of such
agreement” immediately alter ‘(f)”.
Page 69. line 10, strike “concern” and
insert in lieu thereof “contain”.
Page 71, line 2, strike “subsection” and
insert in lieu thereof “subsections (a)(5)
and”.
Page 71, line 19, Insert “(A)” immediately
before “without”,
Page ‘11, 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, st.orage.
and disposal of hazardous wastes, in a
manner which is not In conformance with
such agreement” immediately after “coun-
try”,
AasENDMnrr No. 2801
(Purpose: To make miscellaneous technical’
and clarifying amendments)
On page 33, lIne 4. insert “without a
permit” immediately before the comma.
On page 46, line 10, insert “; Providcd
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
c:2 3
-------
July 25, 1984
the requirements of this subsection is leak.
ing” i mmediately after “such facility”.
AMEmMz7 T No. 2802
(Purpose: To clarify authority of Adminis-
trator to enter into cooperative agree-
ments with States to a.ssist in the adminis-
tration of new requirements and prohibi-
tions)
On page 85, line 18. Insert immediately
after “requirement.” the following new sen-
tence: “Pending authorization under this
section of a State program which reflects
the amendments made by the Solid Waste
DiFposal !iet Amendments 011984. the Ad-
ministrator may enter into an agreement
with the State under which the State may
assist In the admirustration of the require-
inents and prohibitions which take effect
pursuant to such amendments.”.
AMEP1DMreT No. 2805
(Purpose: To grant Interim status to facili-
ties not previously required to have a
permit under SectIon 3005 of the Act)
Amend S. 757 by adding the following new
section:
zatsare STATUS
Sec. - SectIon 3005 of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act Is amended by amending para-
graph (1) of subsection (e) to read as fol-
lows:
“(1) owns or operates a facility required to
have a permit under this section—
“(A) which facility was In existence on No-
vember 19. 1980. or
“(B) which facility is in existence on the
effective date of statutory or regulatory
changes under this Act that render the fa-
cility subject to the requirement to have a
permit under this section: Provided. That
the facility has not been pre ious1y denied a
permit under thts section and authority to
operate the facility under this section has
not been pre iousIy terminated.”.
(Purpose: To extend deadline for e’cpiration
of interim authorization of State hazard-
ous waste programs)
Amend S. 757 by adding the following new
section.
UITCifle Au’rwoRizATrOl, OF STATE RAZA300US
WASTE PROGRAMS
Szc. . Section 3006c) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act is amended by striking
“twenty-four month period beginning on
the date six months after the date of pro-
mulgation of regulations under Section 3007
through 3005” and trisertinr in lieu thereof
“period ending no later than January 31,
1986”.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is the
Senator asking for consideration of
those amendments en bloc?
Mr. CHAFEE. Thi’ answer is yes. I
move the adoption of those amend-
ments en bloc.
Mr. President. I ask unanimous con-
sent that the following expianatioris
of amendments No 2794. 2795 2796.
2797. 2800. 2801. 2802. 2â05. and 2809
be printed in the RECORD.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, the explanations will be
Included in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the expla-
nations of the amendments were or-
dered to be printed in the REcoiw, as
follows:
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
AMmDMssrr No. 2795
(To make conforming amendments to
change years and amounts of authoriza-
tions for appropriations)
As introduced In March 1983 and reported
in October 1983, S. 757 authorized funds for
fiscal years 1983, 1984, 1985. 1986, and 1987
at levels based upon the administration’s
budget requests for fiscal years 1983 and
1984.
To account for the delay in Senate consid-
eration of the bill, this amendment sill
retain the 5-year reauthorization cycle that
was en Isioned by the Committee and au-
thorize funds for fiscal years 1985 through
1989. The amounts authorized are also In-
creased to reflect the fact that both actual
1984 appropriations and Administrator
Ruckeishaus’ fiscal year 1985 budget sub-
mission to the Office of Management and
Budget exceed the figures in S. ‘757. The Ad-
ministi-ator’s budget submission is the best
estimate of funds needed for this program
and, as such, form the basis for the amounts
set forth In this amendment to sectIons 2
and 3 of S. 757.
There are no “implied authorizations” In
5, 757. Agency actions that are directed by
this bill, including reports to Congress, are
to be carried out with funds that are avail-
able under the authority of other existmng
laws or are explicitly authorized by this bill.
AMulMzs’r No. 2796
(To clarify authority of Administrator to
promulgate regulations for small quantity
generators that differ from those applica-
ble to large quantity generators)
As reported, the bill explicitly provides
that the requirements that are to be pro-
mulgated by March 31, 1986 for small quan-
tity generators ‘may vary from the require.
ments applicable to hazardous waste gener-
ated In quantities greater than one thou-
sand kilograms during any calendar month,
to the extent the Adimnistrator determines
such standards are adequate to protect
human heaith and the environment.” That
phrase is explained at page 11 of the Com-
mittee Report.
Concern has been expressed that reten-
tion of the law’s underlying requirement
and ultimate standard that RCRA regula-
tions assure protection of human health
and the en ironment might undercut the
explicit authority to vary for smail quantity
generators the requirements applicable to
hazardous waste generated in quantities
greater than one thousand kilogran’s per
month. Such a concern Is based upon an im-
proper reading of the law, It is based upon a
mistaken belief that the Administrator is re-
quired by law to select a single regulatory
approach that is applicable to all hazardous
wastes and generators of hazardous waste.
Ha ing promulgated a regulatory program
for large generators of chemical hazardous
wastes, a program that EPA contends is pro.
tectlve of human health and the environ-
ment and is necessary to assure such protec-
tion, It Is argued that the same regulatory
prog am must be used whenever EPA is di-
rected to proitiulgete reEjiattons that
assure protection of human health arid the
environment from hazardous wastes The
notion is that If EPA is authorized ann capa-
ble of developing different regulations for
different situations, then the existing regu.
lations for large generators are not “neces-
sary ‘ to protect human health and the ent’I-
ronment and are, therefore, not legally de-
fensible.
Such an argument assumes that use of the
word “necessary” In section 3004 Imposes
upon EPA a responsibility to select and pro.
mulgate only regulations that are “essen-
tial”, “vital” or “Indispensable”. However,
S9169
“necessary” denotes that which fills an
urgent need, but not invariably an all-com-
pelling need The stronger “essential” and
“vital” are applIed to that without which
somrthing. by Its nature, cannot exist. “in.
dispensable” even more arecilically denotes
that which cannot be sacrificed: frequently
It is applied to part of a whole, there are tin.
doubtedly portions of existing regulations
that are “Indispensable” and cannot be
aried when faced with a requirement to
“protect human health and the cn :ron-
ment”. To recognize that there are port ions
of existing regulations that are not “Indis.
pensable”, however, does not in arty way
suggest that those portions are not “neces
sary” and, therefore, unlawful.
This amendment is a clarification of the
Administrator’s existing authority. As with
mining wastes, the administrator Is able tO
choose from a range of regulatory options
that sill satisfy the mandate that protec’
tic-n of human health and the emironment
be assured When faced with a specJic prob-
lem. the Administrator can often identify
several options, each of which would protect
human health and the emironment. The
Adminisiator Is not required to select the
option that would satisfy the statutory
mandate In the most simple or most cost-ef.
fective manner. He has a responsibii.tv to
protect human health and the environment
and, as such. may choose among several ap.
proaches. The selection of a particular ap-
proach shall be lawful provided It satisfies
the statutory mandate and Is not an arbi-
trary or capncious decision. Distinctions
often can be and are made on the basis of
waste characteristics, waste management
practices and locational criteria. This
amendment will simply clarify the Adminis-
trator’s existing authority to make such dis.
tinctions in the specified instances and to
consider she her variation Is neces zrl’ by
reason of the smaller size and the technical
and managei ml capability of small quantity
generators.
It is recognized that many small quantity
generators may be small businesses that
may be adtersely affected if the full set of
subtitle C regulations are required Never-
theless. these quantities of wastes from
smaller individual generators may cause po.
tent ai harm II they are Improperlj man-
aged. Given these considerations, the
Agency should determine whether require-
ments for small quantity generators can be
varied from those applicable to other gen-
erators while assuring protection of human
healtn and the environment, In particular.
the Administrator should examine whether
it Is possible to simplify, reduce the frecuen.
cy of, or eliminate the existing reporting
arid record keeping requirements and still
provide adequate prpt(ctiun of human
heaUi and the environment. Distinctions
may be made from requirements for larger
generators. and among classes of small
quantity genci’ators or of wastes produced
by them.
AMr iD:4cxT No. 2797
(To clarify which diosin-containing sss.’c
are included in the f:rst categor, o hri7-
ardnus wastes to be Ccns:der d by the Ad
mn;istra’or for iand disposri limitatior ’
In hearings before the Commtttcc’. EPA
statcd that it planned to begin to picrnui-
gate land disposal limitation regulation, arid
would ln 1 tia!!y re icw d:oxin’cciuairiiw haz-
ardot:m wastes and hazardous wastes nu’ia-
bored FOUl, P002. F003, FOC4. and P005 in
regulations promulgated pursuant to section
3001. Recognizing that such wastes arc
properly candidates for early ret iew, the bill
specifies that these wastes hate been sclcct-
24 ’3
-------
$9170
ed to be reviewed first and on a “fa L.tra k”
basis.
On February 15. 1984. the Agency pub-
Hshed an Advanced Notice or Proposed
Rulemaking to announce the Agency’s cur-
rent activisies to de elop regulations to re-
strict or prohibit the land disposal of haz-
ardous aas tes (49 FR 5854). On page 5858.
the Agency stated that the dioxin-contain-
ing hazardous wastes included in the “fast
track” study are those identilied and pro-
posed to be added to 40 CFR 261.13 in an
April 4, 1983. Federal Register notice. Those
are proposed EPA Hazardous Waste Nos.
P020. F021. F022 and P023. This amend.
ment. clarifies the reference to “dioxin-con-
taining hazardous wastes” in this section of
the bill by adding specific reference to the
proposed hazardous waste numbers that are
set forth in the April 4. 1983. Federal Regis-
ter notice and cited in the February 15,
1984. notice.
It is noted that by including hazardous
wastes numbered F003. the universe of
wastes selected by the Congress for a “fast-
track” review under this section is some-
what larger than that Identified in the Feb-
ruary 15, 1984. Federal Register notice.
AMENDMzx’r No. 2800
(To make technical and clarifying amend
Inents to Section 13 regarding export of
hazardous waste)
This amendment does not change the
meaning or original intent of the provision,
As stated on page 48 of the Committee
Report “(s)hipnients must conform with the
terms of the (Internutionaj) agreement to
satisfy the requirements of this section.”
The language added by this amendment
clarifies and codifies that originai intent.
ASENOMENT No, 2801
(To make miscellaneous technical and
clarifying amendments)
This amendment makes two clarIf ’ing
amendments and one technical amendment
to correct a typographical error.
This first clarif)ing amendment relati’s to
on.site storage by small quantity generators
and the second relates to preservation of
the Administrator’s authority, in the con.
te’ t of permit issuance or otherwise, to
order new liners at landfills or surface tin-
poundments which installed liners during
interim status.
Amarsiq’r No, 2802
(To clarify authority of Administrator to
enter into cooperative agreements with
States to assist in the administration of
new requirements and prohibitions.)
This amendment ratifies the current prac-
tice of using State-EPA agreements to
enable States to participate as much as pos-
sible in the implementation of RCRA prior
to authorization of a State program under
Section 3006. For example, States that do
not 5 et hate adequate authority to obtain
authorization may still have suffic,ent State
authority to be able to enter into agree-
mems to conduct inspections and draft per-
mits for EPA. Other States may have made
the necessary statutory and regulatory
changes to Implement an Independent State
regulatory program for small quantity gen-
erators between 100 and 1.000 kilograms
that EPA can acknowledge in an agreement.
In thoce cases, the Administrator may well
wish to arrange to detote his priorities and
resources to other areas a here there is not
al-eady considerable State acthity and/or
to ether Stales.
The agreement or existence of an operat.
(ng State program does not mean that the
Admin scrator relinquishes his authority or
responsibility. Until a State receives interim
or final authorization for a program compo-
nent. the Administrator alone is charged
with the legal responsibility under subtitle
C. We do not intend agreemen to be
viewed as a tie facto, more lenient type of
authorization.
A.4ENDssENT No. 2805
(To grant interini status to facilltie not pre-
viously required to hai e a permit under
Section 3005 of the Act)
New paragraph (lhB) amends RCRA Sec-
tion 3005(e) to allow facilities in existence
subsequent to November 19. 1980 to qualify
for interim status if those facilities become
subject to the subtitle C requiremen as a
result of amendments to the RCRA statute
or regulatio issued pursuant thereto, Fa-
cilities subject to this provision include fa-
cilities in existence subsequent to No%ember
19, 1980 which treat, store or dispose of
newly listed hazardous wastes, including
mobile treatment units, and facilities which
treat, store or dispose of hazardous wastes
which were previously exempted from cer-
tain RCRA requirements but subsequently
became subject to these requirements as a
result of legislative amendments (i.e.. small
Quantity generator wastes). Facilities for
which RCR#. permits have been previously
denied or interim status has been previously
terminated would not be able to qualify for
interim status pursuant to this protision
under any circumstances,
A?nNDSWNT No, 2808
(To extend deadjine for expiration f inter-
im authorization of State hazardous waste
progra )
This amendment will assure that the
States have adequate time to fulfill the nec-
essary requirements to become fully author.
ized under Section 3006. WIthout. this
amendment, the States’ interim authoriza.
tions will expire on January 28. 1985. It is
my understanding that approx’mately 7 to
14 States will not be able to meet this dead-
line. and so would lose their interim author-
izations Therefore, this amendment gives
the States until January 26, 1986 to fuif ill
their requirements before they lose their in-
terim status,
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
there further debate on the committee
amendments?
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I with-
draw amendment No. 2794.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered,
Mr. CHAFEE, Mr. President, I move
adoption of those amendments.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, The
cluestion is on agreeing to the amend.
n ients.
The amendments (Nos. 2795, 2796,
2797. 2800. 2801, 2802, 2805, and 2806)
were agreed to en bloc.
AME ZDMEN5 NO. 3409
Mr, CHAFFE, Mr. President, I send
a series of 18 committee a’nendments
to the desk and ask for their immedi-
ate consideration, I ask that they be
considered en bloc.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered. The
clerk will report the amendments.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Rhode Island U 1r,
CHAFEd proposes an amendment numbered
3409, en bloc.
Mr. CIIAFEE. Mr. President. I ask
unanimous consent that further read.
July 25, 1984
ing of the amendment be dispensed
with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered,
The anieridment Is as follows:
A%IENDuENT No. 3409
(Purpose: To extend deadlines in various
sections of the bill)
Proposed by Mr. CHAFEE (for himself
and Senators Sw-FoRD, RANDOLPH, and
MIrcnEuj.
SZCTION 5 LAND DISPOSAL LIMITATIONs
On page 39, line 11, strike “July 1. 1985”
and insert in lieu thereof “twenty.four
months after the enactment of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1984”.
On page 41, line 11, strike “twelve” and
insert in lieu thereof “taenty-four”,
On page 41. line 18. strIke “thirty-two”
and insert in lieu thereof “(orty-etght”,
On page 41. line 20. strike “forty-two” and
insert in lieu thereof “sixty”,
On page 41. line 21, strike “fifty-two” and
Insert in lieu thereof “seventy.Lwo”,
On page 41. line 22. Immediately following
“enactment” add the following new sen
tense: “The Administrator shall base the
schedule on a ranking of such listed wastes
considering their Intrinsic hazard and their
olune such that decisions whether or not
to prohibit the land dsposal of high volume
hazardous wastes with high intrinsic hazard
shall, to the maximum e aent possible, be
made by the date 42 months after the enact-
ment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
Amendments of 1984 and decisions regard-
ing low volume hazardous wastes with lower
intrinsic hazard shall be made by the date
72 months after the date of such enact.
ment.”,
On page 43, line 23. strike “one year” and
Insert In lieu thereof “fifteen months”,
SECTION 5 USTlNG/D ,I5TING MODIFICATIONs
On page 51, lines 12 and 13, strike “twelve
months after the date such petition Is
granted or six” and insert in lieu thereof
“twenty.four”,
On page 51, line 15. strike “, whichever is
later”.
On page 53, line 22. strike “two years” and
Insert in lieu thereof “twenty’eight
months”,
SECTION 9 BURNING AND BLENDING OP
HAZARDOUS WA5TES
On page 54. line 16, strike “twelve” and
insert in lieu thereof “fifteen”,
On page 60. line 12. strike “twelve” and
insert in lieu thereof “fifteen”,
SECTiON 24 AIR EMISSIONS FROM LAND
DISPOSAL FACILITIES
On page 85. line 22. strike “thirty” and
insert in lieu thereof “thirty-six”.
SECTION 28 REPORT TO CONGRESS
On page 90. line 24 and 25, strike “M ”rh
15. 1984” and Insert In lieu thereof “Jane
15. 1984”.
AMLriDMENT No. 3409
(Purpoce, To clarify Administrator’s author.
ity to require a permit to construct a haz-
ardous waste treatment, storage, Or dispos.
at facility)
Amend S 757 by adding the following new -
section.
SEc. . Srction 3005ts) of the Solid Waste
Dispocal Act is amended by—
(1) Striic:ng ‘a” immediately after
“owning or operating” in the first sentence
and inserting in lieu thereof “an existing Ia.
cility or planning to construct a new”;
(2) lns rting in the second sentence “and
the constructIon of any new facility for the
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
/ -rHL No J6 .’
1 INTERIM STATUS; PERMITS
2 SEC. 8. (a) ExPANSIoN DURING INTERIM STATuS.—
3 Section 3005(e) is amended by inserting “(1)” after “INTER-
4 IM STATUS.—”, redesignating paragraphs (1) through (3) as
5 subparagraphs (A) through (0), and adding the following at
6 the end thereof:
7 “(2) Any owner or operator of a treatment, storage, or
8 disposal facility operating under interim status pursuant to
9 this subsection who expands the capacity of the facility
10 (except the capacity for storage or treatment in tanks or con-
11 tainers and enclosed waste piles) by an amount in excess of
12 10 per centum of the capacity specified in the permit applica-
13 tion shall be required to obtain a permit under subsection (c)
14 prior to the construction or expansion. The Administrator
15 may promulgate regulations under this subsection which, in
16 the discretion of the Administrator, contain standards for
17 facilities which expand such capacity by 10 per centum or
18 less; such standards may vary from the standards applicable
19 to those facilities operating pursuant to a permit under this
20 subsection which do not expand such capacity.
21 “(3) The standards concerning ground water monitor-
22 ing, corrective action, liners and leachate collection systems
23 which are applicable under section 3004 to new landfills, sur-
24 face impoundments, and waste-pile units required to be per-
25 mitted under subsection (c) shall also apply to any landfill,
-------
f 1 i
1 surface impoundment or waste-pile unit (including any new
2 unit, replacement of an existing unit or lateral expansion of
3 an existing unit) operating under interim status under this
4 subsection which receives hazardous waste after the applica-
5 ble date. In the case of standards concerning ground water
6 monitoring and corrective action, the applicable date is July
7 26, 1982. In the case of standards concerning liners and
8 leachate collection systems, the applicable date is the date six
9 months after the date of enactment of this paragraph. The
10 Administrator may amend the requirements in effect under.
11 section 3004 and applicable to liners and leachate collection
12 systems required under this paragraph as may be necessary
13 to protect human health and the environment.
14 “(4) In the case of any facility in which a liner and
15 leachate collection system has been installed pursuant to the
16 requirements of paragraph (3) and in compliance with the
17 Administrator’s regulations and guidance documents govern-
18 ing liners and leachate collection systems, no liner or leach-
19 ate collection system which is different from that which was
20 originally installed pursuant to paragraph (3) shall be re-
21 quired by the Administrator when issuing pel’mits under sub-
22 section (c) to such facility.”.
-------
).4 11. -z g pt; i3 .L
-
16 J.VTERIM STATUS; PERMITS
17 SEC. 7. (a) ExPAsslo.v DURING iNTERIM STATUS.—
18 Section 3005fr) is amended by inserting “(1)” after dLV
19 TERIM STATUS.—”, redesignaling paragraphs (1) through
20 (‘3.) as subparugraphs (A) through (C), and adding the follow- d.J - ‘
21 ing at Me end thereof:
22 “(2) Any owner or operator of a treatment, storage, or
23 disposal facility operating under interim status pursuant to
24 this subsection who expands the capacity of the facility
25 ‘except the capacity for storage or treatment in tanks or con-
HR 2867 RH
-------
24
I lainers and enclosed waste piles) by an amount in excess of
2 10 per centum of the capaCity specified in the permit applica-
3 tion shall be required to obtain a permit under subsection (c)
4 prior to the construction or expansion. The Administrator
5 may promulgate regulations under this subsection which, in
6 the discretion of the Administrator, contain standards for
7 facilities which expand such capacity by 10 per centum or
8 less; such standards may vary from the standards applicable
9 to those facilities operating pursuant to a permit under this
10 subsection which do not expand such capacity. .•- —
11 “3 ) The standards concerning ground water monitor-
12 ing, corrective action, liners and leachate collection systems
13 which are applicable under section 3004 to new landfills.
14 surface impoundments, and waste-pile units required to be
15 permitted under subsection (c) shall also apply to any land-
16 fill, surface impoundment or waste-pile unit (including any
17 new unit, replacement of an existing unit or lateral P.rpan-
18 sion of an existing unit) operating under interim status
19 under this subsection which receives hazardous waste after
20 the applicable date. in the case of standards concerning
21 ground water monitoring and corrective action, the applicable
22 date is July 26, 1982. in the case of standards concerning
23 liners and leachate collection system.s, the applicable dati ii
24 the dale .six mont’us aftcr the datc of enactment of his pa i-
25 graph. Thc Administrator may amend the requirements in
HR 2S67 RH
rfl t J3
-------
25
1 effect under section 3004 and applicable to liners and
2 leachate collection systems required under this paragraph
3 as may be necessary to protect human health and the
4 environment. -
5 “(4,) In the case of anz, facility in which a liner and
6 leachate collection system has been installed pursuant to the
7 requirements of paragraph (3,) and in compliance with the
8 Administraior s regulations and guidance documents govern-
9 ing liners and leachate collection systems, no liner or leach-
10 ate collection system which is different from that which was
11 oriyii al1y initai?ed pursuant to paragraph (‘3) shall be re-
12 quired by the Administrator when issuing permits under izb-
13 section (c) to such facility. ‘
-------
A JJ Oc i..L) p L ..
b INTERIM STATUS; PERMITS
7 Sec. 7. (a) ExPANsIoN DURING INTERIM STATUs.—
8 Section 3005(e) of such Act is amended by inserting “(1)”
9 after “INTERIM STATus.—”, redesignating paragraphs (1)
10 through (3) as subparagraphs (A) through (0), and adding the
11 following at the end thereof:
12 “(2) Any owner or operator of a treatment, storage, or
13 disposal facility operating under interim status pursuant to
14 this subsection who expands the capacity of the facility
15 (except the capacity for storage or treatment in tanks or con-
16 tainers and enclosed waste piles) by an amount in excess of
17 10 per centum of the capacity specified in the permit applica-
18 tion shall be required to obtain a permit under subsection (c)
19 prior to the construction or expansion. The Administrator
20 may promulgate regulations under this subsection which, in
21 the discretion of the Administrator, contain standards for
22 facilities which expand such capacity by 10 per centum or
23 less; such standards may vary from the standards applicable
24 to those facilities operating pursuant to a permit under this
25 subsection which do not expand such capacity.
HR 2867 III
-------
23
1 “(3) The standards concerning ground water monitor-
2 ing, corrective action, liners and leachate collection systems
3 which are applicable under section 3004 to new landfills, sur-
4 face impoundments, and waste pile units required to be per-
5 mitted under subsection (c) shall also apply to any landfill,
6 surface impoundment or waste pile unit (including any new
7 unit, replacement of an existing unit or lateral expansion of
8 an existing unit) operating under interim status under this
9 subsection which receives hazardous waste after the applica-
10 ble date. In the case of standards concerning ground water
11 monitoring and corrective action, the applicable date is July
12 26, 1982. In the case of standards concerning liners and lea-
13 chate collection systems, the applicable date is the date six
14 months after the date of enactment of this paragraph. The
15 Administrator may amend the requirements in effect under
16 section 3004 and applicable to lines and leachate collection
17 systems required under this paragraph as may be necessary
18 to protect human health and the environment.
19 “(4) In the case of any facility in which a liner and
20 leachate collection system has been installed pursuant to the
21 requirements of paragraph (3) and in compliance with the
22 Administrator’s regulations and guidance documents govern-
23 ing liners and leachate collection systems, no liner or lea-
24 chate collection system which is different from that which
25 was originally installed pursuant to paragraph (3) shall be
HR 2867 III
iA 3
-------
24
1 required by the Administrator when issuing permits under
2 subsection (c) to such facility.”.
-------
Section 7. Interim status; permits
The primary purposes of Section 7 are to restrict the expansion
of hazardous waste facilities during interim status; to correct sever-
al of the deficiencies in the land disposal regulations that are al-
lowing a continuation of uncontrolled expansion of present interim
status landfills, to ensure that units of land disposal facilities
which stopped accepting waste prior to January 26, 1983, the effec-
five date of the land disposal regulations are subject, at a mini-
mum, to the groundwater monitoring and corrective action require-’
ments of those standards; to expedite the final permit review of I
major land disposal and incineration facilities and close those facil-
ities that cannot or will not meet the fmal standards at the earliest I
possible date; and to circumscribe the Agency’s authority to issue I
permits by class to only a limited class of storage and treatment
facilities.
Section 7(a) allows owners or operators of a treatment, storage or
disposal facility operating under interim status to expand the ca-
pacity of such a facility by 10 percent or less without being re-
quired to submit an application for a final RCRA permit. This is
done in recognition that EPA lacks the resources necessary for the
timely issuance of permits for all such expansions. This unfortu-
nate compromise with the ideal of requiring the rapid permitting
of all the approximately 7,000 interim status facilites during the I
lengthy permitting time table. EPA retains, of course, the discre-
tion to require a facility owner or operator to file an application for
a final permit at any time. The Committee expects that the Agency
will use its discretion to require application for final permit in any
case where an expansion is undertaken at a facility which raises
particular questions about a possible adverse impact on human
health and the environment.
In addition, subsection (a) requires that any landfill, surface liii-
poundment or waste pile unit operating under interim status and
which received hazardous waste after July 26, 1982, the date of pro-
mulgation of final standards for these facilities, shall all be subject
to the corrective action and groundwater monitoring requirements
of those standards as they would apply to any regulated unit sub-
ject to the standards. The Committee has included this provision
for the purpose of correcting one of the most serious deficiencies in
the final standards for land disposal facilities. Under the July 26
final regulations, any land disposal unit which closed or did not re-
ceive hazardous waste after January 26, 1983, the effective date of
the July 26, 1982 final land disposal regulations, is not subject to
the corrective action or groundwater monitoring requirements of
those regulations. Several EPA regions have documented a sub-
stantial number of facilities and units that have closed or stopped
taking wastes after January 26, and as such will provide little’
warning and no remedy should they cause a release into the envi-
ronment at any point in the future. Thus, a significant loophole
was created which allowed a substantial number of facilities and
units to escape cleanup requirements for the contamination they
-------
45
caused. In light of the predictable failure of land disposal facilities
to contain wastes, these sites are likely candidates for future reme-
dial action under the Superfund program. For the very purpose of
ensuring that these facilities do not become the province of Super-
fund, which is insufficient to address the priortiy sites that have
been identified to date, and for the principle that operators of facil-
ities should address the contamination they caused, the Committee
has included this provision.
In addition, in the case of standards for liners and leachate col-
lection systems required in the July 26, 1982 regulations, subsec-
tion (a) requires all new units to install liner and leachate collec-
tion systems as povided in the regulations and guidance document.
For facilities which install a liner and leachate collection system
pursuant to the requirements of this subsection and in compliance
with the Administrator’s requirements of such items, no additional
substantive requirements respecting liners and leachate collection
systems will be imposed for the duration of the permit issued for
that facility. The Committee does not intend to require by statue
the retrofitting of landfill, surface impoundment, and waste pile
units with liners and leachate collection systems if such landfills,
surface impoundments and waste piles have interim status and
have received significant amounts of waste prior to the date of en-
actment of this section. However, the Adminictrator shall require
such retrofitting where he determines it is necessary to protect
human health and the environment. Significant amounts in this
case means greater than minor deposits of waste designed to create
the aooearance of an existing interim status facility.
-------
S s R- Ci . .
24 (b) Section 3005(e) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is f”i
- 25 amended by adding the following: “The owner or operator of
1 a waste pile qualifying for the authorization to operate under
2 this subsection shall be subject to the same requirements for
3 liners and leachate collection systems or equivalent protection
4 provided in regulations promulgated by the Administrator
5 under section 3004 before October 1, 1982, or revised under
6 section 3004(f), for new facilities receiving individual per-
7 mits under subsection (c) of this section, with respect to each
8 new unit, replacement of an existing unit, or lateral expan-
9 sion of an exüling unit that is within the waste management
10 area identified in the permit application submitted under this
11 section, and with respect to waste received beginning six
12 months after the date of enactment of the Solid Waste Dis-
13 posal Act Amendments of 1983. The owner or operator of a
14 landfill or surface impoundment qualifying for the authoriza-
15 lion to operate under this subsection shall be subject to the
16 requirements of section 3004(f), with respect to each new
17 unit, replacement of an existing unit, or lateral expansion of
18 an existing unit that is within the waste management area
19 identified in the permit application submitted under this sec-
20 lion, and with respect to waste received beginning six months
21 after such date of enactment. The owner or operator of each
22 such unit shall notify the Administrator (or the State, if ap-
23 propnale) at least sixty days prior to receiving waste. The
24 Administrator (or the Stale) shall require the filing of a corn-
25 pleted permit application within six months of receipt of such
S757 1 1S
-------
46
1 notice, for each facility 3ubmitting such notice. In the case of
2 any unit in which the liner and leachate collection system
3 has been installed pursuant to the requirements of this sub-
4 section and in good faith compliance with the Administrator’s
5 regulations and guidance documents governing liners and
6 leachate collection systems, no liner or leachate collection
7 system which is different from that which was so installed
8 pursuant to this .subsection shall be required for such unit by
9 the Administrator when issuing the first permit under this
10 section to such facility. The Administrator may, under sec-
11 tion 3004, amend the requirements for liners and leachate
12 collection systems required under this subsection as may be
13 necessary to provide additional protection for human health
14 and the environment. ‘
15 (c) Section 3005 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
16 amended by adding the following new subsection:
17 “(g) The standards concerning ground water monitor-
18 ing, unsaturated zone monitoring, and corrective action,
19 which are applicable under section 3004 to new landfills,
20 surface impoundments, land treatment units, and waste-pile
21 units required to be permitted under subsection (c) shall also
22 apply to any landfill, surface impoundment, land treatment
23 unit, or waste-pile unit qualifying for the authorization to
24 operate under subsection (e) which receives hazardous waste
25 after July 26, 1982. ‘
S 757 RS
-------
September 8, 1982
shall file with the Administrator a notifies.
Uon stating the location and general de-
scription of the facility, together with a de-
scription of the identified or listed hazard-
ous waste involved and, In the case of a fa.
duty referred to in paragraph (11 or (2), a
description of the production or energy re-
co ery activity carried out at the facility
and such other information as the Adniinis.
trator deems necessary. For purposes of the
preceding sentence, the term ‘hazardous
waste listed under section 3001’ also In-
cludes any commercial chemical product
which Is lL5ted under secuon 3001 and
which, in lieu of its origInal intended use, Is
(ii produced for use as (or as a component
oD a fuel. th distributed for use as a fuel.
or till) burned s.c a fueL Notification shail
not be required under this subsection in the
case of facil tiec (such as residential boilers)
where the Administrator determLnes that
surh notiticauon is not necessary in order
for the Admtm, .irator to obtain sufficient
information respecting current practices of
facilities using hazardous waste for energy
recovery Nothing in this subsection shall be
construed to affect or impair the prot isions
of secuun 3003(b1c3. 3thIng in this Subsec-
tion shall affect regulatory determinations
under section 3012 (s.c amended by the Used
Oil Ret’ychng Act of 1080).”
(2) Section 3010 Is amended by striking
out “the preceding sentence” and substitut-
ing “the precedh g rotielons”,
1b Snsoaaos.—Section 3004 of such Act
Is amended by adding the folio ing at the
end thereof:
‘(el Htz.ucnovs WASTE Usro as Fou..—Not
later than tao years after the date of the
enactment of thls subsection, and after
notice and opportunity for public hearing,
the Administrator shall promulgate regula-
tions establishing such—
“(1) standards applicable to the owners
end operators of facilities aluch produce a
fuel (A) from any hazardous aaste identi-
led or listed under sectIon 3001. or (B) from
any hazardous easte identif’ed or listed
under section 3002 and any other materlal
“(2) standards applicable to the owners
and operators of facilities which burn for
purposes of energy recovery any fuel pro-
duced as provided in paragraph (1) or any
fuel ahich otherwise contains any hazard-
ous aaste identified or listed under section
3001: and
“(3) standards applicable to any person
aho distributes or rnarketa any fuel ahich Is
produced as provided in paragraph (1) or
any fuel ahich others ise contains any haz-
ardous waste idet iWled or listed under see-
tion3 0 0 l
as may be necessary to protect human
health and the enaironinent, Such stand-
aids may include any of the requirements
set forth In paragraphs 1 through (7) of
subsection (a) as may be appropriate, Roth.
Ing In ths subsection shall be construed to
affect or impair the provisions of section
3001(b)(3), For purposes of this subsection.
the term ‘hazardous a aste listed under sec-
tion 3001’ includes any commercial chemical
product which Is listed under section 3001
and ahich, In lieu of its original intended
use. Is (A) produced for use as (or as a com-
ponent of) a fuel, IB) distributed for use as
a fuel, or (C) burned as a fuel.
“(t) LABCL INC.—Nota )thstanding any
other pros ision of law, it shall be unlawful
lot any person aho Is required to file a nott.
ficat ion In accordsnce with paragraph (1) or
(3) of section 3010 to distribute or market
any firel ahich Is produced from any haz-
ardous aaste identified or listed under sec-
tiOn 3001, or any fuel which otheraise con.
tains any hazardous waste identified or
listed under sectIon 3001 LI the invoice or
the bill of sale fails—
- AprucATIoi cs
Szc’. A. Section 3005c of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act Is amended by inserting “(1)”
after “PsaMrr Issoagea.—” and by adding
the following new paragraph at the end
thereof:
“(21(A) Not later than the date four years
aS’er the enactment of the Resource Cot.’
aervatlon and Recotery Act Reauthorization
Act of 1982, In the case of each application
for a permit for a land disposal facility
under this section ahich was subriutted
before such date, the Adrninu tratar 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 sli years
after the enactment of the Resource Con.
sertatlon 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 reterred to In sub-
paragraph (A)) which ass 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 c i any
—
ID it &4 e-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE 5 4 t4 675
“(1) to bear the following statement: State which 2 . c admd fLtering an authorize
“WARNING: THIS FUEL CONTAINS hazardous waste program under sect lo
HAZARDOUS WASTES”, and 3006 Interim status under subsection (e
“12) to list the hazardous wastes coni.alned shall terminate for each facility referred t
therein, in subparagraph (A) or (B on the expire
Such statement shall be located In a con- lion of the four. or six.year period referrei
apicuous place on every such Invoice or bill to in subparagraph (A) or (B), whichever I
of sale and shall appear In conspicuous and applicable, unless an application Is tiled foi
legible type in contrast by typography, lay- a permit under other provisions of this sub-
outs, or color with other printed matter on section wIthin such four-year or six-year
the invoice or bill of sale.”. ‘ period, as the case may be.”,
B 5C’TION 3003 PERM!T$ lasrioteas, oltoPirowalu cowxzssroyi
Ssc. 7 (a) F i at Ptaieir.—Section 3005 of Sac. 9. (a) Esrs .at,rsgamrr.—There Is estab-
the Solid Waste Disposal Act Is amended by iished a commission to be known as the Na-
adding the following new subsection at the Lions.! Groundaater Commission (herein-
end thereof: after in this section referred to as the
“(g} Rr.tzss s.—My permit (other than S “Commission ”),
permit treated as issued pursuant to subsec- (bi Du’rics or CoMMrss lotq,—The duties of
tion Ce)) Issued to a treatment, storage, or the Commission are to:
disposal facility under sectIon 3005 (or (1) ‘ ,sess generally the amount, location,
under an authorized State harardous waste
program under section 30061 shall, In addf. and quality of the Nation’s groundwater re-
Lion to other applicable requirements, ad- sources,
dress any release of hazardous aaste front (2) Identify generally the sources, extents
such facility shich occurs prior to the date and types of grouzidaater contaminatIon.
of issuance of such permit. Such permits . 3) Assess the scope and nature of rela-
shall include schedules and provide I man- tionship beta-een grounds ater contancina.
ci a ] assurances for addressing such releases tion and groundsater s’ithdraaal and devel.
where the required actIon cannot be coin- P projections of available, usable ground-
pieted prior to permit Issuance. The permit water in future years on a nationwide basis,
provisions required under this subsection (41 Assess the relationship between sur-
shall not apply to any portion of the facility face water pollution and groundsater polls.
at which hazardous saste treatment, slot- tion.
age or disposal activities do not take place, (5) Assess the need for a policy to protect
flb ExpA isrox Dosiec Ix’rrsuw STcTvs — grounds ater from degradation caused by
Section 3005(e) of such Act is amended by contamination.
adding the following at the end thereof: 6) As e s generally the extent of over-
“The Administrator shall promulgate regu. drafting of grounds ater resources and the
lations under ahlch any owner or operator adequacy of existing mechanisms for gre-
of a treatment, storsye. or disposal facility venting such overdrafting.
operating under interim status pursuant tO (1) Assess generally the engineering and
this subsection who expands the capacity of oiogical capability to recharge
the facility (except the capacity for storage
or treatment in tanks or containers and en- (S I Assess the adequacy of the present un-
closed saste piles) by an amount in excess derstanding of groundwater recharge zones
of 10 per centum of the capacity specified Ii i and sole source aquifers and assess the ade.
the permit application shall be required quacy of knoa ledge regarding the utterrela.
obtain a permit under the provisions of thiS tionship of designated aquifers and re-
section prior to construction of such expan- charge zones.
slon. The regulations of the Administrator (9) Assess the role of land-use patterns as
under this subsection may, In the discretion tbeae relate to protecting grounds ater from
of the Administrator, contain standards for
facilities ahich expand such capacity by 10 contamination.
per centuni or less and such standards may (10) Assess methods for remedial abate.
vary from the standards applicabie to those anent of grounds ate, contamination as eli
facilities operating pursuant to a permit as the costs and benelits of cleaning up pol-
luted grounds ater and compare Cleanup
under this subsection which do n,Pan j costs to the costs ul substitute water supply
such capacity.”. methods.
u3srrAsi .g yOR aiviaw or rn Ill) InvestIgate policies and actions takeis
by foreign governments to protect ground-
water from contamination.
(12) Asses the use and effectiveness of ex-
isting interstate compacts to address
groundwater protection from contamina.
tion.
(13) Analyze existing legal ilghts and rem-
edies regarding contamination of ground-
water,
(14) Assess the adequacy of existing stand-
ards for grounds ater quality under State
and F”ders.) law,
(15) A.cress morutormg 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
groundsater flow 5 stems (and associated
recharge areas) and the Control of sources
of contamination.
(17) Assess the role of under-ground injec-
tion practices as a means of disposing of
waste fluids ahile Protecting groundwater
from contamination,
U8 Assess methods for abatement and
Containment of groundw er contamInation
and for aquifer restoration including the
L3
-------
H . 1 p30 ’7 £S
19 “(b) E;a’ANsloN DURiNG INTERIM STATus.—Section
20 3005(e) of such Act is amended by adding the following at
21 the end thereof: “The Administrator shall promulgate regula-
22 tions under which any owner or operator of a treatment, stor-
23 age, or disposal facility operating under interim status pur-
24 suant to this subsection who expands the capacity of the fa-
25 cility (except the capacity for storage or treatment in tanks or
1 containers) by an amount in excess of 10 per centum of the
2 capacity specified in the permit application shall be required
3 to obtain a permit under other provisions of this section prior 12 —
4 to construction of such expansion. The regulations of the Ad-
5 ministrator under this subsection may, in the discretion of
6 the Administrator, contain standards for facilities which
7 expand such capacity by 10 per centum or less and such
8 standards may vary from the standards applicable to those
9 ‘facilities operating pursuant to a permit under this subsec-
10 lion which do not expand such capacity. ‘
c 3
-------
97-c70) . a)
Section 7. Section 3005 perm ile
Section 7(a) requires that interim status facilities under 3005(e)
which apply for a final permit under 3005(c) and which release haz-
ardous wastes into the environment, must control those releases within
the limits of the permitting standards prior to issuance.
Section 7(b) requires that prior to the expansion of interim status . Zo
facilities, the Administrator must promulgate regulations governing
the terms of any expansions, as expansions are prohibited under exist-
ing regulations (40 CFR 122.23), except in certain rare circumstances.
If a facility desires to expand by 10 percent or less of its stated capa-
city in the original interim status application, such expansions may
occur under standards that are less comprehensive than the final stand-
ards for that class of facilities under Section 3004 of RCRA, but that
are in addition to the present interim status standards (40 CFR 265),
which contain no design or operating requirements. This form of ex-
pansion may occur only once. A facility that applies for expansion of
greater than 10 percent of its stated capacity in the original interim
status application triggers concurrent and immediate final permit
review of that facility based upon the final standards under 3004 for
that class of facilities. Expansions by greater than 10 percent may not
occur until 3004 standards for that facility become effective.
c2
-------
-z2 V AS 17 -c-c i-i” c.-l)
INVENTORY OF FEDERAL AGENCY HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES
SEc. 244. Subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by
adding the following new section after section 3015:
“INVENTORY OF FEDERAL AGENCY HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES
“SEc. 3016. (a) Each Federal agency shall undertake a continuing
program to compile. publish, and submit to the Administrator and
to the State itt the case of sites in States having an authorized
hazardous waste program I an inventory of each site which the
Federal agency owns or operates or has owned or operated at which
hazardous waste is stored, treated, or disposed of or has been
disposed of at any time. The inventory shall be submitted every two
years beginning January 31. 1986. Such inventory shall be available
to the public as provided in section 3007(b). Information previously
submitted by a Federal agency under section 103 of the Comprehen-
sive Environmental Response. Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980, or under section 3005 or 3010 of this Act, or under this section
need not be resubmitted except that the agency shall update any
previous submission to reflect the latest available data and informa-
tion. The inventory shall include each of the following:
“1) A description of the location of each site at which any
such treatment. storage, or disposal has taken place before the
date on which permits are required under section 3005 for such
storage, treatment, or disposal, and where hazardous waste has
been disposed, a description of hydrogeology of the site and the
location of withdrawal wells and suffice water within one mile
of the site.
“(2) Such information relating to the amount, nature, and
toxicity of the hazardous waste in each site as may be necessary
to determine the extent of any health hazard which may be
associated with any site.
“(3) Information on the known nature and extent of environ-
mental contamination at each site, including a description of
the monitoring data obtained.
H. R. 2867—42
“(4) Information concerning the current status of the site,
including information respecting whether or not hazardous
waste is currently being treated, stored, or disposed of at such
site (and if not, the date on which such activity ceased) and
information respecting the nature of any other activity cur-
rently carried out at such site.
“(5) A list of sites at which hazardous waste has been disposed
and environmental monitoring data has not been obtained, and
the reasons for the lack of monitoring data at each site.
“(6) A description of response actions undertaken or contem-
plated at contaminated sites.
“ 7) An identification of the types of techniques of waste
treatment, storage, or disposal which have been used at each
site.
“(8) The name and address and responsible Federal agency for
each site, determined as of the date of preparation of the
inventory.
“(b)E 1vtRoNME rrAL PR0rwrioN AGENCY PROGRAM—If the Ad-
ministrator determines that any Federal agency under subsection
(a) is not adequately providing information respecting the sites
referred to in subsection (a), the Administrator shall notify the chief
official of such agency. If within ninety days following such notifica-
tion, the Federal agency has riot undertaken a program to adequately
provide such information, the Administrator shall carry out the
inventory program for such agency.”.
-------
lP )
SECTION 244—INVENTORY OF FEDERAL AGENCY HAZARDOUS WASTE
FACILITIES
House bilL—Each Federal agency must compile an inventory of
hazardous waste sites it has ever owned or operated, and submit it
to EPA and authorized States every 2 years beginning January 1,
1986.
Senate amendment.—Within 1 year, each Federal agency shall
undertake a continuing program to compile and submit to EPA
and authorized States an inventory of hazardous waste sites it has
ever owned or operated. If an agency, after notice, fails to comply,
EPA shall carry out the inventory for that agency.
Conference substitute.—The Conference substitute adopts the
Senate amendment.
-------
1 é + Sp4S E.b
12 “(0 FEDERAL AGENCY HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY
13 INVENTORY.—Each Federal agency shall undertake a con-
14 tinuing program to compile, publish, and submit to the Ad-
15 ministrator (and to the State in the case of sites in States
16 having an authorized hazardous waste program) an inventory
17 of each site which the Federal agency owns or operates or
18 has owned or operated at which hazardous waste is stored,
19 treated, or disposed of or has been disposed of at any time.
20 The inventory shall be submitted every two years beginning
21 January 31, 1986. Such inventory shall be available, consist-
22 ent with section 1006, to the public as provided in section
23 3007(b). Information previously submitted by an agency
24 under section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Re-
25 sponse, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, or under
1111. 2867 RFS——3
c2 4
-------
1 section 3005 or 3010 of this Act, or under this section need
2 not be resubmitted except that the agency shall update any
3 previous submission to reflect the latest available data and
4 information. The inventory shall contain each of the follow-
5 ing, at a minimum:
6 “(1) The location of each site, and where hazard-
7 ous waste has been disposed, a description of hydro-
8 geology of the site and the location of withdrawal wells
9 and surface water within one mile of the site.
10 “(2) Such information relating to the amount,
11 nature, and toxicity of the hazardous waste in each site
12 as may be necessary to determine the extent of any:
13 health hazard which may be associated with any site.
14 “(3) Information on the known nature and extent
15 of environmental contamination at each site, including
16 a description of the monitoring data obtained.
17 “(4) A list of sites at which hazardous waste has
- 18 been disposed and environmental monitoring data has
19 not been obtained, and the reasons for the lack of mon-
20 itoring data at each site.
21 “(5) A description of response actions undertaken
22 or contemplated at contaminated sites.
23 “(6) An identification of the types of techniques of
24 waste treatment or disposal which have been used at
25 each site.
1 “(7) The name and address and responsible
2 agency for each site, determined as of the date of prep-
3 aration of the inventory.”.
44L
-------
,q5
(b) Subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is
amended by adding the following new section:
‘ INVENTOR Y OF FEDERAL AGENCY HAZARDOUS WASTE
FACILITIES
“SEC. 3015. (a) FEDERAL AGENCY INVENTORY.—
Each Federal a gency shall, within one year after the enact-
ment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of
1984, undertake a continuing program to compile, publish,
and submit to the Administrator and the State (in the case
of States having an authorized hazardous waste program)
-------
45
an inventory describing the location of each sUe which the
Federal agency owns or operates where hazardous waste has
at any time been treated, stored or disposed of. Such inven-
tory shall contain—
“(1) a description of the location of the sites at
which any such treatment, storage, or disposal has
taken place before the date on which permits are re-
quired under section 3005 for such storage or disposal;
“(2) such information relating to the amount,
nature, and toxicity of the hazardous waste at each
such site as may be practicable to obtain and as may
be necessary to deter-mine the extent of any health
hazard which may be associated with such site;
“(3) the name and address and responsible agency
for each such site, determined as of the date of prepara-
tion of the inventory;
“(4) an identification of the types or techniques of
waste treatment, storage, or disposal which have been
used at each site; and
“(5) information concerning the current status of
the site, including information respecting whether or
not hazardous waste is currently being treated, stored,
or disposed of at such site (and if not, the date on
which such activity ceased) and information respecting
HR 2867 EAS
-------
46
the nature of any other activity currently carried out at
such site.
“(b) ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY PRo-
GRAM.—If the Administrator determines that any Federal
agency under subsection (a) is not adequately providing in-
formation respecting the sites referred to in subsection (a),
the Administrator shall notify the chief official of such
Agency. if within ninety days following such notification,
the Federal agency has not undertaken a program to ade-
qu tely provide such information, the Administrator shall
carry out the inventory program for such agency. ‘ .
4L
-------
Cru.parv 9Z -? 2 p p 3
18 ‘ tNVENTORY OF FEDERAL AGENCY HAZARDOUS WASTE
19 FACILITIES
20 “SEC. 3015. (a) FEDERAL AGENCY iNVENTORY.—
21 Each Federal agency shall, within one year after the enact-
22 ment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1983,
23 undertake a continuing program to compile, publish, and
24 submit to the Administrator and the State (in the case of
25 States having an authorized hazardous waste program) an
S 757 RS
1441
-------
64
1 inventory describing the location of each site which the Fed-
2 eral agency owns or operates where hazardous waste has at
3 any time been treated, stored or disposed of. Such inventory
4 shall contain—
5 “(1) a description of the location of the sites at
6 which any such treatment, storage, or disposal has
7 taken place before the date on which permits are re-
8 quired under section 3005 for such storage or disposal;
9 “(2) such information relating to the amount,
10 nature, and toxicity of the hazardous waste at each
11 such site as may be practicable to obtain and as may
12 be necessary to determine the extent of any health
13 hazard which may be associated with such site;
14 “(3) the name and address and responsible agency
15 for each such site, determined as of the date of prepara-
16 lion of the inventory;
17 “(‘4) an identification of the types or techniques of
18 waste treatment, storage, or disposal which have been
19 used at each site; and
20 “(‘5) information concerning the current status of!
21 the site, including information respecting whether or:
22 not hazardous waste is currently being treated, stored,
23 or disposed of at such site (and if not, the date on
24 which such activity ceased) and information respecting
S 757 RS
r l441
-------
65 -
1 the nature of any other activity currently carried out at
2 such site.
3 “(b) ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY PRO-
4 GRAM.—If the Administrator determines that any Federal
5 agency under subsection (a) is not adequately providing in-
6 formation respecting the sites referred to in subsection (a), the
7 Administrator shall notify the chief official of such Agency.i
8 If within ninety days following such notification, the Federal
9 agency has not undertaken a program to adequately provider
10 such information, the Administrator shall carry out the in-
11 ventory program for such agency. ‘
-------
4 £oL-L c.. b L) )
EXPORT OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
SEc. 245. (a) Subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by inserting the following new section after section 3016:
“EXPORT OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
“SEc 3017. (a) IN GENERAL—Beginning twenty.four months after
the date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amend•
ments of 1984, no person shall export any hazardous waste identified
or listed under this subtitle unless
“(iXA) such person has provided the notification required in
subsection (c) of this section,
“(B) the government of the receiving country has consented to
accept such hazardous waste,
“(C) a copy of the receiving country’s written consent is
attached to the manifest accompanying each waste shipment,
and
“ED) the shipment conforms with the terms of the consent of
the government of the receiving country required pursuant to
subsection (e). or
“(2) the United States and the government of the receiving
country have entered into an agreement as provided for in
subsection U) and the shipment conforms with the terms of such
agreement.
“(b) REGuLArloNs.—Not later than twelve months after the date
of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of
1984, the Administrator shall promulgate the regulations necessary
to implement this section. Such regulations shall become effective
one hundred and eighty days after promulgation.
-------
H. R. 2867—43
“(c) NOTIFiCATION—Any person who intends to export a hazard-
ous waste identified or listed under this subtitle beginning twelve
months after the date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984. shall, before such hazardous waste is
scheduled to leave the United States, provide notification to the
Administrator. Such notification shall contain the following infor-
mation:
“(1) the name and address of the exporter;
“(2) the types and estimated quantities of hazardous waste to
be exported;
“(3) the estimated frequency or rate at which such waste is to
be exported; and the period of time over which such waste is to
be exported;
“(4) the ports of’ entry;
“(5) a description of the manner in which such hazardous
waste will be transported to and treated, stored, or disposed in
the receiving country: and
“(6) the name apd address of the ultimate treatment, storage
or disposal facility.
•‘ d) PROCEDURES FOR REQuES’rING CONSENT OF THE REcEIvING
CoUNrIlY.—Withln thirty days of the Administrator’s receipt of a
complete notification under this section, the Secretary of State,
acting on behalf of the Administrator, shall—
“(1) forward a copy of the notification to the government of
the receiving country;
“(2) advise the government that United States law prohibits
the export of hazardous waste unless the receiving country
consents to accept the hazardous waste;
“(3) request the government to provide the Secretary with a
written consent or objection to the terms of the notification: and
“14) forward to the government of the receiving country a
description of the Federal regulations which would appLy to the
treatment, storage, and disposal of the hazardous waste in the
United States.
“le) CoNvEYANcE OF %VRrrrEN CoNsENT to EXPoRTER.—Within
thirty days of receipt by the Secretary of State of the receiving
countrys written consent or objection (or any subsequent communi-
cation withdrawing a prior consent or objection), the Administrator
shall forward such a consent. objection, or other communication to
the exporter.
“(f) l1FTKRNATIONAL AGREEMEN’rs.—Where there exists an interna-
tional agreement between the United States and the government of
the receiving country establishing notice, export, and enforcement
procedures for the transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal
of hazardous wastes, only the requirements of subsections (aX2) and
(g) shall apply.
“(gJ REPoRTS—After the date of enactment of the Hazardous and
Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, any 1 person who exports any
hazardous waste identified or listed under section 3001 of this
subtitle shall file with the Administrator no later than March 1 of
each year, a report summarizing the types, quantities, frequency,
and ultimate destination of all such hazardous waste exported
during the previous calendar year.
“(h) OTHER Sr*i muws.—Nothing in this section shall preclude
the Admin’ trator from establishing other standards for the export
of hazardous wastes under section 3002 or section 3003 of this
subtitle.”.
-------
£wz 6i.’c.
H. R. 2867—44
(b) The table of contents for such subtitle C is amended by adding
the following new item after the item relating to section 3016:
Sec. 3017. Export of hawdoua wa ite.’.
(C) Section 3008(d) of the Solid Waate Disposal Act, as amended by
section 232 of this Act, is amended by adding after paragraph (5)”;
or” and the following new paragraph:
“(6) knowingly exports a hazardous waste identified or listed
under this subtitle (A) without the consent of the receiving
country or, (B) where there exists an international agreement
between the United States and the government of the receiving
country establishing notice, export, and enforcement procedures
for the transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of haz.
ardous wastes, in a manner which is not in conformance with
such agreement”.
CouF LPT.p/
SECTION 2 45—EXpORT OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
House bilL—The House bill provides that, beginning 24 months
after enactment, no person may export hazardous waste unless: (1)
he has filed a notification, (2) the receiving Country has Consented
to accept the waste, (3) a copy of the receiving country’s written
consent is attached to the manifest, and (4) the shipment conforms
with the terms of the consent. EPA shall promulgate implementing
regulations within 12 months.
Items (1)—(4) above do not apply if there exists an international
agreement between the U.S. and the receiving Country establishing
hazardous waste export procedures. Exporters must file annual re-
ports with EPA.
Senate amendment._The Senate amendment is the same as the
House bill with several minor and technical differences.
Conference substitute.—The Conference substitute adopts the
Senate amendment.
-------
S L .pt ‘7 ’ ic .7...
EXPORT OF HAZARDOUS WASTES
This section of the reported bill adds a new section 3016 to subti-
tle C, to address problems which have arisen and are expected to
arise involving the export of hazardous wastes generated in the
United States.
Under current EPA export regulations, persons who wish to
export hazardous wastes are required each year to notify EPA four
weeks prior to the initial shipment of a given hazardous waste.
This notification includes EPA and Department of Transportation
classification numbers as well as the names and addresses of the
generator and the consignee. The notification does not include any
reference to the amounts to be exported; the frequency of exports;
the points at which the waste will enter the receiving country; the
methods of storage, treatment or disposal in the receiving country;
or the ultimate destination of the waste.
The existing notification system is inadequate to address the
present and potential environmental, health, and foreign policy
problems which occur when wastes are exported to nations which
do not wish to receive them, or lack sufficient information to!
manage them properly. Accordingly, the Administrator is directed
to exercise increased authority over hazardous waste exports. In
the absence of a bilateral agreement between the U.S. and the gov-
ernment of the receiving Country setting forth specific notice,
export, and enforcement procedures for the transportation, treat-
ment, storage and disposal of wastes, no person shall export haz-
ardous wastes unless (1) such person has notified the Administrator
of the plan to export; (2) the government of the receiving country
has agreed, in writing, to this plan; (3) a copy of the receiving coun-
try’s written consent is attached to the manifest accompanying
each waste shipment; and (4) the shipment conforms with the
terms of such receiving country’s consent.
The notification provided to EPA by the person who intends to
export a hazardous waste, and forwarded by the government of the
U.S. to the government of the receiving country, will enable that
government to make an informed decision as to whether it will
accept the waste and, if so, how it will deal with that waste.
The notification shall include (1) the name and address of the ex-
porter; (2) the types and estimated quantities of hazardous waste to I
be exported; (3) the estimpted frequency or rate at which such
waste is to be exported and the period of time over which such
waste is to be exported; (4) the ports of entry; (5) a description of
the way in which the waste will be transported to and treated in
the receiving country; and (6) the name and address of the ultimate
treatment, storage or disposal facility.
A receiving country’s written consent must be obtained prior to
shipment and attached to the manifest accompanying each waste
shipment. This will provide the foreign country with the option of
rejecting, accepting or accepting with conditions the waste, and
will facilitate enforcement of that decision. Without the receiving
country’s written consent, the shipment cannot take place.
241
-------
48
In order for the notice to be managed properly and effectively,
the Administrator, working with the Secretary of State, should es-
tablish a procedure for forwarding information to the foreign coun-
try regarding the shipment and pertinent U.S. law. Also, the proce-
dure should include a request for the receiving country to provide
the Secretary with a written copy of the consent or rejection.
Where there exists an international agreement between the
United States and the government of each receiving country that
establishes notice, export, and enforcement procedures for the
transportation, treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous
wastes, such an agreement shall govern direct shipments of hazard-
ous waste from the United States to the receiving country. Such
agreement may or may not require the receiving country’s prior
written consent on a shipment-by-shipment basis.
Effective monitoring and enforcement programs must be part of
any agreement between the United States and a receiving country.
Such a bilateral agreement should describe joint efforts to monitor
and spotcheck shipments of hazardous waste to assure that they
conform with the terms of the agreement. Shipments must conform
with the terms of the agreement to satisfy the requirements of this
section. A bilateral agreement should also describe responsibilities
for enforcement and prosecution of the terms of the agreement.
Any person who exports any hazardous waste after enactment of’
this section must report on an annual basis on all exports of such
waste to any country. These reports will be useful in more accu-
rately assessing the volume, frequency and destination of hazard-
ous waste exports from the United States.
Although the Agency has up to two years to fully implement the
new hazardous waste export policy, such implementation can prob-
ably be accomplished in a shorter period of time and the Adminis-
trator should promptly begin the implementation task. Until this
section is fully implemented, any person who intends to export a
hazardous waste should follow existing hazardous waste export no-
tification procedures as required under the present subtitle C regu-
lations. However, twelve months from the date of enactment of this
bill any person who wishes to export will be required to comply
with the provisions of this section.
As in the other provisions of subtitle C, public oversight is neces-
sary to assure proper implementation. Accordingly, the public
should be given full access to information and documents produced
under this section. Citizens, upon request, should be given access to
all notices filed under subsection (c), comments on such notices re-
turned by the receiving country, a copy of the receiving country’s
final consent returned under subsection (e), and all annual reports
filed under subsection (g).
The requirements of this section should be vigorously enforced
using all the tools of section 3008. To accomplish this, the Agency
should work with the U.S. Customs Service to establish an effective
program to monitor and spotcheck international shipments of haz-
ardous waste to assure compliance . ith the requirements of the
section. Violations should then be vigorously pursued.
-------
4r 7.4 : :?. 45?Aøt L) p
3 EXPORT OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
4 Sec. 13. (a) ExPOET.—Subtitle C is amended by
5 adding the following new section at the end thereof:
6 “EXPORT OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
7 “S c. 3016. (a) IN GENERAI 1 .—Beginning twenty-four
8 months after the date of enactment of the Hazardous Waste
9 Control and Enforcement Act of 1983, no person may export
10 any hazardous waste identified or listed under section 3001
11 unless—
12 “(1) such person has provided the notification re-
13 quired in subsection (c) of this section,
14 “(2) the receiving country has consented to accept
15 such hazardous waste,
16 “(3) a copy of the receiving country’s written con-
17 sent is attached to the manifest accompanying each:
18 waste shipment; and
19 “(4) the shipment conforms with (A) the terms of
20 the consent of the receiving country required pursuant
21 to subsection (e) or with (B) the terms of an agreement
22 entered into between the United States and the receiv-
23 ing country as provided in subsection (f).
24 “(b) REGULATIONs.—Not later than twelve months
25 after the date of enactment of the Hazardous Waste Control
-------
58
1 Enforcement Act of 1983, the Administrator shall promul-
2 gate the regulations necessary to implement this section.
3 “(c) N0TIFIcATI0N.—Any person who intends to
4 export a hazardous waste identified or listed under section
5 3001 after the date beginning twelve months after the date of
6 enactment of the Hazardous Waste Control Enforcement Act
7 of 1983, shall, before such hazardous waste is scheduled to
8 leave the United States, provide notification to the Adminis-
9 trator. Such notification shall contain the following
10 information—
11 “(1) the name and address of the exporter;
12 “(2) the types and estimated quantities of hazard-
13 ous waste to be exported;
14 “(3) the estimated frequency or rate at which
15 such waste is to be exported, and the period of time
16 over which such waste is to be exported;
17 “(4) the ports of entry;
18 “(5) a description of the manner in which such
19 hazardous waste will be transported to and treated,
20 stored, or disposed of in the receiving country; and
21 “(6) the name and address of the ultimate treat-
22 ment, storage, or disposal facility.
23 “(d) PRocEDUREs FOR REQURsTING CONSENT OF
24 THE RECEIVING COUNTRY.—Within thirty days of the Ad-
25 ministrator’s receipt of a complete notification under this sec-
HR 2867 RFS
-------
59
1 tion, the Secretary of State, acting on behalf of the Adminis-
2 trator, shall—
3 “(1) forward a copy of the notification to the gov-
4 ernment of the receiving country;
5 “(2) advise the government that United States
6 law prohibits the export of hazardous waste unless the
7 receiving country consents to accept the hazardous
8 waste or has entered into an agreement with the
9 United States establishing notice, export, and enforce-
10 ment procedures for the transportation, treatment, stor-
11 age, and disposal of hazardous waste;
12 “(3) request the government to provide the Secre-
13 tary with a written consent or objection to the terms of
14 the notification; and
15 “(4) forward to the receiving country a description
16 of the Federal regulations which would apply to the
17 treatment, storage, and disposal of the hazardous waste
18 in the United States.
19 “(e) CoNvEYANCE OF WRITTEN CONSENT TO Ex-
20 PORTER.—Within thirty days of receipt by the Secretary of
21 State of the receiving country’s written consent or objection
22 (or any subsequent communication withdrawing a prior con-
23 sent or objection), the Administrator shall forward such a
24 consent, objection, or other communication to the exporter.
HR 2867 RFS
-------
60
1 “(f) INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTs.—Where there
2 exists an international agreement between the EJnited States
3 and the receiving country establishing notice and export pro-
4 cedures for the transportation, treatment, storage, and dis-
5 posal of hazardous wastes, only the requirements of subsec-
6 tion (a)(4)(B) and subsection (g) shall apply.
7 “(g) REP0RTs.—After the date of enactment of the
8 Hazardous Waste Control Enforcement Act of 1983, any
9 person who exports any hazardous waste identified or listed
10 under this subtitle shall file with the Administrator no later
11 than March 1 of each year, a report summarizing the types,
12 quantities, frequency, and ultimate destination of all such
13 hazardous waste exported during the previous calendar year.
14 “(h) OTHER STANDARDs.—Nothing in this section shall
15 preclude the Administrator from establishing other standards
16 for the export of hazardous wastes under section 3002 or
17 section 3003 of this subtitle.”.
18 (b) PENALTIES.—Section 3008(d) is amended by adding
19 the following new paragraph at the end thereof:
20 “(6) knowingly exports a hazardous waste identi-
21 fled or listed under section 3001 (A) without the con-
22 sent of the receiving country or (B) if an agreement
23 has been entered into with the receiving country under
24 section 3016(0, in a manner which is not in conform-
25 ance with such agreement;”.
HR 2867 RFS
-------
EXPORT OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
SEC. 13. (a) Subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act is amended by adding the following new section:
‘ EXPORT OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
“SEC. 3016. (a) GENERAL.—Begin fling twenty-four
months after the date of enactment of the Solid Waste Dis-
posal Act Amendments of 1984, no person shall export any
hazardous waste identified or listed under this subtitle
unless (1) such person has provided the notification required
in subsection (c) of this section, (2) the government of the
receiving country has consented to accept such hazardous
waste, (3) a copy of the receiving country written consent
is attached to the manifest accompanying each waste ship-
ment, and (4) the shipment conforms with the terms of the
consent of the government of the receiving country required
pursuant to subsection (e), or (5) the United Stales and the
government of the receiving country have entered into an
agreement as provided for in subsection (f) and the shipment
conforms with the terms of such agreement.
“(b) REGuLATJON&—Not later than twelve months
after the date of enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
HR 2867 EAS——4
-------
50
Amendments of 1984, the Administrator shall promulgate
the regulations necessary to implement this section. Such
regulations shall become effective one hundred and eighty
days after promulgation.
“(c) NOTIFICATION.—Any person who intends to
export a hazardous waste identified or listed under this sub-
title beginning twelve months after the date of enaciment of
the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1984, shall,
before such hazardous waste is 8cheduled to leave the United
States, provide notification to the Administrator. Such noti-
fication shall contain the following information:
“(1) the name and address of the exporter;
“(2) the types and estimated quantities of hazard-
ous waste to be exported;
“(3) the estimated frequency or rate at which such
waste is to be exported; and the period of time over
which such waste is to be exported;
“(4) the ports of entry;
“(5) a description of the manner in which such
hazardous waste will be transported to and treated,
stored, or disposed in the receiving country; and
“(6) the name and address of the ultimate treat-
ment, storage or disposal facility.
“(d) PROCEDURES FOR REQUESTING CONSENT OF
THE RECEIVING COUNTRY.— Within thirty days of the
HR 2867 EAS
-------
51
Administrator s receipt of a complete notification under this
section, the Department of State, acting on behalf of the Ad-
ministrator, shall—
“(1) forward a copy of the notification to the gov-
ernment of the receiving country;
“(2) advise the government that United Stales
law prohibits the export of hazardous waste unless the
receiving country consents to accept the hazardous
waste;
“(3) request the government to provide the Secre-
tary with a written consent or objection to the terms of
the notification; and
“(4) forward to the government of the receiving
country a description of the Federal regulations which
would apply to the treatment, storage, and disposal of
the hazardous waste in the United States.
“(e) CONVEYANCE OF WRITTEN CONSENT TO Ex-
PORTER.— Within thirty days of receipt by the Department
of State of the receiving country written consent or objec-
tion (or any subsequent communication withdrawing a prior
consent or objection), the Administrator shall forward such
a consent, objection, or other communication to the exporter.
“(f) iNTERNATiONAL A GREEMENTS. — Where there
exists an international agreement between the United Stales
and the government of the receiving country establishing
HR 2867 EAS
-------
52
notice, export, and enforcement procedures for the transpor-
tation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous wastes,
only the requirements of subsections (a)(5) and (g) shall
apply.
“(g) REP0RTs.—Afler the dale of enactment of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1984, any person
who exports any hazardous waste identified or listed under
this 8ublitle 8hall file with the Administrator no later than
March 1 of each year, a report summarizing the types,
quantities, frequency, and ultimate destination of all such
hazardous waste exported during the previous calendar year.
“(71) OTHER STANDARDs.—Nothing in this section
shall preclude the Administrator from establishing other
standards for the export of hazardous wastes under section
3002 or section 3003 of this subtitle. “.
(Ii,) PENALTJES.—Section 3008(d) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act, as amended by section 12(a) of this Act, is
amended by adding after paragraph (5) ‘ or” and the fol-
lowing new paragraph:
“(6) knowingly exports a hazardous waste identi-
fied or listed under this subtitle (A) without the con-
sent of the receiving country or, (B) where there exists
an international agreement between the United States
and the government of the receiving country establish-
ing notice, export, and enforcement procedures for the
transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of haz- I
ardous wastes, in a manner which is not in conform-
ance with such agreement “.
-------
4 ’t7 r’
5 EXPORT OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
6 SEC. 13. (a) Subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal
7 Act is amended by adding the following new section:
8 ‘ EXPORT OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
9 “SEc. 3016. (a) GENERAL.—Beginning twenty-four
10 months after the date of enactment of the Solid Waste Dis-
11 posal Act Amendments of 1983, no person shall export any
12 hazardous waste identified or listed under this subtitle unless
13 (1) such person has provided the notification required in sub-
14 section (c) of this section, (2) the government of the receiving
15 country has consented to accept such hazardous waste, (3) a
16 copy of the receiving country written consent is attached to
17 the manifest accompanying each waste shipment, and (4) the
18 shipment conforms with the terms of the consent of the gov-
19 ernment of the receiving country required pursuant to subsec-
20 Lion (e), or (5) the United States and the government of the
21 receiving country have entered into an agreement as provided
22 for in subsection (f).
23 “( b) REGULATJONS.—NoL later than twelve months
24 after the date of enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
25 Amendments of 1983, the Administrator shall promulgate the
S 757 RS
-------
69
1 regulations neczssary to implement this section. Such regula-
2 lions shall become effective one hundred and eighty days after
3 promulgation.
4 “(c) NOTIFICATION.—Any person who intends to
5 export a hazardous waste identified or listed under this sub-
6 title beginning twelve months after the dale of enactment of
7 the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1983, shall,
8 before such hazardous waste is scheduled to leave the United
9 States, provide notification to the Administrator. Such notifi-
10 cation shall concern the following information:
11 “(1) the name and address of the exporter;
12 “(2) the types and estimated quantities of hazard-
13 ous waste to be exported;
14 “(3) the estimated frequency or rate at which such
15 waste is to be exported; and the period of time over
16 which such waste is to be exported;
17 “(4) the ports of entry;
18 “(5) a description of the manner in which such
19 hazardous waste will be transported to and treated,
20 stored, or disposed in the receiving country; and
21 “(6) the name and address of the ultimate treat-
22 ment, storage or disposal facility.
23 “(d) PROCEDURES FOR REQUESTING CONSENT
24 THE RECEIVING COUNTRY.—Within thirty days of the Ad-
25 ministrator receipt of a complete notification under this sec-
-------
70
1 lion, the Department of Stale, acting on behalf of the Admin-
2 istrator, shall—
3 “(1) forward a copy of the notification to the gov-
4 ernment of the receiving country;
5 “(2) advise the government that United Slates
6 law prohibits the export of hazardous waste unless the
7 receiving country consents to accept the hazardous
8 waste;
9 “(3) request the government to provide the Secre-
10 tary with a written consent or objection to the terms of
11 the notification; and
12 “(4) forward to the government of the receiving:
13 country a description of the Federal regulations which
14 would apply to the treatment, storage, and disposal of
15 the hazardous waste in the United States.
16 “(e) CONVEYANCE OF WRiTTEN CONSENT TO Ex-
17 PORTER.— Within thirty days of receipt by the Department
18 of State of the receiving country ‘a written consent or objec-
19 lion (or any subsequent communication withdrawing a prior
20 consent or objection), the Administrator shall forward such a
21 consent, objection, or other communication to the exporter.
22 “(f) INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS.—Where there
23 exists an international agreement between the United States
24 and the government of the receiving country establishing
25 notice, export, and enforcement procedures for the Iransporta-
S757RS
4t
-------
71 (
1 tion, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous wastes,
2 only the requirements of subsection (g) shall apply.
3 “(g) REP0RTs.—After the date of enactment of the
4 Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1983, any person
5 who exports any hazardous waste identified or listed under
6 this subtitle shall file with the Administrator no later than
7 March 1 of each year a report summarizing the types, quan-
8 tilies, frequency, and ultimate destination of all such hazard-
9 ous waste exported during the previous calendar year
10 “(ii) OTHER S TA NDARDS.—Nol hi ng in this section
11 shall preclude the Administrator from establishing other
12 standards for the export of hazardous wastes under section
13 3002 or section 3003 of this subtitle. ‘
14 (b) PENALTIES.—Seclion 3008(d) of the Solid Waste I
15 Disposal Act, as amended by section 12(a) of this Act, is
16 amended by adding after paragraph (5) “,or” and the follow-
17 ing new paragraph:
18 “(6) knowingly exports a hazardous waste identified
19 or listed under this subtitle without the consent of the
20 receiving country ‘
-------
S 13820
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
October 5, 1984
tional constituents. EPA’s regulations
did not allow the Agency to do 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, to be a hazardous waste, a waste
must exhibit a characteristic of haz-
ardous wastes or be listed by name.
None of the characteristics of hazard-
ous wastes promulgated so far—ignit-
ability, corrosivity, reactivity, or ex-
traction procedure—identifies wastes
on the basis of organic toxicity. Fur-
thermore, EPA’s listint process has
been virtually stalled for sevcral years.
This bill will direct EPA to consider
criteria, constituents, or other factors,
In addition to those for which a waste
was listed, when evaluating petitions
to delist or exclude from regulation a
hazardous waste generated at a par-
ticular facility.
EPA is to consider additonal hazard-
ous constituents and criteria when de-
ciding whether 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 fiaz-
ardous. EPA is specifically empowered
to obtain information from the peti-
tioner relevant to this reasonable basis
determination, The bill thus provides
that the initial petition must be ac-
companlcd by Information adequate to
evaluate the petiton. This includes in-
formation necessary in determining
whether there is a reasonable basis to
bclleve the waste cou d still be hazard-
‘ous. Examples of information that can
appropriately be reque zted in an ini-
tial application arc data an constitu-
ents used as raw materials, catalysts,
solvents, or ingredients in the process
generating the waste.
Once EPA obtains this data, the
Agency must determine—based on the
Information in the petition and on
other relevant information available
to the Agency—sLich 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 3001 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.
BUSSING AND BLENDING
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
one-half of all hazardous wastes gener-
ated are burned in facilities not now
regulated under 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 kllns, or other heat re-
covery units to avoid RCRA regulation
and treatment costs.
Therefore, we require that within a
year, EPA must be notified 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 years 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 INSPECTIONS AND (ESERAL
FACILITIES
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.
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.
FEDCRAL ENFORCEMENT
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-
]arly, where hazardous waste is know-
ingly transported without a manifest,
there would be no criminal liability
unless the waste’ is subsequently deUv-
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 endan-
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 causing
wastes to be transported to an unper-
mitted facility or without a manifest,
there is no intent to affect the applica-
tion of title ia, United States Code,
section 2 to all provisions of RCRA.
azpoar OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
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 H.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.
4 4t3
-------
S9150
conclusion of this study the Adminis-
trator Is required to promulgate ap-
propriate regulation governing 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, tithe regula-
tor process does not yield these regula-
tiona by March 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
rnani.festing 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 f a-
diitles.
Originally In the committee’s delib-
eratinn , a cutoff point of 25 kilograms
per month was the threshold for this
requirement, This level would accom-
pUsh 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 quantity, 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 v.-ith
containerization and off.site transport
i-ecordkeeping 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 pro-
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 dumpir 1 g, 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 undtr the Superfund are munici-
pal landfills. If we give Inadcquate 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 amenth-nent 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 Assoc.atmon of State and
Territorial Solid Waste Management
officials recently conducted a survey
of State subtitle D activities. Prellnui.
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 if 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 possible. Technology
should be guided by prudent use and
protection of resources. M rmirnizirig
the amount of hazardous waste gener-
ated and continued research into alter-
native waste neutralization and treat-
merit technhpies are necessary steps In
dlminishmng threats to public he:Uth
and the environment.
Mr. President, I have been lnvoh ed
with legislation relating to solid wamte
management and control for more
than 20 years. This bill Incorporates
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, 1984
and to consider additional legislation
in the future.
This measure represents a substan-
tial commitment of time and effort by
members of the Committee on Envi.
ronment and Public Works, I acknowl-
edge particularly the dedicated le:tder-
ship of our able chairman. Senator
SrArFoRD. and of the chairman and
rantting minority mcmber of thc Sub-
committee on Environmental Pollu-
tion. Senator CIIAFEE and Senator
MITCHELL.
In developing this legislation, we
have been greatly aided by the com-
mittee staff which has brought its
know!edge and e’cpermence to bear en
this subject. I express appreciation for
their work on this bill to members of
the mlrority stall: PhIlip T. Cum-
mings; John W. Yago, Jr.; Stephanie
dough: Lee Fuller; Helen Kalbaugh;
Elizabeth Thompson; ano Margie
Wright,
Mr. MITCHELL addressed the
Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Maine.
Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. President, I
thank the dm tingtushed Senator irom
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 Ca rEE. a hose
leadership has made this legislation
possible as well as other members of
our committee, the distinguished
chairman. Senator STAFFoRD of Ver-
mont, Senator BORDIcK. and Senator
LAtTENSEnG for whom this is such an
important matter in New Jersey.
Mr. President, todoy we consider leg-
islatmon which will affect the health
and well-being of literally every person
in these United States. S. 157, a bill to
amend the Resource Conservation and
Reco’ cry Act, marks yet another mile-
stone in our efforts to protect our-
sel cs from the ubiquitous b producL
of our highly Industralized societ -—
hazardous waste.
In 1976. the Congress enacted the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act. It ‘as an amibicious, far-react jn
statute. It conferred on the Environ-
mental Protection Agency broad gen-
eral authormties to regulate the genera-
tion. transportation, storage, and ma-
posal of hazardous waste.
Standards for the transportation of
hazardous waste acre mandated
Standards for the storage of hazard.
ous waste were mandated.
Standards fur the disposal of ha. ard-
ous waste were mandated.
Enforcement authorities a em e man-
dated.
CItiZen particlpaUon In regulatory
and t’ntorcement proc edmi;s aa,s
mandated. -
The underlying goal of all of these
activities was protection of public
health and the environment. Indeed.
-------
Jury 25, 1984
the statutory standard by which the
mandated regulations were arid cont n-
ue to be measured Is prnterti . r. of
public health and the en iicir- t.
The statute estabiishvd a tra or :
for Ilie pre enticn of h r ’ t. i :nan
be.ngs and natural rt oure”s
Today, we propose a se: e of ruend
m nts to the bss c ‘.Latute.
The preventive ranw.vork of the
Resource Conser ati n an] Recovery
Act is sound. Today we pro;ose modi-
fications brsed on the hnov.e’içe ac-
qu:red s-rice l ’l6. A;t of the chsr.ges
we are rr cnimeiu.r to the Senate
will strevgthen the ability of the Fed-
eral Gcver: r.ient to protect pub:Lc
health and the r,tircnnient from has-
a:c ous w tes. Tl v are desgned to
give EPA more sr.ec 1 fc g iidai ce.
bace.1 t n our e pcrr:ice uth irrpte.
mentation of th a s ge era1 au-
thoritics since 1976.
Whst lave .e lcarncd in 7 years?
Ve 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 waste
are generated In this country each
year: this estimate is more than four
times greater than pre ioii l thoughL
We have learned that there are
thousands of waste sites across th s
country which present poscntidl or
actual threats to ht.man hea’th or
well.being. EPA now estimates tr at
there may be 22.000 sites in need of
some type of cleanup; 546 of these
sites ha’e been designated as priorit;es
for cleanup. The Sup rfund law en-
acted in 1930 was a necessary response
to our past inattention to the cnreful
disposal of hazardous wastes.
S.mply put, past practices hase left
us a legacy of chem.cal contamination
which has poisoned our s ir, 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 s te is esimated to be
$6 million. accordm to EPA. If Just
the priority sites, known to present a
health hazard, acre cleaned up. the
cost would be billions of dollars. No
matter who pays the bill. whpttier it
be the respons:ble party or the Feder-
al Government. that figure is too hwn.
We cannot afford the status quo.
We also know now that the genera-
tion of hazardous warte continues to
grow and that most of that ase—80
percent—is currently disposed of on or
in the land.
It has become e ident that a strong
congrc sional expres.sion of d, sppov-
al of EPAs slow arid t mid 1mp.’men
tation of the existing lew is nccsary.
as cll as a clear congressior l dir’c-
tive mandating c rain bold. pre ,-
the actions by EPA v hich iil rot be
taken otheruise. di srite the exicting.
bro.td authorities contained in RCRA.
EPA has not. implemented the Re-
source Conservation and Recovery Act
aggressively. The Agency has missed
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
deadlinrs. proposed Inadequate regua-
tioris, and e en e tacerbat d the l:az-
ardnus wa ;c pret !em by suspena.rig
cerlain reguIst;oi s.
It has become evidvnt that this slow.
pl dding course ‘ ill be cunt nued in
th ab enee of a clear ccn res i3nai di.
rect:ve. ‘1 .ls s nut ce ble. Acc .rJ-
int y. S ‘57 p:’o ldes more spcc 1 .:c
guidance to EPA as to how the bro d
grants of authority of the e ist: ig
RCRA law should be used.
The bill dcc arcs as con res ioi al
poi:cy that—
T ato,d subs&antal nsk to human he th
a” the e ircnmeni, rth.uic.e on Lini dis-
p 0 21 si oiild be nunlm,., ’d a land dbpOs-
al. particularl> iandi ll and •.jrface im
po’indment. should be the least ta ored
method for manag n ha ardotis sstcs.
It specifically reaffirms the Actminis-
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-
ministrator to use that authority.
Deadlines are estabhshed by which
EPA must evaluate all wastes hated as
hazardous and subject to RCRA regu-
lati’)n. as to the appropriateness of
their disposal on land.
The bill establishes minimum tech-
noiogiiai standards for land disposal
facilities and inc:nerat.ors to insure
that EPA requirca the use of the hC L
technology available at hazardous
wa.st di;posal fari!ilics.
Henceforth, the use of landflls will
be circumscribed by str:ct rules gov-
erning, first, under section 5. what
kinds of materials may be la.ndfilled.
and second. under section 6. hat the
physical character of the landfills
themselves will be.
Th minimum technological require-
ment.s under section 6 for new and.
esentually. 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-
(ions, EPA will match certain wastes
to certain land disposal technologies
or deternune that no match Is feasible.
Within the framework of those evalua-
tions. Congress under the terms of this
legislation Is aiso directing EP t to
take into account certatn locational
chararterlsitcs with respect to all land
diposal fa:i)ities L’ the country in
ord ’ to estabish a performance range
f. r Iandhfl j. Tt e locatIonal character-
istics to be factored jn’o EPA’s analy-
ses include, among others, the hydro-
genlogy of the site, and climatological
and d’mographic effects Landfills
thus will be ahie so be messed accord.
ma to th Cr hyroge ,logic performance
and clacscied as fully accep ablc. ac-
ceptsb1 for cerra:n lim tcd uses, and
l1nar e;t:ble. W.’la a phaccoet of on-
aaet-ptaoIe landfills nvid a highly ana-
lyt c e’ aluation of the rema r ]rr ac-
ccrd ng to their highest and best uses.
I anticp te that the health and safety
of the American people will be sign:fi-
cantly enhanced with respect to their
S 9151
potential exposure to harmful toxics
In the environment.
Thc bill e pantis the coverave of the
laA I C tiios’ ho generate bi .‘t n IflO
and l. iiu(i I. .lograms of asLC a n’ ’;t’i
In 1j D. EPA e .empted all guirrators
of less Lnar I OOJ kilograms, sOkiy on
the Ins’s of its ork!oa’J. a: d s.aL ci
that it iiitvride 10 init ate ru!enta u ’
to expand the law’s coverage v.itl.in
to 5 years.
Th s has not occurred. Accordingly.
the committee proposes to Imp lement
EPA’s 1980 commitment. This il
bi ing Into the regt2ntory system an
additional 15 m:!lion tons of hazardo:is
v aste.
The bill strengthens signiirantly
the role of citizens in enforcing the
law. As the sponsor of this pro :sion. I
bt’Iieve that it will provide an impor-
tant and nece ary supplement to
EPA’s efforts.
The bill expands the law to present
the export of hazardous waste to for-
eign countries witnout the recenxng
COUntr3 s consent.
I would like to discuss in greater
detail two provisions of S. 757 which I
sponsored.
CITi7 SOITS
The citizen suit amendments eon-
tamed in S. ‘ 57 pro ide an Important
supplement to the efforts of the Fed-
eral and State G., ernments to abate
the most serious imds of hazardous
waste situations: Those that may
present an imm:nent and substantial
endangerment to human health or the
en ironment.
I reiterate: These amendments are a
supplement to. not a substitute for
Go ernment action.
Under current law, a citizen may
bring suit to enforce a permit or other
similar RCRA requirement If EPA
fails to do so. However, citizens are not
now authortzed to sue to abate an ‘im-
minent and substsntial endanger-
ment” to health or the environment.
Only EPA can sue to abate an immi-
nent hazard under current law. If EPA
does not act, the endangerment con-
tinues.
In light of the thousands of known
hazardous a.ste sites across this coun
try. this simply do s not make scn e.
The Environmental Protection
Agency clearly does not have the re
sources to deal wtth all of these SLSCS.
nor do the States.
Citizen su ts to abate Iniminem has
ards can expand the n.itional effort to
minimize these very real threats to
our well-being.
This bill a thori:es citiacns to br’’g
Imminent hszard s ir,s in the a en
of actIon. The iro isIon is :ruc
tur d rarefu:ly in the following a .c
to insure that cltI:en suits dri not
interiere ith ongoing Fei1 - ! or
State enforcement efforts:
Citizen action Canlot occur uritil l2
days after EPA, (he affected State and
the alleged defendant have been gnen
notice of intent to sue.
-------
S9152.
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
- If EP or the State has settled an
action to abate an activity hich may
present an Imminent and substant al
endangerment, citizen suit is barred
with respect to that activity.
T io safeguards against frivolous
suits have been added to the bill, in re-
sponse to concerns expressed by com-
mittee members. First, attorneys fees
are authorized to be auardcd by a
court only to a “substantially prevail.
Ing’ party. A citizen who brings a Suit
which has little or no merit does so
only at his own expense. hich may be
considerable.
Seccnd, citizens are prohibited from
bringmg 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 solely as a delaying
tactic. Concerns about the proposed
siting of such facilities ave more ap-
propriately raised in the context of
the laws permit.ing process.
The citizen suit amendments to S.
757 ali .o clarify the Intent of the cur-
rent low that c tizens do hate a statu-
tory right to intervene in imminent
hazard cases brought by EPA. This
right of intervent!c:i has been an im-
portant mechanism for insuring citi-
zen invohement In litigation and pro-
posed settlements between EPA and
defendant comparues.
However, recent court opinions have
held to the contrary. There is now a
conflict in statutory interpretation
which needs to be resolvea.
It is important that the statutory
intent u th respect to int2r ention in
inuninent hazard cases be clari.f ted for
a number of reasons.
First, the citizens of a community In
ahich 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 Oo ernment is not
adequately representing the citizens
Interest.
Second. citizen Involvement pros ides
an Important set of checks and bal-
ances in the enforcement process. By
overseeing the Government’s efforts,
citizens can assure themselses and the
public at large that all views are repie.
sented in the process, and that the
out me Is based cn all asailable
kno .s ledge. This gv. es the outcome ad-
- ditional 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 RCRA permits and regula-
tions. The right also exists in enforce-
ment cases brought under the Toxic
Substances Control Act, the Clean Air
Act, the Cican Water Act, and the
Safe Drinking Water Act.
£XPORT OF HAZARDOUS WASTES
The hazardous waste export provi-
sion in S. 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. At the presont time, only an
annual r.olce is provided to receiving
countries prior to the initial shipment.
This notice does not give the recejung
nation any tndication 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 enuronmental minister
of a fcreigri nation. I would want to
know as much as possible about the
hazardous waste coming into my coun
try. If I were the U.S. Secretaty of
State. I would want to be sure that no
American ally or trading pai tner is
saddled with U.s. it does not
want or does not have the capacity to
handle in an environmentally sound
manner.
The export provision will guarantee
that the wishes of foreign states are
considered and tbat U.S. International
interests are safeguarded. It estab-
lishes a more con prehens se and re-
spons:ble waste export policy wiLh a
minimum ol additional regulatory
burden on U.S. generators.
The proposed permit system Is quite
simple. In the absence of a bilateral
agreement between the United States
and the government of the receiving
country setting forth specific notice,
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-
ceiving country has agreed. In writing
to the plan;
Third. A copy of the receiving coun-
try’s written consent Is attached to the
manifest accompanying each waste
shipment: and
Fourth. The shipment conforms
with the terms of such receiving coun-
try’s consent.
When this program becomes effec-
tive, it will at long last become possible
for the executive branch to determuie
the amounts and ultimate destination
of U.S.-generated hazardous v.aste
which are exported each year. Once
this Information is available. EPA and
the Congress will be able to gauge
July 25, 1984
whether the export right Is being
abused and whether further controls
are necessary or desirable.
Th s important new pros Ision incor-
porates suggstions made by EPA and
industry. It w ll. I believe, ensure that
the right to export does not become a
right to cir:i.tmvent RCRA.
co acLusio x
Mr. President. we have worked long
and hard on this package of amend-
ments. I believe that we have ach’eved
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
eventual chemical contamination of
all elements of our natural life sup-
port system—a:r, water, and lend; and
Second. The reality that because the
pervasise 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 de’iberate but measured pace,’
S. 757 represents a mandate for
change in the status quo. It also repie-
sents a mandate for informed regula-
tion which dot’s 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 hundreds
of persons over the past years. It is
also a compromise In the sense that
probably no one person or interest
supports every aii.gle element of the
legislation,
We have had to make difficult judg.
rncnt ,s as to how the results we desire
can be best achieved, S. 757 represents
that judgment. I urge ray colleagues to
support the legislation before the
Senate. U approved It will be another
sinificant achievement by this body
In assuring a safe environment for all
persons of this country.
Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. President, when
the Committee on Environment and
Public Works considered amendments
to .he Sohd Waste Disposal Act, it was
confronted Viittm the increasingly diffi-
cult problem of legislating in a comrn
plex technical arena. %Vlien the com-
mittee first developed the landmark
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act of 1976, It recognized that quick
solutions to the problem of ens iron-
mentally harmful waste disposal
would not be POSSibIC. There are mil-
lions of tons of waste generated in the
United States, much of Ii’eji is con-
sidered hazardous under the criteria
created by the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act, Elinunating this
waste or assuring Its disposal in the
most environment ally protective
manner depends upon a regulatory ap-
proach that alters the cost and avail-
-------
July 25, 1284
ability of improper alternatives, Regu-
latory development and implementa .
tton has been slower than expected, in
part due to the diffIculties of assuring
- the avaflabllfty 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 constr’iction, no r.iatter
how well they are initially lined. In
this context, the committee was faced
with considering whether landfills and
surface Impoundments shoi ld be al-
lowed to receive certain types of waste.
It is a troubling dilemma when Con.
gre s must address detailed technical
problems as a matter of public policy.
Unfortunateiy, e do not have the ex-
pertise to acquire and assess the infor-
mation on these prob!ems 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
expericnce In the design, construction,
and operation of various technical al-
ternatives, Nevertheless, when public
pelicy demands it, Congress must be
prepared to squarely confront these
difficult de ’isions. -
Within this legislation the commit-
tee compels the EPA Administrator to
determ ne whether certain astes
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 clieaui , the bill
requires that the waste be deposited in
the most tec.hnoiog,eal ly ad%anced
land disposal f:icil:ties until a decision
Is made. In adopting this approach.
the committee rejected argumen
that failure of EPA to make a timely
judpriieiit should result in the prohibi-
tion of placement of these wastes In
land disposal Sites.
It makes little sense to create a fore-
big mechanism which, If It fails to
work, would drastically disrupt the
fundamental waste disposal system,
There is too much reliance on laud dis-
posal and too long a leadtime to get
adequate alternatives into commi’rcial
operation to believe that the prohibi-
tIon 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 ac-ted 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
envir.,njnen al protection.
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 aste,
as long as the waste ren’ains hazard-
ous, from the disposal unit or the iii-
jection 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 Drnking Water Act. These regu-
l tlor,s require so-called class I tells to
Inject below drinking water sources
and to assure that no migration will
oc tir from the injection zone. This
bill specifica! y refers to the term—in.
jection zone—as it is used in the Safe
Drinkir:g 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 aste
that they dispose of would not migrate
from the lnjcction zone. Similarly,
States that operate approved under-
ground injection Control piogra
could make such a demonstration for
all approved wells ithin the State.
TliI, Is an important element of the
bill. While there is consideiab!e anxie-
ty over the use of the land fcc the dis-
posal of hazardous waste, it is equally
Important that the law pro idc 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 regulatioms 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 Buiuixcx, Senator
BRASLEy, and Senator LAuTESIBERO
have amendmen .
Let rae Just take this one first:
Mr. Piesident. on October 28. 1983.
the Committee on Environment and
Public Works favorably reported S.
757 with an &.tnendznent in the nature
of a substitute.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that. the committee amendment
be agreed to and that all subsequent
amenc 1 ,rnents be to the text of S. 757 as
reported on October 28. 1983,
The PRESIDING OFFICER, With-
out objection, it Is so ordered.
The committee amendment In the
nature of a substitute 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. CRAFEE, Yes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered,
A$4RfDMg r NO 340$
(Purpose This amendment instructs the Ad-
ministrator of EPA k study methods for
extending the useful life of sanitary land-
fills and Lu explore n:orp ef(.cwnt nays to
use tilled or clostd landfills, -
Mr. BURDICK, Mr. President, I
send an amendment to the desk and
a,sk for its immediate co’ sideratIon.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read
as follows:
The Senator from North Dakota (Mr.
2uit zcxJ proposes an amendment num-
bered 3405.
Mr. BURDICIC, Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that further i-cad-
Ing of the amendment be dispensed
with,
The PRESIDING OFFICER, With-
out Objcctio . IL is so ordered
The amendment Is as folio ts:
S. 757 Is amended by aaaing the folloa lag
new Section:
S Ec. - Section 8002 of the Solid Wa Le
Disposal Act Is amended by inserting at [ er
Subsection (p) the following new Subsection,
and redesignating succeeding subsections ac-
cordinyly.
“(q) Exrcxon.c Lp.’40,1LL Li g axa REUS-
ING L.s%?DFZLLSNG AiEiS.—TI’, Aarninu trator
shall ConduUt detailed compr hcrisite stud-
ies of methods to extend the useful life of
sannar)- laidfi lls and to better use .cItes in
v’hich il:ed or doted landfills are located.
Such sttidws shall address—
(1I methods to rec’ice the ‘olume of ma-
teripJc before placement in lArdf ils:
“(2) more elf uc:ent systems for depos;tu
waste In landfills:
“(3) methods to enhance the rate of de.
compositior, of solid waste In landfili . in a
safe and ensIroflJ nLailv acceptable
manner:
“(4 met hane product Ian trots closed land-
fill units,
‘(5) inno atI uses of closed l5’ dfull sites,
Including ust’ for enirgy production such as
solar or wind energ) and use for nit tals re-
covery:
“(6) potential for use of seaage treatment
sludge in reclaiming landfi lled areas: and
‘17) methods to coordinate use of a land.
fill owned by one munielnaitry by nearby
munucipal’tiea and to cstabI’s ’ equitable
rates for such use, taking Into accouiiL the
need to proiide future landfill capacjty to
replace that so used.
The Administrator Is authorized to conduct
demonstrations in the areas of study prosid-
ed in this subsection. The Adznirnstrator
shall periodically report on the esuIts of
such studies, ith the first such report sub.
mitted not later than Octob i• 1. iass.”,
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
senitar)’ landfills and to e cplore more
efficient ways 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
S9153
-------
October 6, 1983
‘my coUeagues to support this amend-
ment.
The CHA1EMAN. The question is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from New York (Mr. L ).
The amendment was agreed to.
AMmIDMmIT Orruza By Ms. UL5K1
Ms. MIKUL K1. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment olfererd by Ms. Mn.xuz.sxi:
Page 30. alter lIne 25. Insert:
EXPORT 0? HAZARDOUS WASTE
Sm. 10*.. (a) Exroa .—8ubtItle C Is
amended by adding the following new sec-
tion at the end thereof: - -
“EXPORT 0? HAZARDOUS WASTE
“Sec 3016. (a) I x Oxxzau ,.—Beglnnlng
twenty four months after the date of enact-
ment of the Hazardous Waste Control and
Enforcement Act of 1983. no person may
export any hazardous waste idehtlfled or
listed under section 3001 unless—
“(1) such person has provided the notifica-
eon required in subsection (c) of this aec
ton. -
“(2) the receiving country has consented
to accept such hazardous waste,
“(3) a copy of the recelvln country’s writ-
ten consent Is attached to the manifest ac-
companying each waste shipment; and
“(4) the shipment conforms with (A) the
terms of the consent of the receiving coun-
try required pursuant to subsection (e) or
with (B) the terms of an agreement entered
into between the United States and the re-
ceiving country as provided In subsection
(I)-
“(b) ReeuLa’rioics.—Not later than twelve
months after the date of enactment of the
Hazardous Waste Control Enforcement Act
of 1983. the Administrator shall promulgate
the regulations necessary to Implement this
section.
“(c) NorincAl’Iox.—Any person who In-
tends to export a hazardous waste identified
or listed under section 3001 after the date
beginning twelve months after the date of
enactment of the Hazardous Waste Control
Enforcement Act of 1983. shall, before such
hazardous waste Is scheduled to leave the
United States, provide notification to the
Administrator. Such notification shall conS
tam the following Information—
“(1) the name and address of the exporter;
“(2) the types and estimated quantities of
hazardous waste to be exported;
“C 3) the estimated frequency or rate at
which such waste Is to be exported, and the
period of time over which such waste is to
be exported:
“(4) the ports oY entry:
“(5) a description of the manner in which
such hawdou 5 waste will be transported to
and treated, stored, or disposed in the re-
c-iving country; and
“(6) the name and address of the ultimate
treatment, storage, or disposal facility.
“Cd) Paoc uRzs rca REQUE5TINO CoiVsVIT
Or THE Rxcrrvrwo Comrrrr.—Withln 30 days
of the Administrator’s receipt of a complete
notification under this section. the Secre-
tary of State. acting on behalf of the Ad-
ministrator. shall—
“(1) forward a copy of the notification to
the government of the receiving country;
“(2) advise the government that United
States law prohibits the export of hazard’
ous waste unless the receiving country con’
sents to accept the hazardous waste or has
entered into an agreement with the United
States establishing notice, export, and en-
‘rcement ptocedurea for the transporta.
5. treatment, storage, and disposal of
Zardous waste;
“(3) request the government to provide
the Secretary with a written consent or ob
Jection to the terms of the notification; and
“(4) forward to the receiving country a dc-
lption of the Federal regulations which
would apply to the treatment, storage, and
disposal of the hazardous waste in the
United States.
‘(c) Coavxyaxcx or Wamme Coxs To
* poaTm,—Withln 30 days of receipt by the
Secretary of State of the receiving country’s
written consent or objection (or any subse-
quent communication withdrawing a prior
consent or objection), the AdI, lnl4rator
shall forward such a consent, objection, or
other communication to the exporter.
“(f) Iierzasayrox*i. Ans rrs—Where
there exists an international agreement be-
tween the United States and the receiving
country establishing notice and export pro-
cedures for the transportation, treatment,
storage, and disposal of hazardous wastes,
only the requirements of subsection
(aX4XB) and subsection Cs) shall apply.
“(5) Rxross’s.—After the date of enact-
ment of the Hazardous Waste Control En.
forcernent Act of 1983, any person who ex-
ports any hazardous waste identified or
listed under this subtitle shall file with the
Administrator no later than March 1 of
each year, a report summarizing the types,
quantities, frequency, and ultimate destina-
tion of all such hazardous waste exported
during the previous calendar year.
“(hi O rxu STANDARDS—Nothing in this
section shall preclude the A, inixtrator
from establishing other standards for the
export of hazardous wastes under section
3002 or section 3003 of this subtitle.”,
(b) PxxALTIES.—Section 3008(d) is amend-
ed by adding the following new paragraph
at the end thereof:
“(6) knowingly exports a hazardous waste
Identified or listed under section 3001 (A)
without the consent of the receiving coun-
try or (B) If an agreement has been entered
into with the receiving country under sec-
tion 3016(f). In an manner which is not in
conformance with such agreement;”.
DONPORMING AMENDM ITS
Page 39. line 12, strike out “or”.
Page 39. lIne 18, Insert “or”.
Ms. MIKULSKL Mr. Chairman, I
ask unanimous consent that the
amendment be considered as read and
printed in the Recoiw,
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of. the gentlewoman
from Maryland?
There was no objection,
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. Chairman. I
am offering this amendment today in
order to close a major loophole in the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act.
Currertly EPA has no authority to
regulate the export of hazardous
wastes to other countries. My amend-
ment will provide EPA with the an-
thorlty to prohibit the export of haz-
ardous wastes If the receiving nation
does certify that It is aware of the haz-
ardous nature of the waste, and that It
Is willing to receive the shipment.
This amendment does not mandate
an outright ban on such shipments, I
recognize the fact that there are sever-
al legitimate reasons for exporting
hazardous wastes, such as for scientif-
ic testing, reprocessing and recycling,
My amendment Is not aimed at these
shIpments.
The focus of my amendment is those
wastes which are exported to avoid the
118163
stringent and more expensive require-
ments which govern the disposal of
hazardous wastes In this country.
We must prevent the dumping of
hazardous waste in unsuspecting third
World nations and we must make It
very clear to other countries that we
will not export our problems onto
their shores. -
There have been several tncldences
In the past few years where American
companies have sought to export
wastes In order to dump them In some-
one else’s backyard. This reflects
poorly on our country and harms our
foreign policy Interests.
In Mexico, an American citizen ille-
gally disposed of PCB’s and mercury
sludge (both extremely hazardous sub-
stances) in an abandoned mine with-
out adequate safeguards to the sur-
rounding area.
Last year a Florida company pro-
posed to Incinerate large quantities of
PCB-contamlnated wastes in a Hon-
duran facility after It had been denied
an EPA permit for PCB incineration
In this country. Once the Honduran
Government learned of the hazardous
nature of the waste, It refused to
permit the activity.
In both of these cases If the receiv-
ing country was notified of the nature
of the waste and certifIed It was will.
Ing to accept it, this amendment would
provide no obstacle to the shipment.
However, U the receiving country does
not want the shipment, EPA would
have the authority to stop the ship-
ment.
Both the State Department and
EPA agree that the ECRA legislation
is the appropriate plato to deal with
this issue and I have worked with the
EPA to create the least administrative
burden on that Agency.
Our own country will have safe-
guards from the ill effects of hazard-
ous waste upon passage of this legisla-
tion. We should take an equally firm
stand on the transportation of hazard-
ous waste bound for export to other
countries- I urge you to Support my
amendment to Insure such a clear rues-
sage to the rest of the world,
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chalrznan , will
the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. MIXUISICI. I yield to the gen-
tleman from New Jersey.
Mr. FLORIO. I thank the gentle-
woman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman. I would just say that
I express my support for this amend-
ment. The gentlewoman is correct. As
we strive to upgrade our laws, and per-
haps even because we are upgrading
our laws, the loophole the gentlewom.
an makes reference to is being used
more and more to provide for the dis’
posal of these wastes overseas, and
that certainly is not in our interest or
In the world’s interest.
Mr. Chairman. I commend the Con-
gresswoman from Maryland for offer-
ing her amendment on the export of
hazardous waste and I want to voice
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
118164
my strong support for this amenc
ment.
I have become Increasingly con-
cerned that the RCRA l Islatlon pro-
vides no regulatory authority for A
to control the export of bw.ardoi
waste. Even while our own Nation Is
striving to improve the disposal of han-
ardous wastes, this looph.ale is being
exploited l ’ those wl seek to find
ways to circumvent our laws by dispos-
big of the wastes in other nations.
The number of incklenta In which
this is happening is increasing. I know
of arrangements that have been at-
tempted In Nigeria, Liberia, Senegal.
Sierra Leone, Chile, Haiti. Honduras,
Antlgua. AnguIlla , the B hnma c , and
Mexico, to name just a few.
So far we have been fortunate that
most of these plans have been prevent-
ed through public awareness aiid
public pressure. However, the fact Is
that we have little If any way of know-
big how many of these shIpments have
occurred or how many have gone un-
noticed. -
Like water running downhill, haz-
ardous wastes invariably will be dis-
posed of along the path of least resist-
ance and least expcz e . In light of the
current loopholes and the Increasing
costs of sle disposal. ecasdftlons ore
ripe for farther attempts to find “safe
havern’ for hazardoes wastes around
the globe.
I applaud the C mgresewmian’s ef-
Sorts to address this problem through
this amen nent. Her amendment has
the support of I A. environmental
groups, and the waste-handling ladus-
‘J7.
We afl look heysaid cor IndiviØ-
us] bardes’s to recognise that ‘en the
acnst stringent national requirements
ran be asthsarted I an we mutually
assure the control am! mtz oring of
I nternational bamrdotm waste shIp-
ments. I urge you to ipport thm
amendment.
Ms. MIKULSKI. I thank the gentle-
man from New Jersey i c r ha support.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Charman. will the
gentlewoman yield?
Ms. MIKUISKL I yield to the gen-
tleman from New York.
Mr. LENT. I thank the gentlewoman
for yielding. - —
Mr. Chairman. I rise In support of
the aznendm nt offered by the gentle-
woman from Maryland.
It appears to me to be rnly fair to
afford a country to which a ham.rdotrs
waste is being exported the opportuni-
ty to know In advance of that pending
export.
berefcre, I pport the asnendrnent
offered by the gentlewoman from
Maryisnd.
Ms. XUL L I thank the gentle-
man from Mew York for his support,
and I urge the adoption of my amend-
ment.
The CHAIRMAN. The eztinn Is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
woeusn from Maryland (Ms. M i-
StULSX1 )
The seomcisnent was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there further
amendments to sectIon 10?
* M T orrum IT l .TOW
)jy, R f ’I’oM. Mr. Chairman. I
offer an amendment
Mr. FWEIO. Mr. Chub-man, I re-
serve a point of order against the
amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from New Jersey reserves a point of
order on the amendment.
The Cleit will report the eanend-
ment
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. 8 rux Page
30, line 25. kisert
0o aTT EmOCSTION
Sac. 10A. (a) The second sentence of pare-
Wupb (23) of sectIon 101 of the C nprehen-
live 2 ivb-oonental Response, Compensa.
tion. and I.i h4iIty Act of 1980 (Public Law
89-5 0) is amended by Inserting after .
utherwtse se1ded for,” the phrase ‘eceis
of psesesnent peloestlon of rents where
ft Is determlool thet such permenrat relo-
cation is c effective or may be n wy
is i . ct h or welfare.” and by strik-
Mg out Ui. aunicolon at the end thereof
end inserting In Se, thereof a period and
the folisadng: “In the osse of a buai lo-
rated In an area of e, ia&Ion or relocation.
the term may also Include the payment of
those installment s of principal and Interest
en b neas debt which accrue between the
te of evarsatlon or iscoporary rel tIos
and thIrty days following the date that per-
manent relocation Is actually accomplished
Sr. If permanent relocation Is formally re-
jected as the appropriate response, the date
os which eve uscion or temporary reloca-
then cones. In the one of an Individual .
employed as a result of such evacuation or
relocation, It may also Include the provi-
lions of the assistance aethoi-ued by see-
eons 401. 408. and 409 of the Disaster Relief
Act of 1I’ )4:”.
-(b) Sec n 104(cXl) of the mprehen-
sive Environmental Rospense. pezwa-
tion. and Liability Act of 1989 (Public Law
96-510) Is amended by Inserting before ‘au-
thmlzed by section (hi of this section.’ the
phrase for permanent relocation Or”.
(e) Nothing is the a . . da ents made by
this section shall be construed to appropri-
at .. funds (or divert appropriated funds) for
any purpose for whIch such funth would not
otherwise be available. -
Mr. S TON. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous cocwent that the amend-
ment be considered as read and print-
ed In the Racown.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Missouri’
There was no objection.
Mr. SHELTON. Mr. Chairman,
daring the last year Missouri has had
the unfortunate experience of provid-
ing a laboratory for the operation of
the superfund law. The amendment
which I offer today is an effort to
learn from our experience of the past.
In Mlasourl, through the activities of
one waste hauler, Mr. Chairman, over
O potential sites were created and to
this date over 39 have been confirmed.
0 16211
The problems whlth my amendment
addresses are not huge ones: Instead.
they clarify what the administrator
can do In certain hopefully rare cases
October 6, 1983
where superfund must be applied to a
contaminated community.
I would like to especially emphasize
that diseretlon Is left with the Admin-
istrator as to whether to use these
tools in a given case. We do not seek.
Mr. Chairman, to create an entitle-
ment In any way, but It should be
made clear what tools the Administra-
tor has If he needs them.
Let me go through the three sec-
tions of my amendment briefly. The
first part provides that the Adminis-
trator can if he deems it appropriate
or cost effective or necessary to pro-
tect health and welfare, permanently
relocate a community that Is contami-
nated beyond repair by hazardous
wastes.
This is exactly the situation we had
in Missouri at Times Beach and at
Quail Run. The ground was so con-
tatninated that nothing short of per-
manent relocation made any sense;
and yet, the EPA went through the
motions of a temporary relocation
until a loophole could be found to
move the residents permanently. After
the flood at Times Beach, they used
the saster law to effect a permanent
relocation; In other words, Indirectly
doing what we cay In this amendment
can be done directly.
The second provision provides that
the Administrator can again if he
finds It approprwte pay the principal
and Interest cci business debts so that
the economy of an area can be kept
alive during a temporary relocation or
until a permanent relocation can be
put into effect.
Now, does it make sense to rescue a
colnmuiuty. but endanger its econo-
my? Why bother to send them back if
every business has been . .either run off
or put Into bankruptcy?
We found that in Times Beach the
residents were asked to relocate by the
Government and were provided assist.
arice to mitigate their financial
mishap; but the busLnesses now left
without cirstomers were put Into a sit-
uation where their income was zero.
but their obligations continued on.
My amendment In Its second portion
would not replace their lost profit, but
ft would maintain the status quo so
that all the residents had something
to return to.
Finally, my amendment provides
that some of the aid provided to indi-
viduals under the Disaster Relief Act
of l9’74 would be permitted for those
persons thrown out of work by reloca-
tion. This could include again at the
Administrator’s discretion unemploy-
ment and reemployment assistance,
food stamps, and certain grants where
other programs were not available to
meet the serious needs of these relo.
cated residents.
This third provision simply provides
the kind of assistance that is available
to the victims of a natural disaster to
those who suffer from a manmade
one.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE,
-------
.;c , 1 AJT .; i 9
DOMESTIC SEWAGE
SEC. 246. (a) Subtitl C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by adding the following new section after section 3017:
“DOMESTIC SEWAGE
‘SEC. 3018. (a) REPoRT—The Administrator shall, not later than
15 months after the date of enactment of the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984, submit a report to the Congress con-
cerning those ubstances identified or listed under section 3001
which are not regulated under this subtitle by reason of the exclu-
sion for mixtures of domestic sewage and other wastes that pass
through a sewer system to a publicly owned treatment works. Such
report shall include the types, size and number of generators which
dispose of such substances in this manner, the types and quantities
disposed of in this manner, and the identification of significant
generators, wastes, and waste constituents not regulated under I
existing Federal law or regulated in a manner sufficient to protect
human health and the environment.
“tb) REvisIoNs or REGUi.A1IONS.—Within eighteen months after
submitting the report s .ecified in subsection (a), the Administrator
shall revise existing regulations and promulgate such additional I
re ulationa pursuant to this subtitle (or any other authority of the
Administrator, including section 307 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act) as are necessary to assure that substances identified or
listed under section 3001 which pass through a sewer system to a
publicly owned treatment works are adequately controlled to protect
human health and the environment.
“(C) REPoRT ON W*.srEwATta LAG0oNS.—The Administrator shall,
within thirty-six months after the date of the enactment of the
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendmenta of 1984, submit a report to
Congress concerning wastewater lagoons at publicly owned treat-
ment works and their effect on groundwater quality. Such report
shall include—
“(1) the number and size of such lagoons;
“(2) the types and quantities of waste contained in such
lagoons;
“(3) the extent to which such waste has been or may be
released from such lagoons and contaminate ground water; and
H. R. 2867—45
“(4) available alternatives for preventing or controlling such
releases.
The Administrator may utilize the authority of sections 300’ and
3013 for the purpose of completing such re2ort.
“(d) APPLICATION OF SEcrioN 3010 *.r ’ n SECTION 3007.—The provi-
sions of sections 3007 and 3010 shall apply to solid or dissolved
materials in domestic sewage to the same extent and in the same
manner as such provisions apply to hazardous waste.’.
(C) The table of contents for such subtitle C is amended by adding
the following new item at the end thereof:
“Sec. 3018. Domestic sewage”
-------
A)F r - ’ 1 ,iir
SECTION 246—DOMESTIC SEWAGE
House bilL—The House bill provides that within 15 months EPA
shall report to Congress on hazardous wastes exempt from Subtitle
C because they are mixed with domestic sewage or other wastes
that go to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs).
Within 18 months after submitting the report, EPA shall revi e
or promulgate regulations to control those wastes. Within 36
months of enactment EPA shall submit a report to Congress on
wastewater lagoons at POTWs and their effect on groundwater.
Senate amendment—The Senate amendment does not contain a
similar provision.
conference substitute.—The Conference substitute is the same as
the House bill, with the clarification that EPA may use pretreat-
nent standards under section 307 of the Cléãri Water;Act to con-
trol hazardous wastes mixed with domestic sewage. .:
-------
r’ ‘ -‘- ‘
22 DOMESTIC SEWAGE
23 SEc. 15. (a) DOMESTIC SEwAGE.—Subtjtle C of the
24 Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by adding the following
25 new section at the end thereof:
2 “SEc. 3014. (a) REPORT.—The Administrator shall,
3 not later than fifteen months after the enactment of the Haz-
4 ardous Waste Control and Enforcement Act of 1983, submit
5 a report to the Congress concerning those substances identi-
6 fied or listed under section 3001 which are not regulated
7 under this substitle by reason of the exclusion for mixtures of
8 domestic sewage and other wastes that pass through a sewer
9 system to a publicly owned treatment works. Such report
10 shall include the types, size and number of generators which
11 dispose of such substances in this manner, the types and
12 quantities disposed of in this manner, and the identification of
13 significant generators, wastes, and waste constituents not
14 regulated under existing Federal law or regulations in a
15 manner sufficient to protect human health and the
16 environment.
17 “(b) REvIsIoNS OF REGULATIONS.—Withifl eighteen
18 months after submitting the report specified in subsection (a),
19 thc Administrator shall revise existing regulations and pro-
20 mulgate such additional regulations pursuant to this subtitle
21 (or any other available authority) as are necessary to ensure
22 that substances identified or listed under section 3001 which.
23 pass through a sewer system to a publicly owned treatment
24 works are adequately controlled to protect human health and
25 the environment
-------
1 “(c) REPORT ON WASTEwATER LA000NS.—The Ad-
2 ministrator shall, within 36 months after enactment of the
3 Hazardous Waste Control and Enforcement Act of 1983,
4 submit a report to Congress concerning wastewater lagoons
5 at publicly owned treatment works and their effect on
6 ground-water quality. Such report shall include—
7 “(1) the number and size of such lagoons;
8 “(2) the types and quantities of waste contained in
9 such lagoons;
10 “(3) the extent to which such waste has been or
11 may be released from such lagoons and contaminated
12 ground water; and
13 - “(4) available alternatives for preventing or con-
14 :trolling such releases.
15 The Administrator may utilize the authority of sections 3007
16 and 3013 for the purpose of completing such report.
17 “(d) APPLICATION OF SECTION 3010(a) / i D SECTION
18 3007.—The provisions of sections 3007 and 3010 shall apply
19 to solid or dissolved materials in domestic sewage to the
20 same extent and in the same manner as such provisions apply
21 to hazardous waste.”.
22 (b) AMENDMENT TO SECTIONS 3007 AND 3010.—(1)
23 Section 3007 is amended by adding the following new sub-
24 section at the end thereof:
-------
1 “(e) APPLICATION TO SOLID OR DIsSOLvED MATERIJ
2 s n DOI sTIc SEwAGE.—The provisions of this section
3 shall apply to solid or dissolved materials in domestic sewage
4 to the same extent and in the same manner as such provi-
5 sions apply to hazardous waste.”.
6 (2) Section 3010 is amended by adding the following
7 new subsection at the end thereof:
8 “(c) APPLICATIoN TO SOLID OR DISSOLVED MATERI-
9 ALS IN DOMESTIC SEwAGE.—The provision of this section
10 shall apply to solid or dissolved materials in domestic sewage
11 to the same extent and in the same manner as such provi-
12 sions apply to hazardous waste.”.
13 (c) TAJ3LE OF O0NTENTS.—The table of contents for
14 such subtitle C is amended by adding the following new item
15 at the end thereof:
“Sec. 3014. Domestic sewage.”.
-------
• .- . • .— ..- . ... ..2...
V • —. •
Nov rrther 198k :-: • ‘I £ ‘ .uh4
waste, tier will ft ever require mitiga- by 4hii the fo1I,wbi _- r’ J C k .euwe .
Lion or compensation ol injury j- S odthor . - &ou i (d
fered by thase affected by improperly • - - I ......arni . mwaes . gL Mr. Cbalrman I ask urisnlrenu ,
‘sposed-of hazardous waste. There 1014. Ca3 !boosr.—The Athntnh . w nt t the kmpy i,Impnt
C other, far more comprehensive 4cr shall. not later than 15 moi,ths after the sidered as read and iatnd .lhe
,rovtsions both In RCR& of the Ha dous Wute Control . . . . . . j
CERCLA which serve those functions. d ifO flifzlt Aet c i 1983. iubmlt Xhe ( A1 J pro täxtp ,re. la.
r ,ort to the Cosgyum conecroing those
However. as the San Lorenzo mse baa • t w toenUlled or listed wader ise U1&C ObJ Ctian SO the the
made dear to me. there are no pratt- uo te* genfleinan from New Yesti
slons In either of these landmark boa- rjbtltle by reason of the exclusion for mix- -‘ There was no Object Ion. -
dens substance sta.tij o which would of dom sewage and other wastes . MoIfl J eaked and was
• require—as this amendment would— that pen through a sewer system to a pub - permission to revise and extso$
Immediate notiflrafaon of local offi- heir own J bea on works. Suds r t
dais and the public that a public shall include the types. she sod number ci ..• .;:i 4 j
danger exLc s. In cases comparable w ieaere&ors which dsi’post of such suestanon
___ __- 01610
San Lcren’n Rig h ’s the additional ___ . c ni n. I3se-
time and thrifkn.tion provided by this ties of signlian.nL generators. waste. and primary purpose of the Resource
amendment could mean the difference and Reocwery Act wider wb-
betwe injury and a healthy life, er latuig Federal law or regulations , $ , ‘craoie4o-grave”
between a public health disaster and a manner sufficient to ofect bmnan heQILh - ment of hazardou wastes. Ass osm -j
viable. healthy community. I C0 SOd - ___ e the a effective
mend this amendesent - to , 1b) K UZOIii 5? IATT L—W1thtn
18 months after subinltth ig the report sped- oversight Is esoentlal toprot ct, -..,
leagues for their support. - subsection (a). the lug human health and the environ- •
Mr. Chairman. I have discussed shall revise existing reguJation and pmmul- meat. Yet, a significant.
1th both the chairman of the sub- reguiations poi to ezisto th RCRA which .plst ‘the’
commjUee and also the r nking minor- th aubtitie ter any other available anthorl .- health and environment of our Net cm-L
Ity member. I believe this amendment syi as are neemsary to essure that sob- !fl Under the
Is aceept.ab ’le to both sides. - 5tkn IdpnUf, ..4 or listed under r.’ ion waste regui-’ory program oh h zd- ’
Mr pj • Mr asairn*ai) , Wll 3001 which pen through a sewer system tO waste which passes tiunugha pish
the gentleman yleld? - a publicly owned beatnient works br ade. •,
Mr. PANETr&. i e- quately controlled to protect h health
and the environnirsit. •. - . — • from deral r ulatios indeed, ow
man from New Jersey. • • -• - 9 ) Rmoxr ow Wasrzwtv Lanoom,— hazardous waste generator ma,y dis- .
Mr. OR1O. ML £bairmaxi. The Adminhtza&or shall. wtthto 36 mont2 pose of virtually assy waste to
amendment amply requires that wbco ona ,t of the Eawdoos Wade sewer provided that the aewcri ist
the Administrator determines that a Control and mIoro m. ia Act of 1983. connected to a publicly owned eat
release of hazardous waste poses a submit a report to Con en nonon Ing
danger to public health, notIce be wastrnter lagoons at publicly owned trust-
‘yen to the affected population. This %‘OTks SOd thefr effect on voondwster cLeapest method to dispose of
qus.Uty. Such report shall include:
simple, co!nnionsense TeqUfl efl 91) the number and aim of suds lsaotsse wastec—dmplj dimsplrw It .down the:
‘ something that should be done ii- - wade eon- 5CW . . •. - , ‘.
rcady. We are simply requiring It to be - • ‘ - - This exesnpthm does not refer to anL
standard operating procedure. - • ‘C3) the extent to which such waste has ft signifimrn quantity of w - -es Th
Mr. Chairman, this amendment tins been or m he reI iron such lmgooes Othee of Tsoh 1rgy
been reviewed by the majority and, 1 and onnttmrn.ted - - eluded the.t w es which eurrenUf -:
suspect, by the minority. Providing 14) available Ilteroalives far pievPntlng escape the Federal definftion and rug- ;
notice to the affected population Is ° con o lung ub “ ulation pose substantial hazards, OTA.
highly desirable, and the amendment lbs Administrator may utilize the autburi- . -tmatpii mat wastes- cwTenl
Is acceptable. tl’ of sectIons 3007 and 3013 for the purpose
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, will the of Completing such - - - exempted from RCRA Drob bly t aL .
Id) A, Ucairoiq cv &crrov 1010(a) several million tons per pear. . .t.;
gentleman yield? - aoo -j— . p situation is grave when we
Mr. PANErTA. I yield to the gentle- APPlY . as- dZs - older the state c i our NaUon’ sewag
man from New York. .. •-.: - solved mitm1i in to - iu share th sin
j . r Mr Chairman. I thank same ext t and In the same manner as prob1ern in their sewage
the gentleman for ylelniiig. .- .. - - such prorusom apply to hazardous systems as New York City, i sta ‘
I would also say that posting of the (b) Ai( n x ro Szcrzoirs 3007 san
3010.—Cl) Section 3007 by largely to the 19th century and ez.
notification it. the disposal sUe £0 ng the ftlloving now ‘f ’ . -Uci & tended as the popni& gpe , .
asottfy the affected population is an ____ • - New t’cet City pipes an6 thnn
appropriate action to take. I supPort Ic) A ca o & d o Thssotv bullt rec ve both sew and storm ‘ -
the gentleman’s amendment.. • - D0 flC provi- water. During the heavy ralnf , t A
Mr. PANETrA. Mr. Chairman, 1 mom id thk section xl i ii) atiitv to mild or ptpes overflow, possibly spilling
thank both the gentleman from New disiolved materials In dom tic sewage to ardous wastes. . : - - -: . -
Jersey and the genLleuian from New the same extent and In the same manner so pub b3’ e
simb prot-teom apply to hazardous a-tee.”
York.. £21 ‘- “ 3010 Is amended by ii4ding New York Times diseussed the ob-’
The CHAIRMM( Pl O thawing new subsection at the end thereof: Reins experienced by New York ty 4
question is on the amendment offered to lloLTn 01 DISS0LVm and Boston, Problems typical for avee
by the gentleman from California (Mr. _m provi- ZOO coastal cities. In Boston, for exam..
-. •- - - ci thIs section shall apply to solid as dh- - pie, when the volume is too great for
The amendment was agreed to. . solsed matermh in dmsatlc seu 10 the the pipeline network, the overflow
aaswnrr orrman y as. O0LT &Si -
lame extent and In the same maimer Si charges through heore than 100 out-.-
such provisions apply to hazardous waste.”,.
Mr. MOLINARI. Mr. Chairman. I TAILS or Cos ‘ ,—The table of con- - along the livers and harI) r Iroot ‘
offer an amendment. - . tents for such mbUUe c i a nzt This amnonta to about 6 bIllion gallona ‘ ‘
The Clerk read as follows: - ____ flem at the annually of raw sewage which feeda
ejsdm nt offered by Mr. Moz.niaa th .wE - - - . ,•‘ out through the combined sewn- out- ‘.:
40. allOt line 11, Is— .L - •. ‘ ee. i& adIe se.iige.’ . ‘‘ tb W .Wp yi . As many at
&,, 4 t , the plantg generathig much of !baZ. , , ,
-e Ilk. (a) flo ti , Sswaio...SithtJj,Is to in t the foUowto new it • sewage are allowed to dump bamrdoas ‘c;
af the Solid Waste Dlq o Act is am - kern pel. .tI g 4c aect1 38; • - - material Into the pipes, during ov 4-’
-------
H 9150. - CONGR .ESSIONAI ECORD lOUSE-’ “ koièmber Z98 f ’
- .——
flows. hazardous wastes spill directly Act l&. Iete. R & eontah % r. i r. Er. ChlhiMn ,wtfl U ;
thto Boston waters. . more comprehensive list of bawdos gentleman yield? . - - - -
Once the sewage reaches the public- d etn1ca1s than the Clean Water Act. Mr. MOLINARL 1 yIeld tojiie g -
ly owned treatment works, there Is Thus, more generators and types of tieman from New Yr
still no guarantee that the waste will wastes would be reviewed. For exam.. Mr. LENT. I thank the gentleman :-:‘
be adequately treated. Most publicly pie, the pretreatment program Is - for yielding. - - .
owned treatment works are capable of cerned with only 22 Industrial catego- Mr. Chairman, I rha In support of
only primary treatment even though rica of polluters and 129 pollutants. La the amendment by my colleague from ‘
the Clean Water Act requires second- the other hand. RCRA classified over j y i&E ! ‘
azy treatment. A survey conducted by 250 additiOnal th t1UC81S 55 DOtefltthllY EPA to study the domestic sewage
JRB Associates identified that only 25 hazardous for th puiposca of Its regu- - emp , Li’ 55 f( e5 I 5 f 5 f ] 55
.percent of the 2000 publicly owned latlon. -, . . - . ,.‘ : included In last yeafs RCRA reauth. .:
treatment works sampled had the es- A recent report Written an - orization bill. Unfortunately. *hof .
sential m chani vn In place to trol EPA con uct focused 00 CollusIve and - measure was never acted upon by the . ,:
thdustrlal wa ge. . gnltable material which damaged Ser i a t . - - . .. ,
- The amendment which I offer today publirally owned treat nent works.- smen ent isa very
wOUld address this problem. It le- ‘I eatment plants. The zame repost one since It addressca a -potenttaDy :
EPA to prepare a report to the Identified 63 Industrial cttegoiles not very serious shortcoming In. RCR& ?
Congress within 15 months of enact- covered In the Clean Water Act i,re - Right now an, hazardous waste
ment specifying the Agency’s progress treatment plan ‘which .ator may &spooe ‘of -virtually mw
In quantifying, as accurately as pomi- ardous waste. ‘ - ‘. -
ble, the nature and scope of hazardous Mr. 4y waste Into any sewer ,w dded st tto • 4
____ ____ se thre o ected a ubl y
waste disposal Into diin tie dated by 7OUT amendment result In owned treatment works. The eff f Q
including the types of wastes and new pretreatment standards for uuls provision Is to create an ez’ 1 ” ”
waste streams: the extent to which hazardous waste generators? -. - .
this exclusion Is Justified and should M. MOLINARL That Is highly ‘ - from the RCRA segulatlom whIth ’ is
be modified or’ eliminated; and the likely. The purpose of the study Is to W broad as to to beyond
adequacy of pretreatment as a means Identify the gaps currently In RCRA °° at the PTCS t t
of de -’wg with this problem. The Ad’ which may threaten public health This unqualified clusion Is pot .-.f
Ini trator will then be required the environment. My amendment t a extr &y dangerous siam Ito
revise existing regulations and proniul . would simply requ1r EPA’4q review majority of the Na&Iolz
gate additional the discharge of baeardous works do not monitor for toxic orsar - -
- listed under RCRA and estimate the Il or toxic metals ‘and prettmrnt’
This study will look at all the laws scope of hazardous waste currently standards for toxic organic and motoR
governing waste disposal and su pi exempt from regulation. EPA Is hi- dtharses are not in
to integrate the functions of those structed to concentrate on significant enc np’- the till rs of wast -
laws, It Is an attempt to get a h dIe amounts of wastes discharged from being placed Into - ‘ -‘
on this problem and deal with It In the significant numbers of generators. 11 rm0 fleW5pS es ! ‘p tI :
most effective manner. If our envir - the receiving publicly owned treat- have esinfumed that thapproprIsto
mental laws are intended to u_y thent plants can handle the waste in hazardous wastes are being placed ln-
ale disposal of hazardous wastes, a niPxiner which adequately protects sewer systems—last year there was an i ’
loophole which pennits generators to human health and the environment, explosion In the Louisville sewer
essentially dump their wastes down then regulatory change will not be system that wised a great deal of.
the sewer appears to contradict that necessary.- - - - .. -. - death. zometbn ahonid M .i,
objective. I believe my amendment Mr. FLORTO. wni this study require done about a provision ‘ wbieh p lto
represents a first step toward address- substanita] expenditures? - - - - ‘ type of result.. . - :-
Jng this situation. , Mr. MOLINARI. EPA has already I strongly support Mr. Mor.usasx ;’ ’
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, v obtained a great deal of oseful m l or- amendment and urge my collgi -to - v
the gentleman yield? - niatlon. Municipalities have been re- do the same. . - -b—-
Mr. MOUNARL I yield to the gen- qusred to survey the Industrial contri- Mrs. JOHNSON. ‘) r ‘Chairman, 1 .
tleman from New Jersey. haters In their system and their Tis hi support of RJL 67. the flas.--
Mr. FLORIO. I thank the g ti . n.i ’ impact on the publicly owned treat-- sidous Waste C ol and
for yielding. - . nient rki. While the review has fo- went Act of 1983 and my mofleagneb
3 am pleased to support the amend- cused primarily on corrosive and Ignit- 7 smendment Mr. Mouxasrz
went offered by the gentleman from able materials, the niech&ni ms f dodIC&tih)fl to Improving our ivh 4 , S
New York. As you recall, a study an a specific hazardous waste study are In ment Is beyond question and I
the mixtures of sewage and hazardous place. Therefore, the costs would not joendhlm for his participation In
wastes disposed of Into sewer systems be significant, . - Of this legIshat lcIL .. -.
was mandated by sectIon 4 of the Mr. FLORIO. I thank my colleague This act will extend mansgiesit
RCRA reauthorization bill (R.R. 6307) from New York for sharing this lnIoi ’- COntrols over certain types of
during the 97th Congress. It was em I t jn it Is clear from mis wastes not now regulated, such an: r
widely recognized as a much.needed statements that we need a study to dioxins. It will bring wider RCRA ieg.
step toward addressing the problems review the whole picture—from point ulatlon the owners and opemiom Of
posed by the domestic sewage exemp- source to the ultimate ctjschs.rge fima tac1ll t burn ur bl rd .’’
tion. However’, as we are all aware, the the treatment plant—with specific at- Waste for’ u l v 7 . ii.ith
Senate never passed a RCRA reauth- tentlon to hazardous wastes. Several cement -kilni and Industriat and cow- f
crization bill last year. - Federal statutes have authority over inercial boilers, but which ire now -eI -.r
I would like to ask my distinguished the disposal of domestic sea-age, yet ,fectlvely exempt from reguiatiøn, 1t -
colleague. Mr. Motrr.iaxi . whether none of them directly oversees all of will set n fntmum design and perform-
under the pretreatment program of the hazardous waste generated and onqe standards for land dkposal laduj
the Clean Water Act, EPA Is currently discharged into municipal sewage sys- . ties and for incinerators, - -- ‘ • . - -.--
conducting a study on the domestic ferns. As study to determine the most 0.11.2867 alan will establish a
sewage problem, and, If so, will this effective means for providing a cow- dry of acceptable hazardous wa :-
amendment duplicate that study? prehensive solution Is an appropriate management practices, with land Wa-
Mr. MOLINARL No, roy amew vnPnt step toward addressing the domestic pow! clearly the manajement prsZ2he
I not duplicate that study. The In- sewage exemption. i ask my colleagues Of last u t This flects the ve - - ‘1.
‘nation obtained for the pretrcat - to low me In support of this “.“ 4 - menidasican Of the Of hee of Te 1m 4
ent program under the Clean Water -___ - -. - . snd the .ti nd j
-------
November 3, 1983
Academy of Science’s National Re-
search Council. A statutory hierarchy
- also was endorsed In the RCRA testi-
ony of Geoffrey Stengel, Jr., presi.
•nt of Envirite Corp; Envirite has a
..at.e-of-the-art treatment facility In
Thomaston. Conn.. In my district. En-
virlte treats metal finishing wastes and
certain other hazardous wastes that
have been contaminated by nonor.
• ganic constituents, and transforms
• them into noriharardous material.
I concur with Mr. Stengel’s state.
inent that managing hazardous waste.s
for the protection of human and em.
nomic health requires a three-part
First, to encourge Industry to find ways to
generate less waste. Second, to encourage
industry to recover and/or recycie as much
waste as possible. Third. for wastes that
must go Into the environment, to rc uire
ich wastes to be UeaLed and neusrahzed so
that no harm can come to the environment
upon disposal.
This Is the basic goal of section 5 of
HR. 2867. Within this hierarchy of
management practices, the Adrninstra-
tot of EPA must decide what hazard-
ous wê.stes are appropriate for land
disposal and shall require the best
available treatment prior to land dis-
posal.
My constituents already are comply.
Ing with both the letter and spirit of
RCRA to treat, not just dispose of
their hazardous wastes. Unfortunate-
ly, they are at a competitive disadvan-
tage from facilities In other States
at do not have comparably protee-
e standards who have waited for
to act; or who are not enforcing
their standards as vigorously as Is Con-
necticut. Therefore, another reason I
support HR. 2867 Is that ft will re-
quire other States and Industries to
come up to Connecticut’s advanced en.
vironmental s ndards arid eliminate
the competitive disadvantage we have
experienced as a result of sound c mi-
ronznentai programs.
Mr. Chairman, we also must recog-
nize that while RCRPt Is necessary to
assure protection of human health
and the environment from the mis-
n nAgement of hazardous wastes, It Is
rot sufficient. The Clean Water act
also must. be strengthened. Unless
publicly owned treatment works
(POTWs) are encouraged to meet the
same high standards as Individual dis-
chargers, our work toward purifying
our water will be, at best, halfhearted.
EPA ECRA regulations currently
exempt generators of hazardous waste
who discharge into a sewage treatment
system, OTA estimates that 5 million
nietnc tons of toxic wastes are being
discharged into POTW’s without sire-,
treatment. EPA’s commendable objec-
tive is to avoid duplication with the
Clean Water Act’s pretreatment re
quirements. However, unless POTWS
are required so meet higher standards,
“e goal of preventing these hazardous
tes from entering our waterways
I remain elusive.
- S’iot only will our rniroiurent.sl
goals not be met if we fall to Include
POTW’s the romplete -yegatory
system, but also the existing incentive
to utilize this environmentally un-
sound alternative, that Is, to dispose of
hazardous waste by unfettered dump-
ing into-a POTW rather than treat-
ment at the source, will continue to
encourage such destructive behavior.
Recently, Mr. Stengel of Envirite no-
tified M teacttusetts that be was wIth-
drawing his notice ot intent to con-
atruct a treatment facility In that
State because of the uncertainties of
on effective sewer pretreatment pro-
gram serving the greater Boston area.
Re inW1i. it clear that he was caking
this action because -7 will paraphrase
his letter—any prhgitely owne ’ , rsst.e
treatment ra,clllty that pretreated re-
aponsibly could never compete eco-
nomically with a POTW currently not
required to treat effectively Los- toxic
wastes.
Until we address this gaping hole In
our hazardous waste treatment laws.
we will maintain an uneconomic Incen-
tive to circumvent them. Mr. Mot.ns-
L iii’s amendment will require EPA to
review Its current policies to close this
regulatory vacuum. -
Adoption of ILR. 2867. as amesided,
is an essential first step to provide the
regulatory climate In which companies
can expand their capacity to provide
high tech treatment that may be more
costly in the short run, but ecological-
ly preferable and economically less ex-
pensive over the long term.
As a member 1 0 the Public Works
and Transportation Subcommittee on
Investigations and Oversight., I am
committed to working to assure that
the Clean Water Act will complement
the environmental protections of
RCRA, This sill include maintaining
the current stringency and deadlines
of the categorical pretreatment pro-
gram: requiring compliance with pre-
treatment standards as a condition of
a section 301(h) waiver of secondary
treatment requirements for ocean
sewage outf aIls, establishing standards
for sewage sludge to assure that It is
managed consistently with RCRA and
Is disposed of in an environmentally
sound way; and, assuring enforcement
of categorical pretreatment standards.
I Include the testimony of Envu’ite
and Its letter to the Massachusetts
Hazardous Waste Facthty Site Safety
Council In the REcoRD at this pclnt
Es mnx Cosr..
September 15, 1983.
.?1c,yop if P 5icwmioo.
Ossirmcn. Hara ,d us Waste P ’urilfty Lite
Safety CounciL CcnnmonweolUl of Pies.
sachusetts. Boston, MA
Dzea Da N icwsow As you know. Envtr-
its Corporation has been working for ap-
peoxunately two years with the Site Safety
Council and the Department of Environ-
mental Management (DEM) on the subject
of an Envirite waste treatment facility to be
In e usuliS. The utz.’tm
you, your staff and DEM have provided has
been greatly appreciated: Madeleine Koib
and Riwaeli Peless have been gortlculazly
beiptid
FolIowthg a vIsit to Bcaton In June of last
year. Mr. T. B. Palmer, Cbahsnan of EnvIr-
- . ‘ciiJ 9j5
id President of ba ,,.
Tamy Corporation. wrote Jolso A. Bewtth,
then Secretary of Envfronmentsl Affairs,
sad Indicated that Envtnte would be inter
ested In locating a new facility to the stat..
- - soon as we see that these Is a dens-
of sufficient businon developing be -
Masudussetts to wsmnt b. iiIUiiy a second
plant in lAew England,” We continue to hold,.
th lsv lew. , ,‘.: - ,
At the present time h vcr . these does
not appear to be a clear preapeet of miff I . .
elent bn 1m. developing to
to justify a new plant, although there
tainly are prospects. The major imue Is un-- 1
co-tainty on our part as to the of.-
state and local efforts to establish and en
tte treatment standards limiting the dis-
charge of Indjstrlal peliutant. Inse
eswer syctem uernng the greater Boston -
area. Any privately .owned waste tresitnent
facility would find It dLlficull to nosopele.
with a publicly-owned outlet for entreated -.
wastes. . — •‘ — —
be Depes of ___
ity ‘Engineering and the Metropolitan Dh
trict Commission have been striving to
selop an effective pretreatment program toe
Industrial discharges’s that will nlthnate
og g t.ly , ,,,,d,ni. , the flow of
material into the toy. Ind1ca-
lions are that program o ug made, rnt
that fwther progrem ma he cof ores’ -
the next several ‘seass, oust -
forcemant still werde to In
considerably. - - ‘ -. :- zirr5 —:
in our Judgment therefoie. It Is preinatwe-
for Envirlte to e n ,v mI to a
ftclllty at this time. Wbfle It ma he argued
that the siting application pro may it-.
quire at least two years and that by then -
the enforcement program v.111 be gignifi-
canf.ly Improved, we simply cannot Justify
that d of financial rs at Ac- -
cordingly. Envirite wishes to withdraw (Is
notice-of .lflteflt. — ‘ “-‘ -, —‘ -
-Much national public attention baa been
focused thIs year an the need to clean up
basardow wade sites created to th past.
Relatively (Ittle s.ttenUoo has been paid be
the fact that existing laws and regulaUom
continue to permIt as south ma €0 percent of - -
all hasardous wastes to be hradiflled st
aewered without having f at been rendered
northars.rdOUs . Onlma these dreumsun .
change, this country will be draning up corn-
taminated isndfllla and water plhe be..
perpetuity -
In tp trn1ony. In arth of this
before a subc 1Uee of the ‘U.S. Rome
Energy and Commerce Commlttce.y argued
for the adoption of a tinee.part strate to
effectively arid economically deal with the
problen of baw’doiis wad “p ,’g, _ —
coinage industry 10 lIed v.v.y to generaif- ’ .
1cm waste. Second, to encourage Industry t,.
recover and/or recycle as much waste as
possible. And third, fo r wastes that most go
Into the environment, to require suds
wastes to be bested and neutral to that
o tiarm can come to the envfronjnen t ou
dtspomL This kind ol aPmetiwouId
long way to insuring that the geesent gun--i
eratlon does not bequeath t get- -
eratlon the essne tnherttanoe ived t,mo
the former generation. .. . - , -
,.Aa a leader iii the prmaotlou of advanced
teohnologi industries. ‘M 4iu a.
iogt a1 home fur state-of-the-art waste hest- -
ment facilities to serve the special needs of
its increedneb’ -te ’ ”_ 1 ’-baaM _____
By rendering trastes nonhazazdoui. a ibm
such as Envlrite would offer industry La thr
Commonwealth an environmentally sousid
alternative to dl argsngm’ landfifl!ng .‘ S
taminated, poieiiUzllj dangerous insterts.Is,
ft Is our hope ma a co’ g” e . that these
a,—’’,.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD HOUSE .‘
-------
! ouen ber 19&Y .
• 119152 ‘‘‘I ‘CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE
ul be another opportunity to consider Mrey cyanldes (2) by reducing hexavalent lag wasten and sludgos have been Esed ‘ -:
Massachusetts In the futsire. cromaum to much’ toxIc and noluble A at haaardous wasees. ,.,, -‘ -- -:;
£tnoert ly. tve3ent chromium, and (3) by hy*aiide/ When disposed on the bad. th wale
Oeoresa JE FiL& .L ailfide precipitation of tire metal eon 1- Voflutants are quite soluble atid readily
— nsnts. We then i a vacuum filtration leach Into the environsoenL fl ’A land dis.
£rai r or Georvary Brriuom ,k.. systeni for the alkaline sludge which ytehis possi regulattoes will not be ellective to em-
pasainesir. Evvz,m . • adewatesed sludge and ctarllied wastewater. eme long-term confinement of
Mr. aiairmsn. r i , i t t dewatmed sludge to In an losohable log snd other hazszdoos weates placed to
toe my name to Geoffrey atan&’eL Jr fOT tM to th dispOSed of either to off- toad disposal lacililim, and therefore do not . -
President of P. vinte Corporauon. I appreci- site eOoiIDercIai Isfld.fiUL or f ilflul the RCRA mandate under regulate -
Ste tlus opportunity to appear before the St OW proprietary landfill. Wasiewaler ‘S i nocessarr to P’o1 heenan ireelils and
abcornm1Uce. y r P sage Is that hawd- dlschazyed to Lire sewer. We masotam eare the ewoiamen&.’ - - — , .- -
sos wastes can — must be treated flu quality control over these treatment Even EPA a o led ’thsL the 1a.fl
they are disposed of in a Isadnu es g . proceases and eontmuousll analyse the se. ugu and management praet now se.
___ mnwjp j . sy s ‘ suiting eated wastewater effluents and the qutred of land disposal facUlties under 0 -.
present EPA approach of rrs urthg nilni. dewa ered sludge before dispesel. - ‘ R Parts 264 and 285 may not. In many.
mum design and management practaiws for €ludgos (tom frvmte’u treatment d be sufficient to r
load dispomi facilities. bet not to req ’jfr listed hazardous east s P006 througt PVOL reduce the potential adverse human ‘icaftis
treatment, will not protect i health and P011. P012. P015, and K062 do not en- and enriromnesztii Imnp ” - posed b — =
and the envfromaenL ros thea bibit th’ c r isUiis of tiawdo,s Wiatee disposaL storapt, trmWieslt ci metal
• treamnmemn to orceu ry sod be eeL forth In 40 CFR Part 261. cbpart C fmalung wastes.
, - sad do not meet the criteria for baUng bee- def Icier belade -
We should not hupose en future erwrs . aidOUs WaStES Sit forth to 40 CFR 2 1.U. —Landfills and surface Impoundmento’
tions avoidable health risks and cuhtren . EPA has granted Erwtrite a listing ’ of with t i states see not required to base
mental remedial mete because EPA and the sludges produced from this treatment es Isachate colleetion . y.l iz . The
Coagrme have given to ya g azum of jesetmte gemrvsted san wry Into the eev4 ’ ’
hazardous wasim teied dwnetion to i”- ronment significant amounts of the soluble
mismanage their wages. eosstrairwd enly poeswaes (1) extremely tow cOmentTStime metals and other coeitamlnsiita typl-• .,
by st of cyanides gnd bexai alect chromium. (2) a found In metal ftwI thing wastes. Even -
night dumping ?’ Cocgrma must cxer e hash and well-buffered pH which mienn imued permits these Interim status knd-- .
respoiubtlity to protect the long-term pj.hI WStei Solubibty sad caching of entrained m is will not be teqwred to retrofit with ‘ -
interest. The laadfilllng m it toxic metal oontamuianta. sad (3)s very low liners and ‘-‘ collection’ lystesos -to” —
must be mininilsed. Affirmative water content. Which further inhibits leach- prevent or control ‘.‘4 iltrat1no .
IDes most be placed . in S of toxic metals. - o ate i an existing to-:-
Inerstora t se Envirlte produces a tietted w tewateT ef. term status facility t tort exempt endto’
i g.n dlilled. fluent that conforms with the etthitrU mu- the ‘ixistlng portion opbole will be es*
The undoserabulty of tire 1 , g pr taUon guidelines and pretreatment stead- .is isactrate collection sys-._.
tices of Ian dlspmal of hazardous , ards proposed by EPA for indunon An or tems. ‘,,,‘a ,, ‘rr z. i: :e-• ‘ j
was confirmed again only last reek by the amendments to 40 CFR P z1s 413 sad 433• , fsthltlesuill be ,
• Office of Technology Amessznent and by • -
• the National Academy of Science’s Ilatlosal EviVirite t xids that it Ii tirniogimily Ject to the now hoer mid collecti ;
Research CounciL * blearchy of and economically feasible for ill persons sYstem requirement. The — Standarde are
tIre hazardous Waste mansg who manage metal not laU .mje In setemi I l .,,w.nti1Mfl he -
must be hue rporated the elde comparable treatment results before Ui saute of potential flaws or ttsm.g In the in
stallation of liners. a tmctioziing of the,
Clerrerration and Recovery Ad (RCRA) to timate disposaL Envirite further contreude leachate collection. system . inherent prob.
enable, as the Council stated. “ rational dcci- such level and t ’ve of peetreatment h tems In the sampling and mcnitormg re-:’,
does to be made, beat risk solutima to be nOt discixtlomiafl Pretreasrneifl to ‘oecea- quirements. and the exemption of doubte
slentitmed, and better public understanding sary to protect human health and tire envi’ liners with lieu . colle 5’ syst f
of the twues.” Both reports, and 2 nvu-rt,e, ronmenr and therefore Ia mandated W ______
recommended a hierarchy that would RCRA. Aflowing land disposal of untreated I ’ .’
waste redueti Avolumr and toxicity) hazardous metal wastES Given the qizanllte of thom
S lti7lTeC ’,cIme toe igtwnt prrtiaea. .coeuformlna to current design and “ ,erte e• wastes generated and di ed at amamllv.
with treatment of the wages the second nne meat the high concentration of the toxic pollut . -
of defense, land disposal ahould be allowed human health and the envti.,.. ,,, .,t ants in these w stea, and the non .dev’sda.
for suitable wastes, Le.. residuals from s-sale r’1’ also respectfully urges that (mm . his. persistent nature of thom contezat-
treatment emliona. bested ( - trw close the loophole exempting hazard- tmflts. ft is clear that the mandate of RCRA -
mused) wastes, untrrktable wastes. Otis a sates nos being discharged into Pub- tO regulate as to protect hummi
licly .Owned Treatment Works PO ’FWa health and the cot’Imnmesir lo not
relatively low-hazard (and other and mixed with domestic The ile,ed. . -—: :. -.
ome wastes.’ __ __
sewage sludge exemption s-as based no the i .v m’S PaarULsw
them non .hazsrdous. Present law stud regu’ thuplemetutation of pretreatment standarde “ vfrfte therefore has petitioned EPA t 1
lation allow generators to avoid entirely the pursuant to the Clean Water Act Uafortti• require owners sad operators of facilities
treatment of hazardous saste. and does not ostely. these pretreatment ste ,rde see that dispose of, treat, or store certain instil
even require that landtillu ig reduce not now In place and may not be for the finishing wastes In a tandlfll or surface he’
minimum the risk to human health foreseeable future. Only industrial dis. to eQ —
environment bun untreated bazardot. charges wibi to sad I owriplorice with s w’ & - azardsus waste mid -
s astes. - - Pretreatment utandu’d dioold be ezenipt dean weatewater effluent. .
Slevirite. for the peat seven years. from RCR/ req uiremen ’- —C—
been In the business of collecting, transport- - - RCRA to sthleve the none general objective ‘-
big, and treating metal finishing wastes and Of the 28-54 millIon niefric tons of h*z. as sought by Evivinlte The treatment at
certain other wastes that Principally stdous wastes generated uaAly In this hazardous waste to convert these wastes
contaminated by inorganic constituents We country, about 40 percent are inorganic to from hazardous to aonhaxardous
ate employing gale-of-the-art trealincal satire, Meat of thom wages ate generated before land dt i We think $ sthtsScu ..
technologies sad inanagumem methode so by metal fj hjng spegaLlme wjch as ecch fequnesnwit to pretre. ! metal flnktthw::,
unvert toxic and hazardous wastes so non- i . etectroplaung. ,lecsrohespiaUng. dean- wastes to needed now to prevent tmtzeated.
hazardous wastes prior to their ultimate die- log, and heat treating. We estimate that toxic metals from entering the atvlromimcig,’
posaL ‘ ‘ about 20 peroniL of these asates, or 2.34— • We kime t toetsi f I.4 .hW wastes em -
We collect these wastes from generstore 4.32 mIllion taos of hiorganlea are disp”- .st rdouI nod mind be legulsted mi ’
and transport them In apecial ta ke to me of ofj 4 landfills, g j em weUa and RCR* arid the Clean Water Act. We bmw
of our tOur treatment plants, which a le Is- other emnineicial establishments, The toxic -that the allowable management practIce at -
in York, Pennaylvanla, Canton, Ohio .pollutm te primarily cosaist of cyanide, land dlspoiil of witreeled wastes may not
Thoenaston. Coonecucut, and Harvey. WI- chrommum, cadmium, lead, nickel, copper, be protective of k. .. ,. bosith and environ-
noes. At the 1ilstment plants the IX’iI!fl iO( d sine ounda. 5 eept for the cyanide niemfl and therefore does not meet the
wastes are thoroughly analysed, .evtrated Sompoorsta, these toxic pollutants cannot be R A mandate. We thai,. to .iif or- -
as appropriate, and stored An fiberglass destroyed y treatment. Once placed or die. oh, before Its new law, perem at the
ia prior to treatment We thee neutral- tIiai d Into the towy Wa_ge kndfUkd omd4 be veepeled, treated
be wastes UI by a idira* t to do. te nod toag at lln.loh- or oyed. We a the g nt bth
- - . . I . - —••• “ - • . ‘.. ,‘ F?
- ,,_,._.
-------
November 19&
tri favor ci land disposal a disinrentive In
“e development of new treatment technol.
ca We know from the California experl’
that the additionaJ cost of treatment
.ili have a minimal effect on Industry. We
knot that without strong government regu-
lation and effective enforcement, land dis-
posal L 5 will not be internalized and will
retain a competitive advantage over Veal-
merit. We know that sequiring poiutive. 1w-
front treatment of metal fmi .c Lrig wastes
produces a stabIlized. non.hawdous waste
for safe land dispom,l. and a clean
wsstewate? effluent that complies with the
Clean Water Act. We know that reqtif ring
treatment sill provide a more 1li ient sod
cost effective integration of RL.’RA and the
Clean Water Act, as required by Section
1006. -
Ericirite is sensitive to the concerns of
Congress about Intruding Into technical
areas within the domain of a regulatory
•agency. We think, however, that enough la
known about the environmental dangers
from the land disposal of untreated metal
finishing wastes, Since regulations consist-
ent with Envirite’s proposal are e.lrcsdy hi
effect or proposed, Congress would be well
justified in statutorily requiring that these
wast.e.s be pretreated.
‘The legislation passed by the Rouse last
year would have required EPA to develop a
list of wastes that should not be land dis-
posed Metal finishing wastes are an obvious
pnorlty candidate for regulation tinder this
provision, California now restricts land di .-
posal for liquid hazardous wastes cont t g
significant concentrations of free cyanldse.
arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury,
nickel, selenium, or thallum. Illinois has
‘tuied landiililng by 1987. and Governor
mpeon has proposed additional l isla-
i banning landiilhng of liquid hazardous
..a.stes by December 31. 1983.
I . it necessary for the nation to wait years
for EPA to require treatment of met.3,l fin-
Is lw ig wtes’ Experience hoes that EPA
has failed to meet statutory deadlines or
spend in a ttme y way to petitions, Congresa
must take the initiative and statutorily ban
untreated astes from landfills. By requLr-
trig pretreatment, Congress also releases
scarce EPA resources to concentrate on reg-
ulaLing other hazardous wastes for which-
land disposal may not be protective of
human health and envfronnienL
a.osz -rex ooexsvzc sawacs z.ooruoia
Industrial diachargers into a POTW ate
nos exempt from RCRA regulation ander
EPA’. “domestic sewage’ loophole. Section
1004(27) of ECRA specifically ,ezclu&s
from the definitlen of “solid waste” any
solid or dissolved material In domestic
sea age. EPA has interpreted ieglslativc
intent to Include within the “domestic
sea s.ge” exemption mixtures of sanitary
wastes nnd other wastes, including induxtri.
al discharges, that pass into POTW s. lilt is
not a “solid caste”, the material 1 i* e a
“hazardous waste” regulated w ECRA.
EPA justified deferring RCRA regulation by
relying on Iwo programs under the Clean
Water Ad (1) the pretjeaunent program
‘to insure that users of sewer and trealmefli’
systems do not dump wastes trite the syst
that will present envIronmental problems”,
45 Ped. Reg. 3309 (May 19, 1980), and (2)
the construction grants program to provide
financial assistance for building waste beat.
‘nt facilities.
his reliance Is , a1s1 I.aw ’d
Sc conatzurtioc grants program baa not
•,t pace with seeds, end face. an or .
In Suture alter the isorent authorexuon
,ins out. More briportant, the pretreatment
program baa yet so eel oil the ground, sea
pears after the .i- .- - eal Waler
Pollution Contrul Let, *1nen ents of 1972
was enacted. OTA e.Umates that 5 million
metric Ions of toxic wastes are being di.-
charged into POTW’s without pretreat.
merit, Many POTW’s are unable to properly
treat these wastes, The result Is that the
pollutant Is either discharged as part of the
effluent from the POTW, or transferred to
the sewage sludge .,The jewace sludge may
be a hazardous waste unoer present regula-
lions. owev ’, ft may not exhibit any of
the requisite etiazaeter,sxjcs and still may
pose a Lgmf leant threat to human health
sad the environment,
The loophole is made even more signib.
eant when a POTW can apply for en ezemp’
lion from the Clean Waer Act’s secondary
treatment requirement, under Sect ion
301(b) of that Act, it can then discharge
into the an Industrial wastes that aren’t
pretreated out, because there is no applica.
ble pretzcatment standards. Envirite or any
other treatment company can never -
pete with a free, government-granted license
to pollute. -
Let me illustrate ur concern, with this
loophole by using the metal finishing indus-
try, with which Envlrite Is most fQrniIIftl’ ,
The metal finishing Industry generates over
15.000 metrIc tonz/yw of toxic pollutants,
of whIch 11,000 are w’h rged into
POTW’s. The POTW is unable to treat
these inorganic wastes Instead, the ‘pm-
dominantly liquid process wastes sie dew..
tered, leaving the toxic metals in the result-
ing sewage sludge. The sludge is then land
dl osed or dumped hi the ocean. Unlike or-
ganic compounds, these Inorganic and heavy
metal toxic waste. do not degrade In the en
vu’onznenL They are readily leachable and
carried Into the envtronment.
A baa promulgated and proposed ci flu’
ant guidelines, new source performance
standards and categorical pretreatment
standards under the Clean Water Act which
are designed to substantially reduce the
toxic emsti 11 Lc discharged by the metal
finishing Industry into surface waters.
eIther directly through point sources or in-
directly through discharges into POTWa. If
not weakened, this will prevent the eontaml
nation of the POTW sludge with metal f in-
ishing wastes, making It far more acceptable
for land sp rPañing or ocean dumping. Unfor-
tunately, this program, partIcularly the pie-
‘treatment component, is not in place.
But the RCRA domestic sewage exesnp’
tlon assumes that, the pretreatment require-
ment La in place and Is working. It is tImer to
end the unrestricted RCRA exemption for
Industrial discharges into POTWa.
ivflhte recommends that Congress close
this loophole. Only If a categorical pretreat-
ment standard is in effect and is being Im-
plemented by the local agency under the
Clean Water Act should an industrial di . -
charge Into a POTW qualify los’ the RCRA
domestic sewage exemption,.
Wamidoss waste. 5 . iit en enormous
challenge for this country with . ect to
both human and economic health. Manag’
trig hazardous wastes (or the protection of
human and economic health requires, in our
glee,, a tbree’psrt strategy. First, to encour-
age industry to find ways to generate less
waste. Second, to encourage industry to re-
covet and/or recycle as much waste as pond’
ble. Third, for waste. thai must, go Into the
environment, to require such wastes to be
treated and neutralized so that no harm can
come to the anvirwonesil upon disposal.
Itis tbh part is c ese , virite fits loin
the
Erivblte a treatment alternative.
and we ate very good at It. We do tius do’
e the a taintie. of tedomi regulation
119153
and the institutional and economic hisses
against treatment. Em trite and other. no
gaged In hazardous waste treatment have
acted bold Il and responsibly to provide a
public service that protects human health
and the environment.
Erivirite has a commitment to the environ-
ment that we know this Committee shares,
We look to Congress to renew Its onuanit’
merit, to close the RCRA loopholes, to
asaure that hazardous wastes are property
managed and treated before being land.
filled. The Resource Conservation and Re’
covery Act requires that EPA regulate “as
necessary to protect human health and the
envlrcrimcnt” We hope Congress,. in Its
rr-authormatioii of RCRA, will adopt the
legislation ‘necessary to protect human
health and the environment,”. --
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I
would like to take a moment to discuss
come of the key elements of the provi’
sion dealing with common law, First,
Federal common law serves essentially
a gap’fillmg function. Congress cannot
reasonably be expected to anticIpate
every possible aspect of enforcement
litigation. in suing to enforce the act.
EPA, the authorized States, and cltl•
semis should be able to resort to appil’
cable common law prinmplos In argu-
ing their case.
Second, use of Federal i’n nrriflfl law
In furtherance of a Federal statutory
purpose Is common practice. There Is
no good reason to single out the haz-
ardous waste area and prohibit the oc-
casional application of rnmmon law
principles. -
I ant aware of at least 10 Supreme
Court decisions, each of which was
handed down subsequent to Erie Rail-
road against Tomkins (1938), which
have held that reliance on Federal
common law was appropriate.
Third, our provision, sectIon 11(c),
does not overturn Illinois against Mil-
waukee 11. It leaves the Supreme
Court’s decision completely un-
touched. By enacting section 11(c),
Congress would simply be taking up a
suggestion the Court made in footnote
22 of the Milwaukee II decision. The
clear Implication of that footnote Is
that If Congress wants to retain”
common law principles In Implement-
ing a statute, It tan VeTy rIght to do
50.
I would also like to point out that
Federal .iuim0vi law In RCRA is not
limited to interstate pollution, The
statute’s reach I a not limited by the
fact that a hazardous waste sit fo
contamination ls.ils to aum 8In2e
boundaries, Similarly. comnion law
principles should not be so restricted,
since the purpose of Federal common
law is to help implement the statute.
Ce gress has the undisputed authorl-
-ty under the Cornnierce clause to cor-
rect a problem that Is national hi
scope, even though the Individual cir-
cumstances which created the problem
may not involve border crossings,
Finally, ii a court determines that
use of Federal mon law furthers
the statutory purpose of RCRA. then
the court could either rely upon, or
“borrow,” Bla ze law or “ ‘ a
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
H9154
remedy based upon general
law principles. This approach is entire-
ly consistent with the Supreme
Court’s approach to these questions in
other areas. I cite, for example, Clear-
field Trust G b. v. United StaJe.s , 318.
U.S. 363 (1943) and Texftie Workers
Union V. L incoln Mills. 353. U.S. 4(8
(1957). -
It Is aim ecns stent with a recent
Federal district court decision in U.S.
V. client-Dyne (SD. Ohio. Oct. ii.
1983. In that ease Judge Rubin held
that under the Superfund legislation.
Federal common law—as opposed to
State cotnnion law—must be applied
because the improper dispmal or re-
lease of hazardous substances Is an
enormous and complex problem in.
volving uniquely Federal IntereSts.”!
would only add that although RCR.A
Is a Federal-State parmership. there is
a need to develop a ‘uniform liability
standard under RCRA end one that Is
consistent with CEHCLA.
Ymfl tAL OON O5 iA
A good example of the appropriate
application of Federal common law Is
apparent In litigation to force the
cleanup of a haeardous waste te
owned by a corporation. If the camps-
nYs assets had been systematically
drained by a corporate officer or con-
trolling shareholder, the company
might claim that It was unable to pay
for cleanup because it was broke.
Nothing In RCRA provides for 3.
ing with a situation like that—but
‘ommon law has well established,
early understood precedent, for piero-
.g the corporate veil and allowing ft
plaintiff, in this case the Government,
to go alter the assets of a company
alter they have been transferred to of-
tIcma or storkholders. This remedy
and other features of common law are
frequently relied upon in many differ-
ent situations. it would be absurd to
arbitrarily preclude the Ocvernment
from resorting to law prind-
plea where appropriate.
It should be kept in mind that mo-
tIon 7003. which authorizes lawsuits to
fec-ce eleanupa of hazardous waste
sites, Is founded on longstanding prin-
ciples of common law nuisance. The
common law Is the fnn tanientoJ
urve of I ah us and equity In Lu-
dicial system. It should not be ban-
ished from RCRA.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
question is on the amendment offered
by the gentleman from New York (Mr.
The arnesidment was agreed to. -
The Clerk will read sectsoo 1.2.
The Clerk read as inllowg -
£2 D OSJWTTV O 5 .in warn
. 13. (a) 1002(bi Is
amended by— -
(1) strIking out paragraph (5) sod ui l-
tuUrw
“CS) the placement of Inadequate wtrul5
- azardous caste management c -t V zesult
batsnzlal risks to h as . and
nvft ,
L I I I bawdm. wnde .mnagmi Is to-
er )y perlwmed .Is the L
ieeth,e . otimi Is Skdy to be
ompleL and time vomesuin
7) hod dL ,. l facilities sin act espshle
of ensuring p tu,J containment of mi-
tabi bamrdous waste, therefore, reliance em
land di oml should be ehesmased for
sod”;
(2) iedndgrmthig pars_graph (6) as
gr aph(8) and
13) rikb sat the kmIosi In rededi-
ted ngrapb ã8 and substituting a
period. ... -
(b) Oa semm —8ection 1003 Is amended
by striking out paragraph (4), substItuting
the following new paragraphs, arid redes-
ignating pare.grs_pbs (5) thiotigti (5)51 ps_ ia-
graphs (7) Urough (10):
“(4) ensur i tha bazaideus w jte wan
Sstw .m “ Ct UT conducted frL t
manner which protects human health and
the ,nvlronmmit
“(5) requtrtng L bmar us waste be
properly managed In the first Instance
thereby f ’ du 4Qg the ased
action at a luture dater
“(I) minimizing the enemtIan of hazard.
o t is waste and the land disposal of hazard-
ous waste by encouraging procea substitti-
(Ion, materials recovery, properly conducted
recycling and renss, sod Desament . -
Mr. FLORIO (during the resdingL
Mi-. Chairman, I ask onarorenus con-
sent that the section be co dered as
zead and printed in the Rsucsen. -‘‘
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Ta
there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New Jersey? ,.
There was no objection..
£ tDXniT ?fl IT RI. P 50 5 10
Mr. FLORIO. Mr. Chairman, I offer
an amendment . - -
The Clerk read as foflows ,
Amendment offered by Mr. Ftoaio: Page
41. strike out line 18 and subetituter “para-
graphs (8) through (11)”.
Page (2. lIne 1. strIke mit the ‘ “g aim-
toliam mets sod penod.
Pge42.after l&neb, lnscrV -
“(7) ndablmblng a viable peders_1-Btate
partnership to carry out the purposes of
this Act s_nd Insuring that the Adnisnistra-
(or will. In carrying out the provisions of
subtlue Cot the Act. site a high prionty to
aesuting sod cooperating aILb States In oh-
raining full authorization of State pr s10I
under subtitle “ —
Mr. FLORTO (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanim ous Con-
sent that the amendment be consid-
ered as read and printed Lu the
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is
there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New Jersey?
There a-as no objection.
(Mr. FL.ORIO asked and was given
p i J m to revise end eatend his
Mr. FLORTO. Mr. Chairman, this
• amendment Is simply intended to
convey Conm-ens clear and tinmistak.
able - ge to EPA that ft must
make much greeter efforts to sasist
States In obtaining authorization for
RCRA programs. There has been en-
tirely too much emphasis by EPA on’
procedural, even nit-picky matters.
rather than the substance of the
Stitea. ogiaL EPA stx,uld remem-
ber that Is a partnership and
that should be ouiiged to
Nouemberi 198.?
develop Innovative end mose efficient
ways of carrying out this statute.
Mr. BROYRT1.1. Mr. Chairman, a-ill
the gentleman yield?
Mr. FLOR!O. I yield to the gentle-
mart from North Carolina.
Mr. BROYHILL I thank the gentle.
man for yielding.
‘We have examined the amendment,
and we have agreed to accept the
amendment
Mr. FLORIO, I thank the geuUeman
from North Carolina,
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
guestlol? Is on the amendment offered
by the genUeman from New Jersey
(Mr.?z.oaio).
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are
there further amendments to section -
If not, the Clerk a- U I read sectIon 13.
The Clerk read as follows:
UITIJU ASP V 15T G 0 ? .rat i R I1t
. 13. (a) Sracn’lc Wssi ’es.—Seetiou
3001 Is amended by Inserting the following
new aubsections at the end thereof:
(f) Srrczn a Wasrza.—U) Not later than
two months after the date of enactment of
this subsection, the Administrator shall.,
whe re appropriate, list inider subeecLian
(b)(1). additional wastes containing chlorin-
ated dioxins or thiorlnated.dlbenzofurans.
Not lateT than ten months alter such date
of enactment, the Administrator shall.
where appropriate, list under subsection
(bXl) additional wastes containing polychlo-
rinated biphenyls. Not later than one year
.Jter the date of enactment of this subsec-
tion, the AdmIniStratOT shall, where appro
priate. list under subsection (b)(l) castes
containing remaining halogenated duoxins
and -dibenzofurans. In the case of polychlo-
rinated biphenyla, the standards pioniulgat-
ed under this Act shall be conatneot with
the standards promulgated under section
5 (e) of the Toxic Substances Control Act.
“(2) Not later than fifteen months after
the date of the enactment of this subsec-
tion. the Adrnlntstrator shall make a deter-
sslriation of c-hether or not to list under
subsection (b)C1) the following wastes:
chlorinated Ahphatics, Dioxin. Dim ijl
Bydra_nine. TDI (tolurne dilsoryaimtel, .
bamates. Bromadi. Lininon. orgaxio.bro.
mines. soltenta. refining wastes, chlorinated
smmatios . dyes sod pigments, Inorganic
chemical industry wastes, lithium battenes,
e e byprodtiCt. 5. painS production sa ,
and coal slurry pipeline effloent.,
(b) LIITnIG O THZ SAss 0? Coits n’ .
nrrs.—&ctloT’ 3001(bXl) Is amended by
adding the following at the end thereof:
-‘The Administrator shall tl3o Identify or
list those hazardous wastes which shall be
subject to the provisions of titus maisitir
solely because they contain harardoim .
gULuenZa (sueb as IdenUi ied oszdnocma.
mutagens, or letlta.aefls) at concentration
levels In eacea of letels which sdvm’a Jy
affect human health sod the miebsa-
enent.”. -
(c Dn.xsnsc l o uc, . —SectIon 1001
is amended b adding the following new
gUbsection at the end thereof:
“(g) Drz.isTn’G Pao vus.—4I) W
evaluating a petition to exclude a waste gen-
erated at a particular fatuity from listing
under this section, the Administrator shall
consider facroes (Including edditional con-
stituentst other than (hon for width
waste was listed If the Administrator has a
reasonable basis to believe Ihet o a I-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE’
-------
H 6758
ess identificatIon, or applying knoaledge of
the characteristIcS of the waste based upon
materials or processes used, or generic test-
ing for an industry ahere waste streams of
generators within the Industry have the
same or similar characteristicS:
“(iii ) labeling requirements prior to waste
shipments mai be modified so that such re-
quirements may be satisfied on the basis of
information obtained through testing. or
process identification. or applying knowl-
edge of the characteristics of the waste
based upon materials or processes used, or
generic testing for an industry where waste
streams of generators Iitlnn the industry
bate the same or sirular charaetertstlcs
“1 5) in the case of standards under sec-
Ibm 3003. pro ide that transportation re-
quirements for smaller quantities of hazard’
otis a astes may vary from those applicable
to hazardous a aste generated In excess of
one thousand kilograms during any calen-
dar month, and
“(C) in the case of standards under section
3004. provide that storage requirements
shall be modified to allow on-site waste stor-
age for up to 180 days without the require-
ment of a permit.
The variances as specified In subparagraphz
(A). (B), and (C) shall apply to alt hazardous
waste generated during any calendar month
In a quantity of less than one thousand kilo-
grams unless the Administrator demon-
strates that other standards are necessary
to protect human health and the environ-
ment. In addition the Administrator is di-
rected to examine the reqwretnent .S in
effect under section 3003 and. In coopera-
tion with the Secretary of TranspOrtatl oli.
modify regulations in effect on the date of
the enactment of this paragraph to the
extent appropriate to conform such require-
ments to the scale of the operations In-
solved The actions of the Mmmistrator
under this paragraph shall be treated as a
rmoncltscretiOflary duty for purposes of sec-
tion 7002.
“(3) The Administrator may promulgate
regulations under this subtitle ahich estab-
lished special standards for, or exempt from
regulation, hazardous wastes a hich are gen-
erated by any generator in a quantity less
than one hundred kilograms during any cal-
endar month.
(4) Nothing In this subsection shall be
construed to aflect or Impair the validity of
regulations of the Administrator promulgat-
ed prior to the date of the enactment of the
Resource ConservatiOn and Reco ery Act
Reauthorization Act of 1982 wIth respect to
hazardous waste generated by generators of
less than one thousand kilograms per
month of hazardous waste. except that after
the date eighteen monthz after such date of
enactment, such prior regulations shall not
apply to hazardous a aste generated by gen-
erators which generate more than mininsal
quantities (one hundred kilograms or less)
of ha2ardoiis waste per month.”.
HAZARDoUS WASTE M X WI ZR DOstESflC
Sec. 4. The Administrator of the Em-Iron-
mental Protection Agency shah, not, later
than one year after the date of the enact-
ment of this Act. submit a report to the
Congress concerning hazardous wastes Iden-
tified or listed under section 3001 of the
5olid Waste Disposal Act which are cx.
eluded from regulation pursuant to subtitle
C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act under
regulations exempting mixtures of domestic
sewage and other wastes that pass through
a sever system to a publIcly owned treat-
ment works for U-eaUnent. Such report shall
specify the types and quantities of such haz-
ardous wastes which are exempted pursuant
to such regulations and shall Include recom-
inendatbons respecting whether or not exist-
ing law applicable to such mixtures are site-
quate to protect human health and the en-
vironment from the hazards associated with
such wastes Not later than six months after
the date or the enactment of this section,
the Administrator shah submit to Congress
a notice setting forth the progress made on
the report required under this section.
HAZARDOUS WASTE Ir4rsCTloN LIQUIDS SW
LAriiWiU 5
Sec. 5. SectIon 3004 of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act is amended by inserting “Ca) lit
GeazaiL.—” after “3004 “ and by adding the
following at the end thereof:
“b) HAZARDoUs WASTE IitsEcTioN.—(1)
E :h-een months after the enactment of
the Resource Coriser ation and Recovery
Act Reauthorization Act of 1982. the dispos-
al of hazardous waste bY Injection through
• class IV well into an underground source
of drinking water is prohibited. Twelve
months after the date of enactment of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Reauthorization Act of 1982, disposal of
hazardous waste by Injection through a
class IV well which is above an underground
source of drinking water is prohibited with
such practices are regulated by State pro.
grams or by the Administration pursuant to
section 1422 of the Safe Drinking Water
Act. In those States that have riot undertak-
en administrative responsibility for the un-
derground injection program with regard to
Injection into an underground source of
drinking water by January 1. 1983. the Ad-
ministrator shall assume such responsibility
at that tIme. For purposes of this subsec-
tion, the terms ‘underground source of
drinking water’ and class IV veil’ shall have
the same meaning as prot ided in regulations
of the Administrator under the Sale Drink-
ing Waler Act.
“(2) Nothing in paragraph (I) shall affect
any well which injects fluids:
“(A) which are brought tO the surface in
connectijon with contentional oil or natural
gas production:
“(B) which are brought to the surface In
connection with the withdrawal of natural
gas from underground storage reservoirs;
“(Cl which are brought to the surface in
connection with the production of geopres-
aured methane;
“(D) ror enhanced recovery of oil or natu-
ralgas
“(El for storage of hydrocarbons which
are liquid or gases at standard temperature
and pressure.
“(3) Nothing In paragraph dl shall affect
any well which Injects fluids for extractiOn
of minerals or energy, including, but not
limited to:
“(A) mining of sulfur by the Prasch proc-
ess:
“(B) solution mining of minerals:
“(C) In-situ combustion of fossil fuel; arid
“ (DI recotery of geothermal energy to
produce electric power.
“Cc) Liqoios SM La ieonu.s.—Not later than
one year after the enactment of the Re-
source Conservation and Recovery Act
Reauthorization Act of 1982. the Adnitnis-
trator shall promulgate final regulations
which minimise the disposal of liquid haz-
ardous waste, and free liquids contained In
hazardous waste, in landfills Pending pen-
mulgation of such regulations, the Adminis-
trator shall maintain the current require-
ments In regulations wider this section re-
specting the disposal In landfills of liquid
hazardous waste and free liquids contained
in hazardous waste.
“(dl Lairs Diseosal. Rrs’osTs —The Athnin-
istrator shall, not later than one year after
the date of the enactment of this subsec-
tion, and after notice and opportunity lot
September 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
toxicity, mobility, perslstence. and ability of
the waste to bioaccumulate. The report
shall also identify hazardous wastes for
which there exists one or more technologi-
Callv feasible means of treatment. recovery.
or disposal (including incineration, neutral-
ization, fixation, chemical destruction, or
any other means of thermal, chemical.
physical, or biological treatment, recovery.
or disposal) other than land disposal which
will protect human health and the en iron-
ment. The report shall include an assess-
ment of the costs of such other means of
treatment. reco ery. or disposal. The report
ahall also include an assessment of other
hazardous wastes which are unsuitable for
other means of waste treatment or disposal.
The report under this subsection shall be
modified and supplemented from time to
time after Its initial publication as new in-
formation becomes available.
“(e) Resmmt’rioiis oc Lairs Dis,Os*L,—NOt
later than 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 Administrator shall promulgate
regulations respecting those hazardous
wastes for which land disposal may not be
protective of human health arid the envi.
ronment based upon the toxicity, mobility.
persistence. and ability of the waste to
bioaccumulate. Such regulations shall con-
taIn effective dates that take into account
the Administrator’s best estimate of the
amount of time necessary to Install nation-
wide sufficient capacity of alternative treat-
ment, recovery or disposal methods identi-
lied pursuant to section Cd). After any effec’
tite 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 delerrzl in-
Ing reasonable availability shall include, but
shall not be limited to. geographic proxim-
ity and the nature of particular wastes. For
purposes of such regulations, the Admtnis.
trator shall—
“(1) consider the ability of land disposal
facilities to contain hazardous wastes over
time:
“(2) consIder alternative treatment meth-
ods;
“(3) examIne the actions taken by State
governments with regard to such controls;
arid
“(4) review all halogenated organic
wastes.”.
Sgc. 8. (a) Noncs.—Cl) Section 3010 of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended by in.
sertirig the follow iimg after the first sentence
thereof: “Not later than twelve months
after the date of the enactment of this sen.
tence—
“ (I) the owner or operator of any facility
which produces a fuel (A) from any hazard-
ous waste Identified or listed under sectton
3001, (RI from such hazardous waste identi.
tied or listed under section 3001 and any
other material. (C) from used oil, or (D l
from used oil and any other material,
“(2) the owner or operator of any ladility
which burns for purposes of energy recov-
en’ any fuel produced as provided in pare.
graph (1 or any fuel which otherwise con-
tains used oU or any hazardous waste Identi-
fied or listed under section 3001; and
“(3) any person who distributes or mar-
kets any fuel which is produced as provided
in paragraph (1) or any fuel which other.
wise contains used 0 (1 or any hazardous
waste identified or listed under
f • ” o7 5çj tc
- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
fE 1c, O7 .
6
1 HAZARDOUS WASTE MIXED WITH DOMESTIC SEWAGE
2 .SEO. t The Administrator of’the Environmental Pro-
• 3 tection Agency shall, not later than two years after the date of
4 the enactment of this Act, submit a report to the Congress
5 concerizing hazardous wastes identified or listed under sec-
6 lion 3001 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act which are ex-
7 cluded from regulation pursuant to subtitle C of the Solid
8 Waste Disposal Act under regulationà exempting mixtures of
9 domestic sewage and other wastes that pass through a sewer
10 system to a publicly owned treatment works for treatment.
11 Such report shall specify the types and quantities of such
12 hazardous wastes which are exempted pursuant to such regu-
13 lations and shall include -recommendations respecting wheth-
14 er or not other provisions of law applicable to such mixtures
15 are adequate to protect human health and the environment
16 from the hazards associated with such wastes or whether reg-
17 ulation of such mixtures under subtitle C of the Solid Waste
18 Disposal Act is necessary for such purpose. Not later than
• • 19 one year after the date of the enactment of this section, the
20 Administrator shall submit to Congress a notice setting forth
21 the progress made on the report required under this section.
-------
J\jo. c i ? s7ô ( 1Ai.) I s, s. ((q 2)
Section 4. Hasardous waste mixed ii,itli. dome8tic sewage
Under current statutory definition, “any mixture of domestic sew-
age and other wastes that pass through ‘a sewer system to a publicly-
owned treatment works for treatment” is excluded from regulation
under RCRA (40 CFR 261.4). The effect of this definition is to create
an exclusion which is so broad as to be beyond accurate quantification
at the present time. Any hazardous waste generator may dispose of
virtually any waste into any sewer provided that the sewer line is
connected to a publicly-owned treatment works.
The Committee finds that this exclusion has the potential to invite
abuse for the following reasons: it is a virtually unqualified exclu-
sion; many of the nation’s sewers are combined systems that fail to
separate domestic sewage and mixtures of domestic sewage from storm ,b. r
overflows; the majority of the nation’s treatments works do not moni-
tor for toxic organics or toxic metals; pretreatment standards for toxic
organic and metal discharges are not in place and do not encompass
the full range of wastes being placed into sewers.
The Committee directs the Agency to prepare a report to the Con-
grass within one year of enactment specifying the Agency’s progress!
rn quantifying as accurately as possible the nature and scope of haz-
ardous waste disposal into domestic sewers,’ including the t ypes of
wastes and waste streams the extent to which this exclusion is justified
and should be modified or eliminated, the progress to date in con-
trolling this exclusion through pretreatment standards, and the ade-’
quacy of pretreatment as a means of dealing with this problem. A
final report on these same matters is due no later than two years after
enactment.
The Administrator may want to consider using the notification au-
thority under the Section 3010 to gather the necessary data in a timely
fashion. The Committee also urges the Administrator to complete its
assessment of approximately 12 organic waste streams that are not
currently listed or identified under Section 3001 in accordance with
the stated timetable of late 1982 (Appendix I).
-------
H 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 will 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.oRzo). -
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 dIst1ngulsZ ed gen-
tleman, my colleague, the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Fi.oaio), In
having joined his subcommittee with
our subcommittee In the two 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
many of the problems that OUT 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
grounds ater supply affecting the very
life and health and safety of the
people of our Nation.
Mr. HAMMERSCHMIDT. Mr.
Chairman. I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
(Mr. HAMMERSCKMIDT asked
and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. HAMM SCHMIDT. Mr.
Chairman, I wish to associate myself
with those remarks just mad° by our
very able ChaIrman of the Water Re-
sources Subcommittee. Mr. Ros of
New Jersey.
Mr. Chairman, there are two provi-
sions of H.R. 6307, As reported by the
Committee on Energy and Commerce,
which involve matters under the juils-
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 grounduater
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
1z &- f) , ‘. (p307
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.oazo arid Mr. Lxx i’ 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 arid 9 between the bills
reported by the two committees.
Second, the Public Works Commit-
tee received sequential referral of B.R.
6307 only for consideration of section
4 (dealing with publicly owned treat-
ment works) and sectIon 9 (dealing
with the Groundwater Commission).
In testimony received on the bill
during the Water Resources Subcom-
mittee’s hearings, concerns were raised
with respeci to other sections but the
conunittee 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
testifying, subject those who are In
full compliance with the act to addi-
tional undefined Federal liabilities and
be an Invitation to plaintiffs to reverse
legitimate administrative determina-
tions. -
Third, Mr. Chairman, the Public
Works Committee amendments to see-
tloris 4 and 9 of the bill reported by
the Energy and Commerce Committee
were designed to improve those provi-
sions 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-
propnate because much work baa al.
ready been done and data collected
concerning EPA’s pretreatment pro-
gram and because the 1-year period
will better dovetail with fut.ure con-
gressional legislative schedules. Our
amendment to section 9 expands the
scope of the Groundwater Commis-
sion’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 to subsection 9 ( 1) 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 HR. 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.
lIons 4 and 9 of HR. 6307 are Im-
proved by actions talcen 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. CLAUsEN).
(Mi-. 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 H.R. 6307’s provisions relat-
ing 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 H.R. 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 call for an ex-
amination of all types of ground water
contamination rather than just that
resulting from hazardous wastes. 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
c ’_
-------
H 6756
sonous wastes, such as cyanide, toxic
metals, PCB’s, and chlorinated sol-
vents, are produced by smaller busi-
nes .ses. In practice, this has not been a
burden for either the State or for In-
dustry. An Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) exemption can have se-
rious 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. That 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 trach 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.
NO £X MPTiOjq COR BURNING WASTES IN
BOILESS
EPA now allows generators to burn
their hazardous wastes In their own
boilers without a permit. Just because
the baste is to be burned for the laud.
able goal of energy recovery does not
mean that the hazards of such a prac-
tire 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 whether treat-
inent, incineration, recycling, or land-
filling Is planned.
This bill addresses this problem.
BAN ON THE lAND DISPOSAL OF R1GHLT TOXIC
WASTES
Despite EPA’s ban on the landfilling
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
my 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 encouj ’-
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 under anc that my colleague from
New York (Mr. LaFALcsi will offer an
amendment that will require EPA to
promulgate regulatio indentifying
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:
t’Fl-ei-n the Washington Post, Sept, 1, 1982)
CALiTOsueza Thnrrrr,s Sziucr Nxw Toxic
WASTE Rui,ss
(By Ward Sint-lafrI
The California state government yester.
day announced details of a faz ’reachlng new
program 1,0 ban the land disposal of a van.
ety of highly toxic chemical wastes identi.
tied as serious hazards to human health.
The program, which would require that
toxic wastes be treated at new handling
facthties, 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.-
gTowth 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 heighten by the Love Canal
N.Y., tragedy, Involving sickness and land
contamination, and disclosures that hun.
drcds 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 (fl-Cob), 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 En%ii-Qnment and Public Works
Committee, The House Is expected to
debate It own version of a RCRA extension.
with amendments similar to Hart’s offered
by Reps. James 3. Florlo (fl.N J.), John J.
La7alce (D-N,Y,) and Noz- P. Lent (H.
N.Y.).
Brown said yesterday that he was “fully
supportive” of the Hart proposals.
California officials estimate that their
Slew regulatio , 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 cyarudes. toxic metals,
Strong acids, PCBs. halogenated organic
compounds such as the pesticides DDT,
DBCP and Kepone, and all other wastes
Currently ClMsilied by the state as “ex-
tremely hazardous,”
The propose(J regujatIo carry a maid-
mum fine of $25,000 per day for each viola-
tion of the land-dumping ban,
Comphan and enforcement, according
to Kent Stoddard 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
31.
The facilities will be built by private en
terprise. with low’lnterest sate pollutIon.
control loans available, The Brown program
also calls for expedited state processing of
applications for construction permits,
“We have Identified the treatment and re-
cycling technologies that could be used,”
Stoddard said, “and we know there are clear
alternati es to land disposal of these wastes.
We hate worked closely with the chemical,
petroleum and electronics Industries In
laying out these treatment tunetables”
California’s plan to phase out landfills as
dumps for highly toxic wastes began last
October when Brown Issued an executive
order banning such acln’ity and increasing
state monitoring and enforcement at all
hazardous waste disposal sites.
Slate officials estimate that California,
with perhaps the nations fourth largest
volume of toxic wastes, has at least 70 major
dumping sites that need cleaning up, includ-
ing some in the state’s most populous coun-
tiesi
• Mr. HOWARD, Mr. ChaIrman, I rise
In support of HR. 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 o er 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, pass through, or
contaminate the sludge produced by
municIpal sewage treatment planta
Section 9 establishes a National
Ground Water Commission to Investi.
gate and as sess 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 Comrnis, 11 Is di-
rected to transn,.It a report along With
recommendations for appropriate leg-
islation and administrative actious to
Congress and the President no later
than October 30, 1986; 110 millIon Is
authorized to carry out the Study,
Our committee adopted amendments
to these sections, which will be ex-
- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
4 ’ L ) A S -) )
EXPOSURE INFORMATION AND HEALTH A3SESSMENT
SEC. 247. (a) Subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by adding the following new section after section 3018:
“EXPOSURE INFORMATION AND HEALTH ASSESSMEN ’I ’S
“Scc. 3019. (a) EXPosURE INFORMATION—Beginning on the date
nine months after the enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984, each appLication for a final determination
regarding a permit under section 3005(c) for a landfill or surface
impoundment shall be accompanied by information reasonably as-
certarnable by the owner or operator on the potential for the public
to be exposed to hazardous wastes or hazardous constituents
through releases related to the unit. At a minimum, such informa-
tion must address:
“ IL) reasonably foreseeable potential releases from both
normal operations and accidents at the unit, including releases
associated with transportation to or from the unit;
“(2) the potential pathways of human exposure to hazardous
wastes or constituents resulting from the releases described
under paragraph (1); and
“(3) the potential magnitude and nature of the human expo-
sure resulting from such releases.
The owner or operator of a landfill or surface impoundment for
which an application for such a final determination under section
3005(c) has been submitted prior to the date of enactment of the
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 shall submit the
information required by this subsection to the Administrator (or the
State, in the case of a State with an authonzed program) no later
than the date nine months after such date of enactment.
“(b) Hw.m ASSESSMENTS—U) The Administrator (or the State, in
the case of a State with an authorized program) shall make the
information required by subsection (a), together with other relevant
information, available to the Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry established by section 104(i) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response. Compensation and Liability Act of 1980.
“(2) Whenever in the judgment of the Administrator, or the State
(in the case of a State with an authorized program), a landfill or a
surface impoundment poses a substantial potential risk to human
health, due to the existence of releases of hazardous constituents,
the magnitude of contamination with hazardous constituents which
may be the result of a release, or the magnitude of the population
exposed to such release or contamInation, the Admii istrator or the
State (with the concurrence of the Administrator) may request the
-------
H. R. 2867—46
Administrator of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry to conduct a health assessment in connection with such
facility and take other appropriate action with respect to such risks
as authorized by section 104 (b) and (i) of the Comprehensive Envi..
ronmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980. If
funds are provided in connection with such request the Administra-
tor of such Agency shall conduct such health assessment.
“(C) MEMBERS OF THE Puauc.—Any member of the public may
submit evidence of releases of or exposure to hazardous constituents
from such a facility, or as to the risks or health effects associated
with such releases or exposure, to the Administrator of the Agency
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, the Administrator, or the
State (in the case of a State with an authorized program).
‘(d) PluoRrrY.—In determining the order in which to conduct
health assessments under this subsection, the Administrator of the
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry shall give priority
to those facilities or sites at which there is documented evidence of
release of hazardous ‘constituents, at which the potential risk to
human health appears highest. and for which in the judgment of the
Administrator of such Agency existing health assessment data is
inadequate to assess the potential risk to human health as provided
in subsection (f). -
“(e) PERIODIC Rgpowrs —The Administrator of such Agency shall
issue periodic reports which include the results of all the assess-
merits carried out under this section. Such assessments or other
activities shall be reported after appropriate peer review.
“U) DEnNrrioN.—For the purposes of this section. the term ‘health
assessments’ shall include preliminary assessments of the potential
risk to human health posed by individual sites and facilities subject
to this section, based on such factors as the nature and extent of
contamination, the existence of potential for pathways of human
exposure ‘including ground or surface water contamination, air
emissions. and food chain contamination, the size and potential
susceptibility of the community within the likely pathways of expo-
sure, the comparison of expected human exposure levels to the
short ’term and long-term health effects associated with identified
contaminants and any available recommended exposure or toier-
ance limits for such contaminants, and the comparison of existing
morbidity and mortality data on diseases that may be associated
with the observed levels of exposure. The assessment shall include
an evaluation of the risks to the potentially affected population from
all sources of such contaminants, including known point or nonpoint
sources other than the site or facility in question. A purpose of such
preliminary assessments shall be to help determine whether full-
scale health or epidemiological studies and medical evaluations of
exposed populations shall be undertaken.
“(g) Cos’r Racovx iy.—In any case in hich a health assessment
performed under this section discloses the exposure of a population
to the release of a hazardous substance, the costs of such health
assessment may be recovered as a cost of response under section 107
of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980 from persons causing or contributing to such
release of such hazardous substance or, in the case of multiple
releases contributing to such exposure, to all such release.”.
(b The table of contents for such subtitle C ii amended by
inserting the following new item after the item relating to section
• io . -‘• ... ..
-------
F+ r72.VG ,O pi 1 p 14
116
SECTION 247—EXPOSURE INFORMATION AND HEALTH ASSESSMENTS
House bill.—The House bill provides that EPA shall require all
landfills to conduct a health effects study for the surrounding com-
munity within 1 year. EPA must define the extent of the effected
community, which is to be no less than a 2.5 mile radius of the
landfill.
Senate amendment.—The Senate amendment provides that be-
ginning 9 months after enactment, all landfill and surface im-
poundment permit applications shall be accompanied by informa-
tion on the potential for the public to be exposed to hazardous con-
stituents. This information shall be transmitted to the Agency for
Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). If ATSDR, EPA
or the state judges that the facility poses a substantial potential
health risk, ATSDR shall conduct a health assessment. The public
may also submit evidence to ATSDR, to EPA, or to the State.
Conference substitute.—The Conference substitute restructures
and modifies the Senate amendment to delete specific funding from
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act of 1980, and to provide that health assessments by the
ATSDR may be requested by the Administrator of EPA, or by an
authorized State with the concurrence of EPA, in any case for
which funds are transferred to ATSDR to perform such assess-
ments.
The provision requires owners or operators of landfills and sur-
face impoundments to submit information about the potential for
the public to be exposed to hazardous wastes or constituents in con-
nection with the facility. Whenever such a facility poses a substan-
tial potential risk to human health, the Administrator or an au-
thorized State can require ATSDR to perform a health assessment
of the risks posed by such a facility.
t7
-------
p ’
1 (e) HEALTH EFFECTS STUDIES.—Section 3005 is
2 amended by adding the following new subsection after sub-
3 Section (g):
4 “(h) HEALTH EFFECTS STUDIEs.—(1) Each landfill
5 which is operating pursuant to a permit under this section (or
6 for which a permit is treated as having been issued under
7 subsection (e)) shall be required by the Administrator (or th
8 State in the case of an authorized State program under sec
9 tion 3006) to conduct a health effects study for the affected
10 community of the hazardous waste associated with such land-
11 fill (including hazardous waste transported to or released
12 from the landfill). The study shall include, for individuals re-
13 siding or working in the affected community, a statistical
14 analysis of the present and future health effects associated
15 with the landfill. Such study shall include an analysis of
16 health effects associated with all pollutant pathways throug
17 which hazardous waste may reach individuals in the affecte
18 community. Not later than one year after the date of the
19 enactment of this subsection (or after the commencement of
20 operations at the landfill, if later), the results of each such
21 study shall be made available to the public and shall be sub-
22 mitted to the Administrator and to the appropriate State au-
23 thorities for the State in which the landfill is located. Th
24 study shall be periodically updated as determined by the Ad
25 ministrator.
4t7
-------
1 “(2) For purposes of the study under this subsection, the
2 affected community shall consist of individuals residing or
3 working within such distance of the landfill as the Adminis-
4 trator determines to be appropriate based on a site specific
5 analysis, except that in all cases, the surrounding community
6 shall be treated as including at least those individuals work-
7 ing within the landfill and those residing or working within a
8 two-and-five-tenths-mile radius of the landfill. The Adminis-
9 trator shall specify the surrounding community for each land-
10 fill referred to in paragraph (1) as promptly as practicable
11 after the date of the enactment of this subsection.”.
-------
2 psI’fr
“(j) EXPOSURE INFORMATION AND HEALTH As-
SESSMENTS.—(1) Beginning on the dale nine months after
the enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments
of 1984, each completed application for a permit under sub-
section (c) for a landfill or surface impoundment shall be
accompanied by information reasonably ascertainable by the
owner or operator on the potential for the public to be ex-
posed to hazardous wastes or hazardous constituents through
releases related to the unit. At a minimum, such informa-
lion mu_st address:
“(A) reasonably foreseeable potential releases from
both normal operations and accidents at the unit, in-
417
-------
93
cluding releases associated with transportation to or
from the unit;
“(B) the potential pathways of human exposure to
hazardous wastes or constituents resulting from the re-
leases described under subparagraph (A); and
“(C) the potential magnitude and nature of the
human exposure resulting from such releases.
The owner or operator of a landfill or surface impoundment
for which a completed application for a permit under subsec-
tion (c) has been submitted prior to such date 8hall submit
the information required by this paragraph to the Adminis-
trator (or the State, in the case of a State with an author-
ized program) no later than the date nine months after such
dale of enactment.
“(2) The Administrator (or the State, in the case of a
Stale with an authorized program) shall make the inforina-
lion required by paragraph (1), together with other relevant
information, available to the Agency for Toxic Substances
and Disease Registry established by section 104(i) of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act of 1980. Whenever im. the judgment of the
Administrator of such Agency, the Administrator or the
State (in the case of a Stale with an authorized program), a
landfill or a surface impoundment poses a substantial poten-
tial risk to human health, due to the existence of releases of
HR 2867 EAS .2 II7
-------
94
hazardous constituents, the magnitude of contamination
with hazardous constituents which may be the result of a
release, or the magnitude of the population exposed to such
release or contamination, the Administrator of the Agency
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry shall conduct a
health assessment in connection with such facility in ac-
cordance with section 111(m) of the Comprehensive En vi-
ronmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of
1980 and take other appropriate action with respect to such
risks as authorized by section 104 (b) and (i) of such Act.
“(3) Any member of the public may submit evidence of
releases of or exposure to hazardous constituents from such
a facility, or as to the risks or health effects associated with
such releases or exposure, to the Administrator of the
Agency for Toxic Substances and Diseases Registry; the
• Administrator, or the State (in the case of a State with an
authorized program). “.
4L7
-------
S 13822
by EPA’s RCRA Permit Advisory
Committee and believe the wru
permit procedure outlined therein,
merits further consideration by the
Agency.
DISTINCTION rvirnj ONSITE AND OPFSIT
FACiLITIES
According to the National Survey. 84
percent of those who generate hazard-
ous astes ship their wastes offsite for
treatment, storage, or disposal. That
fact seems to support the notion that
our regulatory effort should be fo-
cused on these offsite facilities. Some
people allege that the offsite treat.
meat and dispbsal industry has, In
fact, been subject to much greater
scrutiny, regulatory control, and en-
forcenicnt than those ho generate
hazardous wastes and manage thcni
inhouse or onsite. if this is true, it is
without justification. Onsite facilities
should be regulated at least as vigor-
ously as offsite facilities.
Although offsite facilities manage a
significant amount of hazardous
wastes, they represent a small portion
of the total volume. Using EPA’s num-
bers, which are conservative, 96 per-
cent of the hazardous waste disposed
of is disposed of oiisite. 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 offsite facilities? The Issue is
not just one of fairness but it Is also
one of safety. Let’s focus on the piob.
leni. We should continLe 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 r.o reason to assume that in-
house operations are run any better
than the offsite commercial faciliUes.
\Vith history as our guide, we must
not let any facility that is managing
hazardous waste escape our regulatory
and enforcement efforts.
DIRECT ACTION IN CERcLA
I am a strong supporter of the direct
action provisions 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,
Ccnipensation and Liability Act
(CERCLAJ, It was deleted only be-
cause all CERCLA amendments to this
bvlll were deleted. A similar amend-
ment shold be added to CERCLA and
title III of the Outer Continental
Shelf Lands Act at the earliest appro-
priate time.
NEALTII ASSESSMENTS
The bill requires that owners 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 completeness or adequacy
of a part B permit application, It is an
Independent requirement of this act.
enforceable as any other violation of a
repoi ting 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 people of this Nation that
the generation, handling, storage,
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.
died with 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
good enough. We must do as much as
we can to assure the publlc that haz-
ardous wastes are being handled in a
safe manner 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 translate the promises of
1976 into action. They recognize new
areas of promise and pursue them. For
these reasons, H.R. 2867 deserves your
support and your vote ef approval.
Madam 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 with us and helped us to craft
this major environmental bill. With-
out the amistance of EPA Assistant
Administrator Lee Thomas and his
staff. Environment and Public Works
Committee counsel Steve Shimberg,
Phil Cummings. Kathy Cudllpp, Jon
Jewett, staff members Charlene Stur-
bitts, Bill Fay, Jimmie Powell, and Liz
Bai’rett-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 supportof H.R.
2867, the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984, and urge its im-
mediate adoption by the Senate. This
conference reporl 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 foi-niida-
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, 1984
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 environjnent,
The bill that we will approve today
is the first major environmental regu-
latory bill to be enacted since the Su.
perfund bill passed in 1980. It will
greatly improve the management of
our wastes. It will close dangerous
loopholes in the current program 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 arc
the limitations on land disposal, retro-
fit requirements for surface impound-
ments, regulation of small quantity
generators, and a new program for lo-
cating and monitoring underground
storage tanks, many of which are leak.
ing and threatening water supplies,
Madam President, I was honored to
serve as a conferee ott this bill. The
bill is the culmination of two sessions
of debate over needed L’nprovenients
to this program. Senate approval of S.
757, on July 26, by a unant’nous vote
of 93 to 0, is testament to the concern
of all Senators that the storage, trans-
port, and disposal of hazardous wastes
be carefully regulated.
This bill closes 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 beruzene, toluene,
and other dangerous chemicals in our
neighborho 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 dioxirs, 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, PCB’s, and other
highly toxic chemicals be allowed in
landfills. Instead, this il1 encourages
the reduction, recycling, and treat-
ment of hazardous wastes. It is my
hope that the disincentives to dispose
of waste in landfills included in H.R.
2867 will stimulate the development of
new technologies to safely treat waste.
The limitations ott 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 f 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
-------
S9181
surface lnipouridment.s in the context
of these realities.
Mr. BENTSEN. I appreciate the op.
portumty to discuss these issues with
the manager of the bill.
Mr. CHAFEE, Mr. President. that
completes It.
Mr. President. I suggest the absence
of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the
roll.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinled.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out obJection. It Is so ordered.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President. I
am pleased that the Senate is today
turning to consideration of S. 757, the
Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments
of 1983. This important piece of legis-
lation v.’lil strengthen our Nation’s
system of hazardous waste manage-
ment, thereby providing greater assur-
ance of protection of human health
and the environment. I supported this
bill in committee, and urge my col-
Icagues to support it today.
‘I his comprehensive 5-year reauthor-
I !!on of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act is based on t o essential premises
with which I believe all Americans a ill
agree: first, wherever feasible, the gen-
eration of hazardous wa Ite should be
reduced or eliminated as expect!tiously
as possible, and: second, waste that is
nevertheless generated should be
treated, stored, or disposed of so as to
minimize the present and future
threat to human health and the envi-
ronment.
Among its major sections. the bill di-
rects the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA] to promulgate regula-
tlors prohibiting land disposal of cer-
tain hazardous wastes, brings genera-
tors of small quantities of hazardous
wastes into the reporting system. es-
tablishes minimum technological re-
quirements for landfills, surface Im-
poundments and incinerators, gives
EPA full authcrity to regulate the
burning and blending of hazardous
wastcs for energy and heating pur-
poses. Improves enforcement of haz-
ardous waste provisions, increases con-
trols over hazardous waste exports.
takes a first step toward minimization
and reduction of the generation of
hazardous wastes, and requires EPA to
promulgate regulations for monitoring
and cordrol of air ernissicns from haz-
ardous waste facilities as may be nec-
essary to protect human health and
the en ironment.
This last provision Is one which I of-
fered during committee markup of the
bill. Although the bill as reported In-
cluded a 30-month deadline for pro-
mulgation of these regulations, EPA
subsequently asked that this deadline
be extended to 42 months. I am
- pleased that Senators CuAnE and
MITcHELL have agreed not to grant
this extension in Its entirety, but
rather to compromise on a 36-month
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
deadline. Promulgation of these regu-
lations Is already several years over-
due; If we are to close a significant
loophole and ensure that liquid haz-
ardous wastes are actually treated and
rendered nonhazardous rather than
merely shifted to surface impound-
ments or other forms of land disposal,
then these regulations are essential.
Accordingly. I urge EPA to move rap-
idly and diilgently to address this re-
quirement.
Mr. President, I am also delighted
that the distinguished manager of this
bill. Senator CIAIU. has agreed to
accept an amendment I authored with
Senator CzaNsToN, which will address
the many concerns raised about the
threat to public health posed by oper-
ating and abandoned hazardous waste
treatment, storage, and disposal facili-
ties. By conducting health assessments
and studies at such sites and facilities,
we will not only be able to respond to
immediate public health concerns, but
will also build a comprehensive body
of data that will help us better under-
stand the threat that exposure to haz-
ardous wastes may pose to human
health, In the long term, greater
knowledge of the human health ef-
fects of exposure to toxic substances
will Improve the prevention and con-
trol stratcgies required to protect and
Improve the health of the citizens of
this country.
Mr. President. It Is my strong hope
that we will enact tl’ s reauthorization
before the year is out. Finally. I aish
to express my sincere thanks and con-
gratulattons to Senators CHAFEE,
MITcumz.. Sr rroan. and RAr DoLrH, as
well as to the dedicated staff of the
Environment and Public Works Com-
mittee, for their hard ork arid per-
sistence in getting this bill reported
and to the Senate floor.
AM D iEi ’T i O. 3410
(Purpose: To amend the Comprehensive En-
vIro mental Response. Compensation, and
Liability Act and the Solid Waste Disposal
Act to provide ror health , .ssesslnent.s to
determine potential risks to human health
resuaing from exposure to releases of haz-
ardous substances from landfills and sur-
face impoundmti s)
Mr. HUMPHREY, Mr. President, I
send an amendment to the desk on
behalf of Senator CRaNSToN, Senator
SwroaD, Senator RAresoapil, and
myself, and ask for its immediate con-
sideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will report.
The bill clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Nes Hampshire (Mr.
HuMrnitEyl, for himself, Mr. SrApoRD. Mr.
Casrisros. and Mr. RAroOI.p$, proposes an
amendment numbered 3410.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that further
reading of the amendment be dis-
per.sed with.
‘The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection. it Is so ordered.
The amendment Is as follows:
At the end of the bill, add the (olloaing
new secttoru
July 25, 1984
55! 0 ? FtJND FOR HEALTH ASSESSMENTS. REGIS-
TRY OF IXPOSED INDIVIDUALS, AND DIAGNOS-
TIC SERVICES
Ssc. . (a) Section llHcX4) of the Corn-
prchcnsh’e Environmental Response. Corn-
pensation, and Liability Act of 1980 is
amended—
(1) by Inserting “in accordance aith sub-
section (m).” after “14)”; and
(2) by striking “epidemiologic studics” and
inserting in lieu thereof “epidemiologic and
laboratory studies and health assessment’’.
(bi Section 111 of such Act is amended by
adding at the end thereof the folio,’ing new
subsection:
“(m)(1) For fiscal year 1985. not less than
$18,000,000 shall be used for the purpose of
carrying Out activities described in subsec-
tion (c)(4). including any such aLtnities re-
lated to hazardous aasie stored. treaLed. or
disposed of at a facility ha’ing a permit
under section 3005 of the Solid Wasie Dis-
posal Act.
“(2) The activitles described in sub5eCtiOn
(e)(4 ). Including any such aclitities related
to hazardous Raste stored, treated cr dis’
pOSrd of at a facilacy hating a permit under
SectiOn 3005 of the Solid Waste D: posai
Act, shall be carried out by the Ageney for
Toxic Substances and D;sease Registry es-
tabii.he’d by section lO4ti), either d rectiy.
or throuah grr.nts to the State (or political
subdis:sions thereof In the case of Siales
(or pn iticaI subdisisions which the Admin’
Istr Lor of such Agency determines are ca-
pable of carrying out such acusities Such
actiuties s!iail include conducting health as-
sessments. ineh ’din those required under
section 300 5(j) of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act.
“(3) In determining sites at which to con-
duct health assessments under this si bsec-
tion, the AdrI.irustrat,r of the Aaenc for
Toxic Substances and Discase Registr) shah
give priority to thLse facilities or sites at
ahich there is documented evidence of re-
lease of har..rdo’ s constituents, at ahich
the potential risk to human health appears
highest, and for utiich In the udgmenc of
the Adniinistrator of such Agency e istir1g
health assessment data Is inadequate to
assess the potentia! risk to human health as
prosided in paragraph (5’.
“(4) Any SLate or poliucal subdnis,on car-
rying out an assessment shall report the re-
sults of the asse. s:nent to the Adminnstratoi
of such Agency, and shall include recom-
mendations with respect to further actol.
ties a hich need to be carried out under this
subsection or section 104. The Administra-
tor of such Agency shall include the same
recommendations in a report on the results
of any assessment carried out directly by
the Agency, and shall Issue pei’iodic reports
ahich include the results of all the a.ssess•
merits carried out under this paragraph
Such assessments or other acthtues shall be
reported after appropriate peer ret iew.
“(5) For the purp ea of this subsection
and subsection (CR4 ). the term healtni as-
sessnients’ shall include preliminary assess
merits of the potential risk to human heaith
posed by Ind siduaI sites and facilities sub-
ject to this subsection, based on such fi ctors
as the nature and extent of contamination.
the existence of potential for pattiaa ’s of
human exposure (inciud:sg ground or sur-
face aatercont’imlnation. air tmissions, and
food chain ContaminatiOni, the size and p0-
tentlal susceptibility oh the community
aithin the hll’ciy pathways of e’ ,posure. the
comparison of expected huir’a, exposure
levels to the short-tei-m anc long term
health effects associated with idirttified
contaminants and any avaiiable reconi.
mended exposure or tolerance limits for
Such contaminants, and the comparison of
L 7
-------
July 25, 1984
existing morbidity and mortality data on
diseases that may be associated with the ob-
aervc’d levels of exposure. The assessment
.-..aji ne’iide an evaluatton of the risks to
the potentially affected population from all
sources of such contaminants. Including
known point or nonpoini sources other than
the site or factlity In question, A purpose of
sLichd preliminary assessments shall be to
help deterrun, anetner full-scale health or
ep.demioIog cpJ siUdie.s and med.eal e alua-
tioas of e.posed populations shall be under.
taken.
‘(6) In any case in which a health assess.
ment performed under this subsection (in-
clt’ding one required by section 3005 (j) of
the Soiid Va .tc Disposal AcLl discloses the
exposure of a population to the release of a
hazardous stibstance, the costs of such
heath assess’nont may be reco ered as a
Cost of response under sectton 1O’ of this
Act from icr ons causing or cortribut.ng to
such release of such hazardous sub tanee or.
En the case of mLlti,le releases contributing
to such exposure, to all such releases,”.
id I Section 3005 of the Soli l Wa.te Dis-
posal Act is amended by adding the fellow.
ink, tien subsection:
“(j) Exensoag INPoRM 7I0x AND REsi.TH
AssEs 5MC -tL_(1) Bcginniyut on the date
nlr’e months after 11e enactmd;iL of the
Sohd Waste Dispnsp,l Act Amendments of
11)81. each com; .Ictcd appileakian for a
permit under subsac’tion (c rot a landfill or
‘urlac’e unpot;porneni shall be acconlisnied
b n!ormacicn re ’.onabiy aacertaiiiable by
the owi cr or operP. r on the pQtent al for
the public to be e pcsed to hazardous
nsLes or haz’ raous co’ stiLuNus through•
r. i .cs rc(atcd to the Uii ,t At a minimum,
sue info:uuttion must address-
(A) reasona .ly foreseeable potential re-
ltasei from bc,tn no:mal operations and ac-
e:denLs st the ui it. LLeluding reh.ases aa.coci-
ated a lilt Lransportntjon to or from (lie
un t
7 l ti.e pote ’ittr.l at!i’tq c of hurian e’cpo-
sure to h trsrd ss 1:i,,(es or cCflStItu.nts te-
sulLine tro i the reka:es dcsciihed under
subparpg-.ra i (A) r’id
iC th roter,ua’ mz ’gfliIud and nature
of the human exposure result.ng from such
The (‘crier or operator of a laiudfitl or qir.
fact’ impot .ndrncuit for hich a Completed
appiieat,on for a permit Undcr subscetion
(Ct ass been submitted prior to such date
shall Cub-flit the infcirmqtio required by
this Pitrs craph to the Administrator (or the
Stat,. in tJ:e ca.,e of a S’ate a.ih an author.
Ised Progra” ,) no later than the date nine
morchs after such dare of enactment
t2 The Administrator (or the State In
the case of a State aith an authorized pro-
gra..-n) shall make the information required
by p ’tragTaph iii. together auth Other rele.
sant Information. asailabue to the A -ncy
for Tc’,ic Substances and Disea ResitLry
establuehad be section io . i of tilL Comore.
he-otive Environmental Re’.ponse, C’ rnprn.
sation and l.iabilicy Act of 1980 V. Ii’ never
in the Juditmeni of th Admin:strsio of
such Agcnc . the Aamine. racor or the
State tin the case of a State auth an author-
Ized program ), a landfill or a surf, c ’e en-
poundment poses a substantial potential
runt to human heai:h, due to the
of releases of ha2a dous COfl 5i u( ’tii 5 the
magnitude of cOiu. rnination aith ha ardo, s
C(’nStituenLs huch may be the result of a
release. or the magnituje of the Population
exposed to such release or contaminatu,,n
lie Aclmin.stnjtor of the Agen for roxic
Substanc’es and Disease Registry shall con-
duct a health assessment in coniiec i auth
such facility In aocordancc with section
llL(m of the Cociprehepjive Entironruen.
tal Respôn.qe, Compensation and Liability
Act of 1980 and take other appropriate
action with respect to such risks as author-
ized by section 104(b and (I) of such Act.
‘13) Any member of the public may
submit esidence of releases of or exp ure
to hazardous constituents from such a lacili-
ty. or as to the risks or health effects ascoci.
ated %iut)i such relrases or e posuire. to the
Administrator of the Agency for Toxic Suo.
stances o d Duseascs Rc’gistry, the Adminis-
trator. or the State (in the case of a State
aith an authortsed program). ”.
Mr. HUMPHREy, Mr. President. on
behalf of myself, Senator CRAsST0N,
and Senator RAr Doaptr, I am offering
an amendment that addresses the vital
issue of the potential health effects of
operating and abandoned hazardous
waste si:es. In recent years, the possi-
bll;ty that releases of har’ardous sub-
stances Into the envircnment may
pose a direct threat to public health
has received Increasing attention and
concern, In particular, In the case of
both operating and abandoned hazard.
otis waste treatment, storage, and dis-
posal facilities, many members of the
public, as well as the scientific commu-
nity, have suegested these sites may
be hating an effect on the health of
nearby residents due to releases of
hazardous substances from the sites
into the air, land, or water arid subse-
quent human exposures,
This possibility raises two primary
needs: First, to respond to the immedI-
ate necessity of assessing the potential
effects these sites may be having on
the health of community resiJents,
and to prc ide aritisorie; for the pi’o-
tection of human health, and second,
to build a comprciicnsi e body of con-
sistcnt!y gathered and analyzed data
from a large number of sites in order
to better understand the oterall
nature arid extent of the problem and
to help deterrntne the magni:ude of
the threat these sitcs and lacilities
may pose to human health,
The amendment we are offering
today Is based on the observation that
generally the same kinds of public
health concerns are raised by current-
ly licensed and operated hazardous
waste treatment, storage, and disposal
faculties—regulated under the Re-
source Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA]. and the Solid Waste Disposal
Act—as by closed or abandoned sites—
usuit Ily regulated by the Comprehen-
sive Envii-onrnental Response, Com-
pensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLAI. or Superfund. Hence,
while our proposal is offered as an
amenduient to the Solid Waste Dispos-
al Act, it also amends both RCRA and
CERCLA,
In enacting CERCLA In 1980, Con-
gress recognized the need to address
these public health concerns, for it In-
cluded in the law two Important provi-
sions: SectIon 104(1) mandating estab-
lishment of the Agency for Toxic Sub-
stances and Disease Registry
(ATSDRJ, to which various responsi-
bilities were assigned, and; section
111(c)(4) allowIng moneys from the
hazardous substances response trust
S9185
fund to be used to fund the activities
of the ATSDR, Our amendment builds
on this existing authority by further
defining the nature of the work to be
undertaken by the ATSDR and by di-
rectIng the ATSDR to os’erace health
effects studies at RCRA as well as
CERCLA sites,
The amendretent amends section
l1l(c)(4) of CERCLA to clarify that
laboratcry—inc u ing toxicological—
studies, as well as health assessments
and epidemiologleal studies are eligible
and alloti able expenses under the haz-
ardous substances response trust fund,
The amendment provides an author.
ization for appropriatIon for fiscal
year 1985 for the ATSDR of not less
than $1S,000.000, such funds to be
taken from the hazardous substances
response trust fund. To implement its
authoritIes, the ATSDR must be pro.
t’ided ith adequate personnel, but no
fewer that 100 lull-time equivalent
employees (FTEs ]. At the current
time, ATSDR has 47 FTE’s. which Is
an inadequate let-el. It Is the intent of
this amendnaent to provide Increased
perscnnel for the ATSDR without
forcing a concomitant reduction in
F ’rE’s In other components of the Dc-
part ,n - , ,t of Health and Human Serv-
ices. Furthermore, this a ithorization
shall not preclude the ATSDR from
seeking and receiving additional funds
from the Environmental Prctection
Agency (EPA] under separate inter-
agency agreements for the unplemen-
tbnon of health studies,
The amendment grants authority to
the AT DR to enter into coeperative
agreements with States or political
subdi’. ! ions thereof for the purpose of
delegat:ng any or all of the functions
of the ATSDR under this subsection
and protiding funding for the de egat-
ed functions, which may include the
conduct of health assessments of
RCRA and CERCLA sites. This coop-
erative agreement authority is mod-
eled after similar authority provided
under section 104’d) of CERCLA.
except that it Es the amendment’s pur-
pose to allow such cooperative agree-
ments to cover any or all of, but not
necessarily limited to, the following:
Health assessments, health and epide-
miological studies, health referral sys-
tems, data collection systems, disease
registrtps, and establishment of ongo-
ing environmental health risk assess-
ment Programs_IncludIng personnel
and overhead expenses. Other activi-
ties may also be delegated through Co-
operative agreemen at the dl cretion
of the Admunistraton of the ATSDR,
The Administrator of the ATSDR Is
directed to establh ,h a priority system
for determining at which RCRA and
CERCLA sites health assessments
shall be conducted, Highest priority
shall be given to those sites at, which
all three of the following criteria
apply: First, there exists documented
etidence of release of hazardous con-
stituents Into the environment:
second, the potential risk to human
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
SU186
health as a result of the documented
risk appears highest, and third. In the
Administrators judgment, existing
he !th survey data gathered at the
g:t’en site and other aini!ar sites are
ina u uate to assess the’ poCnt al r. k
to human health posel b the site.
The existence of ft sc criteria. ho ev-
er. Is not intended to r q’ :re the
ATSZ ’ R to fIrst sur ey the rntire urn.
verse of I CRA and CLRC’LA sites in
ordi r to estabL.sh a ran ng before
choosing to conduct h ,-? th a ’ seas-
ments or othcr ctud es at i: diudual
sites.
The amcn ment makes implicit rtf-
eiencc to a standard four-s .ep ap-
proach to site-specific health studies
develop ’d by the ATSDR. As de-
scribed in :estln- ony by Dr. James 0.
Mason. Administrator, . TSDR. before
the &i ate Committee on En iron-
ment and Public Works or, May 24.
1934. the first step is to assess the po-
tential health hazard of a site on the
basis of the results of environmental
san’plmng.
These “health assessments” are de-
fined in the amendment to include a
broad overall examination of the site
or fac iity and to assess its pctent:al
risk to the health of the nearby popu.
latton. He .lth assessments should in-
clude: First, a determination of the
nature and extent of the release or
contamination—that is, what are the
hazardous constitutents and in what
amounts and concentrations have th y
been released! se’ond, information on
exirting or potenttal pathways of
human exposure to the rekase—in.
cludrng contaminated ground or sur-
face water, air emissions, and contami-
nation of the food chain: third, the
size and potential susceptibihty of the
community within the existing or po.
tential pathways of human exposure—
that is. how many people, and of what
age and fitness could possibly be af-
fected?; fourth, a comparison of ob-
served—measured—-or expected human
exposure levels at the site with known
short-term and long-term—acute and
chronic—health effects associated
with the identified contaminants and
any available recommended exposure
or tolerance limits for such contami-
nants; fifth, analysis of available exist-
ing morbidity and mortality data for
the population under study on diseas-
es that may be assoezated with the ob.
served levels of exposure, including
comparison of obser ed versus exoe’t-
ed moibidity and mortality rates
where appropriate, and sixth, an eval-
uation of the risks to the potenttally
affected population from all sources of
the contaminants. Includ.ng knov n
po’nt or nonpoint sources other than
the site or facility in Question—that is,
the assess!oents should not assume a
priori that the site or faciiity in ques-
tion is the soe source o the coimtami-
nant Included in the release, and
therefore should also consider v beth-
em’ any suspected or obser ed health
problems may be related to sources
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
other than the site or facility in Ques-
tion.
All health assessments at CERCLA
and RCRA sites sha!l include recorn-
mc’ndat!ons as to whether further ac-
t ;ttcs should be carried out ui d r
sec’:ons 1O( or 111 of CERCLA. O
the basis of a hec ,hh assessment. icc-
omeraat ons should aso be matte as
to whether any i; mediate acuons
should be taken to pro: ct hunici
health—that is, Olib adttsory infor-
mat!ori should be prc ided.
If, on the basis f a health asscss-
ment, potential fer a serious health
hazard Is deemed to exist, and if the
Administrator of the ATSDR ecricurs.
the second step would be to conduct a
pilot eptdemiolog c study—crnss sec-
ticnai or retrospective—of a group of
those people identified as hetng the
most highly exposed. If the pilo: study
appears to salldate the presence of
excess morbidity or mortality, the
third step will be to conduct a health
study. Including medtcal evaluations
where indicated, of the enttre poten-
tially affected population, The fourth
step is to establish a registry of ex-
posed individuals for extended follow-
up when scientifically justified and
feasible.
It is the Intent of the amendment to
require peer re tew of any and all stich
studies prior to their release to the
public, We recognize that tune msy
not always permit, and the Adminis-
trator of the ATSDR may not always
find it necessary or approprtate to con-
duct. peer re iews of each individual
site health assessment. Whenever con-
ducted, the peer r v ew shall be per.
formed by panels cons tiz g of no
fewer than three and no store than
seven disinterested scientific experts,
selected by the Adniirustrator of the
ATSDR on the basis of their reputa-
tion for a lack of advocacy and a lack
of Institutional ties with any person
involved In the conduct of the study
under review, The support staff for
the review panels shall come from the
ATSDR. Peer reviewers shall remain
anonymous until such time as their
findings are made known. After corn.
p!etion of the peer review process, the
ATSDR will make the significance of
the results known to the study partici-
pants. The background data, calcula-
tions, results, Interpretations and con-
clusions of any and all studies con-
ducted under this authorIty shall be
published as appropr;ate In peer re-
viewed scientific journals. In addition,
summaries will be period ea I pub-
Imahed as supplements to the Morbidi-
ty and Mortality Week!y Report.
These peer review and reporting re-
quirenwnts are necessary in ord r to
ensure that sound and valid scientific
work is performed and reported to the
public, as well as to ensure the obSec-
tivity and cred.buity of the ATSDR.
In addition, the ATSDi’ is expected to
p’iolish period:c reports of the results
of health assessments end other stud.
ies which It conducts or osersees In
order to prot mdc further information
J ily 25, 1984
on the overall extent and nalure of
the potent:ai threat to public hralth
posed by ha’.ardous waste sites.
The costs of an-i health asses mrnIs
or furthci’ hcalth st ,dies cond cL-d at
CEHCLA or RCRA sites under this au
thority may be rscevered under th’
pru i mor_c of section 107 of CCRCIJe
from the owner or op rator of tu r
site or others physically contrmbu: rr
to the relcase. If sources other than
tht RCRA or CERCLA site under
study also contributed to the release,
they would hate to bear their share of
liability.
Tl e amendment adds a new se t on
3)051J) to subtitle C. It requires that
owneis-’o ra:ors of landfills and sur-
face impoundments submit to the
Agency—or authorized Slate—art as.
sessmemit of the potential for the
puolic to be exposed to hazardous sub-
stances rcleased from these un.ts. The
assessment must address reasonably
foreseeable potential releases from
both normal operations and accIdents.
The farmer includes the steady release
of small quantities of volatile chemi-
cals into the air, and the seepage of
waste constituents through clay lln ers.
The latter results from abnormal oper-.
ating condiLions and Includes ftrcs, ex-
plosions, and major liner failures, as
well as transportation accidents.
Owners/operators are requtred to
obtain reasonably ascertainable Infor-
mation cn both types of releases the
potential pathways of human expo-
sure. the magnitude of the exposed
population, and the nature and toxici-
ty of the hazardous substances.
Owner/operators should already
have access to moot of the informatton
required under this section. Regardtng
accident data, there are many reasons
why such Information should already
have been compiled. Concern for
worker safety, avoidance of plant shut-
downs, arid a desire to keep insurance
premiums at a minimum all create an
existing incentive for owners/opera-
tom’s to identify sources of potential ac-
cidents at their facilities and to take
preventive measures to correct them.
Thus, for example, It is a common
practice for plant operators to identIfy
existing hazards with the “standard
checklist” method—see, for example,
American Ir.stitute of Chemical Erigi-
neers, Fire and Explosion Index
Hazard Classiticatlon Guide, 1930.
Where ruch assessments have been
condu tcd, all that owners/operators
need further do to comply with srction
3O0 (j) is identify the rotentlal path-
ways—for example a:r, surface water—
for hazardous substances relea. ,ed
during an accident, and the na:ure
and magnitude of the rele ’i.ce and the
potentia’J ’ exposed pot ulation.
SImilarly, ownerz/operatoi’s should
a!:raciy have access to d ta on roLt’flt,
rcleav fr3m the.r faciltties. L or cr
for in uromtc carriers to compute pie-
miumn, tsr noitsudden liab hty coti’r.
age—as required under 40 CFR part
264—they often survey their client’s
-------
July 25, 1984
facility to determine the risk of expo-
sure of third parties to anticipated re-
le:s’s. ‘Vhere Insurance carriers pro-
vide this information to their clients.
this should largely relieve owners/op.
erators of the bd;den of developing
the data required under section
3005(j).
The assessment must be submitted
to the Agency—or an authorized
State—either with the part B applica-
tion or. for facilities for which a com-
plete part B application has already
been submitted. 9 months after enact-
ment. However, submission of an ade-
quate exposure assessment is not a
condition for permIt issuance; noncom-
pliance with section 005(j) is a sepa-
rate tiolation of RCRA and should not
be viewed as a vehicle to delay the per-
mating process. Furthermore. owriers/
operators should not postpone con-
ducting the assessment In scction
3005(j) In anticipation that EPA will
subsequently promulgate regulations
interpreting the statutory require-
ment. Congress believes that exposure
assessments at facilities handling haz-
ardous substances have become fairly
routine and, therefore, the require-
ment in section 3005(J) needs no imple-
n i; g tegulation. Of course. EPA is
not precluded from publishing an in-
terpretive rule if it. chooses to do so.
The EPA shall make all Information
collected under section 3005(j) avail-
-able to the ATSDR. If, in the judg-
ment of the Administrator of the
AT3DR. the Administrator of the
EPA. or a State—In the case of a State
with an authorized program—condi-
tions exist which warrant a l’ealth as-
sessment at a partIcular landfill or sur-
face impoundment, such as ,cssment
shall be conducted by the ATSDR In
accordance with the provisions of sec-
tion 1 11(m) of CERCLA. Further ap-
propriate actions may be taken under
the authorities of section 104(b) and
(I) of CERCLA. A health assessment
at a RCRA landfill or surface im-
poundment would be appropriate if
the facility posed a substantial poten-
tial risk to human health for any one
of a variety of reasons: The existence
of actual releases of hazardous con-
stituents; the magnitude of contami-
nation with hazardous constituents
which may be the result of a release,
or the magnitude of the population
exposed to such release or contamina-
tion.
Members of the public msy submit
to the Administra tot of ATSDR. the
Administrator of EPA, or an author-
Ized State. evidence of releases of or
exposure to hazardous con titu Ls
from RCRA landfdls and surface un-
potndnients. In light of this informa-
tion. ATSDR. EPA. or the State may
enc’oe to take further actions in ac-
cord r 1 ce with section 3005(fl(2).
In summary, Mr. President, the
arnei draent Senator CR NsToN and I
arc offering today deals comprehen-
sively, fairly and responsibly with the
difficult issue of health concerns
raised by past, present arid future stor-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
age, treatment, and disposal of hazard-
otis wastes. We believe it Is crucial for
Congress to take steps to build our
knowledge of the effects of exposures
to hazardous materials. so that we
may better respond to public health
conccrns raised by people living near
sites where hazardous wastes have
been disposed as well as to concerns
raised by the general public. As struc-
tured. the amendment makes clear
that such advances will best be made
on the basis of a Federal/State part-
nership, and will be greatly enhanced
by the provision of adequate personnel
and resources for the lead Federal
agency, the Agency for Toxic Sub-
stances and Disease Registry.
Mr. President, I urge support for,
and adoption of, our amendment.
Mr. President, this amendment has
been carefully worked out and agreed
to by both sides. It does not need very
extensive discussion. There is unani-
mous agreement with the amendment.
Mi-. President. I yield to the Senator
from California (Mr. CR sTo il.
Mr. CRANSTON. Mr. President, I
am pleased to join my colleague, Mr.
Huspuw ’, in offering this amend-
ment which will begin to resoh-e the
serious problem of potential health ef-
fects posed by hazardous waste sites
around the country.
- As I have traveled around California
and the rest of the country over the
past 2 years, I have personally heard
from large numbers of people who are
increasingly concerned about the risks
posed by hazardous waste facilities in
their communities. I am convinced the
level of concern is just as great in
States as far a ay as Massachusetts as
it Is in California, The public ants to
know—and I believe deserves to
knew—what are the effect.s on the
health of residents near operating and
abandoned hazardous v.aste treat-
ment. storage, and disposal facilities
due to the release of hazardous sub-
stances from the sites Into the air,
land, or water.
During House consideration of HR.
2867. the Hazardous Waste Control
and Disposal Act of 1933, Congress-
man Esi’zwi ToaJiEs of California,
whose dIstrict includes the BK}C land-
fill, raised this vital issue and offered
an amendment requiring that health
effects studies be conducted for all op-
erating landfills. The amendment was
adopted.
The amendment Senator HUMPHREY
and I are offering today addresses the
same concerns raised by Congressman
Toaars—but Is broaa r in scope It is
not lim:tcd to landf 1 iis The amend-
ment recognizes that the same kinds
of public health concerns a e r ised by
currently operating sur1a . e impoufld-
ments as well as by landii is rcguioted
under the Resource Con.ser ation and
Recovery Act (RCRAJ and the Solid
Waste Disposal Act and abandjned
hazardous waste sites genc!afly r •gu-
lated by the Comprehensive Environ-
mental Response. Compensation and
Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund).
S9187
Thus. our amendment to S. 757
amends both RCRA and Superfurid.
With the enactment of Superfund in
198(i. Congress established the Agency
for Toxic Substances and Disease Reg-
istry (ATSDR) to deal with health
concerns. Our amendment expands ex-
isting authority by giving ATSDR the
responsibility to oversee health effects
studies at both RCRA and Superfund
sites. The ainendrncnt clarifies that
laboratory studies as ssell as health as-
sessments and epidemiological studies
are eligible expenses under the Haz-
aidous Substances Response Trust
Fund. The amendment authorizes 518
million for fiscal year 1955 to cc nduct
such studies with the moneys coming
from the Hazardous Substances Re-
sponse Trust Fund,
Under the amendment, the AdminIs-
trator of ATSDR is directed to estab-
lish prionties for determining at
which RCRA and Superfund sites
health assessments shall be conducted.
Highest priority Is to be given to those
fac Iities or sites at which there is doc-
umented evidence of the release qj
hazardous chemicals, at which the po-
tential risk to human health appears
highest, and for which, in the judg-
ment of the Aclmimstrator of ATSDR,
existing health assessment data gath-
ered at the site Is Inadequate to assess
the potential threat to human health
posed by the site.
The preliminary assessments of the
potential risk posed are to cover the
nature and extent of contamination.
the existence of potential pathways
for human exposure—including
ground or surface water contamina-
tion, air emissions, and food chain con-
tamination—the size and potential sus-
ceptib:l;ty of the populatIon likely to
be exposed, the comparison of expect-
ed human exposure levels to the short
term and long tei-m health effects as-
sociated v.-ith the contaminants re-
leased. and the comparison of existing
morbidity and mortality data on dis-
eases associated with levels of expo-
sure.
All health assessments at RCRA and
Superfund sites are to include recom-
mendations as to whether further ac-
tivIties should be carried out—such as
health athisuries and full.scale health
or eptdcrniological studies and meo ica l
evaluations.
With respect to currently operating
landfills and surface impoundments,
the amendment requires that begin-
ning 9 months from the date of enact-
mean, operators or owners of such fa-
cilities who submit applications to
EPA for operating permits must pro-
s’icI Informaticn regardii.g the poten-
tizl for public exposure to hazardous
substances from releares from these
facilitlrs or sites. For thcsc op .rating
landfills and surface Impoundments
for which a completed permit apçlica-
tion has already been submitted, the
owner or operator will hive 9 months
to provide such information The re-
quirement for health risk information
-------
S9188
to acc.mpany permit applications Is
not Intended to delay—and should not
delav riie permitting process. But It
will provide EPA and ATSDR with
more complete information on health
effects posed by landfills and stirface
Impoundments,
The amendment provides that when-
ever, in the judgment of the Adminis-
trator of EPA, the Administrator of
ATSDR, or the State in the co.se of a
State with an authorized program, a
landfill or surfa impoundment poses
a substantial potential risk to human
health due to releases of hazardous
substances, the magmtude of contarnj-
nation ith hazardous substances
which may be from a release, or the
magnitude of the population expo ed,
the Adminigr to of ATSDR shall
conduct a hcalth 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 ith
the release or exposure.
It is my expectation that with pas-
sage of this amendment residents of
West Covica, CA. will seek a health as-
sessment of the potential risk to
human health posed by the lar.dfill
operating In their cominumty, Recent
releases of methane gas and vinyl clor-
Ide from the site itself, ground water
contamination at a monitoring well
Outside the landfill and transportatjo
spills strongly suggest that a health
assessment is warrant .
Mr. President, our amendment re-
sponds to two sery 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 romp le a
(‘Omprehensis’e body of con ustently
gathered Information from a large
number of sites to understand bett, i-
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 PRESIDfl Q OFFICER, Is
there further debate on the amend.
inent? If not, the question Is on agree.
lug to the amendment of the Serator
from New Hampshire.
The amendment (No. 3410) was
agreed to.
Mr. CRANSTON. Mr. Presij&ct. I
move to reconsider the sole b:: wh h
the amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HUMPHREY, I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to hy o.i the table s
agreed to.
AMEND%IEWT 1 J 3411
Mr. CRANSTON, Mr. President, I
send an amendment to the desk and
ask for its immeciate consim erac ion.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendment will be stated.
The legislative clerk read a.i follows:
The Senator from CalIforn a lMr. Cain.
SToil] proposes an amendment numbered
3411.
Mr. CRANSTON, Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that further
reading of the amendment be dis-
penscd with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With.
out object ion. It Is so ordered.
The amendment Is as follows:
On page 40, line 3, strike the aord “dis-
solved”.
Mr. CRANSTON. Mr. President, S.
757 as reported by the Senate En iron-
ment and Public WorLs Comm!ttee
contemplates that certain hazardous
wastes would hencefortl b prohih ted
from land disposal. The bill further
contains a llst of hazardous w2ct s 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 restr ct ions on
these hazardous wastes at fte speci-
fied concentration levels. One of the
prohibitions involses liquid hazardous
wastes continuing certain “dissoh’ed’
metals. But by specifying “dIssolved”
metals, California has unintentionally
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 “dissoz ed’ metals on the
theory that suspended metals would
not migrate as quickl3 as “dissolved”
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. Tins is accomplished 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
specific liquid going Into an impound-
ment consists of “dIssolved” metals or
metals In 5Izspen ,jon Second, there is
no ban on codisposing suspended
metals with astes that have a p1-I of
2.1 or more. This disposal of such an
i ,idic waste with susuerided metals
mll rcdissolse the metals a: d allow
them to migrate e ily, especially at
the very hIgh concentrations specified
in the bill. Third, complete precipita-
tion is sery mf:!cult to achieve outsidt-
a sc!entific laboratory setting. Dis.
soi ed metals likely will be the liqu:d
residue. Thus, some of these meta!s
may stIll find their way to ground
Water.
The solution to the problem Is
straightforw ard and siinple—di-lete
the word “d:ssolv d” from the bIll.
July 25, 1.98
This will permit a ban on landfill dis-
posal of iq iid wastes contain rg cer-
tnin highly toxic m tals in s e’itj”d
contdntrat ions whether in dIs.s Ivecf er
suspecded torn,. I urge my coIn igjr
In joining me in cerrectjn this dc fi.
emenc) in the b& l. I ask for adoption of
my arnen ment.
Mr. CH FEE. Mr. Pi-esldcct, ihi
amenom nt is acceptable to this
It i f ne one. I commend the Sena
tor for it.
Mr. MITCHELL, Mr. President. the
2mendment is acceptable.
The PRESIDING OFFICER The
question is on agreeing to the arnena.
mect of the Senator from California.
The an endinent (No. 3411) ‘as
agreed to,
Mr. MITCHELL Mr. President, I
mote 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 as
agreed to.
Mr. CR. NSTON, Mr. Presid.mt, I
thank the distfngui’ hed handlers of
the bill s’.’ry much for their coopers-
tion on both amendments.
AMi (DME c’ NO. 3413
IPurpose. To e td a provision regardi , z thi-
USF (if tk C) cied materisis b Federal ap ’fl’
cleat
Mr. C}IAFEE, Mr. President, I have
a serIes of amendment submitted by
Senators, The first Is an amendment
on b’hai( of Senator K s- ;. I send it
to the d ’sk and ask for its immediate
consideration,
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendment will be stated.
The legislative clerk real as follov.s:
The S.nalrir from Phv)de 1 la, d r?, r,
Cn fEr). for Mr. K srsw, propo,.ss an
ai.’endnient nuinSered 34t2.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I ask
unaniinotis consent that further read-
irmg of the amendment be dispensed
with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it Is so ordered,
The amendment Is as follows:
R”designet— seuions 22 through 29 as s’e.
(ions 23 through 30. and insert after secuun
21 the fol!e in rww Section:
USF OF FSCOVERSD M5 ’E!laLS 8Y rEDEasi,
MF. ClEs
Sec. 22. (a) S ctlon 6002 of the b.).Ld
Wa,ste Di poqal Aer is amer.ded by adding at
tile er d Lhe :eof the following flea
(Ions.
iii ) Dermn:rion.—M used in thu s’:et. i
In tue ea,e of paper prod jets, the tc ni r,’.
CO creJ matcr:aL, mnc lud’:s—
Ii) pu l eonsumcrmat r als such i,_
“(A, paper. papeiboard, and
v.astes from retail stores. offic buiij. ‘
h ’y’ s. and smn’:!ar estaol,thi eits a: r
the) taste passe’t through their end
a Ccn.umer Itrm. mncludi. g (bi:t r, . I”
Cd to) used corrui,a(ed b es. nt” ,’ ,
nmc’ zn(’s, ma pd w .stepr;er. Ca ”
cards and used coi’da e. and
“(B’ 3 . paper. gwerhcard, and tiui ,,,.
wastr wl’ith en!er and are collecti d ir.
flhlirit wal sold wasie, a..J
“(2) mauufactuiIn waites. fori’ ,
and ocwr aas’ s such as—
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
/
-------
October 6’, 1988
and effect for more than ten years after the
date on which the permit La Issued unless
the permit Is renewed for addlUanal pertoda
of not to exceed ten years each, Any such
renewal shall be subject to the same ie-
quirements as are applicable to the Issuance
of a new permit.”
Cc) TUSZTAZZ2 tea Rzvztw 0 , Z A Pussrr
An’ucartoas.—Sectlon 3005 (c) of such Act
Is amended by Inserting cir after “Psaaerr
Iasus.i cs.—”and by adding the following
new paragraph at the end thereof:
“(2XAfl (I) Not later than the date four
years after the enactment of the Hazardous
Waste Control and Enforcement Act of
1983. In the case .f each application for a
permit for a land disposal facility under this
section whIch was submitted before such
date, the Administrator shall Issue a final
permit pursuant such application or issue a
final denial of such applicalton. In consider-
ing permit applications for existing land dia-
pocal facilities, the MmInI trathr shall give
highest priority to permits for facilities that
ire cwTentZy ground water.
“UI) Not later than the date fIve years
after the enactment of the Hazardous
Waste Control and Enforeement Act of
2983. In the ease of each aplleatlon for a
permit for an IncInerator racility under this
section which was submitted before such
date, the A intqrator shall Issue a final
permit pursuant to such application or Issue
a final denial of such application.
“(8) Not later than the date eIght years
after the enactment of the Hazardous
Waste Control and Enforcement Act of
1983. In the case of each application for a
permit for any facility under this section
(other than a facility referred to In subpara-
graph (A)) which was submitted before such
date, the Mrn1i trstor shall Issue a final
permit pursuant to such application or Issue
a final denial of such application.
“(C) The time periods specified In this
aragraph shall also apply In the ease of
y State which Is administering an author.
ed hazardous waste program under section
J0O6. Interim status under subsection In)
shall terminate for each facility referred to
In subparagraph (A) or (B) on the expira-
tion of the four . five-, or eight-year period
referred to In subparagraph (A) or (8),
whichever is appilcable. unless an applica-
tion Is filed for a permit under other provi-
sions of this subsection within—
“(5) tune months after the date of the en-
actment of the Hazardous Waste Control
and Enforcement Act of 1983 Un the case of
a facility referred tO in subparagraph (A)
which Is a landfill faeWty.
“(Ill two years after the date of the enact.
utent of the Hazardous Waste Control and
Enforcement Act 0L1B83 (In the ease of a
facility referred to in subparagraph (A)
other than a landfill facility), or
“CIII) four years’ alter such date of enact-
ment (In the case of a facwty referred to In
subparagraph (B)).”.
Cd) CLass Frain’rs.—Sectlon 3005 of such
Act Is amended by addins the following new
subsection at the end thereof:
“(g) ClAss Pcesurs.—(l) After notice and
opportunity for hearing, the Administrator
may promulgate permit application require-
menta and permit conditions applicable to
owners and operators of a class of facilitIes
It he determines that the facilities In the
class should be subject to similar design, op-
erating, and management requirements.
Such classes shall be limited tO facilities
which treat or store hazardous waste In con-
tainers. tanks, or enclosed Dues and mobile
treatment units designed to treat specified
types of hazardous waste.
- “s) It, after notice and opportunity for an
aal hearing under section ‘ 004(bX3).
Iminietrator determines that a facility
In any class dailgnated under paragraph (1)
meets the requirements and conditions pro-
mulgated under that paragraph, he may
Issue a class permit for such faclUty contain-
lug such permit conditions,
“(3) Notwithstanding the foregoing, the
Administrator may, in establishing require-
ments and conditions under paragraph (1).
provide that certain permit conditions shall
be established tot- each facility on a site-ape’
el lis basis, Additional permit conditions
shall be promulgated to take Into account
site-specific factors In the case of mobile
treatment units.”.
Mr. TORRES (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I ask nnanfm con-
sent that section 7 be considered as
read and printed In the Racoiw.
The CHAIRMAN, Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
California?
There was no objection.
The CHAiRMAN. Are there amend-
ments to sectIon 77
as aaonrr orrmm aw ica. sosaza
Mr. TORRES. Mr. chairman, I offer
an amendment..
The Clerk read as foUowtu
Amendment offered by Mr. Toazza Page
38, ,.fter line 22, Inseit
Ce) Hzszru ! 75 .-,i . Sroaxza.—Section 3005
Is amended by adding the following new
subsection alter subsection (g)
‘th) Hmi-u Eri’ Srutrzs.—(l) Each
landfill which Is operating pursuant to a
permit under this section (or for which a
permit is treated as having been issued
under subsection Ce)) shall be required by
the Administrator (or the State In the case
of an authorized State program under sec-
tIon 3006) to conduct a health effects study
for the affected community of the hazard-
ous waste associated with such lazud.fill (In-
lud1ng hazardous waste transported to or
released from the landfill). The study shall
Include, far individuals residing or working
In the affected community, a statistical
analysis of the present and future health ef-
fects associated with the landfill. Such
study shall include an analysis of health ef-
fects associated with all pollutant pathways
through which hazardous waste may reach
individuals In the affected community. Not
later than one year after the date of the en-
actment of this subsection (or after the
commencement of operations at the landfill,
If later), the results of each such study shall
be made available to the public and shall be
submitted to the Administrator and to the
appropriate State authoritIes for the State
In which the landlifi Is located. The study
shall be periodically updated as determined
by the Administrator.
“(2) ‘or purposes of the study under this
subsection, the affected community shall
consist of IndIviduals residing or working
within such distance of the landfill $ 5 the
Administrator determines to be appropriate
based on a site specific analysis. except that
in all cases, the surrounding community
shall be treated as Including at least those
Individuals working within the Landfill and
those residing or working within a 2.5 mile
radius of the landfill. The Administrator
shall specify the surrounding community
for each landfill referred to In paragraph (1)
as promptly is practIcable alter the date of
the enactment of this subsection.”.
Mr. TOREES (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the amendment be consid-
ered as read and printed In the
Rzconn.
118155
The CHAIRMAN, Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
California?
There was no objection.
Mr. TORRES. Mr. Chairman, there
are approximately 450 hazardous
wa.ste landfills In this country. These
are class 1 hazardous waste dumps. My
amendment would make it possible to
find out exactly how the health of our
constituents Is affected by these 450
landfills. Right now there Is no way of
knowing with any certainty whether a
person’s health Is In danger if he or
she is living next to a hazardous waste
landfill.
People living next to landfills need
to know if the operations of the land-
fill within their community have any
effect on their health. They need to
know the facts. Landfill operators
should not be afraid to disclose the
facts, If they are operating a safe land-
fill the facts just might show that
nearby residents have nothing to fear.
But without the facts, our constitu-
ents have only to fear the worst, and
contrary to belief my amendment Is
not Intended to close down any partic-
ular landfill but rather to disclose
Jacts In order to minimize constituent
fears—! know about constituent fears
firsthand because a hazardous waste
landfill Is located In my district. La-st
June 3. the Small Business Subcom-
mittee on Energy. Environment and
Safety. Chaired by the distinguished
gentleman from Missouri. Mr. SicEL-
von, held a lactflndlng hearing about
a hazardous waste landfill In West
Coviria, Calif.
This particular landfill, Is surround-
ed by homes and businesses. The testI-
mony we receIved from State agencies.
local enforcement officials, the landfall
operators, and residents of the area
clearly indicated that no one knows if
the landfill In West Covina adversely
affects the health of the nearby 50000
residents, and people that work In the
area.
My amendment will require every
hazardous waste landfill operator to
conduct an Independent health effects
study. I would anticipate that a land-
fill operator will hire an Independent
consultant to conduct the health
study. The study will Include a site
specific examination of the landflU
and the surrounding area within at
least a 2.5-mile radius. The site specific
examination will consider the unique
hydrological and geological character-
istics of each site. For example: The
study should Investigate the presence
of ground water or earthquake faults
underneath or adjacent to the landfall.
Following a determination of the
unique characteristics of each site, the
eonsultant will then make a decision
about the field monitoring procedures
to be used.
These procedures may include
taking soil samples by coring the land.
fill at predetermined locations, sam-
pling the ambient air at the landfill
and the surrounding area and collect-
. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
H 8156
Ing ground wer specimens. These
monitoring procedures will provide In-
formation abput the types, locations,
and concentrations of the chemical
hazards which may affect the lives of
the peop who live or work close to
the landfill.
The health study will also Include
Information about the health charac-
teristics of the nearby residents and
workers. Demography, transience, and
general health status are among the
Items usually Included In health ef-
Lecta studies. The comultant will salle-
ft from the people living and working
near the landfill their health history.
The consultant could have the resi-
dents con lete a questlonnawe sLmilar
to the one filled out when first visiting
a doctor’s office.
Once the site specifle Information Ii
obtained. It will be aplied to an ana-
lytical system. The system will show
the degree of danger the landfill
poses—if any—ta the health p1 the
persons residing or working In the sur-
rounding comniunIty The U.S. Army
uses an analytical system called the
Preliminnry Pollutant Limit Wlue
Method. It uses site specific Informa-
tion. considers both single and multi.,,
pie pathways of exposure, utilises the
new laboratory data recorded from the
soil, air and water, and incorporates
previous site studies. The analytical
system used by the Army h capable of
using all this tnform ion and trans-
lating It Into a health effect assess-
ment which nonscientisti can under-
stand.
For example, the study will show
bow clean a site Is or how clean a site
can become. The study will also offer a.
number of procedures the landfill op-
erators might consider if the landfill
needs to be cleaned up or If changes
need to be made In the landfill’s oper-
ating procedures,
Following the completion of the
study by the independent consultant.
my amendment provides that It shall
be made available to the Mministra-
tar of the Environmental Protection
Agency, the appropriate State agen-
des and to the general pubile.
Mr. Chairman, the technology for
such studies Is available. The people of
this country deserve to know If their
lives are in danger because hazardous
waste Is being dumped improperly
near theli homes and businesses.
We owe the people of this Nation a
safe environment within which to
reále and work.
I urge my colleagues to vote ior this
amendment Thank you.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, will
the gtsitleman yield?
Mr. TORRES. I yield to the gentle-
man.
Mr. SKELTON. I thank the gentle.-
man for yielding.
The gentleman will recall that he
and I conducted a Small Business Sub-
committee bearing In his district t o
West Covina, Calli, and the very
thing to which he speaks right nOW,
constituent fears, was a very real
thing.
I am not sure that there Is any way
that we can describe it to our col-
leagues today, but what the gentleman
does, I think, Is a step In the right d i-
rection. He Is to be commended for It.
I certainly support his, amendment.
The members of the small business
eommunlty, up and down Asriza
Avenue, if he will recall, those who
testified really had a message for us.
Today the gentleman not only Is lis-
tening to his constituents but he Is
teking action.
I wish him well and thank him.
Mr TORRES. I thank the gentle-
man from Missouri who did accompa-
fly me and did preside over those hear-
togs.
The testimony that we received at
those hearings from. local and State
agencies, local officials, landfill opera-
tors, residents of the area clearly indi-
cated no one knows if the landfill In
West Covina adversely affects resi-
dents In the area.
Mr. LENT. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. TORRES. I yield to the gentle-
man from New York.
Mr. LENT. I thank the gentleman
for yielding.
Plrst of all, Mr. Chairman, I want to
commend the gentleman (Mr. ToanEs)
r his participation. And I certmnly
lympathise with an appreciate the
problems that he has in his distnct.
I think we all can say that we have
one sort or another of districts where
we have something havuig to do with
water conth-rnlnation, hazardous landS
tills, and so forth.
But I did want to ask the gentleman
a couple of questions on his amend-
macn t
Fimt of all, has he done any assess-
masfl of the tionwxie availability of
contractors to perform the required
health stu es on these 450-odd baa-
ardous wa.ste landfills?
Mr. TORRES. I would like to re-
spond to the gentleman from New
York by saying that I was concerned
with this question when I I irat began
to consider this amendment. H e,er,
I have talked to scientists who have
conducted health effects studies and
they assure me there are ample Indi-
viduals in the Nation, across the coun-
try, who could conduct these studies.
Moreover, It Is not a very complicat-
ed process because there Is availability
of expertise In this area.
There are feelings that there are
ample amounts of people of could con-
duct studies In the period of 1 year for
the kinds of sites that I have Just indi-
cated.
Mr. LENT. The gentleman’s amend-
ment requires that all of these studies
be consummated withIn a period of 1
year. Is that true’
Mr. TORRES. Yes, It Is.
Mr. LENT. I am concerned that this
tlmeframe may be too short.
October 6, 1983
Is the gentleman aware of any
health studies whIch have been per-
formed within a 1-year period?
Mr. TORRES. Well, there are a
number of studies that have taken
place. For example, I might cite the
U.S. Army has a very effective pro-
grain, they conduct health studies and
have been doing it In the past 2 years.
So there is ample evidence for the
record that these have taken place.
Mr LENT. As I understand the gen-
Ueman’s amendment, It pertains to
kndiills only and net to surface im-
poundments. Is that correct?
01550
Mr. TORRES. That Is correct.
Mr. LENT. Assume that there Is a
lined landfill that exists on one side of
the street and an unlined surface Im-
poundment on the other side. I would
like to ask the gentleman, under the
gentleman’s amendment, which I acill.
t)r would have to pay for the health
effect study?
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from California (Mr.
ToRnes) has expired.
(At the request of Mr. Lxrir and by
-unanlmous consent. Mr. Toanzs was
allowed to proceed for 2 additional
minutes.)
Mr. TORRES. The gentleman from
New York has asked a hypothetical
question obviously and I think that It
Is highly unlikely that there would be
a landfill and a surface Impoundment
located next to each other.
Mr. LENT. Well, maybe they are a
quarter of a mile apart, or a half a
mile apart. But which of the two facil-
ities would have to pay for the health
effect study?
Mr. TORBES. Well, we would obvI-
ously like to see that aspect of the
study take place perhaps the language
to be included, but let me say this,
that I think If you have such a case, in
terms of the gentleman’s question,
that the passage of this bill, as amend-
ed, It requires surface Impoundments
be double lined and that the quality of
the operations be upgraded.
So we would really be taking care of
that problem by approving this bill.
Mr. LENT. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. MOLINARI. Mr. Chiuirman, I
move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr Chairman, I rise In support of
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from CalifornIa. Too often
American citizens suffer illness and
personal injury due to nearby land-
fills. And by the time a threat is dis-
covered a significant portion of the
Population suni-ounding a disposal site
become seriously Ill. An early invest-
ment to detect potential health effects
and geological defects around the
landfill will save us massive expendi-
tures later In dR.mnge suits and clean-
up costs.
A population health-survey does not
present an anerous task. And I speak
from personal experience because we
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
-------
October 6’, 1983.
bad one in my congressional dItrIct.
In fact.- them were boo done. One by
the city of New York and one by my
own office. Ybhmteers vIsited 254
households competing questionnaires
and it took 11¼ weeks. We are
about a year In the gent 1 m an’s
amendment, which allows more than
sufficient time. I can tell the gentle-
man that we had a very extensive
survey done both by the New York
City Health Department and by my
own office In 11¼ weeks. It was not a
considerable expenditure. Ours cost
about $1,600. And when we consider
the savings that would result from
this preventative measure, such mini.
ma! costs are worth it.
I think it is a good amendment and I
would urge my colleagues to support
the gentleman from California.
Ms. MIKULSKL Mr. Chairman. I
move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman. I rise In support of
the amendment because like the spon-
sor of the amendment I beileve that
citizens have a right to know what is
occurring In their own community.
Each one of us does have horror sto-
ries where the horror was not. so much
the landfill, but the absence of knowl-
edge and treating the community with
seriousness.
Too often I have seen in my own ex-
perience and even In oversight hear-
ings that I have conducted that ctti.
sens are treated as If they were the
problem rather than the landfill. And,
as a result. often their questions are
‘noted, causing both anxiety and
ien usually community protest.
I think the gentleman’s amendment
.s an excellent one and I am happy to
support It.
However. I do have a question for
the gentleman from California.
Does the gentlemen’s study or the
gentleman’s re u1rement mandate
that landfills operaved by govei ent.
be tlw municipal er 8tate, also can-
duct s ‘. ‘s Lca?
Mr. T . Mr. Chairman, will
the gende oman- yIel
Ms. MIXtILSKL I yield to the gen-
tleman om CaBlbrnf a
Mr. TORRL . I thank the gentle-
woman for yielding.
Yes. Let me answer the gentlewom-
an from Maryland In the affirmative
saying that If they have a permit
under section 3005 of this bill they
would come under that regulation.
Ms. MIKtJLSKI. I am delighted to
hear that. Too often government Is
exempted from the requirements we
place an the private sector and govern-
ment often does not always wear a
white hat in these situations.
I compliment the gentleman from
California on his amendment.
Mr. TORRES. I thank the gentle-
woman from Maryland.
Mr. RI t Mr. Chairman. I move
‘rlke the requisite number of
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — BOUSE
(Mr. ‘-s-a t asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.) ____
Mr. Rirreiss. Mr. Chairman, I do
not think there is anyone In this
House that has paid more attention to.
the subject of assessing risks and kes-
as’da In trying to gain some perspectiva
on what is dangerous and what Is not
than the gentleman mom Pcensyfca-
niL
But 1 must say that what this.
amendment does Is attempt a blanket
risk assessment study of every single
landfill with hasaidous waste in the
entire United States of America. I
think we are t 1k1ng about 1,700 land-
fills.
Now, let me point out that the gen-
tleman from New York talked about
$1,600. I do not know who did the
study for $1,600, but $1,600 in this.
area will buy you a couple of days of
consultants’ time and that Is It. Maybe
New York City and the Big Apple
came up with the rest of the money. It
cost them In their congressional dis-
trict $1,600, but we are tn1k ng about
figures In the tens of thousands of dol-
lars for each and every one of these
studies, conceivably in the hundreds of
thousands of dollars.
Mr. MOLflJARI. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. RIri it. I yield to the gentle-
man from New York.
Mr. MOLINARI. Mr. Chairman, I
thknk the gentleman for yielding.
I would like to clear up perhaps a
misunderstanding of what I said. The
cost of $1,600 actually was our own
east, not what it normally would cost.
And I think that the gentleman has a
point In terms of the cost.
But I would like to tell the gentle-
man to do a full and proper population
health survey, you need the develop-
ment of a questionnaire, 1 week, 40
man-hours.. Actual IntervIewing. 1¼
weeks, 60 man houzs. The total Is at.
$80 an hour, an awerage of 332 man-
hours,, It would run somewhere La, the
vicinity of $26,000, If you had to go’
outside and. hire professional cenauis—
ants ted. It .
Mr. . I thank t gentleman.
for that clarification.
And that Is $26.000 only to start, be-
cause what happens Is once you have
the data, once you have done the
study, then you have to assesa It. And
that Is a much more difficult proce-
dure. Then you have to normalize It,
then you have to find out what the
control populations are you are deal-
ing with, then you get Into the whole
framework of risk assessment. I am
not against risk assessment. In fact, we
have a bill that is going forward to
make some sense of ongoing risk as-
sessments.
Let me say this. In 1 year—and that
Is the way this amendment Is set up—
you can come up with data that Is
Love Canal style data that will scare
people, that may or may not be true,
that the politicians will run around
with, and flail before the television
H8157
eras, and that the media will just
lump up and down with. This Is a kind
of shotgun approach. I must say that
the gentleman from California is well
Intended and that of course we want
In understand and realize the health
Impacts of every single landfill’ witft
any hesardous waste around the coun-
try. However, what he Is proposing to
do In 1 year’s time and with no regard
for the r ources required to do it, Is
perhaps Impossible.
For example, who is going to do it.? I
suggest to some of the staff or perhaps
some of my colleagues on the commit-
tee that they may wish to start up
something called Congressional Re-
search and Risk Assessment Studies
Corporation because I think there Is
going to be a windfall business oppor-
tunity there. The number of available
finns to study 1, ’tOO sites Is dismally
small. But the number of available
firms Is not even the point, nor is the
cost even the point. The real pomt Is
the quality of the effort possible in 1
year given the relatively low level of
the state of the science. We are talk-
ing about so much more than simply a
survey. -
- 01600
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Rn-rm) has expired.
(By nnanfnioUs consent, Mr. Rnrm
was allowed to proceed for 3 additional
minutes.)
Mr. MOLINARI. Let me Just con-
clude. If I may, the remarks I made
before.
We have reached the poInt, I think,
in this country where we have had so
many problems with illnesses that
some additional work has to be done.
In the case I cited before, when the
study was completed Indeed It showed
that there was a problem In the area,
a serious problem which Is now being
looked at. The only way we would
know that was by having this survey
done.
Wow. I suggest, when you, say,. “Who
Is going to pay It?” those who are en-
gaged In the business, they are the
logical ones who should have to
And I also suggest that at the cotaple.
tion of these studiet we are going to
have a lot mote information on the
health of the nearby populations than
we do today. And that Is something
that Is very desirous.
Mr. RITTER. I do not argue against
the dealrabWty of gaining this Infor-
mation. What I am saying is that this
amendment goes about seeking the in-
formation in a way which may well be
flat out Impossible. may cause far
pester concerns and disruptions that
may never be solved, ending up with
additional closures of facilities where
we may net be fully Informed.
When the gent man talks of health
risk studies, he Is not just talking
about a survey. He is also talking
about the interpretation and the com-
parison of surveys with control popu-
)4I7
-------
H 8158
lations, and the evaluation of coftrol
populations. These are the kinds of
things that are going to be essential if
we are not to repeat the kind of love
Canal quick and dirty. 1-year chroino-
some damage study that ended up
greatly impacting the people who live
there to no avail. Since in the final
analysis, when the Love Canal study
was done more seriously, the first
suIts turned out not to be true.
Mr. PWRIO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. RITrER. I yield to the gentle-
man from New Jersey.
Mr. FLORIO. I thank the gentleman
for yielding.
- Mr. Chairman, just to put into ques-
tion the gentleman’s implication that
somehow this is a new, very un-
thought out approach, this is identical
to what it is that is currently being
done by RILE and EPA on Superfund.
The gentleman recalls, of course,
that we put into the law the same type
of capability with regard to abandoned
dumps. ______
Mr. Rr ,t a .tt. U I may reclaim my
time—and I will yield to the gentle-
man again—I think the point is ex-
tremely well taken that the 104(i)
study in Superfund. has approached
this very question.
Let me tell you how they have done
It. You know, of course, the gentleman
from New Jersey is responsible for this
legislation and I must say the 104(i)
study is a responsible legislati re ap.
proach. Under the Superfund statute
enacted in 1980, there Is authorized
under section 104(1) of that statute an
agency within the Public Health Serv-
ice known as the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry,
which shall report directly to the Sur-
geon General of the United States.
Under a recent court order that estab-
lished—with the concurrence of envi-
ronmental and industry intercst —a
timetable for the Agency’s action. The
Agency will:
Establish and maintain a national
registry of serious diseases and ill-
nesses and a national registry of per-
sons exposed to toxic substances;
Establish and maintain inventory of
literature, research, and studies on the
health effects of toxic substances; and
Conduct periodic survey and screen-
ing programs to determine relation-
-ships betwen exposure to toxic sub-
stances and Illness.
Moreover, the land disposal regula-
tions effective In January of this year
(1983) minimIze the release of con-
taminants into the environment. Fur-
thermore, safeguards—for example, in
the form of mandatory groundwater
monitoring—insure that materials
from a waste disposal site would be de-
tected prior to their release from the
property boundary.
I might add that here we are talking
about toxic substances. We sometimes
mistakenly use the terms ‘toxic” and
“hazardous” interchangeably. I tried
to point this out In previous debate.
The two are not Interchangeable.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Rn-rm) has again expired.
(By unanimous consent. Mr. Rrrran
was allowed to proceed for 3 additional
minutes,)
Mr. Rsrzz st. We use the terms in-
terchangeably, and the two are not
the same.
Vinegar can be considered hazardous
because It is corrosive acetic acid, but
Is certainly not in the toxic category.
Planintability is a part of the defini-
tion of “hazardous,” and there are
many things that are flammable
which are not toxic. There are also
many hlngs that are just slightly re-
active which are not toxic,
The gentleman from New Jersey
points out that In 104(i) of Superfund
we do have provisions to evaluate in
this sense—and I might add, the lan-
guage does not only pertain to aban-
doned sites, It establishes and main-
tains a national registry of serious dis-
eases and Illnesses and a national reg-
istry of persons exposed to toxic sub-
stances.
It is my understanding that on Su-
perfund—the gentleman may correct
me. It establishes and maintains an In-
ventory of literature of research stud-
ies and health effects of toxic sub-
stances, and it conducts periodic sur-
veys—this Is the part, I think, that the
gentleman is referring to—and screen-
ing programs to determine relation-
ships between exposure to toxic sub-
stances and illnesses.
In other words, what we are doing
there is approaching the far more
severe problem of toxic materials as
opposed to hazardous materials, which
can be defined In a way substantially
less dangerous to human health and
safety than the toxic materials.
What the gentleman from California
Is doing, without the kind of definition
that Is present in 104(1) of Superfund,
Is extending it to a vast new playing
field. He is trying to do something in
one year that we are having some dif-
ficulty in accomplishing over many
years. It is not the substance of what
the gentleman Is proposing, it Is the
mechanism and the scope and the
extent which makes the gentleman’s
amendment extremely unworkable.
The CHAIRMAN. The question Is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from California (Mr. Toiutzs).
The amendment was agreed to.
The C R -AIRMAN. Are there further
amendments to section 7?
as mcn ,T onmm BY an sxc,rON
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment to section 7.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amdhdment offered by Mr. Smrox: Page
28. alter lIne 22. insert:
51W AIW IIqsO VAT! V I TRZATM (T
TacXl,Oi.OG1ZS
Sac. 7a. (a) Rssc utcu, Devn.oruesv, AND
DuiossTaaT!oN priuizrs.—Section 3005 Is
amended by adding the following new sub-
section at the end thereof
“(hi Rrse aci . DEvlLoPwx,IT. aim
smAnox P zrs.— 1) The Administrator
October 6 1983
may Issue a research, development, and
demonstration permit for any hawdous
waste treatment faculty which proposed to
uUlize an innovative and experimental haz-
ardous waste treatment technology or proc-
__ for which permit standards for such ex-
perimental activity have not been promul-
gated under this subtitle. Any such permit
shall include such terms and conditions as
wllL.assure protection of human health and
the environment. Such permits—
“(A) shall provide for the construction of
such facilities, as necessary, and for oper-
s*Ion of the faculty for not longer than 1
year. and
“(B) shall provide for the receipt and
Deatinent by the facility of only those types
and quantities of hazardous waste which
the Administrator deems necessary for pur-
poses of determining the efficacy and per.
formance capabilities of the technology or
process and the effects of such technology
or procem on human health and the envi-
ronment, and
“(C) shall include such requirements as
the Administrator deems necessary to pro-
tect human health and the environment (In-
cluding, but not limited to, requirements re-
girding monitoring, operation. insurance or
bonding, flnancial responsibility, closure.
and remedial action), and such, require-
ments as the Administrator with respect to
the operation of the faculty.
The A n inIr trator may apply the criteria
set forth In this paragraph lxi establishing
the conditions of each permit without sepa’
rate establishment of regulations imple-
menting such criteria.
“(2) For the purpose of expediting review
and Issuance of permits under this subsec.
lion, the Administrator may, consistent
with the protection of human health and
the environment, modify or waive permit
application and permit issuance require-
ments established in the Administrator’s
general permit regulations except that
there may be no rno&flcatlon or waiver of
regulations regarding financial responsibili-
ty (including insurance) or of procedures as-
tablished under section 7004(bX2) regarding
public participation.
‘(3) The Administrator may order an lxxi-
mediate termination pf all operations at the
facility at any time he determines that tar-
rnlnation is necessary to protect human
health and the environment.”.
Mr. SKEL’ZON (during the reading).
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the amendment be consid-
ered as read and printed in the
Racoaxi.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Missouri?
There was no objection.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, the
amendment I offer encourages the de-
velopment of alternatives to landfill-
big for hazardous waste disposal at the
Federal policy level, especially those
Ideas developed by people In small
business.
Mr. FLORTO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. SKELTON. I yield to the gentle
man from New Jersey.
Mr. FLORIO. I thank the gentleman
for yielding,
Mr. Chairman, I support this amend-
ment and I commend the gentleman
for offering it. The central purpose of
HR. 2867 Is to restrict land disposal of
hazardous waste and to develop safe
------- |