[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 125 (Thursday, September 12, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H10364-H10368]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT SUBCOMMITTEE FIELD BRIEFING
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of May
12, 1995, the gentleman from California [Mr. Rohrabacher] is recognized
for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
Mr. DORNAN. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield for a second.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yes; I would.
Mr. DORNAN. I thank my colleague for yielding.
I made reference earlier to your hard-hitting, factual, truthful
special order last night with Chris Cox, and I would like to ask
unanimous consent that this not interrupt the flow of this fascinating
environmental presentation, but that my question of you and my short
statement hear appear at the beginning of your special order so it has
a flow from special order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. DORNAN. What I wanted to do was to point out at the end of my
special order, because I got caught a little about there, that I have
asked unanimous consent they duplicate it to put it in the Record at
the end of my remarks for any Americans tracking us through the gallery
of visits here, or through the electronic wizardry of C-SPAN I and II,
that I am putting into the record the vote.
You were here for that great debate in January 1991, so was the
Speaker pro tempore; 180 Democrats voted against doing anything about
Saddam Hussein. Some of them even voted against the sanctions, like my
pal, Eliot Engel, although he voted for hostile action. But all the
leadership: Tom Foley, who was the Speaker, Mr. Bonior, who was in
leadership then, Mr. Hoyer, the entire leadership here and the entire
leadership that is over there today in the Senate: Mr. Daschle, then
the majority leader, Mr. Mitchell, they all voted against doing
anything. And Admiral Crowe, who had risen to glory under Reagan and
Bush, he wrote against any action, and his reward is to be the
Ambassador to England in the Court of St. James.
Now we have these same people coming to the floor. The gentleman from
Massachusetts [Mr. Markey] at least had the decency to say, well, he
voted no because he thought we went into week 2 early and left a few
days too late, and I might agree with the analysis, but that is not a
reason to vote against going in at all, because he did not know when we
were going in.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. If I could reclaim my time for a moment?
Mr. DORNAN. Sure.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Actually, it is worse than what you are presenting.
The fact is that we had hundreds of thousands of Americans in the
desert in a very vulnerable situation. They were in a hostile
environment, even if there were no enemy troops out to kill them; and
what happened, what you are talking about, the vast majority of the
members of the Democratic Party who were here in this body decided and
voted that they should not be permitted to conduct offensive military
operations.
What, in essence, that vote was all about was saying our troops,
vulnerable in the middle of a hostile desert, facing a well-armed foe
would not be able to conduct offensive operations but would have to sit
there and fry in the desert and take hits, but were not permitted to
take offensive action.
This is Vietnam times 10, if they would have succeeded. Luckily a
number, Democrats crossed over to join almost every Republican.
Mr. DORNAN. 240 to 183.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Right. Almost every Republican voted to side with
our troops.
You do not put people out in that condition unless you are willing to
back them up, and the last thing you want to do is put them out in the
middle of the desert as it is going into summertime and make them sit
there and make them take the hits for not letting offensive military
operations take place.
They voted that way, and then when Schwarzkopf came here, when he
came here to give a speech to this body after the great victory that he
led us to, I remember the Schwarzkopf reception because all of those
who voted, not all of them, but so many of those who voted to make him
a sitting duck elbowed everybody else out of the way in order to get
their picture with General Schwarzkopf.
At that time, if you remember, right after we voted to give them the
right to conduct offensive military operations, and it became clear
that our forces were going to win a magnificent victory, the Democrats
who controlled this body at the time, if you remember, Bob, called us
back, immediately called us back in order to have a vote which was
nothing but a face-saving vote for them at massive expense to the
taxpayers to get everybody back here for just a face-saving vote for--
--
Mr. DORNAN. To support the men and women.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. That is right.
Mr. DORNAN. Two quick final thoughts:
You are right. Boy, was I understating it. Those of us who were
raised in California and in New York, a few other big cities, find
words like arrogance, gall, the effrontery of it all. They are not
strong enough.
We must turn to Yiddish, one of the world's most powerfully
expressive and emotional languages. The word with great accent
``chutzpah'' comes to mind, that they would ask us, without even being
consulted, let alone a fulsome debate, as President Bush and Dick
Cheney gave us, that we should sign off on some feel-good thing from
the other Chamber without being consulted about the air war that may be
beginning any second over there of hostilities again affronting our
Constitution.
{time} 1430
A final thought. I leave you now to go to the West Front, Ronald
Reagan the first President ever sworn in out there, where bishops,
cardinals of the Catholic Church, bishops of the Mormon Church, prolife
ministers and pastors, great evangelical leaders and pro-life rabbis
are gathering to ask the U.S. Senate, six hardened hearts, to turn
around and support the overwhelming majority of theHouse and Senate to
override Clinton's veto on partial birth infanticide of 80-percent-
delivered babies held in the mother's birth canal under great distress
to the mother, heck with the distress on the baby, because the
abortionist is about to stab it in the back of its head and remove its
brains by suction. I am going out there now to that.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, I have always
believed that there is an honest disagreement on the issue of pro-life
and pro-choice and the abortion issue. I personally, until I came to
the conclusion that life begins at conception, I was ambivalent about
this whole issue. But once you come to a conclusion, once
[[Page H10365]]
you say to yourself, I honestly believe that we are talking about a
baby, once you actually say to yourself this is the conclusion I have
come to, and looking at all the facts, then that is it. There is no
more decision. If you believe life begins at conception, you cannot
permit the killings of babies.
Many of our colleagues have an honest disagreement. They have not
come to that. Their eyes have not been opened to that. I did not
believe that all the time, either. But as soon as I did, then my
decisionmaking was past. No moral person could permit a baby to be
killed.
But a partial birth abortion, even those people who do not believe
that life begins at conception, as I now have come to believe, even
those people who do not believe that know that a partial birth abortion
is a baby that is well along the way.
Mr. DORNAN. You see the arms and legs moving.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. This really is tragic that the other side, who is so
opposed to any restrictions on abortion, have been able to blind
themselves about what this is. There should be no question about this.
Mr. DORNAN. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan is changing his vote. At
least one has let his conscience kick in. He wrote a speech titled
``Too Close to Infanticide.'' Great cardinals and bishops and
Protestant leaders have said it is infanticide, and that is what I say.
Eighty percent of the infant is there, You are holding the mother in
distress while you take its brains out and kill it right in front of
your eyes. That is infanticide.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Let us just hope, I happen to believe that we should
try to explain in a very heartfelt, way, those of us whose eyes have
been opened, that honestly, there is no other, once you conclude that
life begins at conception you cannot have any other belief. Even the
most strident person who is pro-choice that I know, if they believed
that it was a baby that we were talking about, they would not believe
that there should be an abortion.
Mr. DORNAN. Beautifully put. You have actually picked up the theme of
the cardinals, to try and win by persuasion. But when you are a fighter
pilot, that is hard. Your dad is a fighter pilot. Ask your dad how hard
it is to be loving and kind and try to open people's eyes when they
keep trying to funnel Federal dollars into what is obviously the
infanticide of a living child, 80 percent born. I am going to take your
advice and speak with love out there on the West Front today.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. I think we should.
Mr. Speaker, I asked for this time to report to theHouse on a field
briefing and site visit that was held on August 8, a hearing and field
briefing that was hosted by the Energy and Environmental Subcommittee
which I chair. Joining me at that field briefing were four other
members of the Committee on Science: Mr. Schiff, the distinguished
chairman of the Basic Research Subcommittee, Mr. Calvert, Mr. Foley,
and Mr. Stockman. The field briefing could well have been called: Free
Enterprise Works. Each of the sites that we visited gave us a firsthand
look and a better understanding of the private sector's response to
environmental challenges. We found that in southern California new
technologies are emerging to clean and purify the environment and to
make a profit, to boot.
We began the day by attending a ground-breaking for C-launch. This is
an innovative project of the Boeing Corporation which will launch
commercial satellites from platforms based at sea. I am particularly
pleased that Boeing has chosen the site of the now closed Long Beach
Naval Station for its home port, bringing much-needed jobs to the area.
We next visited the Long Beach headquarters of Gridcore. Gridcore is
a company that has commercialized technology originally developed at
the Department of Agriculture research lab in Wisconsin. They are a
proud example of a public-private partnership.
The result of this cooperation is a remarkable product. They are
panels with the strength of plywood at half the weight made from 100
percent recycled material, primarily fiber from old corrugated
cardboard containers. It is keeping our landfills from overflowing
while at the same time producing a building substitute for trees.
Even more, this technology allows the production of Gridcore products
without the use of toxic resins or binders. Not only is Gridcore made
from recycled materials, but the product itself is also recyclable.
So what we have here, a product of a basically public-private
partnership, is the development of an environmental technology that
will keep our landfills from overflowing, but at the same time save
trees, and at the same time, of course, make a profit for those who are
engaged in the enterprise.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to enter Gridcore's
specification sheet at this point in the Record.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Barton of Texas). Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
The specification sheet referred to is as follows:
Gridcore
specification sheet
Product description
Gridcore is an engineered molded fiber stressed
skin panel. Proprietary technology facilitates the pressure
forming of recycled resources into three dimensional
geometric ribs molded to smooth faces. When laminated
together, they form a honeycomb panel with high strength-to-
weight features and impressive design, fabrication and
application flexiblity.
Size
4' x 10' x 23/32'' (Internally Tested)
Thickness Tolerance: 1/64''
(Equivalent to A/C plywood specifications)
Weight
1.0-1.25 pounds per square foot (nominal 3/4'' basis)
(Internally Tested)
Density
20 pounds per cubic foot (nominal 3/4'' basis) (Internally
Tested)
Bending Strength
ASTM D 1037 @ 50% RH
Modulus of Rupture: 1,000-1,300 PSI (Timber Products
Inspection Lab)
Modulus of Elasticity: 150,000-200,000 PSI
(Equivalent to low density particleboard specifications)
Flat Crush
ASTM C 365 @ 50% RH: 50-60 PSI (Internally Tested)
Screw Withdrawal
ANSI A208.1 @ 50% RH:
Hollow Core: 76 pounds (Timber Products Inspection Lab)
Epoxy Filled Core: 254 pounds
Linear Expansion
50%-90% RH: 0.15%-0.20% (Fiber Research International)
Flame Spread
ASTM E-84: Class C (United States Testing Company)
Flame Spread Index: 115 Test performed on Gridcore
Smoke Density: <450 Gridboard assembly.
Environmental Features
Current Gridcore products are made from 100%
recycled resources, primarily kraft fiber from old corrugated
containers. Gridcore is free of formaldehyde's and
urea reins. Non-toxic PVA (white) glue is used to laminate
sub-panels. The manufacturing process generates no toxic off-
gasses. The water utilized in the forming & pressing cycles
is recycled back into the system. Wide-spread adoption of
Gridcore can slow deforestation and provide
sustainable building solutions for the growing needs of
Twenty-First Century development.
Note.--Changes in raw material content can affect the
structural characteristics of the panels. If surfaced with
coatings, veneers or laminates, Gridcore should be
balanced with similar treatments on both faces to prevent
warping.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Speaker, as part of its commercialization
agreement with the Government, Gridcore is paying royalties on its
profits. As a result, the taxpayers will get more back in terms of what
Gridcore is giving them through royalties than it costs us in the
original investment.
Well, I have been somewhat skeptical of developing a partnership-type
relationship between government and private companies. In this case it
has obviously worked, and certainly these royalty arrangements by which
private companies commercialize government-developed technologies,
certainly this should be encouraged, and in this case, Gridcore has
developed a product which is a win for the taxpayers, a win for the
consumers, and a win for the environment.
From Gridcore, our field briefing went on and we visit the
headquarters of Simple Green in Huntington Beach. Simple Green began in
the family workshop of Bruce Fabrizio and his father, Joseph. They
successfully developed an alternative to toxic cleaners
[[Page H10366]]
used to remove tannic acid that results from coffee roasting. Twenty
years later they have developed an all-purpose cleaner that degreases
products marketed around the world, and these products are nontoxic
nonflammable, nonabrasive, and even biodegradable.
One of the greatest obstacles to this success, to the development of
an environmentally friendly product, a cleaner that went well beyond
anything that was on the market at that time, one of the greatest
obstacles they had to overcome was the high taxes, high interest rates
and double-digit inflation during the 1970's.
This was the time during the late 1970's when, as entrepreneurs, they
struggled to establish their new company to offer this environmentally
sound alternative to the cleaning products that were already on the
market. But with high interest rates and a killer inflation they were
almost kept off of the market simply by the general economic
conditions.
So let us never forget that when we are talking about cleaning the
environment or any other very laudable goal that we must insure that
the fundamental economic factors that are at play in our society are
conducive to entrepreneurs developing new products and creating jobs
and basically bringing about the progress that will make this a better
world.
Well, once they were successful, Simple Green did not stop at just
making a good product and making a profit. In fact, the product itself,
of course, is beneficial in that it is more environmentally safe than
the other cleaners that are on the market, but they did not stop at
just making a profit at doing that. They went on to establish the Egbar
Foundation which stands for: everything is going to be all right, which
is, of course, in stark contrast to some of the pessimism that we hear
from other people who claim to be interested in the environment but
basically are so pessimistic and are making such outlandish claims that
the world is going to end and that we all are going to be consumed in
our own waste that it actually decreases the amount of activity, of
human activity, that is aimed at solving the problems because they are
so pessimistic.
Well, the Simple Green people established this foundation, everything
is going to be all right, in order to stimulate new ideas and to get
people active and personally mobilized to try to make this a better
planet environmentally. Using 1 percent of the company's annual sales,
the foundation sponsors an environmental education program which
involves over 200,000 California students.
While onsite we learned that Simple Green has recently begun research
on using its technologies to improve bioremediation techniques. They
now have developed a method to reclaim land despoiled by oil and other
toxics in a more effective and more efficient way than the currently
alternatives.
Again they are making money by building a better more effective
product that will be better for the environment as the product is being
used.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to place a statement from Simple
Green, on its bioremediation research, into the Record.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Barton of Texas). Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
The statement referred to is as follows:
Simple Green--The Key to Environmental Technology
For more than 20 years, Simple Green has been helping make
our planet a much cleaner place. Unlike hazardous solvents
and harsh detergents, Simple Green's unique formula is non-
toxic, non-flammable and biodegradable.
Now marketed throughout the world as an environmentally
sensitive cleaner and degreaser, Simple Green's reputation
continues to grow.
Simple Green is versatile, safe and effective. We're still
discovering brand-new applications for its use. At home,
industry, and, now even in the land, as an integral part of
promising new techniques for bioremediation.
Bioremediation is proving to be an attractive alternative
for waste disposal. The United States Environmental
Protection Agency defines bioremediation as ``a process
whereby naturally occurring microbes, typically bacteria or
fungi, degrade harmful chemicals into less toxic or non-toxic
compounds.''
One of the most difficult problems in bioremediation is
that the pollutant is often not readily available to the
microbial community. Material that disperse organic
pollutants prove to be a very important part of an effective
bioremediation process. Even at relatively low levels
compared to the pollutant concentration.
Simple Green has proven to be outstanding for this kind of
intermediary function. Simple Green's chelating capacity
decreases metal toxicity problems and its formulation
significantly increases the bioavailability of many types of
pollutants.
Bacterial viability is a critical consideration for any
additive proposed for use in a bioremediation effort. Simple
Green has properties that will increase the effectiveness of
bioremediation, and could be used safely with no deleterious
effect on the indigenous bacteria.
According to Celia Bonaventura, Co-Director, Marine
Biomedical Center Duke University Marine Laboratory, ``The
part that Simple Green plays in this process is facilitating
the hydrocarbon bacterial juxtaposition. Hydrocarbons tend to
stay in oily pockets and bacteria likes to live in watery
places and Simple Green works well to help these come
together.''
Simple Green's cutting edge formulation and superior
results is something chemists call Micro-Particulate-
Fractionalization, or MPF.
Simple Green uses special ``surface active'' agents to
break down large globs of oil, grease and fat to create much
smaller microscopic droplets called ``micelles.''
Unlike ordinary industrial cleaners and dispersants, Simple
Green's special MPF properties continue breaking down these
microscopic droplets even further.
These droplets are made increasingly smaller and more
numerous by Simple Green's MPF process, which provide
increasingly greater surface area for Simple Green and water
to attack. The end result of the MPF process is the pollutant
is much more available to the microbial community.
Simple Green has invested millions of dollars in
independent testing and research to thoroughly evaluate the
products, the efficacy and safety.
According to Dr. John Todhunter, President, Science
Regulatory Services, International, and former head of
toxicology for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
``Simple Green's unprecedented MPF process is a
scientifically advanced method of achieving effective
cleaning.''
In the past, surfactants have been used in bioremediation
with minimal success. What makes Simple Green different?
Simple Green's combination of surfactants has been found to
actually encourage bacterial activity. While surfactants
alone such as Tergitol can actually inhibit bacteria growth
due to toxicity.
H & H Eco Systems of North Bonneville, WA, founded by Terry
Horn, has established itself on the leading edge of
biological systems.
Terry Horn, President of H & H Eco Systems and with 20
years of experience in the field, realized that no one single
bioremediation approach would work. Bioremediation needs to
be individually assessed for every site.
Because of heterogeneity in the distribution of pollutants,
indigenous micro-organisms and soil components,
bioremediation methods in a given project vary from site to
site.
The approach developed by H & H Eco Systems, Inc. is unlike
any other. It's called ``the bio-triangle'' approach.
The ``attack'' on contaminants involves a combination of
Simple Green, biological and mechanical components. Simple
Green chemically acts to alter the physical composition of
the contaminant whileH & H Nutrients provide a balanced
biological diet, and the System 614 Turbo-rator serves as the
mechanical component to enhance this process.
Simple Green is also an extremely effective vapor
suppressant able to keep vapors below state and Federal
levels. Its deodorizing properties, even at diluted levels,
help overcome tough odor problems, particularly a concern
when doing sites in residential areas.
Celia Bonaventura states ``as a cleaner Simple Green makes
a good dispersion between the hydrocarbon or oily material
and water. As the material is held in that contact it's
tendency to vaporize will be much less. Thus there is a very
nice complimentary between the cleaning properties of Simple
Green and it's ability to act as a vapor suppression.''
Today, we are working on sites and showing that we have
improved the efficiency of the biological systems and that
our approach works.
``We've looked at the growth rates of these bacteria under
different conditions in laboratory settings where we would
control the temperature and everything in the environment of
the bacteria and we're able to see how Simple Green is one of
these facilitators which actually enhance the growth of the
bacteria in ways that promoted degradation of the
hydrocarbon.''
The results produced by this collaboration between Simple
Green and H & H Eco Systems are both encouraging and
impressive.
bremerton, washington--contaminate: heating oil (b-2)
Date and levels: 12/03/93, 2,400 ppm; 02/08/93, 53 ppm;
Outside Ambient Temperature, 20 deg. F; Cell Temperature,
70 deg. F.
[[Page H10367]]
cleelum, washington--contaminate: pentachlorophenol (pcp)
Date and levels; 06/18/93, 87 ppm; 06/25/93, 9.5 ppm.
cleelum, washington--contaminate: creosote
Date and levels: 06/18/98, 1000 ppm; 06/25/93, 9 ppm.
cleelum, washington--contaminate: diesel
Date and levels: 06/18/03, 530 ppm; 06/25/93, 20 ppm.
sauvin ford, oregon--contaminate: used motor oil
Date and TPH level: 11/14/92, 35,000 ppm; 12/16/92, 13,000
ppm; 01/21/03, 850 ppm.
olympia, washington--contaminate: gasoline and kerosene
Date and levels: 06/14/93, 3000-6000 ppm; 06/23/93, 32 ppm.
Terry Hom states, ``This was a really high clay soil and
now it's a real mealy soil, very fine texture able to be used
in agriculture, in lawns and gardens. Compared to what we
started with, it was nothing but a slab of silt and clay.
Silt and clay level on this was 87 percent fines which means
you could squeeze it together and play baseball with the
hunks. We've ended up with a soil that now will grow
anything. Before it sat for 2\1/2\ years without any growth
on it at all, now we have stuff coming out of it within two
weeks.''
At Simple Green, the research and development we fund, the
products we make, and the soil bioremediation techniques
we're helping to pioneer, all share a common goal: To help
make the world a cleaner and better place.
But perhaps Bruce FaBrizio, Founder and CEO of Simple
Green, describes the company's philosophy best:
``The world is a finite piece of ground, the environment is
finite and not infinite, and if we don't do something
aggressive now it won't be there for our grandchildren and
yet there is plenty of time to make it a better place for our
grandchildren if we just start doing things that are in our
ability today.''
Our atmosphere, attitude and actions haven't been concocted
to achieve a certain appearance. They stem from a natural
dedication to excellence and improving the environment--
something that's been with us from the very beginning.
It's a dedication all of us at Simple Green invite you to
share.
While at Simple Green, we also visited with representatives of
Microbics, which is a company based in Carlsbad, CA. They demonstrated
a biological toxicity test the company has developed with private
funds. They believe that this test is faster, less expensive, and more
precise than test methods currently approved in the United States. So
they showed us a test that would demonstrate biological toxicity in a
way that we then, we have used that knowledge to try to clean the
environment and know the threats around us.
Although approved in Canada and in eight European countries, our EPA
has yet to see the value of this very effective, low-cost test for
toxicity. Thus, it has been hampering its commercial use in the United
States. This reconfirms the hesitation many of us have about increasing
government's role in most endeavors. While in Gridcore there was an
example, of course, where working together and getting the Government
involved actually did help that company produce a similar, a new
product that will help the environment; but in this particular case
with this company down from Carlsbad, the Microbics, we found that the
Government's power that it has through the EPA has been used to
actually thwart innovation and progress.
So that is one of the drawbacks. Government can be helpful on one
hand and you strengthen it, but you have to remember you are also
strengthening the Government's hand to be an obstructionist in the game
of human progress.
Our final stop at the field briefing was at a site of a former
leaking underground storage tank behind the Fountain Valley City Hall.
That is Fountain Valley, CA, city hall. There the Regenesis Co., and it
is based in San Juan Capistrano, demonstrated a bioremediation
technique known as oxygen release compound. By inserting the compound
into a well, naturally occurring micro-organisms flourish and use the
petroleum hydrocarbons as a food source. What has developed then is a
product that protects our valuable water resources and cost-effectively
reclaims that water that has already been contaminated.
Mr. Speaker, I include the Regenesis project results for the Record.
The information referred to is as follows.
Environmental Science &
Engineering, Inc.,
Fountain Valley, CA, September 4, 1996.
Mr. Craig Sandefur,
Regeoesis Bioremediation Products, San Juan Capistrano, CA.
Dear Mr. Sandefur: Environmental Science & Engineering,
Inc. (ESE) is pleased to submit this report of current
activities at the subject site. A figure, tables and
appendices of current and historical data are attached.
On August 6, 1996, ESE installed oxygen release compound
(ORC) in Well MW-9. ESE is evaluating the effects of the ORC
at 2-week intervals by collecting a grab sample (non-purge)
and monitoring the concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons
in the well. As the rate of biodegradation of petroleum
hydrocarbons is controlled partly by the availability of
dissolved oxygen (DO), ESE believes that by monitoring the
amount of DO, you can better evaluate the effectiveness of
the ORC. The historical monitoring data is presented on the
next page.
The results of this groundwater monitoring event shows that
petroleum hydrocarbons decreased several orders of magnitude
in 2 weeks time. The concentrations in this well had remained
high for approximately 5.5 years prior to the application of
ORC. The levels of petroleum hydrocarbons increased at the 4
week sampling. ESE will conduct groundwater monitoring in the
future to track the fluctuations in these levels.
ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR GROUNDWATER SAMPLES COLLECTED OVER TIME
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA Method (g/L)
----------------------------------------------------------------- Dissolved
Well ID and Sample date 8015M 8020 oxygen (mg/
----------------------------------------------------------------- L)
TPH B T E X
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MW-9:
08/17/90........................ 3,400 470 810 84 850 NA
04/03/92........................ 26,000 700 1,000 500 2,000 NA
10/20/92........................ 94,000 11,000 18,000 24,000 5,000 NA
10/10/93........................ 39,000 2,900 5,600 1,400 8,400 NA
01/06/94........................ 10,000 1,900 2,000 630 2,900 NA
04/27/94........................ 9,600 810 700 720 2,100 NA
04/07/95........................ 1,700 42 14 130 280 NA
10/31/95........................ 8,100 1,000 440 330 990 *2.3
03/25/96........................ 10,000 660 540 440 860 <1
08/06/96........................ NA NA NA NA NA <1
08/20/96........................ ND<100 0.84 ND<0.3 0.55 4.0 1.6
09/03/96........................ 15,000 ND<12.5 320 ND<12.5 3,800 2.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes.--EPA--U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; TPH--total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline; M--modified
for volatile hydrocarbons; BTEX--benzene, toluene, ethylbenzens and total xylenes; NA--not analyzed; g/L--micrograms per liter; mg/L--milligrams per liter; ND--not detected; *--readings taken after purging.
If you have any questions regarding this report, please
call me at (714) 964-8722.
Sincerely,
David A. Ferreira,
Senior Project Hydrogeologist.
Mr. Speaker, I believe my colleagues on the Committee on Science, as
I did, found these site visits to be enlightening and informative. The
environment is too important simply to be relegated to a Federal
bureaucratic program, and it is too important to just simply rely on
the dictates of government employees to meet the environmental
challenges facing America.
Instead of Federal restrictions and mandates, new technology and the
profit motive can and must be the primary forces at work in this
effort. We can clean the environment and make a profit in doing so.
That is what we learned at our field briefing. It is a lesson that we
must keep in mind while making policy for this country.
Many of our environmental problems have been and will continue to be
solved not by reducing our standard of living, not by increasing the
cost of government and hiring government employees to look over our
shoulder and control our lives, but, instead, through innovative
technology and commercialization developed in the
[[Page H10368]]
private sector, and motivated, motivated by the profit motive.
Unfortunately, far too many people in government think that the
profit motive is a dirty phrase.
Instead, the profit motive can give people the incentive to do good
things, rather than the alternative method, which is having government
order people to do that which they think is a good thing.
What we have seen throughout this competition between the Soviet
Union and the United States is that societies that are based on
incentives, societies which give their people a profit motive to
produce and to do good things and to increase the standard of living
and produce more wealth and to clean the environment, that those
societies are the progressive societies. Those societies that rely on
hiring more government bureaucrats or hiring more government employees
and empowering them to give orders to other people in order to
accomplish those ends have not succeeded. That is why when the Berlin
Wall went down, people started rushing from the East to the West, and
not in the other direction.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to go back to Simple Green's
motto: EGBAR, everything is going to be alright. This is not the
blather of some unrealistic optimist. The EGBAR concept, everything is
going to be all right, is in stark contrast to what is basically being
presented to especially young people in this country in terms of the
environment.
I know that young people who visit from California come to visit me
in my office, and I in fact have a policy that says any people from my
district who want to see me, I am their Congressman, and they come all
the way to Washington, DC, I spend time with them, especially the young
people, especially students who come here as a group.
It never ceases to amaze me, when I am talking to the young people
and I ask them about air pollution. In southern California, we know all
about air pollution. But what has happened is that the young people are
being told that air pollution today is the worst it has ever been, and
that their lives are being shortened, and they are frightened out of
their wits.
But I always take this poll and say to the young people visiting from
southern California, ``Is the air cleaner today, or is it worse today
than when I went to high school back in southern California 30 years
ago?'' And it happens every time. Almost every student raises their
hands and says, the air is much dirtier now than it was when you were
in high school back in southern California 30 years ago. It is
terrible, because now it is going to destroy our health, we are going
to live worse lives, and it is terrible how the big companies are
trying to hurt us so much. You have these young people telling you
that.
In fact, in southern California, the air is cleaner today than it has
ever been in my lifetime. When I was in high school, and I tell these
kids, when I was in high school, about every third day when you wanted
to go out for a gym class they would say, there will be no exercise
today because we are having a smog alert, a heath alert, and young
people cannot go out and exercise and breathe in that air because it is
unhealthy. Of course, there have only been about 20 such days like that
in southern California per year for the last few years.
Mr. Speaker, what we have is a pessimism, talking about global
warming, global cooling. We are talking about factors that are gong to
destroy all of mankind that immobilize us, when, instead, we should be
giving incentives for people to develop new technologies that will make
it a better place and encourage people to be active, rather than to
give up. Mr. Speaker, this is a Republican message of hope, but it is
also an American theme.
____________________