[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 49 (Wednesday, April 23, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H1750-H1753]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LEAKING UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK TRUST FUND AMENDMENTS ACT OF 1997
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 688) to amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act to require at least 85
percent of funds appropriated to the Environmental Protection Agency
from the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund to be distributed
to States for cooperative agreements for undertaking corrective action
and for enforcement of subtitle I of such act, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 688
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Leaking Underground Storage
Tank Trust Fund Amendments Act of 1997''.
TITLE I--DISTRIBUTIONS FROM LEAKING UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK TRUST FUND
SEC. 101. LEAKING UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS.
(a) Trust Fund Distribution.--Section 9004 of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6991c) is amended by adding at
the end the following new subsection:
``(f) Trust Fund Distribution to States.--
``(1) In General.--(A) The Administrator shall distribute
to States at least 85 percent of the funds appropriated to
the Environmental Protection Agency from the Leaking
Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund (in this subsection
referred to as the `Trust Fund') each fiscal year for the
reasonable costs under cooperative agreements entered into
with the Administrator for the following:
``(i) States' actions under section 9003(h)(7)(A).
``(ii) Necessary administrative expenses directly related
to corrective action and compensation programs under
subsection (c)(1).
``(iii) Enforcement of a State or local program approved
under this section or enforcement of this subtitle or similar
State or local provisions by a State or local government.
``(iv) State and local corrective actions pursuant to
regulations promulgated under section 9003(c)(4).
``(v) Corrective action and compensation programs under
subsection (c)(1) for releases from underground storage tanks
regulated under this subtitle in any instance, as determined
by the State, in which the financial resources of an owner or
operator, excluding resources provided by programs under
subsection (c)(1), are not adequate to pay for the cost of a
corrective action without significantly impairing the ability
of the owner or operator to continue in business.
``(B) Funds provided by the Administrator under
subparagraph (A) may not be used by States for purposes of
providing financial assistance to an owner or operator in
meeting the requirements respecting underground storage tanks
contained in section 280.21 of title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of the
enactment of this subsection) or similar requirements in
State programs approved under this section or similar State
or local provisions.
``(2) Allocation.--
``(A) Process.--In the case of a State that the
Administrator has entered into a cooperative agreement with
under section 9003(h)(7)(A), the Administrator shall
distribute funds from the Trust Fund to the State using the
allocation process developed by the Administrator for such
cooperative agreements.
``(B) Revisions to process.--The Administrator may revise
such allocation process only after--
``(i) consulting with State agencies responsible for
overseeing corrective action for releases from underground
storage tanks and with representatives of owners and
operators; and
``(ii) taking into consideration, at a minimum, the total
revenue received from each State into the Trust Fund, the
number of confirmed releases from leaking underground storage
tanks in each State, the number of notified petroleum storage
tanks in each State, and the percent of the population of
each State using groundwater for any beneficial purpose.
``(3) Recipients.--Distributions from the Trust Fund under
this subsection shall be made directly to the State agency
entering into a cooperative agreement or enforcing the State
program.
``(4) Cost recovery prohibition.--Funds provided to States
from the Trust Fund to owners or operators for programs under
subsection (c)(1) for releases from underground storage tanks
are not subject to cost recovery by the Administrator under
section 9003(h)(6).''.
(b) Technical Amendments.--Subtitle I of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6991 et seq.) is amended as follows:
[[Page H1751]]
(1) Section 9001(3)(A) (42 U.S.C. 6991(3)(A)) is amended by
striking out ``sustances'' and inserting in lieu thereof
``substances''.
(2) Section 9003(f)(1) (42 U.S.C. 6991b(f)(1)) is amended
by striking out ``subsection (c) and (d)'' and inserting in
lieu thereof ``subsections (c) and (d)''.
(3) Section 9004(a) (42 U.S.C. 6991c(a)) is amended by
striking out ``in 9001(2)(A)'' and inserting in lieu thereof
``in section 9001(2)(A)''.
(4) Section 9005 (42 U.S.C. 6991d) is amended--
(A) in subsection (a), by striking out ``study taking'' and
inserting in lieu thereof ``study, taking'';
(B) in subsection (b)(1), by striking out ``relevent'' and
inserting in lieu thereof ``relevant''; and
(C) in subsection (b)(4), by striking out ``Evironmental''
and inserting in lieu thereof ``Environmental''.
TITLE II--EXTENSION OF TRUST FUND PURPOSES
SEC. 201. EXTENSION OF TRUST FUND PURPOSES.
Paragraph (1) of section 9508(c) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (relating to expenditures) is amended by
striking ``to carry out section 9003(h)'' and all that
follows and inserting ``to carry out--
``(A) section 9003(h) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (as
in effect on the date of the enactment of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986), and
``(A) section 9004(f) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (as
in effect on the date of the enactment of the Leaking
Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund Amendments Act of
1997).''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Ohio [Mr. Oxley] and the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Stupak] each will
control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley].
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. OXLEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, as the estimable Yogi Berra said, ``It's like
deja vu all over again.'' H.R. 688 is the same Leaking Underground
Storage Tank bill we passed by a voice vote on the floor just 7 months
ago in the last Congress. Except for a couple of technical, completely
nonsubstantive changes, everything is the same except the number.
The LUST program cleans up leaking underground storage tanks and
requires tank owners to put in new tanks meeting tough Federal
standards by the end of next year. The program is funded by a dedicated
trust fund.
Owners of cars pay taxes into the LUST trust fund. On every gallon of
gas we pay a one-tenth of a cent tax for the LUST program. This tax
went into effect in 1987 and expired at the end of 1995, but only 40
percent of the money we have paid has been spent out on the program. We
have spent only $655 million on LUST since 1987 out of $1.7 billion
collected. Before we give the taxes another ride, we ought to look
carefully at using what we have already collected. Congress did not
create the trust fund for the sake of having another trust fund; it was
created to fund this particular program.
In contrast with some other environmental programs, we taxpayers seem
to have gotten an effective program for our LUST money. With financial
assistance from EPA cooperative agreements, States have secured cleanup
of 140,000 sites since 1987. Contrast this with Superfund. Taxpayers
spent $17 billion through the EPA alone in 17 years and only 130 sites
or so were taken off the list of the country's worst sites. States
should have a bigger role in running Superfund.
While I am on the subject, I want Members to know we are working on
Superfund reform in my subcommittee on a bipartisan basis with the
administration, and I hope our efforts will result in a bill with
bipartisan support from our full committee.
Back to LUST, H.R. 688 improves the LUST program in two ways:
First, it requires EPA to give at least 85 percent of its
appropriation to the States each year. This puts the money where the
tanks are and where the cleanup work is done.
Second, the bill authorizes three new uses of the Federal funding,
giving States flexibility to make their programs more effective by,
one, putting the money into their financial assurance funds for tank
cleanup in cases of financial hardship; two, enforcing requirements
that underground tanks meet minimum leak detection and prevention
standards by 1998; and, three, administering their State assurance
funds.
Less than 30 percent of tank owners have come into compliance with
the EPA tank requirements that all tank owners will have to meet in
1998. We need to help States meet the financial burdens of the huge
enforcement task that is coming down the pike next year.
The bill also prohibits States from using the money to help someone
comply with the 1998 tank requirements so tax dollars will not be used
to put people who have already complied with the law at a competitive
disadvantage.
This is another good bill for the environment from the Committee on
Commerce, and I encourage Members to support this bill as they did just
7 months ago on the floor.
I congratulate the chairman, the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Dan
Schaefer, the sponsor of the bill, for his work, as well as the
gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Bart Stupak, the chief Democrat cosponsor.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. STUPAK asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia,
Chairman Bliley, and members of the committee for working together in
taking this major step forward on moving this very important bill. I
appreciate the opportunity to work with the gentleman from Colorado,
Mr. Dan Schaefer, and his staff. We have worked together well the past
Congress and this Congress to put forth this leaking underground
storage tank legislation.
{time} 1845
The Leaking Underground Storage Tank Program is one of the most
important and least known environmental programs run by the Federal
Government and the States. The act regulates the use of large
underground tanks that hold petroleum products. One need only to go to
their local gas station to find tanks regulated underneath this act.
This is the National Water Quality Inventory Report to Congress. In
this report, which list each State, this report states that the leaking
underground storage tanks are the most frequent cause of groundwater
contamination. Unfortunately, the Committee on Appropriations does not
feel our Nation's groundwater is as high a priority as many of us here
in this Chamber believe tonight. In fiscal year 1997, the Committee on
Appropriations cut the President's request by more than a third for the
funds necessary to help us clean up leaking underground storage tanks.
The Committee on Appropriation's actions are even more frustrating
because the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Program is funded, as the
gentleman from Ohio pointed out, from a tax on petroleum products.
Currently, the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund, or LUST, as
it is called, has a billion dollar surplus. I will continue to join
with my colleagues, especially the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Dan
Schaefer, in the fight to increase the appropriations for this program.
In Michigan, my State, the State's leaking underground storage tank
fund is insolvent due to improper management and funding. In Michigan,
the fund is not accepting new claims, and cleanups on leaking
underground tanks have all but ceased. Although I believe the
legislation being discussed here tonight is an important step in
cleaning up leaking tanks, it is my hope that States, and Michigan in
particular, will renew their commitment to this program.
Beyond any doubt, H.R. 688 will make improvements to the program.
These improvements will increase the amount of funding available for
contaminated sites, increase the amount of money for State enforcement,
and guarantee that the money Congress appropriates for this program
will get to the States.
This legislation does not completely turn the program over to the
States. We have maintained a strong role for the EPA in this
legislation by preserving the current cooperative agreement process
between the States and the Federal Government. This bill does not
decrease the Federal role in the LUST
[[Page H1752]]
program. Rather, it will strengthen the Federal-State partnership that
has been successful since the program's inception.
The bill before us today will not require the Committee on
Appropriations to direct more resources to this problem. However, it
will strengthen the EPA's partnership with the States and increase
EPA's flexibility to use this money for the Leaking Underground Storage
Tank Program and get that money back to the States.
I would like to comment briefly, if I may, just on a few points that
the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley] made about the Superfund Program
and its comparison with the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Program.
Although we are certainly not here to debate Superfund issues tonight,
it is clear that in order to achieve our mutual goal of improving the
Superfund Program, we must take a full and fair look at the program as
it exists today.
I have heard too many times from my Republican friends that very few
Superfund sites have been cleaned up despite heavy expenditures. These
statements are no more than old, worn out political rhetoric. The facts
reveal an entirely different landscape:
Out of the 1,335 National Priorities List sites, 1,100 of those sites
have had significant on-site, physical cleanup work performed. Those
1,100 sites break down as follows:
At 400 sites, all cleanup construction has been completed; at 500
sites, actual cleanup construction is under way, such as construction
of a slurry wall for installation of a treatment system; and at 200
sites, significant removal work has been completed to abate an imminent
hazard.
Mr. Speaker, in my district, Manistee Harbor, we were just there the
other night to sign the final documents between the State of Michigan,
industry, environmental groups, and the Federal Government, because we
have taken a site that was on the Superfund that put PCBs out into Lake
Michigan, and in less than 3 years we have most of it cleaned up.
Everybody has agreed upon a solution. It is being done, and it has been
a record cleanup for a Superfund site. That could not have happened
without the help of my friends on the Republican side.
Mr. Speaker, Superfund expenditures to date have totaled $13 billion,
not the wildly inflated figures we hear. It is my hope, and if we take
Manistee Harbor as an example, that our mutual efforts on this bill
here tonight will serve as an example of how we can work together on
the more difficult issue of Superfund reauthorization. We should
examine the facts and the progress of the Superfund Program today in
order to achieve a bipartisan consensus on improving Superfund.
I look forward to working with the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Oxley,
the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Dan Schaefer, and their staffs, as we
work this bill the rest of the way through, through the Senate, and on
to the conference committee, and even to the White House, and I hope we
can do the same with Superfund.
On today's bill, I would like to thank the gentleman from Colorado,
Mr. Dan Schaefer, and his staff person Patrick O'Keefe, as well as
Alison Burkes of the minority staff; Fred Eases from the majority and
Matt Berzok on my staff for all their hard work over the past year on
this very important program, the Leaking Underground Storage Tank
Program.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Dan Schaefer.
(Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado asked and was given permission to
revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, I again want to certainly thank the gentleman from Ohio
and the ranking members of this committee for moving this finally
along.
The objectives of the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund
Amendments Act, which is H.R. 688, are really simple. This is identical
to the bill that we passed last year, ran out of time, but I think it
is very imperative that we finally get back to it. It is going to give
the States, as has been stated, more financial stability in operating
their underground storage tank programs and greater flexibility to
address unique environmental problems, particularly in rural America.
Throughout the drafting process, the gentleman from Michigan [Mr.
Stupak] and I solicited and received substantial input on how to best
achieve our goals. As a result, the final product we have before us
today meets all our initial goals, with a strong emphasis on quicker
cleanups and stricter enforcement. H.R. 688 has over 70 bipartisan
cosponsors and diverse private sector support.
The so-called LUST program was first enacted in 1984. The trust fund
followed in 1986. The current LUST statute allows States to spend the
Federal LUST trust fund money in a limited number of instances, mainly
for corrective actions where an owner is unable, or unwilling, to clean
up a leak.
Along with the corrective action standards for leaking tanks, the
LUST statute also requires owners and operators of underground storage
tanks to meet certain standards. The deadline for compliance with these
tank standards is 1998. When implemented, the tank standards will
provide an important preventative protection against many future leaks.
The LUST program has largely been a success. The regulated industry
and the EPA tank office share a good working relationship. However,
over the next few years the nature of the program is going to change
dramatically. EPA has stated it envisions drastically scaling back the
tank office. States will supervise corrective action where leaks have
occurred and become the primary enforcers for the tank standards.
I certainly support this progression. However, if we expect States to
carry out more duties, it is critical that they must be given more
freedom to use LUST trust fund money where most needed.
Finally, EPA has traditionally dedicated about 85 percent of its
annual LUST trust fund appropriation to the States. But as State
responsibilities do increase, we need to give them peace of mind that
this tradition will continue. H.R. 688 gives this financial stability.
I want to thank all those involved in crafting this bill. The process
has embodied the spirit of bipartisanship and compromise. Our final
product increases enforcement and enhances site cleanups with the
broad-based support of the regulated industry.
I again want to thank the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Stupak] for
all his work on this, and certainly again thank the gentleman from Ohio
[Mr. Oxley], and on my staff Patrick O'Keefe for staying with this
issue for so long.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this sound environmental
initiative.
Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Doyle] who was a valuable asset in
drafting this legislation and as a member of the Committee on Science
certainly understands it.
(Mr. DOYLE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 688. I want to
thank the bill's sponsors, the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Dan
Schaefer, and my good friend, the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Stupak,
for their diligent leadership on this issue.
The LUST program was enacted in 1984 to address the potential health
and environmental risks associated with antiquated and substandard
underground storage tanks. A tax was levied on all petroleum products
to create a trust fund to fund these efforts. That tax expired on
December 31, 1995, with nearly $1 billion in the trust fund.
Unfortunately, the majority of these funds expended so far have gone
to offset general Federal spending and not for the purpose to which it
was meant to be dedicated.
The LUST Amendments Act gives the ironclad assurance that trust fund
spending will go to assisting States to pursue compliance and
corrective action associated with the LUST program. It also gives the
States more flexibility in using these funds, including direct use of
Federal LUST trust fund money to help business owners who would
otherwise be unable to afford Government-mandated cleanups.
[[Page H1753]]
These cleanups are pivotal to comprehensive economic revitalization
efforts like the one many of us in the Pennsylvania delegation are
looking at for Allegheny County and for the Mon Valley region in
particular.
We have a good program here, and Congress in its wisdom found a sound
funding mechanism for it. Let us demonstrate our good faith to small
businesses in this sector and move this legislation forward without
delay.
Last year, the Congress passed this legislation, but the Senate
failed to act on it before adjournment last October. Since this year's
version is identical to the previously approved bill, I expect the
House will act expeditiously to pass the LUST Amendments Act.
Hopefully, this will give the Senate ample time to send this
legislation to the President for his approval.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member rises in support of H.R. 688,
the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund Amendments Act. As an
original cosponsor of the legislation, this Member would like to
commend the distinguished gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Dan Schaefer,
and the distinguished gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Stupak, for
introducing this bill and working for its enactment.
Across the Nation, leaking underground storage tanks present a hazard
which must be addressed. Unfortunately, less than half of the
identified leaking tanks have been remedied. In addition, there are
likely thousands of other unidentified leaking tanks which require
action.
This legislation improves the current situation by distributing more
money from the existing trust fund to the States where it belongs. The
trust fund was established by Congress in 1986 and currently contains
about $1 billion. Although the trust fund is intended to provide
assistance in the cleanup of underground storage tanks, too much of the
money in the trust fund has been used to offset general Federal
spending.
This Member certainly believes that the money in the trust fund
should be used for the purposes for which it was originally intended;
money simply accumulating in the trust fund obviously does not address
the current needs. The large number of remaining leaking underground
storage tank sites is evidence that the States could use this money
which is currently accumulating in the trust fund. This bill would
assist States in more efficiently receiving and disbursing money from
the trust fund. It would also give the States increased flexibility in
the use of money from the trust fund.
This Member urges his colleagues to support H.R. 688.
Mr. LARGENT. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Commerce Committee's
Finance and Hazardous Materials Subcommittee, I rise in support of H.R.
688, the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund Act, commonly
referred to as the LUST program.
My colleague, Mr. Schaefer, has developed a well-crafted piece of
legislation which has two primary purposes. The first is to ensure that
85 percent of the money Congress appropriates for the program goes to
the States; and to expand the uses for which the trust fund moneys can
be used.
In 1986, Congress created the LUST Trust Fund, paid for with a one-
tenth of one cent per gallon tax on motor fuels. The Trust Fund is to
be used by the EPA or the States, in accordance with Federal law, to
enforce Underground Storage Tank corrective action requirements; to
conduct cleanups where no solvent responsible party can be found, where
there is a known but unwilling responsible party, or where a
responsible party does not have the financial ability to pay for the
entire cleanup.
Unlike many other well-intentioned bills enacted by Congress, which
then fall victim to the law of unintended consequences, the LUST
program has met its intended purpose to set leak detection and
prevention standards for underground tanks.
H.R. 688 improves on the current program because it provides an
increased amount of stability and certainty to State agencies while
granting greater flexibility.
I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 688.
Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Dan
Schaefer, once again for his leadership on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ewing). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley] that the House suspend
the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 688, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________