[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 115 (Thursday, September 3, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9934-S9935]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         THE $2 BILLION FAILURE

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, we have failed.
  For the past nine months, I have worked with the members of the 
Environment and Public Works Committee and the Administration to draft 
much needed reforms to our nation's hazardous waste program. These 
reforms would have made RCRA work more quickly and more cheaply. They 
would have removed the bureaucratic obstacles that hinder environmental 
cleanups. They would have given the states the proper authority and 
freedom they need to responsibly manage their RCRA sites.
  My colleagues, the Senate has failed to save the federal government 
$2 Billion this year in clean up costs. Despite our best efforts, 
agreement could not be reached on a bill to save two billion dollars 
per year.
  Early in this Congress, the General Accounting Office released a 
report highlighting the need for a legislative change in remediation 
waste policy. The Administration, states, stakeholders--even the EPA--
agreed that only a legislative fix could adequately streamline the 
program and speed the pace of cleanups. This GAO report also said that 
a legislative fix would save the federal government $2 billion each 
year.
  Unfortunately, the Congress and the administration were unable to 
come to agreement on how to structure this legislative fix. Discussions 
among interested parties and legislators clearly showed the need for a 
bill, but translating this need into legislative language has been 
difficult. Progress was made, but not enough.
  And so, Mr. President, the next Congress is tasked with addressing 
this two billion dollar environment opportunity. Although I am truly 
disappointed that these many months of educating and negotiating have 
left us without a bill to champion, I am hopeful that the Senate will 
return to this issue with renewed vigor next year.
  I know that Senator Chafee, the Chairman of the Environment and 
Public Works Committee, and Senator Smith, Chairman of the Superfund, 
Waste Control and Risk Assessment Subcommittee, share my commitment to 
seeing meaningful RCRA reform enacted in the next Congress and will 
make it a priority. With this leadership, I believe that we can resolve 
the outstanding issues quickly and move forward with legislation that 
will indeed make the cleanup of contaminated sites smarter, faster and 
better. This is also true of those on the House Commerce Committee as 
well as many in the Administration.
  I was encouraged by the RCRA team built this year and look forward to 
working with this team again next Congress.
  I again want to stress that the RCRA reform goals have not changed. 
To make RCRA work more cheaply and quickly, to streamline the 
bureaucratic process and give more authority to the states and to speed 
site clean up. It is unfortunate that yet another year has passed 
without reform.
  Mr. President, let's make sure Congress gets the job done next year. 
The nation expects and deserves its RCRA sites to be cleaned up. This 
nation wants $2 billion in savings each year. I would like to thank my 
colleagues and their staffs for the work done this session and look 
forward to redoubled efforts in the 106th Congress.


         rcra reform will be a priority for the 106th Congress

  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, for the past year, the Majority Leader, 
Senator Bob Smith, and I have been working with our colleagues on the 
Environment and Public Works Committee and the Administration to draft 
legislation to address some of the requirements of the Resource 
Conservation and Recovery Act (``RCRA'') that currently impede the 
cleanup of literally thousands of contaminated sites across the nation. 
This so-called ``RCRA rifle-shot'' would have been an important piece 
of legislation. It would have demonstrated once again that we can 
improve our environmental laws, without jeopardizing human health or 
the environment, and reduce unnecessary costs. Just last year, the 
Government Accounting Office reported that eliminating those 
impediments to cleanup could save up to $2.1 billion per year

[[Page S9935]]

and, at the same time, significantly expedite environmentally 
responsible cleanups.
  It was our hope to craft a bipartisan bill that could be enacted this 
year. Our goal was a shared one--to develop legislation to eliminate 
overly restrictive treatment standards for mediation waste, to 
streamline permitting requirements, and preserve existing State cleanup 
programs, all while still ensuring that human health and the 
environment are protected. Under Senator Lott's leadership, we worked 
hard to achieve that goal and I believe that we made significant 
progress in resolving our differences. Unfortunately, we were not able 
to reach a final agreement and we have essentially run out of time.
  I remain committed, however, to the goal of improving the remediation 
waste program. I continue to believe that this is an important issue 
and that with appropriate legislation we can achieve a significant 
environment benefit--cleaning up thousands of contaminate sites and 
saving billions of dollars. That is clearly a worthwhile goal. 
Therefore, I intend to make RCRA reform a priority for the Environment 
and Public Works Committee in the next Congress. Building on the 
progress that we have made this year, and with Senator Lott's continued 
leadership, it is my hope that we will move legislation through the 
Senate early in the next Congress.


                   rcra remediation waste legislation

  Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire. Mr. President, it is with some regret 
that I am here today to join my colleagues, Majority Leader Trent Lott 
and Environment Committee Chairman John Chafee, in announcing that we 
will be unable to enact legislation this year to reform the remediation 
waste provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
  As many of my colleagues know, since I became Chairman of the Senate 
Superfund Subcommittee, which has jurisdiction over the RCRA, it had 
become apparent to me that hazardous waste cleanups in the United 
States take too long, are too costly, and result in widespread areas of 
our country becoming brownfield wastelands.
  Since I introduced RCRA remediation legislation in the 104th 
Congress, S. 1286, I have attempted to work with Senators Lott, Chafee, 
Breaux, Baucus, and Lautenberg, with the Clinton administration, 
States, and members of the industrial and environmental communities to 
achieve a bipartisan fix to this confusing and burdensome law. Despite 
our best efforts and the dedicated work of our respective staff, we 
weren't able to come to agreement.
  It is particularly troublesome that we come to this juncture given 
the fact that just about a year ago we received a report from the GAO 
(Hazardous Waste--Remediation Waste Requirements Can Increase the Time 
and Cost of Cleanups) that demonstrated the urgency of fixing the 
remediation waste program. Although I have quoted that report 
previously, I believe that it is worth repeating today.

       Despite the fact that remediation waste ``does not pose a 
     significant threat to human health and the environment,'' the 
     RCRA requirements are so costly and time consuming that 
     ``parties often try to avoid triggering the requirements by 
     containing waste in place or by abandoning cleanups 
     entirely.''
       The report further stated that RCRA ``can drive parties to 
     use less aggressive and perhaps less effective cleanup 
     methods, such as leaving contaminated soil in place and 
     placing a waterproof cover over it rather than treating it.'' 
     Instead of dealing with the problem, the statute forces 
     parties to ``purchase land elsewhere for their plant 
     expansion or other needs.''
       Even the EPA, which is responsible for implementing the 
     statute is quoted in the report as stating: ``Although 
     cleaning up a site may offer economic benefits, such as 
     relief from liability for contamination and increased 
     property values, industry sometimes concludes that the costs 
     of complying with RCRA can outweigh the benefits.''

  According to the GAO report we could save upwards of $2 billion per 
year by making some common sense legislative fixes to RCRA--cost 
savings that would really jump-start the efforts by industry to address 
these languishing sites. Nonetheless, despite tireless efforts by 
members and staff, and notwithstanding good progress in translating 
these changes into legislative language, it appears that we will not be 
able to accomplish our shared goal of passing a RCRA remediation waste 
rifle shot during the time we have left in the 105th Congress.
  As I conclude my statement, I would like to join Senator Lott and 
Senator Chafee in pledging my desire to press forward on this issue 
when the Senate returns next year. Perhaps the additional time will 
give the staff the additional opportunity to bridge the gaps that 
currently separate us.
  Finally, in addition to thanking Senator Lott and Senator Chafee for 
their leadership on this issue, I would like to thank our staff, Jeff 
Merrifield, Lynne Stauss, Ann Klee Carl Biersack and Kristy Sims for 
their hard work on this issue. Similarly, I would like to recognize 
Senator Baucus and Lautenberg and their staff for their hard work on 
attempting to come to a consensus.
  Again, I am disappointed that we were unable to make this happen this 
year, but I am hopeful that we can make it happen in 1999.

                          ____________________