[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 123 (Wednesday, September 16, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10416-S10417]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     SUPERFUND RECYCLING EQUITY ACT

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, over the past three decades, concern for our 
environment and natural resources has grown--as has the desire to 
recycle and reuse. You may be surprised to learn that one major 
environmental statue actually creates an impediment to recycling. 
Superfund has created this impediment, although unintended by the law's 
authors.
  Because of the harm that is being done to the recycling effort by the 
unintended consequence of law, the distinguished Minority Leader, Mr. 
Daschle, and I introduced The Superfund Recycling Equity Act (S. 2180). 
This bill removes Superfund's recycling impediments and increases 
America's recycling rates.
  We had one and only one purpose in introducing the Superfund 
Recycling Equity Act--to remove from the liability loop those who 
collect and ship recyclables to a third party site. The bill is not 
intended to plow new Superfund ground, nor is it intended to revamp 
existing Superfund law. That task is appropriately left to 
comprehensive reform, a goal that I hope is achievable in the 106th 
Congress.
  While the bill proposes to amend Superfund, Mr. President, it is 
really a recycling bill. Recycling is not disposal and shipping for 
recycling is not arranging for disposal--it is a relatively simple 
clarification, but one that is necessary to maintain a successful 
recycling effort nationwide. Without this clarification, America will 
continue to fall short of its recycling goal.
  S. 2180 was negotiated in 1993 between representatives of the 
industry that recycles traditional materials--paper, glass, plastic, 
metals, textiles and rubber--and representatives of the Environmental 
Protection Agency, the Department of Justice, and the national 
environmental community. Similar language has been included in 
virtually every comprehensive Superfund bill since 1994. In fact, the 
original agreement, upon which the bill is based, has remained intact 
for five years. With over 40 Senate cosponsors, support for the bill 
has been both extensive and bi-partisan. The companion House bill has 
almost 300 co-sponsors.
  Mr. President, since Senator Daschle and I introduced S. 2180, some 
have argued that we should not ``piecemeal'' Superfund. They argue that 
every part of Superfund should be held together tightly, until a 
comprehensive approach to reauthorization is found.
  I generally agree that keeping popular, non-controversial provisions 
in an omnibus bill makes the more controversial provisions easier to 
swallow. And given the broad-based support for the recycling piece 
across both parties, some think it should be held as a ``sweetener'' 
for some of the more difficult issues. Superfund's five-year history 
suggests, however, that the recycling provisions--as sweet as they 
are-- have done little, if anything, to help move a comprehensive 
Superfund bill forward. Rather, ``sweeteners'' like brownfields and 
municipal liability are what keep all parties at the table.

[[Page S10417]]

  Holding the recyclers hostage to a comprehensive bill has not helped 
reform Superfund, and continuing to hold them hostage will not ensure 
action in the future. What it does ensure is that recycling continues 
to be impeded and fails to attain our nation's goals.
  Mr. President, this recycling fix is minuscule compared to the 
overwhelming stakeholder needs regarding Superfund in general, but so 
significant for the recycling industry itself. It is easy to see why 
this bill has achieved such widespread bi-partisan support among our 
colleagues.
  S. 2180 address only one Superfund issue--the unintended consequence 
of law that holds recyclers responsible for the actions of those who 
purchase their goods.
  Therefore, S. 2180 does not address the very contentious and 
important issues of cleanup standards or natural resource damages.
  It does not deal with orphan shares or municipal liability. The goal 
of this bill is to remove the liability facing recyclers, not to 
establish who should be responsible for those shares if the unintended 
liability is removed.
  It does not deal with municipal liability specifically, but if 
municipalities ship materials for recycling, they would be treated the 
same as any other recycler. Thus, municipalities are provided some 
relief under S. 2180 for recycling transactions.
  It does not deal with owner/operator liability because such liability 
was intended by Superfund. Any changes in owner/operator liability 
should be considered within the context of comprehensive Superfund 
reform.
  Likewise, issues of relief for generators who ship for disposal, 
rather than for recycling, are not addressed by S. 2180. Waste 
disposal--indeed proper, environmentally sound waste disposal--is a 
basic tenet of Superfund. Reforms should be considered within the 
context of comprehensive Superfund revisions.
  Senator Daschle and I have heard from various parties who want to add 
minor provisions outside the scope of the bill. Although many have 
presented interesting and often compelling arguments, I find that none 
of these parties has been able to demonstrate the broad base of support 
that has made the Superfund Recycling Equity Act so unique. No group 
has been able to demonstrate the support of the broad-based, truly non-
partisan group that has long recognized the need for recycling reform. 
I will continue to ask that any party wishing to enlarge the narrow 
focus of S. 2180 show support on both sides of the aisle, as well as 
from the Administration and the environmental community.
  Mr. President, much time, energy and expertise went into crafting an 
agreement where few thought it was possible. That agreement has been 
maintained through three separate Congresses where all sorts of 
attempts to modify it have failed. Congress should accept this 
delicately crafted product.
  S. 2180 shows Congress' commitment to protect and increase recycling.
  S. 2180 repeats what we all know and support--that continued and 
expanded recycling is a national goal.
  S. 2180 removes impediments to achieving this goal, impediments 
Congress never intended to occur.
  Mr. President, the 40+ Senators who have already co-sponsored this 
bill recognize the need to amend Superfund for the very important 
purpose of increasing recycling in the public interest. Let's act this 
year.

                          ____________________