[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Page 87]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                     SUPERFUND RECYCLING EQUITY ACT

  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I take this opportunity to correct an 
inadvertent but significant error in the Congressional Record of 
November 19, 1999, the last day of the first session of this Congress. 
It concerns a statement submitted for the Record by Senator Lott (145 
Congressional Record S15048) regarding the Superfund Recycling Equity 
Act, which was passed as part of the Intellectual Property and 
Communications Omnibus Reform Act of 1999. The statement erroneously 
was attributed to both Senator Lott and me. In fact, the statement did 
not then and does not now reflect my understanding of the Superfund 
recycling amendments.
  I make this clarification at the earliest opportunity, in order to 
minimize the possibility of any mistaken reliance on the statement as 
the consensus view of two original cosponsors, particularly with 
respect to the availability of relief in pending cases. It is not.
  The recycling amendments were passed as part of the end of year 
appropriations process and did not have the benefit of hearings, 
debates, or substantive committee consideration during the 106th 
legislative session. Thus, there is no conference report, and there are 
no committee reports or hearing transcripts, to guide interpretation of 
the bill.
  However, much, though not all, of the language in the recycling 
amendments originated in the 103d Congress. At that time, key 
stakeholders, including EPA, members of the environmental community and 
the recycling industry, agreed on recycling provisions as part of 
efforts to pass a comprehensive Superfund reform bill. Although 
Superfund reform legislation did not reach the floor in the 103d 
Congress, it was reported by the major Committees of jurisdiction in 
both the Senate (S. 1834) and the House with bi-partisan support. In 
reporting these bills in the 103d Congress, the Senate Environment and 
Public Works Committee, the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and 
the House Public Works and Transportation Committee each produced 
reports that include discussions of the recycling provisions.
  Since the recycling provisions of S. 1834 were identical in most 
respects to the Superfund Recycling Equity Act of 1999, and the meaning 
of key provisions of that bill were actively considered and discussed, 
the Senate Committee Report contains probably the best description of 
the consensus on the meaning of those provisions.
  To the extent the Committee Report does not address a particular 
provision of the recycling amendments, the Committee may very well have 
chosen to be silent on the point. With respect to such provisions, the 
``plain language'' of the statute must be our guide.
  I am proud of our accomplishment in finally passing the Superfund 
Recycling Equity Act with broad bi-partisan support. This could not 
have happened without the hard work and cooperation of Senator Lott. 
And the significance of this accomplishment is by no means compromised 
by the absence of agreement on any legislative history. As usual, it 
will be for the courts to resolve questions of interpretation on a 
case-by-case basis, applying the bill to a wide range of potential 
factual situations.
  I again thank the distinguished majority leader for his work on this 
bill.

                          ____________________