entific methods and data available help to answer those local questions and alert all parties to the key public health issues, and equally importantly in some instances the assessments can also mitigate local concerns by demonstrating that there, in fact, is not a health problem. Once a hazardous waste site is identified, there is a window of opportunity for establishing baseline health and exposure data to understand the potential health risks that exist and to develop plans for remediation that specifically address those health risks. This window all too often closes before public health has a chance to intervene. H.R. 1300 encourages the completion of public health assessments prior to the choice of remedial activities, lending to the higher likelihood that health considerations will be included. As you know, Superfund process is governed by State and Federal agencies, and local health departments have not had statutory authority. But they do have the responsibility for the protection and promotion of health for their entire community. It is critically important to bring local public health agencies to the table, then, to understand demographic and cultural characteristics that apply to remediation. Let me say a few words, if I can, about brownfields. While the statutory authorities differ widely from Superfund, the same health and public health principles apply. Local public health officials dealing with the 600,000 brownfields, the number that we are using, know that the health of the public is intimately linked to economic prosperity. Economic development is vital to creating and sustaining healthy communities. Done carelessly, however, economic development can have a negative impact on the health of the public. The local public agency's role in brownfields includes the application of professional expertise to determine the readiness and the appropriateness of a property for redevelopment. It includes determining the baseline health status of the community members that are potentially affected by the site. Public health authorities can serve as brokers between developers, redevelopment authorities, and the community at large. They may conduct long-term monitoring of the site as well. Done well, public health oversight of brownfields can protect the investment of the developer and the health of the community. As with Superfund sites, health protection of the special vulnerabilities of children is especially critical. Redevelopment of a waste disposal site in Weld County, Colorado, illustrates the benefits of public health involvement. The county commission, aware of an abandoned waste site-and that it was lying unused-requested the health department to investigate the site to determine what, if any, contamination remained. An assessment revealed that the soils beneath the facility were contaminated. The health department worked with the prospective developer to establish a common-sense plan involving soil treatment, which the development paid for. The project was completed. The county is now assured that there is no risk of future public health problems due to contamination, and the property is back on the tax roles. H.R. 1300 establishes a number of granting mechanisms, which you are well aware of. We would suggest three changes-three additions-that the mechanisms also include funding for: assessments of local public health impacts of redevelopment and remediation activities; secondly, ongoing monitoring of human health and environmental effects; and lastly, ongoing enforcement of institutional controls that may be delegated as laws change and affect local health authorities. We have additional comments in writing, Mr. Chairman, but just to reemphasize, we very much appreciate your leadership in this. We think it is an important bill, and we support its passage. Mr. BOEHLERT. Thank you very much, Mr. Milne. As I think it is very apparent to one and all, public health and the environment need to be protected, and that is the purpose of this bill. We have a call in the House, and I could ask you to hang around for a half hour. That would not be fair to you. Let me say all of your statements are in the record in their entirety. We appreciate your comments. We appreciate your constructive suggestions. We appreciate the spirit with which you come before this committee. Together, we can get something accomplished that is going to be good for all. So I thank you for your input, and I would declare this hearing adjourned. [Whereupon, at 2:11 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] STATEMENT OF CAROL M. BROWNER U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT MAY 12, 1999 INTRODUCTION Good morning Mr. Chairman, and Members of the Subcommittee. I am pleased to have this opportunity to appear before you to discuss H.R. 1300, the "Recycle America's Land Act of 1999," as well as the Agency's record of accomplishments over the past several years in fundamentally improving the Superfund program. Before addressing the bill or the successes of the current Superfund program, I believe it is important to recognize, from the outset, Superfund's mission. Superfund is an important, and above all, necessary program, dedicated to cleaning up our nation's hazardous waste sites, including those caused by the Federal government, and protecting public health and the environment for citizens no matter where they live in our country. EPA has worked closely with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) in evaluating the impacts of these sites on public health. Superfund site impacts are real. ATSDR studies show a variety of health effects that are associated with some Superfund sites, including birth defects, reductions in birth weight, changes in pulmonary function, changes in neurobehavorial function, infertility and changes in blood cells that are associated with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. EPA also works with other federal agencies to assess the significant adverse impacts Superfund sites have had on natural resources and the environment. Together, the efforts of these agencies, working with EPA, provide the basis for targeting cleanups to protect public health and the environment, and show the need for Superfund. SUPERFUND PROGRESS The Superfund program is making significant progress in cleaning up hazardous waste sites and protecting public health and the environment. EPA has significantly changed how the Superfund program operates through three rounds of administrative reforms which have made Superfund a fairer, more effective, and more efficient program. EPA has made considerable progress in cleaning up sites on the National Priorities List (NPL). The Agency has gone from cleaning up 65 sites per year to cleaning up 85 sites per year. As of March 17,1999, 90% of the sites on the final NPL are either undergoing cleanup construction (remedial or removal) or are completed: 599 Superfund sites have reached construction completion. 464 Superfund sites have cleanup construction underway: An additional 208 sites have had or are undergoing a removal cleanup action. By the end of the 106th Congress EPA will have completed construction of all cleanup remedies at approximately 61% of all non-Federal sites currently on the NPL. In addition, approximately 990 NPL sites have final cleanup plans approved, and approximately 5,600 removal actions have been taken at hazardous waste sites to stabilize dangerous situations and immediately reduce the threat to public health and the environment. Almost 31,000 sites have been removed from the Superfund inventory of potentially hazardous waste sites to help promote the economic redevelopment of these properties. INCREASING THE PACE OF CLEANUPS The Superfund program is making significant progress in accelerating the pace of clean up while ensuring protection of public health and the environment. Our analyses clearly show that Superfund cleanup durations have been reduced approximately 20%, or two years on the average. Almost three times as many Superfund sites have had construction completed in the past six years than in all of the prior years of the program combined. In fact, in large part because of our administrative reforms, EPA will have completed construction at more than 85% of the sites on the current NPL by 2005. The accelerated pace of cleanup is demonstrable. In only two years, FY 1997 and FY 1998, EPA completed construction at 175 sites --more than during the first 12 years of the program (149 sites). Seventy-three percent (128) of the sites are designated enforcement lead, demonstrating PRIVATE PARTY FUNDING EPA's "Enforcement First" strategy has resulted in responsible parties performing or paying for approximately 70% of long-term cleanups, thereby conserving the Superfund Trust Fund for sites for which there are no viable or liable responsible parties. This approach has saved taxpayers more than $15.5 billion to date more than $13 billion in response settlements, and nearly $2.5 billion in cost recovery settlements. PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT The accomplishments in protecting human health and the environment are significant. Environmental indicators show that the Superfund program continues making progress in hazardous waste cleanup, reducing both ecological and human health risks posed by dangerous chemicals in the air, soil, and water. The Superfund program has cleaned over 132 million cubic yards of hazardous soil, solid waste and sediment and over 341 billion gallons of hazardous liquid-based waste, groundwater, and surface water. In addition, the program has supplied over 350,000 people at NPL and non-NPL sites with alternative water supplies in order to protect them from contaminated groundwater and surface water. ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS Through the commitment of EPA, State, and Tribal site managers, other Federal agencies, private sector representatives, and involved communities, EPA has made Superfund faster, fairer, and more efficient through three rounds of administrative reforms. Several years of stakeholder response indicates that EPA's Superfund Reforms have already addressed the primary areas of the program that they believe needed improvement. EPA remains committed to fully implementing the administrative reforms and refining or improving them where necessary. EPA will be releasing its Annual Report on the status of Administrative Reforms for fiscal year (FY) 1998 within the next several weeks. Below are some of the highlights from the 1998 Annual Report. REMEDY REVIEW BOARD EPA's National Remedy Review Board (the Board) is continuing its targeted review of complex and high-cost cleanup plans, prior to final remedy selection, without delaying the overall pace of cleanup. Since the Board's inception in October 1995, it has reviewed a total of 33 site cleanup decisions, resulting in estimated cost savings of approximately $43 million. UPDATING REMEDY DECISIONS In addition to the work of the Board, EPA has achieved great success in updating cleanup decisions made in the early years of the Superfund program to accommodate changing science and technology. In fact, the Updating Remedy Decisions reform is one of EPA's most successful reforms, based on its frequent use and the amount of money saved. After three years of implementation, more than $1 billion in future cost reductions are estimated as a result of the Agency's review and update of remedies at more than 200 sites. It is important to stress that the future cost reductions described above can be achieved without sacrificing the protection of public health and the current pace of the program. |