Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Subcommittee, my name is Preston Daniels, and I am the Mayor of the City of Des Moines, Iowa. Thank you for inviting me to testify today on behalf of the National Association of Local Government Environmental Professionals, or "NALGEP." NALGEP appreciates the opportunity to present this testimony on the views of local government officials from across the nation on the need for federal brownfields legislation to support the cleanup, redevelopment and productive reuse of brownfields sites. Today, I wish to convey how S. 2700, the "Brownfields Revitalization and Environmental Restoration Act of 2000," would meet the needs of American communities to promote brownfields revitalization.
NALGEP represents local government officials responsible for ensuring environmental compliance, and developing and implementing environmental policies and programs. NALGEP's membership consists of more than 135 local government entities located throughout the United States. Our members include many of the leading brownfields communities in the country such as Des Moines, Providence, Trenton, Richmond, Rochester, Portland, Chicago, Los Angeles, Salt Lake City, Dallas, and Cuyahoga County, Ohio, to name a few.
In 1995, NALGEP initiated a brownfields project to determine local government views on national brownfields initiatives such as the EPA Brownfields Action Agenda. The NALGEP brownfields project culminated in a report, entitled Building a Brownfields Partnership from the Ground Up: Local Government Views on the Value and Promise of National Brownfields Initiatives, which was issued in February, 1997. That report called for new federal resources to support brownfields revitalization, particularly cleanup. The report also called for new liability clarification, as well as authority for states to take a lead in voluntary brownfields cleanup. As this Committee knows, local governments have sought federal brownfields law for many years now.
During the past few years, NALGEP has continued its work on brownfields through coordinating projects involving local officials to address the following issues: (1) Brownfields Cleanup Revolving Loan Funds; (2) use of HUD Community Development Block Grants for Brownfields; (3) partnerships between business and local government officials to reduce sprawl and promote smart growth; and (4) implementation of the Administration's Brownfields Showcase Community initiative. As a result of these efforts, NALGEP is well qualified to provide the Committee with a representative view of how local governments, and their environmental and development professionals, believe the nation must move ahead to create long-term success in the revitalization of brownfields properties.
NALGEP's testimony today will focus on the following areas: (1) the urgent need for increased federal funding to support the assessment, cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields sites across the country; (2) the need for liability clarification to encourage states and the private sector to step forward and revitalize more sites; (3) the need for federal brownfields legislation to provide funding for the cleanup of brownfields blighted by lead, asbestos and petroleum; and (4) the need to facilitate the participation of other federal agencies, such as the Army Corps of Engineers, in local brownfields initiatives. Overall, our view of the opportunity created by S. 2700 is straightforward this bill provides critical, positive support to local governments who badly need federal resources and assistance for the revitalization of America's brownfields. I would also note that both of my senators, Senator Grassley and Senator Harkin, are co-sponsors of S. 2700.
The cleanup and revitalization of brownfields represents one of the most exciting, and most challenging, environmental and economic initiatives in the nation. Brownfields are abandoned, idled, or under-used properties where expansion or redevelopment is hindered by real or perceived contamination. The brownfields challenge faces virtually every community; experts estimate that there may be as many as 500,000 brownfields sites throughout the country.
The brownfields issue illustrates the connection among environmental, economic and community goals that can be simultaneously fostered through a combination of national leadership, state incentives, and the innovation of local and private sector leaders. Cleaning up and redeveloping brownfields provides many environmental, economic and community benefits including:
The City of Des Moines is impacted by brownfields, and is seeking partnership with the federal government to revitalize its brownfields and create new opportunity for our citizens. With the business community, key federal and state agencies, and civic organizations, Des Moines is demonstrating how turning its brownfields into waterfront and mixed-use developments, new manufacturing, and recreational and open spaces can keep Des Moines a livable city, empower distressed communities, and avoid the sprawling of the metropolitan region into the area's precious farmland. In addition, Des Moines' brownfields efforts demonstrate the value of federal support, as U.S. EPA's resources and assistance to my City have made a critical difference in our ability to revitalize our blighted brownfields sites. EPA has been a spark that has fueled the brownfields flame in our community.
Des Moines has a solid track record in brownfields, as demonstrated by the successful revitalization of the Guthrie Avenue Business Park a $30 million, 815,000 square feet office/warehouse/manufacturing project on a formerly contaminated site. The City is also underway with Phase II environmental assessment and cleanup plans for the 1200-acre Des Moines Agribusiness Park, which will accommodate the growth of value-added agribusinesses and assist in positioning Iowa as the Food Capital of the World. The Ag-Park is expected to add $250 million to the tax base and create 7,000 new jobs.
Des Moines is also seeking to assess, clean up, and redevelop the Riverpoint West area in downtown Des Moines. The 300-acre Riverpoint West area is located directly south of the Central Business District, north of the Raccoon River, in a census tract with a 37.8% poverty rate. Prior uses in the Riverpoint area have included but are not limited to rail yards; newspaper and magazine printing; tanning; asphalt paving; paint manufacturing; limestone, coal and coke yards; foundry operations; iron works and industrial chemical manufacturing. Soil and groundwater concerns are evident, and there are tremendous land disturbances throughout this area. Construction and demolition debris, metal drums with unknown contents, straw, glass and broken tile have been deposited. The redevelopment challenge not only involves determining the nature and extent of environmental contamination, but also assessing the geotechnical constraints that may limit construction density and affect the economic viability of the project.
In partnership with the Greater Des Moines Partnership (comprised of 17 chambers of commerce and business associations), the City will revitalize this environmentally contaminated industrial area into a mixed-used urban village with approximately 1,000 residential units, 850,000 square feet of low-rise office and retail space, and environmental and recreational enhancements along the riverfront. By creating an interconnection with the adjacent Central Business District, Riverpoint West can advance the success of downtown redevelopment initiatives by meeting needs for workers and new consumers, providing parking, and offering support services. Moreover, the revitalization of Riverpoint West will be coordinated with the recycling of the adjacent DICO Superfund site into essential parking and transportation facilities. A Phase I assessment and an initial economic feasibility study have been completed, and Des Moines is ready to begin Phase II testing on 175 acres. Several local developers have indicated their serious interest in redevelopment opportunities. When completed, this revitalization project is expected to create 1,000 jobs and increase the tax base twelve-fold from approximately $12 million to more than $140 million in the Riverpoint West area alone, not even taking into account the positive economic reinvestment that can spread throughout downtown Des Moines.
Although Des Moines has already made great progress, success in achieving the community's vision to revitalize Riverpoint West will require substantial additional resources and support, including from the federal government. Des Moines is facing daunting challenges and expense at the Riverpoint West area, which needs further environmental assessment and geotechnical exploration; significant environmental remediation; substantial site preparation for development; and flood control and aquatic ecosystem restoration assistance. Clearly, the federal government has a role to play, and federal legislation for brownfields revitalization could make a major difference for our revitalization plans. And, the time is now for new national brownfields incentives, while the economy is strong and when this legislation can make a positive difference on the market feasibility of blighted urban sites.
The Proposed Legislation Will Meet Local Government Needs for Federal Brownfields Incentives
Local governments across America need federal incentives and assistance for brownfields revitalization. Priority needs include funding for assessment and cleanup, liability clarification for parties who can foster the cleanup of brownfields, and clear authority for state-led brownfields cleanups.
I. Ensuring Adequate Resources for Brownfields Revitalization
As Des Moines' efforts to revitalize the Riverpoint West area clearly demonstrate, local governments need additional federal funding for site assessment, remediation and economic redevelopment to ensure long-term success in revitalizing our brownfields. The costs of site assessment and remediation can create a significant barrier to the redevelopment of brownfields sites. In particular, the uncertainty associated with brownfields sites pose an initial obstacle that drives development away from brownfields sites. With this initial obstacle removed, localities eliminate uncertainty, save time, and are much better able to put sites into a development track. In addition, the allocation of public resources for site assessment can provide a signal to the development community that the public sector is serious about resolving liability issues at a site and putting it back into productive reuse. In fact, the resources provided to Des Moines through the EPA brownfield assessment pilot program are what enabled the City to get serious about the redevelopment of our priority brownfield sites. Without this help, many brownfields will continue to blight communities across America and encourage sprawling patterns of development.
Likewise, resources for cleanup are the missing link for many brownfield sites a link that keeps brownfields from being redeveloped into productive areas in many communities like Des Moines. Although the private sector has a key role to play in brownfields cleanup, the catalyst of federal cleanup dollars is needed at many sites to leverage private cleanup funds and to help level the development playing field between brownfields and our precious open spaces and agricultural lands. The use of public funds for the assessment and cleanup of brownfields sites is a smart investment. Public funding can be leveraged into substantial private sector resources. Investments in brownfields yield the economic fruit of increased jobs, expanded tax bases for cities, and urban revitalization. And the investment of public resources in brownfields areas will help defer the environmental and economic costs that can result from unwise, sprawling development outside of our urban centers.
The $150 million in annual federal funding for brownfields revitalization provided in S. 2700 will go a long way toward helping communities make progress on this daunting brownfields problem. Furthermore, S. 2700 properly recognizes a wide variety of local entities as eligible entities for federal brownfields funding, including not only local governments, states and tribes, but also local development agencies, regional economic development districts, and other entities that play key roles in local brownfields revitalization. The following types of federal funding will help local communities continue to make progress in revitalizing our brownfields sites:
-- Grants for Site Assessments and Investigation: EPA's Brownfields Assessment Pilot grants have been extremely effective in helping localities to establish local brownfields programs, inventory sites in their communities, investigate the potential contamination at specific sites, and educate key stakeholders and the general public about overcoming the obstacles to brownfields redevelopment. Additional funding for site assessments and investigation is needed to help more communities establish local brownfields programs and begin the process of revitalizing these sites in their communities. S. 2700 recognizes the value of federal funding for brownfields assessments, and appropriately provides money for the development of local assessment programs, as well as for targeted brownfields assessment activities.
-- Grants for Cleanup of Brownfields Sites: There is a strong need for federal grants to support the cleanup of brownfields sites across the country. The U.S. Conference of Mayors' recent report on the status of brownfields sites in 223 cities nationwide indicates that the lack of cleanup funds is the major obstacle to reusing these properties. For many brownfields sites, a modest grant targeted for cleanup can make the critical difference in determining whether a site is redeveloped, creating new jobs, tax revenues and return on investment, or whether the site remains polluted, dangerous and abandoned. The approach in S. 2700 recognizes this critical funding need, and appropriately provides for direct grants for cleanup, based on considerations including the protection of green space and parks, and the re-use of existing infrastructure. NALGEP emphasizes the importance of the Subcommittee's recognition of the connection between brownfields redevelopment and smart growth in our local communities.
-- Grants to Capitalize Brownfields Cleanup Revolving Loan Funds: In addition to grants, federal funding to help localities and states to establish revolving loan funds (RLFs) for brownfields cleanup is another effective mechanism to leverage public and private resources for redevelopment. EPA deserves credit for championing brownfields RLFs as a mechanism for helping communities fill a critical gap in cleanup funding. Likewise, S. 2700 provides needed improvements to the RLF program, by enabling EPA to separate cleanup grants for loan funds from the burdensome and unnecessary requirements of the Superfund National Contingency Plan that have hindered the effective use of RLF funds thus far.
II. Liability Clarification at Brownfields Sites
On the issue of federal Superfund liability associated with brownfields sites, NALGEP has found that the Environmental Protection Agency's overall leadership and its package of liability clarification policies have helped establish a climate conducive to brownfields renewal, and have contributed to the cleanup of specific sites throughout the nation. Congress can enhance these liability reforms by further clarifying in legislation that Superfund liability does not apply to certain "non-responsible" parties such as innocent landowners, prospective purchasers and contiguous property owners. S. 2700 clearly addresses these issues, and overcomes a hurdle that has kept innocent parties from voluntarily cleaning brownfields sites.
III. Enhancing the Role of the States in Brownfields Cleanup, Improving State Programs, and Keeping the Safety Net of EPA Protection
Addressing the American brownfields problem will require federal law that provides effective State brownfields cleanup programs with the authority to foster cleanups and clarify liability at these sites. Moreover, resources and support are needed to improve the effectiveness of many state brownfields cleanup programs. At the same time, the law must preserve the ability of U.S. EPA to protect citizens and local governments from bad cleanups and ineffective state programs. The approach proposed by S. 2700 puts forth a well crafted, workable approach that can help foster increased brownfields revitalization.
It is clear that effective brownfields likely to take place in states with effective voluntary cleanup programs. NALGEP has also found that states are playing a critical lead role in promoting the revitalization of brownfields. More than forty states have established voluntary or independent cleanup programs that have been a primary factor in successful brownfields cleanup, including my home state of Iowa. The effectiveness of state leadership in brownfields is demonstrated by those 14 states that have taken primary responsibility for brownfields liability clarification pursuant to Superfund "Memoranda of Agreement" (MOAs) with U.S. EPA. These MOAs defer liability clarification authority to those states, and have resulted in increased brownfields activities in local communities that can make use of these state-EPA agreements.
The federal government should further encourage states to take the lead at brownfields sites. States are more familiar with the circumstances and needs at individual sites. A state lead will increase local flexibility and provide confidence to developers, lenders, prospective purchasers and other parties that brownfields sites can be revitalized without the specter of Superfund liability or the involvement of federal enforcement personnel. Parties developing brownfields want to know that the state can provide the last word on liability, and that there will be only one "policeman," barring exceptional circumstances. Moreover, it is clear that U.S. EPA lacks the resources or ability to provide the assistance necessary to remediate and redevelop the hundreds of thousands of brownfields sites in our communities.
S. 2700 provides that EPA will not take Superfund enforcement or cost recovery action against a person who is conducting or has completed a response action regarding the specific release that is addressed by the response action that is in compliance with a State program that specifically governs response actions for the protection of public health and the environment. The approach taken by S. 2700 will help effective State brownfields programs to take a lead in brownfields cleanup, and give confidence to brownfields developers that they can get the job done.
At the same time, local officials are also concerned that citizens need to be protected from inadequate brownfields cleanups, in which a state program does not effectively protect public health or in other exceptional circumstances. States vary in the technical expertise, resources, staffing, and commitment necessary to ensure that brownfields cleanups are adequately protective of public health and the environment. If brownfields sites are improperly assessed, remediated or put into reuse, it is most likely that the local government, will bear the largest impact from any public health emergency or contamination of the environment. Thus, it is important to keep the safety net of U.S. EPA Superfund authority intact for those exceptional circumstances in which a state needs help at a particular brownfields cleanup, the sites presents an imminent and substantial threat to health or the environment, or in other limited situations. The approach in S. 2700 keeps this important safety net for our citizens and the environment in place, and provides a balanced and workable state-federal approach.
The approach provided in S. 2700 goes even further, by providing resources and assistance to enable States to develop and improve their brownfields cleanup programs, so that brownfield cleanups are effective and circumstances of public health threat remain truly exceptional. By tying grants to States for the enhancement of cleanup programs to criteria to ensure that the state programs have adequate provisions for meaningful public participation, enforcement, and mechanisms for the approval of cleanups, S. 2700 will help promote state leadership on brownfields cleanup.
IV. Addressing the Local Need to Clean Up Brownfields with Lead, Asbestos, and Petroleum Contamination
NALGEP suggests one major improvement for the proposed brownfields legislation, which is needed to address a priority local problem - the cleanup of brownfields impacted by petroleum, or by lead and asbestos in the structures of buildings.
Under the current law and agency programs, these pollutants are excluded from federal brownfields assistance. These environmental contaminants are some of the most difficult problems facing local communities in their public health protection and revitalization. Abandoned gas stations, housing with severe lead paint hazards, and buildings contaminated with asbestos blight communities across America, and represent a top local priority for cleanup. In fact, EPA reports that there are nearly 200,000 abandoned gas stations in the United States.
"Brownfield sites" with these pollutants should be eligible for funding. Local governments should be granted the flexibility to direct their brownfields resources, including federal funds provided by S. 2700, to their priority brownfields projects, including those that are blighted by petroleum, lead or asbestos. In addition, these sites should also be eligible to take advantage of the liability protections offered to innocent landowners, prospective purchasers, and contiguous property owners.
V. Liability Clarification at Brownfields Sites
On the issue of federal Superfund liability associated with brownfields sites, NALGEP has found that the Environmental Protection Agency's overall leadership and its package of liability clarification policies have helped establish a climate conducive to brownfields renewal, and have contributed to the cleanup of specific sites throughout the nation. Congress can enhance these liability reforms by further clarifying in legislation that Superfund liability does not apply to certain "non-responsible" parties such as innocent landowners, prospective purchasers and contiguous property owners. S. 2700 clearly addresses these issues, and overcomes a hurdle that has kept innocent parties from voluntarily cleaning brownfields sites.
VI. Enhancing the Role of the States in Brownfields Cleanup, Improving State Programs, and Keeping the Safety Net of EPA Protection
Addressing the American brownfields problem will require federal law that provides effective State brownfields cleanup programs with the authority to foster cleanups and clarify liability at these sites. Moreover, resources and support are needed to improve the effectiveness of many state brownfields cleanup programs. At the same time, the law must preserve the ability of U.S. EPA to protect citizens and local governments from bad cleanups and ineffective state programs. The approach proposed by S. 2700 puts forth a well crafted, workable approach that can help foster increased brownfields revitalization.
It is clear that effective brownfields revitalization is most likely to take place in states with effective voluntary cleanup programs. NALGEP has also found that states are playing a critical lead role in promoting the revitalization of brownfields. More than forty states have established voluntary or independent cleanup programs that have been a primary factor in successful brownfields cleanup, including my home state of Iowa. The effectiveness of state leadership in brownfields is demonstrated by those 14 states that have taken primary responsibility for brownfields liability clarification pursuant to Superfund "Memoranda of Agreement" (MOAs) with U.S. EPA. These MOAs defer liability clarification authority to those states, and have resulted in increased brownfields activities in local communities that can make use of these state-EPA agreements.
The federal government should further encourage states to take the lead at brownfields sites. States are more familiar with the circumstances and needs at individual sites. A state lead will increase local flexibility and provide confidence to developers, lenders, prospective purchasers and other parties that brownfields sites can be revitalized without the specter of Superfund liability or the involvement of federal enforcement personnel. Parties developing brownfields want to know that the state can provide the last word on liability, and that there will be only one "policeman," barring exceptional circumstances. Moreover, it is clear that U.S. EPA lacks the resources or ability to provide the assistance necessary to remediate and redevelop the hundreds of thousands of brownfields sites in our communities.
S. 2700 provides that EPA will not take Superfund enforcement or cost recovery action against a person who is conducting or has completed a response action regarding the specific release that is addressed by the response action that is in compliance with a State program that specifically governs response actions for the protection of public health and the environment. The approach taken by S. 2700 will help effective State brownfields programs to take a lead in brownfields cleanup, and give confidence to brownfields developers that they can get the job done.
At the same time, local officials are also concerned that citizens need to be protected from inadequate brownfields cleanups, in which a state program does not effectively protect public health or in other exceptional circumstances. States vary in the technical expertise, resources, staffing, and commitment necessary to ensure that brownfields cleanups are adequately protective of public health and the environment. If brownfields sites are improperly assessed, remediated or put into reuse, it is most likely that the local government will bear the largest impact from any public health emergency or contamination of the environment. Thus, it is important to keep the safety net of U.S. EPA Superfund authority intact for those exceptional circumstances in which a state needs help at a particular brownfields cleanup, the sites presents an imminent and substantial threat to health or the environment, or in other limited situations. The approach in S. 2700 keeps this important safety net for our citizens and the environment in place, and provides a balanced and workable state-federal approach.
The approach provided in S. 2700 goes even further, by providing resources and assistance to enable States to develop and improve their brownfields cleanup programs, so that brownfield cleanups are effective and circumstances of public health threat remain truly exceptional. By tying grants to States for the enhancement of cleanup programs to criteria to ensure that the state programs have adequate provisions for meaningful public participation, enforcement, and mechanisms for the approval of cleanups, S. 2700 will help promote state leadership on brownfields cleanup.
VII. Addressing the Local Need to Clean Up Brownfields with Lead, Asbestos, and Petroleum Contamination
NALGEP suggests one major improvement for the proposed brownfields legislation, which is needed to address a priority local problem the cleanup of brownfields impacted by petroleum, or by lead and asbestos in the structures of buildings. Under the current law and agency programs, these pollutants are excluded from federal brownfields assistance. These environmental contaminants are some of the most difficult problems facing local communities in their public health protection and revitalization. Abandoned gas stations, housing with severe lead paint hazards, and buildings contaminated with asbestos blight communities across America, and represent a top local priority for cleanup. In fact, EPA reports that there are nearly 200,000 abandoned gas stations in the United States. "Brownfield sites" with these pollutants should be eligible for funding. Local governments should be granted the flexibility to direct their brownfields resources, including federal funds provided by S. 2700, to their priority brownfields projects, including those that are blighted by petroleum, lead or asbestos. In addition, these sites should also be eligible to take advantage of the liability protections offered to innocent landowners, prospective purchasers, and contiguous property owners.
VIII. Facilitating the Participation of Other Federal Agencies in Brownfields Revitalization
The cleanup and redevelopment of a brownfields site is often a challenging task that requires coordinated efforts among different government agencies at the local, state and national levels, public-private partnerships, the leveraging of financial resources from diverse sources, and the participation of many different stakeholders. Many different federal agencies can play a valuable role in providing funding, technical expertise, regulatory flexibility, and incentives to facilitate brownfields revitalization. For example, HUD, the Economic Development Administration, the Department of Transportation, and the Army Corps of Engineers have all contributed important resources to expedite local brownfields projects. The U.S. EPA and the Administration have provided strong leadership through the Brownfields Showcase Community initiative that is demonstrating how the federal government can coordinate and leverage resources from many different federal agencies to help localities solve their brownfields problems.
Congress can help strengthen the national brownfields partnership by further clarifying that the various federal partners play a critical role in redeveloping brownfields, and by encouraging the agencies to meet local needs and to create innovative new approaches. For example, Congress should be commended for legislation passed in 1998 to clarify that HUD Community Development Block Grant funds can be used for all aspects of brownfields projects including site assessments, cleanup and redevelopment. This simple step has cleared the way for communities across the country to use these funds in a flexible fashion to meet their specific local needs. In addition, Congress has provided $25 million in each of the past two years for HUD's Brownfields Economic Development Initiative.
Similarly, Congress should consider clarifying that it is appropriate and desirable for the Army Corps of Engineers to use its resources and substantial technical expertise for local brownfields projects. In Des Moines, for instance, we need the Corps of Engineers' help to succeed in our revitalization of the Riverpoint West area, which is severely impacted by flooding, environmental contamination, and the need for restoration of the local aquatic ecosystem. The Corps of Engineers is already conducting a major flood control study for Riverpoint West, and Des Moines is seeking to expand this study to address ecosystem and environmental contamination issues.
I understand that the Administration has proposed a new authority in the Water Resources Development Act 2000 legislation for brownfields cleanup, in order to protect the water quality and promote the revitalization of communities across the nation. Likewise, Senator Chafee has introduced S. 2335, the "State and Local Brownfields Revitalization Act of 2000," which also provides the Corps with clear authority to conduct brownfields activities along America's waterways. NALGEP believes this is an excellent proposal that will make a big difference for our city and many other communities.
Congress also should work with EPA and the Administration to determine how other agencies can help facilitate more brownfields revitalization. By taking these steps, Congress can give communities additional tools, resources, and flexibility to overcome the many obstacles to brownfields redevelopment. Conclusion
Senator Robert Kennedy once declared "give me a place on which to stand, and I shall move the earth!" The people of America, the people of our local communities, people in this Congress, are standing up on our brownfields and in our streets and in our neighborhoods and we are shouting, let's move the earth! Let us take these places that have been abandoned, and let us turn them back to jobs and business and parks and homes. Let us show that we can bring business people and environmental groups and City Hall and the federal agencies together toward a common, exciting goal. Let us work together to let entrepreneurship thrive. Let us take this notion that jobs and the environment are a tradeoff, and recycle it into a new notion of livable communities where these goals are linked and supportive of each other. And let's do it now.
In conclusion, local governments are excited to work with the federal government to promote the revitalization of brownfields, through a combination of increased federal investment in community revitalization, further liability clarification, and other mechanisms to strengthen the national partnership to cleanup and redevelop our communities. On behalf of NALGEP, I thank the Subcommittee for this opportunity to testify, and we would be pleased to provide further input as the process moves forward.