Statement of Senator Bob Smith
Chairman, Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works
Hearing on S. 2700, Brownfield Revitalization and Environmental Restoration Act of 2000
June 29, 2000

Good Afternoon. Thank you very much Senator Chafee. I'd like to welcome the witnesses here today, particularly those who traveled some distance to be here.

As the former Superfund Subcommittee Chairman, I have worked on Superfund issues for a long time. Today, we receive testimony on the first bipartisan bill amending Superfund to be introduced since the 103rd Congress.

This bill enjoys bipartisan support because of the recognition that today's environmental problems cannot be addressed by yesterday's solutions and that we must strive to allow for the sustainability of our environment, our resources, and our economy in order to succeed as policymakers.

The U.S. Conference of Mayors has estimated that more than 450,000 brownfield sites exist around the country. These sites endanger human health and the environment, force alternative greenfield development, and discourage the revitalization of areas in desperate need of economic development.

Under current law, incentives do not exist to clean up and develop these sites; in fact, quite the opposite, disincentives and fear of liability prevail. Although the level of contamination at many of these sites is relatively low, and the potential value of the property may be quite high, developers often shy away from purchasing and developing these sites because of the current status of the Superfund law.

To address these disincentives, EPA developed the National Brownfields Program. This Program provides funding to assess brownfield sites, but involves a cumbersome application process, and does not address the underlying fears of liability that exist under current law. This program is a good first step; but, in order to reach its full potential, we must guide the efforts of EPA by authorizing the Program.

Addressing the fear of Superfund liability is just as important, if not more so, as providing funding for site assessments and revolving loan funds. S. 2700 provides not only funding for assessments and revolving loan funds, but for the remediation of sites and the enhancement of state programs as well. The bill includes clarifications of the liability scheme to ease and encourage the transfer of properties to those willing to clean up and develop. These clarifications protect prospective, contiguous, and innocent landowners from liability.

The bill also addresses the fear of Superfund liability by providing a final decision point for assessing liability; that decision point rests with the States. To do this, the bill restricts EPA's ability to second-guess decisions made at sites cleaned up under a State Voluntary Cleanup Program, except in limited circumstances. In addition, the bill builds on the ability of the States to clean up contaminated sites by providing that EPA defer NPL listing of a site to a State program at the request of the State.

The need for this legislation, as well as a future comprehensive reform bill, is supported by the conclusions of a recent GAO report examining the effectiveness of the reforms instituted by EPA in the Superfund program. The results found that three-fourths of the 62 reforms implemented by EPA are ineffective or unmeasurable. The study also found that the implementation of reforms peaked in 1997 and has declined since that time, thus indicating that further action is needed.

As demonstrated by the findings of this study, there is a continuing need for reform of Superfund. I plan to work toward that end next year, however, an even more pressing need exists today. That need is to ensure the few reforms that are working continue to be implemented. Of the 7 reforms that GAO found to demonstrate positive results, 4 affect the management and cleanup of brownfields. To continue the work EPA is doing and to better guide their efforts, the passage of BRERA is essential.

Some members of the Committee believe that taking brownfields out of a comprehensive reform package will jeopardize future Superfund reform. I feel that we can move forward with brownfields without compromising comprehensive reform. The funding, liability clarifications, and state finality afforded by this bill will ensure these sites are cleaned up, never becoming Superfund sites, and resulting in an improved quality of life for all of us.