But phasing out the use of MTBE does not mean that we have to sacrifice our commitment to clean air. Several refineries have announced that they are already developing new additives that will produce the same clean-burning effect without the use of MTBE.

It is time for the Federal Government to admit that MTBE was a mistake and to look for better, safer ways to clean our air that do not endanger our safe drinking water. I applaud Mr. Bilbray for his efforts and I encourage this committee to go beyond Mr. Bilbray's legislation and ban MTBE nationwide.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Bob Franks follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. BOB FRANKS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to testify today.I'm here to lend my support to H.R. 11, a bill that would allow the State of California to opt out of the 2% oxygenate requirement of the Clean Air Act...and to urge you to go one step further.

There is compelling evidence that this requirement-which was designed to reduce carbon monoxide emissions in 10 areas of the country-has led to another risk to the public health.

It comes from Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether, or MTBE, the fuel additive of choice in many areas of the country because it was the least expensive way of meeting the two percent oxygenate requirement.

MTBE has been found to have contaminated the water supply in California and in other areas across the country-including in my home state of New Jersey. A University of California study into MTBE, released on November 12, 1998, concluded: "Within a relatively short period of time, MTBE has become one of the most highly publicized and widely released contaminants of surface and ground waters. Introduced as a gasoline additive without adequate investigation of its fate, transport and toxicity, it is now potentially a major threat to human health."

As we mark Safe Drinking Water Week-in recognition of 25 years of the Safe Drinking Water Act-it is only appropriate that Congress act to curb this risk to our national water supply.

In New Jersey, the state Department of Environmental Protection reports that 400 private wells and 65 public wells have been contaminated with MTBE. The contamination has been found in wells providing drinking water to homes and businesses throughout the state. One particularly serious treat is to the KirkwoodCohansey aquifer-a massive storehouse of drinking water in South Jersey-where wells have been found to have unacceptably high levels of MTBE.

The EPA is currently in the process of conducting additional research into the health effects of MTBE on humans. In the meantime, it has proposed that the chemical be included in the list of drinking water contaminates that are regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act.

Many states are not waiting for the EPA to take more definitive action. Growing concern about the potential health and environmental impact has prompted Alaska, North Carolina, Missouri, Montana and Maine to stop the use of MTBE.

And in March, Governor Gray Davis of California ordered that MTBE be eliminated from the gasoline supply in California by 2003, calling the chemical "a significant risk to California's environment."

I urge this committee to follow the lead of these states and put an end to the use of MTBE in gasoline-across the United States.

Legislation I am sponsoring-H.R. 1367-would ban the use of MTBE as a fuel additive over the next three years. By banning MTBE, we can prevent the spread of this chemical to other sources of drinking water.

Phasing out the use of MTBE does not mean that we have to sacrifice our commitment to clean air. Several refineries have announced that they are already developing new products that will produce the same clean-burning effect without the use of MTBE.

It's time for the federal government to admit that MTBE was a mistake and to look for better, safer ways to clean our air that do not endanger our safe drinking water.

I applaud Mr. Bilbray for his efforts. And I encourage this committee to go beyond Bilbray's legislation and ban MTBE nationwide.

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you, Bob.

Next, also from our side of the Capitol, The Honorable Ellen Tauscher from the State of California. Ellen, please proceed.

STATEMENT OF HON. ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for calling this hearing. Mr. Brown, thank you very much for your leadership. I want to applaud my colleague, Mr. Bilbray, and certainly Senator Feinstein for her leadership in the Senate, and I want to thank my colleagues both from California and throughout the country for their support for H.R. 11 and efforts to remove MTBE from California's gasoline.

As you know, I testified last year before this panel on the need to move quickly to provide California the flexibility necessary to maintain its clean air while protecting the State's water resources. By requiring California to blend an oxygenate such as MTBE into two-thirds of the State's gasoline, the Congress is unnecessarily putting our environment at risk. It makes little sense to continue using a chemical additive that is polluting the general drinking water supply in California and is both difficult and expensive to remediate.

Furthermore, many experts believe, as Senator Feinstein has said, that MTBE may be a human carcinogen. H.R. 11 is a bipartisan, performance-based, and environmentally sound bill which enjoys the support of 50 members of the California delegation. And as others have said, perhaps most importantly, California Governor Gray Davis issued an executive order on March 25 in which he prudently and appropriately established a timeline for the elimination of MTBE from California's gasoline. We in Congress must act now to ensure a seamless transition for the State's refiners and the families who depend on gasoline on a daily basis, and I urge the committee to swiftly consider this vital legislation.

Mr. Chairman, our State already suffers from very tight gasoline supplies. California's air pollution problems require that we use a cleaner blend of gasoline than is even required by the Federal law, making our gasoline market an island that is difficult and expensive to serve. If this bill fails to pass, studies conclude that California families could see their gasoline prices jump even higher than they are.

H.R. 11 will significantly mitigate any price increases associated with removing MTBE from gasoline by ensuring that a competitive market remains in place in California. Quite frankly, I fear a fullscale backlash against our State's clean air strategies if that comes to pass.

In sum, H.R. 11 will restore to California the flexibility it traditionally has had in this area. It will enable California to set fuel standards based on performance standards that set a required level of emissions reductions from the tail pipe and then leave it to the refiners to figure out how best to achieve those reductions. These are exactly the type of environmental strategies I support: Set a level and let the States achieve it in their own way. Put simply, we should be about results, not about process.

I want to thank you again, Mr. Chairman, and ranking member Brown and the members of the subcommittee for hearing this testi

mony, and I urge you to support this important measure. And I yield back the balance of my time.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Ellen O. Tauscher follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

I thank the Subcommittee for allowing me to testify today to express my support for H.R. 11 and efforts to remove MTBE from California's gasoline.

As you know, I testified last year before this panel on the need to move quickly to provide California the flexibility necessary to maintain its clean air while protecting the State's water resources. By requiring California and other states to blend an oxygenate such as MTBE into two-thirds of the state's gasoline, the Congress is unnecessarily putting our environment at risk.

It makes little sense to continue using a chemical additive that is polluting the general drinking water supply in California and is both difficult and expensive to remediate. Furthermore, many experts believe MTBE may be a human carcinogen. H.R. 11 is a bipartisan, performance-based and environmentally sound bill which enjoys the support of 50 members of the California delegation. Perhaps most importantly, California Governor Gray Davis issued an Executive Order on March 25 in which he prudently and appropriately established a timeline for elimination of MTBE from California's gasoline. We in Congress must act now to ensure a seamless transition for the State's refiners and the families who depend on gasoline on a daily basis, and I urge the Committee to swiftly consider this vital legislation.

We must not lose sight of the fact that the important issue at hand is ensuring that our air is clean and that pollution is reduced-not how we get there. By federally mandating particular chemical additives to gasoline, it takes away the local flexibility that could achieve the same or better results.

By clearing away this federal mandate, this bill will greatly benefit existing clean air strategies throughout California. Residents, industries, and air quality watchdogs in California-from the California Air Resources Board and the oil and auto industries, to environmental groups and ordinary citizens-support the California Cleaner Burning Gasoline (CBG) program. The CBG initiative already has shown dramatic improvements in air quality and is certain to succeed if given a full opportunity. It has proven to exceed the emissions reductions achieved by Federal RFG because of the performance-based nature of California's fuel program.

What's more, this bill was narrowly drafted to apply only to the State of California, so as to avoid a controversial re-opening of the Clean Air Act; and as I said, almost every California Member has cosponsored it. It presents an excellent opportunity to demonstrate to America's working families that Congress has the ability to work together and lead in a bipartisan fashion on an important environmental and public health issue. Most importantly, H.R. 11 is an example of exactly the type of second generation laws and rules governing environmental protection that we should promote. Our national approach to environmental stewardship should be modernized to improve the environment through performance standards rather than "command and control" approaches, thus increasing public and private sector efficiency, and instilling more fairness and accountability.

Unfortunately, without the passage of H.R. 11, California residents stand to suffer dramatically higher prices at the gas pump because the oxygenate mandate will cripple the ability of refiners to supply clean-burning gasoline in a cost-effective manner. We will be left in California with no option but to use ethanol in every gallon of federal RFG. In effect, in the nation's largest gasoline market, federal law would give the ethanol industry a legally-mandated monopoly for a taxpayer-subsidized product, controlled by an oligopoly in which three companies own almost 60 percent of the market and one company owns about 45 percent. That is a very unhealthy economic prospect.

Mr. Chairman, our state already suffers from very tight gasoline supplies. California's extreme air pollution problems require that we use a cleaner blend of gasoline than is required even by federal law, making our gasoline market an island that is difficult and expensive to serve. If this bill fails to pass, studies by the California Energy Commission conclude that California families could see their gasoline prices jump even higher than they are today. H.R. 11 will significantly mitigate any price increases associated with removing MTBE from gasoline by ensuring that a competitive market remains in place in California. Quite frankly, I fear a full-scale backlash against our state's clean air strategies if that comes to pass.

In sum, H.R. 11 will restore to California the flexibility it traditionally had in this area and that it lost in the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments due, as best as we can

tell, to an oversight or technical glitch. It will enable California to set fuel standards based, not on a federal mandate or on the filing of a mound of paperwork with the Federal EPA, but rather based on performance standards that set a required_level of emissions reductions from the tailpipe and then leave it to the refiners to figure out how best to achieve those reductions. Cal EPA and CARB can then follow with necessary state law changes. These are exactly the type of environmental strategies I support-set a level, and let states achieve it in their own way.

Put simply, we should be about results, not about process.

I thank you, Chairman Bilirakis and Ranking Member Brown, and the members of the Subcommittee for hearing my testimony and I urge you to support this important measure.

Thank you.

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you. And from the city of Santa Monica, its Mayor, The Honorable Pam O'Connor. Please proceed, Ma'am. STATEMENT OF HON. PAM O'CONNOR, MAYOR, CITY OF SANTA MONICA

Ms. O'CONNOR. Good morning, I am Pam O'Connor, Mayor of Santa Monica, California. I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the subcommittee, for the opportunity you give me to testify before you today. I would also like to thank Congressman Waxman and Senator Feinstein for all their efforts on behalf of the people of Santa Monica.

My entire statement has been submitted to you so I will go into the highlights here.

Yes, H.R. 1 takes a step back from oxygenates. But what H.R. 11 does is to allow us a time to get it right, to plan the safest and most responsible course to eliminate contaminants like MTBE from the water we drink while finding long-term solutions to air pollution.

While removing oxygenates is a requirement for cleaner gasoline, it is not enough. We need your help. We need the Federal Government to embark on a plan to aggressively clean up MTBE that has leaked. Each day that MTBE is allowed to travel in soil, it gets closer to destroying more of our Nation's limited water resources. It happened in Santa Monica, and I am here to share with you the key lessons we learned from our experience with MTBE. Santa Monica depends heavily on groundwater for its drinking supply. Before MTBE contamination, the city produced 70 percent of its water from our own wells. However, now after the MTBE contamination, the city imports more than 80 percent of its drinking water. MTBE has handed Santa Monica our greatest environmental disaster. MTBE caused rapid and near complete loss of drinking water supplies. It has an uncanny ability to find its way to water systems. It attacks suddenly.

MTBE strikes at the heart of public confidence in the safety of drinking water. People are not going to drink water that smells and tastes like turpentine. For 3 years now, Santa Monica has been searching for a solution to this pollution problem. No end is in sight. The projected costs of cleanup are between 100 and $150 million. Think of these costs replicated nationwide. We need the Federal Government to see to it that other drinking water supplies are not gambled away, that more good money is not thrown after MTBE and that groundwater that has been polluted is restored.

Any future attempt to introduce a new chemical to the Nation's fuel supply must first be accompanied by a complete and inter

56-609 99-2

disciplinary assessment of its impacts, its health, safety, and environmental impacts. MTBE fell through the cracks, the regulatory cracks, and they were far too wide. That is why H.R. 11 is important.

I am not a scientist and I certainly don't have all the answers to the problems caused by MTBE. I can't predict how long it will take to clean up the MTBE pollution problem or how much it will cost overall, but let me tell you what I do know. Gasoline tanks, especially underground storage tanks, leak. And once tanks leak, their contents can cause unexpected problems.

Whether there is H.R. 11 or some other legislation, we need to move away from MTBE and from any untested oxygenates or chemicals that take its place. For the past 3 years, many oil companies and their trade groups called MTBE the most studied chemical ever. I suspect some similar votes will be made about other oxygenates touted as better than MTBE or miraculously able to clean the air with no downsides. But let's not repeat the mistakes of the past. Let's create better options. That is what H.R. 11 is about.

Coming from southern California, I know all too well that we need to rapidly clean up our air, but the last 3 years has reminded me that we need clean air and clean water. We should never again sacrifice one for the other.

From California to Connecticut, people know you don't clean air by polluting drinking water. By looking to clean air goals instead of chemical formulas for gasoline additives, H.R. 11 allows us to refocus the simple wisdom of the Clean Air Act to clean up our air and in doing so not make things worse.

Thank you for your time and attention today and thank you all for all the hard work you do for us.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Pam O'Connor follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. PAM O,CONNOR, MAYOR, CITY OF SANTA MONICA Thank you members of The Subcommittee on Health and the Environment for the opportunity to testify before you today on H.R. 11 and MtBE. By taking a step back from oxygenates, H.R. 11 allows us all the necessary time to plan the safest and most responsible course to eliminate contaminants like MtBE from drinking water while finding long-term solutions to air pollution. Yet removing oxygenates as a requirement for cleaner gasoline is not enough. The Federal Government must also embark on a plan to aggressively cleanup the MtBE that has leaked. Each day that MtBE is allowed to travel in soil, it gets closer to destroying more of the nation's limited water resources. I would like to share with you today the key lessons we have learned from our experience with MtBE in Santa Monica.

Santa Monica is a city of 92,000 permanent residents. Over one hundred thousand additional persons visit and work in the City daily. The City depends heavily on groundwater for its drinking water supply. In this regard, MtBE's impact on Santa Monica could not be more cruelly ironic. Prior to the MtBE catastrophe, Santa Monica strove to maximize the use of local groundwater supplies, in an effort to build self-sustainability and to reduce its reliance on water imported from Northern California and the Colorado River. Before MtBE contamination the City produced locally 70 percent of its water supply. Now after MtBE contamination the City imports more than 80 percent of its drinking water. This is a dramatic turn of events. MtBE contamination has forced the City to further tax the State's water system. In doing so, MtBE contamination has all but destroyed any notion that the City could sustain itself in an emergency.

MtBE has handed Santa Monica the City's gravest environmental disaster and Santa Monica has learned that the "real world” impacts of MtBE the hard way: • MtBE causes rapid and near complete loss of drinking water supplies. MtBE travels quickly and combines readily with water like no other gasoline additive;