295 



surface v.ater is an area that has received considerable attention during the revi- 

 sions to the HRS. Results from the scoring of field test sites indicate that the cur- 

 rent HRS should provide slightly more points to sites with surface water contamina- 

 tion than did the original HRS. The pathway is divided into the Drinking Water, 

 Food Chain, and Environmental threats. Thus between the changes to the HRS in 

 the area of surface water and contaminated sediments, sites with either surface 

 water contamination or contaminated sediments should receive higher scores. 



Over 90 percent of the sites scored with the original HRS are adjacent to surface 

 water bodies. Less than half of the sites scored with the revised HRS were identified 

 through the scoring of sites. It is reasonable to expect that scoring for the surface 

 water path way would lead to an underestimate of sites near surface water because 

 pathways are not likely to be scored unless data is available and scoring is expected 

 to lead to a noticeable contribution to the overall site score. 



There are also a group of sites that have been associated with radioactive waste in 

 the ocean. Several of these sites have received repeated attention. These sites in- 

 clude the Farallon Islands, which is over a 100 miles off the California coast from 

 San Francisco, and several sites off the East Coast. 



Q. 40: Last year, I introduced legislation (S.3336) to establish a pilot progrram 

 for the government to acquire and demonstrate the use of products made from re- 

 covered materials in the construction and retrofitting of Federal buildings. What 

 thoughts do you have on how to best make this a successful pilot prog^ram? Will 

 you work with the Committee to help craft and implement this proposal? 



A. 40: EPA believes that its current Design and Construction Program serves as a 

 model for acquiring and demonstrating the use of products made from recovered 

 materials. All newly constructed EPA facilities not only require use of recycled 

 products through Agency procurement policy, but also utilize other pollution pre- 

 vention initiatives, such as water conservation, and energy conservation features 

 utilizing a "green lights" approach. 



EPA would be delighted to work with the Committee to help craft and implement 

 this proposal. 



Q. 41: Ms. Browner, in October, 1992, GAO reported to this Committee on the 

 status of efforts to protect workers from asbestos hazards. Some of its conclusions 

 included the fact that no single agency is responsible for maintaining information 

 on asbestos materials in buildings, no agency surveyed was fully implementing 

 either the EPA's recommendations for managing asbestos or OSHA's requirements 

 for protecting against potentially harmful exposure, and only two of the agencies 

 visited have issued guidance to worksite managers informing them of what actions 

 to take to manage asbestos. Would you comment on the status of EPA's efforts to 

 improve this situation and what you will do to help ensure that workers are ade- 

 quately protected against potentially harmful exposure? 



A. 41: EPA continues its strong support of programs helping to ensure that work- 

 ers are adequately protected against potentially harmful exposure to asbestos fibers. 

 Some of that support is in the form of guidance documents and recommendations; 

 other support comes through regulation. EPA staff meet regularly with other Feder- 

 al agencies at meetings such as the Federal Asbestos Task Force (FATF) and the 

 Asbestos Design and Development Initiatives Group (ADDIG). New EPA regulations 

 and guidance materials are discussed. 



1. OSHA has primary responsibility for regulations applicable to employee expo- 

 sure in the workplace. However, because OSHA lacks jurisdiction over workers in 

 the public sector, under the EPA Asbestos Worker Protection Rule (WPR), EPA ex- 

 tends coverage comparable to that of the OSHA asbestos standards to State and 

 local government (public sector) workers in 27 states. (Twenty-three states and juris- 

 dictions operating OSHLA-approved state plans cover both public and private sector 

 workers and two states cover public employees only.) 



The current (1987) EPA WPR provides worker protection coverage only for asbes- 

 tos abatement projects. A revision of the WPR, now undergoing Agency review, will 

 extend all of the coverage provided under the OSHA Asbestos Standard for the Con- 

 struction Industry to all public sector workers in the 27 states covered by the EPA 

 WPR. Protection will be provided for all "construction work activities," including 

 building operations and maintenance, repair, renovation, demolition, and removal 

 work, where asbestos is encountered in the workplace. 



Also, EPA 's revised Model Accreditation Plan (MAP) will extend training and ac- 

 creditation requirements to workers and others who are not now required to have 

 extended training. 



2. EPA provided financial support and staff oversight to the National Institute of 

 Building Sciences (NIBS) in their development and publication (September 1992) of 

 a new guidance manual. The NIBS Asbestos Operations & Maintenance (O&M) Work 



