492
the conduct or operation of the reme-
dial action;
‘‘(ii) attain any promulgated pro-
tective concentration levels applica-
ble to determining the level of clean-
up for remedial actions conducted
under any State environmental law
where such levels are more stringent
than those established under sub-
paragraph (C)(i) or the concentration
levels determined to be protective for
a given facility in accordance with
the requirements of paragraph (2);
and
‘‘(iii) comply with or attain any
other promulgated standard, require-
ment, criterion, or limitation under
any State environmental or facility
siting 
law 
that 
the 
State 
dem-
onstrates is consistently applied to
remedial actions under State law, and
that the State determines, through a
promulgation process which includes
public notice, comment, and written
response thereto, and opportunity for
493
judicial review, apply to remedial ac-
tions under the Act.
‘‘(B) 
Compliance 
with 
any 
State
standard, criterion, requirement, or limi-
tation under subparagraph (A) shall be
required at a given facility if it has been
identified by the State to the President in
a timely manner as applicable at that fa-
cility. In addition, each State shall pub-
lish a comprehensive list of the promul-
gated standards, criteria, requirements,
or limitations that the State may apply to
remedial actions under this Act and re-
vise such list periodically. The State shall
also revise such list as requested by the
President.
‘‘(C)(i) A goal of this Act is to restore
any contaminated ground water and sur-
face water that may be used for drinking
water to—
‘‘(I) the level of any maximum
contaminant level or non-zero maxi-
mum contaminant level goal for any
hazardous substance, pollutant, or
contaminant which has been estab-
494
lished under title XIV of the Public
Health Service Act (the Safe Drinking
Water Act), and
‘‘(II) a protective concentration
level that attains the goal in para-
graph (1) for any other hazardous
substance, pollutant, or contaminant.
Each total remedy selected under this Act
and each protective concentration level
established under this subsection shall
achieve this goal in the ground water or
surface water unless the President makes
a finding which is published with an ex-
planation and appropriate documenta-
tion that the achievement of the goal is
technically impracticable from an engi-
neering perspective or, in the case of
ground water that meets the require-
ments of subsection (b)(4)(C) and has low
levels of contamination relative to such
goal, compliance with or attainment of
such goal is unreasonably costly. Upon
making such a finding, the President
shall publish the alternative remedial
strategy and its goals.
495
‘‘(ii) For the purpose of this section,
the phrase ‘ground water that may be
used for drinking water’ shall not include
ground waters (I) containing more than
10,000 milligrams per liter total dissolved
solids, (II) that are so contaminated by
naturally occurring conditions or by the
effects of broad-scale human activity un-
related to a specific activity that restora-
tion of drinking water quality is imprac-
ticable, or (III) the potential source of
drinking water is physically incapable of
yielding a quantity of 150 gallons per day
of water to a well or spring without ad-
verse environmental consequences.
‘‘(iii) Remedial actions for contami-
nated ground water (other than ground
water that may be used for drinking
water) shall attain levels appropriate for
the current or reasonably anticipated fu-
ture use of such ground water, or levels
appropriate considering the current use
of any ground water or surface water to
which such contaminated ground water
discharges.
496
‘‘(iv) Concentration levels other than
those required under clause (i) may be
established for ground water that may be
used for drinking water in any case in
which the following conditions are met:
‘‘(I) 
The 
President 
determines
that the use of alternate concentra-
tion levels is appropriate.
‘‘(II) There are known and pro-
jected points of entry of such ground
water into surface water.
‘‘(III) On the basis of measure-
ments or projections, there is or will
be no increase of such constituents
that would pose a threat to human
health or the environment from such
ground water in such surface water.
‘‘(IV) The remedial action in-
cludes enforceable measures that will
preclude human exposure to the con-
taminated ground water within the
facility and up to all known and pro-
jected points of entry of such ground
water into surface water.
497
‘‘(V) Monitoring to ensure attain-
ment of the alternative concentration
level is conducted in ground water at
a point or points immediately prior to
where the ground water enters into
surface water. In such cases, the
point of human exposure may be as-
sumed to be at such known and pro-
jected points of entry.
‘‘(v) Not later than 18 months after
the 
date 
of 
the 
enactment 
of 
the
Superfund Reform Act of 1994, after no-
tice and comment, the President shall
publish guidance as to determinations of
technical impracticability from an engi-
neering perspective to achieve the goal of
this subparagraph, for use in the selec-
tion of remedies for contaminated ground
water under subsection (b). Such guid-
ance shall identify certain hazardous sub-
stances, pollutants, or contaminants and
certain geological or hydrological charac-
teristics of facilities with ground water
contamination, or combinations thereof,
for which restoration in accordance with
498
subclauses (I) and (II) of clause (i) may be
from an engineering perspective tech-
nically impracticable or technically prac-
ticable. Such guidance shall be taken into
consideration 
under 
subsection
(b)(4)(A)(x) and this subparagraph.
‘‘(vi) The President shall make find-
ings of technical impracticability from an
engineering perspective (including find-
ings under this subparagraph or subpara-
graph (E) or subsection (b)(4)(A) on the
basis of projections, modeling, measures
undertaken under subsection (b)(4)(B), or
other analysis on a site specific basis (in-
cluding the consideration of information
presented by responsible parties at such
facility) without a requirement that the
remedial measure for which a finding of
technical impracticability is under con-
sideration be first constructed or in-
stalled and operated and its performance
over time reviewed, unless such projec-
tion, modeling, measure, or other analy-
sis are insufficient or inadequate to make
such a finding.
499
‘‘(D) Procedural requirements of Fed-
eral and State standards, requirements,
criteria, or limitations, including permit-
ting requirements, shall not apply to re-
sponse actions conducted on-site. Compli-
ance with subparagraph (A) shall not be
required with respect to return, replace-
ment, or disposal of contaminated media
or residuals of contaminated media into
the same medium in or very near existing
areas of contamination on-site.
‘‘(E)(i) The President may select a re-
medial action meeting the requirements
of paragraph (1) that does not comply
with or attain a Federal or State stand-
ard, requirement, criterion, or limitation
as required by subparagraphs (A) and
(C), if the President finds any of the fol-
lowing:
‘‘(I) The remedial action selected
is only part of a total remedial action
that will comply with or attain the
applicable requirements of subpara-
graphs (A) and (C) of this paragraph
when completed.
500
‘‘(II) Compliance with or attain-
ment of such requirement at that fa-
cility will result in greater risk to
human health and the environment
than alternative options.
‘‘(III) Compliance with or attain-
ment of such requirement is tech-
nically impracticable from an engi-
neering perspective.
‘‘(IV) The remedial action selected
will attain a standard of performance
that is equivalent to that required
under a standard, requirement, cri-
terion, or limitation identified under
subparagraph (A) through use of an-
other approach.
‘‘(V) With respect to a State stand-
ard, requirement, criterion, or limita-
tion under clauses (i), (ii), and (iii) of
subparagraph (A), the State has not
consistently applied (or demonstrated
the intention to consistently apply)
the standard, requirement, criterion,
or limitation in similar circumstances
501
at other remedial actions within the
State.
‘‘(VI) In the case of a remedial ac-
tion to be undertaken solely under
section 104 using the Fund, a selec-
tion of a remedial action that com-
plies with or attains standards, cri-
teria, requirements, or limitations
will not provide a balance between
the need for protection of public
health and welfare and the environ-
ment at the facility under consider-
ation, and the availability of amounts
from the Fund to respond to other fa-
cilities that present or may present a
threat to public health or welfare or
the environment, taking into consid-
eration the relative immediacy of
such threat.
‘‘(ii) The President shall publish
any findings made under clause (i),
together with an explanation and ap-
propriate documentation.
‘‘(8)(A) Except as provided in subpara-
graph (B), a State standard, requirement, cri-
502
teria, or limitation (including any State siting
standard or requirement) which could effec-
tively result in the statewide prohibition of
land disposal of hazardous substances, pollut-
ants, or contaminants shall not apply.
‘‘(B) Any State standard, requirement, cri-
teria, or limitation referred to in subpara-
graph (A) shall apply where each of the fol-
lowing conditions is met:
‘‘(i) The State standard, requirement,
criteria, or limitation is of general appli-
cability and was adopted by formal
means.
‘‘(ii) The State standard, requirement,
criteria, or limitation was adopted on the
basis of hydrologic, geologic, or other rel-
evant considerations and was not adopt-
ed for the purpose of precluding onsite
remedial actions or other land disposal
for reasons unrelated to protection of
human health and the environment.
‘‘(iii) The State arranges for, and
assures payment of the incremental costs
of utilizing, a facility for disposition of
503
the hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants concerned.’’.
SEC. 502. REMEDY SELECTION.
Section 121(b) (42 U.S.C. 9621(b)) is
amended to read as follows:
‘‘(b) GENERAL RULES. —
‘‘(1) SELECTION
OF
PROTECTIVE
REM-
EDIES.—Remedies selected at individual
facilities shall be protective of human
health and the environment and provide
long-term reliability at reasonable cost. A
remedial action may achieve protection
of human health and the environment
through treatment that reduces the tox-
icity, mobility, or volume of hazardous
substances, pollutants, or contaminants;
containment or other engineering con-
trols to limit exposure; a combination of
treatment and containment; or other
methods of protection. The method or
methods of remediation appropriate for a
given 
facility 
shall 
be 
determined
through the evaluation of remedial alter-
natives and the selection process under
paragraphs (2) and (3). When determining
504
the appropriate remedial method, treat-
ment is to be preferred for hot spots as
defined under paragraph (3)(B). This
preference shall not apply to materials
that do not constitute hot spots.
‘‘(2) LAND USE.—(A) In selecting a rem-
edy, the President shall take into account
the reasonably anticipated future uses of
land at a facility as required by this Act.
In identifying reasonably anticipated fu-
ture land uses the President shall con-
sider factors, which generally shall in-
clude the following:
‘‘(i) Any consensus recommenda-
tion 
of 
the 
Community 
Working
Group and any other views expressed
by members of the affected commu-
nity. The President shall consider the
consensus recommendation of a reuse
entity which has been established for
a Federal facility scheduled for clo-
sure or realignment instead of any
corresponding 
consensus 
rec-
ommendation of a Community Work-
ing Group if the reuse entity has been