Blocking Regulatory Interference From Closing Kilns Act of 2017

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McNERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the ranking member, and I thank the chairman for his work on this, but I am going to rise in opposition to H.R. 1917, the BRICK Act.

This bill will delay the implementation of the EPA's final Brick and Structural Clay Products rule and the final Clay Ceramic Manufacturing rule by extending all compliance deadlines based on pending judicial review.

So what does that mean? That means it will delay implementation until judgment becomes final and not subject to review or appeal. This is a blanket extension that could have lasting negative impacts on the public's health.

Brick and clay plants, if unregulated, can be major sources of toxic air pollutants like hydrogen fluoride, hydrogen chloride, and hazardous metals, pollutants that are associated with a variety of acute and chronic health effects, including cancer. It is estimated that the final Brick and Clay MACT rule will reduce nationwide air toxics by approximately 375 tons per year.

Last Friday, the OMB issued a report showing that regulations have high benefit and low cost. The aggregate benefits of Federal regulations is between $219 billion and $695 billion; whereas, the aggregate costs are $59 billion to $88 billion. Many regulations spur innovation that benefit the economy as well as human health.

Now, it is no surprise to me that this administration and the Republicans are targeting air pollution regulations. The OMB noted that EPA rules ``account for over 80 percent of the monetized benefits and over 70 percent of the monetized costs'' of Federal regulation between 2006 and 2016.

Since regulations protect human health and safety and have more benefits than costs for industry, I stand in opposition to bills like this one that seek to undermine these protections. I ask my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.R. 1917.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source