Improving Coal Combustion Residuals Regulation Act of 2015

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Chair, today, I rise to discuss my opposition to H.R 1734, Improving Coal Combustion Residuals Regulation Act of 2015. H.R. 1734 is an attack on the EPA's recently finalized minimum disposal standards for toxic coal ash and a threat to safety, health, and the environment.

Low-income communities bear an unbalanced share of the health risks from disposal of coal combustion waste, as with so many environmental issues. Almost 70 percent of coal ash impoundments are located in communities of color or low income communities.

Coal ash disposal sites directly impact the health, livelihood, and home values for the already poor and vulnerable communities living around these dump sites. More than 200 coal ash sites have already contaminated water in 37 states.

Supporting this act gives a cold shoulder to American families suffering from toxic coal ash-related health issues. It tells those families that Congress does not care about their health and environmental issues.

This bill will delay many of the EPA's coal ash rule's new health and safety protections, weaken the rule's mandate to close inactive ponds by extending the deadline for closure, eliminate the rule's guarantee of public access to information and public participation, and eliminate the rule's ban on storing and dumping coal ash in drinking water. The bill will also remove the national minimum standard for protection and cleanup of coal ash-contaminated sites, remove the rule's national standard for drinking water protection and cleanup of ash-contaminated sites, prohibit effective federal oversight of state programs, and prohibit EPA enforcement of state program requirements unless invited by a state.

This is why I am in support of the Butterfield/Rush/Clarke/Price/Adams Amendment, which attempts to improve this bill by allowing the Administrator of the EPA to prevent the underlying legislation from going into effect if it is determined to have a negative impact on vulnerable populations.

In summary, I oppose H.R. 1734 because it places the health of communities and environment in great danger and fails to guarantee consistent nationwide protection. I urge my colleagues to join me in protecting the American people by opposing this bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source