Improving Coal Combustions Residuals Regulation Act of 2015

Floor Speech

BREAK IN THE TRANSCRIPT

Mr. Chairman, once again, the House is considering a bill to set standards for coal ash disposal. Unfortunately, H.R. 1734 does not contain standards that will prevent the problems from poor disposal practices that have plagued communities across the country for far too long. H.R. 1734, the Improving Coal Combustion Residuals Regulation Act, largely maintains the status quo, a system that is operated by the States with no uniform Federal standards, and the status quo isn't good enough.

In the 35 years since Congress passed the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, or RCRA, the Environmental Protection Agency has been studying the issue of coal ash disposal. During this same time, the regulation of these facilities has been done by the States, and communities in many States have experienced serious problems related to improper disposal of coal ash.

Spills resulting from coal ash impoundment failures have polluted water supplies, destroyed private and public property, and resulted in lengthy and expensive cleanup efforts. Action on this issue is long overdue.

Last December, the Environmental Protection Agency finalized a rule to strengthen the regulations on the disposal of coal ash. The final rule was published in the Federal Register in April. The rule was in development for many years. It is the result of an extensive public process. The Agency sorted through over 450,000 public-submitted statements during the comment period on this rule and held eight public hearings in communities across the country.

EPA's rule is responsive to industry concerns that officially clarifying coal ash as hazardous waste would harm coal ash recycling efforts that utilize coal ash in new materials and products, and the rule is responsive to the concerns of public health and environmental advocates. For the first time, the rule establishes minimum Federal standards that all coal ash disposal facilities must meet. H.R. 1734 does not do that.

H.R. 1734 enables States to do what some are doing now, that is, to allow continued operation of these facilities without sufficient safeguards. H.R. 1734 isn't about providing flexibility in achieving better standards. H.R. 1734 allows States to weaken a standard if facilities can't meet them.

The standards set by the rule provide a guaranteed floor of protection for all communities. What are these? Well, location restrictions. New or expanded areas of existing coal ash facilities must now be sited with consideration and defined buffers with respect to aquifers, wetlands, seismic impact zones, fault areas, and, indeed, unstable areas.

Liner design criteria are included to prevent leaching. The basic requirements in the rule to include both a geomembrane and a 2-foot layer of compacted soil can be met with an alternative design if the alternative would provide equivalent or better performance.

Structural integrity requirements are defined in the rule to prevent structural failures, such as the one that occurred in Tennessee in the year 2008, a failure that caused tremendous damage when an impoundment failed.

Operating criteria are included in the rule to prevent runoff and wind-blown dust, require periodic inspection and capacity limits, among other things.

The advocates for H.R. 1734 have expressed concerns about the enforcement of EPA's coal ash rule. H.R. 1734 is offered as a remedy to this problem. Well, there is no problem. The rule will be enforced by the States through their own authorities to operate their solid waste management programs. I think that is what H.R. 1734 envisions. The rule will also be enforced through citizen suits; and, by the way, States sometimes bring these suits against private parties on behalf of their citizens.

Listening to the majority criticize an EPA regulation because of its weak EPA enforcement provisions is, indeed, unusual. It is certainly not a complaint the Agency hears very often. The coal ash rule represents a compromise amongst the stakeholders in this issue. H.R. 1734 simply does not.

It is not surprising there are those who are unhappy with certain provisions of this rule. H.R. 1734 is on the floor today at the urging of some of those stakeholders. Of course, the rule from either vantage point is not perfect.

Given the differing opinions on the role of Federal regulation of coal ash disposal and the nature of the standards that should apply to these facilities, that is not too surprising. But I do believe this legislation--in fact, any legislation--is premature.

Changes in regulation or in law take a long time, and hitting the restart button now will only lead to continued uncertainty and continued risk. We have had far too much of those already. I believe the rule should move forward. H.R. 1734 would prevent that from happening.

We have had 35 years of weak protection. It has cost us a great deal. It is time for a more rigorous and stringent approach that prevents spills, water pollution, air pollution, and exposures to toxic substances. It is time to put people's health and safety first.

EPA's coal ash disposal rule was years in the making.

We should not discard the approach taken in EPA's rule before it has even been implemented or evaluated. EPA's rule emerged through an extensive public engagement and negotiation process and as a result of years of work invested by the interested parties and the Agency. The coal ash disposal rule should be implemented and given a fair chance to work. If it does not, we certainly retain the option of moving legislation forward.

H.R. 1734 is unnecessary, and H.R. 1734 offers far weaker protections than those of EPA's final rule. I oppose this bill, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Source