[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 144 (Thursday, October 6, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: October 6, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
 INTRASTATE TOW AND WRECKER TRUCK TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL CORRECTION 
                                  ACT

  Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar 706, H.R. 5123, the 
Intrastate Tow and Wrecker Truck Transportation Technical Corrections 
Act of 1994.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 5123) to make a technical correction to an Act 
     preempting State economic regulation of motor carriers.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the immediate 
consideration of the bill?
  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.


                           Amendment No. 2632

(Purpose: To amend 49 U.S.C. 11501 with respect to preemption of State 
                 economic regulation of motor carriers)

  Mr. FORD. Mr. President, on behalf of Senators Ford, Murray, 
Bingaman, Gorton, and Hutchison, I send an amendment to the desk and 
ask for its immediate consideration; that the amendment be agreed to 
and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; that the bill, as 
amended, be read three times, passed and the motion to reconsider be 
laid upon the tale; further, that any statement relating to this item 
be printed in the Record at the appropriate place as if read.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  So the amendment (No. 2632) was agreed to, as follows:

       Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
     following:

     SECTION 1. TECHNICAL CORRECTION OF 1994 FFA AUTHORIZATION 
                   ACT.

       (a) In General.--Section 11501(h)(2) of title 49, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (A);
     (2) by striking out the period at the end of subparagraph (B) 
     and insert in lieu thereof a semicolon; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) does not apply to the transportation of garbage and 
     refuse;
       ``(D) does not apply to the transportation for collection 
     of recyclable materials that are a part of a residential 
     curbside recycling program; and
       ``(E) does not restrict the regulatory authority of a 
     State, political subdivision of a State, or political 
     authority of 2 or more States before January 1, 1997, insofar 
     as such authority relates to tow trucks or wreckers providing 
     for-hire service.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect on January 1, 1995.

  Mr. FORD. Mr. President, today, the Senate is about to consider H.R. 
5123, the Intrastate Tow and Wrecker Transportation Technical 
Corrections Act of 1994, which was passed by the House on September 29, 
1994. My friend, Chairman Rahall of the House Public Works Subcommittee 
on Surface Transportation worked hard to craft a limited technical 
correction to P.L. 103-305, the Federal Aviation Administration 
Authorization Act, which preempted state regulation of trucking as of 
January 1, 1995.
  The amendment I am offering to H.R. 5123 is also a technical 
correction. It builds on Chairman Rahall's bill, and also adds two 
clarifications. First, let me explain the difference in the tow truck 
provision. The House bill would enable states to regulate tow trucks 
and wreckers for-hire. My amendment would provide the status quo for 
such services, whether regulated by a state or local jurisdiction. In 
any event, the ability to regulate tow trucks and wreckers for-hire 
would expire on January 1, 1997.
  The two technical clarifications relate to what I would consider 
``garbage''. Under the FAA Act, the transportation of property by motor 
carrier can no longer be regulated by state and local jurisdictions. 
The definition of property apparently has created some work for a few 
lawyers. The concern is that ``garbage'' could be construed as 
property'', and thus states and local jurisdictions would be unable to 
regulate garbage collections, and recyclable collections at residences.
  I know we all know what ``garbage'' is, but unfortunately, sometimes 
the lawyers need absolute certainty. I should add that the lawyers from 
the ICC and DOT have been very helpful and agree that a common sense 
definition of garbage exists. Letters from both agencies suggest that 
no amendment is needed. Yet, other lawyers want more certainty. Well, 
to those lawyers, the amendment I am offering will help them understand 
that ``garbage'' is ``garbage''. Once you or I put it out on the curb 
for the garbageman, it is garbage--not ``property''. If the lawyers 
want it, its all theirs! While the FAA Act of 1994 does not restrict 
state or local authority to regulate the transportation of garbage, 
refuse or recyclable material collected at residences, the amendment 
lays to rest any uncertainty as to what is garbage and what is 
property.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, let me ask Senator Ford a question 
concerning section 601 of the recently enacted Federal Aviation 
Authorization Act of 1994 (P.L. 103-305).
  Mr. FORD. I would be delighted to engage in a colloquy with my friend 
from New Mexico. I know he has a number of concerns with the impact of 
section 601 on his State.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Section 601 states that no state or political 
subdivision can regulate the price, route or service of the 
transportation of property by motor carriers and private motor 
carriers. Is it the Senator's understanding that the term ``property'' 
does not include ``garbage''?
  Mr. FORD. Yes, the Senator is correct. In fact, I have made sure that 
all understand that states can continue to regulate the collection of 
garbage and refuse under the amendment I offered to H.R. 5123, the 
Intrastate Tow and Wrecker Truck Transportation Technical Corrections 
Act of 1994.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. I wanted to make sure that the term ``property'' did 
not include, what in my state are commonly called ``water haulers'', 
companies that haul water from an oil or natural gas well. The water 
carried is worthless--it either is dumped into the well or into a 
disposal area.
  Mr. FORD. Assuming that the water being transported is worthless, I 
would believe that it could be construed as garbage or refuse. In 
addition, I might point out that section 601 does not affect a state's 
right to regulate safety or the routing of hazardous materials.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. I thank the Senator for discussing the provision.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I am pleased to lend my support to this 
legislation which makes technical corrections to a bill enacted into 
law earlier this year. I especially appreciate Chairman Ford's 
willingness to work with me and other members of the Washington 
delegation in accepting a provision clarifying that States are not 
preempted from regulating the transportation for collection of 
recyclable materials that are a part of a residential curbside 
recycling program.
  Washington State leads the Nation in efforts to encourage residential 
recycling and resource conservation as part of our overall waste 
management strategy. Programs throughout the State are up and running 
and achieving remarkable results. For instance, in Pierce County alone, 
over 100,000 households participate in programs that have achieved the 
diversion of 42 percent of the waste stream away from disposal and into 
recycling. Local programs rely on integrated financial incentives for 
garbage and recycling to keep costs for residential customers under 
control.
  Mr. President, I think it is important to note that this provision 
simply clarifies existing law. It was never congressional intent to 
preempt the States ability to regulate curbside residential recycling 
and many experts have told me that we did not do so in enacting title 
VI of the FAA Act earlier this year. In fact, I have a letter dated 
September 30, 1994, from Henri F. Rush, the General Counsel of the 
Interstate Commerce Commission which states, ``You have requested my 
opinion as to whether Title VI of the Federal Aviation Authorization 
Act of 1994 preempting State regulation in intrastate truck 
transportation can be interpreted as foreclosing a State or 
municipality from regulating curbside collection of recyclables in 
connection with the provision of curbside trash collection service. In 
my view it cannot.'' While I agree with Mr. Rush's views, due to the 
importance of recycling programs and to address any concerns that 
anyone may have with regard to Congressional intent, I am pleased that 
Chairman Ford saw fit to clarify this issue.
  I have also heard from cities within my State over the issue of the 
regulation of tow trucks and wreckers. I also appreciate Chairman 
Ford's willingness to include a provision relating to this matter. This 
provision will give Congress time next year to examine the legitimate 
concerns raised by cities like Bellevue, WA, over issues of consumer 
protection and public safety as it relates to towing services.
  So the bill (H.R. 5123), as amended, was passed.
  (The text of the bill will be printed in a future edition of the 
Record.)

                          ____________________