[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 13 (Wednesday, January 31, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E115]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

[[Page E115]]


     INTERSTATE TRANSPORTATION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE ACT OF 1995

                                 ______


                               speech of

                         HON. GARY L. ACKERMAN

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, January 30, 1996

  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in reluctant support of House 
Resolution 349, the Flow Control Act of 1996. I am reluctant because of 
the circumvention of the normal committee process and because there are 
provisions in this bill that are so narrowly drafted as to affect only 
one town in my district. In fact, to my knowledge, it's the only town 
in the country so affected.
  The bill generally grandfathers all communities in New York and other 
States which have actually designated waste management facilities 
pursuant to duly enacted State and local legislation. The single 
exception to this situation is the section entitled ``Facilities Not 
Qualified for Flow Control'' incorporated into the bill.
  This section provides that flow control may not be exercised with 
regard to any facility if the following conditions are met:
  The ordinance was determined to be unconstitutional by a State or 
Federal court prior to May 16, 1994, and before the date of enactment 
of the legislation;
  The facility is located over a sole source aquifer and within 1 mile 
of a coastal zone; and
  The facility is not fully permitted and operating in compliance with 
Federal, State, and local regulations.
  As I understand it, the bill was further modified in this 
extraordinary process to ensure that it applied only to facilities 
within 5 miles of a public beach and 25 miles of a city with a 
population of 5 million or more. Clearly a reference to New York City.
  By its terms, the provision applies to only a single town in the 
State of New York: North Hempstead. It would not apply to neighboring 
towns such as Hempstead, Babylon, or Islip, although waste disposal 
conditions are virtually identical in these towns and the need to 
manage solid waste is similar. Only North Hempstead would be denied 
authority to utilize its flow control ordinance in support of a waste 
management plan.
  On its face the bill is unfair. North Hempstead meets the conditions 
set out in the bill for other towns to take advantage of flow control 
yet the amendment would deny North Hempstead this authority for no 
legitimate reason.
  The bill will shift from waste companies to residential taxpayers 
much of the approximately $10 million annual cost of furnishing waste 
management services. By denying flow control authority to North 
Hempstead, the bill will threaten the fiscal solvency of the town 
because the tipping fees currently generated by the town's flow control 
ordinance are utilized for the following: $6 million per year for debt 
service on property purchased by the town's solid waste management 
authority for an incinerator project which was not constructed; $60 
million over several years for remediation of landfills in Port 
Washington, NY, one of which is a Superfund site and the other which 
requires closure under Federal environmental regulations; and $6 
million in construction cost for a new solid waste transfer station.
  The loss of flow control authority for North Hempstead is 
particularly egregious in view of the fact that the villages which 
would benefit utilized the town landfill for 40 years, and should thus 
bear some of the remediation costs which are now being paid for with 
flow control tipping fees.
  Mr. Speaker, it is because of provisions such as this that the bill 
should have been considered by committee and should not have come to 
the floor under suspension of the rules.
  Mr. Speaker, flow control authority is crucial to cities and towns 
across the country. So I hope that as we go to conference with the 
Senate, this onerous provision will be dropped, providing flow control 
to all the municipalities that need it.

                          ____________________