[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 30 (Thursday, March 7, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H1965-H1966]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LAND DISPOSAL PROGRAM FLEXIBILITY ACT OF 1995
Mr. OXLEY. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the
Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 2036) to amend the Solid Waste Disposal
Act to make certain adjustments in the land disposal program to provide
needed flexibility, and for other purposes, with Senate amendments
thereto, and concur in the Senate amendments.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The Clerk read the Senate amendments, as follows:
Senate amendments:
Page 2, line 3, strike out ``1995'' and insert ``1996''.
Page 2, strike out all after line 3 over to and including
line 15 on page 4 and insert:
SEC. 2. LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS.
Section 3004(g) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is amended
by adding after paragraph (6) the following:
``(7) Solid waste identified as hazardous based solely on
one or more characteristics shall not be subject to this
subsection, any prohibitions under subsection (d), (e), or
(f), or any requirement promulgated under subsection (m)
(other than any applicable specific methods of treatment, as
provided in paragraph (8)) if the waste--
``(A) is treated in a treatment system that subsequently
discharges to waters of the United States pursuant to a
permit issued under section 402 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act (commonly known as the ``Clean Water
Act'') (33 U.S.C. 1342), treated for the purposes of the
pretreatment requirements of section 307 of the Clean Water
Act (33 U.S.C. 1317), or treated in a zero discharge system
that, prior to any permanent land disposal, engages in
treatment that is equivalent to treatment required under
section 402 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1342) for
discharges to waters of the United States, as determined by
the Administrator; and
``(B) no longer exhibits a hazardous characteristic prior
to management in any land-based solid waste management unit.
``(8) Solid waste that otherwise qualifies under paragraph
(7) shall nevertheless be required to meet any applicable
specific methods of treatment specified for such waste by the
Administrator under subsection (m), including those specified
in the rule promulgated by the Administrator June 1, 1990,
prior to management in a land-based unit as part of a
treatment system specified in paragraph (7)(A). No solid
waste may qualify under paragraph (7) that would generate
toxic gases, vapors, or fumes due to the presence of cyanide
when exposed to pH conditions between 2.0 and 12.5.
``(9) Solid waste identified as hazardous based on one or
more characteristics alone shall not be subject to this
subsection, any prohibitions under subsection (d), (e), or
(f), or any requirement promulgated under subsection (m) if
the waste no longer exhibits a hazardous characteristic at
the point of injection in any Class I injection well
permitted under section 1422 of title XIV of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300h-1).
``(10) Not later than five years after the date of
enactment of this paragraph, the Administration shall
complete a study of hazardous waste managed pursuant to
paragraph (7) or (9) to characterize the risks to human
health or the environment associated with such management. In
conducting this study, the Administrator shall evaluate the
extent to which risks are adequately addressed under existing
State or Federal programs and whether unaddressed risks could
be better addressed under such laws or programs. Upon receipt
of additional information or upon completion of such study
and as necessary to protect human health and the
environment, the Administrator may impose additional
requirements under existing Federal laws, including
subsection (m)(1), or rely on other State or Federal
programs or authorities to address such risks. In
promulgating any treatment standards pursuant to
subsection (m)(1) under the previous sentence, the
Administrator shall take into account the extent to which
treatment is occurring in land-based units as part of a
treatment system specified in paragraph (7)(A).
``(11) Nothing in paragraph (7) or (9) shall be interpreted
or applied to restrict any inspection or enforcement
authority under the provisions of this Act.''.
Page 7, line 12, strike out ``paragraph.''.'' and insert:
``paragraph.''
Page 7, after line 12 insert:
``(5) Alaska native villages.--Upon certification by the
Governor of the State of Alaska that application of the
requirements described in paragraph (1) to a solid waste
landfill unit of a Native village (as defined in section 3 of
the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (16 U.S.C. 1602)) or
unit that is located in or near a small, remote Alaska
village would be infeasible, or would not be cost-effective,
or is otherwise inappropriate because of the remote location
of the unit, the State may exempt the unit from some or all
of these requirements. This paragraph shall apply only to
solid waste landfill units that dispose of less than 20 tons
of municipal solid waste daily, based on an annual average.
``(6) Further revisions of guidelines and criteria.--
Recognizing the unique circumstances of small communities,
the Administrator shall, not later than two years after
enactment of this provision promulgate revisions to the
guidelines and criteria promulgated under this subtitle to
provide additional flexibility to approved States to allow
landfills that receive 20 tons or less of municipal solid
waste per day, based on an annual average, to use alternative
frequencies of daily cover application, frequencies of
methane gas monitoring, infiltration layers for final cover;
and means for demonstrating financial assurance: Provided,
That such alternative requirements take into account climatic
and hydrogeologic conditions and are protective of human
health and environment.''.
Mr. OXLEY (during the reading). Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous
consent that the Senate amendments be considered as read and printed in
the Record.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Ohio?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the initial request of
the gentleman from Ohio?
Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam Speaker, reserving the right to object, and I
will not object, but I yield to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley] to
explain the bill that we are considering.
Mr. OXLEY. Madam Speaker, as the gentlewoman is aware, the bill as
passed by the House addresses two rulemakings in which EPA tried to use
principles of sound risk management but were prevented by the courts
from doing so. Unfortunately, the current law, as interpreted by the
courts, does not allow EPA to develop a reasonable set of regulations.
Two weeks ago, the other body adopted, by voice vote, several
amendments to the bill. The Senate amendments add underground
injections wells to the 5-year study agreed to during the Commerce
Committee's markup of the bill. The Senate amendments also address
ground water monitoring concerns in Alaskan Native villages.
Senator Chafee, chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and
Public Works, has asked me to place into the Record a point of
clarification consistent with the language of the House-passed bill.
Specifically, it should be clear that the legislation does not modify,
supplement, or otherwise affect the application or authority of any
other Federal law or the standards applicable under any other Federal
law, including the Clean Water Act. I would like to submit this letter
for the Record.
I am pleased to say H.R. 2036 has the strong support of the
administration, the Ground Water Protection Council, the Association of
State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials, and
representatives of the industrial community. I commend Chairman Bliley
for his leadership on this issue and the bipartisan cooperation from
Mr. Dingell, Mrs. Lincoln, and the administration.
House of Representatives,
Committee on Commerce,
Washington, DC, March 5, 1996.
Hon. John H. Chafee,
Chairman, Committee on Environment and Public Works, U.S.
Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Chaffee: Thank you for your letter of this
date clarifying the scope of H.R. 2036, the Land Disposal
Flexibility Act of 1996. Your letter correctly indicates that
this legislation only modifies provisions of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act, a statutory program wholly within the
jurisdiction of
[[Page H1966]]
the House Committee on Commerce. The legislation does not
modify, supplement, or otherwise affect the authority of any
other Federal law or the standards applicable under any other
Federal law, including the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act. The language which was included in the House bill, but
inadvertently deleted by the Senate amendments, was intended
to make clear that the bill does not amend any statute other
than the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
Thank you again for your clarification.
Sincerely,
Thomas J. Bliley, Jr.,
Chairman.
U.S. Senate, Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Washington, DC, March 5, 1996.
Hon. Thomas J. Bliley,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Bliley: It has come to my attention that in
amending H.R. 2036, the Land Disposal Program Flexibility Act
of 1996, the Senate did not incorporate a House provision
that was inserted during your Committee's consideration of
this legislation. The provision stated that ``[n]othing in
this paragraph shall be construed to modify, supplement, or
otherwise affect the application or authority of any other
Federal law or the standards applicable under any other
Federal law.''
The exclusion of this language from the Senate passed bill
should not be viewed as implying a contrary policy on this
issue. The legislation passed by the Senate does not modify,
supplement, or otherwise affect the application or authority
of any other Federal law or the standards applicable under
any other Federal law, including the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act. I understand this clarification is important to
both you and the Chairman of the House Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee.
H.R. 2036 and its Senate companion, S. 1497, provide a
model for moving targeted, commonsense legislation that
maintains protection of human health and the environment
while removing duplicative or overlapping layers of
regulation. It has been a pleasure to work with you and your
colleagues in the House to move this legislation
expeditiously.
Sincerely,
John H. Chafee.
Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam Speaker, further reserving the right to object,
and I will not object, I want to thank the gentleman for his
explanation and certainly commend him for his bipartisan fashion in
which this bill has been handled.
The chairman and the subcommittee chairman here, the gentleman from
Ohio [Mr. Oxley], are certainly to be congratulated for shepherding the
bill through the process it has gone through. I, too, believe this bill
represents a great bipartisan solution to problems identified under
RCRA's existing land disposal restrictions.
As we all know, under the current regulatory regime, industries will
be required to put in place over $800 million a year to install new
equipment without corresponding benefits to the environmental health.
This is something neither the industrial community nor the
Environmental Protection Agency wants. H.R. 2036 resolves this needless
investment by incorporating commonsense solutions.
Industries will avoid duplicative regulations under this bill. If
their surface impoundments are in compliance with the Clean Water Act
or their underground injection wells are in compliance with the Safe
Drinking Water Act, industries will not need further treatment
technologies to comply with RCRA.
I believe it is an excellent bill. Again I applaud Chairman Oxley for
his hard work. It is a bill that should serve as an example for future
environmental legislation as we work together.
It has Republican support, Democratic support, administration
support, and the industry support. We have all worked wholeheartedly
together.
Again I thank Chairman Bliley, Chairman Oxley, and the gentleman from
Michigan, Mr. Dingell, for working with me on this very important
issue.
Madam Speaker, I see no other speakers on this side, and the bill has
been cleared from our side.
Madam Speaker, I rise to address provisions in H.R. 2036, the Land
Disposal Program Flexibility Act.
This is important legislation that will eliminate a mandate that the
Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] promulgate under the Solid Waste
Disposal Act stringent and costly treatment standards for low-risk
wastes that are already being treated to meet standards applicable
under the Clean Water Act, simply because the Clean Water Act treatment
system uses surface impoundments. In 1990, EPA issued regulations that
took the approach adopted by this bill and exempted such wastes from
Solid Waste Disposal Act land disposal restrictions and treatment
standards. In 1992, however, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the
D.C. Circuit overturned EPA's regulations. In compliance with the
court's order, EPA has issued new regulations that would impose these
unnecessary and costly requirements. These regulations will go into
effect shortly so it is important for Congress to act expeditiously on
this legislation.
Recognizing this urgency, I did not seek a formal referral of H.R.
2036 when it moved through the House. Instead, I worked cooperatively
with Chairman Bliley of the Commerce Committee on any potential Clean
Water Act issues raised by the bill. To address my concerns, Chairman
Bliley added language to the bill that specifically states that H.R.,
2036 provides no grant of authority to address the wastes managed in
surface impoundments that are part of the Clean Water Act treatment
systems, beyond the authorities provided under existing law.
Unfortunately, through inadvertent oversight, this language was not
included in the Senate amendment to H.R. 2036. However, Senator Chafee,
chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works has
assured me in a letter dated March 5, 1996, that the legislation passed
by the Senate also does not modify, supplement, or otherwise affect the
application or authority of any other Federal law, or the standards
applicable under any other Federal law, including the Clean Water Act.
Because of the urgency of this issue, I will not offer an amendment
to H.R. 2036 today to expressly state this intent. Instead, I ask
unanimous consent that Senator Chafee's March 5, 1996, letter to me be
printed in the Record.
U.S. Senate, Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Washington, DC, March 5, 1996.
Hon. Bud Shuster,
U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Shuster: It has come to my attention that in
amending H.R. 2036, the Land Disposal Program Flexibility Act
of 1996, the Senate did not incorporate a House provision
that was inserted during the Commerce Committee's
consideration of this legislation at your request. The
provision stated that ``[n]othing in this paragraph shall be
construed to modify, supplement, or otherwise affect the
application or authority of any other Federal law or the
standards applicable under any other Federal law.''
The elusion of this language from the Senate passed bill
should not be viewed as implying a contrary policy in this
issue. The legislation passed by the Senate does not modify,
supplement, or otherwise affect the application of authority
of any other federal law or the standards applicable under
any other Federal law, including the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act.
H.R. 2036 and its Senate companion, S. 1497, provide a
model for moving targeted, commonsence legislation that
maintains protection of human health and the environment
while removing duplicative or overlapping layers of
regulation. It has been a pleasure to work with you and your
colleagues in the House to move this legislation
expeditiously.
Sincerely,
John H. Chafee.
Madam Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the initial request of
the gentleman from Ohio?
There was no objection.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________