[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.

                          ____________________