[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 53 (Tuesday, April 23, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H3671-H3679]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MERCURY-CONTAINING AND RECHARGEABLE BATTERY MANAGEMENT ACT
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 2024) to phase out the use of mercury in batteries and provide
for the efficient and cost-effective collection and recycling or proper
disposal of used nickel cadmium batteries, small sealed lead-acid
batteries, and certain other
[[Page H3672]]
batteries, and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 2024
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Mercury-Containing and
Rechargeable Battery Management Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds that--
(1) it is in the public interest to--
(A) phase out the use of mercury in batteries and provide
for the efficient and cost-effective collection and recycling
or proper disposal of used nickel cadmium batteries, small
sealed lead-acid batteries, and other regulated batteries;
and
(B) educate the public concerning the collection,
recycling, and proper disposal of such batteries;
(2) uniform national labeling requirements for regulated
batteries, rechargeable consumer products, and product
packaging will significantly benefit programs for regulated
battery collection and recycling or proper disposal; and
(3) it is in the public interest to encourage persons who
use rechargeable batteries to participate in collection for
recycling of used nickel-cadmium, small sealed lead-acid, and
other regulated batteries.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this Act:
(1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
(2) Button cell.--The term ``button cell'' means a button-
or coin-shaped battery.
(3) Easily removable.--The term ``easily removable'', with
respect to a battery, means detachable or removable at the
end of the life of the battery--
(A) from a consumer product by a consumer with the use of
common household tools; or
(B) by a retailer of replacements for a battery used as the
principal electrical power source for a vehicle.
(4) Mercuric-oxide battery.--The term ``mercuric-oxide
battery'' means a battery that uses a mercuric-oxide
electrode.
(5) Rechargeable battery.--The term ``rechargeable
battery''--
(A) means 1 or more voltaic or galvanic cells, electrically
connected to produce electric energy, that is designed to be
recharged for repeated uses; and
(B) includes any type of enclosed device or sealed
container consisting of 1 or more such cells, including what
is commonly called a battery pack (and in the case of a
battery pack, for the purposes of the requirements of easy
removability and labeling under section 103, means the
battery pack as a whole rather than each component
individually); but
(C) does not include--
(i) a lead-acid battery used to start an internal
combustion engine or as the principal electrical power source
for a vehicle, such as an automobile, a truck, construction
equipment, a motorcycle, a garden tractor, a golf cart, a
wheelchair, or a boat;
(ii) a lead-acid battery used for load leveling or for
storage of electricity generated by an alternative energy
source, such as a solar cell or wind-driven generator;
(iii) a battery used as a backup power source for memory or
program instruction storage, timekeeping, or any similar
purpose that requires uninterrupted electrical power in order
to function if the primary energy supply fails or fluctuates
momentarily; or
(iv) a rechargeable alkaline battery.
(6) Rechargeable consumer product.--The term ``rechargeable
consumer product''--
(A) means a product that, when sold at retail, includes a
regulated battery as a primary energy supply, and that is
primarily intended for personal or household use; but
(B) does not include a product that only uses a battery
solely as a source of backup power for memory or program
instruction storage, timekeeping, or any similar purpose that
requires uninterrupted electrical power in order to function
if the primary energy supply fails or fluctuates momentarily.
(7) Regulated battery.--The term ``regulated battery''
means a rechargeable battery that--
(A) contains a cadmium or a lead electrode or any
combination of cadmium and lead electrodes; or
(B) contains other electrode chemistries and is the subject
of a determination by the Administrator under section 103(d).
(8) Remanufactured product.--The term ``remanufactured
product'' means a rechargeable consumer product that has been
altered by the replacement of parts, repackaged, or repaired
after initial sale by the original manufacturer.
SEC. 4. INFORMATION DISSEMINATION.
The Administrator shall, in consultation with
representatives of rechargeable battery manufacturers,
rechargeable consumer product manufacturers, and retailers,
establish a program to provide information to the public
concerning the proper handling and disposal of used regulated
batteries and rechargeable consumer products with
nonremovable batteries.
SEC. 5. ENFORCEMENT.
(a) Civil Penalty.--When on the basis of any information
the Administrator determines that a person has violated, or
is in violation of, any requirement of this Act (except a
requirement of section 104) the Administrator--
(1) in the case of any violation, may issue an order
assessing a civil penalty of not more than $10,000 for each
violation, or requiring compliance immediately or within a
reasonable specified time period, or both; or
(2) in the case of any violation or failure to comply with
an order issued under this section, may commence a civil
action in the United States district court in the district in
which the violation occurred or in the district in which the
violator resides for appropriate relief, including a
temporary or permanent injunction.
(b) Contents of Order.--An order under subsection (a)(1)
shall state with reasonable specificity the nature of the
violation.
(c) Considerations.--In assessing a civil penalty under
subsection (a)(1), the Administrator shall take into account
the seriousness of the violation and any good faith efforts
to comply with applicable requirements.
(d) Finality of Order; Request for Hearing.--An order under
subsection (a)(1) shall become final unless, not later than
30 days after the order is served, a person named in the
order requests a hearing on the record.
(e) Hearing.--On receiving a request under subsection (d),
the Administrator shall promptly conduct a hearing on the
record.
(f) Subpoena Power.--In connection with any hearing on the
record under this section, the Administrator may issue
subpoenas for the attendance and testimony of witnesses and
for the production of relevant papers, books, and documents.
(g) Continued Violation After Expiration of Period for
Compliance.--If a violator fails to take corrective action
within the time specified in an order under subsection
(a)(1), the Administrator may assess a civil penalty of not
more than $10,000 for the continued noncompliance with the
order.
(h) Savings Provision.--The Administrator may not take any
enforcement action against a person for selling, offering for
sale, or offering for promotional purposes to the ultimate
consumer a battery or product covered by this Act that was--
(1) purchased ready for sale to the ultimate consumer; and
(2) sold, offered for sale, or offered for promotional
purposes without modification.
The preceding sentence shall not apply to a person--
(A) who is the importer of a battery covered by this Act,
and
(B) who has knowledge of the chemical contents of the
battery
when such chemical contents make the sale, offering for sale,
or offering for promotional purposes of such battery unlawful
under title II of this Act.
SEC. 6. INFORMATION GATHERING AND ACCESS.
(a) Records and Reports.--A person who is required to carry
out the objectives of this Act, including--
(1) a regulated battery manufacturer;
(2) a rechargeable consumer product manufacturer;
(3) a mercury-containing battery manufacturer; and
(4) an authorized agent of a person described in paragraph
(1), (2), or (3),
shall establish and maintain such records and report such
information as the Administrator may by regulation reasonably
require to carry out the objectives of this Act.
(b) Access and Copying.--The Administrator or the
Administrator's authorized representative, on presentation of
credentials of the Administrator, may at reasonable times
have access to and copy any records required to be maintained
under subsection (a).
(c) Confidentiality.--The Administrator shall maintain the
confidentiality of documents and records that contain
proprietary information.
SEC. 7. STATE AUTHORITY.
Nothing in this Act shall be construed to prohibit a State
from enacting and enforcing a standard or requirement that is
identical to a standard or requirement established or
promulgated under this Act. Except as provided in sections
103(e) and 104, nothing in this Act shall be construed to
prohibit a State from enacting and enforcing a standard or
requirement that is more stringent than a standard or
requirement established or promulgated under this Act.
SEC. 8. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are
necessary to carry out this Act.
TITLE I--RECHARGEABLE BATTERY RECYCLING ACT
SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Rechargeable Battery
Recycling Act''.
SEC. 102. PURPOSE.
The purpose of this title is to facilitate the efficient
recycling or proper disposal of used nickel-cadmium
rechargeable batteries, used small sealed lead-acid
rechargeable batteries, other regulated batteries, and such
rechargeable batteries in used consumer products, by--
(1) providing for uniform labeling requirements and
streamlined regulatory requirements for regulated battery
collection programs; and
(2) encouraging voluntary industry programs by eliminating
barriers to funding the collection and recycling or proper
disposal of used rechargeable batteries.
SEC. 103. RECHARGEABLE CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND LABELING.
(a) Prohibition.--
[[Page H3673]]
(1) In general.--No person shall sell for use in the United
States a regulated battery that is ready for retail sale or a
rechargeable consumer product that is ready for retail sale,
if such battery or product was manufactured on or after the
date 12 months after the date of enactment of this Act,
unless the labeling requirements of subsection (b) are met
and, in the case of a regulated battery, the regulated
battery--
(A) is easily removable from the rechargeable consumer
product; or
(B) is sold separately.
(2) Application.--Paragraph (1) does not apply to any of
the following:
(A) The sale of a remanufactured product unit unless
paragraph (1) applied to the sale of the unit when originally
manufactured.
(B) The sale of a product unit intended for export purposes
only.
(b) Labeling.--Each regulated battery or rechargeable
consumer product without an easily removable battery
manufactured on or after the date that is 1 year after the
date of enactment of this Act, whether produced domestically
or imported shall bear the following labels:
(1) 3 chasing arrows or a comparable recycling symbol.
(2)(A) On each regulated battery which is a nickel-cadmium
battery, the chemical name or the abbreviation ``Ni-Cd'' and
the phrase ``BATTERY MUST BE RECYCLED OR DISPOSED OF
PROPERLY.''.
(B) On each regulated battery which is a lead-acid battery,
``Pb'' or the words ``LEAD'', ``RETURN'', and ``RECYCLE'' and
if the regulated battery is sealed, the phrase ``BATTERY MUST
BE RECYCLED.''.
(3) On each rechargeable consumer product containing a
regulated battery that is not easily removable, the phrase
``CONTAINS NICKEL-CADMIUM BATTERY. BATTERY MUST BE RECYCLED
OR DISPOSED OF PROPERLY.'' or ``CONTAINS SEALED LEAD BATTERY.
BATTERY MUST BE RECYCLED.'', as applicable.
(4) On the packaging of each rechargeable consumer product,
and the packaging of each regulated battery sold separately
from such a product, unless the required label is clearly
visible through the packaging, the phrase ``CONTAINS NICKEL-
CADMIUM BATTERY. BATTERY MUST BE RECYCLED OR DISPOSED OF
PROPERLY.'' or ``CONTAINS SEALED LEAD BATTERY. BATTERY MUST
BE RECYCLED.'', as applicable.
(c) Existing or Alternative Labeling.--
(1) Initial period.--For a period of 2 years after the date
of enactment of this Act, regulated batteries, rechargeable
consumer products containing regulated batteries, and
rechargeable consumer product packages that are labeled in
substantial compliance with subsection (b) shall be deemed to
comply with the labeling requirements of subsection (b).
(2) Certification.--
(A) In general.--On application by persons subject to the
labeling requirements of subsection (b) or the labeling
requirements promulgated by the Administrator under
subsection (d), the Administrator shall certify that a
different label meets the requirements of subsection (b) or
(d), respectively, if the different label--
(i) conveys the same information as the label required
under subsection (b) or (d), respectively; or
(ii) conforms with a recognized international standard that
is consistent with the overall purposes of this title.
(B) Constructive certification.--Failure of the
Administrator to object to an application under subparagraph
(A) on the ground that a different label does not meet either
of the conditions described in subparagraph (A) (i) or (ii)
within 120 days after the date on which the application is
made shall constitute certification for the purposes of this
Act.
(d) Rulemaking Authority of the Administrator.--
(1) In general.--If the Administrator determines that other
rechargeable batteries having electrode chemistries different
from regulated batteries are toxic and may cause substantial
harm to human health and the environment if discarded into
the solid waste stream for land disposal or incineration, the
Administrator may, with the advice and counsel of State
regulatory authorities and manufacturers of rechargeable
batteries and rechargeable consumer products, and after
public comment--
(A) promulgate labeling requirements for the batteries with
different electrode chemistries, rechargeable consumer
products containing such batteries that are not easily
removable batteries, and packaging for the batteries and
products; and
(B) promulgate requirements for easy removability of
regulated batteries from rechargeable consumer products
designed to contain such batteries.
(2) Substantial similarity.--The regulations promulgated
under paragraph (1) shall be substantially similar to the
requirements set forth in subsections (a) and (b).
(e) Uniformity.--After the effective dates of a requirement
set forth in subsection (a), (b), or (c) or a regulation
promulgated by the Administrator under subsection (d), no
Federal agency, State, or political subdivision of a State
may enforce any easy removability or environmental labeling
requirement for a rechargeable battery or rechargeable
consumer product that is not identical to the requirement or
regulation.
(f) Exemptions.--
(1) In general.--With respect to any rechargeable consumer
product, any person may submit an application to the
Administrator for an exemption from the requirements of
subsection (a) in accordance with the procedures under
paragraph (2). The application shall include the following
information:
(A) A statement of the specific basis for the request for
the exemption.
(B) The name, business address, and telephone number of the
applicant.
(2) Granting of exemption.--Not later than 60 days after
receipt of an application under paragraph (1), the
Administrator shall approve or deny the application. On
approval of the application the Administrator shall grant an
exemption to the applicant. The exemption shall be issued for
a period of time that the Administrator determines to be
appropriate, except that the period shall not exceed 2 years.
The Administrator shall grant an exemption on the basis of
evidence supplied to the Administrator that the manufacturer
has been unable to commence manufacturing the rechargeable
consumer product in compliance with the requirements of this
section and with an equivalent level of product performance
without the product--
(A) posing a threat to human health, safety, or the
environment; or
(B) violating requirements for approvals from governmental
agencies or widely recognized private standard-setting
organizations (including Underwriters Laboratories).
(3) Renewal of exemption.--A person granted an exemption
under paragraph (2) may apply for a renewal of the exemption
in accordance with the requirements and procedures described
in paragraphs (1) and (2). The Administrator may grant a
renewal of such an exemption for a period of not more than 2
years after the date of the granting of the renewal.
SEC. 104. REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Batteries Subject to Certain Regulations.--The
collection, storage, or transportation of used rechargeable
batteries, batteries described in section 3(5)(C) or in title
II, and used rechargeable consumer products containing
rechargeable batteries that are not easily removable
rechargeable batteries, shall, notwithstanding any law of a
State or political subdivision thereof governing such
collection, storage, or transportation, be regulated under
applicable provisions of the regulations promulgated by the
Environmental Protection Agency at 60 Fed. Reg. 25492 (May
11, 1995), as effective on May 11, 1995, except as provided
in paragraph (2) of subsection (b) and except that--
(1) the requirements of 40 CFR 260.20, 260.40, and 260.41
and the equivalent requirements of an approved State program
shall not apply, and
(2) this section shall not apply to any lead acid battery
managed under 40 CFR 266 subpart G or the equivalent
requirements of an approved State program.
(b) Enforcement Under Solid Waste Disposal Act.--(1) Any
person who fails to comply with the requirements imposed by
subsection (a) of this section may be subject to enforcement
under applicable provisions of the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
(2) States may implement and enforce the requirements of
subsection (a) if the Administrator finds that--
(A) the State has adopted requirements that are identical
to those referred to in subsection (a) governing the
collection, storage, or transportation of batteries referred
to in subsection (a); and
(B) the State provides for enforcement of such
requirements.
TITLE II--MERCURY-CONTAINING BATTERY MANAGEMENT ACT
SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Mercury-Containing Battery
Management Act''.
SEC. 202. PURPOSE.
The purpose of this title is to phase out the use of
batteries containing mercury.
SEC. 203. LIMITATIONS ON THE SALE OF ALKALINE-MANGANESE
BATTERIES CONTAINING MERCURY.
No person shall sell, offer for sale, or offer for
promotional purposes any alkaline-manganese battery
manufactured on or after the date of enactment of this Act,
with a mercury content that was intentionally introduced (as
distinguished from mercury that may be incidentally present
in other materials), except that the limitation on mercury
content in alkaline-manganese button cells shall be 25
milligrams of mercury per button cell.
SEC. 204. LIMITATIONS ON THE SALE OF ZINC-CARBON BATTERIES
CONTAINING MERCURY.
No person shall sell, offer for sale, or offer for
promotional purposes any zinc-carbon battery manufactured on
or after the date of enactment of this Act, that contains
mercury that was intentionally introduced as described in
section 203.
SEC. 205. LIMITATIONS ON THE SALE OF BUTTON CELL MERCURIC-
OXIDE BATTERIES.
No person shall sell, offer for sale, or offer for
promotional purposes any button cell mercuric-oxide battery
for use in the United States on or after the date of
enactment of this Act.
SEC. 206. LIMITATIONS ON THE SALE OF OTHER MERCURIC-OXIDE
BATTERIES.
(a) Prohibition.--On or after the date of enactment of this
Act, no person shall sell, offer for sale, or offer for
promotional purposes a mercuric-oxide battery for use in the
United States unless the battery manufacturer, or the
importer of such a battery--
[[Page H3674]]
(1) identifies a collection site in the United States that
has all required Federal, State, and local government
approvals, to which persons may send used mercuric-oxide
batteries for recycling or proper disposal;
(2) informs each of its purchasers of mercuric-oxide
batteries of the collection site identified under paragraph
(1); and
(3) informs each of its purchasers of mercuric-oxide
batteries of a telephone number that the purchaser may call
to get information about sending mercuric-oxide batteries for
recycling or proper disposal.
(b) Application of Section.--This section does not apply to
a sale or offer of a mercuric-oxide button cell battery.
SEC. 207. NEW PRODUCT OR USE.
On petition of a person that proposes a new use for a
battery technology described in this title or the use of a
battery described in this title in a new product, the
Administrator may exempt from this title the new use of the
technology or the use of such a battery in the new product on
the condition, if appropriate, that there exist reasonable
safeguards to ensure that the resulting battery or product
without an easily removable battery will not be disposed of
in an incinerator, composting facility, or landfill (other
than a facility regulated under subtitle C of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.)).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. (Mr. Upton). Pursuant to the rule, the
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley] and the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr.
Pallone] will each be recognized for 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley].
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. OXLEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be on the House floor today
with broad bipartisan support for pro-environmental legislation that
originated in the subcommittee I chair.
H.R. 2024, the Mercury-Containing and Rechargeable Battery Management
Act, is the second bipartisan environmental bill we have brought to the
floor from the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Hazardous
Materials, the first being the Land Disposal Flexibility Act, which has
been signed into law. Any discussion of this Congress' environmental
record needs to acknowledge the good bipartisan work we are doing.
This battery bill proves an important point: we can improve the
environment by reducing government regulations, and by reducing burdens
on industry. This bill reduces regulations, and the result will be less
cadmium in our ground water and our air.
Right now, cadmium is classified as a hazardous waste, so spent
nickel-cadmium rechargeable batteries are hazardous wastes too.
Hazardous wastes are subject to all sorts of disposal, handling,
storage, and transportation regulations, like disposal in specially
permitted subtitle C landfills, recordkeeping, reporting, manifesting
and so on.
If your nickel-cadmium battery at home ran out of power, you could
just throw it in the trash and not be subject to the hazardous waste
regulations, because the law exempts household waste. But if you took
the battery back to the store to recycle it, all of a sudden it would
be subject to the hazardous waste regulations.
We want consumers to take rechargeable batteries back to the store
and have them recycled. But retail stores don't want to touch used
batteries under the current hazardous waste requirements, because it
would cost them an arm and a leg, and subject them to fines and
penalties if they don't comply.
This bill solves the problem by exempting rechargeable batteries from
hazardous waste regulations so we can recycle. Retailers collecting
these batteries for recycling will only need comply with the Universal
Waste Rule, which does away with most of the onerous hazardous waste
regulations. The reduced regulation doesn't pose an environmental
threat. After all, the batteries are in the same condition when you
throw them away as they are when you buy them. They don't become more
hazardous in between.
This bill also requires battery labeling so consumers know the
batteries can be recycled, and it bans mercury in several battery
types, which will reduce mercury in our air and ground water.
We made two minor changes since this bill passed the Commerce
Committee by voice vote. First, we changed the effective date of the
mercury ban to the date of enactment. Second, we clarified the
enforcement provision so importers who have knowledge of the contents
of the batteries they import can be enforced against if the batteries
violate the mercury ban.
I want to thank the bill's sponsor, Congressman Klug, for his
efforts, as well as the gentleman from New Jersey, Congressman Pallone.
I would also like to thank the chairman of the full committee for his
leadership on this issue in bringing the bill to the floor in a timely
fashion.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the legislation. This is a
bipartisan bill that is supported by the Clinton administration and was
reported out of the committee unanimously last week. I will include in
the Record a letter from the Clinton administration in support of the
legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I first became involved with this legislation because
New Jersey has a very serious mercury problem. In February of 1994, the
State released a study that showed some fish in over half of the
State's lakes with elevated mercury levels. These fish reflected
increased mercury levels in the atmosphere. In addition, the Asbury
Park Press, a newspaper in my district, did an outstanding
investigative report over a number of days on the dangers and sources
of mercury.
Mercury enters the atmosphere and the food chain in a number of ways,
but among the most significant sources are coal-fired utilities and
solid waste incinerators. Many of the components of garbage burned by
incinerators contain mercury, and incinerators then release the mercury
into the atmosphere, which then reaches the ground through rain, snow,
and other precipitation.
As its title implies, the bill deals with mercury in a comprehensive
fashion, including a user fee on mercury air emissions, reduction of
mercury in packaging, mandatory separation of mercury-containing items
from the waste stream, and a requirement for an EIS in order to site an
incinerator.
At one time, batteries may have accounted for as much as 60 percent
of the mercury being released from municipal solid waste incinerators,
but today batteries basically do not account for anywhere nearly as
high a percentage of the mercury emitted into the atmosphere.
I think it is clearly important to recognize the battery industry for
its accomplishments in this area. The industry has made tremendous
strides in reducing the mercury content of batteries, and now we are
considering legislation that is supported by the industry that bans
virtually all mercury containing batteries. That is no small feat.
But non-mercury-containing batteries also contain other heavy metals
and chemicals which can prove hazardous to human health and the
environment if they are incinerated or landfilled. The bill before us
that the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Klug], myself, and others have
introduced, and I have to specifically mention the gentleman from New
Mexico [Mr. Richardson] who is the original sponsor of this bill in
previous Congresses, but basically what this bill does for these other
issues, such as nickel-cadmium and other hazardous items other than
mercury, it provides a coherent national system of handling for
batteries and products, it streamlines regulatory requirements for
battery collection programs, and it encourages voluntary industry
programs by eliminating barriers to funding the collection and
recycling or proper disposal of used rechargeable batteries.
I just wanted to mention one more thing, Mr. Speaker. At the hearings
our subcommittee held, the EPA raised some concerns about certain
provisions in this bill. I criticized the agency for bringing its
concerns to our attention many months after the bill passed the Senate
and had been introduced.
Working together, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley] myself, the
gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Klug], the gentleman from Michigan [Mr.
Dingell] and others were able to address these concerns. Among other
things, the amendments adopted by the committee close unintended
loopholes in enforcement, allow States to implement and enforce the
act, and make
[[Page H3675]]
clear that the Administrator can invoke the Solid Waste Disposal Act
against those who fail to comply with the provisions of the bill.
I also want to note one change that has been made to the bill since
it left committee. This change as reported by the committee is a change
to the bill as reported and clarifies that the Administrator of EPA may
enforce title II against any retailer-importer who has knowledge of the
general chemical content of the general chemical content of the
imported battery. However, the change allows the defense where the
retailer-importer lacks such information, because, for example, of the
duplicity of the overseas manufacturer.
I do not want to get into more detail. It is a good bill. It has
bipartisan support. I commend the chairman and the other members, the
gentleman from New Mexico [Mr. Richardson], the gentleman from
Wisconsin [Mr. Klug] for their involvement.
Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman
from California [Mr. Miller].
Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
yielding me time and for his support and work on this legislation.
Let me just say, Mr. Speaker, that this legislation will not clean
up. It may recycle batteries, but it will not clean up the record of
the Republicans on the environment as this agenda is supposed to do.
I note the previous speaker, the chairman of the subcommittee, that
just spoke, recently voted five times against protecting our
environment, against protecting children from arsenic in their drinking
water, against adequate funding for our Nation's toxic cleanup program,
to stop EPA from protecting America's exposure to arsenic, dioxin, and
other cancer causing pollutants, to allow corporate polluters to dump
70,000 chemicals into our Nation's rivers, lakes, and streams, and to
allow industry to pollute our drinking water.
So while the gentleman and others who will speak on this bill from
your side of the aisle can earn a figleaf, and we will be glad to give
them a figleaf to cover themselves when they support this legislation,
but, under that figleaf, what you will see is in fact their
environmental record for the past 16 months, which has been against
environmental protection and, in many instances, providing much more
pollution than we will ever be able to prevent by passing this
recycling bill. This is a good bill, but it does not erase that record.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I cannot resist responding to what I guess is a
predictable response from the far left. Here we are, trying to craft a
bipartisan environmental bill dealing with rechargeable batteries and
recycling. It is unfortunate we have to already in the early part of
the day resort to political palaver about the environmental issues. It
is unfortunate, but I guess predictable.
Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman
from Wisconsin [Mr. Klug], the sponsor of the battery bill.
Mr. KLUG. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Ohio
[Mr. Oxley], the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Bliley], and the
gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone], for all of their help in this
legislation and helping to move it forward.
Mr. Speaker, the American people are consumers of millions of
rechargeable ni-cad batteries. I introduced this legislation because it
offers a sound solution to a serious environmental problem. This
legislation gives the battery industry the ability to implement a fully
private, let me say that again, fully private, voluntary, national
program to collect and recycle spent ni-cad batteries.
This recycling program is already running in several pilot programs
in different areas of the country, but a multitude of different State
labeling and collection regulations, as well as Federal waste
regulations, have prevented the industry from fully implementing it on
a national level.
Under H.R. 2024, regulations governing battery collection and
recycling programs will be streamlined and a comprehensive, uniform
system of battery labeling will now be established nationwide.
{time} 1500
In addition to establishing a nationwide recycling program for ni-cad
batteries, H.R. 2024, importantly phases out the use of mercury in
other batteries. Studies have shown mercury is a serious health threat
to both human health and the environment. It can damage the brain, the
kidneys, in addition, and also the developing fetus. It is time that
Congress take the lead in removing this dangerous element from our
waste stream.
H.R. 2024 is not controversial and enjoys wide bipartisan support.
The other body passed similar legislation by unanimous consent last
September. In addition, H.R. 2024 is supported by the National Retail
Federation, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National Electrical
Manufacturers Association, the Electronic Industries Association, the
Central Virginia Waste Management Authority and, perhaps more
importantly, my home Governor, Governor Thompson of Wisconsin.
Again, Mr. Speaker, this legislation has tremendous support across
the board and across the aisle, and let me reiterate one more time my
deep thanks to my colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr.
Pallone, for his great help in moving this legislation forward and to
my friend and colleague from Ohio, Mr. Oxley, for having the courtesy
and good sense to move this legislation forward as well. Both regulator
and the regulated community agree that the Government should take steps
to reduce the presence of nickel cadmium and mercury from the solid
waste stream.
I also believe we must do something about this problem and I am
hopeful we can quickly implement this bipartisan legislation. Within a
matter of days of signing this bill into law we can set forth a
completely voluntary and industry financed recycling program that will
provide enhanced environmental protection without burdening the States
or without burdening the taxpayers.
I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2024.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
California [Mr. Miller].
Mr. MILLER of California. Again to state, Mr. Speaker, that we will
be delivering a fig leaf to the gentleman from Wisconsin's office so he
can use it to try to hide his environmental record when earlier this
year he voted to stop EPA from protecting against the dumping of 70,000
chemicals in our Nation's rivers and allowing industry to pollute our
drinking water.
Voting to recycle batteries will not cover that up, and the fig leaf
will be delivered to his office later today.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New
Jersey [Mr. Saxton].
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I am sorry the gentleman from California
[Mr. Miller] has chosen to make a partisan political debate with fig
leaves and gimmicks. This afternoon was structured to be productive and
it was structured, in particular, in a bipartisan way.
We, for example, are going to consider a bill this afternoon known as
the Coastal Zone Protection Act, which has 130 signatures, about half
Republicans and half Democrats. We are going to have a number of bills,
one sponsored by the gentlewoman from Hawaii [Mrs. Mink], a Democrat;
another sponsored by the gentleman from New York [Mr. Forbes], a
Republican; we will have another, the North Platte Refuge Act, by the
gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. Barrett]; another sponsored by the
genteman from Louisiana [Mr. McCrery], a Republican. So we have gone
out of our way, Mr. Speaker, to make this a bipartisan effort this
afternoon to do some things that are good that we all agree on in the
name of the environment.
I am sorry that the gentleman from California insists on performing
the way he has with fig leaves and other gimmicks. I think it is not
what the American people expect. My constituents expect me to come to
Washington to pass legislation that does things they want done. I would
think the gentleman's constituents would want the same.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California [Mr. Miller].
Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
[[Page H3676]]
yielding me this time, and I appreciate the sensitivity of the
gentleman because he too will earn a fig leaf since he voted wrong
three out of five times.
The issue is not about these bills. The issue is about the continued
record that has not been bipartisan, where Members have again chosen
time and again to increase the ability of polluters to dump pollution,
to dump toxics into the rivers, the lakes, and the waterways of this
Nation. That is the gentleman's voting record.
The gentleman is not going to hide that voting record by voting on
bills that have basically unanimous support and that are
noncontroversial, and then suggest that represents his environmental
voting record, at the same time that we see the Committee on
Appropriations continuing the riders that have been so detrimental to
the environment.
Those are the facts and I appreciate the gentleman's sensitivity.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Colorado [Mr. Schaefer], the chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy and
Power.
(Mr. SCHAEFER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SCHAEFER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this
commonsense legislation. I commend industry, the Environmental
Protection Agency [EPA], and the environmental community in their
efforts to craft consensus proposal.
Currently, businesses, trying to do the right thing by implementing
battery recycling programs are stymied by a patchwork of State laws.
This legislation replaces the current random system with reasonable
uniform national standards for the transporting, selling, recycling,
and disposing of batteries.
With this bill, the battery industry will be able to launch a
voluntary recycling campaign that will keep batteries out of local
landfills and incinerators. Additionally, this measure will phase out
mercury-based batteries that currently threaten our Nation's
groundwater and air.
I am particularly pleased with the process that resulted in the
development of this bill. The business community was able to come
together with environmental regulators to produced a sensible piece of
legislation with broad bipartisan backing.
It is my hope that we can continue this cooperative spirit as we move
forward with consideration of additional environmental initiatives.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to adopt this reasonable, consensus
bill.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
California [Mr. Miller].
Mr. MILLER of California. Again, Mr. Speaker, I want to award a fig
leaf to the gentleman from Colorado who has voted five out of five
times against improving our environment and allowing arsenic to
continue in the drinking water of children and against adequate funding
for cleaning up the Nation's toxic waste program and to continue to
allow corporate polluters to dump up to 70,000 chemicals in our
Nation's rivers and lakes. The gentleman has a perfect score of five
for five that he was on the wrong side of the environment, and he
earned his fig leaf.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, it is always good to hear from the far left,
even if it is just 30 seconds.
Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman
from North Carolina [Mr. Burr].
Mr. BURR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me.
Mr. Speaker, I say to my good friend from California that I accept my
fig lead before I speak, knowing that I am going to get one, and saying
proudly that I am not accepting it to hide behind. I do not hide behind
anything I have done while I have been here that I think is in fact
right, and in fact I have done what I think voters sent me here to do.
That is to try to strike the right balance.
But I rise today in support of H.R. 2024. This legislation, passed
out of the Committee on Commerce on a bipartisan basis, will promote
recycling of used batteries that currently end up in landfills and
incinerators. Innocently, consumers like myself dispose of batteries
that leak mercury and cadmium into the groundwater and cause toxic air
emissions when incinerated. Today, batteries account for 68 percent of
the cadmium in landfills and 85 percent of the mercury. This possible
hazard is not acceptable, and I, for one, will appreciate the
opportunity to dispose of my batteries in an environmentally sound
manner.
With passage of H.R. 2024, consumers will be able to walk into any
store that sells batteries and leave them for recycling. Consumers will
be able to read right on the label, through uniformed labeling, that
the battery they have purchased is recyclable. All retailers have to do
is to set up battery recycling receptacles. Furthermore, H.R. 2024
allows the battery industry to launch a voluntary recycling program
which will promote the shipments of used batteries to a central
recycling center directly from the retailer.
This is perfect common-sense environmental legislation. H.R. 2024
does not create an expensive, out-of-control Government program. The
shipments of batteries to the recycling center will be prepaid for by
the Rechargeable Battery Recycling Corp., which is made up of nearly
every one of the battery manufacturers and consumer industry interests.
I cannot imagine a more convenient process. This bill will accomplish
removing batteries related mercury and cadmium from the waste stream,
which means a healthier safer environment for all.
This is common sense, Mr. Speaker, commonsense legislation that we
should enact today on a bipartisan basis.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
California [Mr. Miller].
Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
yielding me the time.
The previous speaker in the well quite properly predicted he too will
earn a fig leaf. He quite properly stated he will not be able to hide
behind it because right now we are sending all the heavy hitters
against the environment to the well. He, too, had a perfect score of
five for five against protecting children from arsenic in their
drinking water, against adequate funding for our Nation's toxic waste
cleanup programs to allow industry to pollute our drinking water and an
effort to stop EPA from protecting Americans from exposure to arsenic,
dioxin, lead and other cancer-causing pollutants. The gentleman has a
perfect score; he earned his fig leaf.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, it appears the other side does not have a whole lot of
substantive arguments in favor of this legislation, which is
unfortunate. Our good friend from New Mexico and good friend from New
Jersey are carrying a lot of water for some other folks. It is nice
they drafted somebody from the other committee to come in and be a
designated hitter, and I do mean hitter.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia [Mr.
Deal].
Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding
me time.
I walked in and thought this was a debate about horticulture. I would
suggest to the gentleman from California his analogy to the realm of
the horticultural area would be more in the nature of sour grapes
rather than fig leafs, however.
Let us talk about the issue here, however. The issue is one that is
important to our Nation and my State. I recently had an opportunity to
visit one of the manufacturing plants in my State that utilizes the
batteries that will be used in this recycling process. I think that
H.R. 2024, which is the Mercury Containing and Rechargeable Battery
Management Act, is the kind of bill all of us certainly will support.
It would maximize the environmental protection and resource recovery
through a vigorous voluntary recycling program.
I think it is the kind of legislation that all of us should support
in that it encourages people to do voluntarily both at the consumer
level, at the retail level and at the manufacturer's level what all of
us would like to do, and that is to reduce the toxins in our
environment.
H.R. 2024, the Mercury Containing and Rechargeable Battery Management
Act, is a bill which maximizes environmental protection and resource
recovery through a vigorous, voluntary recycling program. H.R. 2024
will make it more efficient, and less costly to handle batteries in an
environmentally sound manner. It
[[Page H3677]]
will phase out the use of mercury in batteries nationally and is
consistent with many State laws. Last, H.R. 2024 is an important step
in reducing toxics in the waste stream without imposing expensive
mandates on local governments. The bill has enjoyed bipartisan support
in both the House and Senate and is supported by the Clinton
administration.
I would like to make two additional comments in regard to this
legislation that I hope the public will take note of. First, I would
like to recognize and commend both the Republican and Democratic staff
for their hard work in crafting a bill that all parties could agree on.
While there may have been differences along the way, you established a
common ground from which you could work together to develop a solution.
It is unfortunate that bipartisan environmental efforts such as these
are too often overlooked.
Second, let me emphasize that Republicans are respectful of
American's desire to protect the environment. We embrace opportunities
to work with our colleagues across the aisle in any effort to
strengthen and improve our Nation's environmental laws.
H.R. 2024 is an important example of our commitment. It is my hope
that the public will look beyond the political rhetoric and media bias
that is typically associated with environmental legislation. The fact
is that Republicans have the same environmental concerns as our
constituents. H.R. 2024 is but one example of how we are addressing the
issue of solid waste disposal. This is a bill that we can all be proud
of. I believe that many more opportunities exist for me to return to
this well and tell the public what Republicans are doing to protect the
environment.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New
Mexico [Mr. Richardson].
(Mr. RICHARDSON asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. RICHARDSON. Mr. Speaker, my only regret is that this legislation
has taken so long to progress through the Congress. As I mentioned
before, I introduced a similar bill in the 103d Congress. It is good
that we are making this initiative now so that it becomes law.
Mr. Speaker, this legislation that we are considering today seeks to
protect our environment by providing real relief from the toxic effects
of mercury, lead and cadmium in landfills and incinerators. This bill,
which I am a cosponsor of, and its counterpart in the other body shares
the same goal of removing regulatory barriers to the implementation of
an industry sponsored program to collect and recycle ni-cad
rechargeable batteries.
Currently, 350 million nickel batteries are being sold in the country
each year, and about 40 percent are sold to household consumers. Most
of these batteries will therefore end up in solid waste landfills,
since households have no alternative opportunity to recycle.
The legislation we are discussing today is going to inform consumers
that these batteries can be recycled. In fact, consumers are
conveniently going to be able to return used recharageable batteries to
battery retailers who will have collection containers at their stores.
There is wide consensus and support of this issue. The bills have
been endorsed by the Conference of Mayors, the National Conference of
State Legislators, and industry has made a positive effort in moving
this bill. I am pleased to join these groups in supporting legislation
that does offer workable solutions.
Mr. Speaker, I understand that there are some concerns regarding this
legislation. I hope we can work them out to resolve these concerns so
that we can finally see this important issue become law.
Mr. Speaker, I think the point that needs to be made is, now that it
appears that we are moving with some environmental initiatives in the
Committee on Commerce, I would commend the gentleman from Ohio [Mr.
Oxley], the chairman, and urge him to move ahead on some other very
important initiatives, a bipartisan bill that does not pass a cleanups
on the taxpayer, a safe drinking water bill that keeps public health as
a top priority.
I think for those of us that also serve on the Committee on
Resources, let us move ahead with a sensible parks reform bill, not a
bill that moves ahead to try to shut down some of our national parks. A
fair concessions bill that does not make it easier for concessionaires
and the big operators to have a sweetheart deal as they manage the
national parks.
In addition to that, a bill that is fair on the grazing issue is
coming up in the Committee on Resources very soon. Let us make these
bipartisan. Chairman Oxley is somebody who has crafted bipartisan
bills. I urge him in the days ahead, besides this commendable effort,
to move in that direction on some of the bills I mentioned.
Today, though, this battery recycling bill is a good bill. It should
be approved. It is bipartisan. But we have to move beyond this small
bill into the major issues affecting the environment in the days ahead.
{time} 1515
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from California, [Mr. Miller].
Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I would just say that if the
Yankees had such heavy hitters in their lineup as you have against the
environment, they would win the World Series. The gentleman from
Georgia, [Mr. Deal], who just spoke earlier in the well in favor of
this legislation, in fact has a perfect record of voting 5 for 5
against the environment, against protecting children from arsenic in
their drinking water and against adequate funding for our Nation's
toxic waste cleanup to allow corporate polluters to dump 70,000
chemicals in our Nation's rivers and to allow industry to pollute our
drinking water and to stop the EPA from protecting America from
arsenic, dioxin, lead and other cancer-causing pollutants. So, again, a
perfect score for Mr. Deal of Georgia against the environment. Once
again, he has earned his fig leaf, but he will not be allowed to hide
it when his real environmental record is exposed against the
legislation today.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman from New Jersey will
proceed, then I will be glad to close.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, let me say, that I believe that this battery recycling
bill is an important bill, as is the Coastal Zone Management Act which
I believe we will be taking up next. They are important to my district,
to the State of New Jersey. But I think that what we are hearing from
our side of the aisle is a tremendous frustration over the fact that
major pieces of legislation that relate to the environment, such as the
Superfund, which is before the Committee on Commerce, such as safe
drinking water, such as the Clean Water Act, which already passed this
House, that consistently over the last year, since the beginning of
1995, the Republican leadership has made an effort to weaken major
environmental laws and also has made a major effort to cut back on the
amount of money that is available through appropriation bills, through
the budget bill for environmental enforcement.
I was very saddened really to learn today that even though it is the
day after Earth Day and even though the Republican leadership and my
colleagues on the Committee on Commerce on the other side are bringing
up these bills today that are important, that nonetheless, we continue
to see an effort by Speaker Gingrich and the leadership to press on
through the appropriations process in providing less money for
environmental enforcement and also in insisting on continuing with
these antienvironmental riders in the appropriation bills.
We were out on the lawn in front of the Capitol just about an hour
ago, Mr. Miller and myself, and also the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr.
Obey]. And we were told that the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr.
Livingston] and the Republican leadership insist on antienvironmental
riders that would eliminate the EPA's role in wetlands protection,
eliminate the possibility of designating for Superfund sites, not
allowing the EPA to proceed with standards for radon, even though in my
home State of New Jersey that is a major issue because of the radon and
radiation contamination that has been found in some of the drinking
water in Ocean County.
So we are extremely upset over the fact that the Republican
leadership continues this effort to turn back the clock on
environmental protection. As
[[Page H3678]]
much as we are supportive of the bills that are coming up today, we
insist upon the fact that we will make a point over the next few weeks
and certainly over the next few months until such time as we are
successful in stopping this Republican raid on the environment.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, we have been blessed by the chairman of the
Committee on Resources who has been drawn to this debate.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alaska [Mr.
Young].
(Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I came to the floor because I have
been listening to the tirade. Very frankly, I was questioning the
validity of some of the arguments. We are talking about a very good
bill here on this side of the aisle.
All I hear Members say on the other side is that for some reason
Republicans are going to sell the national parks. That is an outright
distortion. That is an outright distortion that is being said by
Secretary Babbitt. In fact, it is being said by that side of the aisle.
I just wanted the people that might be watching this show to say, and
show me anyplace, anytime anywhere we ever suggested such an action on
this side. The bill, in fact, Mr. Babbitt says that we are trying to
pass to sell the park was his bill. It was supported by the gentleman
from Minnesota [Mr. Vento]. It was voted on by Mr. Miller. It was voted
on that side of the aisle last session when they were in power.
Now all of a sudden we are the bad guys. Now, shame on you. I am
going to suggest respectfully what is occurring here is a gamut for
this television for people that watch it to tell some things that have
been distorted completely out of context and where they do not take the
responsibility. I have listened to the gentleman from New Jersey be on
the floor one time. One time I was sitting in the chair. I had to
listen to the nonsense that he spouts, and it is nonsense about how bad
we are. And I challenged him, show us where. What have we done in our
committee that has been bad? Nothing. We have done everything good, 13
bills have been signed out of the committee by this President. Some of
those he did not vote for, but the President did sign them.
So I think it is time we bring a little light to this subject here, a
little back to what we are talking about, this bill today, this small
battery bill to try to dispose of something that could be damaging, a
bill that came out of Mr. Oxley's committee that is noncontroversial.
To have this kind of rhetoric continued on and on is totally, I think,
irresponsible.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to reclaim my time.
My understanding, from the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley], was that he
was going to be the last speaker and that he would close. Now that the
gentleman from Alaska [Mr. Young] has spoken, I would ask to reclaim my
time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore [Mr. Upton]. Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from New Jersey?
Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I object.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to
close.
Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate, given all of the work that was done
on this battery bill, the fact that we heard testimony from the EPA.
Much of the testimony at the time when it was taking place in our
subject committee, was criticized by the gentleman from New Jersey as
being unrealistic and rather nitpicking, I think was the term he used.
But despite that, we worked very hard on a bipartisan basis to put
together a good piece of legislation, a bill that passed unanimously in
the Senate.
It had a great deal of momentum, that was supported by industry, as a
matter of fact encouraged by industry, supported by virtually every
environmental group. To bring it to the floor and end up with some kind
of a dog and pony show orchestrated by the gentleman from New Jersey
and his cohort from California is really, I think, unfortunate in this
situation.
When we start dealing with bills like Superfund, I am assuming the
gentleman from California and I know my friend from New Jersey are very
supportive of getting a good Superfund reform bill out there. Everybody
assumes, everybody knows that the existing Superfund law is badly
flawed and needs fixing. That is what we have been working on. I would
hate to think, Mr. Speaker, that somehow if we brought a bipartisan
Superfund bill to this floor, which is our goal, that we would have the
kind of cheap shots that are taking place on the floor of this House on
a very important issue.
So I am very disappointed today. If the gentleman wants to vote
against the battery bill, then go ahead and yell ``no'' as loud as you
want to. But I would suggest if you are serious about environmental
protection, instead of making slogans and little cutouts for
television, you would by very supportive of this strong bipartisan bill
that will get a lot of mercury and cadmium out of the system and help
clean up the environment.
You can have it one or two ways, but you cannot have it both ways.
Mr. GILLMOR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2024, the
Mercury-Containing and Rechargeable Battery Management Act. I am an
original cosponsor of this legislation and am glad that we are able to
finally bring this bill to the floor.
Mercury and cadmium are elements that can cause significant
environmental harm. The U.S. Public Health Service's Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry report serious problems with mercury
and cadmium containment in landfills. In fact, within New York alone,
batteries account for 68 percent of the cadmium at landfills and 85
percent of the mercury. The legislation before us today would help to
make our landfills safer and less toxic by providing a more
environmentally friendly alternative to current practices for battery
disposal.
Specifically, H.R. 2024 addresses three necessary areas that are
essential to getting an effective, private sector-driven program
established. First, it educates consumers on the need to recycle by
setting up a uniform labeling system for nickel-cadmium and other
rechargeable batteries. Second, it removes command-and-control
regulatory hurdles that now prohibit a viable, voluntary recycling
program from existing. Third and lastly, it bans the use of mercury in
some batteries and limits its use in others. These reforms should
provide us commonsense benefits that resonate on several levels.
Mr. Speaker, this bill has suffered deaths in two previous Congresses
that should not have occurred. Today's consideration is proof of the
worthiness of the ideas contained in this bill. I am pleased that,
unlike so many other bills in this Congress, we were able to work in a
bipartisan fashion to find common ground and pass this legislation. I
commend Chairman Bliley, the chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Oxley,
Mr. Pallone, and Mr. Klug for their hard work on this bill.
Throughout this Congress, the House Commerce Committee and this House
have spent time debating cleanup of hazardous waste sites, allocation
of spectrum, reform of the telecommunications industry, and collection
and management of waste streams. This bill has implications on all of
them in that nickel-cadmium and related mercury containing batteries
are used for cellular phones and laptop computers, whose widespread use
will be escalating.
Yesterday, our country took time out during Earth Day activities to
reflect on ways to make our environment better. Recycling has long been
considered part of the environmental triumvirate of: reduce, reuse, and
recycle. In fact, I believe this bill accomplishes all three of these
tenets by limiting the use of mercury in batteries, moving these
batteries out of the waste stream, and collecting the batteries for
future purposes. I hope all my colleagues will see the wisdom of the
efforts contained in herein and will overwhelmingly support this
legislation.
Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this
environmentally sound legislation. Through its comprehensive
collection, education, and recycling programs, the Mercury-containing
and Rechargeable Battery Management Act will effectively reduce the
presence of mercury, cadmium, and other metals from batteries in the
solid waste stream.
The use of as many as 2.5 billion dry cells every year has made
significant contributions to the high levels of mercury and cadmium in
the solid waste stream. As dry cell batteries break down, their toxic
contents are released into groundwater resources. In incinerators,
toxins are emitted through the combustion of these dry-cell batteries.
Through industry's collaboration with the EPA, State and local
governments, retailers,
[[Page H3679]]
and the recycling industry, a voluntary recycling program for nickel-
cadmium batteries has been developed. The final step toward
implementation of this program will be completed by passing this
legislation today.
Two important provisions in this legislation establish uniform
labeling procedures, and uniform collection, storage, and
transportation requirements for these recyclable batteries. The
labeling requirement will clearly inform those who buy the batteries
that they are recyclable. The transportation requirements are
streamlined, providing further encouragement for participation in this
voluntary program.
The recycling program will promote the shipment of used batteries to
a central recycling center, keeping them out of our local landfills and
incinerators. The battery industry strongly supports this program, as
well as the American people. At no cost to the Federal Government, we
have the opportunity to efficiently and swiftly put these recycling
programs into action.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to support this legislation which takes a
positive step in working for the common goal of preserving the
environment.
Mrs. THURMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to express my strong
support for H.R. 2024, the Mercury-containing and Rechargeable Battery
Management Act. Today, we will take an important step toward making
this earth a cleaner place. The battery bill will ensure that nickel-
cadmium batteries get out of the waste stream and into the recycling
stream.
In my district, energizer power systems employ 1,400 people. In fact,
our Alachua plant is one of only two facilities in the United States
that produces nickel-cadmium batteries.
We may be one of the only one's producing them, but you all use them.
Nickel-cadmium batteries are used in power tools, appliances, cellular
and cordless phones, and so many other every day products.
Recognizing the danger the disposal of these batteries posed, 13
States, including Florida, took the initiative to label and recycle the
batteries. Industry has done a terrific job in promoting the labeling
and recycling programs, particularly through the creation of the
Rechargeable Battery Recycling Corporation [RBRC] Manufacturers fund
the recycling programs and the RBRC is charged with collecting and
recycling the used batteries. The Federal Government isn't spending tax
dollars to set up a new bureaucracy, industry is financing and
administering the program itself.
Actions like these are examples of the kind of good corporate
citizenship we want to encourage. More than 100 companies helped to
create the RBRC and, together, they work to ensure that their products
do no harm to our environment.
The problem is that conflicting State regulations about labeling and
collecting have hindered the RBRC's ability to fully achieve its goals.
Today, we will enact uniform environmental labeling standards and allow
for national collection of nickel-cadmium batteries by retail stores.
These actions will help the energizer bunny keep going and going--then
be recycled--so he can keep going and going again.
I am delighted that we have bipartisan support for this bill that not
only addresses nickel-cadmium, but also phases out the use of mercury
in batteries. I am pleased that the 1,400 hard-working energizer
employees in my district have taken an active role in promoting this
legislation.
I commend their efforts and urge the House to vote for the passage of
H.R. 2024.
Mr. TORRES. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to see the House addressing the
issue of recycling. The bill under consideration today would encourage
voluntary battery recycling, curtail the use of mercury-containing
batteries and improve the procedures for recycling such batteries. The
bill is a step in the right direction, but it's only a very small,
half-step. We can and we should be doing much more to fix our country's
critical solid waste disposal problems.
Common items such as lead acid batteries, newsprint, motor oil and
tires continue to clog neighborhood landfills, incinerators and sewers.
Communities all over America continue to grapple with the serious
health and safety hazards that result. There is a way, however, to turn
these items usually treated as trash into valuable resources. And there
is a way to meet this environmental challenge, which does not rely on
command and control regulation.
Mr. Speaker, 7 years ago, along with the late Senator John Heinz and
former Senator Wirth, I introduced a innovative concept in
environmental protection. The idea was simple--use market forces to
achieve environmental protection. Very simply, our legislation offered
a solution to the demand side of the supply-and-demand equation.
Recycling is not just the process of having a product collected,
recycling means turning the old product into a new product and using it
again. Garbage is still garbage unless it has value throughout its
lifecycle. Unfortunately, because there is currently no stable market
for recycled materials, our separated garbage too often ends up buried
in the dump.
The legislation I have reintroduced this Congress would give
companies an incentive to recycle the goods they produce, while giving
them the freedom to determine the most efficient and least expensive
way to do so. The bills employ a system of tradable credits. The
credits serve as the medium of exchange in recycling markets.
Manufacturers would be required to use an annually increasing
percentage of recycled materials. If unable to meet the content
standard for a given year, a manufacturer could achieve compliance by
purchasing recycling credits from other manufacturers who exceed their
targets.
The bills, H.R. 1522, H.R. 1523, H.R. 1524, and H.R. 1525, represent
innovative proposals to foster the lead battery, oil, newsprint, and
tire recycling industries. I encourage my colleagues to consider these
incentive-based bills and join me in promoting a more comprehensive
approach to addressing the serious solid waste challenges we face as a
nation.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley] that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill, H.R. 2024, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________