[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.

                          ____________________