[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 18]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 23830-23831]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                                 CERCLA

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. RALPH M. HALL

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                        Friday, December 8, 2006

  Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my regret that the 
109th Congress was unable to address an issue of importance to hard-
working Americans across the country. Some groups are misinterpreting 
the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability 
Act, also called ``CERCLA,'' by seeking to apply Superfund liability to 
traditional agriculture as it relates to the use of animal manure as a 
fertilizer and soil conditioner. I was in Congress when CERCLA was 
passed, and I assure you that this is a misapplication of that law.
  Congress did not intend this law to apply to animal manure returned 
to the soil as a fertilizer and did not intend this law to make every 
farm a hazardous waste site.
  This misuse of CERCLA attracted attention from the Energy and 
Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous 
Materials, which held a hearing in November 2005. That hearing prompted 
me to introduce a bipartisan bill, H.R. 4341, along with distinguished 
co-sponsors, to specifically clarify CERCLA's definition of ``hazardous 
waste'' to make clear that animal manure is not included. This became 
necessary because some have lost sight of CERCLA's purpose. CERCLA was 
designed to fund the cleanup of dangerous abandoned industrial sites 
and chemical landfills, such as the infamous Love Canal site in New 
York. It was not written to cover ongoing agricultural operations.

[[Page 23831]]

  I am very proud that 191 of my House colleagues have signed on as 
cosponsors of this bipartisan legislation. This level of support is a 
testament to the strength of our arguments and the threat that a 
misapplication of CERCLA poses to America's farmers. H.R. 4341's 
cosponsors represent all regions of this great country. The common 
thread is a dedication to U.S. agriculture.
  Critics of farming claim that CERCLA has always applied to animal 
manure and should be broadly interpreted to fill gaps in the 
environmental laws. But, CERCLA was never intended to cover farming and 
agriculture, and it specifically excludes the normal application of 
fertilizers, such as animal manure. American farms already are subject 
to many federal and state environmental laws. Applying CERCLA to manure 
expands it beyond anything its drafters imagined. Critics believe that 
by targeting so-called ``factory farms'' their disregard for the law's 
language is legitimate. Unfortunately, these critics fail to understand 
modern agriculture. Today, integrated farming techniques allow large 
companies to work together with small, family farmers--they rely on 
each other. Driving these large companies out of business, as some seem 
intent on doing by misinterpreting CERCLA, will devastate the family 
farmers working closely with them. And, all have seen how an 
exaggerated interpretation of CERCLA liability can doom small 
businesses. Interpreting the law to include animal manure creates 
liability for every farmer in the country, big or small.
  Mr. Speaker, for generations, animal manure has been used as a 
healthy, natural, organic fertilizer. It is not waste, but a commodity 
that is bought, sold and bartered for in small farming communities 
across America. Partly because of the use of this organic fertilizer, 
farmers have an outstanding track record as environmental stewards. 
They do not deserve to be treated like polluters or criminals. H.R. 
4341 will remedy this situation and I look forward to returning to this 
issue in the 110th Congress.

                          ____________________