[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 9]
[House]
[Pages 12247-12249]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1900
      AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT DIESEL EMISSION REDUCTION SUPPLEMENTAL 
                         ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS

  Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
Senate bill (S. 2146) to authorize the Administrator of the 
Environmental Protection Agency to accept, as part of a settlement, 
diesel emission reduction Supplemental Environmental Projects, and for 
other purposes, as amended.

[[Page 12248]]

  The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
  The text of the Senate bill is as follows:

                                S. 2146

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. EPA AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT DIESEL EMISSIONS REDUCTION 
                   SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS.

       The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency 
     (hereinafter, the ``Agency'') may accept (notwithstanding 
     sections 3302 and 1301 of title 31, United States Code) 
     diesel emissions reduction Supplemental Environmental 
     Projects if the projects, as part of a settlement of any 
     alleged violations of environmental law--
       (1) protect human health or the environment;
       (2) are related to the underlying alleged violations;
       (3) do not constitute activities that the defendant would 
     otherwise be legally required to perform; and
       (4) do not provide funds for the staff of the Agency or for 
     contractors to carry out the Agency's internal operations.

     SEC. 2. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT PROVISIONS.

       In any settlement agreement regarding alleged violations of 
     environmental law in which a defendant agrees to perform a 
     diesel emissions reduction Supplemental Environmental 
     Project, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
     Agency shall require the defendant to include in the 
     settlement documents a certification under penalty of law 
     that the defendant would have agreed to perform a comparably 
     valued, alternative project other than a diesel emissions 
     reduction Supplemental Environmental Project if the 
     Administrator were precluded by law from accepting a diesel 
     emission reduction Supplemental Environmental Project. A 
     failure by the Administrator to include this language in such 
     a settlement agreement shall not create a cause of action 
     against the United States under the Clean Air Act or any 
     other law or create a basis for overturning a settlement 
     agreement entered into by the United States.

     SEC. 3. INCLUSION OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IN CERTAIN 
                   STATE AND LOCAL GRANT PROGRAMS FOR DIESEL 
                   EMISSION REDUCTIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 791 of the Energy Policy Act of 
     2005 (42 U.S.C. 16131) is amended by adding at the end 
     thereof the following:
       ``(9) Definition of state.--The term `State' includes the 
     District of Columbia.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--(1) Section 793(d)(2) of such 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 16133(d)(2)) is amended by striking 
     ``Governor'' and inserting ``chief executive''.
       (2) Subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 793(c)(2) of such 
     Act are each amended by striking ``50'' and inserting ``51'' 
     and by striking ``2 percent'' and inserting ``1.96 percent'' 
     in each place such terms appear.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Boucher) and the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.


                             General Leave

  Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous material on the bill now under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I rise to urge the passage of S. 2146, a measure which was previously 
approved by the Senate. The House counterpart legislation was sponsored 
by our California colleague, Mr. Costa, and has been approved by the 
House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
  The bill allows the Environmental Protection Agency to continue using 
supplemental environmental projects funds to retrofit existing diesel 
powered engines with emission reduction controls. Diesel emissions from 
on and off-road vehicles and engines account for more than one-half of 
the nitrogen oxide and particulate matter emissions from all mobile 
sources. The Environmental Protection Agency has issued regulations to 
limit emissions from new diesel engines and vehicles, but those rules 
only apply to the new vehicles, not to the heavy duty diesel fleet that 
is on America's roads today. And given the long life of many diesel 
vehicles and engines, it's estimated that the existing fleet of 
vehicles will not be entirely cycled out of existence until about the 
year 2030.
  In order to achieve emission reductions from that very large existing 
diesel fleet, a number of actions have been taken in order to retrofit 
those vehicles with emission reduction technologies. For example, the 
Environmental Protection Agency has administered the Clean School Bus 
Program for a number of years, providing grants to school districts 
across the Nation for the purpose of retrofitting diesel powered school 
buses.
  As another example, Congress has provided funding for diesel 
retrofits under the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program. And 
in addition, the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act was included as part of 
the Energy Policy Act of 2005. That Act authorizes the expenditure of 
$200 million annually over a 5-year period for grant and for loan 
programs funding diesel project retrofits.
  Most recently, $49.2 million was appropriated by the Congress for 
that program as a part of the fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill.
  In addition to these programs administered by EPA, private entities 
have also often funded clean diesel programs as part of settlement 
agreements that have been reached with the Environmental Protection 
Agency in cases in which the agency had alleged that the private entity 
had committed violations of the environmental laws. These supplemental 
environmental projects used for diesel emission reductions have totaled 
$45.5 million from fiscal year 2001 through fiscal year 2006, and 
they've been a very valuable source of obtaining emission reductions 
from the existing diesel fleet.
  But as matters now stand, this very valuable tool to obtain diesel 
emission reductions from the older vehicles can no longer be used. The 
Environmental Protection Agency has concluded that because Congress 
appropriated funds for the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act, which is 
targeted toward older vehicle retrofits, supplemental environmental 
projects for diesel retrofits may no longer be used.
  That decision interprets the Miscellaneous Receipts Act, which 
prohibits agencies from augmenting from other sources their budgets as 
approved by the Congress. Because of that Act, the EPA has determined 
that it can no longer use private funding from case settlements to 
accomplish diesel retrofits since Congress has directly appropriated 
some funds for that purpose.
  In view of the fact that there are 10 million heavy duty diesel 
vehicles and other engines in use today, the continued use of 
supplemental environmental projects in case settlements is both cost 
effective and environmentally beneficial.
  Mr. Costa's bill would assure their continued use. The measure enjoys 
bipartisan support and has been endorsed by more than 45 interested 
organizations, including a broad range of health, environmental and 
industry groups.
  The measure would simply grant to EPA specific authority to accept 
diesel emission reduction supplemental environmental projects as part 
of settling alleged violations of environmental laws, provided that the 
projects protect human health or the environment, are related to the 
underlying violation, do not constitute activities the defendant would 
otherwise legally be required to perform, and do not provide funds for 
the staff of the agency or contractors in order to carry out internal 
EPA operations.
  I commend Mr. Costa for his fine work in bringing this measure to the 
House, and I urge passage of the Senate bill which incorporates his 
legislation.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. TERRY. I yield myself as much time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in support of Senate bill 2146, a very 
commonsense based solution to dealing with older diesel technology.
  Retrofitting simply is a cost-effective way to address the issues. It 
produces immediate emissions reductions and eliminates these really 
unnecessary infrastructure requirements.
  So with that, I'm going to urge all of my colleagues to support us in 
this measure.

[[Page 12249]]

  Before I reserve my time, I yield to the gentleman to answer if he 
has any other speakers.
  Mr. BOUCHER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Costa will be 
speaking. He is the only other speaker which we have. After he 
finishes, I will be yielding back our time as well.
  Mr. TERRY. Since they have the right to close, anyway, I'm going to 
yield back our time and let them wrap it up.
  Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Costa). He is the author of the legislation we are 
considering.
  Mr. COSTA. Congressman Boucher and Congressman Terry, I want to thank 
you and your staffs for the hard work that you've done with your 
colleagues. The Energy and Commerce Committee has made a significant 
difference in bringing this legislation to the floor.
  This measure, along with its companion measure, Senate bill 2146, is, 
I think, very important to ensuring that we provide improved 
opportunities for air quality, as well as throughout the country.
  I also want to thank my cosponsors in the House bill, which includes 
the original cosponsors, Congressmen Cardoza, McNerney, Congressman 
Nunes, as well as Representative Butterfield, Representatives Hill, 
Kind, Matheson, Matsui, Bono Mack, Shimkus and again Congressman Terry.
  This measure, combined with Senate 2146, will allow the Environmental 
Protection Agency to continue the prior practice of accepting diesel 
emission reduction projects as part of an environmental settlement 
agreement. These settlement agreements are important when you're trying 
to reach an accord with the private sector and still, at the same time, 
clean up the air.
  For many years the Environmental Protection Agency has funded diesel 
retrofit projects through the Supplemental Environment Projects, 
otherwise known as SEPS with the corporations as part of overall 
settlement agreements. From fiscal year 2001 to fiscal year 2006, the 
Environmental Protection Agency entered into diesel emission reductions 
with these settlement environment projects valued at over $45 million. 
This bill will help maintain this separate private funding source as a 
part of a private/public partnership for these projects and, at the 
same time, improve air quality in basins throughout the country that 
have regional air issues that they are in noncompliance with.
  This is particularly of importance in my own district that I share 
with my colleagues, Congressmen Nunes and McCarthy and Congressmen 
Radanovich and Cardoza, as well as McNerney. The San Joaquin Valley 
area is a non attainment area, and consequently, we have difficult 
challenges trying to become an attainment area, especially when we 
consider that we are one of the fastest growing regions in California.
  The air basin is 250 miles long, but it's shaped in a valley where 
you have mountain ranges on each side. Therefore, we not only have our 
own stationary and mobile sources of emission that we create, but 
because we're in the center of the transportation hub between Northern 
and Southern California, actually, all the way along the west coast, we 
have interstate transportation on 99 and Highway 5, which is no 
contribution of ours, but it's part of interstate transportation that 
contributes to the emissions that we have to deal with. So, therefore, 
this is an important measure.
  We have among the highest rates of childhood asthma in the State. We 
have other issues that we are continuing to deal with.
  Today, 90 percent of the commercial trucks are powered by diesel 
engines. Two-thirds of all farm and construction equipment run on 
diesel engines. Therefore, this measure can make a difference.
  California does lead the Nation in clean diesel technology, and some 
of the cleanest types of diesel fuel anywhere in the world. But even 
retrofit projects have their role and play a significant contribution 
to improving air quality, not only in our district but throughout the 
country.
  Finally, in addition, retrofitting clean diesel technologies for 
diesel vehicles and equipment, I think, is one of the most cost 
effective strategies for achieving tangible and immediate air quality 
benefits. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that these 
retrofit projects have a 13:1 benefit-to-cost ratio, meaning that the 
$45 million invested between 2001 and 2006 translates to over $600 
million of health benefits that also benefit young people, children who 
have asthma cases, those who have cardiovascular issues and the like.
  I want to again thank my colleagues, Congressman Terry, Congressman 
Boucher and your staffs and all those who are cosponsors of this 
important measure. This is cost effective. It's meaningful. It will 
improve air quality throughout the country.
  At this time I want to urge all of my colleagues to support the 
passage of this measure.
  Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and 
yield back the balance of our time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Boucher) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the Senate bill, S. 2146, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________