Frank Pallone: “As someone who cares about beneficial reuse and wants to see the beneficial reuse flourish, I am listening to this…”

“As someone who cares about beneficial reuse and wants to see the beneficial reuse flourish, I am listening to this debate. And one might think that we are facing a stark choice, either vote for this bill or coal ash recycling will stop, but that is not the choice that we face. When EPA issued its final coal ash rule, they finalized a nonhazardous regulation, exactly what the coal ash recycling industry sought, and the rule explicitly protects beneficial reuse. Many Members of Congress sent letters and submitted comments to EPA during the comment period on the proposed rule in support of the subtitle, the option they ultimately chose. In this bill, on the other hand, the decision between hazardous and nonhazardous would be moved to the State level, meaning that these materials could be regulated as hazardous in some States, but not others. Now, how will that avoid the stigma so many in the industry have spoken of and how will it create the certainty they crave? Even worse, this bill would eliminate important protections in EPA's final rule, meaning the number of damage cases is likely to continue to grow, and that will really create a stigma around these materials. So, if we leave these ash ponds in place and another one fails, what will happen to the beneficial reuse industry?…”