|
Washington, D.C. --- U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ) testified before the House Transportation Committee's Railroads Subcommittee this morning about the critical need to ensure solid waste facilities next to rail lines fall under the same regulations as every other waste facility in the nation.
The New Jersey congressman urged the subcommittee to pass his legislation, H.R. 4821, the Solid Waste Environmental Regulation Clarification Affecting Railroads Act, to clarify this point so waste transfer facilities are not able to get around state and local health and environmental regulations. Pallone's statement follows.
"Chairman LaTourette, Ranking Member Brown, thank you for holding this hearing and for allowing me to testify before you today. Today's hearing highlights what has become a very troubling issue throughout my home state of New Jersey and a looming threat to our environment and to public health.
"As you know, certain waste handlers and railroad companies have tried to exploit a supposed loophole in federal law in order to set up unregulated waste transfer facilities. Under the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995, the Surface Transportation Board has exclusive jurisdiction over "transportation by rail carriers" and the ability to grant federal preemption over other laws at any level -- local, state, or federal -- that might impede such transportation.
"This makes sense, and it was obviously Congress' intention in passing the ICCTA to ensure that the STB could enforce compliance with the Commerce Clause. I agree that local and state governments should not have the ability to unduly impede interstate rail operations.
"But Congress intended such authority to extend only to transportation by rail, not to the operation of facilities that are merely sited next to rail operations or have a business connection to a rail company. Unfortunately, certain companies have exploited uncertainty regarding Congressional intent under the ICCTA to build or plan waste transfer stations next to rail lines and avoid any regulation, giving them a competitive advantage.
"In New Jersey, there are approximately nine railroad transfer facilities operating under supposed federal preemption -- one of which actually handles hazardous waste. Some of these companies have gone before the STB to seek federal preemption of a host of environmental and public health laws that apply to every other waste transfer facility. Even without applying for specific exemptions from the STB, companies have held up the threat of federal preemption as a way of getting local and state governments to back down on proposed regulations.
"Apparently, word is spreading. In my home district, a company called Red Bank Recycling is preparing to take advantage of the possibility of an ICCTA preemption to move forward with a proposal to build railroad sidings as well as facilities for transferring construction debris and separating recyclable materials. Officials from the Borough of Red Bank, the County Solid Waste Advisory Council, and the state have all weighed in with my office expressing grave concerns about this proposal.
"The Red Bank proposal and others throughout the state have shown that certain waste haulers are trying hard to avoid environmental regulation and to site facilities in environmentally sensitive locations. One facility in Mullica Township was stopped by a court order before it could begin operations but would have been located in the midst of New Jersey's famed Pinelands region. Another facility in Pleasantville would have come within a mere two feet of coastal wetlands.
"Unregulated waste transfer stations are not merely small operations that exist to move containerized waste from trucks to rail. As you can see from the poster I brought, these facilities are large and dirty and often in the midst of heavily populated areas. The one pictured here was in North Bergen, New Jersey, and as you can see clearly is right across the street from a McDonald's and other retail locations. This facility performed much of the same work that you would expect to see at any large waste transfer station -- with the exception that this particular station does not have to comply with the state's rigorous solid waste regulations.
"Mr. Chairman, I do not come before you to ask that Congress do anything to interfere with the legitimate interstate movement of freight rail. In fact, the freight rail industry itself does not see federal preemption of environmental laws as critical to their commerce. In a recent filing with the STB, the Association of American Railroads noted that potential federal loopholes under the ICCTA are "being abused by parties whose objective is something other than providing rail service."
"I simply want to ensure that these new waste facilities sited near rail lines comply with the same regulations as every other facility of that type. New Jersey has very strict solid waste regulations that often require an important permitting process. This process is critical because protecting public health and the environment in the country's most densely populated state is no easy task.
"That is why in March I introduced H.R. 4821, the Solid Waste Environmental Regulation Clarification Affecting Railroads Act, legislation originally championed by our state's two senators. This simple bill amends the ICCTA to say that solid waste management and processing are excluded from the jurisdiction of the STB. This will do nothing to impede interstate freight rail service but will ensure that solid waste facilities next to rail lines fall under the same regulations as every other waste facility. I hope this legislation can move forward in the Subcommittee as soon as possible.
"Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Brown, thank you again for your interest in this critical issue and for allowing me to testify. I look forward to working with you as this process continues." |
