Senator Joseph Lieberman
Thursday, June 6, 2002
Good morning, and welcome to
this hearing of the Environmental and Public Works Committee’s Subcommittee on
Clean Air, Climate Change and Wetlands. We’re here today to talk about
a matter of critical importance to the health of America’s rivers and streams,
the changing the definition of fill material under the Clean Water Act.
Streams and rivers provide drinking water for people and habitats for many aquatic species. They also provide a means of transporting water during heavy storms. Waterways are our planet’s circulatory system, and we should no sooner allow them to be disrupted than we would accept blockages in our own veins or arteries.
In 1972 Congress passed the Clean
Water Act, one of the landmark pieces of environmental protections in our
nation’s history. Under the Act, and
under the careful oversight of government ever since, our lakes, rivers and
streams have been cleaned and
safeguarded for us and for future generations.
Under the Act, the federal
government has allowed industry to put some materials in our rivers and
streams. The idea is that limited
deposits of certain materials in particular places do not harm our water
supply. Sometimes, the deposits serve a
useful and constructive purpose—such as providing the foundation for a building
or a bridge. When that’s the case,
what’s dumped is not called waste—it’s called “fill.” Ever since the passage of the Clean Water Act, the Army Corps of
Engineers has given industry permits for such deposits on a case-by-case basis.
But we’ve learned that the Army
Corps has been issuing permits to companies which allow them to dump vast
quantities of blasted rubble—literally, tons and tons of rock, dirt, and toxic
materials—right into our rivers and streams.
And the environmental consequences of this shortsighted policy have been
severe: water has been polluted,
aquatic life has been terminated, and ecosystems have been irreparably changed.
Mountaintop removal is the most
prominent historical and current activity associated with the fill issue under
the Clean Water Act. It is an important
industry on which many American communities depend.
But if this type of mining must continue, the waste created by
this practice and others must be disposed of in compliance with the Clean Water
Act. That’s the law—and for years, it’s
shameful that our own government wasn’t following it.
Unfortunately, the Bush
Administration isn’t looking for ways to stop the dumping. It is looking for ways to allow it to
continue indefinitely and expand it in the future. Just last month, when EPW Committee Chairman Jeffords and I
learned that Bush Administration was on the verge of finalizing rule changes
that do just that, we sent a letter to the President urging him to
reconsider. We asked for the
opportunity to work with the Administration and others to fully assess the
environmental and other effects of the changes first.
Two days later, despite the concern
we and many others had expressed, the Administration changed the rule
anyway. I believe that the new rule
violates the Clean Water Act. And just
days after the rule was issued, a federal district court agreed with that
belief —stating that the Clean Water Act does not allow filling the
waters of the United States solely for waste disposal, and that agency policy
that holds otherwise is beyond the power conferred by the Clean Water Act.
What’s doubly disturbing is that the
new EPA/Corps rule not only puts a seal of approval on the dumping of
mountaintop removal waste in our waters, but effectively invites many
new kinds of waste to be put in our rivers and streams. The rule redefines “fill material” so
broadly as to include mining overburden, woodchips, and even construction
debris. And it no longer requires those
seeking permits to demonstrate that the dumping would serve any useful purpose.
If the EPA wants to change the Clean
Water Act to allow this dumping, not to mention new dumping, it should seek to
change the law, but not through administrative fiat. As long as the Clean Water
Act is the law of the land, this practice cannot be permitted—and must
literally not be permitted by the Army Corps of Engineers.
We will hear this morning testimony
on the relevance of the fill definition to the health of the environment and
local economies, how this problem has been addressed in the State of West
Virginia, and impacts mountaintop removal waste has had on the waters in
Appalachia.
Before
starting the hearing I must address an issue that has caused some controversy
regarding the hearing. I am sorry to report that my good
friend Senator Voinovich is not here today to hear testimony on this important
topic. There was a misunderstanding
between our staffs over witnesses, specifically our calling Mr. Kevin
Richardson to testify, that led him to boycott this hearing and invoke a Senate
rule that requires this hearing to end two hours after the Senate opens for
business. Forgive the pun but Senator Voinovich and I were not “N’Sync” with
about having a Back Street Boy testify today.
I am sorry about this, especially because I know so many of you have
travelled so far to be here today.
Mr. Richardson, I am sorry that you
have been subjected to criticism about your coming here to testify. I know that you were born in Kentucky and
raised on the edge of the Daniel Boone National Forest, and still own a farm
there. You have family and friends throughout the Appalachian region. I understand that you are the founder and
president of the Just Within Reach Foundation.
Your foundation promotes personal responsibility and promotes environmental
education, including the granting of scholarships. Finally, you have been involved in the issue before us today,
and have flown over the coal fields in Kentucky, West Virginia, and Tennessee,
so you have seen first hand the consequences of the granting of fill permits to
allow the disposal of waste from mountaintop removal.
Mr. Richardson is here as more than a well-known celebrity. He is knowledgeable on this issue and has in fact worked to protect the environment in his home state. I believe his voice will add to our understanding of the issue.