January 14, 2009 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E83 

pollution control facilities, rather than solid 

waste management units. 

Similarly, requirements for liners for coal 

ash ponds vary State by State. For example, 

Alabama and Florida do not require liners for 

surface impoundments for coal ash, while Wisconsin does. 

The argument that all States have adequate 

regulations for coal ash is not substantiated by 

the facts. It is impossible to write off the disaster in Tennessee as a freak accident. The 

absence of national standards for coal ash 

has resulted in environmental damage 

throughout the country—not just last month, or 

last year, but for decades. In 2007, the EPA 

recognized 67 contaminated sites in 23 states 

where coal combustion byproducts have polluted groundwater or surface water. This may 

be just the tip of the iceberg, because most 

coal ash sites in the United States are not 

adequately monitored. 

The ‘‘Coal Ash Reclamation and Environmental Safety Act of 2009’’ requires minimum 

design and stability standards for all surface 

impoundments constructed to hold coal ash. 

The bill draws on the regulatory model for impoundments that is used for coal slurry management under the Surface Mining Control 

and Reclamation Act of 1977. Requirements 

for coal slurry impoundments that would be 

made applicable to coal ash impoundments 

under 2 this legislation cover aspects of design, construction, operation, and closure, including: 

Regulations detailing the engineering and 

stability of the embankment. 

Regulations requiring all applications for an 

impoundment to have a foundation investigation to determine design requirements for stability. 

Each design plan must include a 

geotechnical investigation of the embankment 

foundation area. 

Each impoundment plan must include a survey describing the potential effect on the 

structure from subsidence of the subsurface 

strata resulting from past mining operations in 

the area. 

Plans for impoundments must be reviewed 

by a geologist or an engineer. 

Regulations requiring that a qualified engineer, with experience in construction of impoundments, inspect each impoundment regularly during construction, upon completion of 

construction, and periodically thereafter. 

The ‘‘Coal Ash Reclamation and Environmental Safety Act of 2009’’ also requires immediate development of a detailed inventory 

and analysis of all existing coal ash disposal 

sites, to guide informed and prompt decisions 

on how to bring that universe of ponds and lagoons up to safe standards, now. 

For States that already have careful standards for coal ash disposal, the bill I am introducing will not be a problem. For those that do 

not, the ‘‘Coal Ash Reclamation Environmental 

Safety Act of 2009’’ will require immediate attention to shocking gaps in coal ash management. 

As a witness at our hearing last year so presciently reminded the Subcommittee on Energy and Minerals: ‘‘the cost of safe disposal 

[of coal ash] is not burdensome to industry, although it has proved, at site after site, to be 

catastrophic to the public and the environment.’’ 

The time to act is now. 

THE INTRODUCTION OF THE MARINE TURTLE CONSERVATION 

REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2009: 

JANUARY 9, 2009 

HON. HENRY E. BROWN, JR. OF SOUTH CAROLINA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Madam 

Speaker, I am today pleased to introduce the 

Marine Turtle Conservation Reauthorization 

Act of 2009. 

There are 7 species of marine turtles which 

were once abundant throughout the Atlantic, 

Indian, and Pacific Oceans. Sadly, 6 of those 

species including the Green turtle, the 

hawksbill, the Kemp’s ridley, the leatherback, 

the loggerhead and the Olive ridley, have experienced tremendous over-exploitation and 

they are now listed as critically endangered 

under our Endangered Species Act. In fact, 

only the flatback turtle which lives in the 

inshore waters of Australia has managed to 

maintain a healthy population. 

While there are many reasons for the dramatic decline in marine turtle population numbers, the leading factors include foreign fishing 

practices, the destruction of essential nesting 

habitat, massive poaching of turtle eggs, meat 

and shells, the degradation of grass beds and 

coral reefs, light pollution from onshore development and the dumping of tons of plastic 

products into our oceans. 

In response to this crisis, the Congress enacted the Marine Turtle Conservation Act of 

2004 which I strongly supported. While this 

law authorized up to $20 million in Federal 

funds over the past 4 fiscal years, only $2.2 

million has been appropriated to finance 

worthwhile conservation projects. Despite 

these funding limitations, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service has leveraged nearly $4 million in private matching funds and together 

this money has funded 78 meritorious conservation projects in more than 60 countries. 

While more than 200 grant proposals have 

been submitted, sadly, the Service has only 

awarded grants to less than 40 percent of the 

eligible recipients. 

Nevertheless, a number of extraordinary 

projects have been funded. These included a 

project to assist loggerhead turtles in Oman 

which has the largest nesting population of 

this species in the world; a project to protect 

leatherback turtles at their 4 primary nesting 

beaches in Mexico and a project to assist the 

highly depleted Chiriqui Beach hawksbill nesting population in Panama. 

Madam Speaker, marine turtles have been 

a vital component of our ocean ecosystems 

for more than 100 million years. They have 

long symbolized longevity, fertility and 

strength. We are proud of the fact that populations of loggerhead sea turtles nest on our 

beaches in South Carolina where they are 

highly protected. 

Like canaries in a coal mine, declining populations of marine sea turtles are a bellwether 

species for the health of the world’s oceans. 

The Marine Turtle Conservation Act of 2004 

sent a powerful message of the international 

community that the United States was willing 

to take proactive conservation efforts to save 

these flagship species from extinction. It is essential that this law which has yet to reach its 

full potential be reauthorized beyond this fiscal 

year. 

The legislation I am introducing today would 

extend the authorization of appropriations for 

the Marine Turtle Conservation Fund until 

September 30, 2014. Despite severe funding 

limitations, this law has conclusively demonstrated that it is an effective and essential 

lifeline to marine turtle populations throughout 

the world. We should not allow any of these 

6 species of marine turtles to disappear during 

our lifetime. 

I urge early consideration of the Marine Turtle Conservation Reauthorization Act of 2009. 

f 

CONGRATULATING HOSTELLING 

INTERNATIONAL USA 

HON. SUE WILKINS MYRICK OF NORTH CAROLINA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 

Mrs. MYRICK. Madam Speaker, I rise today 

to recognize Hostelling International USA for 

75 years of service to intercultural understanding and youth travel. 

Hostelling International USA is a nonprofit 

organization founded in 1934 to promote hostels and hostel-related programs in the United 

States, especially among youth travelers. In 

doing so, it promotes cultural exchange 

through travel and supports tourism for local 

economies. 

The North Carolina Council of Hostelling 

International USA promotes hostelling in North 

Carolina by offering workshops on world travel 

and intercultural understanding at local 

venues, including NC college campuses and 

through local Girl Scout troops. During the 

past year, the NC Council funded overnight 

stays for 51 young people and their group 

leaders, allowing them to stay at hostels in the 

Blue Ridge Mountains of Virginia, Philadelphia’s Fairmont Park, and Washington, DC. 

I congratulate Hostelling International USA 

for its 75 years of service to our country and 

our state. 

f 

PERSONAL EXPLANATION 

HON. STEVE KAGEN OF WISCONSIN

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 

Mr. KAGEN. Madam Speaker, I deeply regret that I was not able to vote on H. Res. 34 

recognizing Israel’s right to defend itself 

against attacks from Gaza and reaffirming the 

United States’ strong support for Israel, and 

supporting the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. On Wednesday, January 7, 2009, I had 

surgery on my knee and was not able to be 

present for voting. 

Make no mistake about it, I fully support 

Israel’s right to defend itself against all attacks. I would have wholeheartedly voted for 

H. Res. 34. 

Presently, Israel, like any other country, is 

exercising its right to self-defense. If any country were attacked like Israel has been they 

would do the same. 

How many attacks on an American city 

would we tolerate from our neighbors? Zero. 

In July 2008, I visited Sderot, an Israeli town 

just over the border from Gaza. I toured sites 

where Israeli homes were destroyed by rockets launched from Gaza. I met with the U.S. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REMARKS