Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hazardous Waste Moratorium topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House approves moratorium tied to interim study on hazardous-waste burning after heated debate
Summary
The House passed a substitute to H.B. 165 to impose a moratorium on certain hazardous-waste burning (including at cement kilns) while sending the matter to an interim study; members debated technical complexity, permit windows, and the moratorium end date. Vote on substitute: 57-15.
The Utah House voted to adopt a substitute version of House Bill 165 on Tuesday that creates a temporary moratorium on specified hazardous-waste burning activities — notably actions discussed in relation to cement kilns — and sends the issue to an interim study committee for further review.
Representative Joe Moody, sponsor of the substitute, said the change provides a moratorium period and an interim-study process that will allow lawmakers to craft policy with better technical input. He told the chamber "This will go on the interim and it will be reviewed as to policy and it'll be study[ed]." (Representative Moody).
Opponents and skeptical members repeatedly argued the subject is highly technical and that existing EPA and state regulations may already govern the conduct in question. Representative Hayman urged an interim-study approach and warned that legislating complex environmental permitting on the floor is unrealistic: "My position is that we should have an interim committee that studies this issue and comes back with legislation." (Representative Hayman).
A procedural dispute over the effective date and length of the moratorium became a central pivot of floor debate. Representative Hayman and others proposed shortening the interim period (proposal to change a May 1, 1992 repeal date to December 31, 1991), while backers of the longer timeline said it gives the legislature time after interim study to craft implementing legislation. Representatives Jones, Ellertson, and Jack Arrington each argued for either immediate enactment or careful study depending on their concern for local impacts and regulatory gaps.
Supporters stressed public-protection reasons tied to water recharge zones and local environmental sensitivity; Representative Jones highlighted concerns about the Ashgrove plant's location atop a major recharge zone and urged a moratorium as a precaution.
After extended floor debate and several amendment attempts, the House voted to adopt the substitute and then on final passage. The substitute for H.B. 165 passed the House with 57 votes in favor and 15 opposed and will be forwarded to the Senate.
Next steps: The item is set for interim study as described in the substitute language; legislators indicated they will analyze permitting consequences and possible statutory changes during the interim.
