Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
House Environmental Committee advances bill to speed hazardous-spill cleanups, 14-12
Loading...
Summary
The House Environmental Committee voted 14-12 to report House Bill 2178, the Environmental Cleanup and Responsibility Act, to the House floor. Supporters said it forces quicker cleanup after pipeline spills; opponents warned it creates broad strict liability and could strain DEP cleanup funds.
The House Environmental Committee voted 14-12 to report House Bill 2178, the Environmental Cleanup and Responsibility Act, to the full House after a day of debate that centered on immediate cleanup requirements, strict liability and the capacity of the Department of Environmental Protection to fund and prioritize remediation.
Supporters said the bill is aimed at preventing prolonged contamination cleanups like the petroleum pipeline leakage in Rep. Perry Warren’s district near East Makefield Township. "The whole purpose of this is to have immediate action moving forward to protect the people who get damaged," Rep. Isaacson said, arguing the measure closes gaps that leave victims waiting for remediation.
Opponents warned the bill could expand liability and coverage beyond current law and overwhelm the Hazardous Site Cleanup Fund. "So I don't think ... the purpose of the bill's immediate action ... is gonna happen under this," Chair Rader said, arguing the bill’s broad definitions of "hazardous" and an expansive "immediate" threshold could greatly increase the number of sites requiring remediation and duplicate authorities already available to DEP.
Rep. Gephardt urged caution over the bill's proposed liability scheme, explaining the legal consequences of strict and joint-and-several liability: "If you're strictly liable, regardless of your fault, you're liable," he said, adding that joint-and-several liability can make a party who is only partially responsible pay the full damages.
Rep. Rabatdin described lengthy local disputes over pipeline damage and the costs borne by residents, saying companies have resisted remediation and that government has a duty to act: "If we don't do something here, we are failing in our role as government," he said, recounting constituents who paid to replace destroyed wells (he cited an example of about $60,000 out-of-pocket).
Committee discussion also focused on whether DEP already has tools to act quickly. Chair Rader and others noted the Hazardous Site Cleanup Fund can be used for emergency responses, but warned the bill would increase the number of sites the fund would have to cover without adding revenue to it. Several members said the bill seeks to prioritize public safety by speeding response, while others said it risks imposing large unfunded obligations and creating duplication with federal statutes such as CERCLA and RCRA.
After debate, committee members called the question on whether to report the bill to the House floor. The roll call produced 14 ayes and 12 nays; committee leadership announced the bill is reported out to the House.
The committee did not amend the bill on the floor of the committee; the next procedural step is consideration by the full House.
