Water Resources Development Act of 2016
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MURPHY. That is correct. Sediment from Federal projects and larger private projects are required to undergo toxicity testing, and if they fail, the sediment cannot be disposed of at the Long Island Sound sites.
Connecticut requires ``capping'' or placement of clean sediment on top of sediments containing contaminants above certain levels as a best practice. It is not required, but our State does it as an added measure of protection.
We understand though that there are some who remain uncomfortable with the open-water disposal of dredged material, even if the material passes toxicity tests.
As the Senate affirmed when it adopted the amendment to S. 2848 that Senator Blumenthal and I filed, the best way to resolve these types of disagreements over State water quality standards is collaboratively, with input from all relevant stakeholders.
Water quality standards that apply to the disposal of dredged material in Long Island Sound should be worked out by the States bordering the sound, working with appropriate Federal entities. One State should not arbitrarily impose its will on the other.
And that is the process I intend to work towards with my colleagues in Connecticut and New York, as we continue to address the issue of dredging in Long Island Sound.
If I understand correctly what Senator Inhofe just explained, nothing in S. 2848 gives any State any new rights with which to impose its own water quality standards on any other State. Is that a correct reading of the bill?
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MURPHY. Does section 2004 or any other provision in WRDA 2016 revise the Army Corps' Federal standard for disposal of dredged material from Federal projects?
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MURPHY. I would like to thank Chairman Inhofe and Ranking Member Boxer for this informative discussion and for their help in clarifying the content and intent of section 2004 and the dredging provisions contained in WRDA 2016.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source