PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 202.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Oct 14, 2011
Coal Residuals Reuse and Management Act - (Sec. 2) Amends the Solid Waste Disposal Act to authorize states to adopt and implement coal combustion residuals permit programs. Requires each state governor to notify the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) within six months about whether such state will implement such a program. Requires states that decide to implement such a program to: (1) submit to the Administrator within 36 months a certification that such program meets the specifications of this Act; and (2) maintain either an approved municipal solid waste program for the control of hazardous disposal or an authorized state hazardous waste program. Establishes minimum requirements for coal combustion residuals permit programs. Requires: (1) the revised criteria established by this Act to apply to such programs; (2) landfills, surface impoundments, or other land-based units that may receive coal combustion residuals (structures) to be designed, constructed, and maintained to provide for containment of the maximum volumes of coal combustion residuals appropriate for the structure; (3) such programs to apply such revised criteria to surface impoundments; and (4) new structures that first receive coal combustion residuals after this Act's enactment to be constructed with a base located a minimum of two feet above the upper limit of the natural water table.
Authorizes: (1) state agency heads to require action to correct structural integrity deficiencies according to a schedule for structures that are classified as posing a high hazard potential pursuant to the guidelines published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) entitled "Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety: Hazard Potential Classification System for Dams"; (2) state agency heads to require that such a structure close if such deficiency is not corrected according to such schedule; (3) states to inspect structures and implement and enforce such permit program; and (4) states to address wind dispersal of dust from coal combustion residuals by requiring dust control measures.
Sets forth revised criteria for such programs with respect to: (1) design, groundwater monitoring, corrective action, and closure and post-closure for structures; (2) location restrictions for new structures in floodplains, wetlands, fault areas, seismic impact zones, and unstable areas; (3) criteria for air quality, financial assurance, surface water, and record keeping; (4) criteria for run-on and run-off control systems for landfills and other land-based units, other than surface impoundments that receive coal combustion residuals; and (5) run-off control systems for surface impoundments. Authorizes states to determine that such criteria is not needed for the management of their coal combustion residuals permit program. Authorizes the Administrator to treat such state determination as a deficiency if it does not accurately reflect the needs for the management of coal combustion residuals in the state.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Administrator to provide a state with notice of, and an opportunity to remedy, deficiencies.
Requires the Administrator to implement such a program for a state only if: (1) the governor of such state notifies the Administrator that such state will not implement a program, (2) the state is notified of, but fails to remedy, program deficiencies, or (3) the state notifies the Administrator that it will no longer implement such a program. Sets forth provisions concerning resumption of implementation by states.
Requires the time period and method for a structure's closure to be set forth in a schedule in a closure plan that takes into account the site-specific characteristics of such structure. Directs the closure plan for a surface impoundment to require the removal of liquid and the stabilization of remaining waste as necessary to support the final cover.
Prohibits the Administrator from applying such programs to the utilization, placement, and storage of coal combustion residuals at surface mining and reclamation operations.
(Sec. 3) Prohibits this Act from being construed to alter the EPA's regulatory determination, entitled "Notice of Regulatory Determination on Wastes from the Combustion of Fossil Fuels," that the fossil fuel combustion wastes addressed in that determination do not warrant regulation under such Act.
People & committees
Rep. McKinley, David B. [R-WV-1] · R–WV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 202.
Received in the Senate. Read the first time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 267 - 144 (Roll no. 800).
House roll call 800 · Individual votesMotion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 267 - 144 (Roll no. 800).
House roll call 800 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 172 - 238 (Roll no. 799).
House roll call 799 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H6957)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Cicilline motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to report the same back to the House with an amendment to implement a warning system in the event of a catastrophic failure at a coal ash disposal site. Under this amendment, the EPA Administrator must require the owner or operator of a surface coal ash disposal site, such as a disposal pile or lagoon, to equip such site with a sufficient system to monitor for, and notify the public of a potentially hazardous condition that could lead to failure of the site's ability to contain coal ash.
Mr. Cicilline moved to recommit with instructions to Energy and Commerce. (consideration: CR H6956-6958; text: CR H6956)
The House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. (text of committee amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H6943-6945)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H6956)
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 2273.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - The Chair announced that the unfinished business was on the adoption of amendments which had previously been debated and on which further proceedings were postponed.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Jackson Lee (TX) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Ms. Jackson Lee (TX) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 431, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Jackson Lee (TX) amendment.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Rush amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Rush demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 431, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Rush amendment.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Markey amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Markey demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 431, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Markey amendment No 4.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Markey amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Markey demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 431, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Markey amendment No. 3.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Waxman amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Waxman demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 431, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Waxman amendment.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 431, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Shimkus amendment.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 2273.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Kevin Yoder to act as Chairman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 431 and Rule XVIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2273 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order. The resolution provides that the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Energy and Commerce shall be considered as an original bill.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 431. (consideration: CR H6934-6959)
Rule H. Res. 431 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 431 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2273 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order. The resolution provides that the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Energy and Commerce shall be considered as an original bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 147.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 112-226.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 112-226.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment and the Economy.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2273 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2273 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2273 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2273 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.