S6830 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE May 17, 1995

is responsible for establishing Katy

Trail State Park along the north bank

of the Missouri River. Through his public activism and fundraising efforts,

Mr. Hindman successfully spearheaded

creation of the Katy Trail that follows

the historic Lewis and Clark expedition

of 1804 to 1806. Mr. Hindman also was

instrumental in developing the MKT

Fitness/Nature Trail. Mr. Hindman and

the foundation are working with the

State and others to expand the Katy

Trail, with the goal of extending it

across the State.

The Dolphin Defenders of St. Louis is

a group of more than 50 inner city children working to restore their neighborhood by improving the environment.

Their name comes from the group’s desire to mimic dolphin behavior of protecting each other from danger. The

Dolphin Defenders revitalized a once

trash laden vacant lot used by drug

dealers and abusers into a beautiful environmental retreat now known as the

Promised Land. The group has also recognized children surviving in violent

communities by planting 31 trees on

Arbor Day in Visitation Park. The Dolphin Defenders are one of five nonprofit

organizations/public agencies to receive this year’s Conservation Award.

Moneys raised from the youth group’s

continuous collection and recycling of

tires and glass bottles enable the Dolphin Defenders to pursue new environmental projects.

The honorees will be recognized at an

awards dinner on May 17 in Washington, DC, and will receive a $2,000 award

along with a bronze plaque acknowledging their achievements and continued efforts to enhance the environment. The awards program was established in 1954 by the late Ed Zern, a nationally recognized sportsman, humorist, author, and former columnist for

Field & Stream. Nearly 900 individuals

and organizations have received this

award since its conception to honor individuals and groups who protect and

enhance renewable natural resources.

My sincerest congratulations to Mr.

Hindman and the Dolphin Defenders for

their significant accomplishments and

contributions to conservation and the

environment.

f∑

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

POSITIONS

∑ Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, on

April 7, 1995, the Committee on Energy

and Natural Resources filed the report

to accompany S. 610, a bill to provide

for a visitor center at the Civil War

Battlefield of Corinth, MS.

At the time this report was filed, the

Department of the Interior had not

submitted its position regarding this

measure. The committee has since received this communication from the

Department of the Interior, and I ask

that it be printed in the RECORD for the

advice of the Senate.

The communication follows:

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY,

Washington, DC, May 10, 1995.

Hon. FRANK MURKOWSKI,

Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural

Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Legislation authorizing the construction of a visitor center at

Corinth, Mississippi, S. 610, has been reported out of the Committee on Energy and

Natural Resources. In addition to providing

for a visitor center, which would be administered as part of Shiloh National Military

Park, the bill authorizes the Secretary to

mark sites associated with the Siege and

Battle of Corinth National Historic Landmark.

On July 25, 1994, we testified before the

House Subcommittee on National Parks,

Forests, and Public Lands regarding the proposed visitor center at the Civil War Battlefield of Corinth. In our testimony we opposed

construction of an interpretive center at

Corinth. We believe such a facility is unnecessary given the presence of the National

Park Service visitor center at nearby Shiloh

Military Park. A visitor center at Corinth is

particularly difficult to justify in light of

current fiscal constraints. The cost estimate

for the proposed 5,300-square-foot interpretive center is $6 million which includes the

cost of development, operation and maintenance for 5 years.

We continue to oppose proposals to construct a visitor center at Corinth. The current legislation, S. 610, would give the National Park Service primary responsibility

for interpreting the story of Corinth. We believe this responsibility rests more appropriately at the local level. It is not fiscally

possible for the National Park Service to

have interpretive centers at every significant site associated with the Civil War. We

believe we can appropriately relate the story

of the Civil War in this area from our current facilities at Shiloh National Military

Park.

The Office of Management and Budget has

advised that there is no objection to the

presentation of this report from the standpoint of the Administration’s program.

Sincerely,

GEORGE T. FRAMPTON, JR.,

Assistant Secretary for

Fish and Wildlife and Parks.

Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, on

April 7, 1995, the Committee on Energy

and Natural Resources filed the report

to accompany H.R. 400, a bill to provide

for the exchange of lands within Gates

of the Arctic National Park and Preserve.

At the time this report was filed, the

Department of the Interior had not

submitted its position regarding this

measure. The committee has since received this communication from the

Department of the Interior, and I ask

that it be printed in the RECORD for the

advice of the Senate.

The material follows:

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

Wasington, DC, April 26, 1995.

Hon. FRANK MURKOWSKI,

Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural

Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: We are writing to express the Department of the Interior (Department) position on H.R. 400, ‘‘To provide

for the exchange of lands within Gates of the

Arctic National Park and Preserve, and for

other purposes,’’ as reported by the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The

proposed legislation includes two titles

which relate to Gates of the Arctic National

Park (Title I) and the acquisition of subsurface rights from Koniag, Inc. (Title II) on

the Alaska peninsula.

We strongly support Title I of H.R. 400,

‘‘Anaktuvuk Pass Land Exchange and Wilderness Redesignation,’’ as approved by the

Committee. Title I authorizes a land exchange involving the National Park Service

(NPS), the Nunamiut Corporation and the

Arctic Slope Regional Corporation concerning lands in and around Gates of the Arctic

National Park and Preserve. The proposed

exchange marks thousands of hours of work

and over 10 years of negotiations among the

affected parties. We believe the proposed exchange would resolve difficult land use issues, improve the management of the Park

and benefit the people of Anaktuvuk Pass.

Accordingly, the Alaska native community,

the Department and private groups all supported the version of H.R. 400 that the House

of Representatives passed unanimously on

February 1, 1995.

As reported to the Senate, however, Title

II of H.R. 400, ‘‘Alaska Peninsula Subsurface

Consolidation,’’ directs the Secretary of the

Interior to acquire oil and gas rights and

other subsurface interests on the Alaska peninsula from Koniag, Incorporated. We

strongly oppose Title II for the following

reasons. First, we do not believe that Koniag

has valid selections to some of the lands that

the proposed legislation would direct the

Secretary to acquire. Second, both the NPS

and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)

consider the acquisition of Koniag’s mineral

interests to be an extremely low priority in

terms of the missions of the two agencies.

However, even if we were to disregard this

factor, there is a third and most critical

problem with the bill as currently drafted:

we believe that the directed appraisal methodology would establish a significant negative precedent in terms of longstanding and

widely accepted appraisal practices. In sum,

we believe that the valuation and acquisition

of these interests, as directed by Title II, do

not serve the interests of the Department,

the Federal Government or the public at

large.

A more detailed statement of our objections follows:

1. Status of Koniag entitlements and selections has not yet been determined.—The

Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, as

amended, authorizes Koniag to receive the

rights to oil and gas and sand and gravel

used in connection with exploration and development of the oil and gas to 343,000 acres.

However, Koniag has selected approximately

465,158 acres of subsurface estate, an

overselection of approximately 122,158 acres:

Alaska Peninsula NWR: 266,068 acres of

subsurface selections.

Becharof NWR: 14,080 acres of subsurface

selections.

Aniakchak NM and pres.: 185,010 acres of

subsurface selections.

Total selections: 465,158 acres of subsurface

estate.

Overselections: 122,158 acres of subsurface

estate.

Title II does not resolve the issue of

Koniag’s overselections. It is our understanding that the map referenced in Section

201(8) includes all of Koniag’s selections, but

does not identify Koniag’s 275,000 acre entitlement. The validity of certain Koniag selections is currently the subject of administrative litigation. On October 12, 1993, the

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) rejected

a portion of Koniag’s selections. Koniag has

appealed the BLM decision and the issue is

currently before the Interior Board of Land

Appeals.

Based on the above, we object to proposed

legislation which would require the Federal

Government to acquire property where the

validity of certain selections is under appeal.
May 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S6831

2. Federal land management agencies have

determined that these properties have extremely low priority for acquisition by the

Department.—It is our understanding that

the proposed subsurface selections have been

examined for their economic potential for oil

and gas development. We also understand

that test wells have been drilled in the area

and that the results of the test drilling have

not indicated commercially-viable oil and

gas deposits. Therefore, we do not believe

that the continued private ownership of oil

and gas rights within the conservation system units of the Alaskan peninsula would

pose a significant threat to refuge or park

resources.

Title II envisions that the acquisition cost

not exceed $300 per acre on average. If this

average cost is met, the Federal Government

would be required to provide $82.5 million in

land assets for these low priority mineral interests. We believe that the market value of

these interests, as determined by an approved appraisal, will not exceed a tiny fraction of this envisioned value.

3. Proposed appraisal methodology would

establish a significant negative precedent for

the standard appraisal process.—We strongly

oppose several provisions of the bill which

direct a specific appraisal methodology.

Section 202(b)(2) directs that the appraisal

will be conducted according to the standards

of the ‘‘Appraisal Foundation,’’ and that the

‘‘risk adjusted discounted cash flow methodology’’ would be the sole method to establish value. This direction that the appraiser

must utilize one single appraisal method violates broadly supported and adopted appraisal principles and would likely lead to

inflated values for the subsurface rights at

the expense of the taxpayer. This section,

therefore, is inconsistent with the Appraisal

Foundation standards referred to in the bill.

The Federal Government currently uses

the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal

Land Acquisition (UASFLA), a product of

the Interagency Land Acquisition Conference, which is chaired by the U.S. Department of Justice. Federal and State agencies

use these standards to appraise lands for possible acquisition. Federal courts have upheld

these uniform standards, which are based on

fairness and equity. To support the uniform

appraisal standards, the Appraisal Standards

Board of the Appraisal Foundation has issued the Uniform Standards of Professional

Appraisal Practices.

The uniform appraisal standards used by

both public and private sectors establish

three basic approaches to determine fair

market value: sales comparison, income and

cost approaches. The standards allow for all

three approaches to be considered and

weighted according to specified factors.

In the case of the Koniag subsurface selections, there is no proven mineral reserve, nor

an established market. In these situations,

the uniform standards do not favor the discounted cash flow methodology, as directed

by Section 202(b)(2). In fact, the uniform

standards specifically caution against using

the discounted cash flow methodology in isolation. When appraising non-producing mineral interests, the market comparison approach is considered the fairest and most equitable appraisal method. Legislation that

distorts this process will lead to inequitable

transactions and set a harmful precedent

that could seriously undermine future land

exchanges in Alaska.

Congressional action mandating that only

one of the several standard appraisal methodologies be used, particularly when that

methodology may be totally inappropriate

to the circumstances, would render meaningless the principles of fairness and equity that

form the basis of the uniform appraisal

standards. Such action could encourage land

owners throughout the United States to demand that their lands be valued in ways that

have not gained acceptance throughout the

community of professional appraisers.

We also note one additional constraint in

Title II that deviates from the standard appraisal practice. In contravention of appraisal ethics and standards, Section 202 of

Title II would limit the appraised value to a

cap of $300 an acre on average. Based on our

desire to maintain the integrity of the appraisal process, we object to imposing a cap

on the valuation process, just as we would

oppose any artificial floor.

4. The mandated timetables would divert

personnel and resources from other high priority acquisitions.—With the consent and approval of the Congress, both the NPS and the

FWS are reducing the number of Federal employees in their respective regions and headquarters offices. The respective realty offices

are also facing significant staff and budget

reductions in order to meet downsizing and

budget targets. The remaining realty staffs

are currently working to reach agreements

with landowners within the Kodiak National

Wildlife Refuge, the Kantishna area of

Denali National Park and many other areas

in Alaska. Negotiating and implementing a

priority land exchange would add to the current workload.

Based on the Department’s experience in

appraising subsurface rights, mineral appraisals require significant expenditures of

staff time and appropriated funds to complete. Directing the realty offices to complete these appraisals within the 180 day

time period would lead to significant delays

in work on the other high priority activities

to meet the terms of the proposed legislation.

5. Ability to execute appraisals within

mandated timetable.—Section 202 of Title II

would require an appraiser to submit an appraisal to the Secretary within 180 days after

the selection of an appraiser. Given the complexity of the mineral appraisal process of

such a large area, and putting aside the issue

of the discounted cash flow method, this

timetable would at best lead to a hastily prepared appraisal that would not accurately

value the rights in question.

Because Title II could significantly harm

the financial interests of the American taxpayer, would undermine the integrity of the

standard appraisal process and would not enhance the protection of natural resources or

improve land management, we strongly urge

that the Senate not approve Title II. We continue to support passage of Title I of H.R.

400, to protect significant natural resources

in Gates of the Arctic National Park.

The Office of Management and Budget has

advised that there is no objection to the

presentation of this report from the standpoint of the Administration’s program.

Sincerely,

GEORGE T. FRAMPTON, Jr.,

Assistant Secretary for Fish

and Wildlife and Park.

Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, on

March 29, 1995, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources filed the

report to accompany H.R. 694, the

Minor Park Boundary Adjustments and

Miscellaneous Park Amendments Act

of 1995.

At the time this report was filed, the

Department of the Interior had not

submitted its position regarding this

measure. The committee has since received this communication from the

Department of the Interior, and I ask

that it be printed in the RECORD for the

advice of the Senate.

The communication follows:

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY,

Washington, DC, May 9, 1995.

Hon. FRANK MURKOWSKI,

Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural

Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Committee on

Energy and Natural Resources favorably reported H.R. 694, the Minor Park Boundary

Adjustments and Miscellaneous Park

Amendments Act of 1995 on March 29. The

National Park Service testified in support of

this legislation when it was considered in the

House, and recommended several amendments. We would like to provide our views on

the substitute adopted by the Energy and

Natural Resources Committee.

Sec. 105. Craters of the Moon. The National

Park Service supports Section 105, which revises the boundaries of Craters of the Moon

National Monument. We prefer the language

in the House version of H.R. 694 that authorizes the NPS to acquire ‘‘lands, water, and

interests therein’’ on the land being included

in the boundary adjustment. One of the primary reasons for the boundary adjustment is

to protect the monument’s potable water

source and ‘‘waters’’ is not currently included in the Senate version of Section 105.

Sec. 108. New River Gorge, Sec. 109. Gauley

River, and Sec. 110. Bluestone River. We have

no objection to the boundary changes to existing units proposed in these sections. These

sections would amend the boundaries by including uneconomical remnants, a large parcel proposed for donation, and two State

parks. The addition of the State parks would

not change the management of either State

park.

Sec. 201. Advisory Commissions. This section would extend advisory commissions for

Kaloko-Honokohau National Historical Park

and Women’s Rights National Historical

Park. On February 10, 1993, the President issued Executive Order 12838, ‘‘Termination

and Limitation of Federal Advisory Committees,’’ ordering each agency to prepare a detailed review of all existing advisory committees. As a general policy, the Administration does not support provisions that would

establish or reauthorize advisory commissions; however, with respect to KalokoHonokohau, given the limited extension requested and the unique circumstances in this

case, the Administration has no objection to

this short extension.

Sec. 203. Cumberland Gap National Historical Park. We recommend enactment of this

section, which would clarify the authority of

the Secretary of the Interior to acquire lands

or interests in lands with appropriated funds.

Passage of this section would enable the NPS

to use monies in the Land and Water Conservation Fund for a specific parcel without

necessitating an Act of Congress to authorize each purchase. We believe the proposed

amendments would enable us to respond to

conservation and recreation opportunities as

they arise within the authorized area of the

park.

Sec. 204. William O. Douglas Outdoor Classroom. The President’s budget estimate for

fiscal year 1996 for the NPS includes funds

for the William O. Douglas Outdoor Classroom in the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area. The classroom is a

nonprofit organization, which operates an

environmental and special multicultural

program in the Los Angeles area that serves

some 100,000 people annually, including many

inner-city elementary school children. The

language of this section would provide the

authorization necessary for the classroom to

receive funding and for the Secretary of the

Interior to enter into cooperative agreements.
S6832 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE May 17, 1995

Sec. 206. Gauley Access, and Sec. 207. Visitor Center. We recommend that these sections be deleted from the bill. The public

comment period on the Draft General Management Plan (GMP) for Gauley River NRA

ended in November 1994. Those comments are

guiding the completion of the final plan,

which will address the issue of a visitor contact facility and will recommend locations

for river access. We continue to maintain

that the general management planning process should be the proper vehicle for determining the location of visitor facilities within Gauley River NRA. It is anticipated the

plan will be released by the end of 1995.

Sec. 205, Miscellaneous Provisions, Sec.

208. Extension, and Sec. 209, Bluestone River

Public Access. We support extending the provisions of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act for

a 5-year period for segments of the Bluestone

and Meadow Rivers previously studied and

determined eligible for wild and scenic river

designation. The general provisions relating

to cooperative agreements and remnant land

for Bluestone River Public Access are acceptable to the Department. We recommend

that any remnants purchased pursuant to

Sec. 205 be automatically included within

the boundary of that park unit. The costs of

implementing the above sections, if amended

as we have suggested, would be between $1.5

million and $2 million in additional land acquisition for the three existing NPS units.

Sec. 305. Volunteers in the Parks. The National Park Service increasingly relies on

volunteers in many program areas and reaps

many benefits from this program. We recommend the elimination of any cap on this

appropriation as it would allow for any budgetary increases that may be adopted in future years.

Sec. 306. Cooperative Agreements for Research. The Senate version allows the NPS

to enter into cooperative agreements with

several entities, including ‘‘private conservation organizations.’’ We prefer that this authority reflect similar language in 16 U.S.C.

753, which allows the Fish and Wildlife Service to establish Cooperative Research Units

with ‘‘non-profit organizations.’’ The House

version deleted this authority completely.

Sec. 306. Carl Garner Cleanup Day. We have

no objection to establishment of the Carl

Garner Federal Lands Cleanup Day.

Sec. 307. Corinth Interpretive Center. In

addition to providing for a visitor center,

which would be administered as part of Shiloh National Military Park, this section authorizes the Secretary to mark sites associated with the Siege and Battle of Corinth

National Historic Landmark.

We oppose construction of an interpretive

center at Corinth. We believe such a facility

is unnecessary given the presence of the National Park Service visitor center at nearby

Shiloh Military Park. A visitor center at

Corinth is particularly difficult to justify in

light of current fiscal constraints. The cost

estimate for the proposed 5,300-square-foot

interpretive center is $6 million, which includes the cost of development, operation,

and maintenance for 5 years.

We support each of the other sections not

specifically mentioned in this letter. However, we note that the committee-reported

bill does not include the extinguishment of a

reservation for the Army Corps of Engineers

to deposit dredging spoils at Fort Pulaski

National Monument. We support the House

provision eliminating this reservation as the

reserved area contains two significant historic structures listed on the National Register of Historic Places and significant natural resource values. Extinguishment of this

reservation would assure permanent protection of these values.

The Office of Management and Budget has

advised that there is no objection to the

presentation of this report from the standpoint of the Administration’s program.

Sincerely,

GEORGE T. FRAMPTON, JR.,

Assistant Secretary for

Fish and Wildlife and Parks.

Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, on

April 7, 1995, the Committee on Energy

and Natural Resources filed individual

reports to accompany S. 115, Colonial

Park land conveyance; S. 127, Women’s

Rights NHP amendments; S. 134, FDR

Family land acquisition; S. 188, Great

Falls Historic District; S. 197, Carl Garner Federal Lands Cleanup Day; S. 223,

Sterling Forest land acquisition; S. 357,

Kaloko-Honokohau advisory commission; S. 392, Dayton American Heritage

amendment; S. 551, Hagerman Fossil

Beds and Craters of the Moon boundary

change; S. 587, Old Spanish Trail study;

and S. 601, Blackstone Heritage Area

revision.

At the time these reports were filed,

the Department of the Interior had not

submitted its position regarding these

measures. The Committee has since received a communication from the Department of the Interior, regarding

these bills, and I ask that it be printed

in the RECORD for the advice of the

Senate.

The communication follows:

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY,

Washington, DC, May 9, 1995.

Hon. FRANK MURKOWSKI,

Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural

Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Committee on

Energy and Natural Resources recently reported several bills. The National Park Service testified in support of similar versions of

many of these bills in the 103rd Congress.

The following provides the National Park

Service’s position on most of the bills reported.

S. 115, COLONIAL (VA) PARK LAND CONVEYANCE

S. 115, which authorizes the Secretary of

the Interior to acquire and convey certain

lands or interests in lands to improve the

management, protection, and administration

of Colonial National Historical Park, was reported with an amendment to conform it to

the bill approved by the committee last year.

The amendment struck the provisions which

would have allowed for the expansion of a

specific area of Colonial Parkway and in

turn would have permitted the acquisition of

property immediately adjacent to the parkway. The property in question has been subdivided and development of such will result

in a major visual intrusion to the parkway.

The Department of the Interior/National

Park Service strongly supported this section

of S. 115. If a boundary expansion for this

area of the Colonial Parkway is not enacted

by Congress, the National Park Service will

not be able to purchase this land and it will

be developed.

We support the provisions of S. 115 that

would allow the National Park Service to

transfer the sewage systems to York County,

Virginia. We urge the Senate to consider restoring the boundary adjustment and acquisition provisions struck by the committee on

March 15, 1995, when S. 115 comes before the

entire Senate for consideration.

S. 127, WOMEN’S RIGHTS NHP (NY) AMENDMENTS

S. 127, which would improve the administration of the Women’s Rights National Historical Park in the State of New York, was

reported from committee with the same

amendments as in 1994. These amendments

delineate the properties the National Park

Service may acquire at Women’s Rights

NHP. A property is also removed from the

park. The development/land acquisition ceiling is increased by $2 million to cover the expenses which will be incurred for the permitted expansion. The National Park Service has no objection to S. 127 as reported by

the Senate Energy and Natural Resources

Committee on March 15, 1995, and supports

the legislation as amended.

S. 134, FDR FAMILY LAND (NY) ACQUISITION

S. 134, which would provide for the acquisition of certain lands formerly occupied by

the Franklin D. Roosevelt family, was approved by the committee with the same

amendments adopted in 1994. These amendments delineate specifically the properties

the National Park Service may acquire at

the Roosevelt Sites. Although we did not testify about specific lands, the amended language, which delineates the tracts, addresses

the National Park Service’s concerns for protecting property at the Roosevelt Sites. The

National Park Service has no objection to S.

134 as reported by the Senate Energy and

Natural Resources Committee on March 15,

1995, and supports the legislation as amended.

S. 188, GREAT FALLS (NJ) HISTORIC DISTRICT

S. 188, which would establish the Great

Falls Historic District in the State of New

Jersey, was approved by the committee with

language similar to a bill reported from the

committee in September 1994, requiring a 50

percent local match and limiting Federal

funds. This language supports the National

Park Service’s position and belief that defining the maximum funding and requiring

local participation through matching funds

is appropriate and necessary to limiting National Park Service involvement in a site

that is not a unit of the National Park System.

S. 197, CARL GARNER FEDERAL LANDS CLEANUP

DAY

We have no objection to the enactment of

S. 197, a bill that recognizes the contribution

of Carl Garner to our Federal lands cleanup

efforts. This is consistent with the position

the Department took on this legislation

when we testified before the Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks

and Forest in the 103rd Congress. Carl Garner

originated this day, and we feel it is appropriate to include his name in the official

title.

S. 223, STERLING FOREST (NY/NJ) LAND

ACQUISITION

The National Park Service (NPS) supports

S. 223, the ‘‘Sterling Forest Protection Act

of 1995’’, as approved by the Senate Energy

and Natural Resources Committee. In the

103rd Congress, the NPS had opposed the

original Sterling Forest legislation that was

introduced. A substitute was adopted and

subsequently passed the Senate, which addressed the concerns of the NPS and the Department of the Interior. The bill just reported from the committee, S. 233, reflects

our view that Department of Interior/National Park Service involvement in Sterling

Forest be limited to areas adjacent to the

Appalachian Trail.

S. 357, KALOKO-HONOKOHAU (HI) ADVISORY

COMMISSION

S. 357 would extend the advisory commission for Kaloko-Honokohau National Historical Park. On February 10, 1993, the President

issued Executive Order 12838, ‘‘Termination

and Limitation of Federal Advisory Committees,’’ ordering each agency to prepare a detailed review of all existing advisory committees. As a general policy, the Administration does not support provisions that would
May 17, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S6833

establish or reauthorize advisory commissions; however, given the unique circumstances in this case, the Administration

has no objection to this short extension.

S. 392, DAYTON (OH) AMERICAN HERITAGE

AMENDMENT

S. 392 will facilitate the appointment of

the Dayton Aviation Heritage Commission.

This bill will satisfy the Department of Justice’s concern that the process for appointing commission members raises constitutional issues, limiting the Secretary’s discretion to appoint members to the commission.

These amendments will correct this issue

and we support enactment of S. 392.

S. 551, HAGERMAN FOSSIL BEDS AND CRATERS OF

THE MOON (ID) BOUNDARY CHANGE

The National Park Service supports S. 551,

which would revise the boundaries of

Hagerman Fossil Beds National Monument

and Craters of the Moon National Monument. Similar legislation was unsuccessful

in the past two Congresses. Passage of this

legislation is critical to both parks. We recommend however that S. 551 incorporate language from the House version of H.R. 694 regarding Craters of the Moon National Monument. That language authorizes the NPS to

acquire ‘‘lands, waters, and interests therein’’ for the area of the boundary adjustment.

One of the primary reasons for the boundary

adjustment is to protect the monument’s potable water source and ‘‘waters’’ is not currently included in S. 551.

S. 587, OLD SPANISH TRAIL (CO/NM/NV/CA) STUDY

The National Park Service supports S. 587,

which authorizes the study of the Old Spanish Trail for potential inclusion into the National Trails System as a national historic

trail. The present language is not specific,

however, as to whether national historic or

national scenic trail status is sought. Because of the existing highway and other development along the trail we do not believe

it would meet the national scenic trail criteria. We recommend the bill be amended to

limit the study to national historic trail feasibility, which would greatly reduce study

cost and time to complete the project. In addition, we recommend that the legislation be

broadened to allow study of all components

of the Old Spanish Trail, including the

Dominguez-Escalante Trail, to assure a fair

and complete assessment of the trail, and if

designation is recommended, to allow inclusion of the trail’s best components.

S. 601, BLACKSTONE (MA/RI) HERITAGE AREA

REVISION

S. 601, would revise the boundaries of the

Blackstone River Valley National Heritage

Corridor in Massachusetts and Rhode Island.

The bill approved by the Senate committee

is the same bill reported by the committee in

September 1994. The National Park Service

supports S. 601, however, it does not address

the Department of Justice’s concern regarding appointments to Federal Advisory Committees. We will be happy to provide the

committee draft language to resolve this

concern. We hope the Senate will take this

matter into consideration before it takes

final action on S. 601.

The Office of Management and Budget has

advised that there is no objection to the

presentation of this report from the standpoint of the Administration’s program.

Sincerely,

GEORGE T. FRAMPTON, Jr.,

Assistant Secretary for Fish and

Wildlife and Parks.∑

ALASKA POWER ADMINISTRATION

ASSET SALE AND TERMINATION

ACT

The text of the bill (S. 395) to authorize and direct the Secretary of Energy

to sell the Alaska Power Marketing

Administration, and for other purposes, as passed by the Senate on Tuesday, May 16, 1995, is as follows:

S. 395

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in

Congress assembled,

TITLE I

SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ‘‘Alaska

Power Administration Asset Sale and Termination Act’’.

SEC. 102. SALE OF SNETTISHAM AND EKLUTNA

HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS.

(a) The Secretary of Energy is authorized

and directed to sell the Snettisham Hydroelectric Project (referred to in this Act as

‘‘Snettisham’’) to the State of Alaska in accordance with the terms of this Act and the

February 10, 1989, Snettisham Purchase

Agreement, as amended, between the Alaska

Power Administration of the United States

Department of Energy and the Alaska Power

Authority and the Authority’s successors.

(b) The Secretary of Energy is authorized

and directed to sell the Eklutna Hydroelectric Project (referred to in this Act as

‘‘Eklutna’’) to the Municipality of Anchorage doing business as Municipal Light and

Power, the Chugach Electric Association,

Inc., and the Matanuska Electric Association, Inc. (referred to in this Act as

‘‘Eklutna Purchasers’’), in accordance with

the terms of this Act and the August 2, 1989,

Eklutna Purchase Agreement, as amended,

between the Alaska Power Administration of

the United States Department of Energy and

the Eklutna Purchasers.

(c) The heads of other Federal departments

and agencies, including the Secretary of the

Interior, shall assist the Secretary of Energy

in implementing the sales authorized and directed by this Act.

(d) Proceeds from the sales required by this

title shall be deposited in the Treasury of

the United States to the credit of miscellaneous receipts.

(e) There are authorized to be appropriated

such sums as may be necessary to prepare,

survey, and acquire Eklutna and Snettisham

assets for sale and conveyance. Such preparations and acquisitions shall provide sufficient title to ensure the beneficial use, enjoyment, and occupancy by the purchaser.

SEC. 103. EXEMPTION AND OTHER PROVISIONS.

(a)(1) After the sales authorized by this Act

occur, Eklutna and Snettisham, including

future modifications, shall continue to be exempt from the requirements of the Federal

Power Act (16 U.S.C. 791a et seq.) as amended.

(2) The exemption provided by paragraph

(1) does not affect the Memorandum of

Agreement entered into among the State of

Alaska, the Eklutna Purchasers, the Alaska

Energy Authority, and Federal fish and wildlife agencies regarding the protection, mitigation of, damages to, and enhancement of

fish and wildlife, dated August 7, 1991, which

remains in full force and effect.

(3) Nothing in this title or the Federal

Power Act preempts the State of Alaska

from carrying out the responsibilities and

authorities of the memorandum of Agreement.

(b)(1) The United States District Court for

the District of Alaska shall have jurisdiction

to review decisions made under the Memorandum of Agreement and to enforce the provisions of the Memorandum of Agreement,

including the remedy of specific performance.

(2) An action seeking review of a Fish and

Wildlife Program (‘‘Program’’) of the Governor of Alaska under the Memorandum of

Agreement or challenging actions of any of

the parties to the Memorandum of Agreement prior to the adoption of the Program

shall be brought not later than ninety days

after the date on which the Program is

adopted by the Governor of Alaska, or be

barred.

(3) An action seeking review of implementation of the Program shall be brought not

later than ninety days after the challenged

act implementing the Program, or be barred.

(c) With respect to Eklutna lands described

in Exhibit A of the Eklutna Purchase Agreement:

(1) The Secretary of the Interior shall issue

rights-of-way to the Alaska Power Administration for subsequent reassignment to the

Eklutna Purchasers—

(A) at no cost to the Eklutna Purchasers;

(B) to remain effective for a period equal

to the life of Eklutna as extended by improvements, repairs, renewals, or replacements; and

(C) sufficient for the operation of, maintenance of, repair to, and replacement of, and

access to, Eklutna facilities located on military lands and lands managed by the Bureau

of Land Management, including lands selected by the State of Alaska.

(2) If the Eklutna Purchasers subsequently

sell or transfer Eklutna to private ownership, the Bureau of Land Management may

assess reasonable and customary fees for

continued use of the rights-of-way on lands

managed by the Bureau of Land Management

and military lands in accordance with existing law.

(3) Fee title to lands at Anchorage Substation shall be transferred to Eklutna Purchasers at no additional cost if the Secretary

of the Interior determines that pending

claims to, and selections of, those lands are

invalid or relinquished.

(4) With respect to the Eklutna lands identified in paragraph 1 of Exhibit A of the

Eklutna Purchase Agreement, the State of

Alaska may select, and the Secretary of the

Interior shall convey to the State, improved

lands under the selection entitlements in

section 6 of the Act of July 7, 1958 (commonly referred to as the Alaska Statehood

Act, Public Law 85–508, 72 Stat. 339, as

amended), and the North Anchorage Land

Agreement dated January 31, 1983. This conveyance shall be subject to the rights-of-way

provided to the Eklutna Purchasers under

paragraph (1).

(d) With respect to the Snettisham lands

identified in paragraph 1 of Exhibit A of the

Snettisham Purchase Agreement and Public

Land Order No. 5108, the State of Alaska may

select, and the Secretary of the Interior

shall convey to the State of Alaska, improved lands under the selection entitlements in section 6 of the Act of July 7, 1958

(commonly referred to as the Alaska Statehood Act, Public Law 85–508, 72 Stat. 339, as

amended).

(e) Not later than one year after both of

the sales authorized in section 102 have occurred, as measured by the Transaction

Dates stipulated in the Purchase Agreements, the Secretary of Energy shall—

(1) complete the business of, and close out,

the Alaska Power Administration;

(2) submit to Congress a report documenting the sales; and

(3) return unobligated balances of funds appropriated for the Alaska Power Administration to the Treasury of the United States.

(f) The Act of July 31, 1950 (64 Stat. 382) is

repealed effective on the date, as determined