E 982 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks May 9, 1995

deciding whether to issue a license and again

upon relicensing. That review takes into account the inputs of state and federal agencies,

Indian tribes, and the public. The review also

carefully evaluates and addresses the potential environmental impacts of each proposed

and existing project. Therefore, in the context

of hydropower projects under the Commission’s jurisdiction, there is no need for the additional, duplicative layer of regulation that the

Clean Water Act now creates. This amendment eliminates the duplicative layer of federal

regulation.

CUTS IN NUCLEAR ARSENALS

fNEEDED

HON. ELIZABETH FURSE OF OREGON

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Tuesday, May 9, 1995

Ms. FURSE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to

submit for the RECORD the letter I and 24 of

my colleagues sent to President Clinton last

Friday. In it, we urged him to propose beginning negotiations with Russia on a START III

agreement, to further limit our two nations’

massive nuclear weapons arsenals.

Depending on the outcome of this week’s

summit in Moscow, I will consider introducing

a resolution similar to this letter. I believe

these reductions are vital in order to achieve

a safer world for all of us.

ELIZABETH FURSE,

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

May 5, 1995.

Hon. WILLIAM J. CLINTON,

President of the United States of America,

The White House, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: We wish you success

in your upcoming summit with President

Boris Yeltsin in Moscow.

The substantial improvement in relations

between Russia and ourselves in this postCold War era offers a historic opportunity to

secure further reductions in nuclear arms,

thereby reducing the nuclear risk and cost

for the United States, Russia and the world.

As you know, at your September 1994 summit with President Yeltsin, you agreed that

our two nations would discuss possibilities

for further limits on our remaining nuclear

forces, including further reductions. As you

prepare for the summit, we urge you to

prompt the United States Senate to complete START II approval of ratification. In

Moscow, we urge you to encourage Russia

also to ratify START II.

We believe that the United States should

begin negotiations with Russia as quickly as

possible on a START III agreement to

achieve deeper cuts in our strategic nuclear

arsenals. Such an agreement should require

dismantling excess warheads and placing the

resulting nuclear materials in storage under

international or bilateral monitoring. We

also encourage you to initiate negotiations

with Russia to retire and dismantle all tactical nuclear weapons in our respective arsenals.

Additional measures toward nuclear disarmament enjoy broad support among the

American public and are vital to reducing

the threat of nuclear conflict. We hope you

will include these practical steps in the summit agenda.

Sincerely,

Tom Barrett, Howard Berman, Sherrod

Brown, Bob Clement, Peter DeFazio,

Ron Dellums, Michael Doyle, Lane

Evans, Elizabeth Furse, Sam Gejdenson, Maurice Hinchey, Zoe Lofgren, Ed

Markey, David Minge, Connie Morella,

Jim Oberstar, Major Owens, Frank

Pallone, Nancy Pelosi, Martin Sabo,

Pat Schroeder, Jose Serrano, Louise

AN AMENDMENT ADDRESSING HYDROELECTRIC POWER GENERASlaughter, Pete Stark, Ron Wyden,

fTION

HON. SPENCER BACHUS OF ALABAMA

HON. GREG LAUGHLIN OF TEXAS

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Tuesday, May 9, 1995

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Speaker, last year, the

U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision commonly referred to as the Tacoma decision that

has created friction, conflict, and unnecessary,

duplicative regulation for the Nation’s hydropower projects. Specifically, the Court has interpreted section 401 of the Clean Water Act

so broadly as to supersede the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s licensing authority over the projects under the Federal

Power Act.

The Court’s opinion allows State water quality agencies to set conditions directly on the

operation of hydropower projects, not just the

discharges they produce. Furthermore, these

conditions are not limited to standards set

under the act but can be based on independent State laws that may not have water quality

as their objective. The Court also said that

water quality agencies can evaluate whether a

project is consistent with the agency’s designated uses for the water body, not just narrative and numeric water quality criteria. Most

troubling, the Court also said that the conditions can directly address stream flows, even

for aesthetic, fish and wildlife, or recreation

purposes.

The following amendment, which we plan to

offer to H.R. 961, the Clean Water Act

Amendments of 1995, would restore the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s licensing authority by narrowing the reach of the

Clean Water Act, in particular section 401, as

to hydroelectric projects. The amendment

would limit State water quality agencies to applying narrative and numeric water quality criteria to the project discharges. If an agency

wants to go beyond those definitive criteria,

then it would need to submit its recommendations to the Commission for consideration as

part of the Commission’s comprehensive licensing review of the projects. Under section

10(a) of the Federal Power Act, such recommendations would get serious consideration, along with the numerous other environmental, recreational, and other recommendations the Commission reviews for each project.

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 961, AS REPORTED

OFFERED BY MR. BACHUS OF ALABAMA

Page 213, after line 5, insert the following:

SEC. 507. FEDERAL POWER ACT PART I

PROJECTS.

Section 511(a) (33 U.S.C. 1371(a)) is amended

by striking ‘‘, or (3)’’ and inserting the following: ‘‘; (3) applying to hydropower

projects within the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission or its

successors under the authority of part I of

the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 791 et seq.);

except that water quality certification, unless waived or denied, shall be issued for such

projects under section 401 and the water

quality conditions in those certifications

shall become conditions on project licenses

and except that any water quality certification conditions or denial issued under section 401 shall be limited to consideration of

narrative and numeric water quality criteria

adopted in water quality standards under

section 303 and such conditions shall not regulate, or such denial be based on, water use

or water quantities; or (4)’’.

Renumber subsequent sections of the bill

and conform the table of contents of the bill

accordingly.