Volume 149, No. 172 covering the 1st Session of the 108th Congress (2003 - 2004) was published by the Congressional Record.
The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2754, ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT 2004” mentioning the Environmental Protection Agency was published in the Extensions of Remarks section on pages E2433-E2434 on Nov. 23, 2003.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2754, ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT
APPROPRIATIONS ACT 2004
______
speech of
HON. MAURICE D. HINCHEY
of new york
in the house of representatives
Tuesday, November 18, 2003
Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the Chairman of the Energy and Water Subcommittee, Mr. Hobson and the ranking member, Mr. Visclosky for their good work on this bill. This conference report deserves the overwhelming support it is about to receive.
I do want to bring attention to one provision in this bill that has not received the scrutiny it deserves. Section 115 is an affront to our nation's environmental laws. It was not included in either the House or Senate bills and was added in conference. The provision waives all environmental laws and directs the construction of a road from the village of King Cove, Alaska through the sensitive Izembek National Wildlife Refuge and right to the boundary of the fragile and internationally significant Izembek Wilderness Area.
Specifically, Section 115 directs the Corps of Engineers to build a road proposed in one Alternative from a draft Environmental Impact Statement prepared to evaluate several modes of transportation between the villages of King Cove and Cold Bay, Alaska. The Environmental Protection Agency has raised significant concerns with the alternative mandated by Section 115. The Corps of Engineers is still reviewing public comment on the draft EIS.
The King Cove Access Project first surfaced as legislation in 1998. Proponents attempted to add the provision to an appropriations bill that year but were not successful. A compromise was reached later that year with the King Cove Health and Safety Act which was included as Section 353 of Public Law 105-277, the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. The measure appropriated $40 million to address the access needs of the communities of King Cove and Cold Bay; however, the Act did not approve a road through the Izembek refuge or the Izembek Wilderness. In fact, the legislation specifically required that expenditure of the funds allocated in the bill ``must be in accordance with all other applicable laws.''
Five years after a satisfactory compromise was agreed upon, this rider inappropriately short-circuits the public process. An administrative decision on a project to enhance marine-road access for the community of King Cove is proceeding in a timely manner and does not require intervention by Congress. However, the King Cove Access Project mandates one alternative in the EIS, thereby effectively ignoring the advice of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, other federal agencies and the American public.
Section 115 is an affront not only to public process, but also to our nation's environmental laws. Unlike the King Cove Health & Safety Act, which is subject to national environmental laws, the King Cove Access Project is
``notwithstanding any other provision of law.'' It is inappropriate to exempt the Izembek refuge from federal environmental laws in this manner.
The Izembek National Wildlife Refuge, on the Alaska Peninsula, is internationally recognized as one of the most important wetland reserves in the Northern Hemisphere. Home to threatened and endangered species, as well as millions of migratory birds, the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge and Izembek Wilderness are keys in the fight to conserve the natural diversity of wildlife populations and habitats. A road through the refuge will inevitable damage the refuge's critically important habitat.
The King Cove Access Project ignores environmental laws, threatens important wildlife habitat and sets a dangerous anti-wilderness precedent. The 17-mile road proposal is not compatible with the purposes of the refuge, as established by ANILCA, or with the Wilderness Act. The King Cove Access Project rider is terrible policy and terrible process.
____________________
Alerts Sign-up