Dave Hobson

Mr. HOBSON

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that debate on this amendment and any amendments thereto be limited to 30 minutes to be equally divided and controlled by the proponent and myself.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I would just ask for approval of the amendment. This restores the language for one year in the bill.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent the remainder of the bill through page 42, line 6 be considered as read, printed in the Record and open to amendment at any point.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I rise to oppose the amendment to increase funding for the renewable energy program. Everything we did in the major renewable accounts, with the exception of the hydrogen program, which were reduced because the Department ignored congressional guidance on competition and cost sharing, is at or above the President's budget request. While I am supportive of the renewable energy programs, there are many other areas of the bill I would have included additional funds, if possible. However, the committee's allocation was tight and we had to make some tough decisions. I believe we wrote a fair and balanced bill, and the renewable energy programs did very well. I might point out that I have already taken a hard line in our committee with the nuclear weapons computer programs, and additional major reductions, I do not think, are helpful or necessary at this time. So I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher).

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that debate on this amendment and any amendments thereto be limited to 24 minutes to be equally divided and controlled by the proponent and myself, the opponent.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of the bill through title II be considered as read, printed in the Record and open to amendment at any point.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I share my colleague's concern about the lead in parts of the D.C. water system. However, I have to point out that such work is really not in the Corps of Engineers bailiwick. They are not authorized and we do not include any new water project authorization in our bill at this time. I should also note that the Corps is probably not the best agency to conduct this kind of work. The Corps' role in the water system for the District of Columbia is limited to operating the water treatment plant. The Corps currently has no responsibility after the water leaves the plant for the water distribution and supply lines are a district responsibility and not that of the Corps. Therefore, regrettably, I mean this sincerely, I do not have any way to really take care of this right now. This is a problem that the District has. At some point we ought to find a solution to help the District solve this problem. I just do not have the tools at this time to do that. Therefore, I must oppose the amendment.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Ose) such time as he may consume.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I will agree to work with the gentleman on this as the bill goes to conference, but I want to remind him, though I am sure this study deserves to proceed, the fact is that not all deserving new studies can go forward at the same time. It is one of the basic cornerstones of this bill that we tried to limit projects and studies until we finished some of the things we have already started. There has been a lot of criticism of the Corps that it does not get things done and costs get out of line. What we have tried to do is limit the new starts. But I want to assure the gentleman that should the door open and new studies in conference are available, we will take another look at the merits of the Boulder Creek study.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, yes.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Wamp), the vice chairman of our committee.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I do share the concerns of my colleague from Illinois. That is why I commit to her and the rest of our Great Lakes colleagues that I will work in conference, I am sure with my ranking member, to see that the Corps receives the funding and authority it needs to complete work on these barriers and have them up and running as soon as possible. I agree we need a permanent redundant protection against the spread of aquatic invasive species between the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River basins and the Federal Government should be responsible for the long-term operation and maintenance of this project of national and international significance.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert) for the purpose of a colloquy.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his comments. The committee wrestled with the need to balance existing commitments of the Corps of Engineers with new projects such as the Wabash River study in Tippecanoe County. Unfortunately, we were not able to satisfy both demands.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer).

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's statement. I want to assure him that I will work with him to insert acceptable language into the Statement of Managers to accompany the conference report to encourage the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to address the recommendations found in the May 2004 General Accounting Office report.

Mr. HOBSON

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOBSON. Well, if the gentleman will continue to yield, yes. And I think in some other instances in this bill we have also taken a stand that you cannot have one standard one place and one standard another. So any conclusion must be comprehensive and consistent nationwide.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I agree with the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King) that the purposes and intentions of this act should be met. The funds appropriated for endangered species habitat restoration on the Missouri River should be used for those purposes. As the Army Corps of Engineers works to that end, let us encourage the Corps to properly oversee that the funds are being utilized for their purposes.