Frank Murkowski

Mr. MURKOWSKI

Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to call to the attention of my colleagues a most unusual and informative event which took place in the Senate Energy Committee hearing room on May 8 and 9. The first Partners Outdoors Fair was hosted by the committee and organized by six Federal agencies and the Recreation Roundtable, a group comprised of the chief executives of more than 20 of the leading recreation-oriented companies in America. The fair was a great success, celebrating the imaginative and effective work taking place across the nation through partnerships involving Federal, State and local agencies, private corporations and others. The idea for the Partners Outdoors Fair was conceived in early 1995 at the Partners Outdoors conference in Florida, an annual meeting of public and private organization leaders committed to the protection of America's wonderful outdoors resources and the enhancement of the recreational experiences of visitors to federally-managed areas. Candidates for programs to be showcased at the fair were submitted by all six Federal agencies taking part in the conference: the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Corps of Engineers, and the Bureau of Reclamation. From the dozens of submissions, 20 displays were selected to represent diversity in focus, partners and size. As chairman for the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, I was very enthusiastic upon learning of the plans for the fair and was pleased to offer the use of our hearing room for this important 2-day event. As you might guess, Mr. President, I was particularly enthusiastic about those displays that showcased successful programs in my State of Alaska. One of these, an eye-catching display describing fishing restoration efforts and the Wallop-Breaux Fund, prominently featured the creation of a new sportfishing opportunity at Homer Spit in Alaska. Thanks to the determined efforts of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and several State agencies--as well as to the millions of Americans whose purchases of fishing equipment and motorboat fuels make the Wallop-Breaux fund viable--Homer Spit has seen a steady return of large chinook salmon and has been made more accessible to children, the elderly and those with physical disabilities. Another display featured a successful partnership including ARCO, the Anchorage School District, the National Audabon Society, Alaska Pacific University, and the BLM. The diverse collection of entities polled its resources to design the Campbell Creek Environmental Education Center, a 10,000-square foot facility that will be built by the BLM on Campbell Tract in Anchorage. Targeted for completion in 1996, the Campbell Creek facility will provide children and others with the opportunity to experience the outdoors, learn about wildlife and understand the role people play in the local and global environments. The center will also promote behaviors, practices and lifestyles that have minimal impact on the environment. Still another display described the interpretive programs used aboard cruise ships that ferry visitors to Alaska's majestic Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve. These programs greatly enhance the cruise experience and are the result of a collaborative effort between companies such as Holland America and the National Park Service. The fair features many other outstanding displays about partnerships in operation around the country, and those who stopped by saw that the number of partners involved was breathtakingly large and diverse. For example, a program entitled ``WOW--Wonderful Outdoor World,'' which aims at introducing city kids to the pleasures of camping and other outdoor recreational activities, was established with contributions from the Walt Disney Co., the city of Los Angeles, the Bureau of Land Management, the Coleman Co., Chevy/Geo, California State University at Long Beach, and the U.S. Forest Service, among others. Another good example was Tread Lightly, a program to help protect public and private lands through the responsible use of off-highway vehicles. Tread Lightly involves the Forest Service, Four Wheeler Magazine, the Izaak Walton League, Goodyear, Jeep, Honda, Toyota, Ranger Rover, the Perlman Group, and Warn Industries. There were many others worthy of mention. Mr. President, I would ask that a complete list and description of the featured displays appear in the Record immediately following my remarks. Mr. President, there have long been, and continue to be, debates in this country over whether the private or public sector can accomplish certain tasks more effectively. And today, perhaps more than at any other time since the drafting of the Constitution, there is much discussion about whether State and local governments are better equipped for certain tasks than the Federal Government. I do not expect that a relatively small, 2-day event in the Senate Energy Committee hearing room will by itself lay these contentions debates to rest. However, I do believe the Partners Outdoors Fair made great strides in calling our attention to the fact that it does not always have to be one or the other. The public sector can work with the private sector, and the Federal Government can work with State and local governments. In fact, when the particular resources and expertise of each come together in a collaborative effort, the results are precisely what we saw on display on May 8 and 9. In addition, the projects displayed at the fair made clear that progress can be made even without large increases in Federal budgets and even without specific legislative direction. Mr. President, I would also like to mention an important event that took place on the afternoon of May 9, as the Partners Outdoors Fair was winding to a close. At that time, I joined with Francis Pandolfi, the president and CEO of Times Mirror Magazines and chairman of the Recreation Roundtable, in a news conference at which the Recreation Roundtable released the results of its latest national survey of public attitudes regarding outdoor recreation. Joining us was Edward Keller, executive vice president of Roper Starch Worldwide, the organization that performed the study for the roundtable. One of the most interesting aspects of this event was the presentation of a new national index--the Recreation Quality Index [RQI]--which reflects public perceptions regarding changes in recreation opportunities, quality of experience and personal participation. Regarding the significance of this development, I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Pandolfi, who called the RQI ``a new, important expression of public opinion which can help guide and measure the impact of policy decisions in Washington and decisions by companies providing recreation goods and services. The RQI provides the first comprehensive reflection of satisfaction with outdoor recreation in America--not just a specific service provided or a specific recreational product.'' Mr. President, I strongly encourage my colleagues to heed these words and to carefully study the recreational needs of the American people when considering legislation that affects our public lands and other issues that affect the $300 billion plus recreation industry in America. The material follows: Partners Outdoors--1995 fisheries restoration: successes from coast to coast America's anglers and boaters pay special federal taxes and fees totaling more than $300 million annually--most of which is deposited into the Wallop-Breaux Fund. A sizeable portion of that money is then provided as grants to state fisheries agencies for fisheries research, habitat improvements, fisheries management activities and for expanded access to public waters by anglers and boaters. The monies have had direct and very successful consequences for fisheries from coast to coast. In Alaska, Wallop-Breaux funding was used to create a new sportfishing opportunity at Homer Spit, close to the homes of many Alaskans and accessible by children, persons with physical challenges and the elderly. Research into sensory impregnation has brought a steady return of large Chinook salmon to an area previously without any sizable run. Similarly, federal assistance has been used on the east coast by Maryland and other states to arrest the precipitous decline in striped bass populations. Research efforts for 75% federal funding. As in many cases, the decline in the fishery was attributable to a combination of pollution and over-fishing. States along the east coast responded with an ambitious recovery plan, limiting fishing and undertaking some mitigation projects. The result is a strong return of this popular sportfish in the Chesapeake Bay and surrounding areas and a reopening of fishing for this species. Partners in this effort include the millions of Americans purchasing fishing tackle and motorboat fuels, the fishing tackle industry which ``fronts'' the tax monies, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and state fish and wildlife agencies across the nation. aquatic resources education efforts Aquatic Resources Education Programs are underway across the nation, thanks to Wallop-Breaux partners. Focusing chiefly on youth, the programs teach subjects as diverse as science and safety, fishing techniques and ethics. Up to 10% of each state's Wallop-Breaux Fund allocation can be used for these programs; overall, about 5% of the total funding to states is being spent on these efforts. In ten years, some two million young people have participated in state aquatic resources education projects, and the programs are growing in size and sophistication. One of the imaginative partnerships which has evolved in aquatic resources education has been Pathway to Fishing. Initiated by Outdoor Technologies Group and expanded to include federal agencies ranging from the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management to the Bureau of Reclamation as well as Wal-Mart and other companies, Pathway events have occurred at hundreds of sites across the nation. Pathway can be conducted by a lake, river or pond--or even in a parking lot or open field. Kids learn and have fun, regardless. Volunteers from organizations such as B.A.S.S. and Trout Unlimited as well as federal and state agencies act as instructors in this 12-learning station effort. Another major focus of aquatic resources education is National Fishing Week, which began on June 5. Hundreds of events will be held across the nation. Partners in this effort include the American Sportfishing Association, fishing tackle companies, federal and state agencies, recreational fishing organizations and the media. wallop/breaux: making our waters better for boating and fishing Although relatively new, the Wallop/Breaux program is already causing tremendous positive changes in fishing and boating--as well as in the health of our nation's surface waters. Using a 10% federal excise tax at the manufacturer/ importer level imposed with the support of industry plus the federal motorfuel excise tax collected on gas used in recreational boating, Wallop/Breaux provides grants to states for fisheries management, for improved boating and fishing access, for aquatic resources education programs, for wetlands restoration, for construction of marine waste disposal sites and for boating safety efforts by the U.S. Coast Guard and state and local agencies. Using 3:1 matching federal grants, Wallop/Breaux program partners accomplished the following between 1986 and 1993: built 1600 new public boat launching ramps and related facilities, including parking areas and restrooms; improved 9,700 public boat ramps; built 600 roads to open up access to public waters; installed directional signs for thousands of boating and fishing access sites; developed over 1,500 new fishing access sites; and acquired at least 170 properties and over 50,000 strategic acres to improve access to public waters. In 1992, the Wallop-Breaux program was amended to add a new emphasis on wetlands restoration. A new revenue source--the federal excise tax on fuels used in lawnmowers, chainsaws, snowblowers and other small-engine items--was approved by the Congress. Approximately $50 million per year is now invested in this wetlands effort. Partners in Wallop/Breaux include more than thirty national recreation and conservation organizations which constitute the American League of Anglers and Boaters, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, state fishery and boating agencies, the U.S. Coast Guard and America's anglers and boaters. wow--wonderful outdoor world On opposite coasts of the nation last year, two groups of individuals addressed the lowered rate of exposure of today's youth to traditional outdoor recreational activities such as camping, fishing, hiking and wildlife viewing. Many factors are behind this drop, from the lure of indoor pastimes to changes in the structure of our families. The conversations joined and a unique national partnership resulted called ``WOW--Wonderful Outdoor World.'' Now operating in a pilot effort in Los Angeles, the program brings tents, lanterns, sleeping bags, fishing poles and other recreational items to the neighborhoods of city kids and offers them camping adventures within blocks of home. The program doesn't end with this first exposure; ``graduates'' are helped to understand the outdoor fun opportunities near-by and the organizations available to make this fun accessible--from city and county agencies to the Boy Scouts. Current partners include the Walt Disney Company, the City of Los Angeles, the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the Recreation Roundtable, the Coleman Company, Chevy/Geo Environmental, Ralphs Grocery Company, California State Parks, Wells Cargo Trailers, California State University at Long Beach and the L.A. Times. Partners hope to learn from the monthly camping adventures for 9-12 year-olds between May 1995 and April 1996 and to expand the program both in Los Angeles and to more cities. smokey bear balloon floats across america In celebration of the 50th anniversary of Smokey Bear, the Forest Service and many friends and partners helped create a new non-profit organization based in Albuquerque, New Mexico, to build and ``campaign'' a new hot air balloon in the shape of Smokey Bear. Towering 85 feet high and 75 feet across, the balloon has already made almost 100 flights. The balloon travels with a specially constructed trailer, donated by Fleetwood Enterprises, which offers an outstanding fire and conservation ethics message. This newest icon for Smokey, one of America's best known and best loved symbols, is totally privately funded but works in close harmony with federal and state forestry organizations. Smokey recently flew in formation with another famed American symbol--Mickey Mouse--at the Walt Disney World Resort, celebrating both the partnerships reflected by the balloon and the origin of the idea for the balloon--at the first Partners Outdoors conference at the Florida site. winter sports partnership Approximately half of all downhill skiing in the United States occurs at ski areas operating on national forests. Private funding has been used to build the lifts and other facilities, which are then operated under long term permits which return revenues to the government. The ski areas also assist the Forest Service with wildlife management, interpretation and other programs. A partnership was established among the U.S. Disabled Ski Team, Olympic Gold Medalist Sarah Will, Dick Bass of Snowbird, the National Ski Area's Association and the U.S. Forest Service in 1994. At this time, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was signed by Under Secretary Jim Lyons, Forest Service Chief Jack Ward Thomas and the President of the National Ski Area's Association Michael Berry. The MOU supports enhancing public awareness of ecosystems through environmental education at ski areas at National Forest lands, particularly ski areas, increasing partnership recognition, encouraging stewardship of public land and demonstrating the availability of the National Forests to people of all ages, abilities and cultures. tread lightly This program was started by the Forest Service in 1986 to help protect public and private lands through education about responsible use of off-highway vehicles. To maximize its effectiveness, Tread Lightly, Inc., a non-profit organization funded and managed by the private sector, was incorporated in 1990. Tread Lightly unites manufacturers, publishers, environmental groups and individuals who share a basic commitment to recognize and protect our valuable resources. Some of these partners are: Jeep, Honda, Toyota, Range Rover, the Perlman Group, Warn Industries, the Izaak Walton League, Goodyear and Four Wheeler Magazine. access america's great outdoors The partnership is among the American Recreation Coalition, the Forest Service, MIG Communications, Quickie Designs and Wilderness Inquiry. It involves a comprehensive approach to integrating universal access to outdoor recreation environments and supports the full implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Efforts on this program were inspired by the President's Commission on Americans Outdoors. Among the products of this partnership are: a design guidebook offering practical and creative information to public and private recreation facility operators alike; improved facilities across the nation; demonstrations for the Western Governors Association and recreation community leaders and national awareness through media stories. back country byways The Bureau of Land Management's Back Country Byways program now includes more than 70 routes, showcasing some of the scenic and cultural best of the West. The BLM program has enjoyed the active support of national partners such as the American Recreation Coalition, Farmers Insurance Companies and American Isuzu as well as dozens of local corporate, municipal and civic organizations. Three outstanding byways have been developed recently in the state of Arizona. Historic Route 66 is a part of many family histories dating back to the 1920s. The 42-mile scenic road offers an outstanding side-trip for visitors traveling to Arizona, California and Nevada. The Historic Route 66 Association, Kingman, Oatman and Topack chambers of commerce, Mohave County and Arizona state governmental agencies have worked cooperatively to develop and promote this back country byway. In March 1994, the Black Hills Back Country Byway was dedicated celebrating ``Riches from the Earth.'' This 21-mile road journeys through rough terrain, provides opportunities for rockhounding, viewing wildlife, hiking, rafting the Gila River and many other activities as well as seeing one of the nation's largest copper mining sites. This byway was developed as a partnership with Phelps Dodge and the Graham and Greenlee Counties and chambers of commerce. blackfoot challenge Facing population growth and the consequences of poor land use practices in the past, the large and lovely Blackfoot River valley in Montana was threatened and in need of comprehensive action. The Bureau of Land Management led efforts to develop a common vision for the region and then enlist public and private partners able to turn the vision into reality. The result is both astonishing and encouraging. Major corporations such as Plum Creek Timber and Phelps Dodge Mining have joined federal agencies, environmental organizations, local governments and private citizens to develop a land use strategy for the area, target priority sites for clean-ups and other mitigation and communicate goals to landowners in the area. The effort has been aided by use of GIS and other new technologies. The valley now has a markedly more positive future. blm: hidden partnerships in the east BLM has developed partnerships with numerous states, oil and gas companies, wild horse and burro adopters, as well as historically black colleges and universities. These organizations have worked together to protect wildlife habitat, introduce non-traditional publics to the outdoors, improve recreation opportunities, protect fragile ecosystems and cultural resources, and improve environmental education programs. national river clean-up week As the national coordinator, America Outdoors originated this program in 1992 in partnership with federal agencies and the private sector. The organizations participating include: Bureau of Reclamation, Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, American Canoe Association, American Rivers, American Whitewater Affiliation, North American Paddle Sports Association and The National Association of Canoe Liveries and Outfitters. Since the inception of this partnership, 100,000 volunteers have participated in 1,600 clean-ups covering 30,000 miles of waterways. American Outdoors donates staff time for promotion, coordination, fund raising, distribution of trash bags and development of educational materials. The federal agencies provide logistical support to volunteers for clean- ups on public land, assist with the acquisition of trash bags and coordinate clean-ups. The private sector promotes clean- ups among their membership and provides educational material on the value of maintaining healthy riparian zones and waterways. campbell creek (alaska) environmental education center A partnership, including ARCO, Anchorage School District, National Audubon Society and Alaska Pacific University along with BLM, designed the Campbell Creek Environmental Education Center that will be located in a residential facility and will be built by the BLM on the Campbell Tract in Anchorage. The facility will be completed in 1996 and will include a 10,000 square-foot education center, two dormitories, outdoor amphitheater and interpretive trails. The center will provide children and others with the opportunity to experience the outdoors, learn about wildlife and understand the role people play in the local and global environment. The center will also promote behaviors, practices and lifestyles that have minimal impact on the environment. public land appreciation day PLAD was initiated by Times Mirror Magazines (TMM) in 1994 and encourages conservation-oriented volunteers to help diminish the huge back-log of restoration projects on our nation's public lands. Through TMM, reaching 30 million readers, a call to action was given that mobilized forces to public land sites across the country. Five federal government agencies--the Bureau of Land Management, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Forest Service, the Park Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service are partners with TMM. At each site, agency staff oversee the PLAD volunteers who work on restoration projects. All the tools needed to accomplish the work are donated by the PLAD corporate sponsors. PLAD started with two pilot sites in 1994 and has expanded to 15 sites in 1995. By the end of the century, there will be hundreds of PLAD sites throughout the country and people will know that on the last Saturday in September they can go to a local site to do their part. lake havasu (arizona) fisheries improvement program This program partnership includes the Bureau of Land Management, Anglers United, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Bureau of Reclamation, California Department of Fish and Game, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. It is the largest and most comprehensive warm water fisheries project ever undertaken in the United States. The $28.5 million program meets the needs of a host of anglers, revitalizes the fishery, and restores populations of native fish in Lake Havasu. This program will increase access for all shoreline anglers by construction of foot trails, fishing docks, access roads and parking areas. Other facilities such as fish cleaning stations, ramadas with picnic tables, interpretive areas and restrooms will be added in eight access areas. Over 150 artificial habitat structures will be placed in the lake to provide spawning sites, feeding locations and escape cover for the declining populations of sport fish. Volunteers are a major factor in the construction and placement of artificial habitat structures in the lake. Hundreds of volunteers contribute thousands of hours each year at work sites on the lake. Community involvement complements the partner contributions to implement this program. The Lake Havasu Fisheries improvement program provides exhibits and a habitat construction station for participants and their families so that they actually help make structures on site.

Mr. MURKOWSKI

Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, on behalf of the administration, I introduce the Helium Disposal Act of 1995. This legislation was submitted to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources by the administration as a legislative proposal needed to implement the President's budget for fiscal year 1996. While I support ending helium refining and marketing operations by the U.S. Bureau of Mines, I do not support the administration's legislation. I am a cosponsor of Senator Thomas' legislation, S. 738, the Helium Act of 1995. I support Mr. Thomas' legislation and look forward to working with him to enact responsible legislation that will end the Federal Government's involvement in the refining and marketing of helium in the United States.

Mr. MURKOWSKI

Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will take place Thursday, June 15, 1995, at 9:30 a.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, DC. The purpose of this hearing is to receive testimony on S. 871, a bill to provide for the management and disposition of the Hanford Reservation, to provide for environmental management activities at the reservation, and for other purposes. Those wishing to submit written statements should write to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510. For further information, please call David Garman at (202) 224- 7933 or Judy Brown at (202) 224-7556.

Mr. MURKOWSKI

Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, dangerous nuclear leftovers from the cold war and the commercial spent fuel storage problem present the U.S. with two major environmental challenges. An explosion at the liquid high-level waste storage tanks at Hanford could result in a catastrophic nuclear accident, and electric utilities are running out of space for storage at commercial nuclear reactors. Although these are separate problems, the solutions are related. Unfortunately, President Clinton is AWOL (absent without leadership), and the DOE is playing legal games instead of taking responsibility for taking the commercial spent fuel by 1998. It's time for a comprehensive solution. First, let's review the facts: Thirty thousand tons of spent nuclear fuel is being temporarily stored at powerplants at 75 sites. In less than 3 years, 23 reactors will run out of space in their spent fuel storage pools. By 2010, a total of 78 reactors will have run out of space. We've already spent 12 years and $4.2 billion to find permanent high- level repository and conduct site characterization at Yucca Mountain. DOE will decide if Yucca Mountain is a suitable site for a permanent repository in 1998. If it is, DOE will file for license in 2001. DOE has told us that the odds of the site being suitable are about 80 percent. However, DOE has also indicated that the odds of getting a license for a permanent repository under our existing laws are about 50-50, and probably much worse. These odds are not good enough to bet the taxpayer's money on. Still, the fact remains that, if after 3 to 6 years more work at Yucca Mountain, and a total expenditure of at least $9 billion on our nuclear waste disposal program, Yucca is either found not to be suitable or licensable, we have nowhere to turn. We currently have no contingency plan for waste storage. We will simply have to start over. Meanwhile, the President and DOE are dragging their feet. DOE has recently issued a ``Final Interpretation of Nuclear Waste Acceptance Issues,'' reaffirming its earlier position that its contracts with the utilities to take waste by 1998 are not enforceable in court. DOE has also asserted that it has no authority under existing law to site an interim repository. DOE has missed the point. While DOE is focusing on legal technicalities to avoid its obligations to the American people, we have had no suggestions from DOE regarding solutions to this problem. Although we have been told that DOE is studying the issue, all we have heard from the administration is a refusal to support any pending legislation at this time. I have received no response to my letter to the President requesting that the administration engage on this issue in a meaningful way. Finally, the State of Nevada and the Nevada congressional delegation remain opposed to the location of any nuclear waste facilities in their State. It is time to take a comprehensive look at the problem based on two basic principles: First, the Government must meet its obligation to take spent fuel by 1998 or as soon thereafter as practical. The ratepayers have paid for it. They deserve performance, not excuses. Even if it is found to be suitable, Yucca Mountain will not be ready before 2010. Therefore, interim storage of spent fuel is needed. Although there is nothing unsafe about the storage of spent fuel at reactor sites, for reasons of both economics and safety, we must consolidate our 74 spent fuel storage sites into 1 or 2. Second, the U.S. must continue efforts toward a permanent geological repository. While we can keep alternatives such as deep seabed disposal and transmutation alive (if Yucca is found unsuitable), our long-term goal remains geologic disposal. This raises a more difficult question: Where do we locate central interim storage? I would suggest the best location for an interim storage facility would meet the following criteria: Spent fuel should already be there. There should be adequate land area. The Federal Government should already own the land. There should be transportation infrastructure. There should be a security infrastructure. A skilled work force familiar with handling nuclear materials should be available. A nuclear safety/worker protection infrastructure should be in place. The location(s) should be in general proximity to the Nation's reactors, i.e., one for the East and one for the West. The new economic activity associated with spent fuel management may address concurrent job losses. After all of these considerations are evaluated, the relative costs of the alternatives should be taken into account. Locations that meet the above criteria include some of our existing DOE weapons facilities. Geographically, the most likely candidates are Hanford and Savannah River. There are other important factors about Hanford, and Savannah River--each contain nuclear materials dramatically more dangerous than spent commercial fuel safety contained in dry casks. For example, Hanford has 61 million gallons of liquid high level wastes in 177 underground tanks--some of which have leaked or are leaking. Under certain conditions, one or more of these tanks could explode, resulting in a catastrophic nuclear accident. Also at Hanford are 4,300 metric tons of plutonium in various forms and locations, contaminated reprocessing facilities, corroding and possibly dangerous DOE nuclear fuels, and a contaminated plutonium finishing plant just to name a few. Savannah River has five closed reactors, two contaminated reprocessing facilities, and a variety of liquid and solid radioactive wastes. Despite the very real environmental health and safety risks that exist at Hanford and Savannah River, fiscal pressures are forcing us to cut the overall cleanup budget even as we squander millions of dollars cleaning up low risk sites to comply with environmental regulations designed for a perfect world. As Ivan Selin, Chairman of the NRC, said last week, Prioritization of the cleanup at DOE sites, based on an assessment of risk to the public and the cleanup workers, isn't happening to the extent it should. Finally, Hanford and Savannah River already have spent nuclear fuel. Not the safe, stable nuclear fuel found in commercial power reactors-- but military fuel designed to be quickly reprocessed to make plutonium. When we abruptly shut down plutonium production, this military fuel was left in limbo. Today it sits, corroding, in pools at Hanford and Savannah River . . . 206 metric tons at Savannah River, and 2132 metric tons at Hanford. To review the situation, we need one or two centralized, dry cask storage sites for spent commercial nuclear fuel, until Yucca Mountain or another permanent geologic repository is ready. We have spent military fuel at Hanford and Savannah River--along with a host of other environmental problems--that demand attention despite declining dollars and misplaced priorities dictated by current environmental statutes. Employment at Hanford and Savannah River is dropping. The local communities are feeling the economic pinch. the activity at Hanford and Savannah River is shifting from defense production to environmental restoration. Hanford and Savannah River meet all the criteria listed earlier: Spent fuel is already there. There is adequate land area. The Federal Government already owns the land. There is transportation infrastructure. There is security infrastructure. There is an available, skilled work force that knows how to handle nuclear materials. There is a nuclear safety/worker protection infrastructure in place. Savannah River is conveniently located with respect to civilian power reactors in the east, and Hanford is convenient to reactors in the west. The new economic activity associated with spent fuel management will help address economic declines in the area. The new dry cask storage facilities may even help safely contain the more dangerous spent military fuel that exists at both sites. [[Page S7492]] Overall costs of transportation and storage would appear to be lower at these sites. Therefore, I believe Hanford and Savannah River offer excellent sites for the temporary, dry cask storage of civilian spent nuclear fuel until a permanent geologic repository is available. At this point, I would like to make clear my support for continued progress toward a permanent geologic repository. Hanford and Savannah River already have defense nuclear waste and spent nuclear fuel from defense and research activities that is destined for the permanent geologic repository. This proposal is intended to hasten the day that those wastes, as well as the civilian spent fuel, are sent away from the sites for permanent disposal. I realize that at this time, nobody wants to store nuclear waste. Incentives must be offered. The communities near Hanford and Savannah River will understandably ask, what's in it for us? I would be prepared to pursue benefits for these communities if they are inclined to take spent commercial fuel on an interim basis only. First, I am working with several of my colleagues to develop legislation that will prioritize DOE cleanups in accordance with actual risks. That approach will result in Hanford and Savannah River being cleaned up faster, since many of the high-risk problems are located there. Second, I am encouraging the privatization of efforts to vitrify--or turn into glass--high-level liquid wastes at Hanford. This is the best way to stabilize the liquid tanks and make them safe. Third, we are offering new construction and economic activity associated with the construction and operation of an interim, above ground, dry cask storage site. This will help address the job losses and economic declines associated with the end of defense-related activities at Hanford and Savannah River. Fourth, there are other arrangements, including financial incentives, that can be considered. Whether or not DOE continues to exist as a Cabinet-level agency, its functions and operations will be significantly scaled back. As the various DOE sites compete for the remaining missions, special consideration could be given to a site that hosts the interim storage facility. Other benefits to communities agreeing to host an interim storage site can also be discussed. Finally, to provide assurances to the local communities of Richland/ Pasco/Kennewick, WA; Aiken, SC; and Augusta, GA, that the interim dry cask storage sites are not intended to be permanent, work on Yucca Mountain will be continued. Remember, there is already spent nuclear fuel at these sites that is destined for a permanent geologic repository, when one is available. It is in the long-term interest of these facilities to participate in a program that will take care of the immediate problem so that the work on the permanent repository can go forward. In addition to selecting a site, there are four elements that we should include in a legislative bill dealing with spent nuclear fuel. First, in order to construct a central interim storage facility in a timely manner, changes must be made in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. These amendments should provide: that licensing of an interim storage facility can begin immediately; that the interim dry cask storage site can be constructed incrementally and that waste acceptance can begin as sections are completed; that the NRC will be the sole licensing authority; short-term renewable licenses to ease NRC rulemaking; and that DOE will be treated like a private licensee. Second, to help ensure that the spent fuel can be moved from reactor sites to interim storage as soon as possible, a transportation system must be developed. Legislative changes would provide: that utilities are responsible for obtaining casks; that DOE will take title to fuel at reactor site; that DOE will be responsible for delivery; and a clear regulatory regime related to the transportation of spent fuel. Third, to ensure that Yucca can be licensed, we should streamline licensing provisions, specifying repository performance standards. Finally, fourth, a budgetary framework must be established that ensures that the money put into the Nuclear Waste Fund by the ratepayers is available to the program in amounts sufficient to achieve the first three goals in a timely and efficient way. These draft proposals outline a workable and efficient interim storage program that would allow us to pursue the investigation of our permanent disposal options, including a full study of the Yucca Mountain site. However, one lesson we have learned is that we cannot put all of our eggs in one basket. We cannot solve every nuclear waste and spent fuel issue before this country in this Congress. However, we can set up the beginnings of a workable, integrated nuclear waste management system that will allow succeeding generations to apply new technologies to these problems. In conclusion, I have given a basic outline of principles Congress must address if we are to solve these two major environmental problems. As chairman of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, I pledge to continue our goal of reaching a common sense and comprehensive solution. We'd like to do that with the help of President Clinton and his Department of Energy. So far, I have not seen sufficient indication they really want to be a part of any solution. Unfortunately, this issue is not one where America can be without leadership. I will look forward to working with all of those who have an interest and concerns to resolve what is undoubtedly one of America's most frightening problems, the management of waste left at DOE defense weapons facilities, while providing a legislative framework for DOE to meet its obligation to take possession of the Nation's civilian spent nuclear fuel.

Mr. MURKOWSKI

Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, today I am introducing on behalf of myself and Senator Stevens legislation to address a serious national need--the condition and availability of military family housing for the Armed Forces of the United States, including the Coast Guard. The condition of the family housing for our military personnel has deteriorated to the point where it is a serious disincentive to reenlistment and a threat to long-term military readiness. According to a March 7, 1995 article in the Washington Post: ``Defense Secretary William J. Perry cites the poor condition of military housing as the number one complaint he hears from soldiers on visits to bases.'' ``. . . 60% of the 375,000 on base family housing units are inadequate . . .'' ``Many barracks and family apartments, built soon after World War II, are cramped and suffer from peeling lead-based paint, hazardous asbestos, cracked foundations, corroding pipes or faulty heating and cooling systems.'' Mr. President, this is clearly a shameful situation that we can and should address. The Washington Post article I cited goes on to point out the need for a system to attract private investment to help rebuild or replace America's military housing. That is the approach of the legislation I am introducing today. Mr. President, in Alaska we have successfully used private developers to build 1,216 units of critically needed military family housing, including 666 units of Air Force housing at Eielson Air Force Base, and 550 units of Army housing at Fort Wainwright. This was accomplished under the authority of section 801 of Public Law 98-115, a provision I authored in 1983 along with Senator Tower and Representative Charlie Stenholm of Texas. Today I am urging that we revise and extend that law to encourage its use for today's housing needs in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard. While there is still build-lease authority in 10 U.S.C. 2828, it is my understanding that little or no new housing has actually been constructed under the provisions of the statute as currently written due to the manner in which proposed projects are scored for budgetary purposes by the Congressional Budget Office [CBO]. There are also other constraints in the current statutory language, such as the requirement that the housing be off-base, that work to the detriment of successful projects. Mr. President, in Ketchikan, AK the Coast Guard tells me that there is a serious need for new housing. However, they do not believe that they can provide this for their personnel due to budgetary constraints. By providing the authority to lease or construct on or near a military installation I believe we will reduce the cost of providing housing as many of the needed infrastructure support systems, that is, water, sewer, electricity, will already be in place. The approach I advocate, and the approach in the legislation I am introducing today, is simple and cost effective. The military services would invite the private sector to build housing to military specifications on land already belonging to the Federal Government, preferably on base or on Government property. Under my approach, the military service can also contract for maintenance, providing the developer with an added incentive to construct easy-to-maintain housing. The private developer builds the housing, leases it back to the military for the contract lease price including any inflation factors specified in the contract, for a lease term not to exceed 20 years. At the end of the 20 years, the United States has the right of first refusal to purchase the housing for its own purposes. As a practical matter, I'd expect the purchase to occur at little additional cost. Since the land the housing is on belongs to the Government, and since access to the housing and the base can be stipulated, any on-base housing would only be of value to the Federal Government. My approach also codifies the requirement that the housing projects be competitively bid, and that the committees of jurisdiction in the House and Senate have an opportunity to review the economic justifications for the projects prior to final award. Finally, Mr. President, my legislation directs that the total amount of budget authority and outlays required by the build-lease contract shall be scored on a pro rata basis over the term of the contract for purposes of CBO scoring. While some may dislike this provision, experience has demonstrated its necessity. Mr. President, I ask that the article from the Washington Post and the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. MURKOWSKI

Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the full Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will take place Tuesday, June 13, 1995 at 9:30 a.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, D.C. The purpose of this hearing is to receive testimony on S. 755, a bill to amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to provide for the privatization of the United States Enrichment Corporation. Those wishing to testify or who wish to submit written statements should write to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC. 20510. For further information, please call David Garman of the Committee Staff at (202) 224-7933.

Mr. MURKOWSKI

Mr. MURKOWSKI. How much time is remaining on our side?

Mr. MURKOWSKI. I yield 6 minutes to my friend from Oklahoma.

Mr. MURKOWSKI. How much time is remaining on this side?

Mr. MURKOWSKI. I thank the Chair. I would yield such time as the Senator from Maine may need on the available time.

Mr. MURKOWSKI

Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I am glad to see that amendment offered by the Senator from Delaware to strike a major source of new Federal revenues from the budget resolution was rejected by my colleagues. This source of new revenue is $2.3 billion from competitive bonus bids from leasing the oil and gas resources of an area in the northeast part of my State. This is an issue that is important to my State and to our Nation. This vote to keep those funds in the budget resolution is a clear indication that my colleagues would like to see the revenues from the leasing of this area considered in context of the budget deficit reduction effort. Together with the other members of the Alaska delegation I opposed this amendment. The amendment was also opposed by the Inupiat Eskimo people who live on the North Slope; by the local government for this region, the North Slope Borough; by the Eskimo-owned Arctic Slope Regional Corp.; by the State of Alaska; by our Governor Tony Knowles, and by an overwhelming majority of Alaskans. Mr. President, I want to review the history and the potentially huge benefits that opening the coastal plain to oil and gas leasing can provide to the Nation. In the 1980 Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act Congress withdrew more than 19 million acres in northeast Alaska, 8 million acres were designated wilderness and another 11 million acres nonwilderness refuge lands. However, under section 1002 of that act Congress set aside about 1.5 million acres to study for oil potential. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the oil and gas values and the fish and wildlife values of this area. In April 1987 the Department of the Interior released the legislative environmental impact statement and coastal plain report to the Congress. This led to the recommendation of the Secretary of the Interior to open the 1002 area to oil and gas leasing. Let me quote from the report: The 1002 area is the Nation's best single opportunity to increase significantly domestic oil production. It is rated by geologists as the most outstanding petroleum exploration target in the onshore United States. Data from nearby wells in the Prudhoe Bay area and in the Canadian Beaufort Sea and Mackenzie Delta, combined with promising seismic data gathered on the 1002 area, indicate extensions of producing trends and other geologic conditions exceptionally favorable for discovery of one or more supergiant fields (larger than 500 million barrels). There is a 19-percent chance that economically recoverable oil occurs in the 1002 area. The average of all estimates of conditional economically recoverable oil resources (the ``mean'') is 3.2 billion barrels. Based on this estimate, 1002 area production by the year 2005 could provide 4 percent of total U.S. demand; provide 8 percent of U.S. production (about 660,000 barrels/day); and reduce imports by nearly 9 percent. This production could provide net national economic benefits of $79.4 billion, including Federal revenues of $38.0 billion. The report continues: Discovery of 9.2 billion barrels of oil could yield production of more than 1.5 million barrels per day. Estimates of net national economic benefits based on 9.2 billion barrels of oil production, and other economic assumptions, are as high as $325 billion. On April 8, 1991, the Department of the Interior issued a formal update of the recoverable petroleum reserves 1987 study and report. The major finding from the update was that the probability of economic success of finding commercial oil in the 1002 area was increased from 19 percent to 46 percent. [[Page S7344]] Let me place this in context. The probability of finding oil in the lower 48 States in an unexplored area is about 1 percent. As a result, 46 percent is unprecedented. Mr. President, let me quote from the 1991 update: The 1991 update of recoverable petroleum resources in the 1987 Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska Coastal Plain Assessment, also known as the 1002 Report, makes a considerable contribution to the knowledge and understanding of the petroleum geology of the 1002 area of the Arctic National Wildlife Rufuge (ANWR). This study reaffirms most of the conclusions and estimates made in the 1002 Report, and increases the level of confidence that ANWR is part of the North Slope oil province. This is demonstrated by the increase in the marginal probability of economic success from 19 percent in the original assessment to 46 percent in the current assessment. The increase in marginal probability means that ANWR has a higher potential for oil discovery. The overall Minimum Economic Field Size (MEFS) for the 1002 area has been lowered from about 0.44 billion barrels of oil (BBO) to about 0.40 BBO. The mean resource estimate has increased from 3.23 to 3.57 BBO.'' Mr. President, since this 1991 update, a number of new wells have been drilled near the 1002 area. A large number discovered oil and gas. Some of these wells may be commercial oil- fields. These discoveries reflect very favorably on the prospect that the coastal plain contains major reserves of oil and gas. As the reports quoted above make clear, the economic benefits of the coastal plains oil and gas reserves far exceed the $2.3 billion assumed in the pending budget resolution. The 1987 report notes that a discovery of 3.2 billion barrels of oil would produce net national economic benefits of $79.4 billion, including new Federal revenues of $38 billion. A discovery of 9.2 billion barrels would yield net national economic benefits of $325 billion and new Federal revenues of around $150 billion over the life of the oil fields. The Department of Energy and Wharton Econometrics have done independent studies which project that leasing the coastal plain could create 250,000 to 732,000 new direct and indirect jobs in all 50 of our States. Mr. President, in addition to providing a major stimulus to the economy and creating new jobs, opening the 1002 area will allow my State to continue to produce 25 percent or more of the Nation's domestic oil for an additional 30 or 40 more years. This is very important because Prudhoe Bay is now in decline. Since 1990, oil production has fallen from 2 million barrels a day to 1.6 million barrels a day. Every barrel of oil produced in Alaska is a barrel the United States does not have to buy abroad. Senator Henry M. ``Scoop'' Jackson authored the Alaska Statehood Act and the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971. Senator Jackson was a tough, no nonsense moderate Democrat. He was fair. He was accessible. He was informed. And he was balanced. Senator Jackson heard from all of the special interest groups, but he made his own decisions, based upon all of the facts and the interest of people and of the Nation. Jackson, along with the senior Senator from Alaska, authored the legislation to open Prudhoe Bay to oil production by authorizing the Trans Alaska Pipeline Act in 1973. In the face of major opposition from the national environmental organizations, this legislation was adopted. As a result, the Nation has enjoyed two decades of major economic benefits. Scoop also worked out the compromise that was reached which led to the study and report authorized in section 1002. The reason the 1.5 million acres was set aside was to consider the great oil potential in the area. Scoop included the provision of the national security concerns associated with our country being reliant on foreign oil. We are more reliant on foreign oil than ever before. We imported more than 50 percent of our oil consumption for the first time in 1994. Mr. President, the opposition to opening the coastal plain to oil and gas leasing comes from the leaders of some of the Nation's large environmental organizations. My view is that the leaders of these organizations are misguided and poorly informed. I suspect that their opposition has more to do with ``fundraising'' objectives than it does with ``wilderness'' values. The leaders of the environmental community have invested a great deal of time, effort, and money in the Gwich'in Indian steering committee. The steering committee is composed of some of the 400 Athabascan Indians who live in two villages on the Venetie Indian Reservation. The steering committee opposes opening the coastal plain. They are concerned that leasing and development might, in some unknown way, adversely impact the porcupine caribou herd. This herd of 160,000 animals annually migrates between Canada and the United States. In some years, the herd uses the southern portion of the coastal plain for forage and calving. Last year, North Slope Eskimos and Athabascan Indians took about 380 caribou from this herd of 160,000 animals for subsistence uses. I respect the right of the Gwich'in steering committee to oppose resource development in the coastal plain. It is a decision, however, which is contrary to experience at Prudhoe Bay and elsewhere in the Arctic. Caribou are very adaptable. At Prudhoe Bay, the central Arctic caribou herd is flourishing with oil development. Since oil was discovered in Prudhoe Bay the central Arctic caribou herd has increased from 3,000 to 23,000 animals. Further, the Gwich'in steering committees opposition to oil and gas leasing is a new development. In 1980 the Gwich'in people of Arctic village and Venetie villages leased all of the lands in their 1.7 million acre reservation to the Rouget Oil Co. of Tulsa, OK. This 20- page oil and gas lease did not contain any meaningful provisions to protect the porcupine caribou herd. This herd migrates annually through or near the Venetie Reservation. Yet, the Gwich'in leased all of their lands for $1.8 million on the basis that oil exploration and oil development would not adversely impact the herds well-being. I believe this leasing decision by the Gwich'in was correct. It is supported by studies of caribou and oil industry experience elsewhere, including Alaska's North Slope. In 1984, the Gwich'in people hired a consultant to lease their reservation lands a second time after the Rouget Oil Co. oil and gas lease expired. And again, no concerns were expressed by the Gwich'in about any adverse impact on caribou. The North Slope Inupiat Eskimo people are now asking for the same opportunity the Gwich'in had in the 1980's. They regret and I regret that the oil company that Gwich'in leased their lands to did not discover major reserves of oil and gas on their lands. The North Slope Eskimo people want the same right to do as the Gwich'in did in 1980. They want the right to explore the 92,000 acres of land they own at Kaktovik along with the surrounding Federal lands. And if these lands contain oil and gas in commercial amounts, they want the right to develop their land. Mr. President, I am glad to see that the amendment from my colleagues from Delaware was defeated. We now can proceed with consideration of responsible oil and gas exploration and development of the best prospect for a major oil find in North America. Amendment No. 1151 (Purpose: To restore funding for agriculture and nutrition programs)

Mr. MURKOWSKI

Mr. MURKOWSKI. I thank the Chair. I apologize to my colleagues. (The foregoing tally has been changed to reflect the above order.)

Mr. MURKOWSKI. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, on rollcall vote No. 178, I am embarrassed to say that I voted yes. It was my intention to vote no. I have been a proponent of the position of no. Therefore, I would ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to change my vote. This will in no way change the outcome of the vote. [[Page S7199]]

Mr. MURKOWSKI. I yield the balance of my time to the Senator from New Mexico.

Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I wonder if the Senator from Iowa would yield for a unanimous-consent request in regard to a vote.

Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, let me commend my good friend from Wisconsin, Senator Feingold, for offering this amendment. I certainly support the idea that we can do more in deficit reduction and that a tax cut is ill-advised. However, I must reluctantly oppose the pending amendment. Mr. President, the Senate Budget Committee, I think we agree, has performed a very remarkable job in putting this budget resolution together. Senator Domenici and the staff of the majority and the staff of the minority have worked in good faith, and I think they have fulfilled the commitment that everyone of us in this body has made when he or she voted for the balanced budget amendment earlier this year. We have demonstrated that we can balance the budget and put our Nation's fiscal house on the road to solvency. Now, in addition to the savings that will occur under this budget resolution, the Congressional Budget Office has projected that a credible reduction in the deficit by the year 2002 would produce a fiscal dividend for the Federal treasury. We are all in agreement on that. CBO estimates that interest rates would be 1 to 2 percent lower, and real GNP would be nearly 1 percent higher by the year 2002 if we achieve a balanced budget. Now, because of these two factors, CBO estimates that we would reap a fiscal dividend of some $170 billion over a 7-year period, and as much as a $356 billion dividend over 10 years. The issue that has divided many Members on both sides of the aisle, and is the subject of this debate, is what should we do with this financial windfall if indeed there is one? During the debate we have been confronted with two specific choices. One, using the dividend to increase Federal spending, or, two, using the dividend to provide accord on either proposal. The amendment being offered by my friend from Wisconsin would use the fiscal dividend to further reduce the deficit and, as a consequence of that--and this is the discomfort I have--it would absolutely preclude any possibility of a tax cut for this year. I really believe that this is the wrong time for the Senate to completely close off the tax reduction option--I emphasize option--at this time. Despite what many Members on the other side have said, this budget resolution--and I emphasize this--does not mandate a tax cut. In fact, there is no specific tax cut in this plan. What this budget resolution says is that if all of the committees in Congress adopt reconciliation legislation that produces a balanced budget in the year 2002 and if--I emphasize ``if''--that reconciliation legislation makes it through a conference committee--and that is a big ``if''--and then is signed into law by the President, then and only then may Congress consider reducing taxes. The CBO will have to certify that the reconciliation legislation does, in fact, produce a balanced budget. That is, CBO must certify that the budget is balanced in the year 2002. CBO will have to provide an estimate of how much additional savings will be achieved through lower interest rates and increased economic growth. CBO may determine that the savings are as projected, $170 billion; on the other hand, they may be lower or higher. Once CBO has provided that savings estimate, only then can Congress consider cutting taxes. Obviously, we do not necessarily know what interest rates might be. In any event, in the Senate, the decision whether to cut taxes is going to be first made by one committee. That is the Finance Committee, and that is a committee that I serve on. As a consequence, in the Finance Committee, I intend to make every effort to convince my colleagues on the committee that the CBO economic dividend should be used for further deficit reduction rather than tax cuts. Mr. President, if this amendment by my good friend from Wisconsin is adopted, and if we completely foreclose the future option of reducing taxes, this Senator, the Senator from Alaska, is concerned that this balanced budget resolution may not receive a sufficient number of votes to pass this body. I believe it would be far worse for our Nation's economic health if we fail at this effort to bring the deficit to zero than it would be if we merely retained the longer-term option of reducing taxes. It is for that reason, Mr. President, that I must reluctantly oppose the amendment of the Senator from Wisconsin. Mr. President, how much time is remaining on this side?

Mr. MURKOWSKI

Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public the scheduling of 3 days of field hearings in Alaska before the full Committee on Energy and Natural Resources regarding the implementation of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act and the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act. The first hearing will take place on Wednesday, May 31, 1995, beginning at 1:30 p.m. in the auditorium of the Anchorage Museum of History and Art, 121 W. Seventh Avenue, Anchorage, AK 99501. The committee will receive testimony on the regulation of the use of Federal lands by inholders, miners, guides, tour operators, hunters, fishermen, and others who had access and use rights protected by the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act. The second hearing will be held on Thursday, June 1, 1995, beginning at 12:30 p.m. at the Elks Club, Wrangell, AK. Testimony will be received on the impact of administration of the Tongass National Forest on the timber dependent communities and opportunities for economic recovery. The third hearing will be held on Friday, June 2, 1995, beginning at 1:30 p.m. in the Pioneer room of the Carlson Center, 2010 Second Avenue, Fairbanks, AK 99701. Testimony will be received on the regulation of the use of Federal lands by inholders, miners, guides, tour operators, hunters, fishermen, and others who had access and use rights protected by the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act. Because of the limited time available for the hearings, witnesses may testify by invitation only. It will be necessary to place witnesses in panels and place time limits on oral testimony. Witnesses testifying at the hearings are requested to bring three copies of their testimony with them on the day of the hearing. Please do not submit testimony in advance of the hearing. The hearing record will remain open for 2 weeks following each hearing. If you wish to submit a written statement for the hearing record, please send one copy of your statement to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510. For further information regarding the hearings, please contact Andrew Lundquist or Mark Rey at 202-224-6170. subcommittee on forests and public land management

Mr. MURKOWSKI

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. 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 Kaloko-Honokohau, 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. [[Page S6832]] 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 [[Page 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.

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. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I introduced a bill, at the request of the [[Page S6810]] administration, to amend the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation Act of 1972, to authorize appropriations for implementation of the development plan for Pennsylvania Avenue between the Capitol and the White House, and for other purposes. The bill, when enacted, would authorize appropriations for salaries and expenses for the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation [PADC] for fiscal years 1996 and 1997. PADC is the agency which is responsible for the revitalization of the Pennsylvania area between the White House and the Capitol. Since PADC was created by an act of Congress in 1972, it has achieved notable success in transforming America's Main Street from ``a scene of desolation,'' in the words of a Presidential commission formed in the late 1960's to study the condition of the avenue, to a great boulevard worthy of its role in the Nation's history and its place in the center of the Nation's Capital City. PADC is a successful example of how Government can work in partnership with the private sector to achieve beneficial results for both. Since PADC's work began, it has spent $120 million in appropriations to build new parks, plazas, sidewalks, and other kinds of improvements to the public areas and attracted over $1.5 billion in private investment to the blocks on the north side of Pennsylvania Avenue. From the Willard Hotel to the Canadian Embassy, virtually every one of the buildings that one sees in walking or driving down the avenue from the Treasury Building to the Capitol has been constructed or restored since PADC began its block development program in 1978, guided by a master plan approved by Congress in 1975. Now over 20 privately funded office, retail, hotel, and residential structures border a public thoroughfare improved with seven parks and plazas and widened sidewalks. With only a few blocks remaining uncommitted for development, PADC is close to finishing its master plan and is scheduled to terminate operation at the end of fiscal year 1997. The bill I am introducing, by request of the administration, will allow the PADC's 27-person staff to complete its original mission to economically revitalize and beautify Pennsylvania Avenue. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that additional material be printed in the Record.

Mr. MURKOWSKI

Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to, and I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 1104

Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.