Ralph Regula

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I would say to the gentleman from Colorado, a member of the committee, this is exactly the type of situation or provision that we put in which the subcommittee bill is intended to address. The Forest Service could, if they chose, designate Mt. Evans as one of the sites for collection of fees, and could contract with the State of Colorado, or any other private or public entity, for the provision of visitor services. I would hope that this will happen many places. That is the goal of this provision in the bill, is to allow flexibility in the services to contract, privatize, to provide in the most efficient way services to the visitors.

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

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I have a point of order against the amendment. However, Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will withdraw his amendment, I will withdraw the point of order.

Mr. REGULA. Certainly if it is a high priority, as I understand it, in the Forest Service, then it is very possible that they would feel that the circumstances surrounding this purchase qualified as an emergency, and it is possible they could bring that to the appropriate subcommittees for approval. However, as I said earlier, the budget has a moratorium on land acquisition. We did not provide any earmarks on land acquisition, recognizing that these are not imperative, but we also recognize there will be emergency opportunities that should be exercised in land acquisition for a variety of reasons. I think each project will have to stand on its own merits as to whether it qualifies under the emergency conditions.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding that certain funds will be available in this bill for emergency land acquisitions, and I have to emphasize ``emergency.'' These acquisitions could possibly include the area mentioned in the gentleman's opening statement that involves Big Sur. The determination would have to be made by the Forest Service as to whether this truly constituted an emergency. The Forest Service then would have to submit a request to the committee, the Subcommittee on Interior of the Committee on Appropriations in both the Senate and the House for approval as provided in the emergency land acquisition legislation in the bill.

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

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I take this time to explain to the Members what the program will be for the balance of the evening. The leadership on both sides have reached an agreement to continue to debate all amendments to Title II and close out Title II, but the votes on Title II, there is one pending and this one I am sure will be pending and any others, votes on Title II amendments will all be rolled over to tomorrow. So for the Members that are interested, there will be no more votes tonight. The House meets on Tuesday at 10 a.m., and the order will be 1 minute; then we are going to do the rule on Treasury-Post Office, and Treasury general debate tomorrow, and then we will return to Interior. We will do the votes that have been rolled over from tonight. There are approximately four or five amendments left for title II. Then we will, of course, finish title III and complete the bill tomorrow. Mr. Chairman, this is an agreement that has been reached by leadership on both sides, and I will say at this point two things. Any Members who have colloquies, it would be helpful if we could do those tonight to save time tomorrow. Second, I would ask unanimous consent, and this is just for information only, for myself and the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Yates] to each have 5 minutes before we do the roll-over votes to just refresh the information of all of the Members as to what votes will be coming up, because it will be a 15-minute plus the fives.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I respect the effort by a member of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Skaggs], and we have no objection to the amendment. We think it is logical. Under the circumstances, it does not have any impact on our 602(b) allocation.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I renew my point of order.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, my point of order is pending here. I do not think we can go to another amendment. And I renew my point of order against it.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, yes, I reserve my point of order.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I have a point of order against the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I strongly urge Members to vote against this amendment. It is good management and the only alternative we have.

Mr. REGULA. The gentleman is correct.

Mr. REGULA. The gentleman is correct.

Mr. REGULA. Reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for his comments.

Mr. REGULA. The gentleman is correct.

Mr. REGULA. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. REGULA. Reclaiming my time, just let me say again, the gentleman mentioned that there was no problem environmentally. There is a problem. This oil is stored in a salt cavern. The soil is leaching into the aquifer, so there is a problem. In the absence of being able to sell any of the oil, the Secretary may not be able to decommission Weeks Island. We may lose 70 million barrels instead of 7 to contamination. I have to say to you again, after the hearing, listening to the testimony, it was my judgment in putting together the chairman's mark that this was responsible management of SPR. I am an advocate of SPR.

Mr. REGULA. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, I feel like the Lone Ranger on this one. You notice there has been overwhelming support for it. I think I am the only one that has spoken, but as chairman of the committee, I am saying you have to make responsible judgments when you mark up a bill. This is what the Secretary of Energy said in the hearing. I said, ``What are the budget implications for the SPR program?'' I believe in SPR. I have been working for years in that committee to put oil in SPR, but what are the implications if you do not get authority to sell Weeks Island oil and use the proceeds? Answer, Secretary of Energy: If the Department does not obtain authority to sell 7 million barrels of Strategic Petroleum Reserve oil and use the proceeds, the Department would necessarily reduce Strategic Petroleum Reserve site security, reduce the guards, reduce the security, draw down readiness of delivery systems, machinery will be in disrepair, curtail maintenance and life extension activities and defer some Weeks Island decommissioning requirements.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes. Mr. Chairman, let me make it clear again, the last 7 million barrels cost us $17.50, not $33. That is a straw man. That is just put out there to confuse the issue. The real cost is $17.50. But the real cost in terms of national security will be a diminution of the ability to use the balance of the 583 million barrels of oil if we do not take care of the SPR facilities. The facilities are wearing out, and they need to be replaced. This is information I get from the Secretary of Energy. The SPR facilities, when called upon to respond to a national crisis, will not be able to do so. Because we do not have $100 million without the sale, therefore we have no choice but to take that $100 million out of the money designed to maintain SPR in top quality condition. It will have an enormous impact on the ability to use SPR in the future. I know this sounds easy to vote to not sell the oil and let somebody else worry about the $100 million. Somebody, I do not know exactly who, but I know what the Secretary of Energy will do. She will not be able to take care of SPR. Therefore, I think it would be a very poor judgment. I have no objection to the Committee on Rules bringing this out, even though it is subject to a point of order in protecting it. I think it is a very important policy issue. I think 435 Members ought to vote on it. If you want to let SPR deteriorate, vote for the amendment. If you want to maintain the facilities in first-class condition and not bust the budget, vote against the amendment. If you care about the environment, vote against the amendment, but these facilities are leaking at Weeks Island. There is agreement that we have to move the 70 million barrels to another location. It costs money to move that oil.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I would ask the gentleman, where does he suggest we get the $100 million to take care of the balance of the SPR facilities, the 583 million barrels that will be left?

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