Richard Shelby

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I want to talk with the majority leader and others on this before we agree to a time limit. I suggest the absence of a quorum at this point.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I rise at this time to engage in a colloquy with the subcommittee chairman, the Senator from Missouri. I am concerned about what I feel is an apparent inconsistency and inequity created by two separate and conflicting actions that occurred last May. One was EPA issuing a final rule implementing a consent decree under section 126 of the Clean Air Act that is triggered in essence by EPA not approving the NOX SIP call revisions of 22 states and the District of Columbia by November 30, 1999. The other was by the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in issuing an order staying the requirement imposed in EPA's 1998 NOX SIP Call for these jurisdictions to submit the SIP revisions just mentioned for EPA approval. Caught in the middle of these two events are electric utilities and industrial sources who fear that now the trigger will be sprung next November 30, even though the States are no longer required to make those SIP revisions because of the stay, and even though EPA will have nothing before it to approve or disapprove. Prior to this, EPA maintained a close link between the NOX SIP Call and the section 126 rule, as evidenced by the consent decree. I believe a parallel stay would be appropriate in the circumstance. EPA should not be moving forward with its NOX regulations until the litigation is complete and those affected are given more certainty and clarity as to what is required under the law. A stay is very much needed, especially in light of EPA's more recent comments suggesting that is may reverse its earlier interpretation of the Clean Air Act regarding State discretion in dealing with interstate ozone transport problems. The effect of such a reversal would be to force businesses to comply with EPA's Federal emission controls under Section 126 without regard to NOX SIP Call rule and State input. The proposed reversal is creating tremendous confusion for the businesses and the States. Under EPA's proposed new position, businesses could incur substantial costs in meeting the EPA-imposed section 126 emission controls before allowing the States to use their discretion in the SIP process to address air quality problems, less stringent controls or through controls on other facilities altogether. Indeed, the fact that these businesses almost certainly will have sunk significant costs into compliance with the EPA-imposed controls before States are required to submit their emission control plans in response to the NOX SIP Call rule would result in impermissible pressure on their States to forfeit their discretion and instead simply conform their SIPs to EPA section 126 controls. The bottom line is that not only do the States and business community not know what EPA is doing, EPA doesn't know what it is doing. This is hardly a desirable regulatory posture for what clearly is promising to be a very costly and burdensome regulation. Let's be clear what the law is and what it requires, before rather than after the EPA writes and enforces its rules. I think that is a reasonable expectation and a reasonable requirement that the EPA should be able to meet. Does the chairman agree with me that the EPA should find a reasonable way to avoid triggering the 126 process while the courts deliberate and we have a better understanding of what the law requires States and businesses to do to be in compliance?

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to Mr. Jack Warner, the former Chairman and CEO of Gulf States Paper Corporation. I recognize him for the contributions that he and his wife, Elizabeth, have made to Tuscaloosa and the surrounding community. A man of strong character and a wealth of old-fashioned common sense, Jack Warner has persevered and triumphed no matter what the challenge; through wars, labor strikes, and tough financial and personal circumstances. Through it all, he has remained steadfast in his beliefs and a pioneer from which others might draw inspiration. He has made tough business decisions over the years, and through it all has kept Gulf States Paper privately owned, a challenging endeavor when so many other companies have felt the pressure to go public. His gritty determination has led to financial success, which has helped him to pursue his many philanthropic interests and also allowed him to give back to the Tuscaloosa community. It was through many obstacles and achievements that Jack Warner developed the strong character and firm convictions that are with him today. A graduate of Culver Military Academy in Culver, Indiana in 1936, he moved on to college at Washington & Lee University to pursue a degree in business administration. Following graduation, he promptly enlisted in the U.S. Army to perform what he saw as his duty to serve the country. As a commissioned officer with the Mars Task Force in the Burma theater of operations, he served the United States in exemplary fashion. Assigned in the Army's last horse-mounted unit, his calvary outfit was sent to India to pack supplies along the Burma trail. Once there, Jack Warner's unit was confronted with difficulties and obstacles which would have taken the spirit out of most men. Jack persevered, however, and his regiment ended up making a significant contribution to the War effort. This short episode in the life of Mr. Warner encapsulates his great spirit and will. He has always demonstrated persistence through adversity, and a commitment to get the job done right. Perhaps it is this quality which has led to the astonishing success of Jack Warner's business endeavors. During his tenure as President and Chairman of the Board of Gulf States Paper Corporation, the company experienced enormous growth. The business which has become synonymous with his name today enjoys a very healthy portfolio. This success has paved the way for many other business ventures and activities for Jack. He is the past director of the American Paper Institute, the past chairman and three-term president of the Alabama Chamber of Commerce, the past two-term president of the Greater Tuscaloosa Chamber of Commerce, a Director of the First Alabama Bank of Tuscaloosa, a past director of the Alabama Great Southern Railroad Company, a past director of the First National Bank of Tuscaloosa, just to name a few. He is truly a fixture in the Tuscaloosa business community. Jack Warner has not taken his tremendous business success for granted. In fact, he has used his position in the community to become actively involved in the growth and development of Tuscaloosa. Through his efforts, he has made a tremendous impact on Tuscaloosa and the surrounding area. His numerous civic activities attest to his unyielding commitment towards improving the community in which he lives. A few of his current civic activities include membership in the Mount Vernon Advisory Committee, the Decorative Arts Trust Board of Governors, active Director of the University Club of Tuscaloosa, Commodore of the North River Yacht Club, as well as Elder in the First Presbyterian Church of Tuscaloosa. His former activities include a term as the Chairman of the Alabama Council on Economic Education, President of the YMCA of Metropolitan Tuscaloosa, President of the Druid City Hospital Foundation, as well as a member of the National Board of the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C. He has received numerous honors and awards for his efforts, including the Distinguished Achievement Award from the President's Cabinet at the University of Alabama, the Frances G. Summersell Award from the University of Alabama, the Lifetime Achievement Award from the Alabama State Council on the Arts, the Lifetime Achievement Award from the Greater Tuscaloosa Chamber of Commerce, the Lifetime Preservation Achievement Award from the Tuscaloosa County Preservation Society, and induction into the Alabama Business Hall of Fame. Jack Warner has truly been an integral part in all aspects of the Tuscaloosa community. It is with great pleasure that I recognize his efforts and rise in tribute to all that he has done for Tuscaloosa and the state of Alabama. His commitment and sense of civic duty is greatly appreciated.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. SHELBY. I urge adoption of the amendment.

Mr. SHELBY. We have examined it, and we have no problem with it.

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, is the pending business the Lautenberg amendment that was just offered?

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. SHELBY. No objection.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. I will be happy to yield to the senior Senator from Georgia for a question.

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I ask the Chair to lay before the Senate amendments numbered 1673, 1667, and 1666, as modified.

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, we are trying to get to the end of the Transportation appropriations bill. I think we are close. Maybe we can wind it up in just a few minutes and get a vote. In the meantime, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SHELBY. I am aware of this project, and would like to strongly recommend that the FAA give priority consideration to this request for discretionary funding. The Grants-In-Aid for Airports program is designed to provide federal assistance to airports like the Upper Cumberland Regional Airport for vital safety enhancements and other improvements as my friend from Tennessee mentioned.

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I commend my friend and colleague, the former chairman of the committee, the ranking Democrat, Senator Lautenberg, and his staff. I believe, as he said, we worked a lot of hours, but our staff has put in, together, many more hours. I want to recognize and thank Wally Burnett, who is the staff director on the subcommittee, also Peter Rogoff whom Senator Lautenberg has just mentioned, Elizabeth Letchworth, Jay Kimmitt, Joyce Rose, Paul Doerrer, Steve Cortese, and all the others who contributed to this. We think we have a pretty good bill. We have to go to conference and work it out. Let's hope we can do it. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I now move the Senate insist on its amendments, request a conference with the House, and that the Chair appoint the conferees on the part of the Senate.

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote and I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I understand there are no further amendments to the bill. Therefore, we are prepared for third reading. I ask that the Senate now proceed to a vote on passage of the Transportation Appropriations bill. I ask for the yeas and nays on passage.

Mr. SHELBY. It does appear that the Center stands apart from other research programs by tackling the pollution mixtures problem directly. In my view, this effort is worthy of support by the Department. I will work with you as the FY 2000 spending plan for the Department is implemented to encourage the Agency to respond to our recommendation.

Mr. SHELBY. I would be pleased to discuss the potential of this Center's research initiative as part of the FY 2000 Department of Transportation spending plan. The Committee has recognized funding for this initiative within our Committee report, both under the Department's multi-disciplinary research account and in the Federal Highway Administration.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Yes.

Mr. SHELBY. We are close to completing that. We are hoping to wind that up in the next few minutes.

Mr. SHELBY. That starts Tuesday, September 21.

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate considers the conference report to accompany the DOD authorization bill, the conference report be considered as having been read. I further ask that there be 2 hours for debate, to be equally divided between Senators Warner and Levin or their designees, and following the conclusion or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to vote on adoption of the conference report, without any intervening action or debate. I further ask consent that the Senate consideration of the conference report not be in order prior to 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, September 21, 1999.