Billy Tauzin

Mr. TAUZIN

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, it does not. These entities can continue to use their transmission rights as now allowed under the Federal Power Act.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan) is correct. It was not the intention of the conference committee for any provision to repeal the protections provided by section 212(j).

Mr. TAUZIN

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus), a member of the committee. (Mr. SHIMKUS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) (Mr. SHIMKUS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green), a member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. (Mr. GREEN of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means. (Mr. THOMAS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Virginia for his comments. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Gillmor), chairman of the Environment and Hazardous Materials Subcommittee of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. (Mr. GILLMOR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer).

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton).

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the distinguished member of our committee from the great State of Nebraska (Mr. Terry). (Mr. TERRY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce Energy Subcommittee to whom so much of this bill holds its origin and support. (Mr. BARTON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from the great State of Louisiana (Mr. McCrery), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from the state of New Jersey (Mr. Ferguson).

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, it is my understanding that this definition is intended to include crude oil intermediate refiners, as well under the definition included in section 1501 of the conference report.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), the distinguished majority leader of the House, for whom this conference owes a debt great of gratitude for his help and support.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman's understanding is perfectly correct.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton) is correct. That authority is in section 1504. It is intended that the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency have the authority to prohibit the use of MTBE in gasoline after December 31, 2014. Prior to this time, under section 1505 the National Academy of Sciences shall conduct a review of the use of MTBE in 2013 and 2014. This study is to inform regulations to enact the allowed prohibition on MTBE as well as to inform the President who retains power, under section 1505, to not ban MTBE.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman is correct again. ETBE is included within the definition of a renewable fuel. The conference report attempts to provide maximum flexibility to the refining marketplace to achieve the goals of both the new renewable fuels requirement and, therefore, ETBE is both defined and afforded all the advantages of a renewable fuel under Title XV.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Fossella), a member of the committee.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, like any conference report of this magnitude, as a committee chairman you cannot ever do it alone. There are far too many people to thank, and I apologize for that; but let me single out a few people. The subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton). He has done an amazing job for this House and for this country and deserves a great deal of thanks. I want to thank my good friend, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell). I suspect we will not be voting the same way today, but in every step of the process he has been a gentleman. He has earned, as he always does, my great respect and admiration. I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Boucher), a member of our committee, the ranking member on the Subcommittee on Energy whose keen intellect is only exceeded by his desire to work for bipartisan solutions. He spoke today in favor of this bill. I want to thank my fellow committee chairmen. We had a remarkable 10 committees of outside jurisdiction in this conference. That is without precedent. And without their cooperation we would not be here today. Let me thank the staff. For 3 years now we have lived and breathed energy, and they have lived and breathed it with us. First of all, staff director Dan Brouillette; chief energy counsel, Mark Menezes; my own staffer, Garrett Graves; Bob Meyers, Bill Cooper, Andy Black, Jason Bentley, Sean Cunningham, Jerry Couri, Kelly Zerzan, Dwight Cates, Jim Barnette, our counsel, Kathleen Weldon, Jennifer Robertson, Jackie Lissau, Mary Ellen Grant and Peter Kielty. These staffs burn more midnight oil than you can imagine. They deserve the great gratitude of this House and this Nation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to yield the balance of the time to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), the distinguished Speaker of the House, a gentleman who has led our House with fairness, dignity and civility for many years now.

Mr. TAUZIN. Paul Gillmor and I make the following joint statement. The Committee on Energy and Commerce exercises exclusive jurisdiction over the protection of drinking water and groundwater sources. As a result, we believe it is essential that certain provisions in this bill be clarified. The first area in the conference report to H.R. 6 that we wish to provide further guidance on is section 327, relating to hydraulic fracturing. Section 327 is meant to set the record straight on and clarify any lingering questions regarding the proper role of the states in overseeing the use of this technology. Of course, nothing in the language should be construed as affecting the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's emergency authority under section 1431 of the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300i. On another topic, we feel strongly that sound, quality research on groundwater is the best way to contain existing problems and prevent future ones. There are many sections in the conference report to H.R. 6 that call upon the scientific expertise of our nation to understand and aid our national effort to safeguard our natural resources. For instance, section 961 relates to arsenic in groundwater, and there are projects authorized in Subtitle E of Title IX. When evaluating institutions and resources outside of the Federal community to aid in this work, we strongly encourage the use of the Water Quality Laboratory at Heidelberg College in Tiffin, Ohio. Heidelberg College has operated this lab for 33 years and has upgraded monitoring, research, and educational activities. In fact, the work done there is nationally and internationally recognized for the quality of its research and the great detail of its databases on water quality. The Water Quality Laboratory's well water program has a specific specialty in focusing on private rural well conditions. On several occasions, the lab has provided the majority of the data available to examine regional or national water quality issues and implications for environmental and human health concerns. Both government and industry frequently consult this facility for its expertise in the interpretation of water quality data, and we recommend its use for these purposes as well.

Mr. TAUZIN

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, let me first indicate that, of course, I am rising in strong support of H.R. 2898, the E-911 Implementation Act of 2003. House bill 2898 has already passed the House Committee on Energy and Commerce; and it did so unanimously, as one might expect. Mr. Speaker, it is important we commend the authors, first of all. I want to congratulate the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo) for this incredibly important legislation. I obviously want to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton), the chairman of the subcommittee, who has done such a great job, along with the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the ranking member, in moving this bill forward. Of course, we always need to extend our great thanks for the cooperative spirit we always get from the ranking member of our committee, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), who has on so many occasions provided the bipartisan spirit by which we move important pieces of legislation like this. Mr. Speaker, most of the bills we debate in this body are about money, about how to spend it and who to spend it on and what are our priorities, how to raise it and how to distribute it in this great country. This bill is about lives. It is about saving lives. It is about improving the infrastructure by which this country addresses the worst of situations Americans find themselves in, lost on a highway, in the middle of an accident with nobody there to help them; a young woman on a bike path or a jogging path who gets assaulted, who tries to get help in the 911 system but no one can locate her. It is about whether or not an ambulance arrives in time to save a life or in some cases to save a limb or to save someone from a debilitating injury that could have been prevented if only the first responders could have gotten there in time. It is also about in this time of national concern with terrorism and this war we constantly battle now, a question of whether our infrastructure is going to be good enough for us to quickly respond when things happen that we hope will not happen again in this country. It is about saving lives, like the Firestone investigation that our committee conducted several years ago that produced the first major rewrite of highway safety laws in 30 years that was adopted in this House unanimously and in the Senate unanimously. A remarkable process. Like that bill, this bill when it becomes law, when it is fully implemented, will save American lives, will create the possibility of smart cars, will take the search out of search and rescue, and will give us a chance to quickly locate people who need to be located quickly because relief, help, medical attention, other services must reach them quickly to save a life or prevent, as I said, a debilitating injury. E-911 is all about that. The grants in this bill will go to those communities that more aggressively push out the PSAPs, the point of answers in the local systems that are going to be important to this system to work. It is going to help wireless systems and the wired systems cooperate so that we can in fact have an infrastructure that communicates well with one another. Those points of presence that are going to make a difference as to whether or not you have E-911 present in your community are going to be spreading out across this country and be more available to more and more communities as a result of the grants in this program. This bill makes it clear to communities that the moneys we have given them for E-911 deployment that have been siphoned off and used for other purposes is not going to be tolerated. This is lifesaving money, and no one should be raiding those funds for any other purpose. This bill makes it clear we will not tolerate that anymore. The sooner these systems are in place, trust me, someone you love will thank you, because someone you know, someone you love in the district you are so honored and privileged to represent back home, someone will have some life saved. Someone will come out of a horrible accident with help in time to prevent a disabling condition that could have been prevented if the ambulance or the medics arrived in time. Someone will thank you that today this House, and hopefully the other body quickly, will pass a law that implements this system sooner rather than later in time to make a difference. That is how important this legislation is today. So while we stay here in the waning days of November trying to wrap up our money business, all our appropriation measures and a few other critical, important things, today will be an extremely important day in the history of this Congress, because today we are going to save some lives. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2898, the E-911 Implementation Act of 2003. H.R. 2898 passed the House Energy and Commerce Committee unanimously on October 1st. I commend the bill's sponsor, Representatives Shimkus and Eshoo, for introducing this important legislation. And I commend Subcommittee Chairman Upton and Ranking Member Markey for moving it expeditiously through their subcommittee. Finally, I want to thank my good friend John Dingell for his cooperation with moving H.R. 2898 through our committee. H.R. 2898 will help states and localities that are making a strong effort to implement Phase II E-911 services. The nation's largest wireless carriers have done a good job implementing or putting themselves on a clear path to implementing Phase II E-911 technology in their networks and handsets. But the readiness of carriers to provide safety answer points (PSAPs) with location information will be meaningless if PSAPs do not have the ability to use such information. And too many PSAPs are woefully behind in deploying E-911 services. Only 18 percent of PSAPs and 11.8 percent of counties nationwide have implemented Phase II E-911 technology. Mr. Speaker, nationwide implementation of Phase II technology has enormous public safety and homeland security benefits for the United States. We can save countless lives if emergency personnel can locate people with life-threatening injuries. And law enforcement will be able to prevent or detect more terrorist activities. Mr. Speaker, I would like to dispel a few myths about this bill. This bill does not reward counties and PSAPs that are sitting on their hands rather than deploying Phase II services. No state, county, or PSAP, can simply come to the federal government and ask it to pay for Phase II deployment. H.R. 2898 has a minimum 50 percent matching requirement. You have to be actively engaged in Phase II deployment in order to qualify for money under this program. Some have argued that Congress does not need to authorize new spending for this initiative and that funding for it should be derived from existing homeland security and law-enforcement funds. Well, robbing Peter to pay Paul is not how we are going to solve our nation's homeland security and law-enforcement problems. Congress should be funding homeland security and E-911 initiatives; Congress should not choose between the two. Some have argued that H.R. 2898 does not provide enough specific eligibility criteria to ensure that the agencies implementing the legislation will not provide grants to wealthy counties. But Congress does not need to unnecessarily tie the hands of NTIA and NHTSA. I expect NTIA and NHTSA to work very closely with Congress when it crafts the eligibility requirements. Grants should be, and will be, distributed based on means and will reward entities that are devoting significant resources of their own on Phase II E-911 deployment. And this bill ensures that grants cannot be distributed to counties in states that are raiding E-911 funds for other purposes. This critical element of the bill provides a huge incentive to states and localities to devote their resources to E-911 deployment. Mr. Speaker, I again commend my colleagues for their hard work on H.R. 2898, and I strongly urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation.