Mark Udall

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, this will be one of the most important votes of the year--in fact, it likely will be one of the most important for years to come. The legislation before us addresses one of the most serious threats to the continued health of our democracy--the perception that the national government is for sale to the highest bidder. I say perception, because I think all of us are motivated by a sincere desire to make decisions that are in the best interests of our country and that are based on the best information available. I know that my judgment is not for sale, and I am confident that goes for every one of our colleagues as well. But I also understand why many people think otherwise. They know that since 1988 both parties have increasingly used funds that are supposed to go for party-building--so-called ``soft money''-- to instead support or oppose candidates through the unsubtle subterfuge of so-called ``issue ads'' and similar devices. And they know that past attempts to stop that subterfuge have been stopped by a veto or by obstruction So, it is not surprising that many people think that money talks so loudly that they cannot be heard. All too often, that is the perception--and as we all know, when it comes to public opinion perception is reality. I want to change that perception by changing its cause--the ``soft money'' loopholes in current law. I believe we need to get rid of unlimited ``soft money'' contributions and act to open the election process to all. This is not a new position for me. Starting with my first year as a Member of Congress, I have been a cosponsor of the Shays-Meehan campaign finance legislation. I have consistently voted in support of similar legislation since 1999. I signed the discharge petition that has brought the bill to the floor today. And I supported the Shays-Meehan substitute and opposed amendments to it because I want the House to pass a bill as similar as possible to the McCain-Feingold bill that has already passed the Senate. I think that was essential because otherwise there would have been too great a risk that the bill will die in conference. I am well aware that this legislation is not perfect. But no legislation is perfect, and this bill makes crucial improvements in campaign-finance laws. It deserves and needs to be enacted. And so now, as we come to the time for a final decision, I urge all our colleagues to join me in voting for passage of this bill.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a dedicated public servant who is retiring after over 30 years of service to his country and to his community. Frank Stewart is stepping down as the director of the Department of Energy's Field Office at the National Renewable Energy Lab in Golden, CO. Frank has directed this office for the last 7 years. During this time he was responsible for promoting the development and commercialization of energy, efficiency and renewable energy technologies by working with industry, for administering the management and operations contract for the National Renewable Energy Lab, and for providing administrative support to DOE's six Regional Support Offices. Throughout his career Frank has served in numerous positions in DOE and its predecessor agency, the Federal Energy Administration. Frank served for a time as the Acting Assistant Secretary of the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, and demonstrated leadership as well as broad understanding of renewable energy's potential. At home and abroad, Frank has been a dedicated supporter of renewable technology and has had a hand in numerous projects that expanded the use of renewable energy. When 30 Federal agencies in Denver wanted to purchase wind power, Frank played an important role in formulating the deal that allowed them to purchase ten megawatts of the renewably generated power. He also has traveled to several African countries to advise those governments on the best use of renewable energy technologies. He even helped to install a solar-powered water purification system on one of his trips. From this experience, Frank has gained an understanding of the importance that renewable energy can play in our society, enhancing national security, improving the environment, and its potential in helping to rebuild shattered countries. Frank is a strong proponent of using renewable energy to establish the new infrastructure in Afghanistan. Frank believes that renewable energy would be the most cost effective means to power Afghanistan since ``it would not require the construction of a massive infrastructure, such as a network of pipelines and wires.'' Frank believes that the technology that has the best chance of success in undeveloped countries is one that is non- polluting and can create jobs. Renewable energy can be the power behind the rebuilding of Afghanistan and many other developing countries. Frank Stewart has been a dedicated community servant for over 40 years. He has promoted education and energy technologies that will enhance our children's world rather than pollute it and delete it of resources. Frank has dedicated his career to public service and has sought a way to leave things better than he found them. He deserves our thanks for his service, his dedication, and his commitment. He stands as an example to citizens across the country of how an individual can contribute to society.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, this resolution is not real legislation intended to meet a national need or resolve a national problem. Instead, it is a political game. Everyone in this Chamber knows that--and by bringing it forward under this extraordinary procedure, the Republican leadership is doing us the favor of making it clear to everyone in the country. In simplest terms, the point of this resolution is to try to make the House again express support for last year's tax bill--a bill based on economic projections that were very doubtful then and that now have been shown to have been wildly over-optimistic. When the bill was passed, the economic weather seemed bright--we did not yet know that we already were in recession--and sponsors of the bill claimed that we could rely on that to continue not just for a matter of months but for a full decade. And now, despite the dramatic change in economic conditions, despite the need for increased resources to fight terrorism and for homeland defense, the sponsors of this resolution are calling on us to say that nothing has changed. With storm clouds looming and the wind shifting sharply, they are saying that instead of considering whether to shorten sail we should act as if the sun was still shining and the seas were calm--instead of considering adjustments, we should swear allegiance to stay the course--even if it was plotted in error. And that's not all. The resolution asks that the House insist that ``suspending, repealing or delaying'' any part of last year's bill ``is a tax increase.'' I guess that they subscribe to the theory that if you say something often enough and loudly enough you can get people to believe it. Of course, the problem is that saying something is so doesn't make it so. It simply is not true that changing something scheduled for the future is the same thing as doing something today--any more than revising next year's baseball schedule would be the same as adding an exhibition game tomorrow. I do not think that makes sense, and I cannot support this resolution any more than I could support last year's tax bill. I am not opposed to cutting taxes. I have supported--and still support--a substantial reduction in income taxes and the elimination of the ``marriage penalty.'' I have supported--and still support-- including the child credit and making it refundable so that it will benefit more lower-income families. And I have supported--and still support--reforming, but not repealing, the estate tax. But the affordability of last year's tax bill depended on uncertain projections of continuing budget surpluses that now may inspire nostalgia but are otherwise meaningless. As I said last year, the tax bill was a riverboat gamble. It put at risk our economic stability, the future of Medicare and Social Security, and our ability to make needed investments in health and education. For me, the stakes were too high and the odds were too long, and I had to vote against it. This resolution does not correct those problems--merely insists that they don't exist. That may make its sponsors feel better, but it does not deserve the support of the House.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank Jane Healy for her many years of public service and the contributions she has made to so many people in Colorado. On February 1, 2002, she will be celebrating her 70th birthday. Many of those 70 years have been involved in public service. I wanted to take this opportunity not only to wish her a most happy birthday, but also to highlight her outstanding career and accomplishments. Upon my election to the 2nd Congressional District in 1998, I was fortunate to have Jane join my staff as the Director of Constituent Services. I was very appreciative because I had learned of her many years of constituent service work for my predecessor, David Skaggs, as well as similar work for other Colorado elected officials including Senator Gary Hart and State Treasurer Gail Schoettler. Jane's work in these offices earned her a reputation as a caring and extremely effective advocate for individual Coloradans with state and federal agencies. She had developed great expertise in relevant agency rules and procedures and had earned the respect of agency personnel. As a result, she could provide simple, direct advice and was especially helpful to many people who would have been frustrated and confused without her assistance. Nowhere was this expertise more pronounced than in the complex area of immigration matters and the extensive process of selecting nominees for appointment to the service academies. On immigration matters, Jane became the ``dean'' of the Colorado delegation staff--particularly on issues related to visas and the status of foreign nationals lining and working in the United States. Oftentimes, when an issue was too complex for other offices to handle, she would be asked advice on how to proceed. On the service academy selection process, she was especially adroit at making this potentially stressful and unmanageable system of selecting nominees to our armed service academies a smoothly functioning and enjoyable experience, while always underscoring the honorable nature of the effort and treating it with the highest respect and decorum. When she joined my staff, she helped set the standard of excellence for casework service. She helped train novice staff members in the art of casework service and correspondence. Her knowledge and expertise has served my office well--but more importantly, it has helped countless numbers of people over the years. It is estimated that over the course of her career, she directly helped resolve over 20,000 cases on an impressive array of issues. Jane's dedication was unequaled. Coworkers would notice that she would frequently leave the office at the end of the day with bags of casework papers on which she continued working at home. My staff and I deeply miss her talents in calligraphy, here editing skills, her love of Ireland, and her chocolate raspberry pies. On a personal note, Jane also worked as the Colorado State Coordinator for my father's presidential campaign in 1976. She proudly displayed in her office a photo taken during that campaign showing her with my dad. She also has been involved in many other community activities, such as serving on the Board of North Metro Community services, which provides needed services to disabled citizens in the northern portions of the Denver-metro area. To serve so broadly, so successfully, and with such grace, heart, and spirit is deserving of recognition. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join with me in expressing ourgratitude to Jane Healy for her exemplary public service to the people of Colorado and their elected officials. Her many accomplishments go beyond reckoning, and I wish her good health and happiness in the future.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, earlier this month news came of the death of one of the pioneers of the conservation movement in Alaska, Celia Hunter. A founder of the Alaska Conservation Society--Alaska's first statewide organization of its kind--Celia Hunter was involved in many debates over the future of Alaska, including the ``Project Chariot'' plan to use nuclear explosives to dig a new deep-water port and the proposed Rampart Dam on the Yukon. And in the late 1970's, she was among the many people from across the country whose strong support made possible the enactment of the Alaska National Interests Land Conservation Act, introduced in the House of Representatives by my father, Mo Udall of Arizona. Now Congress has again been debating the proper balance between development and conservation in Alaska, and again Celia Hunter was active and involved in that debate right up to the day of her death. As she explained earlier this year, it remained her view that ``If we lose wild spaces, we could be a much poorer nation . . . the whole concept of natural areas, with intact ecosystems is vital to life . . . we need places of the world that are still natural.'' Mr. Speaker, in the words of the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, Celia Hunter's death was a ``great loss for Alaska,'' and it leaves the whole country poorer. She earned our thanks and remembrance. She will be greatly missed. For the benefit of our colleagues, I am attaching a brief outline of her life as well as a newspaper editorial. Celia's Life Many are called, but few choose to hear and give of themselves completely. Celia Hunter heard the call of the wilderness at an early age and answered it with her adventuresome spirit, loving heart, and thoughtful mind. Born on January 13, 1919 in Arlington, Washington, Celia grew up during the Depression in a logging community. After high school graduation, she worked as a clerk for Weyerhauser Timber Company for $50 a month, enough to buy a car. Each day when Celia drove to work, she passed by Everett Airport and saw an opportunity. An admirer of Amelia Earhart, she decided to learn to fly. One week after her 21th birthday she took off on her first flight and was immediately hooked. ``The viewpoint from on high is so different, and so much more comprehensive . . . just that whole feeling of being aloft. It gives you a feeling that birds must have. In fact, I think, if I wanted to be reincarnated, I'd like to be a bird of some sort.'' Celia had discovered her first wilderness. Her love of flying led her to train with the Women Airforce Service Pilots, and she became skilled at flying a number of aircraft, including large aircraft such as the P-47 that zoomed up to 300 mph. Celia ferried aircraft across the country for the Air Force during WWII and dreamed of flying to Alaska one day to see the vast wilderness that other pilots had described. In December 1946, she and pilot friend Ginny Hill were hired to fly two Stinson airplanes from Seattle to Fairbanks. They arrived in a snowstorm at Weeks Field in Fairbanks on January 1, 1947, nearly a month-long trip with all the weather delays. They decided to stay and work in the tourism industry, ferrying visitors to a travel lodge in Kotzebue during the summer. This experience inspired Celia, Ginny Hill Wood, and Woody Wood to build Camp Denali, a wilderness camp just outside the original boundary of McKinley National Park. There visitors could see Denali and enjoy hiking and wildlife-viewing in a magnificent setting. In 1960, Celia and Ginny help found Alaska's first statewide environmental organization, the Alaska Conservation Society. This small group of pioneering conservationists was inspired by Olaus and Margaret Murie to work for the establishment of the Arctic National Wildlife Range and to protect the special and unspoiled lands of Alaska. Working together, Celia and Ginny have tackled all of Alaska's major environmental issues. They fought against Project Chariot and the Rampart Dam project, became loving stewards and advocates for Denali National Park, and worked to create and pass the 1980 Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, the greatest lands conservation act in world history. In the late '70s, Celia's leadership moved to the national level when she served as Executive Director for the Wilderness Society. She also began writing memorable environmental columns for the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. Fearless and outspoken, Celia carefully studied a diversity of issues and wrote articulate and compelling columns for more than 20 years. Dedicated to the conservation movement, she also helped found the Alaska Conservation Foundation in 1980. Through the years, Celia not only devoted her energy to environmental causes, she also loved people and the web of connections between them. She had the natural ability to inspire and nurture countless individuals by listening to their ideas and dreams and sharing her views. Her glacial- blue eyes could look into one's soul and bring out the best of a person's spirit including a good laugh. Celia leaves a tremendous legacy of conservation accomplishments. Her vibrant spirit will live on in the wilderness she loved, in the lives of those she inspired, and in the legislation that holds her tireless effort to protect what she truly loved. The earth and all its a living things are grateful. Alaska will forever remember Celia. [From the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, Dec. 4, 2001] A Great Loss for Alaska Celia Hunter died still doing the work she loved most-- fighting for Alaska's environment. The night before her death Hunter had been putting together a list of U.S. senators who might be considered undecided regarding the Senate vote on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Hunter spent more than 50 years as a pioneer and conservationist in Alaska, most often working side-by-side with her long-time companion and fellow conservationist Ginny Wood. Hunter's years of dedication to the protection and preservation of Alaska and her work to that end on the local, state and national levels meant that she played a vital role in shaping Alaska's environmental future. Her work and contributions to increase public awareness of Alaska's unique natural resources have been pushed even more into the public eye as the nation began focusing on solving national energy policy issues. One of the biggest questions directly related to Alaska has been what role if any should ANWR play in that policy--the very issue Hunter contemplated during her last days. Hunter and Wood first flew in Fairbanks in January 1947, piloting two planes to be delivered to the Interior. Extreme temperatures kept the pair here longer than expected, and after spending a bit of time in Europe, they were back to stay. The list of her works in conservation and environmentalism are lengthy. In the 1950s, Hunter and Wood built Camp Denali, an early combination of ecology and tourism. Not long after, Hunter was a founding member of the Alaska Conservation Society, the first statewide conservation society in Alaska. Later on, she was instrumental in the formation of the Alaska Conservation Foundation and served as its first board chair. Hunter was interim executive director of The Wilderness Society in the 1970s. In 1991, she was presented the Sierra Clubs' highest honor and has received innumerable awards in recognition of her dedication and service to conservation. News-Miner readers recognize Hunter as a longtime contributor to this page--she began writing her column in 1979. While her opinions quite often differed from our own, our respect for Hunter was beyond question. In the days since her death, Hunter's friends and associates have described her in a variety of ways: pioneer, voice of responsible environmentalism, adventurer, kind and honest with everybody. And all said that her passing would leave a void in Fairbanks and in Alaska. In during a 1986 interview with a News-Miner reporter, Hunter said that her basic philosophy was that much of the damage done to the earth was caused by people making a living. That creates an obligation, she said: ``Each one of us has a responsibility to take care of the part of the world we live in.'' Hunter's life-long goal was to minimize the footprints that humans leave on our environment. But through her work and her passion Alaska, she has left behind an impression that will long be remembered.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I support this bill, which I have cosponsored with my colleague, the dean of the Colorado delegation, Representative Hefley. H.R. 2187 would enable the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to begin environmental restoration activities at the Naval Oil Shale Reserve 3, near Rifle, Colorado, using existing funds in a special Treasury account. This account was specifically designated in the Strom Thurmond National Defense Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85) which transferred administration of the two Colorado Naval Oil Shale Reserves--Numbered 1 and 3, and known as NOSR 1 & 3--from the Department of Energy to the Department of the Interior for management by BLM. This provision was added to that act by an amendment offered by Mr. Hefley with the assistance and support of my predecessor, Representative David Skaggs. It specifies that receipts from existing mineral leases in NOSR 3 are to be retained in a special account intended for cleanup of contamination caused by previous activities on these lands. However, to avoid Budget Act problems the amendment provided that subsequent legislation would be required to authorize BLM to have access to the funds. Since enactment of Public Law 105-85, the Interior Department has collected approximately $8.5 million in lease receipts, which are currently held in the special cleanup account. Enactment of H.R. 2187 will allow BLM to use up to $1.5 million of these funds for the preliminary analyses needed before cleanup work can begin and to prepare an estimate of the cost of completing the project. BLM can then begin work, unless the estimated cost of the work would be more than the total in the special account. If the estimate indicates that more would be required than the total in the account, a subsequent authorization will be required before work can begin. Mr. Speaker, this is important legislation that will allow BLM to begin the process of cleaning up the lands involved and reducing the risks of contaminated runoff reaching the Colorado River. I commend Mr. Hefley for introducing the bill and urge its approval by the House.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, we could do better than this bill. We should do better than this bill. But clearly, today, we will not do better than this bill--and so, with some reluctance, I will vote for this bill. Over the course of this year, the House has considered several important measures, including bills to respond to the terror attacks on our country. But this could be the most important bill of the year, and maybe even of this 107th Congress--because nothing is more important for the health of our democracy than improving the fairness and inclusiveness of our elections. That is why I am cosponsoring H.R. 1170, introduced by Representative Conyers. That comprehensive reform bill would establish uniform and nondiscriminatory requirements for Federal elections, which must be met by the 2004 general election. Under that bill, all voting machines would have to: Allow voters to verify their votes before tabulation; notify voters of over votes and under votes; provide an auditable record; and be equally accessible to voters with disabilities and special needs. Also, under that bill provisional ballots would be permitted in all Federal elections and all voters would have to get a sample ballot and instructions 10 days prior to election day, and would have to be notified of their voting rights under federal and state law and of the federal and state agencies to contract if they think their rights are violated. The Conyers bill would provide for federal reimbursement to the states for meeting these requirements and a matching grant fund program that would provide advance assistance to enable sates and localities for that purpose. And the bill would establish a politically balanced study Commission to examine voter registration and maintenance of voters rolls; issues of voter intimidation; accuracy of voting; establishing a federal or State election-day holiday; modified polling place hours; and whether an existing or a new Federal agency should provide continuing assistance to states. it would also examine access to ballots and polling places, including notice of voting locations and access for voters with disabilities, limited English proficiency, visual and hearing impairments, and with other special needs. The commission would develop recommendations of the best practices in voting and election administration. These are all things that should be done--and while it does into do everything that should be done, this bill takes very important steps to improve current conditions. I opposed the rule because I wanted the bill to do more. I supported the motion to recommit for the same reason. But we should not refuse to do something even if we re not going to do all we should. So I will support the bill in the hope that it will be improved as the legislative process continues.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, the House passed this bill earlier this week. While it was discussed at some length on the floor, and is further explained in the report of the Resources Committee, for the benefit of all with an interest in it here is an outline of the main provisions of the bill. In this outline, I am including the latest acreage numbers by the Forest Service, based on more precise estimates they have made while developing the official map of the lands affected by the bill. I am including these because, of course, where the acreage estimates in the bill text are different, it is the map that will control and will show exactly what the bill would do. Section-by-Section Analysis

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I support this rule and the underlying conference report. I am particularly proud of two provisions that the conference committee adopted that I have championed since coming to Congress. I am very happy that the conferees have seen fit to authorize significant increases in funding for after-school programs. In 1999, the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Berkley) and I first introduced the After School Education and Anti-Crime Act, a bill to increase funding for after-school programs. Since then, we have worked to see federally funded after-school programs grow from a few million dollars in fiscal year 1999 to today's landmark increase. These funding levels will provide nearly 4 million children in need access to after-school programs by 2007. I am also proud that the conferees have included in the final report the High Performance Schools Act, a bill I first introduced in 1999. High performance schools are a win for energy savings and a win for the environment, but best of all they are also a win for student performance. A growing number of studies link student achievement and behavior to the physical building conditions. We have an enormous opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to build a new generation of sustainable schools, schools that incorporate the best of today's designs and technologies and as a result provide better learning environments for our children, cost less to operate and help protect our local and global environment. I am glad that the conferees agreed with me on the importance of this opportunity. I thank them again for including the High Performance Schools Act in H.R. 1. I support the rule and I support the underlying bill.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I support this rule and will support the conference report. There are some things in the conference report that are not fully satisfactory to me, as is often the case with conference reports. But the conference report also includes some items that I very strongly support, and I want to speak briefly about two of them. First, the conference report includes legislation dealing with the future of Rocky Flats, the former nuclear-weapons production facility in Colorado. Under this part of the conference report, Rocky Flats will be transferred from the Department of Energy to the Department of the Interior once it is cleaned up and closed and then will be managed as a national wildlife refuge. This builds on legislation that I first introduced in the 106th Congress to preserve this area for its open space and wildlife resources and incorporates the later bill that I developed in collaboration with Senator Allard. I had the privilege of serving as a House conferee on this provision, and I am very pleased that the other conferees agreed to its inclusion in the final bill. In years past, Rocky Flats made significant contributions to our Nation's security and the economies of the local communities surrounding it. But it was always more than just an industrial site. In fact, the Colorado Natural Areas Program determined that this 6,400- acre landscape, with its prairie grasses, numerous creeks and draws and ponds, contains some of the most highly valued and rare examples of dry, upland prairie ecosystems in the country. Rocky Flats will be a most worthwhile addition to the Nation's wildlife refuge system. Mr. Speaker, there is another important reason that the House should approve the conference report. The report includes vital funding for people covered by the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, or RECA. The people covered by RECA include uranium miners and millers and others who worked to support the nuclear weapons program or who were exposed to its fallout. And because of that exposure, they are sick with cancers and other serious diseases. Many of them are residents of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and other western States. When Congress enacted the RECA law, we promised to pay compensation for their illnesses. But we have not fully kept that promise. We have been slow to appropriate enough money to pay everyone who is entitled to be paid. As a result, too often the Department of Justice has had to send people letters saying that while they are entitled to the money Congress promised, their payments would have to wait until Congress made good on its word. I think that should not happen again. That is why I have joined in sponsoring legislation to make these RECA payments completely automatic. The conference report does not quite do that, but it does provide mandatory funds for paying RECA claims through 2011, subject to certain limits. I do not know if the limits set in the conference report will be adequate, but it is important that we act now to reduce the chance that more people will be sent IOUs instead of the money to which they are entitled. Mr. Speaker, for those reasons above, I urge approval of the rule and the conference report. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to express my support for the provision in this bill which would transfer the former Rocky Flats nuclear weapons facility in Colorado to the Interior Department for management as a national wildlife refuge once the site is cleaned up and closed. This provision was developed through a collaborative partnership with Senator Allard. Together, we were able to produce a bill that we hope will stand as a model for transitioning former nuclear weapons sites across the country into productive natural assets for their surrounding communities. In shaping this legislation, Senator Allard and I consulted closely with local communities, State and Federal agencies, and interested members of the public. We received a great deal of very helpful input, including many detailed reactions to and comments on related legislation that I introduced in 1999 and discussion drafts that Senator Allard and I circulated in 2000. The Rocky Flats facility made some significant contributions to our nation's security and the economies of local communities. The language of this provision includes a strong acknowledgment of that history and legacy. Its mission has shifted from weapons production to cleanup, and looking toward the completion of the process I recognized a need and an opportunity for another new mission--to preserve the open spaces and wildlife habitat that has remained relatively untouched behind security fences and guard shacks. That is why in 1999 I proposed that the site remain in federal ownership as open space. And when after that there was a suggestion of converting the site to a national wildlife refuge, I supported that approach because it was consistent with the principles of federal ownership, open space and habitat protection, and thorough, effective cleanup. In fact, this 6,400-acre landscape, with its prairie grasses, numerous creeks and draws, and ponds is ideal wildlife habitat. As evidence of this value, the Colorado Natural Areas Program, which evaluates landscapes in Colorado for unique, threatened and critical natural resources, determined that the Rocky Flats area contains some of the most highly valued and rare examples of dry, upland prairie ecosystems in the country. This area will thus be a valued addition to the nation's wildlife refuge system and in so doing will thereby protect these resources for generations to come. This provision contains a number of elements, which I outline in more detail below. But let me address just a couple of specific issues that have generated much discussion. First, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and its National Wind Technology Center. This research facility, which is located northwest of the site, has been conducting important research on wind energy technology. As many in the region know, this area of the Front Range is subjected to strong winds that spill out over the mountains and onto the plains. This creates ideal wind conditions to test new wind power turbines. I support this research and believe that the work done at this facility can help us be more energy secure as we find ways to make wind power more productive and economical. NREL has been interested in expanding the wind power research performed on this site. To accommodate that, the legislation provides for 25 acres in the northwest section of the site to be retained by DOE for the expansion of the Center. Second, transportation issues. Rocky Flats is located in the midst of a growing area of the Denver metropolitan region. As this area's population continues to grow, pressure is being put on the existing transportation facilities just outside the site's borders. The communities that surround the site have been considering transportation improvements in this area for a number of years--including the potential completion of a local beltway. In recognition of this, the legislation allows for some Rocky Flats land along Indiana Street (the eastern boundary of the site) to be used for this purpose under certain circumstances. Third, the legislation requires the DOE and the Department of the Interior to develop a memorandum of understanding to help facilitate smooth transition from Rocky Flats's current status to the new status provided for by the legislation. In this regard it is important to note that the legislation requires DOE to retain any ``engineered structure'' that may be needed to control the release of contamination. This language in no way requires the DOE to construct any facility for the long-term storage of wastes or materials. Rather, it is expected that wastes and materials presently stored on the site or generated during cleanup and closure will be transported to safe and secure off- site locations. Hence, this language is only intended to refer to the types of structures typically used to control the release of contamination, such as ongoing operation and maintenance intercept and treatment systems that are envisioned under Superfund remediations. Fourth, private property rights. Most of the land at Rocky Flats is owned by the federal government, but within its boundaries there are a number of pre-existing private property rights, including mineral rights, water rights, and utility rights-of-way. In response to comments from many of their owners, the legislation acknowledges the existence of there rights, preserves the rights of their owners, including rights of access, and allows the Secretaries of Energy and Interior to address access issues to continue necessary activities related to cleanup and closure of the site and proper management of its resources. With regard to water rights, the legislation protects existing easements and allows water rights holders access to perfect and maintain their rights. With regard to mineral rights, the Secretaries of Energy and Interior, through the MOU, are directed to work together to address any potential impacts associated with these rights on the refuge. Finally, with regard to power lines and the proposal to extend a line from a high-tension line that currently crosses the site, the legislation preserves the existing rights-of-way for these lines and allows the construction of one power line from an existing line to serve the growing region northwest of Rocky Flats. The DOE is presently working with Xcel to locate the final alignment for this power line extension to the site's eastern boundary. Fifth, the Rocky Flats Cold War Museum. The legislation authorizes the establishment of a museum to commemorate the Cold-War history of the work done at Rocky Flats. Rocky Flats has been a major facility of interest to the Denver area and the communities that surround it. Even though this facility will be cleanup and closed down, we should not forget the hard work done here, what role it played in our national security and the mixed record of its economic, environmental and social impacts. The city of Arvada has been particularly interested in this idea, and took the lead in proposing inclusion of such a provision. However, a number of other communities have expressed interest in also being considered as a possible site for the museum. Accordingly, the legislation provides that Arvada will be the location for the museum unless the Secretary of Energy, after consultation with relevant communities, decides to select a different location after consideration of all appropriate factors such as cost, potential visitation, and proximity to the Rocky Flats site. Finally, cleanup levels. Some concerns were expressed that the establishment of Rocky Flats as a wildlife refuge could result in a less extensive or thorough cleanup of contamination from its prior mission that otherwise would occur. Of course, that is not the intention of this legislation. The legislation ensures that the cleanup is based on sound science, compliance with federal and state environmental laws and regulations, and public acceptability. Specifically, the cleanup is tied to the levels that will be established in the Rocky Flats Cleanup Agreement (RFCA) for soil, water and other media following a public process to review and reconsider the cleanup levels in the RFCA. In this way, the public will be involved in establishing cleanup levels and the Secretary of Energy will be required to conduct a thorough cleanup based on that input. In addition, and very importantly, the legislation specifies that the establishment of the site as a wildlife refuge cannot reduce the level of cleanup--thereby establishing that the wildlife refuge designation establishes a minimum standard for cleanup while still allowing for more extensive cleanup and removing any possibility of a lesser cleanup based on use of the lands for a wildlife refuge. Mr. Speaker, I want to express my thanks to Senator Allard for his outstanding cooperation in drafting this important legislation. I am very appreciative of his contributions and those of his staff and look forward to implementing this provision. I also want to say thank you for all the work and input of the many individuals and groups involved with Rocky Flats and with developing this refuge legislation. There are too many to mention, but I would like to specially acknowledge and thank all of the entities that comprise the Rocky Flats Coalition of Local Governments--Boulder and Jefferson Counties, and the cities of Arvada, Boulder, Broomfield, Superior and Westminster. I also want to thank the past and present members of the Rocky Flats Citizens Advisory Board. My thanks also go to the members of the Friends of the Foothills and Rachael Carson Group, the local chapter of the Sierra Club. In the past, Rocky Flats has been off-limits to development because it was a weapons plant. That era is over--and its legacy at Rocky Flats has been very mixed, to say the least. But it has left us with the opportunity to protect and maintain the outstanding natural, cultural, and open-space resources and value of this key part of Colorado's Front Range area. This provision will accomplish that end, provide for appropriate future management of the lands, and will benefit not just the immediate area but all of Colorado and the nation as well. Here is a brief outline of the main elements of this part of the conference report. It-- Provides that the Federally-owned lands at Rocky Flats site will remain in federal ownership; that the Lindsay Ranch homestead facilities will be preserved; that no part of Rocky Flats can be annexed by a local government; that no through roads can be built through the site; that some portion of the site can be used for transportation improvements along Indiana Street along the eastern boundary; and that 25 acres be reserved for future expansion of the National Wind Technology Center just northwest of the site. Requires DOE and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding within 18 months after enactment to address administrative issues and make preparations regarding the future transfer of the site to the Fish and Wildlife Service and to divide responsibilities between the agencies until the transfer occurs; provides that the cleanup funds shall not be used for these activities. Specifies when the transfer from DOE to the Fish and Wildlife Service will occur--namely when the cleanup is completed and the site is closed as a DOE facility. Describes the land and facilities that will be transferred to the Fish and Wildlife Service (most of the site) and the facilities that will be excluded from transfer (including any cleanup facilities or structures that the DOE must maintain and remain liable for); Directs that the transfer will not result in any costs to the Fish and Wildlife Service. Directs that the DOE will continue to be required to clean up the site and that in the event of any conflicts, cleanup shall take priority; maintains DOE's continuing liability for cleanup. Requires the DOE to continue to clean up and close the site under all existing laws, regulations and agreements. Requires that establishment of the site as a National Wildlife Refuge shall not reduce the level of cleanup required. Requires the DOE to clean up the site to levels that are established in the Rocky Flats Cleanup Agreement as the agreement is revised based on input from the public, the regulators and the Rocky Flats Soil Action Level Oversight Panel. Requires DOE to remain liable for any long-term cleanup obligations and requires DOE to pay for this long-term care. Establishes the Rocky Flats site as a National Wildlife Refuge 30 days after transfer of the site to the Fish and Wildlife Service. Provides that the refuge is to be managed in accordance with the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act. Provides that the refuge's purposes are to be consistent with the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act, with specific reference to preserving wildlife, enhancing wildlife habitat, conserving threatened and endangered species, providing opportunities for education, scientific research and recreation. Directs the Fish and Wildlife Service to convene a public process to develop management plans for the refuge; requires the Fish and Wildlife Service to consult with the local communities in the creation of this public process. Provides that the public involvement process shall make recommendations to the Fish and Wildlife Service on management issues-- specifically issues related to the operation of the refuge, any transportation improvements, any perimeter fences, development of a Rocky Flats museum and visitors center; requires that a report is to be submitted to Congress outlining the recommendations resulting from the public involvement process. Recognizes the existence of other property rights on the Rocky Flats site, such as mineral rights, water rights and utility right-of-way; preserves these rights and allows the rights holders access to their rights. Allows the DOE and the Fish and Wildlife Service to impose reasonable conditions on the access to private property rights for cleanup and refuge management purposes. Directs the DOE and the Department of the Interior to address any potential impacts associated with mineral rights (and other property rights) on the refuge. Allows Xcel, Colorado's public utility, to provide an extension from their high-tension line on the site to serve the area around Rocky Flats. Authorizes the establishment of a Rocky Flats museum to commemorate the history of the site, its operations and cleanup. Requires the DOE and the Fish and Wildlife Service to inform Congress on the costs associated with implementing this Act.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a tireless worker and a devoted public servant. After eighteen years of public service, Nancy Heil, who began her service on the city council in 1983 and has served as Mayor of Westminster, Colorado, for six years, is retiring. Throughout her public career, Mayor Heil's priority has been preserving the quality of life for Westminster residents. During the forty years she has called Westminster her home, she has watched it grow from a small suburban town of 12,000 residents to a city of over 100,000. Ensuring that people are still able to enjoy the lifestyle they came to Westminster for has always been of top importance to the Mayor. She has been a constant, positive force in the community, displaying an unmatched passion for the welfare of her citizens. Mayor Heil was a leader in focusing attention on the importance of removing the radioactive wastes from the U.S. Department of Energy's Rocky Flats Nuclear Weapons Facility--which is located just west of Westminster. She spoke out about the importance of finding secure locations to remove the dangerously contaminated material from such a well-populated urban area and thereby safeguard the millions of people in the Denver-metro area. She was also one of the leaders and original proponents of preserving the open space resources at Rocky Flats and in calling for the site to be transformed into a National Wildlife Refuge once it is cleaned up and closed. In such a fast growing area of the Denver metropolitan region, Mayor Heil saw an opportunity to keep much of this area as a natural asset for future generations. Through her ability to forge coalitions and collaborate with neighboring communities, Mayor Heil was able to bring out the best in other leaders and ensure that it was always the citizens that benefited. I am proud to have had the opportunity to work with a community leader of her quality. She put the people first and I consider it an honor to represent her and her community in Congress. She is an example of what we all should look for in our leaders: commitment, selflessness, and passion. It is with great pleasure that I take this opportunity to recognize her and thank her for her years of dedicated service. The city of Westminster and indeed the state of Colorado have greatly benefited from her contributions and leadership. Her talents and resourcefulness will be sorely missed. Her accomplishments and the esteem in which she is held were recently reported in the Denver Post. For the information of our colleagues, I am attaching a copy of that report. [From the Denver Post, December 11, 2001] Heil Leaves Office on High Note (By George Lane) Westminster--When Nancy Heil first took her seat on the City Council in 1983, she might have been one of the most naive politicians around. Consider that she wondered if ``Dr. Cog'' might be a family physician. DRCOG is the acronym for the Denver Regional Council of Governments. Since then, Heil's growth and political maturity have resulted in her twice being named Westminster Woman of the Year and becoming the city's first elected mayor. Now, after almost two decades of service, in the middle of the term to which she was elected in 1999, Heil is resigning from office Dec. 31. She says it's time for something new. ``These are extraordinary times, and they have caused me to re-think the importance of the office of mayor,'' she said during a recent interview. ``I have willingly given 18 years of my life to work for the city I love. I have given it my best, and now I believe it is time for me to take a new direction.'' Councilman Ed Moss, recently elected major pro tem, will complete Heil's unexpired term, as dictated by the city charter. Government observers here say following Heil won't be easy. ``Nancy, she's a class act,'' said Adams County Commissioner Elaine Velente. ``Her shoes are going to be tough to fill. I think she's done a tremendous job representing the city of Westminster.'' Heil was a teacher in upstate New York before she met her husband, Jay, and moved to Colorado. Jay Heil is a Colorado native who went back East for dental school. The couple now have four adult children. The mayor said that Westminster was a town of about 15,000 people when she moved here about 40 years ago, and there was almost no place to live. She now points proudly at a city of more than 100,000, the Westin Hotel that opened several years ago and Westminster Mall, where sales tax has been Westminster's major source of revenue for a number of years. The mayor said she has resolved some health problems over the past few years. During the past year, she also has faced a sometimes-divided City Council over whether one of their own should be removed because of expense-account irregularities. ``She had a good vision for the city, wanted the city of improve its image and it did, wanted the city to be known as a good place to live and I think she achieved that,'' said Vi June, mayor from 1985 to 1991.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2440, introduced by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis), renames Wolf Trap Farm Park, located in Northern Virginia, as the Wolf Trap National Park for the Performing Arts. Wolf Trap Farm Park was established in 1966 as a unit of the National Park Service. The park provides music and arts education programs and is best known for its annual summer concert series. Supporters of the park are seeking the name change to better reflect the park's operation as a performing arts center. Although no hearings were held on H.R. 2440 by the Committee on Resources, a similar bill passed the House at the very end of the last Congress, but no action on the bill occurred in the Senate. The language of H.R. 2440, including the clarifying amendment adopted by the Committee on Resources, has been worked out with the administration and the minority, and we are unaware of any problems with the bill. Accordingly, Mr. Speaker, we support H.R. 2440, as amended, and recommend its adoption by the House. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. UDALL of Colorado asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. UDALL of Colorado asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the bill. As the gentleman from Maryland has already explained, H.R. 1989 extends a number of fisheries laws that authorize the conservation management of many of our domestic and international fishery resources. In addition, it encourages an ecosystem approach to the management of these resources which, given the current status of many marine fisheries, is an excellent idea that is long overdue. As the gentleman from Maryland is aware, the general management of marine fisheries in the United States is in serious need of improvement. First, we lack the proper data to manage these stocks. Of the 900-plus stocks that we currently harvest, we do not have enough data to evaluate the status of more than 700 of them. At the same time, while better data is obviously needed, having good data does not ensure good management. Of the 200 or so stocks for which we do have adequate information, half are considered to be overfished or approaching an overfished condition. The status of fisheries worldwide is apparently not much better, either. According to leading scientists in a study published in the November 29 issue of Nature Magazine, the global fisheries catches from the world's oceans have been declining for over a decade. This new evidence, which contradicts reports published by the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization, indicates that the true state of the oceans may be far worse than previously thought. Now, some may think that people in Colorado, a State far from the ocean, would not care about the status of our marine fisheries, but that is not the case. The oceans represent more than 70 percent of the Earth's surface, and I believe it is incumbent upon all of us to work together to better protect and conserve their biodiversity. I know the bill of the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest), with its focus on better data collection and ecosystem management, is a good first step. I look forward to working with him next year to expand this concept to the Magnuson Act, our Nation's primary law governing the management of marine fisheries. Further, the law and its implementation must be strengthened if we are to have any hope of saving our fisheries resources, both here in the United States and around the world. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. UDALL of Colorado asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation. The Homestead National Monument of America was created in 1936 to commemorate the Homestead Act of 1862 and its significant role in the settlement of the American west. The monument includes the first parcel of land claimed under the Homestead Act as well as the Freeman School, an original, one-room schoolhouse adjacent to that parcel. The monument is listed in the National Register of Historic Places. H.R. 38 authorizes the Secretary to acquire two specific parcels of private property, either by donation or purchase from willing sellers, and two parcels of State-owned land, by donation only. Once the land is acquired, the Secretary would be authorized to alter the boundaries of the monument to include these new properties. It is our understanding that this expansion will allow the National Park Service to better protect the monument's historic resources from potential flood damage and aid in interpretation of the site. Mr. Speaker, I support passage of H.R. 38.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I wanted to make the statement that I look forward to working with him on the Deep Creek wilderness proposal. Also if I could, I might just point out, I think the process was a model, first and foremost. We brought people together on an ongoing basis. Nobody walked away from the table. We had differences of opinion and differences of approaches over, as he points out, almost a 3-year or arguably a longer period of time given that Congressman Skaggs introduced the bill back in the 105th Congress. But nobody walked away from the process. People were trusting of other people's motives even though there was perhaps a difference in approach and opinion. I hope that we can bring that model not only to our State, Colorado, but around the West as we continue to have to deal with some of these thorny issues that surround the use of public lands. People operated in good faith. I thank the chairman again for his support and work, and I look forward to working with him in the future.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. If the gentleman will yield further, if I might, I was remiss in not acknowledging the tremendous staff work on the part of Stan Sloss who anybody who works with the Committee on Resources knows is an institution and is a great resource not just to Democrats but to Republicans as well and is a tremendous resource to all of us. I thank the gentleman for acknowledging Stan Sloss and the great work that he does.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. UDALL of Colorado asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bill. I begin by thanking the chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis), as well as the chairman of the Committee on Resources, the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen), and the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall) for making it possible for the House to be considering it today. In particular, the hard work and leadership of the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis) have been essential, and I appreciate all the gentleman has done in connection with this legislation which will provide additional protection for a key part of the high alpine environment along Colorado's Continental Divide. Rising to 13,294 feet above sea level, James Peak is a dramatic feature of this part of the front range section of our State. It is a dominant feature in a 26,000-acre roadless area within the Arapaho- Roosevelt National Forest that straddles this part of the Continental Divide. The peak itself was named after Dr. Edwin James, a prominent botanist and journalist with the Stephen H. Long expedition to Colorado way back in 1820. During that expedition, James became the first Anglo-American to climb a 14,000 foot peak in the continental United States, the one that is now known as Pike's Peak near Colorado Springs. That name, of course, referred to Zebulon Pike, who had earlier seen and described but never climbed that peak. In fact, historians say Long tried to change the name of Pike's Peak in honor of Dr. James' ascent, but by the time of the Long expedition, the name Pike's Peak was too well established. As an alternative, the more northerly peak, visible from many places in the Denver metro area, was named after Dr. James in the 1860s. As my colleague has mentioned, the James Peak roadless area includes lands within four counties. Three of those counties, Boulder, Clear Creek and Gilpin, are on the east side of the divide, within Colorado's Second Congressional District. The other, Grand County, is on the western side in the Third Congressional District. The area offers outstanding recreational opportunities for hiking, skiing, fishing and backpacking. It includes a dozen spectacular alpine lakes, including the Forest Lakes, Arapaho Lakes, and Heart Lake. It is one of the highest rated areas for biological diversity on the entire Arapaho National Forest. It includes unique habitat for wildlife, miles of riparian corridors, stands of old growth forests, and it is home to some threatened and endangered species. Adding James Peak to the chain of protected lands from Berthoud Pass to the Wyoming boundary will promote movement of sensitive species such as wolverine, lynx, and pine marten, and improve the chances of these and similar species that only thrive in wilderness settings. Currently, this is the largest wilderness area on the Northern Front Range that has no specific statutory protection. Under current law it is open to mining claims and other developments that can occur on general national forest lands. In my opinion, these roadless lands are eminently qualified for and deserve to be added to the National Wilderness Preservation System, and that is the view of many Coloradans as well. My predecessor, David Skaggs, introduced a James Peak Wilderness bill, but action on it was not completed. Since my first election to Congress, I have been working to protect the wilderness qualities of the James Peak area. I introduced a bill in the 106th Congress that would have designated about 22,000 acres of the James Peak roadless areas as wilderness, including about 8,000 acres in Grand County. The proposal was designed to renew discussions for the appropriate management of these lands that qualify for wilderness consideration, and that discussion certainly has taken place. In fact, the bill before us today has been shaped by nearly 2 years of discussions with county officials, interested groups and the general public. The previous bill had broad support. However, after its introduction, the Grand County commissioners, which includes the western side of James Peak, expressed some concerns with the proposed wilderness designation for the land in that county. So I undertook to work with the Grand County commissioners and interested residents of that part of the State. We held several discussions, including a public meeting in Grand County. After that, the Grand County commissioners put forth a suggestion for designation of a James Peak Protection Area that would include both the Grand County part of the roadless area and additional lands as well. That suggestion is a key part of the bill now before the House. Mr. Speaker, the bill introduced earlier this year included wilderness designation of about 14,000 acres of the James Peak roadless area in Boulder, Clear Creek and Gilpin Counties. It also included a designation of about 18,000 acres in Grand County as the James Peak Protection Area, and would have added 2,000 acres in Grand County to the Indian Peaks Wilderness Area in accordance with the recommendation of the Forest Service. Within the protection area, there would have been an 8,000 acre wilderness study area. I included the wilderness study provision after the Grand County commissioners indicated that they would not oppose having the Forest Service again review the lands involved for possible wilderness designation. They indicated that they were aware that the Forest Service had reviewed this area in the past and could have recommended it for wilderness but did not do so. The commissioners also indicated that if the Forest Service were to review the area again, they would respect that process. I thought, and still think, that the bill as introduced was a sound, balanced measure that deserved their support and the support of the Congress. However, the bill before us today differs in several ways from the version I introduced earlier. Instead, as it comes to the House, the bill incorporates a number of changes developed through negotiations between the chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis), and myself. One of those changes is that the bill before us does not provide for an immediate wilderness study of any of the lands in the protection area. And there are other changes as well, including an increase in the additions to existing wilderness. In short, this bill is a compromise but it is a good compromise. It does not do everything I would have liked, but it probably does more than some others would have liked. That is what a compromise is all about. In particular, as I have mentioned, it does not designate as much wilderness as I would have preferred on the western side of the James Peak area. But it also does not preclude the Forest Service from revisiting that issue in the future, and in fact it makes it clear that at least part of these lands on the west side will be reviewed for possible wilderness recommendations. In any event, some of these lands on the west side, the ones designated in the bill as the James Peak protection area and specifically the ``special interest area'' lands within this designation, are to be managed by the Forest Service for their pristine and roadless qualities. Furthermore, the present forest plan restrictions for this area are to be locked in place with the additional restrictions prohibiting commercial logging, land exchanges, mining activities, and new recreational trail development. This ``protection area'' designation has been designed especially for these lands. It should not be seen as something that necessarily can be applied elsewhere in Colorado or elsewhere as a substitute for wilderness designation where that designation is appropriate. But I think it is appropriate in the way it addresses the management of the lands involved. On one related point, I want to compliment what my colleague, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis), also said, it should be noted that it is the intention that the final map and boundary description will make clear that the existing water diversion and impoundment facilities owned by the Denver Water Board and other entities are not within the protection area because the boundary is set back so that these facilities, including an aqueduct, are excluded from the designation. I would also like to take this opportunity to acknowledge and thank all of the people who made this legislation possible. There are too many of them for me to mention them all, and I am deeply grateful for all their contributions; but let me highlight some who made particular contributions: All of the county commissioners in the four counties, Boulder, Clear Creek, Gilpin and Grand, deserve thanks for their support and input. I want to especially thank Gilpin County Commissioner Web Sill. I would also recognize and applaud the passion and perseverance of the local conservationists who saw the value of these lands early on. These include Bill Ikler of Nederland, Colorado; Kirk Cunningham and Linda Batlin of Boulder, Colorado; Sue Howell of Idaho Springs, Colorado; and Matt Sugar of Winter Park, Colorado. I also must thank Sierra Club regional representative Steve Smith. Steve was a member of the staff of my predecessor, Congressman David Skaggs, and has been involved in land protection in Colorado for over 20 years. His understanding of the issues as well as his tenacity and diplomacy were indispensable to working out these compromises. Finally, I want to add a special note of appreciation for the work of Doug Young of my staff. His dedication, persistence and expertise were crucial in the process that has brought us to this point. Mr. Speaker, the James Peak area is indeed special. With the continuing pressure of population growth along Colorado's Front Range, I am concerned that if we do not protect these lands now, we could lose a critical resource for future generations. In closing, again I want to thank my colleague particularly, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis), the chairman of the subcommittee, for his invaluable assistance and leadership and his friendship. I look forward to working with him in the future when we have the opportunity. I urge passage of this much-needed bill. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.