Don Young

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, the information I have, and again, I do not have anything in writing, they have testified in favor of my amendment, have written in favor of the amendment; and I think it is up to the Congress and I talked to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) about it to make sure, as this new agency is created, we fund FEMA in toto as it should be to carry forth its duties. If the gentleman would further yield to me, what I am trying to do here is, I told the gentleman, if I had my way, I would be supporting the gentleman's amendment, as the committee did, but realistically, I do not think that is possible. So I have to do what is best for FEMA and that is keep it as an entity and not have it split up because that would be a disaster, as the gentleman and I know. So that is really what I am trying to do is put everything back together again. I think it was inadvertently split apart

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the remaining time. I would like to just say a couple of small things about this. I hope the gentleman from Minnesota understands what I am trying to do; I am confident he does. I hope the rest of the committee understands that FEMA separated, as proposed by the ad hoc committee, would be a disaster. The President supports my position. I believe every member of the committee other than the Committee on the Judiciary supports my position, and I ask for a ``yes'' vote on this very important document. Much has been said tonight about who supports the firefighters the most. I will say the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) is outstanding in that arena, but I also say that the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) is also outstanding in that arena; and the gentleman from Minnesota's (Mr. Oberstar) intent to keep FEMA outside of the separate agency should be admired. I do not think it is a reality, but in saying that, if it is not outside, let us make it whole. Let us make it as one. Let us make it an entity where we know where the money is going. Let us not make it an entity that goes into another agency that has frankly misused their dollars, has not used them correctly. In fact, the GAO says that, and I think it has been raised up before that let us keep this agency intact, let us make sure it works, let us make sure our constituents can be responded to if there is a national disaster, man-made disasters, so we have somebody to turn to and they have somebody to listen to and our constituents are served. That is all I am asking in this amendment. I urge a quick passage of this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri), the chairman of the subcommittee that handled this issue.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I urge all Members to vote for this bill. For the committee, we expect to have a vote on this legislation probably later on this evening. I urge all Members to vote for the passage of this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Dunn).

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, that everybody is thanking everybody means this is a good day, and I would suggest we especially thank again the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the ranking member on the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) and the work he has done, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Larson) and the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Carson). Everybody has worked together and we have got what I think is a good piece of legislation.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. It is rare that I do this as the chairman of two committees over the period of the last 8 years, but I would like to acknowledge at this time the work that has been mentioned by other Members that have spoken, the work of the staff. This has been a long, trying period of time. I want to compliment the staff on the minority side but I also, because I pay their bills, would like to compliment Graham Hill, especially, for his work and his outstanding dedication and perseverance; Levon Boyagian, who has been with me now as the counsel for the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure; Mike Henry from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure; Frank Mulvey; David Heymsfeld; Ward McCarragher; and, of course, Liz Megginson, who is my chief counsel. I rarely do this because I know they are doing what they love to do, but this has been a very complex issue; it takes a lot of work, a lot of discussion, some which I do not have the patience for, and I will be the first one to admit that; but we worked together as a group collectively and fought out the battles and discussed it. I can truthfully say I believe that this piece of legislation is a great step forward to accomplish what I am seeking to do and have the safest pipelines in the United States. Twenty-two million miles of pipeline exist in the United States. This will be the first time where we know they will be inspected in a period of time, they will be repaired under the system of this bill on time, we will not have the accidents, hopefully, that have been happening in the past, and we will be able to deliver that product to the homes that they so badly need to live their lives. Again, I thank the staff for the work they have done on both sides of the aisle. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, first, I would like to thank the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) for his cooperation in reaching this compromise on H.R. 3609, the Pipeline Infrastructure Protection and Enhancement Security and Safety Act. I also would like to thank my good friend and hunting partner, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) for their hard work in crafting a bill that both our committees can agree to. H.R. 3609 improves safety and protects workers and residents who live near pipelines. H.R. 3609 will strengthen the training procedures of pipeline workers, and implement a tough inspection and rigorous inspection schedule of pipelines. The bill will improve the permitting procedures that allow operators to make the repairs that will be required under rules currently being developed at the Department of Transportation. The bill will improve the enforcement of statutes and regulations that cover pipeline and operators at facilities. Mr. Speaker, this is a good piece of legislation, and I urge my colleagues to support the legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I do agree with the gentleman's words and I insert into the Record at this point an exchange of letters between myself and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert) regarding H.R. 3609. House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Washington, DC, July 23, 2002. Hon. Sherwood L. Boehlert, Chairman, Committee on Science, Rayburn Building, Washington,

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton), one of the great subcommittee chairmen of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. (Mr. BARTON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject matter of this bill, H.R. 3609.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3609) to amend title 49, United States Code, to enhance the security and safety of pipelines, as amended.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the bill H.R. 4775, the Defense and Homeland Security Supplemental Appropriations Act Conference Report. I would like to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, for including the restoration of highway funds that was agreed to by the Authorization Committee and 410 Members of this House. It was the right thing to do, and it will benefit all the States for transportation needs. Although unfortunately, the Committee on Appropriations also rescinded $320 million in highway contract authority that was created in TEA-21 and has already been appropriated to every State, such a rescission is unprecedented, and it is absolutely unacceptable to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. This $320 million will be taken from the balance of the contract authority that exceeded the obligation limitations that has been placed on the highway program. So it is sometimes called excess contract authority, but there will still be programmatic impacts resulting from this rescission. State Departments of Transportation utilize their full amount of contract authority when they plan ahead for projects in every Members' district. It has an immediate effect, too. States have been given the flexibility to move funds across programs. This flexibility will be lessened in 2003 by this rescission. Therefore, some of the transportation projects that were coming off the shelf in 2003 will be put back on the shelf. The rescission of the contract's authority should not be used now or in the future to balance the spending of the Congress. I will submit for the Record a State-by-State table showing the cuts to each state. STATE-BY-STATE IMPACT OF $310 M RESCISSION OF HIGhWAY CONTRACT

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3048) to resolve the claims of Cook Inlet Region, Inc., to lands adjacent to the Russian River in the State of Alaska, as amended.

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

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate your ability to pronounce the name of my good friend from American Samoa. This legislation, H.R. 3048, introduced by myself, ratifies a land settlement at Russian River on the Kenai Peninsula in Alaska. Section 14(h)(1) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act authorized ANCSA corporations to make selections of cultural sites within their region. Cook Inlet Region, Inc., selected historical sites and cemetery sites 26 years ago. Initially, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Forest Service, which jointly managed the land at issue, contested CIRI's selections. Not only is the area surrounding the confluence of the Russian and Kenai Rivers rich in archeological and cultural features, but it is also the site of perhaps the most heavily used public sports fishery in Alaska. For the past 3 years, CIRI has been negotiating with Fish and Wildlife and the Forest Service for lands surrounding the confluence of the Russian and Kenai Rivers. On July 26, 2001, all three parties reached an agreement which allows the public to maintain the right to fish the waters at the confluence of the two rivers. Without Federal legislation, this agreement could not be ratified. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4870) to make certain adjustments to the boundaries of the Mount Naomi Wilderness Area, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, this bill was sponsored by the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen), the chairman of the Committee on Resources. Mount Naomi is located in the Wasatch-Cache National Forest near Logan, Utah in the gentleman from Utah's (Mr. Hansen) district. It is a beautiful area composed of approximately 44,523 acres, making it one of the largest wilderness areas in the State of Utah. It is the host of many different families of both plants and animals and undoubtedly deserves wilderness protection. Mount Naomi was designated a wilderness area by the Utah Wilderness Act of 1984. However, some complications have arisen because of the close proximity of the wilderness boundary to Logan City limits. Management and maintenance problems have been reported by the Forest Service and Logan City. Within the southwest corner of the wilderness boundary, lying adjacent to Logan City limits, is a utility corridor with several lines, including power, communication and water lines. This utility corridor existed prior to the designation of the wilderness area. Because no motorized or mechanized equipment is allowed to operate within the wilderness area, maintenance of these facilities is difficult, if not impossible, to conduct. A simple adjustment of the wilderness boundary would provide a commonsense solution to both the utility corridor's maintenance and the Forest Service's management problems. This legislation would adjust the wilderness boundary to exclude the 31-acre parcel that houses the utility corridor. The new boundary would follow the natural contour lines of Mount Naomi. To compensate for this adjustment, and prevent a net loss of wilderness, the Forest Service has identified a separate 31-acre parcel with wilderness characteristics to the southern boundary of the wilderness area to be added. This adjustment would thus provide a manageable, natural boundary for the wilderness area. This legislation has support from the local Forest Service, Logan City and Cache County, and is the smallest area needed to accomplish this purpose. Additionally, a small portion of the Bonneville Shoreline Trail has been proposed within the 31-acre area adjacent to the Logan City limits. This portion of the trail would connect with a number of other trails in the Bonneville Shoreline Trail system and provide outstanding recreational opportunities to thousands of people each year. When completed, the trail system will travel along the shoreline of the ancient Lake Bonneville, which stretches from northern Utah to southern Utah, near present-day Cedar City. This trail system has been incredibly popular for hikers, mountain bikers and equestrian traffic. This is the only portion of this trail system that lies within the wilderness area. This is good legislation. I want to compliment the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen) on proposing it and urge all my colleagues to support it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.