To replace a Coastal Barrier Resources System map relating to Coastal Barrier Resources System Grayton Beach Unit FL-95P in Walton County, Florida.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to express my concern with two bills to be considered under the suspension of the rules today: H.R. 138 and H.R. 479. These two bills would remove land from the Coastal Barrier Resources System, CBRS.

Created by the Coastal Barrier Resources Act of 1982, CBRA, CBRS is a Reagan-era free-market conservation program that denies Federal subsidies to development in certain coastal areas. It was created with three goals: to reduce risk to people and property, to discourage development in ecologically sensitive coastal barrier islands, and to save taxpayers from having to pay for building and rebuilding in high- risk areas. The program included 450,000 acres of coastal barrier islands in 1982 and was expanded to nearly 1.3. million acres in 1990. A unique program, CBRA doesn't preclude development; it just ensures that the Federal Government does not subsidize construction in inherently risky, environmentally fragile areas. This has been a highly successful program: a 2002 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service report estimated that the CBRS will save taxpayers more than $1.2 billion by 2010. In addition, at a time when our Nation has been losing our precious, fragile coastal ecosystems at an alarming rate to both development and coastal erosion, this program has discouraged development in those areas.

I believe that Congress should be working to expand this highly successful program and using its free-market approach as a model for other legislation. This is why I am disappointed that during my time in Congress I have only seen us moving in the wrong direction. The program has been slowly experiencing death by a thousand cuts. It has been more than 15 years since Congress added land to the system, and each Congress brings another set of technical corrections that remove acreage from the program. Even though most of these ``boundary adjustments'' are small, much of the land is ecologically significant.

I hope that my colleagues will join me during the next session of Congress in looking for ways to improve and expand federal programs to discourage development in ecologically sensitive and hazardous areas. Unfortunately, it appears that we have chosen to observe the anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, a painful reminder of the dangers of development in disaster-prone areas, by weakening a program that has been proven to save lives, money, and the environment.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 479) to replace a Coastal Barrier Resources System map relating to Coastal Barrier Resources System Grayton Beach Unit FL-95P in Walton County, Florida, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 479 corrects several Florida mapping mistakes implemented in the enactment of the Coastal Barrier Improvement Act of 1990. Under current law, only Congress can add or delete property from the Coastal Barrier Resources System. Under the bill, 20 acres of privately held land would be removed from the system, ensuring that the affected homeowners are eligible for Federal flood insurance in the future.

We would be making this change because this property was mistakenly included within an Otherwise Protected Area unit. It was designated based on the faulty assumption that this property was included within the boundaries of the Grayton Beach State Park and that the land was undeveloped. In fact, a number of those lots were fully developed with homes constructed by 1983; and, therefore, this property does not qualify for inclusion in the system.

With the Federal Flood Insurance Program experiencing a large number of claims, Congress should be cautious about providing access to additional beneficiaries. However, in this case, H.R. 479 satisfies the threshold of fixing legitimate mapping mistakes.

In addition, the new corrected map will add almost 1,600 acres of State parkland that was inadvertently left out of the unit when it was created in 1990. The net effect of this technical correction is that we expand the system by 1,562 acres of fastland and wetland habitat.

I would urge an ``aye'' vote on H.R. 479.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of my bill, H.R. 479, which creates a new Coastal Barriers Resources Map, removing the Old Miller Place Subdivision from the Otherwise Protected Area. I would like to thank Mr. Pombo and the Resources Committee for their hard work and commitment to this bill.

I will provide a little bit of background for my colleagues: Old Miller Place has been privately owned since the 1890s. The Miller family homesteaded it in 1903. The first residence was built in 1981 and the fourth was completed in 1985. Six lots remained unbuilt by 1990 because they were purchased for future retirement homes by their respective owners. In 2006, they lay bare as they await restoration of their right to build.

Old Miller Place was platted and developed in 1979, 6 years before the State of Florida's land acquisition program joined Grayton Beach State Park with the southern and eastern boundaries of Old Miller Place in 1985. In 1990, a layer of Federal protection was overlaid on part of Grayton Beach State Park when Congress expanded the Coastal Barrier Resources System to include areas known as ``Otherwise Protected Areas (OPA).'' In the case of Unit FL-95P, the otherwise protected area is Grayton Beach State Park. At the time of its creation in 1990, OPA Unit FL-95P included only about half of the 2,238 acres of Grayton Beach State Park and the entire 6.4 acre private-property subdivision known as the Old Miller Place.

Mr. Speaker, on paper this bill is a technical correction, but for the property owners in Old Miller Place Subdivision this bill means greater opportunity and freedom. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 479.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Mr. GRIJALVA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, this legislation has been championed by our colleague from Florida, Allen Boyd, without whose efforts it would not be on the floor today; and I want to thank him for that.

The majority has already adequately explained the bill. I would only note that the expansion of this Coastal Barrier Resource Unit will significantly increase the total area of lands that will now become ineligible for Federal flood insurance.

And because this region of the Florida panhandle is experiencing a frenzy of coastal development, this factor was a pivotal consideration in the committee's approval of H.R. 479.

The net conservation benefit in this instance was considered sufficient to protect the integrity of this coastal barrier unit, despite the strong reservations of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to remove some small areas of private land from the existing unit.

We on this side of the aisle do not object to this legislation.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate en bloc consideration of five bills received from the House: H.R. 5539, H.R. 138, H.R. 479, H.R. 5094, and H.R. 5381.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bills be read the third time and passed, a motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and any statements relating to the bills be printed in the Record, all en bloc.