Platte River Recovery Implementation Program and Pathfinder Modification Authorization Act

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 2739) to authorize certain programs and activities in the Department of the Interior, the Forest Service, and the Department of Energy, to implement further the Act approving the Covenant to Establish a Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands in Political Union with the United States of America, to amend the Compact of Free Association Amendments Act of 2003, and for other purposes.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to call up this legislation which is comprised of 61 separate measures that were already considered by this body, packaged by the Senate, and sent back to us for further and final consideration. This is a bipartisan package, almost evenly split between bills sponsored by Democrats and Republicans.

Further, I would note that 57 of the measures included in this package originated in the Committee on Natural Resources. In this regard, I salute the committee's Chairs who worked so hard on this legislation:

Raul Grijalva, chairman of the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands; Grace Napolitano, chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Water and Power, and Donna Christensen, chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Insular Affairs.

In this body, these three Members did all of the heavy lifting, the hearings, the managing of the individual bills on the floor, the listening from other Members of this body that helped to make the package we are considering today possible.

The pending measures include new protections for wilderness, national parks, historic sites and trails, and precious water resources from sea to shining sea.

I will not speak to each and every provision of this legislation today but would like to highlight two in particular.

This bill will finally designate the long-awaited Wild Sky Wilderness in Washington State, championed by our colleague, Rick Larsen. As I noted last week when the House considered wilderness legislation for my home State of West Virginia, to be in a wilderness area is truly a humbling experience. To be part of designating the wilderness is even more humbling because wilderness is an effort to retain the landscape as God created it. And as with God's good graces, we are working toward designating new wilderness areas in West Virginia today.

Let this be the next-to-last action, other than the President's signature, on establishing the Wild Sky Wilderness in the State of Washington.

The other measure I would like to highlight would finally bring badly needed immigration, national security and labor protections for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Further, this legislation would also grant a nonvoting delegate to the U.S. House of Representatives to the Northern Mariana Islands.

For too long, abuses took place in the CNMI, and for too long remedial legislation was held hostage in this body. Let this legislation bring forth a new dawn, the start of a new era with a delegate to this body, that the people of the CNMI's voices be heard.

Again, I want to thank the gentlelady from the Virgin Islands, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Dr. Donna Christensen, for her great work on this matter.

There are other issues of note in this bill. It would expand parks in Maine, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Washington and Idaho. It would improve visitor transportation options at Denali National Park and Acadia National Park. And it would expand and increase the authorization for the National Underground Railroad Network to Freedom. Three new national heritage areas and nine existing areas will receive Federal assistance under this measure. Seven other areas will be examined as possible new park units.

This bill would also authorize Federal participation in new and expanded water recycling projects around the west, projects which will provide an estimated 52,600 acre-feet of water annually in an area experiencing severe drought.

It's a good bill, Mr. Speaker. I urge all Members to vote for this package.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to a senior member of our Committee on Natural Resources, Mr. DeFazio from Oregon.

Mr. Speaker, I have already commended her profusely, but I want to once again thank the chairwoman of our Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Donna Christensen, from the Virgin Islands for the hard work and long hours that she has put in on this legislation. I now yield her 3 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I want to yield 2 minutes to another of our subcommittee chairwomen who has put in long hours and very hard work on this legislation, the chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife and Oceans (Ms. Bordallo).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to a member of our Committee on Natural Resources, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee).

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

Mr. Speaker, I have commended this gentleman in my opening remarks because he truly has worked hard over a number of years for a major part of this package. It is a highlight of the package, and I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Larsen) to explain it.

Mr. Speaker, a simple response to the gentleman who just spoke. There's no eminent domain authority whatsoever granted in this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut, a very valued Member that has worked hard on this bill and has done a superb job, and I want to commend Mr. Courtney for his leadership and work on this legislation.

I am prepared to close on this side, Mr. Speaker.

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

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, this is 60-some pieces of legislation in this bill, and it may not be perfect, but it's the nature of the beast, as the process is. Of the 60-some measures in this legislation, 57 that went through our committee on

Natural Resources were pretty well examined. They weren't just thrown into this bill without any consideration whatsoever. Either in this Congress or the previous Congress, these bills have had hearings on them. I mentioned the subcommittee process that worked its will in our Committee on Natural Resources. So this bill has had pretty careful scrutiny.

I'd like to conclude by commending the majority leader of the other body, Mr. Reid. He has called me on this legislation. It passed through the other body after a tortuous process. The final vote over there was 91-4. I also want to commend the Chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee on the other side, Mr. Bingaman, for his work and his tenacity.

Again, I commend my ranking member, the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) and the subcommittee ranking member, Mr. Bishop, and the staffs on both sides of our committee on Natural Resources for the long hours that they have put in on this legislation. It is indeed, as the process goes, an excellent piece of legislation, and I am very proud and highly commend it to my colleagues for passage and on to the President for his signature.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado, Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this Senate- passed bill, and urge that it be passed and sent to the President for signing into law.

It gathers into one omnibus measure some 60 bills--dealing with various public land, national park, water, and territorial issues--that have already been passed by the House but on which the Senate has not taken separate action. To expedite their consideration, Senator Bingaman, the Chairman of the other body's Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, gathered them into one package after most if not all of them had been favorably reported by that committee and been pending on the Senate calendar for some time. Each part of the package is important, but I want to highlight three.

produced water legislation

Section 514, entitled ``More Water, More Energy, Less Waste,'' is based on my bill, H.R. 902, the ``More Water and More Energy Act,'' which passed the House last year.

Its purpose is to facilitate the use of water produced in connection with development of energy resources for irrigation and other uses in ways that will not adversely affect water quality or the environment.

I think there is a possibility that it can help change an energy- industry problem into an opportunity, not just for oil and gas producers but for everyone else who would benefit from increased supplies of useable water. And especially in the arid west, that covers everyone--not least our hard-pressed ranchers and farmers.

The focus of the section is the underground water extracted in connection with development of energy sources like oil, natural gas or coalbed methane. It would do two things:

First, it would direct the Bureau of Reclamation and the USGS to identify the obstacles to greater use of produced water and how those obstacles could be reduced or eliminated without adversely affecting water quality or the environment.

Second, it would provide for Federal help in building pilot plants to demonstrate ways to treat produced water to make it suitable for irrigation or other uses, again without adversely affecting water quality or the environment. At least one of these pilot plants would be in each of the States in the Upper Basin of the Colorado River--that is, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming--and at least one would be in one of the States in the Colorado River's lower basin--Arizona, California, and Nevada. This is to assure that, together, the plants would demonstrate techniques applicable to a variety of geologic and other conditions. The Federal Government could pay up to half the cost of building each plant, but no more than $1 million for any one plant. No Federal funds could be used for operating the plants.

The extent of the potential benefits was shown by the testimony of Mr. David Templet at a hearing on the similar bill of mine the House considered in the 109th Congress.

Testifying on behalf of the Domestic Petroleum Council and several other groups, including the Colorado Oil & Gas Association, he noted that produced water is the most abundant byproduct associated with the production of oil and gas, with about 18 billion barrels being generated by onshore wells in 1995. And he pointed out that if only an additional 1 percent of that total could be put to beneficial use, the result would be to make over 75 billion gallons annually available for use for irrigation or other agriculture, municipal purposes, or to benefit fish and wildlife.

Now, remember that in the west we usually measure water by the acre- foot--the amount that would cover an acre to the depth of one foot--and an acre-foot is about 328,560 gallons, so an additional 75 billion gallons is more than 230,000 acre feet--more water, indeed.

And at the same time making produced water available for surface uses, instead of just reinjecting it into the subsurface, can help increase the production of oil and gas.

At the hearing, this was illustrated by the testimony of Dr. David Stewart, a registered professional engineer from Colorado. He cited the example of an oil field in California from which an estimated additional 150 million barrels of oil could be recovered if water were removed from the subsurface reservoir. And he pointed out that where oil recovery is thermally enhanced, a reduced amount of underground water means less steam--and so less cost--is needed to recover the oil.

The potential for having both more water and more energy is also illustrated by the example of a project near Wellington, Colorado, that treats produced water as a new water resource. I had the opportunity to visit it last year, and found it very interesting. An oil company is embarking on the project to increase oil production while a separate company will purchase the produced water to supplement existing supplies, eventually allowing the town of Wellington and other water users in the area to have increased water for drinking and other purposes.

In view of its potential for leading to both ``more water'' and ``more energy'' as well as ``less waste,'' I was pleased but not surprised that the Administration, through the Interior Department, has testified that it ``agrees that the goals of the bill are commendable and the needs that could be addressed are real.'' So, I welcome the fact that the Senate has followed the lead of the House in approving this legislation, and I look forward to its enactment.

platte river recovery implementation legislation

Section 515 of this Senate-passed bill is also based on a bill (H.R. 1462) I introduced last year. It will authorize the Interior Department to participate in the implementation of the Platte River Recovery Implementation Program for Endangered Species in the Central and Lower Platte River Basin.

As I said when the House debated that bill, I consider myself fortunate to have the honor of introducing it, and am gratified that it was cosponsored by my Colorado colleagues, Representatives DeGette, Salazar, and Perlmutter, as well as the entire House delegations of our neighboring States of Wyoming and Nebraska.

Its purpose is to continue a cooperative effort involving the Federal Government and the States of Colorado, Nebraska, and Wyoming (and other entities and groups) aimed at recovery of endangered species in ways that will not involve the creation of Federal water rights or requiring the grant of water rights to Federal entities. It is the result of 14 years of negotiations that culminated in 2006 when the Governors of Colorado, Wyoming, and Nebraska joined Secretary Kempthorne in signing the agreement.

The program is modeled after a somewhat similar program for the recovery of several endangered species of fish in the upper basin of the Colorado River. I have strongly supported that program because it has enabled us in Colorado and other participating States to meet the requirements of the Endangered Species Act while allowing continued development and use of water for other purposes as well. While such arrangements are not easy to work out, I think doing so is far better than alternative approaches that are more likely to be marked by conflicts or litigation. So, I think all concerned in the negotiation of this important agreement are to be congratulated.

The Program has three main elements--(1) increasing stream flows in the central Platte River during relevant periods through retiming and water conservation/supply projects; (2) enhancing, restoring and protecting habitat lands for the target bird species; and (3) accommodating certain new water related activities. Its purpose is to benefit three endangered species (interior least tern, whooping crane, and pallid sturgeon) and one threatened species (piping plover) referred to as the ``target species.'' The Federal Government is to pay half the cost, for which the total authorization would be $157.14 million plus any needed inflation adjustments. Implementation of the Program will mitigate the adverse impacts of certain new water related activities through the implementation of state and federal depletions plans. This will allow continued growth and water development to occur in the Platte River basin along with improving conditions for the target species.

The legislation is important for Colorado and our neighbors in Wyoming and Nebraska. I am glad that the Senate has approved it and look forward to its becoming law.

Northern Marianas Legislation

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I want to note that Title VII of the bill before us includes important provisions related to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, or CNMI.

Subtitle A of that Title responds to longstanding Federal concerns regarding immigration, labor, and law enforcement in the CNMI.

Its enactment will bring completion, at long last, to more than a decade of congressional and executive branch efforts to extend the U.S. immigration laws to the CNMI including the establishment of Federal border control as anticipated by the 1976 covenant agreement between the CNMI and the United States.

And Subtitle B will enable the citizens of the CNMI--who have been U.S. citizens and members of the U.S. family for over 20 years--to elect a Delegate to the House of Representatives, a necessary step if we are to keep faith with our Nation's founding principle of representative government.

The CNMI, a U.S. Territory located in the western Pacific Ocean, is an archipelago comprised of fourteen islands. The majority of CNMI's population lives on three of the most southern islands: its capital Saipan, Rota, and Tinian. At the end of World War II, along with most of the other islands in the Micronesian region, they were included in a United Nations Strategic Trust Territory administered by the United States. In the early 1970's, the Northern Marianas sought greater self- government, and in 1975 submitted a ``Covenant'' proposal to the U.S. for final approval. After favorable consideration by Congress, that Covenant, which established the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands in political union with the United States, was signed into law in 1976 by President Gerald Ford.

During the negotiations over the Covenant, island officials expressed concern about possible adverse effects on their culture and economic development that could come from application of certain U.S. laws. In response, the Marianas government was given temporary responsibility for determining minimum wage laws, immigration standards, and an income tax system.

Beginning in the late 1980s, the CNMI focused on developing a garment industry and used its local control of immigration policy to allow for the recruitment and importation of foreign guest workers. But there were increasing reports of abuses.

For example, after visiting the islands in July, 1997, the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform reported it had found problems ``ranging from bureaucratic inefficiencies to labor abuses to an unsustainable economic, social and political system that is antithetical to most American values,'' including exploitation of foreign workers with retaliation against protesters, suppression of basic freedoms, and flagrant abuses of household workers, agricultural workers, and bar girls. The Commission said the CNMI's guest-worker policy had created major policy problems and resulted in a two-class system where the majority of workers were denied political and social rights.

That and similar reports prompted efforts to achieve reforms through Federal legislation, and both the George H. W. Bush Administration and the Clinton Administration were concerned about repeated allegations that foreign guest workers were being mistreated and exploited. Both Administrations supported addressing the problem through legal reforms.

I have long supported those reforms. In 1999--my first year as a Representative from Colorado--I joined as a cosponsor of a bill a bill entitled the ``United States-Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Human Dignity Act'' to bar use of the ``Made in the USA'' label on textiles produced in the CNMI unless they were produced in plants that conformed with American labor laws, including those aimed at protecting health and safety and guarding against exploitation.

And ever since, I have supported similar legislation, including the bill (H.R. 3079, the ``Northern Mariana Islands Immigration, Security, and Labor Act'') which passed the House last year and which is the basis for Subtitle A of Title VII of the bill before us today.

I did so, in part, because in September, 1999, the Committee on Resources (as it was then named) held an oversight hearing regarding the enforcement of federal laws and the use of federal funds in the CNMI at which officials of the Interior Department and the Departments of Justice and Labor, testified that reform legislation was needed.

As the witness from the Justice Department put it, ``in order to control crime in the CNMI, the U.S. government must be able to prevent criminals from gaining unlimited access to the islands. We cannot expect to stop the flow of drugs, or guns, or trafficking in women and forced prostitution, unless we keep out the people who we know are already committing these crimes'' and ``the only way to fight effectively the larger crime problem on the CNMI is to apply the Act as it is applied in other U.S. jurisdictions with appropriate transitional phase-in provisions to prevent avoidable adverse impacts on the economy.'' And the witness from the Labor Department told our committee that ``there are extremely serious, pervasive, and stubbornly persist[ing] immigration, labor, and human rights problems in the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas'' which ``derive from systematic, structural weaknesses in the legal framework in the Commonwealth and any solution to these problems demands a comprehensive, structural solution.''

In short, in the words of the witness from the Interior Department, ``current Federal law is insufficient to correct the continuing inadequacies caused by CNMI immigration and labor policy'' and ``the need to apply . . . Federal immigration, wage, and trade standards is inescapable.''

Unfortunately Mr. Speaker, while responsible Federal officials saw the need as inescapable, for too long Congress did not act to meet that need. In part, that was because those responsible for some of the worse abuses had friends in powerful positions here in the House of Representatives.

That evidently was why the then-leadership of the House refused to even allow the House to debate a reform bill (S. 1052 of the 106th Congress) sponsored by the Republican Senator who chaired the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources that passed the Senate without dissent in 2000.

Instead of being brought to the House floor, like this bill, that measure was bottled up in the Resources Committee and Jack Abramoff, the lobbyist who represented some of its most important opponents, reportedly informed his clients that ``We erected a roadblock in the House to stop the bill from moving.''

But now that roadblock is gone, and today we can write an end to that sad chapter by approving reforms that have been delayed far too long.

Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill that deserves enactment, and I urge the House to approve it.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, Senate bill 2739 contains around 62 provisions, and I am pleased to see that they're finally on their way to the President's desk. However, this bill is also a testament to the dysfunction of a certain body on the other side of this Rotunda.

Many of the sections of this bill are unable to stand on their own and have subsequently been bundled into a $300 million brew to avoid individual scrutiny. To solve the problem and avoid the discomfort of saying ``no,'' this omnibus was created with enough prizes that inevitably the bad will be overlooked and everything, the good, the bad and the ugly, will be able to cross the finish line.

Many of these provisions were passed by this House last year, so it's nice to say that finally something is coming out of the Senate, even if it's coming in this very poor form. But in other ways this bill is also symbolic of this session. We have wasted time and then glob everything together and throw it together with one fell swoop without the ability of scrutinizing it as individual issues, and at the same time miss essential bills that address critical needs.

This legislation deals with land where energy opportunities do exist, and yet once again we are moving forward with gas approaching $4 a gallon. Today, the average price of gasoline in the United States was $3.61. That's $1.28 for gasoline, $1.57 for diesel, 55 and 59 percent above what it was at the beginning of the 110th Congress. And still, with no plan to solve this issue, we pass bills that exacerbate this conundrum.

This particular bill is full of new designations intended to draw tourists, but the only sightseeing that's going to be done in this country will be from the couch watching the Travel Channel if we don't address our fuel crisis. Every time we pass feel-good natural resource legislation with warm and fuzzy titles, we must consider the damage being done to our ability to provide for ourselves. We have locked up so much of our public land from energy development that we are now seeing the results at the pump, and these are our priorities.

What else do we do? Our solution is to offer biofuels; in other words, we want to burn food to power cars. Not only is this immoral, it is devastating Third World countries now unable to afford food to feed their starving children. These are our priorities.

We could have used forest mass that's dead every year, it would have been perfect cellulose for production of energy and at the same time save our forests from catastrophic fires, but such was specifically prohibited in the ``no energy'' bill that passed this Congress recently. So, these are our consequences.

We discussed many of the sections in this bill individually when they first came to the House floor in 2007. We did it the right way, even if I disagreed with some of the outcomes we decided. Unfortunately, they are back without improvements that would have made them palatable.

I don't believe private property rights are adequately protected in any of the heritage areas in this bill. And I question why the amendment to protect second amendment rights, which was overwhelmingly passed on the House floor, was stripped from this package. It is flat out wrong to have done that. It is almost unfathomable that the Senate would do such a thing and that we would consider passing this bill with that significant provision not there. Yet again, the second amendment and property rights take a back seat to misguided priorities of the other body.

As I stated earlier, there are a few positives I am pleased to support. Congressmen Wilson and Brown of South Carolina have worked to get the ``Swamp Fox'' General Francis Marion Memorial to the President. I congratulate them. Minority Whip Blunt has labored to authorize the Newtonia Civil War Battlefields study that we will move today. I thank him for his fine work. My Resource Committee colleague, Congressman Louis Gohmert from Texas, has an important study to honor the Space Shuttle, Columbia, and I'm pleased that this is included in Senate 2739. Resource Committee Ranking Member Don Young has several provisions that will benefit the country and his constituents in Alaska, and I thank him for his tireless efforts and advocacy on their behalf.

Finally, of all the provisions, probably the best one is a dam bill provision for my congressional district. This

provision would authorize the Bureau of Reclamation to do a feasibility study on raising the height of the Arthur V. Watkins Dam in Box Elder County. And given the shortage of water in the West, by increasing storage capacity of this vital reservoir, the residents of my congressional district will have a more secure water supply and water future.

Having already spent too many hours debating these bills when they came before us that now make up this legislative Frankenstein, I see no need to prolong this much longer.

I will reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentlelady from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf).

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).

(Mr. BROUN of Georgia asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

I continue to reserve.

Mr. Speaker, this Frankenstein bill that we have before us has a whole lot of good stuff in it. It also has a whole lot of bad stuff in there, things that could be cataclysmic consequences to this particular country.

One of the things that is so sad is the process in which we are involved. I realize it's regular order, but it's still a sad process. We have germaneness rules that are very loose. The Senate has germaneness rules that are even looser. Former Senator Gene McCarthy said, The Senate has rules, but no one knows what they are so it doesn't really matter.

Bringing a bill in this pattern with these many provisions over here is something that would never be allowed in most legislative bodies within our States. One of the things we should learn as a body is sometimes it is best if we actually deal with bills on an individual basis in a timely manner. I realize part of this problem cannot be laid at the hands of the chairman of our committee because it's actually dealing with the other body on the other side, which decided to lump everything together as a big glob and just throw it at us.

At the same time, it should be a lesson for us to learn that if we really want to reform the system so that we have actual input on bills in a timely fashion and timely manner, we should have one issue, one bill, one vote, and plumping everything together is simply poor parts of legislation. For all the good that is in this bill, and there is much good, as well as the bad, and there is some bad, it still is the wrong process that we should be engaged.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation, which I introduced earlier this year.

I want to express my thanks to Chairman Rahall, Ranking Member Don Young, Subcommittee Chairwoman Napolitano, and Subcommittee Ranking Member McMorris Rodgers for making it possible for the bill to come before the House of Representatives today.

The legislation will authorize the Interior Department to participate in the implementation of the Platte River Recovery Implementation Program for Endangered Species in the Central and Lower Platte River Basin.

I consider myself fortunate to have the honor of introducing it, and am gratified that it is cosponsored by my Colorado colleagues, Representatives DeGette, Salazar, and Perlmutter, as well as the entire House delegations of our neighboring States of Wyoming and Nebraska.

Its purpose is to continue a cooperative effort involving the Federal Government and the States of Colorado, Nebraska, and Wyoming (and other entities and groups) aimed at recovery of endangered species in ways that will not involve the creation of Federal water rights or requiring the grant of water rights to Federal entities.

This legislation is the result of 14 years of negotiations that culminated last year when the Governors of Colorado, Wyoming, and Nebraska joined Secretary Kempthorne in signing the agreement.

Since then, initial implementing steps have begun and the President's budget for fiscal 2008 has requested the initial funding for the program.

The program is modeled after a somewhat similar program for the recovery of several endangered species of fish in the upper basin of the Colorado River. I have strongly supported that program because it has enabled us in Colorado and other participating States to meet the requirements of the Endangered Species Act while allowing continued development and use of water for other purposes as well.

While such arrangements are not easy to work out, I think doing so is far better than alternative approaches that are more likely to be marked by conflicts or litigation. So, I think all concerned in the negotiation of this important agreement are to be congratulated.

Mr. Speaker, this is an important bill that deserves the support of the entire House, and I urge its approval. For the benefit of our colleagues, I am attaching information about the background of the Recovery Program addressed by the bill:

Background

Since 1997, the States of Colorado, Nebraska, and Wyoming

have worked with water users, conservation groups and the

Interior Department to develop ways to allow continued water

use and development along the Platte River to comply with the

Endangered Species Act (ESA).

In late 2006 the States and the Interior Department signed

the final agreement for a basin-wide Recovery Program to

benefit three endangered species (interior least tern,

whooping crane, and pallid sturgeon) and one threatened

species (piping plover) referred to as the ``target

species.''

The Federal government is to pay half the cost--and the

bill authorizes appropriation of those funds. Total

authorization would be $157.14 million plus any needed

inflation adjustments.

Recovery Program

The Program is designed to secure defined benefits for the

target species and their associated habitats while also

providing ESA compliance for existing and certain new water-

related activities in the Platte River basin. It is to be

incremental, with the First Increment coming over the next 13

years. It would be implemented by a Governance Committee with

membership including representatives of the three states, the

Interior Department, water users, and environmental groups.

While the Program is designed to provide ESA compliance for

existing and certain new water-related activities throughout

the Platte River basin upstream of the confluence of the

Platte and the Loup Rivers (in Nebraska), the land

acquisition and management for the target bird species will

occur in the central Platte River region (Lexington to

Chapman, Nebraska), and Program water activities would be

designed to provide benefits for the target bird species in

the central Platte River region and for the pallid sturgeon

in the lower Platte River region (below the confluence with

the Elkhorn River).

Elements of the Program

The Program has three main elements--(1) increasing stream

flows in the central Platte River during relevant periods

through retiming and water conservation/supply projects; (2)

enhancing, restoring and protecting habitat lands for the

target bird species; and (3) accommodating certain new water-

related activities.

The Program will achieve these results through an adaptive

management approach employing scientific monitoring and

research to evaluate the management actions and species

habitat needs. These elements will be implemented according

to underlying principles that require interests in land to be

acquired only from willing participants and avoid increasing

tax burdens to local citizens by paying taxes or their

equivalent on Program lands. Program lands will be held by a

land holding entity (rather than by the Federal or state

governments) and will be managed under a ``good neighbor''

policy.

Water

The Program's long-term objective for water is to provide

sufficient water to and through the central Platte River

habitat area to assist in improving and maintaining habitat

for the target species using incentive based water projects.

During the First Increment (13 years) the Program's objective

is to retime and improve flows in the central Platte River to

reduce shortages to target flows by an average of 130,000 to

150,000 acre-feet per year at Grand Island.

Land

During the First Increment, the Program's objective is to

protect, restore, and maintain 10,000 acres of habitat. The

Program's long-term objective for land is to acquire land

interests, restore where appropriate, and maintain and manage

approximately 29,000 acres of suitable habitat along the

central Platte River between Lexington and Chapman, Nebraska.

Land acquired during the Program's First Increment will be

credited to this long-term objective as will certain lands

that meet criteria established by the Governance Committee

but are managed by other entities such as environmental

organizations or utility and irrigation districts.

Future Water Development Projects and New Depletions

One Program purpose is to mitigate the adverse impacts of

certain new water-related activities through the

implementation of state and Federal depletions plans. This

will allow continued growth and water development to occur in

the Platte River basin along with improving conditions for

the target species.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 2739, the Consolidated Natural Resources Act of 2008. This measure, recently approved by the Senate, includes a number of measures that earlier had been approved by the House of Representatives, including H.R. 2094, a bill that I sponsored with Representatives Jerry Moran, Todd Tiahrt, Nancy Boyda, Leonard Boswell, and Mac Thornberry. As an Executive Committee member of the Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial Commission, I know that this legislation is important to our continuing efforts to establish a National, permanent memorial to President Eisenhower. H.R. 2094 would make important amendments to the statute establishing the Eisenhower Memorial Commission, so that it can more effectively discharge its duties.

Congress created the Eisenhower Memorial Commission in 1999 and charged the Commission with establishing a National memorial to Dwight David Eisenhower to honor his memory and commemorate his contributions to the nation. The Commission is completely bipartisan, consisting of four Senators, four Representatives, and four private citizens. The Commission keeps an office in Washington, DC, with four full-time staff, including an Executive Director and Executive Architect.

Since determining a preferred site in June 2005, the Commission has worked tirelessly to speed the progress of the memorialization. In September 2006, only fifteen months later, the Commission received final site approval from the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts. The National Eisenhower Memorial will be located across the street from the National Air and Space Museum at the intersection of Maryland and Independence Avenues, SW. The site is surrounded by institutions Ike either created or profoundly influenced, including the Department of Education.

The Commission is now engaged in Pre-Design Programming, a concerted effort to determine what the memorial should be. Eisenhower family members, Eisenhower contemporaries, historians, Kansans, and many others have been interviewed on their vision for the memorial. A voluntary online questionnaire is available to the public. Although there are many diverse opinions on Ike's greatest achievement and the appropriate focus for his memorial, all agree that Eisenhower is, as Michael Korda presents in his new biography, ``an American hero.''

I am particularly proud to claim one of the greatest 20th-century Americans as a fellow Kansan. He ranks as one of the preeminent figures in the global history of the 20th century. Dwight Eisenhower spent his entire life in public service. His most well-known contributions include serving as Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Forces in World War II and as 34th President of the United States, but Eisenhower also served as the first commander of NATO and as President of Columbia University. Dramatic changes occurred in America during his lifetime, many of which he participated in and influenced through his extraordinary leadership as President. Although Ike grew up before automobiles existed, he created the Interstate Highway System and took America into space. He created NASA, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, and the Federal Aviation Administration. He added Hawaii and Alaska to the United States and ended the Korean War. President Eisenhower desegregated the District of Columbia and sent federal troops into Little Rock, Arkansas, to enforce school integration. He defused international crises and inaugurated the national security policies that guided the nation for the next three decades, leading to the peaceful end of the Cold War. A career soldier, Eisenhower championed peace, freedom, justice and security, and as President he stressed the interdependence of those goals. He spent a lifetime fulfilling his duty to his country, always remembering to ask what's best for America.

The development of the Pre-Design Program will produce three books to serve as an information packet for potential designers and the eventual design team for the memorial. The reasons for building a memorial to Eisenhower are only one part of the challenge set out in the Pre-Design Program. Technical considerations and guidance from the National Park Service are also included. Issues from preserving the historic view to the U.S. Capitol to providing a National Park Service Ranger station at the site are presented. This stage is the last major step prior to procuring a design team.

While the Eisenhower Memorial Commission has so far been able to efficiently manage the memorialization process, the tasks involved in design and construction require revised administrative and operational authority. H.R. 2094 provides the needed revisions and will enable the Commission to work more efficiently and effectively during design and construction when quick turnaround times are vital and daily decisions must be made. The authority provided in this legislation is based on the authority given to temporary commissions in existence for up to three years. The Eisenhower Memorial Commission has similar needs, but exists for no set time period. The Commission will exist until the completion of the memorial.

For example, H.R. 2094 will enable the Commission to hire temporary federal employees instead of contract consultants, simplifying administration of staffing and covering the liability of its employees. H.R. 2094 will also provide for the Executive Architect to represent the Commission on the panels that will select the design team for the memorial. As currently written, the Commission's legislation prohibits its staff or members from participating in the determination of the design team.

H.R. 2094 will enable the Commission to continue working not only to ensure that the National Eisenhower Memorial is an inspiration to future generations, but also to ensure that the memorialization process is an example of responsible public work. I urge my colleagues to support passage of S. 2739 today, and with it, the language included in

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 2739, the Consolidated Natural Resources Act of 2008. This bipartisan legislation consists of 61 measures that previously passed the House earlier in the 110th Congress. Among the bill's provisions is Section 201, which incorporates H.R. 276, the Piedras Blancas Historic Light Station Outstanding Natural Area Act of 2007, a bill I sponsored and was approved by the House on March 5, 2007, by voice vote.

First, I want to thank the chairman of the Natural Resources Committee, Mr. Rahall, and chairman of the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands, Mr. Grijalva, as well as the ranking members of the full Committee and Subcommittee for expediting the consideration of this legislation and for bringing S. 2739 before us today. I also want to thank Senator Bingaman, the chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, as well as Senator Feinstein and Senator Boxer for their support of the Consolidated Natural Resources Act.

Section 201 of S. 2739 would designate the Piedras Blancas Historic Light Station--located in my congressional district--as an Outstanding Natural Area within the BLM's National Landscape Conservation System.

The Piedras Blancas Light Station is located on an 18-acre parcel of BLM-administered land along the Pacific Coast in San Luis Obispo County. The property is adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway and the Hearst Castle State Historic Monument, and it looks over a pristine coastal area that includes the southern portion of the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary and California Coastal National Monument. It is also nationally recognized as an important monitoring point for migrating whales, and is used by the U.S. Geological Survey, the National Marine Fisheries Service and a number of universities and colleges for marine wildlife and plant research.

The Light Station and the surrounding area are also important for tourism. For example, the national historic Light House--built in 1879--is a main destination focal point on the Central Coast, and the peninsula is very popular for viewing sea otters, elephant seals, and sea lions from shore. The elephant seal colony at Piedras Blancas attracts an estimated 400,000 visitors annually.

In 2001, BLM assumed ownership and management of the Light Station from the U.S. Coast Guard. Since then, BLM, State and local agencies, community stakeholders and conservation groups have developed a very successful partnership to preserve the Light Station.

Some of these partners include: the Piedras Blancas Light Station Association; California State Parks; San Luis Obispo County; the cities of Cambria and San Simeon; the California Coastal Conservancy and Coastal Commission; NOAA; and the Hearst Corporation.

As a result of their hard work, the site was re-opened to public tours in 2003--for the first time in 128 years! These partners continue to work together on a series of environmental education, historical restoration and resource protection programs. And I'm confidant they will each support and showcase this national designation if enacted.

Mr. Speaker, I also want to acknowledge the second and third-graders at Grover Heights Elementary school in my congressional district for their support of this Light Station. In 2006, these students began the ``Pennies for Piedras'' campaign to raise money toward restoration of the lighthouse. By the end

of the school year, the students had raised $1337.30 in pennies to repair Piedras Blancas. I'm happy to report the students at Grover Heights continue this wonderful effort to protect and enhance one of the Central Coast's crown jewels.

As you know, my legislation tracks the successful model of designating the Oregon Coast's Yaquina Head as an Outstanding Natural Area, which was signed into law in 1980. Yaquina Head was later included in the National Landscape Conservation System.

Like Yaquina Head, the addition of the Piedras Blancas Light Station to the NLCS would be an important step in protecting and preserving this valuable natural and historic resource. It will also focus attention on the restoration of the Light Station and surrounding area, specifically the three on-site National Register properties. And, it will serve as a means to increase public awareness of the Light Station's scientific, cultural and educational values.

Specifically, Section 201 stresses long-term conservation of the Light Station by requiring timely completion of a management plan. The management plan would be developed through a public process and include guidelines for restoration of the National Register of Historic Places buildings, including the Light House; public access; ecological and cultural resource management; and, fostering scientific study and research opportunities.

Mr. Speaker, the Piedras Blancas Light Station is a wonderful resource. It has the potential to serve as a model for future resource management, and therefore would be an appropriate addition to the BLM's National Landscape Conservation System.

Again, I would like to thank the Committee on Natural Resources for supporting this bill, which among other things, will designate the Piedras Blancas Historic Light Station as an Outstanding Natural Area, and urge its immediate passage.