[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 80 (Wednesday, June 22, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: June 22, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
   THE HOOVER DAM VISITORS CENTER AND ITS IMPACT ON ENERGY COSTS FOR 
                      RESIDENTS OF SOUTHERN NEVADA

  Mr. BRYAN. Mr. President, I rise today to bring to your attention an 
example of how an incompetently managed Federal program is going to be 
directly impacting my constituents in Nevada.
  In 1984, the Bureau of Reclamation came before Congress to seek an 
appropriation of $32 million for a visitors center at Hoover Dam.
  Hoover Dam, one of the most successful Federal economic development 
projects of all time, is a major source of pollution-free power for the 
Western region of the United States, and a great visitor attraction.
  The original $32 million cost projection for a new visitors center at 
Hoover Dam should have been more than sufficient to build one of the 
finest visitors centers in our country. Over the next 10 years, 
however, what could have been a model of efficiency and cost-
effectiveness, instead turned into a project of nightmarish 
proportions.
  This is a project that has more than doubled in costs while under 
construction, and consequently a project that will not be soon 
forgotten by the residents of southern Nevada. Indeed, these residents 
will remember every month they pay their power bill for the next 50 
years.
  Under terms of the Hoover Power Plant Act of 1984, beginning in 1996, 
those who receive Hoover Dam power will bear the full brunt of having 
to repay the costs of the visitors center. This includes Nevada Power 
Co. and its 400,000 residential users, and smaller power utilities such 
as Overton Power District and Valley Electric Association. Thirteen 
other power contractors, among them the Metropolitan Water District of 
Southern California, also receive their power from Hoover Dam and will 
be required to shoulder the additional cost.
  The Bureau of Reclamation has indicated the Hoover Dam visitors 
center has gone from $32 million in construction costs to $120 million. 
Add in the interest to repay the Federal Government, and Hoover Dam 
ratepayers have a bill due for $450 million. All for a visitors center.
  That is correct, Mr. President; $450 million all for a visitors 
center that was originally projected to cost $32 million plus the 
interest.
  What does this mean to the residents of southern Nevada? Because 
Nevada receives 21 percent of the hydroelectric power generated by 
Hoover Dam, Nevada users of Hoover Dam power will pay nearly $100 
million over the next 50 years.
  In 1985 Hoover ratepayers thought they had an agreement to pay for a 
$32 million facility plus interest, not a $120 million facility plus 
interest, a price that will undoubtedly go higher before the project is 
finally completed. In short, they agreed to pay for a visitors center, 
not the Taj Mahal.
  Hoover Dam itself was completed in 1935 at a cost of approximately 
$108 million. Hoover Dam is still considered to be one of the greatest 
marvels of engineering ever undertaken in the United States. It was 
truly an extraordinary achievement for a project of its magnitude 
considering the technology of its time. Hoover Dam has been named one 
of our Nation's seven modern engineering wonders by the American 
Society of Civil Engineers. For $108 million the Government got a 726-
foot-high concrete dam containing over 6\1/2\ million tons of concrete, 
and employment for over 5,250 workers during the height of the Great 
Depression. If the dam itself is one of the seven modern engineering 
wonders of our country, what does that make the visitors center? 
Undoubtably one of the most embarrassing and mismanaged Federal 
projects of all time.
  The new visitors center is indeed an improvement from the old 
visitors center, both from a safety as well as visitor access 
viewpoint. Some 750,000 visitors come to Hoover Dam each year, and the 
Bureau is expecting 1 million visitors by next year. But did it need a 
$16 million elevator system that has doubled in costs from original 
estimates? A 400-plus-seat theater sitting on an electric rotating 
platform?
  I think the answer to both of those questions is ``no.''
  You can imagine the sense of outrage of my constituents in southern 
Nevada, especially in areas such as Lincoln County where 100 percent of 
the power they receive is from Hoover Dam. Try explaining to them that 
their power rates are going to skyrocket over the next 50 years as a 
result of the building of the grandest visitors center ever built by 
the Federal Government.
  Who is to blame for this? What are we going to do about it?
  There are allegations that early in the project's development, 
someone--and I use that word advisedly--appears to have made a decision 
to use $77 million, which was appropriated for both the visitor center 
and increased generating capacity, solely to build a visitor center 
which was projected at $32 million. Someone decided to use $45 million 
that was intended to be used for the Hoover upgrade on the power plant 
and combine that and apply that for the construction of the visitor 
center, as well. I use the term ``someone'' because the smoking gun 
evidence has yet to be found that shows just who made this incredible 
decision.
  The only way we can find out about this and get to the bottom of it 
is to hold congressional hearings. Why and by whom the decision was 
made and what relief can be found for the ratepayers that are going to 
suffer as a result of this decision should be the primary focus of 
these hearings. It is the ratepayers who receive Hoover Dam power and 
the ratepayers who will be picking up the tab for this Federal 
mismanagement. It is the ratepayers in southern Nevada, in Lincoln, 
Nye, and Clark Counties, that will be hit in every power bill they 
receive each and every month from 1996 to the year 2046. It is these 
people, Mr. President, who deserve an answer and relief, and 
congressional hearings is the only way to assure that we will obtain 
that answer.
  I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DeCONCINI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 1830

  Mr. DeCONCINI. Mr. President, the pending amendment, as I understand 
it, is No. 1830 dealing with law enforcement retirement?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. DeCONCINI. Mr. President, the amendment I am offering will 
provide Customs inspectors and canine enforcement officers an 
opportunity to participate in the Law Enforcement Retirement System. 
The fact is, Mr. President that this amendment provides only part of 
the status that these employees truly deserve, which is full 
recognition and benefits given to other Federal law enforcement 
officers. Few can argue against the facts and statistics which support 
this position, yet past attempts by myself and my colleagues to provide 
full law enforcement status have been unsuccessful, due solely to 
budgetary constraints. I am hopeful that in fairness, we might, at 
least provide this one benefit.
  The Customs inspectors and canine officers, in their capacity as the 
first line of defense in the war on drugs, must work long, irregular 
hours and are frequently confronted with dangerous and stressful 
situations. A 1991 report by the Customs Inspector and Canine Officer 
Compensation Panel reported the following:

       1. Customs Inspectors and Canine Officers are assaulted 
     more often than FBI, Secret Service, and Customs Agents and 
     U.S. Marshals.
       2. In 1991 CI's and CEO's made 15,808 arrests, representing 
     73 percent of Customs total number of arrests.
       3. In 1991 CI's and CEO's seized 71,705--42 percent of 
     Customs' total--pounds of cocaine and 2,870 pounds of heroin, 
     97 percent of Customs' total.
       4. Only DEA and Bureau of Prisons officers are killed in 
     the line of duty more frequently.
       5. In addition to U.S. Customs laws, they enforce over 
     1,600 laws for 60 agencies.

  As stated in that 1991 report, ``Customs Inspectors constitute a 
vital part of the total enforcement function of the U.S. Customs 
Service.'' They carry firearms, make arrests, conduct inspections and 
participate in seizures. Their duties are difficult and dangerous and 
most certainly take a physical and mental toll on an employee over the 
course of a long career. The duties require a vigorous and physically 
fit work force, especially in geographical areas which have large, 
active marine and air terminals and border crossings with high rates of 
entry and contraband smuggling, such as the Southwest border, New York 
City, and Miami. New York, for example, employs 2,000 inspectors due to 
the high levels of activity. The New York district makes more heroin 
seizures than any other port in the country; processes more air 
passengers, and examines approximately 50 percent of the air cargo 
coming into this country. They would benefit by this amendment.

  This amendment provides currently employed inspectors and officers 
with the opportunity to retain their current status and benefits or 
surrender their current overtime system, which is double time, to 
retire from the U.S. Customs Service under the same 20-year system as 
do Federal law enforcement officers. However, under this amendment, 
inspectors and canine officers entering service after enactment would 
enter under the law enforcement retirement system and would no longer 
receive the current, higher rate of overtime.
  This option will ensure both the well-being of the employee and 
continued high level of competence provided by a young and vigorous 
work force in positions that are more physically and mentally 
challenging.
  This provision is fundamentally cost neutral, in that, the employee 
choosing the early retirement will surrender a more costly form of 
overtime compensation which is funded by COBRA fees. The savings in 
COBRA fees will be redirected into the retirement account. In providing 
this option there is, both a recognition of fiscal responsibility and 
concern for the safety and well-being of the employee.
  The Customs inspectors and canine officers meet the criteria for law 
enforcement officer status and benefits. It is the cost for total law 
enforcement status and not their job description, duties, danger, or 
arrest authority, which has denied these individuals this recognition. 
The amendment I am proposing represents a fair, reasonable, and 
deserved, yet partial solution to this problem at little cost. These 
officers and inspectors have been passed over, unfairly, and deserve 
the same retirement benefit as other officers.
  I urge the Members of this body to support this reasonable and 
inexpensive compromise in fairness to these inspectors and officers.
  Mr. President, I am advised that the Senator from Ohio does not care 
to speak on this amendment. So I urge adoption of the amendment, which 
has been cleared on the other side.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 1830) was agreed to.
  Mr. DeCONCINI. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I 
move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. DeCONCINI. Mr. President, at this time, I also move to table the 
amendment of the Senator from Nevada scheduled for a vote at 2 p.m. and 
ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is not a sufficient second.
  Mr. DeCONCINI. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DeCONCINI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DeCONCINI. In relation to the amendment by Senator Reid, I ask 
unanimous consent that the motion to table that amendment be entered 
into and that the vote at 2 p.m. be on a motion to table the amendment 
of the Senator from Nevada.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DeCONCINI. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is not a sufficient second.
  Mr. DeCONCINI. I know of no other amendments, Mr. President. No other 
Senators want to discuss this bill, and we have approximately 44 
minutes. I would say that if anybody wants to come over and talk about 
the bill, now is the time.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DeCONCINI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DeCONCINI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the vote 
on final passage of the pending matter occur at the end of the last 
vote of those stacked to begin at 2 p.m.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DeCONCINI. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is not a sufficient second.
  Mr. DeCONCINI. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________