[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 89 (Tuesday, July 12, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: July 12, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO MAPS RELATING TO THE COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES 
                                 SYSTEM

  Mr. STUDDS. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 4598) to direct the Secretary of the Interior to make 
technical corrections to maps relating to the Coastal Barrier Resources 
System, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 4598

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. CORRECTIONS TO MAPS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Interior shall, 
     before the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, make such corrections to the maps 
     described in subsection (b) as are necessary to ensure that--
       (1) depictions of areas on those maps are consistent with 
     the depictions of areas appearing on the maps entitled 
     Coastal Barrier Resources System, dated June 29, 1994, and on 
     file with the Secretary of the Interior; and
       (2) the Coastal Barrier Resources System does not include 
     any area that, on the day before the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, was part of unit FL-05P of that System.
       (b) Maps Described.--The maps described in this subsection 
     are maps that--
       (1) are included in a set of maps entitled ``Coastal 
     Barrier Resources System'', dated October 24, 1990; and
       (2) relate to the following units of the Coastal Barriers 
     Resources System: FL-05P, P11A, P17, P17A, P18P, P19P, FL-15, 
     FL-95P, FL36P, P31P, FL-72P, MI21, NY75, and VA62P.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 12 of the 
     Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3510) is amended to 
     read as follows:

     ``SEC. 12. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``There is authorized to be appropriate to the Secretary 
     for carrying out this Act $2,000,000 for each of fiscal years 
     1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997.''

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Studds] will be recognized for 20 minutes, and the 
gentleman from Alaska [Mr. Young] will be recognized for 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Studds].
  Mr. STUDDS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, H.R. 4598, introduced by our colleague, the 
gentlewoman from Florida [Mrs. Fowler] and a number of other Members, 
makes technical corrections to several units and otherwise protected 
areas [OPA's] within the Coastal Barrier Resources System. It is the 
product of substantial cooperation between the sponsors, the 
administration, and the environmental community. The result is a bill 
that is, insofar as I am aware, without controversy.
  In 1990, the Congress enacted the Coastal Barriers Improvement Act 
and, in so doing, substantially expanded the Coastal Barrier Resources 
System. Unfortunately, some of the detailed maps were in error and the 
only way for COBRA boundaries to be changed is through an act of 
Congress. In putting together this bill, we dealt only with what were 
clearly technical errors. Next year, when the Department of the 
Interior submits its recommendations for the Pacific coast, we will 
have the chance to look at other proposed boundary changes.
  The committee amendment, makes several technical corrections, adds an 
additional mapping correction, and adds a 4-year reauthorization of the 
Coastal Barrier Resources Act.
  The mapping correction was brought to our attention by the U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service after the committee's markup. This otherwise 
protected area was designated in 1990 and was incorrectly mapped to 
include a privately-owned and fully developed area. The Service has 
recommended deletion of this developed area.
  The authorization for the Coastal Barrier Resources Act expired in 
fiscal year 1993. The committee expected to extend the authorization in 
conjunction with legislation to add Pacific coast areas to the System, 
but submission of the Pacific maps has been delayed. Therefore, the 
committee amendment adds an authorization of $2 million for each of the 
fiscal years 1994 through 1997.
  I want to thank Mrs. Fowler and the other sponsors of the bill for 
their hard work and I ask my colleagues for their support.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Madam 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. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4598 
and urge its adoption by the House.
  In 1990, the Congress enacted a comprehensive expansion of the 
Coastal Barrier Resources System. This System identifies undeveloped 
coastal areas and provides that Federal flood insurance will not be 
made available to those areas once they are included in the System. It 
does not prevent any property owner from using his property, nor does 
it impose any restrictions on such use. It merely ensures that the 
taxpayers will not have to bear the burden of unwise development.
  After enactment of the original bill, a number of property owners 
pointed out that their property was wrongly included in the System. In 
many cases, this involved property that was already developed before 
enactment of the act and therefore was ineligible for inclusion.
  H.R. 4598 corrects the mistakes in mapping that have been discovered 
since enactment of the original bill. It is noncontroversial, is 
supported by the administration, and I urge its adoption.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. STUDDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Pickett].
  Mr. PICKETT. Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 4598, which corrects errors 
made when the maps of the Coastal Barrier Resources System were 
originally prepared. One such correction applies in the city of 
Virginia Beach, which I represent. The city informed me early last year 
that several private properties in the long-established Sandbridge 
community had erroneously been included in a newly created ``Otherwise 
Protected Area'' of the Coastal Barrier Resources System. While 
intended to incorporate only State and local recreational areas and the 
Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge, the boundaries of the otherwise 
protected area inadvertently drew in a small area of privately owned 
land.
  The staff of the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries and 
representatives of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service examined this 
issue very carefully and agreed that the private properties were 
incorrectly and improperly included in the otherwise protected area. 
They agreed that the error should be corrected in the legislation we 
are considering today.
  The flood insurance rate maps for Virginia Beach are currently 
undergoing a routine 5-year review, with final comments due to the 
Federal Emergency Management Agency this fall. The city of Virginia 
Beach and the property owners were concerned that the private 
properties erroneously included in the otherwise protected area 
designation might be precluded from participating in the National Flood 
Insurance Program. The expeditious consideration of H.R. 4598 will 
enable the city to submit correct data showing that the owners of the 
private property which is the subject of this legislation are eligible 
to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program.
  I would like to thank Chairman Studds and Congressman Fields, the 
majority and minority staffs of the Subcommittee on Environment and 
Natural Resources, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for working 
so quickly to produce this bill for consideration today. I urge my 
colleagues to support H.R. 4598.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Florida [Mrs. Fowler].
  Mrs. FOWLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4598, a 
bill to make technical corrections to the Coastal Barrier Resource 
System.
  I would like to thank Merchant Marine and Fisheries Chairman Studds 
and Ranking Minority Member Jack Fields for their assistance in moving 
this legislation through the committee and bringing it to the House 
floor.
  This bill was the result of several drafts, numerous discussions and 
countless hours of staff, and Member work. While not everyone is 
completely satisfied with this final version, I am pleased at this time 
to be able to offer at least these properties for correction in the 
Coastal Barrier Resource System.
  When Congress enacted the CBRA in 1982, it established the Coastal 
Barrier Resources System [CBRS], consisting of undeveloped coastal 
barriers located on the Atlantic and gulf coasts of the United States. 
The act prohibited the Federal Government from offering Federal 
development assistance or Federal flood insurance to properties 
included within the CBRS.
  In 1990, the act was amended to substantially increase the size of 
the System. Again, the Interior recommended additions to the System 
based on the extent of development of the land. The act also 
established units of otherwise protected areas. These OPA's are defined 
as undeveloped coastal barriers that exist within the boundaries of 
Federal- or State-owned property or held by organizations for wildlife 
refuge or sanctuary, recreational, or resource conservation purposes.
  Unfortunately, when Congress designated land to be included in the 
System, some mistakes were made in drawing the boundaries. In some 
cases, a small parcel of land was mistakenly designated as undeveloped 
coastal barrier with the System even though the owner had made 
substantial investments in development of the land prior to its 
designation. In other cases, private property was mistakenly included 
in an otherwise protected area, a designation that should only have 
been made for land owned by Federal or State governments or by 
conservation organizations. This bill removes these mistakenly included 
properties from the System.
  Enactment of this bill will give countless homeowners access to 
Federal flood insurance and other types of Federal financial 
assistance--access that neighbors who are literally across the street 
or one block away already have. Without correction, these simple 
mapping errors will unjustly deny these homeowners the flood insurance 
to which they are legitimately entitled. The mapping errors that led to 
this situation are just that--mapping errors--and need to be corrected.
  One such area covered in this legislation is Butler Beach, a 
community on Anastasia Island in St. John's County. This area is 
adjacent to a State park and includes over 100 single-family homes. In 
1990, when trying to include the State park in the System as an 
otherwise protected area, the Fish and Wildlife Service mistakenly drew 
the boundary line to include these existing homes.
  The magnitude of this mistake cannot be overstated. These homeowners 
have been denied access to Federal flood insurance for 4 years now. 
They cannot sell their homes without it. They cannot refinance their 
homes without it. And every time there is a storm--and believe me there 
have been a lot of storms--they fear they will lose their homes with no 
chance of rebuilding or recovering their worth. All because of a 
mistakenly drawn map line.
  The exclusions cover property in Florida, Michigan, New York, and 
Virginia. The list of properties in this bill reflects those properties 
that the Fish and Wildlife Service have agreed represent unintentional 
mapping errors. They are the clearest examples of mistakes in the 
current System and deserve our immediate attention.
  Mr. Speaker, it is our duty to correct the mistakes that are 
represented in this bill. I urge my colleagues to support this 
legislation.
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4598, a 
bill making technical corrections to maps relating to the Coastal 
Barrier Resources System.
  This bill, introduced last month by our distinguished colleague, 
Congresswoman Fowler, corrects mapping errors associated with coastal 
barrier units from Florida, Virginia, New York, and Michigan that are 
part of the Coastal Barrier Resources System.
  In 1982, the Congress passed the Coastal Barrier Resources Act [CBRA] 
as a means of reducing Federal expenditures in flood-prone coastal 
areas and providing some degree of environmental protection for 
ecologically fragile coastal barriers. Under the CBRA, areas identified 
as undeveloped coastal barriers that are subject to wind and tide 
action are included as units in the Coastal Barrier Resources System 
(the System). Inclusion in the System results in a prohibition on 
Federal funding for such things as flood insurance, water and sewer 
grants, and highway construction. However, it does not prohibit 
privately funded development.
  In 1990, Congress added additional areas to existing units in the 
System and included new areas, specifically along the Gulf of Mexico 
and the Great Lakes, within the System. Areas known as otherwise 
protected, defined as undeveloped coastal barriers within the 
boundaries of Federal- or State-owned property, or held by 
organizations for wildlife refuge or sanctuary, recreational, or 
resource conservation purposes, were also incorporated within the 
System.
  Currently there are 560 units in the System encompassing over 12,000 
miles of coastline and 1.3 million acres of property. In designating 
some of these units several boundary lines were drawn incorrectly. This 
bill identifies these errors and makes corrections so the Fish and 
Wildlife Service will have accurate maps depicting these changes.
  I compliment the gentlewoman from Florida for all of her hard work 
and leadership on this bill. I strongly support its adoption.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4598 which 
makes corrections to the Coastal Barrier Resource System to remove 
properties that were mistakenly designated as undeveloped coastal 
barriers.
  I appreciate the hard work and dedication that Chairman Studds, Mrs. 
Fowler, and the committee have demonstrated.
  At the same time, however, I am disappointed that a correction for 
the inlet at New Smyrna Beach in my district in Florida, was not 
included in the bill.
  Despite numerous permits for construction of buildings and 
recreational areas; despite substantial financial investments; despite 
contracts that have existed since 1981 for the sewer and water systems, 
infrastructure, and streets; and despite two homes that already existed 
on the property, the inlet was mistakenly included in the System in 
1982.
  Unfortunately this has prevented the completion of development 
projects at the inlet which are vital to the city of New Smyrna Beach.
  I am concerned that constituents in other districts in my State of 
Florida face similar inequities.
  The chairman of the committee has indicated that additional and 
broader changes to the Coastal Barrier System will be considered next 
year.
  It is my hope that the committee and Chairman Studds will work with 
me and my colleagues to address the inequities that continue to face 
our constituents.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for 
time, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. STUDDS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Fields of Louisiana). The question is on 
the motion offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Studds] 
that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 4598, as 
amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  The title of the bill was amended so as to read: ``A bill to direct 
the Secretary of the Interior to make technical corrections to maps 
relating to the Coastal Barrier Resources System, and to authorize 
appropriations to carry out the Coastal Barrier Resources Act.''
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________