[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 48 (Tuesday, April 16, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H3415-H3416]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    EXTENSION OF FEDERAL POWER ACT DEADLINE FOR PROJECT IN KENTUCKY

  Mr. SCHAEFER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 2501) To extend the deadline under the Federal Power Act 
applicable to the construction of a hydroelectric project in Kentucky, 
and for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 2501

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

     SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF DEADLINE.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding the time period specified 
     in section 13 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 806) that 
     would otherwise apply to the Federal Energy Regulatory 
     Commission project numbered 10228, the Commission shall, at 
     the request of the licensee for the project and after 
     reasonable notice, in accordance with the good faith, due 
     diligence, and public interest requirements of that section 
     and the Commission's procedures under that section, extend 
     the time period during which the licensee is required to 
     commence the construction of the project, under the extension 
     described in subsection (b), for not more than 3 consecutive 
     2-year periods.
       (b) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on the 
     date of the expiration of the extension of the period 
     required for commencement of construction of the project 
     described in subsection (a) that the Commission issued, prior 
     to the date of enactment of this Act, under section 13 of the 
     Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 806).

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Colorado [Mr. Schaefer] and the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone] 
will each be recognized for 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Schaefer].


                             general leave

  Mr. SCHAEFER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their 
remarks on H.R. 2501, as amended.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Colorado?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SCHAEFER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. SCHAEFER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SCHAEFER. Mr. Speaker, these bills extend the deadline for 
construction of hydroelectric projects in the States of Illinois, 
Kentucky, North Carolina, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Under section 13 of 
the Federal Power Act, project construction must begin within 4 years 
of the issuance of the license. If the licensee has not begun 
construction by that time, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 
cannot extend the deadline and must terminate the license.
  These types of bills have not been controversial in the past, and the 
bills we are considering today were reported out of the Commerce 
Committee by unanimous voice vote. The bills do not alter the license 
requirements in any way and do not change environmental standards, but 
merely extend the Federal Power Act deadline for construction.
  There is a need to act, since the construction deadlines for some of 
the projects have already expired. If Congress does not act, the 
Commission will terminate the licenses, the project sponsors will lose 
millions of dollars they have invested in the projects, and communities 
will lose the prospect of significant job creation and added revenues.
  The principal reason construction of these projects has not commenced 
is the lack of a power sales contract. In order to finance a 
hydroelectric project, a sponsor typically requires a power sales 
contract to obtain financing necessary to begin construction. However, 
due to the sweeping changes in the electric industry today, many 
utilities are reluctant to sign the long-term purchase contracts. These 
bills give licensees additional time to obtain financing.
  I should also note that the bills incorporate the views of the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The Energy and Power Subcommittee 
solicited the views of FERC, and amended the legislation to limit 
extensions to 10 years, as recommended by the Commission.
  I would like to briefly describe the first of the bills, H.R. 2501, a 
bill to extend the deadline for commencement of construction of a 
hydroelectric project in Kentucky. This 80-megawatt project would be 
located at an existing Army Corps of Engineers dam on the Ohio River in 
Hancock County, KY. The construction deadline expired on June 20, 1995, 
and if we do not act the Commission will terminate the license. 
According to the project sponsor, the lack of

[[Page H3416]]

a power sales contract has prevented construction. FERC has not 
expressed opposition to H.R. 2501, since it includes limitations on the 
extension. The legislation was introduced by our colleague, 
Representative Ron Lewis of Kentucky.
  I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2501.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Colorado went into the details of why 
these bills have been brought to the floor today and why it is 
important that we move on them. In each case they are supported on a 
bipartisan basis, and I certainly support them because of the 
limitations set in the Federal Power Act. We basically have a tradition 
in this House on a bipartisan basis of moving these noncontroversial 
license extensions, and I am pleased that we are continuing that 
tradition today by taking up these bills. They were reported out 
without dissent, and I do support each of them.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SCHAEFER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Schaefer] that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 2501, 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.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________