[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 105 (Thursday, July 30, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9437-S9438]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. MURKOWSKI (for himself and Mr. Daschle):
  S. 2379. A bill to establish a program to establish and sustain 
viable rural and remote communities; to the Committee on Banking, 
Housing, and Urban Affairs


          the rural and remote community fairness act of 1998

 Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, today I introduce the Rural and 
Remote Community Fairness Act of 1998. This Act will lead to a brighter 
future for rural and remote communities by establishing two new grant 
programs that will address the unique economic and environmental 
challenges faced by small communities in rural and remote areas across 
this country. I am pleased that this legislation is co-sponsored by the 
Minority Leader, Senator Daschle.
  The bill authorizes up to $100 million a year in grant aid from 1999 
through 2005 for any commuunities across the nation with populations of 
less than 10,000 which face electric rates in excess of 150 percent of 
the national average retail price. The money can go for electricity 
system improvements, energy efficiency and weatherization efforts, 
water and sanitation improvements or work to solve leaking fuel storage 
tanks.
  The bill also amends the Rural Electrification Act to authorize Rural 
and Remote Electrification Grants of an additional $20 million a year 
to the same communities. The grants can be used to increase energy 
efficiency, lower electricity rates or provide for the modernization of 
electric facilities.
  This nation has well-established programs for community development 
grants. The majority of these programs were established to help resolve 
the very real problems found in this Nation's urban areas. However, our 
most rural and remote communities experience different, but equally 
real, problems that are not addressed by existing law. Not only are 
these communities generally ineligible for the existing programs, their 
unique challenges, while sometimes similar to those experienced by 
urban areas, require a different focus and approach.
  The biggest single economic problem facing small communities is the 
expense of establishing a modern infrastructure. These costs, which are 
always substantial, are exacerbated in remote and rural areas. The 
existence of this infrastructure, including efficient housing, 
electricity, bulk fuel storage, waste water and water service, is a 
necessity for the health and welfare of our children, the development 
of a prosperous economy and minimizing environmental problems.
  There is a real cost in human misery and to the health and welfare of 
everyone, especially our children and our elderly from poor or polluted 
water or bad housing or an inefficient power system. Hepatitis B 
infections in rural Alaska are five times more common than in urban 
Alaska. We just have to do better if we are to bring our rural 
communities into the 21st Century.
  The experience of many Alaskans is a perfect example. Most small 
communities or villages in Alaska are not interconnected to an 
electricity grid, and rely upon diesel generators for their 
electricity. Often, the fuel can only be delivered by barge or 
airplane, and is stored in tanks. These tanks are expensive to 
maintain, and in many cases, must be completely replaced to prevent 
leakage of fuel into the environment. While economic and environmental 
savings clearly justify the construction of new facilities, these 
communities simply don't have the ability to raise enough capital to 
make the necessary investments.
  As a result, these communities are forced to bear an oppressive 
economic and environmental burden that can be eased with a relatively 
small investment on the part of the Federal government. I can give you 
some examples: in Manley Hot Springs, Alaska, the citizens pay almost 
70 cents per kilowatt hour for electricity. In Igiugig, Kokhanok, 
Akiachak Native Community, and Middle Kuskokwim, consumers all pay over 
50 cents per kilowatt hour for electricity. The national average is 
around 7 cents per kilowatt hour.
  Further, in Alaska, for example, many rural villages still lack 
modern water and sewer sanitation systems taken for granted in all 
other areas of America. According to a Federal Field Working Group, 190 
of the state's villages have ``unsafe'' sanitation systems, 135 
villages still using ``honey buckets'' for waste disposal. Only 31 
villages have a fully safe, piped water system; 71 villages having only 
one central watering source.
  Concerning leaking storage tanks, the Alaska Department of Community 
and Regional Affairs estimates that there are more than 2,000 leaking 
above-ground fuel storage tanks in Alaska. There are several hundred 
other below-ground tanks that need repair, according to the Alaska 
Department of Environmental Conservation.
  These are not only an Alaskan problem. The highest electricity rates 
in America are paid by a small community in Missouri, and communities 
in Maine, as well as islands in Rhode Island and New York will likely 
qualify

[[Page S9438]]

for this program. Providing safe drinking water and adequate waste 
treatment facilities is a problem for very small communities all across 
this land.
  What will this Act do to address these problems? First, the Act 
authorizes $100 million per year for the years 1999-2005 for block 
grants to communities of under 10,000 inhabitants who pay more than 150 
percent of the national average retail price for electricity.

  The grants will be allocated by the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
Development among eligible communities proportionate to cost of 
electricity in the community, as compared to the national average. The 
communities may use the grants only for the following eligible 
activities:
  Low-cost weatherization of homes and other buildings;
  Construction and repair of electrical generation, transmission, 
distribution, and related facilities;
  Construction, remediation and repair of bulk fuel storage facilities;
  Facilities and training to reduce costs of maintaining and operating 
electrical generation, distribution, transmission, and related 
facilities;
  Professional management and maintenance for electrical generation, 
distribution and transmission, and related facilities;
  Investigation of the feasibility of alternate energy services;
  Construction, operation, maintenance and repair of water and waste 
water services;
  Acquisition and disposition of real property for eligible activities 
and facilities; and
  Development of an implementation plan, including administrative costs 
for eligible activities and facilities.
  In addition, this bill will amend the rural Electrification Act of 
1936 to authorize Rural and Remote Electrification Grants for $20 
million per year for years 1999-2005 for grants to qualified borrowers 
under the Act that are in rural and remote communities who pay more 
than 150 percent of the national average retail price for electricity. 
These grants can be used to increase energy efficiency, lower 
electricity rates, or provide or modernize electric facilities.
  This Act makes a significant step toward resolving the critical 
social, economic, and environmental problems faced by our Nation's 
rural and remote communities. I encourage my colleagues to support this 
legislation.
                                 ______