[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 121 (Tuesday, October 3, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Page S9692]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     CONFERENCE REPORT ON THE FY 2001 ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT 
                          APPROPRIATIONS BILL

  Mr. L. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I would like to share with my 
colleagues my views on several items contained within the energy and 
water conference report.
  The FY 2001 Energy and Water Appropriations conference report 
includes $24 billion in funding for the Department of Energy, civil 
projects of the Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of Interior's 
Bureau of Reclamation, and a number of independent agencies. I 
understand the difficulty of reaching a consensus on such a 
comprehensive bill. I would like to thank the Managers of the 
legislation for all their hard work in reaching this consensus.
  I am particularly pleased with the nearly $4 million in funding 
included in the bill for a number of important Rhode Island coastal 
restoration and water development projects. The bill contains $1.95 
million in funding for authorized repairs to the Fox Point Hurricane 
Barrier. Since its construction in 1966, the barrier has provided 
critical flood protection to the City of Providence. The bill contains 
$191,000 for Rhode Island Ecosystem Restoration to assist the Army 
Corps of Engineers and the Rhode Island Department of Environmental 
Management to restore degraded salt marshes and freshwater wetlands, 
improve overall fish and wildlife habitats, and restore anadramous 
fisheries. The bill also contains $54,000 for South Coast Erosion to 
complete feasibility study work on potential coastal protection 
projects along the southern coastline of Rhode Island.
  Additionally, the bill contains $584,000 in funding for the final 
Environmental Impact Statement and design work associated with 
maintenance dredging of the Providence River and Harbor federal 
navigation channel. The proposed maintenance dredging project involves 
the removal of approximately four million cubic yards of material from 
the Providence River and Harbor. The Environmental Impact Statement 
process will allow for full and open debate on the placement of dredge 
spoils from the project. We certainly cannot overlook the importance of 
protecting and minimizing the impact on our environment, especially the 
impact on our fisheries.
  As we move into the heating season, funding Environmental Impact 
Statements for Providence Harbor dredging projects cannot be 
overstated. Specifically, until dredging Providence Harbor is 
completed, deep draft vessels carrying precious heating oil to Rhode 
Island and other points in the Northeast will have to continue the 
dangerous and inefficient practice of off-loading their cargoes into 
small barges, in the middle of Narragansett Bay, for delivery to the 
pierside terminals in Providence Harbor. Anyone who has experienced the 
fury of winter wind, ice, and rough waters on the Narragansett 
recognizes this practice is an accident waiting to happen--one with 
disastrous consequences.
  While I voted in support of the conference report last night, I was 
disappointed to find that the Missouri River provision I objected to 
during Senate consideration of the bill was not removed during 
conference. I firmly object to this provision which would block funding 
for consideration of one of the alternatives to the Missouri River 
Master Water Control Manual. The targeted alternative would require 
seasonal river flow changes along the Missouri River in order to 
recover three endangered species including the pallid sturgeon, 
interior least tern, and piping plover. During my past year in the 
Senate, I have voted to remove environmental riders such as this one 
from appropriations bills. In my view, the Missouri River provision 
inappropriately transfers the decision regarding endangered species 
protection along the Missouri River from the Army Corps of Engineers 
and the authorizing committees to the Senate and House Appropriations 
Committees.
  I was one of two Republican Senators that voted in favor of an 
amendment offered by Senator Daschle and Senator Baucus to strike this 
provision during Senate consideration of the FY 2001 Energy and Water 
Development Appropriations bill. When the vote failed, however, I voted 
in favor of the legislation because of its important funding for Rhode 
Island. The FY 2001 Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill, 
and the Missouri River provision contained within, passed 
overwhelmingly in the Senate by a vote of 93 to 1.
  The legislation still has a probable Presidential veto. I am hopeful 
we will be able to revisit the Missouri River provision before the end 
of this session, and ensure its elimination from the legislation.

                          ____________________