[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 82 (Thursday, June 22, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6439-S6440]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION ACT OF 2006
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I rise today to endorse passage of the
Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2006. However, I would
like to clarify several points with regard to section 414 of the
conference report. This section deals with construction of offshore
wind energy facilities in the area off the coast of Massachusetts known
as Nantucket Sound, and it will require the Secretary of the Interior
to incorporate any ``reasonable terms and conditions the Commandant of
the Coast Guard determines to be necessary to provide for navigational
safety.'' Interpretation of this clause will be critical to ensuring
that navigation, aviation, and communications are not adversely
impacted by construction of such a facility.
A company known as Cape Wind, LLC has proposed the permanent
installation of 130 wind turbines, each reaching 417 feet in height, on
24 square miles of Nantucket Sound in an area surrounded by three
commercial airports, two busy ferry routes, and a major shipping
channel. The area is heavily utilized by commercial fishermen and
recreational boaters as well. Perhaps most importantly, the project
would be situated less than 15 miles from the only PAVE/PAWS missile
defense radar station on the entire eastern seaboard. Studies conducted
in and around offshore wind farms in Britain have shown that these
installations can have adverse impacts on radar for boats, aircraft,
and air traffic controllers, and they may pose a hazard to navigation.
It must be left up to the Commandant of the Coast Guard to decide
what is necessary to prevent negative impact to navigation, aviation,
and communications caused by the proposed wind farm. We trust the
Commandant to act responsibly and only
[[Page S6440]]
prescribe reasonable terms and conditions. If someone wants to
challenge his decision as unreasonable, they will have to raise the
matter in court. It will be up to the courts, not the Secretary of the
Interior, to decide if the Commandant's terms and conditions are
unreasonable.
Further, we must remain open to the possibility that the Commandant
may find that no amount of mitigation could be sufficient to eliminate
the potential detrimental effects of the specific siting of this
development. If the final determination of the Commandant is that the
proposed siting is unacceptable, the Secretary must abide by that
decision as well, and therefore fail to issue a permit, lease,
easement, or right-of-way that would allow the facility to be
constructed on the proposed site.
The arrangement dictated by section 414 of this bill has precedence
in the procedure for granting hydroelectric licenses under the Federal
Power Act. This process requires the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission to include in the terms and conditions of its licenses for
hydroelectric licenses any conditions deemed necessary to protect the
interests of other agencies. The United States Supreme Court determined
that such conditions had to be ``reasonable'' and the reasonability of
the conditions was a matter to be determined by the courts, not the
Commission.
I support development of renewable sources of energy, but not at the
expense of public safety or national security. The provisions included
in section 414 of this bill ensure that the impacts of Cape Wind's
potential development on the citizens of Massachusetts and the rest of
the country will be evaluated fairly and appropriately by those who
have the expertise to make a final determination on how best to
mitigate any adverse effects. I urge my colleagues to act swiftly to
pass the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2006.
Mr. WARNER. I further ask that when the Senate receives from the
House a message that the House agrees to S. Con. Res. 103 and the
conference report to accompany H.R. 889 is received from the House, the
conference report be considered agreed to and the motion to reconsider
be laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________