[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 110 (Tuesday, July 21, 2009)]
[House]
[Pages H8449-H8451]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


 EXTENDING DEADLINE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PRICE DAM HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT

  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 2938) to extend the deadline for commencement of 
construction of a hydroelectric project.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 2938

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

     SECTION 1. EXTENSION.

       (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 12187, the Commission may, 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 for up to 3 consecutive 2-year 
     periods from the date of the expiration of the extension 
     originally issued by the Commission.
       (b) Reinstatement of Expired License.--If the period 
     required for commencement of construction of the project 
     described in subsection (a) has expired prior to the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Commission may reinstate the 
     license effective as of the date of its expiration and the 
     first extension authorized under subsection (a) shall take 
     effect on the date of such expiration.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Costello) and the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.


                             General Leave

  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their 
remarks.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Illinois?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2938 would allow the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission to extend the construction deadline for a 
hydroelectric power plant at the Melvin Price Locks and Dam in Alton, 
Illinois. Over the past 20 years, there has been great interest in 
building a hydroelectric plant at this site on the Mississippi River; 
however, construction of the hydroelectric plant has not happened on 
this site as of this date.
  Last October, Brookfield Power acquired the license to proceed with 
the construction of the site. When Brookfield applied for an extension 
of the construction deadline, the company was informed that because of 
the administrative extensions granted to the previous licensee, 
congressional action is needed to grant an extension.
  Brookfield will lose this license at the end of this month, July 
2009. For that reason, Brookfield and the City of Alton, Illinois, 
requested legislation to extend the deadline for 6 years.
  Passing this legislation is necessary to ensure that Brookfield can 
bring renewable energy to Illinois and create green jobs. The 
hydroelectric project will create 404,000 megawatt hours of 
electricity, the equivalent of 283 barrels of oil. Further, Brookfield 
will hire 125 workers over a 3-year period and invest over $400 million 
to construct the plan.
  This bill is cosponsored by my friend and colleague from Illinois, 
Congressman John Shimkus. Both the majority and minority staff of the 
Energy and Commerce Committee have reviewed and accepted the 
legislation. FERC has also reviewed the legislation and does not oppose 
it.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2938.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2938, a bill that 
extends the timeline to bring this hydroelectric power plant project in 
Illinois on line. It gives them another up to 6 years, and ultimately, 
this would be the decision of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 
But as they're going through the process right now of permitting and 
approval, this provides them an additional 6 years to make sure that 
the project has enough time to get approved and completed and bring 
this new power source on line.
  I would like to yield 3 minutes to my friend from Oregon (Mr. 
Walden).
  Mr. WALDEN. I thank my colleague from Louisiana.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today also in support of this legislation. I 
think it's a good bill because I think hydroelectric power is a good 
thing for our country, and when we're concerned about getting renewable 
energy online, there's probably nothing better than hydropower for 
that.
  Unfortunately, in the cap-and-tax bill that was passed by this House 
over my objection and over the objection of the gentleman from 
Illinois, there is a provision on page 19, line 12, sub 3, that says, 
The hydroelectric project installed on the dam is operated so that the 
water surface elevation at any given location and time that would have 
occurred in the absence of the hydroelectric project is maintained.
  Now, I share this language with you because the gentleman from 
Illinois, my friend, talked about the 404,000 watts or megawatts, 
whatever it is--I didn't jot down the exact amount--would be produced 
as hydroelectric power and, therefore, renewable energy and create new 
jobs. My concern is this: that hydropower is being added after this 
legislation is moving forward.
  Should the cap-and-tax bill become law, that hydropower, according to 
this language, would not be considered as renewable energy for purposes 
of Illinois meeting the new Federal standard on renewable energy. 
Because in consultation with two civil engineers I've spoken with who 
operate hydro projects--many of them and large-scale hydro projects--
when I shared this language with them about maintaining the surface 
elevation at any location in time, they laughed. They said you can't 
operate a hydro system and not affect the water behind the dam in some 
way at some point.
  And so to disqualify the new hydro--like the gentleman from Illinois 
is trying to get here--makes no sense to me. Either hydropower is 
renewable or it's not.
  Now, there is another provision in this bill, the cap-and-tax bill, 
that said hydro that came online after 1988 is renewable but hydro 
before 1988 is not. Now, you have got water flowing down a river. 
You've got multiple dams along the way with hydro generation 
facilities. It's the same water. It just depends on what year the dam 
was built whether or not that hydropower is considered renewable or 
not. That doesn't make a lot of sense.
  Nor do the provisions in the cap-and-tax bill that said, if woody 
biomass off a Federal forest comes off of a late successional stand, 
you can't count the burning of that to produce green energy as 
renewable energy, but if it came off of a severely damaged tree, it is, 
although there is no definition for that. And if any woody biomass 
comes off private, county, State lands, it's all considered renewable 
energy when it produces electricity when it's burned, but yet there is 
this restriction on Federal land.

                              {time}  1645

  I share that with you because America's Federal forests are 
terrifically overstocked and subject to catastrophic fire.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. SCALISE. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.
  Mr. WALDEN. We could create more real jobs cleaning up the forest in 
very depressed communities. I was just out in four counties in my 
district. I think two, maybe three, are now at over 20 percent 
unemployment. They have 70, 50 and 80 percent Federal land. This is the 
great forests of our country that are left to burn up. The woody 
biomass could be put into clean energy. There are firms willing to 
invest if they could get supply. Again, the cap-and-trade, cap-and-tax 
bill harms that effort.
  So I share the gentleman's support of this legislation to create and 
move forward on the hydro project. It's unfortunate if the cap-and-tax 
bill that passed the House becomes law that hydro will not be 
considered renewal. That doesn't make sense. And I hope that the Senate 
can correct this problem.
  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, let me thank my colleague for supporting 
this legislation. I share the same concern that you have with the 
section that you quoted in the energy bill, and we hope that our 
friends in the other body

[[Page H8450]]

will address that issue so that it is not a concern for the future.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SCALISE. I would like to yield 3 minutes to a cosponsor of this 
bill, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus).
  (Mr. SHIMKUS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Melvin Price Locks and Dam is named after an historic 
member of this Chamber, Mel Price, who gave me my nomination to West 
Point. So it is with great affinity that I just mentioned that. But now 
that district is ably represented by my friend and colleague, Jerry 
Costello, and I thank him for including me on this reauthorization 
bill.
  The Republicans have already talked about an all-of-the-above energy 
strategy which talks about nuclear, wind, solar and hydroelectric. And 
no one is really more knowledgeable on the hydroelectric issue than the 
colleague who preceded me, Greg Walden. There is a concern about if we 
want these programs, these licenses, to actually become real projects 
in the whole credit issue, then this has to qualify for renewable, and 
that will help bring some dollars to help effect this instead of just 
worrying about relicensing, then we can actually get it built. But if 
we don't do this process, then we have to go through the whole 
paperwork procedure.
  I'm very happy to be here with my friend who, again, worked hard and 
diligently for southern Illinois. And this is all part of that all-of-
the-above energy strategy that will help us decrease our reliance on 
imported crude oil. Thank you for letting me join you in this 
resolution.
  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I would yield 3 minutes to the gentleman 
from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise really in amazement today to hear our colleagues 
on the other side talk about hydroelectric power being a renewable 
energy source, because we have seen multiple venues here in the House 
where Democrats have denied that.
  Mr. Speaker, we have a tremendous need in this country for 
alternative sources of energy, renewable sources of energy. Nuclear 
energy is one of those renewable sources of energy, or a source of 
energy that is one that makes the most sense from an environmental 
perspective as well as a cost perspective.
  We have many members of the opposition on the other side that want to 
deny us going into a nuclear age. France gets over 80 percent of its 
electric power from nuclear sources. The United States should do the 
same thing. In my home State of Georgia, the Georgia Power Company for 
a long period of time now has been trying to get permitting for two new 
nuclear reactors at their plant in Vogel just south of my district, 
just south of Augusta, Georgia. They already have two. They want two 
more. But, Mr. Speaker, they have had a great deal of difficulty 
because the regulatory commission and various environmental groups have 
made it extremely difficult.
  They are not alone. All over this country, there are electric power 
companies that want to put in electric power plants that are nuclear-
fueled. Mr. Speaker, they have great difficulty doing so. We need to 
use our renewable resources, not only for hydroelectric power, but for 
nuclear power. We need to look to wind and solar. We need to look to 
biomass. We need to stop this idiocy of a corn-based ethanol source of 
energy. Mr. Speaker, I'm from Georgia, and I love my cornbread and 
grits. It makes no sense to me to drive down the road burning up my 
food. But we've done that. And it has driven up the cost of corn for 
the chicken producers that produce most of the chicken for the world, 
all over the world in my district, and in my friend Nathan Deal's 
district from Gainesville in the Ninth and Tenth Congressional 
Districts of Georgia.
  Mr. Speaker, we have an energy policy that is broken. Republicans 
have presented bill after bill that would solve the energy crisis. The 
American Energy Act is one. It is an all-of-the-above energy plan that 
would stimulate hydroelectric power. It would stimulate nuclear power. 
It would look to alternative sources of power.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. SCALISE. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. But our plans are not being heard on the floor 
of this House. Why is that? Why are the American people's 
representatives not being heard?
  It is because the leadership on the Democratic side wants to stifle 
debate, wants to shut off any alternative ideas. They call the 
Republican Party the ``Party of No,'' but the Democratic Party has been 
the Party of No, whereas the Republican Party is the Party of k-n-o-w 
Know because we know how to solve the energy crisis. We know how to 
solve the health care financing crisis. We know how to solve the 
economic crisis. But those ideas are not being heard. Mr. Speaker, it 
is time for the American people to wake up and demand that the 
Republicans are heard.
  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, I would ask my friend from Louisiana if he 
has other speakers?
  Mr. SCALISE. I'm prepared to close.
  Mr. COSTELLO. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I again rise in support of the legislation 
dealing with hydroelectric power. I think it is important, as we are 
talking about energy, that we really talk about the need to get a 
comprehensive national energy policy in our country. It is not just 
enough to promote hydroelectric power. It is not just enough to look at 
any one significant source of power. We need to look at all of the 
resources in our land. In fact, the inscription by Daniel Webster right 
above the Speaker's rostrum talks about the need to explore the 
resources of our land. Unfortunately, there are many Federal laws and 
barriers in place that prevent us from doing just that. This cap-and-
trade national energy tax imposes even more barriers. In addition to 
imposing significant taxes on to the backs of American people in the 
form of higher utility rates and bureaucratic regulations, it will run 
millions of jobs out of this country.
  That's not the right approach. What we need is a comprehensive energy 
policy. I'm proud to be a cosponsor, with many other of my colleagues, 
of the American Energy Act, a bill that we filed earlier this year to 
take that comprehensive approach to a national energy policy, one that 
looks at all of the alternatives. We explore more technologies for 
wind, for solar, for hydroelectric and for nuclear power. We use our 
natural resources, like oil and natural gas, to get to that bridge to 
fund those other alternatives. We use the things that we have here 
today to get us to those technologies that aren't yet readily available 
to power our homes or to run our cars. But hopefully one day, through 
the use of these technologies, we will advance the utilization of the 
natural resources we have in our country to create jobs.
  Our bill would actually create jobs and generate billions of dollars 
to the Federal Government, not by raising taxes, but by actually 
creating more economic opportunities by creating jobs and getting 
people back to work so that they can contribute and pay into and pay 
down this debt as opposed to raising the debt and running off jobs.
  So I would hope that we would support and get to a place where we can 
actually get agreement in a bipartisan way to pass a bipartisan bill 
like the American Energy Act that actually takes a comprehensive 
approach to solving our national energy needs and reducing our 
dependence on Middle Eastern oil--rather than this tax approach, this 
cap-and-trade energy tax that actually would make countries in Europe, 
the Middle East and China more powerful and put America further at 
risk--so we can get our strengthened energy policy and we can get 
energy independence. But we need to have a bipartisan approach, not 
this cap-and-trade energy tax that literally would run millions of jobs 
out of our country.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, let me thank my friend from Louisiana and 
the minority for supporting this legislation. In particular I would 
like to thank my colleague from Illinois, Congressman Shimkus, not only 
for his

[[Page H8451]]

kind words, but for cosponsoring this legislation.
  I urge passage of H.R. 2938, and with that I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 2938.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and 
nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________