[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 5]
[House]
[Pages 7556-7558]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[[Page 7556]]

 DECLARING PORTION OF JAMES RIVER AND KANAWHA CANAL TO BE NONNAVIGABLE

  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 1034) to declare a portion of the James River and Kanawha 
Canal in Richmond, Virginia, to be nonnavigable waters of the United 
States for purposes of title 46, United States Code, and other maritime 
laws of the United States, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 1034

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

     SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds the following:
       (1) The canal known as the James River and Kanawha Canal 
     played an important part in the economic development of the 
     Commonwealth of Virginia and the city of Richmond.
       (2) The canal ceased to operate as a functioning waterway 
     in the conduct of commerce in the late 1800s.
       (3) Portions of the canal have been found by a Federal 
     district court to be nonnavigable.
       (4) The restored portion of the canal will be utilized to 
     provide entertainment and education to visitors and will play 
     an important part in the economic development of downtown 
     Richmond.
       (5) The restored portion of the canal will not be utilized 
     for general public boating, and will be restricted to 
     activities similar to those conducted on similar waters in 
     San Antonio, Texas.
       (6) The continued classification of the canal as a 
     navigable waterway based upon historic usage that ceased more 
     than 100 years ago does not serve the public interest and is 
     unnecessary to protect public safety.
       (7) Congressional action is required to clarify that the 
     canal is no longer to be considered a navigable waterway for 
     purposes of subtitle II of title 46, United States Code.

     SEC. 2. DECLARATION OF NONNAVIGABILITY OF A PORTION OF THE 
                   CANAL KNOWN AS THE JAMES RIVER AND KANAWHA 
                   CANAL IN RICHMOND, VIRGINIA.

       (a) Canal Declared Nonnavigable.--The portion of the canal 
     known as the James River and Kanawha Canal in Richmond, 
     Virginia, located between the Great Ship Lock on the east and 
     the limits of the city of Richmond on the west is hereby 
     declared to be a nonnavigable waterway of the United States 
     for purposes of subtitle II of title 46, United States Code.
       (b) Ensuring Public Safety.--The Secretary of 
     Transportation shall provide such technical advice, 
     information, and assistance as the city of Richmond, 
     Virginia, or its designee may request to insure that the 
     vessels operating on the waters declared nonnavigable by 
     subsection (a) are built, maintained, and operated in a 
     manner consistent with protecting public safety.
       (c) Termination of Declaration.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Transportation may 
     terminate the effectiveness of the declaration made by 
     subsection (a) by publishing a determination that vessels 
     operating on the waters declared nonnavigable by subsection 
     (a) have not been built, maintained, and operated in a manner 
     consistent with protecting public safety.
       (2) Public input.--Before making a determination under this 
     subsection, the Secretary of Transportation shall--
       (A) consult with appropriate State and local government 
     officials regarding whether such a determination is necessary 
     to protect public safety and will serve the public interest; 
     and
       (B) provide to persons who might be adversely affected by 
     the determination the opportunity for comment and a hearing 
     on whether such action is necessary to protect public safety 
     and will serve the public interest.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) and the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. 
Taylor) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster).
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1034, a bill to declare a 
portion of the historic canal system in Richmond, Virginia, to be 
nonnavigable for purposes of subtitle II of title 46, United States 
Code.
  The Richmond canal system is part of a waterfront economic 
development project undertaken by the city of Richmond. This bill will 
allow the city to offer boat tours on the canal and to bring economic 
opportunities to downtown Richmond. The Coast Guard has reviewed the 
city's plans for the boat tours and has found no safety problems with 
the operation.
  This bill reflects a bipartisan agreement worked out with the city of 
Richmond. It provides additional safety oversight of the Richmond Canal 
if that becomes necessary in the future. The gentleman from Virginia 
(Mr. Bliley) is the primary author of this bill. It is through his 
leadership that we are here today. I certainly commend him for his 
tenacity in getting us to bring this legislation to the floor. I urge 
my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1034, a bill to 
designate a portion of the James River and Kanawha Canal in Richmond as 
nonnavigable for purposes of subtitle II of title 46, United States 
Code.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a very noncontroversial bill. Its purpose is to 
allow the city of Richmond to regulate safety on this small body of 
water instead of the United States Coast Guard. The Kanawha Canal is 
about 1 mile long and 23 feet wide, with an average depth of 3 feet. As 
part of an urban renewal project, the city is going to have small boats 
taking passengers up and down the canal. This legislation will allow 
the city of Richmond to regulate the safety of the passengers on those 
vessels. If the Coast Guard finds that the vessels operated on these 
waters are built, maintained, or operated in a manner that does not 
protect the public, then the United States Coast Guard can revoke the 
nonnavigability determination and subject all of the vessels operating 
on the canal to full Coast Guard inspection and licensing of personnel. 
Because of the Coast Guard's safety expertise, the city of Richmond has 
committed to consulting with the Coast Guard before allowing any 
material changes to the construction, maintenance or operation of these 
vessels.
  Mr. Speaker, I believe that this bill adequately balances the desire 
to promote tourism in Richmond with the need to ensure the vacationing 
public a safe boating experience on this canal. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, 
I urge my colleagues to support passage of H.R. 1034.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bliley), the author of this legislation.
  Mr. BLILEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1034, a bill 
I introduced with the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) to declare a 
portion of the James River and Kanawha Canal nonnavigable for purposes 
of subtitle II of title 46 of the U.S. Code.
  The city of Richmond along with Richmond's Riverfront Management 
Corporation, a nonprofit group of local business and community leaders, 
have been working for several years to redevelop downtown Richmond. 
Their local historic preservation efforts will promote much needed 
economic development in Richmond's historic downtown and serve as a 
boost to tourism in Shockoe Slip and along the Richmond Canal front.
  The focal point of this renaissance is a Canal Walk along the Haxall 
and James River and Kanawha Canals. The city of Richmond and Riverfront 
Management Corporation hope to operate boat rides for tourists on the 
canals.
  Despite being filled in with dirt for 50 years, the canal was 
considered a navigable waterway and under Coast Guard jurisdiction 
because of its past use, over 100 years ago, in interstate commerce. 
The James River and Kanawha Canal ceased to be used for interstate 
commerce in the 1880s. The Haxall is already nonnavigable because it 
originated as a millrace.
  This is not a major waterway. The canal, as the gentleman from 
Mississippi pointed out, averages a depth of 3 feet. At one point it is 
only 24 inches deep. It has a width of approximately 23 feet. It is a 
controlled channel with a constant water surface elevation and water 
velocity.
  The city of Richmond sought the oversight responsibility for the 
James River and Kanawha Canal, and Richmond's Mayor Tim Kaine has 
written me and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) to ensure us the 
city takes its obligation in protecting public safety seriously.
  Mr. Speaker, I include copies of the two letters from the mayor in 
the Record at this point.


[[Page 7557]]




                                             City of Richmond,

                                     Richmond, VA, April 13, 1999.

     Hon. Thomas J. Bliley,
     Hon. Robert C. Scott,
     Rayburn House Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Messrs. Bliley and Scott: I want to express my 
     appreciation on behalf of the City of Richmond to you for 
     introducing H.R. 1034 to declare the James River and Kanawha 
     Canal non-navigable. The time and energy that you and your 
     respective staffs have given on behalf of this important 
     economic development project are greatly appreciated.
       I am writing to address certain concerns that have been 
     raised by members of the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure professional staff regarding the operation of 
     canal boats on the James River & Kanawha Canal. As you know, 
     members of your staffs and the committee visited Richmond 
     yesterday to gain a first hand understanding of what this 
     project entails.
       The staff has expressed a desire to have a fuller 
     understanding of the actions the City of Richmond will take 
     after the canal is declared non-navigable to insure that 
     boats operated on the canal are built, maintained and 
     operated in a manner that will insure public safety. As you 
     know, the Coast Guard has reviewed the design of the boats 
     that will be used on this canal and found the design suitable 
     for a passenger load of up to 40 people. The Coast Guard has 
     also reviewed other aspects of the planned operation. As I 
     understand it, the staff is not concerned with the operations 
     as planned, but is seeking some assurance of how the city 
     will address changes in operation that may be proposed at 
     some time in the future.
       It would be the city's intention to require that it receive 
     notification from its franchisee (i.e. the Riverfront 
     Management Corporation), of any material changes in the 
     design or operation of canal boats on the James River & 
     Kanawha Canal. The city would then utilize the provisions of 
     section 2(b) of the current draft of legislation to seek 
     advice and assistance from the Secretary of Transportation to 
     enable the city to determine whether or not the proposed 
     changes in operation or boat design were consistent with 
     protecting public safety. The city would then exercise its 
     authority under existing law to take appropriate action.
       The city takes its obligation to protect public safety 
     seriously and will make appropriate use of local, state, 
     federal, and private sector expertise to insure that this 
     project is operated consistent with protecting public safety. 
     The canal redevelopment is of vital importance to the 
     economic development of Richmond. The project is nearing 
     completion and prompt passage of legislation is necessary.
       I hope this letter will serve to clarify the manner in 
     which the city plans to proceed once these waters are 
     declared non-navigable.
           Sincerely,
     Timothy M. Kaine, Mayor.
                                  ____



                                             City of Richmond,

                                     Richmond, VA, April 20, 1999.
     Hon. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr.,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Congressman Bliley: It was a pleasure speaking with 
     you on Monday concerning the renovation and reopening of 
     Richmond's Historic Canal System. We certainly appreciate 
     your efforts to assist us with the Coast Guard regulation of 
     the canal.
       As we discussed, I will introduce an ordinance on Monday, 
     April 26 mandating that the canal boats will carry no more 
     than 40 passengers during operation. I expect that this 
     ordinance will not encounter any opposition and should be 
     passed at our meeting on May 10. Once the ordinance is 
     passed, I will send a copy to you for appropriate 
     distribution.
       Thank you so much for assistance on this matter. We have 
     waited a long time to reopen this historic resource and it 
     will be a great benefit to generations of Richmonders.
           Sincerely,
                                          Timothy M. Kaine, Mayor.

  Mayor Kaine has also introduced an ordinance in the city council 
limiting the number of boat passengers to 40 in accordance with 
approved boat capacity by the Coast Guard. The city welcomes this 
responsibility and I believe has more than demonstrated their 
commitment to ensuring a safe and enjoyable boat ride for Canal Walk 
visitors.
  It should be noted this bill does not waive Federal, environmental or 
labor laws. It also ensures that safety regulations are in place and 
gives the Secretary of Transportation the authority to revoke the 
nonnavigable designation if the Secretary determines the tour boat 
concessions are not being operated in the interest of public safety.
  H.R. 1034 gives the city of Richmond the freedom to continue its 
efforts to rejuvenate an historic part of the city, bringing renewed 
economic opportunity to downtown Richmond and a new historical 
perspective for the enjoyment of tourists and Richmonders alike.
  I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster), the gentleman 
from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Scott) for their efforts in working to produce a common-sense 
bipartisan bill. I urge its swift passage by the House.
  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott).
  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time, and I rise in support of the bill, H.R. 1034, which I have 
cosponsored with the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bliley). The 
legislation, H.R. 1034, declares a portion of the James River and 
Kanawha Canal in Richmond, Virginia, between the Great Ship Lock on the 
east and the city limits on the west as nonnavigable waters. The bill 
gives jurisdiction and authority of the canal to the city of Richmond 
for the purpose of operating boats along the canal adjacent to downtown 
Richmond.

                              {time}  1515

  In the late 19th century the canal was used to transport commerce 
from other parts of Virginia on the James River and into the canal. The 
canal was eventually closed, and, as has been said, filled with dirt 
for many years. In 1973, a federal judge declared parts of the waterway 
nonnavigable. Nevertheless, due to its former use, to move commerce 
along the river, the Coast Guard has maintained that the canal has 
retained its technical classification as a navigable waterway.
  Now the City of Richmond has redeveloped the area with Canal Walk, a 
project that will revitalize the area along the James River and Kanawha 
Canal. The canal, as has been stated, averages 3 feet in depth and has 
a width of approximately 23 feet when it opens, the city will use canal 
boats as a major attraction to draw tourists to the restored area of 
the river. The Canal Walk is expected to generate thousands of visitors 
who will enjoy numerous attractions and seasonal activities along the 
James River and Kanawha Canal, and it will play a valuable role in the 
revitalization of the river front.
  This legislation makes clear that the City of Richmond may operate 
the boats on the canal with a number of accepted requirements and 
standards that will satisfy public safety concerns of Federal, State 
and local regulators. I would like to thank the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster), the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. 
Oberstar), the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest) and the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. 
Taylor) for working in cooperation with the gentleman from Virginia 
(Mr. Bliley) and myself in such an expeditious and bipartisan manner. 
H.R. 1034 has gained the unanimous support of the House Committee on 
Transportation, and I urge its acceptance by the House.
  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may 
consume to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), the ranking 
minority member of the committee.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding this 
time to me. I, too, rise in support of H.R. 1034.
  Mr. Speaker, I had concerns originally about this legislation as 
introduced, but those concerns have been addressed by an amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) during 
committee consideration of the bill. My primary concern was that the 
purpose of the introduced bill was to exempt vessels that would be 
operating on this stretch of the canal from all Coast Guard safety 
laws. Now these vessels would be transporting up to 35 passengers up 
and down the canal for admittedly a very limited distance, but those 
passengers would include small children, elderly persons, people in 
wheelchairs.
  I was concerned also that the bill would exempt vessels from all 
other maritime laws of the United States, including the Jones Act and 
marine pollution laws, from my standpoint, a very unwelcomed precedent. 
In ordinary conduct of business the public has

[[Page 7558]]

a right to expect that vessels they board will be safe, that is laws of 
the United States under which vessels operate will protect them.
  Mr. Speaker, the primary purpose of these vessels is to serve the 
cause of tourism, and I am a very strong supporter of tourism. I 
chaired the Congressional Travel and Tourism Caucus for several years 
and advocated tourism. I want to see developments of this kind take 
place. This is a very ambitious, a very attractive waterfront 
development in the City of Richmond, which indeed started under the 
aegis of the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bliley) when he was mayor 
there.
  So I met with the gentleman from Virginia, and I expressed to him my 
concerns about the rather overly broad sweep of the language and was 
satisfied that the consequences of that language were not intended by 
any means by the gentleman from Virginia, nor the other gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Scott) who was the principle co-author of this 
legislation, and after rather extensive discussion, we came to a very 
clear meeting of the minds, that adjustments should be made. The 
gentleman went back to his City of Richmond, talked with the mayor and 
city council and came back with a narrowing of the scope of the bill so 
that the designation as nonnavigable applies to a very much smaller and 
narrower set of Coast Guard laws.
  Second, the language provides for the Coast Guard to revoke the 
designation and make the vessels operating on the canal subject to 
safety regulations if the vessels are not built, maintained and 
operated in a manner consistent with public safety, the City of 
Richmond will be primarily responsible for ensuring that the vessels 
are operated safely, and third, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Bliley) also worked out with the City of Richmond an agreement to 
consult with the Coast Guard before allowing any material change in the 
operation of the vessels on the canal. So the city is the primary line 
of defense and responsibility for public safety and common wield.
  The Mayor of Richmond, in fourth place, has agreed to introduce a 
city ordinance restricting the carrying capacity of these vessels to 40 
people, the maximum allowed under Coast Guard guidelines and 
recommendations.
  Mr. Speaker, I think these four changes make this a very acceptable 
bill. I know it took a good deal of effort on the part of both the 
principle author and the co-author of the legislation to make these 
adjustments, but they are in the best public interest, and I appreciate 
their cooperation. I think the public will appreciate their concern and 
action on behalf of safety, and certainly we should all rest assured 
that the traveling public will have a very safe medium in which to 
enjoy the pleasures and the extraordinary history of this beautiful 
City of Richmond.
  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests 
for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. 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 Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 1034, 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.

                          ____________________