June 9, 1977
Page 18145
Mr. STEVENS. Will the Senator from Utah yield me time?
Mr. DOMENICI. How much time have we remaining, Mr. President?
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. SASSER). The Senator from Utah (Mr. GARN) has 21 minutes, and the Senator from Maine has 7 minutes.
Mr. GARN. I would be happy to yield to the Senator from Alaska.
Mr. STEVENS. I thank the Senator from Utah.
Mr. President, I intend to offer an amendment as a substitute for this amendment when time has expired. I do not want to get into that amendment right now, but I do want to address some questions to the manager of the bill because of the discussion concerning national parks.
I would like to know what is the Senator talking about when he says national parks in this bill? Is he talking about the national historical parks like the C. & O. Canal? Is he talking about national seashore areas which are part of the national park systems? Is he talking about the national monuments?
Is the Senator being very specific in saying national park means an area established by Congress as a national park and nothing more within the system?
If the Senator is not being very specific, he is causing a lot more problems than he understands because the C. & O. Canal, for instance, 184 miles across Ohio and Maryland, is a part of the national park system. This bill could not possibly apply to that park.
The Cape Canaveral seashore is 67,500 acres. It currently has the problem that the Senator from Utah was addressing, as far as I know, and it would be covered.
I would urge that the managers of the bill make it very clear that when they say national park, they mean a national park, per se, and not a unit of the national park system. If we do not have a record which is clear in our intent, we are going to have litigation all over this country with regard to the impact of this provision.
I intend to get into the problem related to Alaska in terms of the proposed national parks in connection with the Breaux amendment. I would hope the legislative history here would be clear that the committee intends to limit this to national parks established by act of Congress and not other units of the national park system, including but not limited to national monuments, national historical parks, and national recreation areas when it make that reference to national parks in this bill.
Mr. MUSKIE. May I say it applies to national parks, period.
Mr. STEVENS. It is a specific reference to a national park as we understand it and not to generic units of the national park system?
Mr. MUSKIE. I do not know what the Senator means by generic units of the park system. We are talking about national parks.
Mr. STEVENS. The Senator does not intend to include the national historical parks like the C. & O. Canal?
Mr. MUSKIE Of course not.
Mr. STEVENS. It is not a national park in the sense of this bill?
Mr. MUSKIE. That is right. I think last year's legislative history indicates that.
Mr. STEVENS. We had such a discussion last July. We got into a little problem about the changes in the bill and how a court might interpret them later on the basis of legislative history we made last year.
Mr. MUSKIE. Since the legislative history is built by people of different views, legislative history is not always precisely pristine.
Mr. STEVENS. On this subject the Senator from Maine is very pristine and I am delighted to be associated with him.
Mr. RIBICOFF. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. MUSKIE I yield.
[Unrelated intervening action omitted]
CLEAN AIR AMENDMENTS OF 1977
The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill (S. 252) to amend the Clean Air Act, as amended.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Mr. GARN. I am happy to yield such time as the Senator from Idaho needs.
Mr. McCLURE. I thank the Senator from Utah for yielding.
I would like to have the attention of the Senator from Maine and the Senator from Vermont with regard to some language which is not directly affected by this amendment, but, nevertheless, bears upon it.
We recall, I am sure, the discussion we had both in committee and on the floor of the Senate last year with regard to the definition of major emitting facilities. We defined those in the terms of those that had the potential to emit 100 tons of pollutants. Then we listed certain types of plants and gave the Administrator the authority to add other plants of the same general type to the list, if necessary.
The language this year in the bill is precisely the same as the language last year in the bill. I do not want to go through the extensive colloquy we had on the floor last year, trying to pin down exactly what we had in mind.
It is my expectation we mean exactly the same thing this year as we did last. Am I correct on that?
Mr. MUSKIE. Yes. I would be glad to ask unanimous consent that the colloquy be printed in the RECORD.
Mr. McCLURE. I thank the Senator. I think it is not necessary for us to go through all that again this year if, as a matter of fact, the committee intends that this language means precisely the same as we intended last year.
Mr. MUSKIE. May I say it was too laborious a chore to work it out last year for me to try to rework it on different lines this year.
So I subscribe to what the Senator says.
Mr. McCLURE. I thank the Senator from Maine.
I think the Senator from Vermont agrees that is true?
Mr. STAFFORD. The Senator from Vermont so agrees.