Conference Report on H.R. 4818, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005

CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 4818, CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005 -- (Extensions of Remarks - December 07, 2004)

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring my colleagues attention to a provision included in the Fiscal Year 2005 Appropriations Omnibus bill, H.R. 4818, titled, "Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Salaries and Expenses." The language included in this section declares that it is the intent of Congress for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to have exclusive jurisdiction over the siting and approval of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) terminals. This language seems to target a pending lawsuit by the State of California challenging the placement of a LNG facility. Although the language is non-binding, I am concerned with the possible repercussions of this provision, as well as the method in which it was added to the bill.

My home state of Rhode Island is currently examining a proposal regarding a LNG terminal in Providence. Members of the Rhode Island Congressional delegation and state officials have been in active discussions with all federal and local agencies that would be affected by this terminal to ensure that the region is properly informed of the hazards of a potentially expanded or new LNG facility. Rhode Island's unique geography and narrow waterways would force the LNG tanker ships to travel through densely populated areas to reach the terminal. The citizens of Rhode Island and our Congressional delegation have justly requested that all safety concerns are addressed before the facility is considered due to the ships close proximity to residential and businesses areas. There is also an increased potential for environmental damage due to dredging, as well as concerns for how increased tanker traffic will affect the commercial fishing industry, which is already under tremendous stress. Further, the U.S. Coast Guard recently responded in a letter to my office that the security of the LNG ships would be a shared Federal, State, local, and industry responsibility.

I understand the FERC's assessment that the shipment of LNG is engaged in foreign commerce, however, this statement severely limits the process and dangers involved with shipping LNG. The delivery of LNG, especially in populated areas such as Rhode Island, greatly impacts the lives of those who live near the transport route. Also, the state and local law enforcement agencies that will be called upon to ensure the public's safety will continue to be stretched thin. Excluding the involvement of the state from the consideration of a LNG terminal is inconsistent with all the information my office has received from various inquiries that unequivocally proves that state and local agencies would be greatly impacted by the construction of a large facility. The federal government is also ignoring the critical expertise and knowledge that can be gained by including state and local experts in this process.

I am also extremely disappointed with the closed-door method that was used to add this language to the omnibus. Supporting the FERC's exclusive jurisdiction over the siting and approval of LNG terminals is an extremely important decision that is worthy of a full debate in Congress. By including controversial language in an omnibus at the end of the 108th session of Congress, there is no opportunity to amend or strip the bill of this or other, harmful provisions. I hope that my colleagues will join me in more closely examining the full impact of this issue on every state in the next Congress. I look forward to an open debate that will include the input of those citizens and local officials who are most affected by the inclusion of this language in the omnibus. Thank you.