f94f271fbcd8f5908cbe88413c30eedad5a82f10c1f5b0c90ccd27ec38998057

words `to meet the present emergency needs' under the General Expenses
appropriation title of Corps of Engineers--Civil.

d135a9145123d741c5c2aa319f1a3ff2c310607695573720d7a1f7b4be1a10f4

Law 99-88 for construction of facilities at the Mill Creek recreation area
of the Tioga-Hammond Lakes, Pennsylvania, project; in Public Law 100-71
for initiation of land acquisition activities as described in section
1114 of Public Law 99-662; and in Public Law 101-101 for construction
of the Satilla River Basin, Georgia, project, and for acquisition of an
icebreaking boat and equipment for the Kankakee River, Illinois, project,
may be utilized by the Secretary of the Army in carrying out projects and
activities funded by this Act.

0b945b7e1d452e18211c50f31ca177b94be520cc67fb3c5a400d6814b9a3b1dd

directed to maintain in caretaker status the navigation portion of the Fox
River System in Wisconsin. The Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil
Works shall take over negotiations with the State of Wisconsin for the
orderly transfer of ownership and operation of the Fox River Lock System
to a nonfederal entity. These negotiations shall commence immediately, be
conducted in good faith, and be completed as soon as possible. The terms
of a negotiated settlement shall be presented to Congress immediately
upon the completion of these negotiations. The settlement shall include
provisons for both the logistics and timing of the transfer of the Lock
System, as well as a negotiated recommendation for monetary compensation
to the nonfederal entity for the repair and rehabilitation of damage and
deterioration associated with all appropriate portions of the Fox River
System which are being transferred.

c00c8bac0f0763aa2a5dd96f063bc27327152d5949735350275b489bb99993ab

99-662, the projects for flood control, Moorefield, West Virginia, and
Petersburg, West Virginia, authorized by section 101 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1990, are modified to provide that the local sponsors
may satisfy the cost-sharing requirements of section 103 of said law by
contributing after January 1, 1990, land or other assets unrelated to the
project site, at its appraised value.

114b42d83ceae286bd111abb7be5043961479e40f2e83ab608722a984137c077

implement the proposed rule for the Army Corps of Engineers amending
regulations on `ability to pay' (33 CFR Part 241), published in the Federal
Register, vol. 56, No. 114, on Thursday, June 13, 1991.

53f2a8bc6afc2c9aaf8785fd4ab395f12b58284a7fe20cf154bacb86468ab944

of the Army is directed to place the Federal hopper dredge fleet, excluding
the Essayons and the Yaquina which shall be stationed and operated within
the jurisdiction of the North Pacific Division, in a standby status for a
period of one year from the date of enactment of this Act and to make all the
material scheduled to be dredged by the vessels placed in standby, available
for competitive bidding by the private dredging industry. Notwithstanding the
preceding sentence, the Secretary shall mobilize any standby vessels or any
part of the Federal dredge fleet to respond to emergency or national defense
needs, or if the Secretary determines that the private dredging industry
cannot perform the scheduled dredging at a reasonable price and in a timely
manner. No later than 24 months after the date of enactment of this Act,
the Secretary shall submit a report to Congress evaluating the capability
of the private dredging industry to perform the work of the Federal hopper
dredges placed in standby status. The study shall include an analysis of
the cost-effectiveness of having the private dredging industry perform
such work; the incremental cost to the Federal Government of maintaining
these vessels in a standby status; and the cost of retiring each vessel
placed in standby status in this Act.
( 23 ) Page 20, line 15, strike out  [Struck out->][ $13,700,000 ][<-Struck
out]  and insert: $12,390,000
( 24 ) Page 21, line 7, strike out  [Struck out->][ $470,568,000 ][<-Struck
out]  and insert: $466,334,000
( 25 ) Page 21, line 10, strike out  [Struck out->][ $156,168,000 ][<-Struck
out]  and insert: $154,868,000
( 26 ) Page 23, line 16, strike out all after `seq.)' down to and including
`$48,000,000' in line 20
( 27 ) Page 23, line 20, after '$48,000,000' insert: : Provided further,
That pursuant to Section 406(c)(2) of Public Law 101-628, the Secretary of
the Interior is directed to reimburse, in an amount not to exceed $800,000,
the City of Prescott, Arizona for funding advanced by Prescott, Arizona
to the Bureau of Reclamation for hydrological studies required by Section
406(c)(1) of Public Law 101-628
( 28 ) Page 24, line 1, strike out  [Struck out->][ $284,010,000 ][<-Struck
out]  and insert: $269,760,000
( 29 ) Page 25, line 2, strike out all after `nonreimbursable' down to
and including `law' in line 8
( 30 ) Page 25, line 12, strike out  [Struck out->][ $2,202,000 ][<-Struck
out]  and insert: $3,502,000
( 31 ) Page 25, line 20, strike out  [Struck out->][ $5,060,000 ][<-Struck
out]  and insert: $6,000,000
( 32 ) Page 25, line 20, after `$5,060,000' insert: : Provided further,
That $1,300,000 of the funds contained herein shall be for the Fort McDowell
Indian Community Small Reclamation Project Act loan authorized by section
8(e) of Public Law 101-628
( 33 ) Page 26, line 12, strike out all after `expenses' down to and
including `Congress' in line 16
( 34 ) Page 30, after line 5, insert:
None of the funds made available in this Act may be expended to implement
the transfer of title or ownership of the Central Valley Project to the
State of California, unless subsequently authorized by Congress.
( 35 ) Page 32, after line 13, insert:

364013571b6314cb2aa37a9b7e982500a9fabda08f2b66e5b712f502380461be

Act (79 Stat. 216 16 U.S.C. 4601-18) is amended by deleting the Proviso
from the first sentence and by changing the semicolon after the word
`purposes' to a period.
( 36 ) Page 32, after line 13, insert:

760290b9e3281a56d2cb839eb5453c428aff7eeceebec0a1ce9230176b65953f

Policy Act, the Secretary of the Interior is directed to conduct a formal
analysis, by no later than March 31, 1994, of alternatives for the design,
construction, and operation of the Sykeston Canal as a functional replacement
for Lonetree Reservoir, pursuant to section 8(a)(1) of Public Law 89-108,
as amended by the Garrison Diversion Reformulation Act of 1986, Public
Law 99-294. The resulting Definite Plan Report/ Environmental Impact
Statement shall be utilized by the Secretary for the development of a
Record of Decision which is to contain the Secretary's recommendation for
proceeding with the final design and construction of the Sykeston Canal,
consistent with the provisions of the Garrison Diversion Reformulation
Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act,
the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, and the Boundary Waters Treaty of
1909. For purposes of this section, the Secretary shall take into account
the results of studies conducted by the Secretary of the Army with respect
to the stabilization of Devils Lake, North Dakota.
( 37 ) Page 33, line 4, strike out all after `only),' down to and including
`research' in line 9 and insert: $2,971,583,000, to remain available until
expended, of which $300,000 shall be available only for planning funds
for the Bishop Science Center, State of Hawaii; the Ambulatory Research
and Education Building, Oregon Health Sciences University; and the Center
for Energy and Environmental Resources, Louisiana State University, Baton
Rouge, Louisiana, and of which, $4,000,000 shall be derived by transfer
from the Geothermal Resources Development Fund
( 38 ) Page 33, line 9, after `research' insert: : Provided further, That
within the funds appropriated herein, $50,000 shall be available only for
planning funds for the Center for Energy Research, University of Kansas,
Lawrence, Kansas
( 39 ) Page 33, line 22, strike out  [Struck out->][ $1,335,320,000
][<-Struck out]  and insert: $1,321,320,000
( 40 ) Page 34, line 21, strike out  [Struck out->][ $998,884,000 ][<-Struck
out]  and insert: $1,460,784,000
( 41 ) Page 34, line 22, strike out all after `expended.' over to and
including line 8 on page 35
( 42 ) Page 35, strike out lines 9 to 23
( 43 ) Page 36, strike out all including line 1 over to and including line
3 on page 38, and insert:
Nuclear Waste Disposal Fund
For nuclear waste disposal activities to carry out the purposes of Public Law
97-425, as amended, including the acquisition of real property or facility
construction or expansion, $275,071,000, to remain available until expended,
to be derived from the Nuclear Waste Fund. To the extent that balances in
the fund are not sufficient to cover amounts available for obligation in
the account, the Secretary shall exercise his authority pursuant to section
302(e)(5) of said Act to issue obligations to the Secretary of the Treasury:
Provided, That of the amount herein appropriated, within available funds,
not to exceed $5,000,000 may be provided to the State of Nevada, for the
sole purpose in the conduct of its oversight responsibilities pursuant
to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, Public Law 97-425, as amended:
Provided further, That of the amount herein appropriated, not more than
$6,000,000 may be provided to affected local governments, as defined in
the Act, to conduct appropriate activities pursuant to the Act: Provided
further, That the distribution of the funds herein provided among the
affected units of local government shall be determined by the Department
of Energy (DOE) and made available to the State and affected units of
local government by direct payment: Provided further, That within 90 days
of the completion of each Federal fiscal year, each entity shall provide
certification to the DOE, that all funds expended from such direct payment
monies have been expended for activities as defined in Public Law 97-425,
as amended. Failure to provide such certification shall cause such entity
to be prohibited from any further funding provided for similar activities:
Provided further, That none of the funds herein appropriated may be
used directly or indirectly to influence legislative action on any matter
pending before Congress or a State legislature or for any lobbying activity
as provided in 18 U.S.C. 1913: Provided further, That none of the funds
herein appropriated may be used for litigation expenses: Provided further,
That grant funds are not to be used to support multistate efforts or other
coalition building activities inconsistent with the restrictions contained
in this Act: Provided further, That no funds herein appropriated from this
Fund shall be used by the State of Nevada or by the Department of Energy
for public relations, media, advertising or similar activities that are
not related to scientific oversight of activities of the Department of
Energy in furtherance of characterization studies: Provided further, That
of the amount appropriated herein, up to $3,700,000 shall be available for
infrastructure studies, mobile sampling platform and monitoring work and
other research and development work to be carried out by the University of
Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) and the University of Nevada, Reno. Funding to the
universities will be administered by the DOE through a cooperative agreement.
In paying the amounts determined to be appropriate as a result of the
decision in Consolidated Edison Company of New York v. Department of Energy
870 F.2d 694 (D.C. Cir. 1989), the Department of Energy shall pay interest
at a rate to be determined by the Secretary of the Treasury and calculated
from the date the amounts were deposited into the Nuclear Waste Fund. Such
payments may be made by credits to future utility payments into the Fund.
( 44 ) Page 39, strike out all after line 7 over to and including line 14
on page 40, and insert: $4,523,249,000, to remain available until expended:
Provided, That none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available
for the Department of Energy for fiscal year 1993 may be obligated to
implement the reconfiguration of nonnuclear activities of the Department
of Energy until the occurrence of the following:
(1) The Secretary of Energy submits a report to the Committees on
Appropriations that contains an analysis of the projected costs and
benefits of the proposed nonnuclear reconfiguration and an analysis of the
alternatives considered. The analyses shall take into account all relevant
costs and benefits and shall include a discounted cash flow analysis of
each alternative.
(2) The Secretary of Energy certifies to the Committees on Appropriations
that the discounted cash flow analysis demonstrates that the proposed
nonnuclear reconfiguration is cost-effective on a plant by plant basis.
(3) A period of 90 days has elapsed after the later of the submission of
the report and the certification by the Secretary of Energy.
Nothing in this provision prohibits the obligation of funds for studies,
analysis, or preparation of conceptual designs that are necessary to assess
the cost-effectiveness or feasibility of nonnuclear reconfiguration.
( 45 ) Page 40, line 24, strike out  [Struck out->][ $171,800,000 ][<-Struck
out]  and insert: $170,028,000
( 46 ) Page 41, line 17, strike out  [Struck out->][ $4,603,009,000
][<-Struck out]  and insert: $4,802,047,000
( 47 ) Page 42, line 13, strike out  [Struck out->][ $2,550,901,000
][<-Struck out]  and insert: $2,523,301,000
( 48 ) Page 42, after line 14, insert:
DEFENSE NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL
For nuclear waste disposal activities to carry out the purposes of Public
Law 97-425, as amended, including the acquisition of real property or
facility construction or expansion, $100,000,000, to remain available
until expended, all of which shall be used in accordance with the terms
and conditions of the Nuclear Waste Fund appropriation of the Department
of Energy contained in this title.
( 49 ) Page 45, line 21, strike out  [Struck out->][ $326,634,000 ][<-Struck
out]  and insert: $336,634,000
( 50 ) Page 46, line 14, strike out  [Struck out->][ $142,801,000 ][<-Struck
out]  and insert: $158,639,000
( 51 ) Page 46, line 16, strike out  [Struck out->][ $142,801,000 ][<-Struck
out]  and insert: $158,639,000
( 52 ) Page 49, after line 17, insert:

c83354db4beb6f3ac2b823d6a122d5d5b14939065c7df7d6aebb1619a517e4b6

the Department of Energy hereafter may obligate funds in advance of their
receipt from a non-Federal source to the extent of amounts actually held
in trust or escrow to carry out Superconducting Super Collider activities:
Provided, That these funds shall be available without fiscal year limitation
or further appropriation: Provided further, That trust funds heretofore
obligated from such trust or escrow shall, likewise, not be subject to
section 1341 of title 31, United States Code.
( 53 ) Page 49, after line 17, insert:

90c25d431547aa0da3d0602612979b535bfeff6e0413dca4f828f5565acbb6db

enactment of this Act, none of the funds made available in this Act or
any other provision of law for fiscal year 1993 may be available for the
implementation of an environmental restoration management contract at the
Hanford, Washington site.
( 54 ) Page 49, after line 17, insert:

86cb4f26cf421a1a7e4e29a08a17bb4233b6be5a79ede37ef4f52306398256fa

Solenoidal Detector Collaboration (SDC) or the Gammas, Electrons, and
Muons Detector Collaboration (GEM), no Federal funds appropriated to
the Department of Energy for fiscal year 1993 or thereafter may be used,
directly or indirectly, to purchase components for the Superconducting
Super Collider that are manufactured outside the United States, except
pursuant to a contract that was open to competitive bidding.
( 55 ) Page 50, line 5, strike out  [Struck out->][ $185,000,000 ][<-Struck
out]  and insert: $190,000,000
( 56 ) Page 55, line 19, after `Code' insert: : Provided further, That no
amount may be transferred from the Alabama Elk River Development Agency
trust fund if the transfer would result in a balance in such trust fund
that is less than $2,000,000
( 57 ) Page 57, strike out lines 16 to 23 and insert:

db53bbee08d9ca3f6174d6220f06ef1354a32cb4372175c706c142aa6832f4cd

Act for fiscal year 1993 or for any other fiscal year may be available
for conducting a test of a nuclear explosive device only if the conduct
of that test is permitted in accordance with the provisions of this section.
(b) No test of a nuclear weapon may be conducted before July 1, 1993.
(c) On and after July 1, 1993, a test of a nuclear weapon may be conducted--
(1) only if--
(A) the President has submitted the annual report required under subsection
(d);
(B) 90 days have elapsed after the submittal of that report in accordance
with that subsection; and
(C) Congress has not agreed to a joint resolution described in subsection
(d)(3) within that 90-day period; and
(2) only if the test is conducted during the period covered by the report.
(d)(1) Not later than March 1 of each year beginning after 1992,
the President shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services and
Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives, in classified
and unclassified forms, a report containing the following matters:
(A) A schedule for resumption of the Nuclear Testing Talks with Russia.
(B) A plan for achieving a multilateral comprehensive ban on the testing
of nuclear weapons on or before September 30, 1996.
(C) An assessment of the number and type of nuclear warheads that will
remain in the United States stockpile of active nuclear weapons on September
30, 1996.
(D) For each fiscal year after fiscal year 1992, an assessment of the
number and type of nuclear warheads that will remain in the United States
stockpile of nuclear weapons and that--
(i) will not be in the United States stockpile of active nuclear weapons;
(ii) will remain under the control of the Department of Defense; and
(iii) will not be transferred to the Department of Energy for dismantlement.
(E) A description of the safety features of each warhead that is covered
by an assessment referred to in subparagraph (C) or (D).
(F) A plan for installing one or more modern safety features in each
warhead identified in the assessment referred to in subparagraph (C), as
determined after an analysis of the costs and benefits of installing such
feature or features in the warhead, should have one or more of such features.
(G) An assessment of the number and type of nuclear weapon tests, not
to exceed 5 tests in any period covered by an annual report under this
paragraph and a total of 15 tests in the 4-fiscal year period beginning
with fiscal year 1993, that are necessary in order to ensure the safety
of each nuclear warhead in which one or more modern safety features are
installed pursuant to the plan referred to in subparagraph (F).
(H) A schedule, in accordance with subparagraph (G), for conducting at the
Nevada test site, each of the tests enumerated in the assessment pursuant
to subparagraph (G).
(2) The first annual report shall cover the period beginning on the
date on which a resumption of testing of nuclear weapons is permitted
under subsection (c) and ending on September 30, 1994. Each annual report
thereafter shall cover the fiscal year following the fiscal year in which
the report is submitted.
(3) For the purposes of paragraph (1), `joint resolution' means only a
joint resolution introduced after the date on which the Committees referred
to in that paragraph receive the report required by that paragraph the
matter after the resolving clause of which is as follows: `The Congress
disapproves the report of the President on nuclear weapons testing, dated
XXXXXXX.' (the blank space being appropriately filled in).
(4) No report is required under this subsection after 1996.
(e)(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3), during a period covered
by an annual report submitted pursuant to subsection (d), nuclear weapons
may be tested only as follows:
(A) Only those nuclear explosive devices in which modern safety features
have been installed pursuant to the plan referred to in subsection (d)(1)(F)
may be tested.
(B) Only the number and types of tests specified in the report pursuant
to subsection (d)(1)(G) may be conducted.
(2)(A) One test of the reliability of a nuclear weapon other than one
referred to in paragraph (1)(A) may be conducted during any period covered
by an annual report, but only if--
(i) within the first 60 days after the beginning of that period, the
President certifies to Congress that it is vital to the national security
interests of the United States to test the reliability of such a nuclear
weapon; and
(ii) within the 60-day period beginning on the date that Congress receives
the certification, Congress does not agree to a joint resolution described
in subparagraph (B).
(B) For the purposes of subparagraph (A), `joint resolution' means only a
joint resolution introduced after the date on which the Congress receives
the certification referred to in that subparagraph the matter after the
resolving clause of which is as follows: `The Congress disapproves the
testing of a nuclear weapon covered by the certification of the President
dated XXXXXXXX.' (the blank space being appropriately filled in).
(3) The President may authorize the United Kingdom to conduct in the United
States, within a period covered by an annual report, one test of a nuclear
weapon if the President determines that it is in the national interests
of the United States to do so. Such a test shall be considered as one of
the tests within the maximum number of tests that the United States is
permitted to conduct during that period under paragraph (1)(B).
(f) No underground test of nuclear weapons may be conducted by the United
States after September 30, 1996, unless Russia conducts a nuclear test
after this date, at which time the prohibition on United States nuclear
testing is lifted.
(g) In the computation of the 90-day period referred to in subsection
(c)(1) and the 60-day period referred to in subsection (e)(2)(A)(ii), the
days on which either House is not in session because of an adjournment of
more than 3 days to a day certain shall be excluded.
(h) In this section, the term `modern safety feature' means any of the
following features:
(1) An insensitive high explosive (IHE).
(2) Fire resistant pits (FRP).
(3) An enhanced detonation safety (ENDS) system.
( 58 ) Page 57, after line 23, insert:

2821fa516a7a0acbfc7db739f4e351b1b70da6c8010b7f1c68c506fcf2fba60d

funds appropriated in Title I or Title II shall be available for the Central
Maine Water Supply Project, to remain available until September 30, 1993, and
to become available only upon enactment into law of authorizing legislation.
( 59 ) Page 57, after line 23, insert:

ce82533d86530663657c422b37110891efd479fffc9220b89fdd9ddaac24a588

(1) The United States Congress enacted the Low-Level Radioactive Waste
Policy Act of 1980 (Public Law 99-924; 42 U.S.C. 2021b et seq.) upon the
urging of the National Governors Association and prompted by a concern
that failure to open new low-level radioactive waste disposal sites in
the United States would result in a severe shortage of disposal capacity
for such waste in the United States;
(2) Congress enacted the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act Amendments
of 1985 (Public Law 96-573; 94 Stat. 3347) to modify such 1980 Act by
establishing incentives and procedures to permit disposal of low-level
radioactive waste at existing commercial disposal facilities through the
end of 1992;
(3) A 1989 study conducted by the Office of Technology Assessment indicates
that the volume of low-level radioactive waste generated in the United
States declined approximately by half between 1980 and 1989;
(4) The study predicts that such volume may decline approximately by half
again between 1989 and 1993;
(5) The volume of low-level radioactive waste disposed of is a major
determinant of the cost of the disposal of such waste;
(6) The disposal of increasingly small volumes of such waste results in
higher costs of disposal per unit volume because many of the costs of
developing and maintaining low-level waste disposal sites are fixed;
(7) Given the likelihood that the number of low-level radioactive waste
disposal sites in the United States will increase soon from 3 to more than
10, it is likely that the cost per unit volume of disposing of such waste
at such sites will rise dramatically; and
(8) On June 19, 1992, the Supreme Court of the United States held that
the provisions of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act Amendments
of 1985 known as the `take-title' provisions were unconstitutional.
(b) THEREFORE- It is the sense of the Senate that the Congress should
reexamine the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act Amendments of 1985
(Public Law 96-573; 94 Stat. 3347) and work with the Secretary of Energy and
the National Governors Association to develop a solution to problems relating
to capacity in the United States for disposal of low-level radioactive
waste (including a decline in the volume of the generation of such waste
and a projected surplus of such capacity) that have arisen since 1980.
Attest:
Secretary.
HR 5373 EAS----2
HR 5373 EAS----3
HR 5373 EAS----4
HR 5373 EAS----5
HR 5373 EAS----6
HR 5373 EAS----7
HR 5373 EAS----8

9dde752198c58225c2d572c7355758f163bad223197a54a1e5609b13ce3db9e9

Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 1993 — HR. 5373

Other Sections

Want the full experience?