102 



Senator Spong. No ; I am not. 



Mr. Train. Or major historic area — and I must say it is pretty 

 difficult to think of a highway coming through Virginia that does not 

 touch on a major historic area — but the general thrust here would 

 be to require the State to develop a method of control of development 

 around what the legislation calls key facilities. And tliis would be 

 major highway interchanges, for example. This is specified in the 

 bill. Development around key interchanges along that highway sys- 

 tem would have to be identified by the State and brought under some 

 form of effective control insofar as the development is concerned. 



Senator Spong. Do you see a restriction imposed as to the number 

 of interchanges, for instance ? 



Mr. Train. The purpose of this legisation is not to intervene in 

 the normal highway planning process at all. I do not see this legis- 

 lation, in and of itself, as involving a determination or limitation on 

 the numbers of interchanges. 



Senator Spong. I notice that in the definition 



Mr. Train. Let me make one amendment to that. And that is, if 

 we are dealing with an area of critical environmental concern, then 

 I think that the legislation would make it possible for the State, 

 through this program, to put a limitation on the number of inter- 

 changes if, for example, they involve the filling of wetlands or some- 

 thing of that sort. 



Senator Spong. Or going through Mount Vernon ? 



Mr. Train. I think that would be a very good example. 



Senator Spong. I notice in your definition of State that you have 

 all the territories and whatnot, but the District of Columbia is ex- 

 cluded. I realize you are not the sponsor of the bill, but is there any 

 reason for the exclusion? I refer to page 5, paragraph (d). 



Mr. Train. Frankly, I was not familiar with the fact that we had 

 excluded the District of Columbia. I believe that the District — and 

 I am speaking really not from any real examination of the subject. 

 Senator — I believe that the District has the kinds of authorities wliich 

 we are here seeking States to assimie, and it may well be that, given 

 the nature of the District/congi-essional relationship, that the exten- 

 sion of this legislation to the District is not necessary. 



But here I think is something that the Congress would want to take 

 a good look at. 



Senator Spong. I think we will. 



Mr. Train. As a longtime resident and native of the city of Wash- 

 ington, I certainly do not want to see the District of Columbia excluded 

 from the good results which we think will flow from this legislation. 



Senator Spong. I just have one or two more questions, if the commit- 

 tee will bear with me here. You may have touched on this in response to 

 Senator Hollings, but what effect would S. 992 have on the authority of 

 the FPC to issue licenses for power projects involving reservoirs? 



Mr. Train. The powerplant siting policy is generally covered, as I 

 indicated earlier, by the powerplant siting legislation, and we think 

 this is properly treated as a separate program. 



At the same time, there is no exception to the requirement in S. 992 

 that all Federal programs and activities must be consistent with a State 

 land use program once it has been approved. So that — I cannot think of 



