G65 



We have previously debated the matter of powerphxnt siting. We 

 are not injecting something new in the original concept of offshore 

 drilling. 



What does this mean to South Carolina? We have a nuclear power- 

 plant, lip at Trotter Shoals, just above Columbia, S.C. There is no pro- 

 vision for the Trotter Shoals plans under this bill, and there have not 

 been and will not be if the Senate passes these particular amendments 

 to the basic act. There is another such plant at Keowee-Toxaway with 

 the Duke Power Company in the Piedmont section of South Carolina. 



It is not entirely correct, as the Senator from Oklahoma suggests, 

 that the "coastal States get something while inland States get 

 nothing." 



The contrary is true. Coastal regions get something, but that aspect 

 of the coastal States, outside that region which is the majority of my 

 State, are not going to get a dime. So, ordinarily, by way of self-inter- 

 est, I should go along with the Senator from Arkansas. But he violates 

 the fundamental principle that this Congress, after all the debate and 

 in passing it twice, finally found. That is that there is a national con- 

 cern and a national problem to be solved by the Coastal Zone Manage- 

 ment Act. 



The Senator asks why his inland State cannot share in these funding 

 provisions. "V^Tien a Trotter Shoals subjects itself to national zoning, 

 or to a land use plan, or when Keowee-Toxaway, then perhaps his 

 question could be answered. Incidentally, there was not a single coastal 

 area zoned as a coastal area when we started this legislation. The dis- 

 tinguished Senator from jSIaine is in the Chamber. They have the best 

 coastal zone program. They have been leading the country in planning 

 their coastal area. California has already put $10 million into their 

 program. Florida has put $10 million into theirs. They have all come 

 alono: as a result of the impetus of the Coastal Zone Management Act 

 of 1972. 



But I would like to note to my colleagues that we would not give 

 these funds right aM'ay. The money has to conform to the overall im- 

 l)act and in accordance with an approved plan of development. There 

 is not funds for the State of Arkansas, and as is not for the majority 

 of the State or South Carolina, which is outside of the coastal zone 

 thus the majority of the State of South Carolina, and the State of 

 Arkansas are not the focus of this measure. But perhaj)S the entire 

 State of Arkansas and the State of Oklahoma would be included under 

 a Innd use measure but not under one designed for the coastal zone. 



Mr. Bellmon. Mr. President, will the Senator yield ? 



Mr. HoLLixGS. I yield. 



Mr. Bellmo^t. I thank the Senator for yielding. 



The Senator from South Carolina says that the entire State of 

 South Carolina will not be covered. So far as I can tell, there is no 

 definition of "coastal zone" in this matter. 



Mr. HoLETNOS. Yes, there is. These are amendments to the law. That 

 is why I read the law earlier. I thought it was quite clear. 



]Mr. I^^EELMOX. Will the Senator define "coastal zone" as it relates 

 to til is measure? 



Mr. Hoixixos. Section 304. Public Law 92-58?>, at the bottom of 

 pasfe 1489 : 



"Coastal zone" means the coastal waters * * * and the adjacent 

 shorelands * * * 



