670 



State, to be a member of the Ozarks Refjional Commission, which was 

 the commission that served Arkansas, ]\lissouri, Oklahoma, Kansas, 

 and Louisiana. 



The point is that then and now, the title V commissions are funded 

 at a level of roughly 20 cents per person, Appalachia is still funded 

 at approximately $17 per person. I believe that is correct. 



That is what'l have an inordinate fear will happen to the land- 

 locked States, one of which I represent, if we pass this now. I hope 

 nobody will sugi^est, and certainly I want to make it clear that I am 

 not casting any aspersions on my colleagues in the coastal States. On 

 the contrary, I think they are sensitive to the problem. But I believe 

 they would be more sensitive to it if we v.-ere all in the same boat when 

 we get around to land use legislation, treating all States alike. 



Mr. Stevens. Will the Senator from South Carolina yield me 5 

 minutes on this matter ? 



Mr. IIoLLTNGS. I yield. 



Mr. Ste\^xs. I "understand the amendment of the Senator from 

 Arkansas. Being from Alaska, I probably should support it on the 

 basis that if we have any energy facilities offshore of the type we are 

 talking about, they would be related to OCS development. But I took 

 a trip to Scotland and went up to see Dunrea, which is the fast breader 

 reactor up in Scotland. I went down to Florida and looked at their 

 powerplants down there. I went over to Canada and took a look at their 

 nuclear powerplants there. The amazing thing is that every power- 

 plant of the type I am talking about has been in a coastal zone. They 

 have, in fact, been located in a coastal zone. 



The impact of this section we are talking about, the coastal energy 

 facility impact program, is to recognize that, in fact, these large power 

 installations are going to be located adjacent to the sea. They are going 

 to pose fantastic problems for the coastal zone. Those problems can 

 be met only by adequate planning and b}' assistance from tlie Federal 

 Government so that the States and comniimities can finance those 

 action that vrill mitigate the harm tliat would otherwise come to the 

 coastal zone and to coastal States from this kind of development. 



Mr. Bellmox. Will the Senator yield ? 



Mr. Ste\t:xs. I am happy to yield. I have just gotten to the point of 

 asking the question. 



Mr. Bellmox. Assuming that the Senator is right, that most of the 

 plants will be located in the coastal areas and that they will have a big 

 impact, does this change the fact that if a i^lant is located away from 

 the coastal zone, it will have an impact and deserves the same 

 treatment? 



Mr. Stevexs. I agree 100 percent witli the Senator from Oklahoma. 

 But he ])as not seen the Senator's amendment which will limit this only 

 to the exploration for or tlie develo]>ment or production of energy re- 

 sources offshore. This wipes out entirely nuclear plants, wipes out en- 

 tirely any coal-fired plants that are located in the coastal zone, where, 

 again, 50 percent of the population of this country lives and where the 

 most difficult problems are in terms of siting. 



I agree with the Senator, I will help him get a bill to deal with the 

 inshore impacts, but I'ight now we are going to take this bill over to 

 the House and sit down with people who have limited jurisdiction, 

 just as wo are supposed to have. They do have very firm rules, and I 



