1098 



make a major commitment toward our national goal of energy self- 

 suiRciency. I urge the passage of the conference report. 



Before closing, Mr. Speaker, I would like to make one comment 

 about some debates that occurred on the Senate floor yesterday con- 

 cerning the provisions of this act because I think it is important to 

 correct a misstatement that was made by the Senator from South 

 Carolina (Mr. Hollixgs) about his interpretation of the bill. 



I have written a letter to Secretary Richardson hoping to call to his 

 attention tliis misunderstanding. 



Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the letter in the 

 Record at this point. 



The Speaker pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 

 gentleman from Delaware ? 



There was no objection. 



The letter is as follows : 



House of Representatives, 

 Washington, B.C., June 30, 1976. 

 Hon. Elliot Richardson, 



Secretary of Commerce, The Commerce Department, Commerce Building, Wash- 

 ington, D.C. 



Dear Mr. Secretary: The Coastal Zone Management Act (S. 586) Conference 

 Report will be before the House this afternoon. I am, of course, in support of the 

 legislation but want to clarify, for the purpose of legislative history, a serious 

 misstatement of the bill's intent which appeared in the Senate's discussion 

 yesterday. 



On page S10931 of the June 29, 1976 Congressional Record, Senator HoUings, 

 referring to the automatic formula grants of section 308(B) stated: 



"Proceeds or guarantees to which a state is entitled will not be disbursed 

 or made until the state demonstrates to the Secretary that they will be use<l for 

 the purpose described in the bill. Until such demonstration, the proceeds of the 

 formula grants will stay in the states account with the Secretary. . . ." "Thus, 

 the Secretary still will have the discretion he needs before disbursement to 

 assure that the process of such assistance will be expended for the proper 

 purposes." 



Neither the legislation nor the conference report says any such thing. The 

 Secretary only has discretion to require, under section 308(B) (5) : 



"Before disbursing the proceeds of any grant under this sub-section to any 

 Coastal state, the Secretary shall require such state to provide adequate assur- 

 ances of being able to return to the United States any amounts not expended for 

 purposes listed in section 308(B) (4)." 



This should make it very clear that the states are entitled to their grants upon 

 such assurances and that the Secretary has no discretion beyond requiring 

 certification by the state. Indeed, in section 308(B) (5) the language of the act 

 is written in the paSt tense : 



"(5) the Secretary in a timely manner, shall determine that each Coastal 

 state has expended or committed . . . grants which such state has received. . . ." 



At an appropriate time in this afternoon's debate, I will insert this letter into 

 the Record so that there can be no doubt that the Secretary does not have the 

 discretion to make determinations on grant eligibility beyond those set forth in 

 section 308(B) (4). 

 Sincerely, 



Pierre S. du Pont, 

 Mcm'ber of Congress. 



Mr. DU Pont. Mr. Speaker, what the gentleman from South Carolina 

 said on the floor of the other body yesterday, referring to the automatic 

 grants, and this appears at page S10931 of the Congressional Record 

 of June 29, 1976, was as follows : 



Proceeds or guarantees to which a state is entitled will not be dispersed or 

 made until the state demonstrates to the Secretary that they will be used for 

 the purpose described in the bill. Until such demonstration, the proceeds of the 

 formula grants will stay in the states account with the Secretary. 



