I will agree to work with the gentleman on this as the bill goes to conference, but I want to remind him, though I am sure this study deserves to proceed, the fact is that not all deserving new studies can go forward at the same time. It is one of the basic cornerstones of this bill that we tried to limit projects and studies until we finished some of the things we have already started. There has been a lot of criticism of the Corps that it does not get things done and costs get out of line. What we have tried to do is limit the new starts. But I want to assure the gentleman that should the door open and new studies in conference are available, we will take another look at the merits of the Boulder Creek study.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the limitations on new studies in a bill during a conference.
Share
More from David Hobson
I strenuously oppose this approach to the bill. Part of the problem we have is there is no other vehicle where we can do this. This is a very difficult time in our country. We do not have a nuclear repository available in this country to…
The Federal Government signed an agreement with the utility companies to dispose of this nuclear material by 1998 at the Yucca Mountain repository in Nevada. Unfortunately, Yucca Mountain is not scheduled to open until 2010.
I was surprised when several of my constituents contacted me about a little-known law passed eight years ago which has not yet been implemented. The original intent of this law, the Fastener Quality Act of 1990, was to regulate and test…
Section 130 limits the ability of the Army to prepare documents having to do with the transfer of land at Fort Ord that is planned for housing development.





