|
<br />.'
<br />
<br />000699
<br />G. "'IRl2.\ so I\J
<br />
<br />c..CEt=\\"C.S
<br />
<br />',I
<br />
<br />BISMARCK, N,D. (AP) - Legislation in.
<br />tended to allow the Garrison Diversion
<br />project to proceed has been approved by a
<br />House-Senate conference committee. .
<br />Work on the Energy and Water Devel.
<br />opment Appropriations Bill was completed
<br />Wednes~ay, said Sen. Qucntin Burdick, D.
<br />N,D, Passcd earlier by the Senate, the bill
<br />contains $4 million for Garrison Diversion,
<br />$J million for the Burlington Dam ncaT
<br />Minot and language nullifying an interior
<br />department agreement that had stalled
<br />Garrison construction.
<br />Rep. Byroa Dorgan, D-N ,D., said hc
<br />would give the measure a "50-50 chance" of
<br />winning. appro\'al when it reaches the noor
<br />01 the U.S. I10use 01 Representatives today.
<br />"The conference committee included Ian.
<br />guage that would lilt the court order pro-
<br />hibiting construction on Garrison." Dorgan
<br />said in a telephone interview from Wash-
<br />ington,
<br />The amendment, sponsored by Burdick
<br />
<br />C. D 10 f== E. R. -.E t0c. 6:.
<br />
<br />P \A ..,__H~. L
<br />
<br />and Sen, Mark Andrews, R-N.D., is in-
<br />tended to nullily a 1977 agreement between
<br />then-Secretarv 01 the Interior Cecil Andrus
<br />and the Nati';nal Audubon Society. The so-
<br />ciety is challenging the project in court.,
<br />That agreement was the basis lor U.S.
<br />District Judge Charles Richey's May 1980
<br />order which hailed Garrison construcll.On
<br />until ~ongress reauth~ri.ze~ the project.
<br />
<br />Dorgan said the .committee's action
<br />Wednesday gave the 'projeet a chance lor
<br />further construction, but also gave its oppo-
<br />nents another cra.ck at defeating it.
<br />Reps, Morris Udall. D-Ariz., and ,John
<br />Dingell, D-Mich., are the most prominent
<br />opponents of the project, Dorgan said. .
<br />The amendment nUllilying the Garnson
<br />construction ban earlier received Senate
<br />approval.
<br />When the Senate passed the amendment,
<br />Charlene Dougherty 01 the. Audubon So-
<br />. ciely's Washinglon office saId the amend-
<br />
<br />1=-\'\1240
<br />POR.U M
<br />: : II C, / <i I
<br />
<br />--L.-
<br />ment would be challenged in court if ap-
<br />proved by Congress. .
<br />She said the society questions wheth~r
<br />Congress can nullify an agreement made
<br />by a former cabinet secretary - and
<br />wnelher nu\h{ying \he agreement win in
<br />turn remove Richey's court order.
<br />The members of Congress who oppose.
<br />the 250,OOO-acre water project are COD~
<br />cerned about Canadian objections to Garri~
<br />son water draining into Cani3dian water-.
<br />sheds, .
<br />"~I met with. the Garrison Diversion
<br />people yesterday in Washington and they
<br />have told me that the construction in this
<br />liscal year will be' con lined to the Oakes
<br />pu":,ping slation and. the lest irrigation
<br />proJect,". Dorgan said. Garrison proponents
<br />say no water from the Oakes plant will' af-
<br />fect Garrison.
<br />The amendment includes $4 million for
<br />Garrison.
<br />"The point I'm going to make is that the
<br />
<br />--e-
<br />
<br />Richard Steinbach of the canal 'I
<br />protesters group said the deleat ~.,
<br />on Tuesday of Manitoba Premier
<br />Sterling Lyon's Progressive Con-
<br />servative government would
<br />mean stiffer Canadian opposition
<br />!~,
<br />La Lh~ Garrison projccL ~~
<br />"It's our feeling that the new f~
<br />provincial government will take a l1
<br />vcr~ hard-line stand against anj.. 0
<br />
<br />~r~~~i~~~:j~~\'~~JI~aa~~s~?' ~~e~~: I M
<br />
<br />bach said. ! '
<br />The Garrison project is de- Ii
<br />signC'd to divert Missouri River !j
<br />water to central and eastern i1
<br />North Dakota, First authorized by fJ
<br />Cong'css in 1965, the project. is :J
<br />(jow estimated to cost more than' IJ
<br />$1 billion,
<br />The Burlington appropriation I
<br />was added to the bill by Burdick
<br />at the Senate subcommittee level, I
<br />but was not included in the House I
<br />hill
<br />
<br />.-J
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />$4 million appropriation will be used for
<br />construction of the Oakes pumping station
<br />only," he added. .
<br />Dorgan said he hopes that the amended
<br />bill will be included in an omnibus water
<br />projects bill, and that both will be ap-
<br />proved. If Dot, the House will vote on the
<br />amendment alone,
<br />"I'm not optimistic about winning that
<br />vote on the !Ioor 01 the House," Dorgan
<br />said.
<br />In Bismarck, members of the Committee
<br />to Save Stutsman County and the New
<br />Rockford Canal Protesters Association told
<br />a news conlerence Wednesday they are op' I
<br />Umistic the project will be deleated lollow, I
<br />ing a visit by II 01 their members to Wash. _ I
<br />ington last week.
<br />The association members visited the of-
<br />fices of all 435 members of Congress to !
<br />voice their opposition to the project, "
<br />spokesmen said.
<br />
<br />(See_ G~ARRISON 0". Pa~g..~Column 21,' /'!
<br />
<br />J
<br />
<br />"The conference action means
<br />the project should be going lor-
<br />ward soon," Burdick said, "The
<br />lact that it is based 00 an agree-
<br />ment made between the con-
<br />cerned parties has been a big plus I
<br />In getting the project through con-
<br />gress so quickly this year."
<br />
|