Honorable List Members (all 802 of us):

Dendy recently questioned in part: "What's the status of the Section 106
effort at the Panama Canal .... the transfer of property has to be
covenanted or it will be an adverse effect."

Not being an authority on the Canal, isn't the canal a foreign property
that is leased to and operated by the United States under contract to
return it to the Panama people (no response necessary although I know one
will be forthcoming)?  Just because the US built it doesn't mean the US
owns it and that it is subject to Section 106 or any environmental laws
that Federal property stateside is subject to.

Also, what Congress enacts, Congress can make EXEMPT!  That's the nature of
the political beast.  Not wishing to keep abreast of Congressional
activities on a daily basis, I would venture that Congress would make the
transfer of this property exempt from any cultural or environmental laws,
if they are even applicable to this situation.  Why would Congress throw
good money at a no win situation (Boy was that a dumb question; they do it
all the time)?

When is enough documentation of the Canal enough?  I'm sure the Library of
Congress has everything a person needs to know about the Canal,
anyhow....ww