[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 45 (Thursday, April 21, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: April 21, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. THURMOND (for himself and Mr. Hollings):
  S. 2037. A bill to establish the South Carolina National Heritage 
Corridor, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources.


         south carolina national heritage corridor act of 1994

  Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I rise today, along with Senator 
Hollings, to introduce the South Carolina National Heritage Corridor 
Act of 1994. This legislation would establish a framework to help 
protect, conserve, and promote the natural, historical, cultural, and 
recreational resources of the region which have national significance.
  Specifically, this legislation would establish a heritage corridor in 
South Carolina running from the western Piedmont down along the 
Savannah Valley toward Augusta, GA, then following the route of the old 
Charleston to Hamburg Railroad along the Ashley River Road to 
Charleston. This route contains 14 South Carolina counties: Oconee, 
Pickens, Anderson, Abbeville, Greenwood, McCormick, Edgefield, Aiken, 
Barnwell, Orangeburg, Bamberg, Dorchester, Colleton, and Charleston.
  Further, this measure would establish a 23 member Commission, 
consisting of county representatives, South Carolina State officials, 
and Federal officials, including the Director of the National Park 
Service. It authorizes the Commission to oversee the development and 
implementation of a corridor management action plan. This plan will 
inventory the resources of the heritage corridor and discuss advisory 
standards for the use and promotion of those resources. Mr. President, 
let me emphasize that this legislation protects private property rights 
and will not interfere with local land use ordinances or plans.
  The legislation requires the active participation of the Secretary of 
Interior, who shall appoint Commission members, approve the corridor 
management action plan, provide assistance to the Commission, and 
report to Congress on the actions taken to carry out the act.
  Finally, this legislation requires that the Federal cost share 
percentage, including annual operating expenses, may not exceed 50 
percent. However, non-Federal matching funds may be not only cash, but 
also services or in-kind contributions.
  Mr. President, the heritage corridor concept is a technique that has 
been used successfully in various parts of our Nation to promote 
historic preservation, natural resource protection, tourism, and 
economic revitalization for both urban and rural areas. Heritage 
corridors provide a flexible framework for governmental and private 
organizations to work together on a coordinated regional basis.
  The growing popularity of this concept is evidenced by the efforts 
across the Nation to develop heritage areas. This past March, the 
National Coalition for Heritage Areas and other interested groups 
sponsored a conference on heritage partnerships. This event was 
attended by concerned groups and individuals from throughout the Nation 
as well as international representatives.
  The initiative to develop the South Carolina National Heritage 
Corridor is an outgrowth of a grassroots effort to promote the history, 
culture, natural resources, and economy of the region. County visitor 
councils, historical societies, and other private and Government 
entities are now participating in this project.
  Mr. President, I would like to describe some of the historic, 
cultural, and natural resources and sites of national significance 
which are contained in the South Carolina National Heritage Corridor. 
Let me begin by referencing correspondence between Dr. Rodger E. Stroup 
of the South Carolina State Museum and Ms. Joan Davis of the South 
Carolina Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism. In his letter, 
Dr. Stroup describes the path of the corridor, noting many specific 
sites and areas of national significance. I ask unanimous consent that 
a copy of Dr. Stroup's correspondence be placed in the Record following 
these remarks.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  See exhibit 1.
  Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, in many respects, the heritage corridor 
forms a microcosm of the lower South and its history. In the upper 
region of the corridor, during the 1750's and 1760's, settlers and 
migrants came in search of rich lands. This area became a center of 
cotton and agricultural production. As westward lands opened up for 
settlement, it was a major jumping off point for migration during the 
ante-bellum years.
  Significant events in the industrial and transportation history of 
the South took place in the corridor. Graniteville was the birthplace 
of the southern textile industry. It is the site of the first large-
scale cotton mill in the South, built in 1845. This became one of the 
most important manufacturing centers in the pre-Civil-War South, a 
model for the textile industry. Located on one of the South's major 
cotton routes, it remains a textile center today. To accommodate the 
westward moving cotton crop, South Carolina merchants built the 
Charleston to Hamburg railroad, the longest railroad in the Nation in 
1832.
  The corridor also contains precious natural resources. The Francis 
Beidler Forest contains the largest remaining virgin stand of bald 
cyprus and tupelo trees in the world. Additionally, the Cathedral Bay 
Heritage Wildlife Preserve contains unique geological features known as 
the Carolina Bays. These oval depressions in the Earth, the origin of 
which remains a mystery, hold black water lakes. The significant 
riverine and estuarine systems of the ACE Basin forms an ecologically 
diverse area which contains rare plants and serves as a wildlife and 
waterfowl habitat.
  Finally, Mr. President, located within the corridor are numerous 
historical sites and national historic landmarks. For example, 
Middleton Place, on the banks of the Ashley River is an 18th century 
plantation and the site of America's oldest landscaped gardens. It has 
survived revolution, Civil War, and natural disasters. It was home to 
Henry Middleton, President of the Continental Congress and his son, 
Arthur, a signer of the Declaration of Independence. Battlefields of 
both the Revolutionary War and of the Civil War are located in the 
corridor. Of great historical significance is the Burt-Stark House in 
Abbeville. At this site, less than a month after General Lee's 
surrender at Appomattox, the President of the Confederate States of 
America, Jefferson Davis, counseled with his generals on the conduct of 
the war. A decision was reached at this meeting to disband the Armies 
of the Confederacy.
  Mr. President, these are just a few examples of the richness of this 
corridor. The corridor has much more to offer; much that reminds us of 
where we have been as a nation and where we are today. These and other 
attractions are representative of the merging of several cultures along 
the corridor--African, Caribbean, European, and native American. This 
legislation will assist the communities throughout the heritage 
corridor who are committed to the conservation and development of these 
assets.
  Mr. President, this legislation is supported by the Governor of South 
Carolina, Carroll Campbell. Under his direction, various State agencies 
are supporting this effort, including the department of parks, 
recreation, and tourism, the department of archives and history, the 
arts commission, the State department board, and the Downtown 
Development Association. I ask unanimous consent that a letter from 
Governor Campbell be printed in the Record.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  See exhibit 2.
  Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support this 
legislation. Further, I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 
bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2037

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``South Carolina National 
     Heritage Corridor Act of 1994''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) The South Carolina National Heritage Corridor, more 
     than 250 miles in length, possesses a wide diversity of 
     significant rare plants, animals, and ecosystems, 
     agricultural and timber lands, shellfish harvesting areas, 
     historic sites and structures, and cultural and multicultural 
     landscapes related to the past and current commerce, 
     transportation, maritime, textile, agricultural, mining, 
     cattle, pottery, and national defense industries of the 
     region which provide significant ecological, natural, 
     tourism, recreational, timber management, educational, and 
     economic benefits.
       (2) There is a national interest in protecting, conserving, 
     restoring, promoting, and interpreting the benefits of the 
     region for the residents of, and visitors to, the Corridor 
     area.
       (3) A primary responsibility for conserving, preserving, 
     protecting, and promoting the benefits resides with the State 
     of South Carolina and the various local units of government 
     having jurisdiction over the corridor area.
       (4) In view of the longstanding Federal practice of 
     assisting the States in creating, protecting, conserving, 
     preserving, and interpreting areas of significant natural and 
     cultural importance, and in view of the national significance 
     of the Corridor, the Federal Government has an interest in 
     assisting the State of South Carolina, the units of local 
     government of the State, and the private sector in fulfilling 
     their responsibilities.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are as follows:
       (1) To protect, preserve, conserve, restore, promote, and 
     interpret the significant land and water resource values and 
     functions of the Corridor.
       (2) To encourage and support, through financial and 
     technical assistance, the State of South Carolina and the 
     units of local government of the State and the private sector 
     in the development of a management action plan for the 
     Corridor to ensure coordinated public and private action in 
     the Corridor area in a manner consistent with subsection (a).
       (3) To provide during the development of an integrated 
     Corridor Management Action Plan, Federal financial and 
     technical assistance for the protection, preservation, and 
     conservation of land and water areas in the Corridor that are 
     in danger of being adversely affected or destroyed.
       (4) To encourage and assist the State and the units of 
     local government of the State to identify the full range of 
     public and private technical and financial assistance 
     programs and services available to implement the Plan.
       (5) To encourage adequate coordination of all government 
     programs affecting the land and water resources of the 
     Corridor.
       (6) To develop a management framework with the State of 
     South Carolina and the units of local government of the State 
     for--
       (A) planning and implementing the Plan; and
       (B) developing policies and programs that will preserve, 
     conserve, protect, restore, enhance, and interpret the 
     cultural, historical, natural, economic, recreation, and 
     scenic resources of the Corridor.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       As used in this Act:
       (1) Commission.--The term ``Commission'' means the South 
     Carolina National Heritage Corridor Commission established 
     under section 5.
       (2) Corridor.--The term ``Corridor'' means the South 
     Carolina National Heritage Corridor established under section 
     4.
       (3) Corridor management action plan.--The term ``Corridor 
     Management Action Plan'' or ``Plan'' means the management 
     action plan developed pursuant to section 7.
       (4) Governor.--The term ``Governor'' means the Governor of 
     the State of South Carolina.
       (5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.

     SEC. 4. SOUTH CAROLINA NATIONAL HERITAGE CORRIDOR.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established in the State of 
     South Carolina the South Carolina National Heritage Corridor.
       (b) Boundaries.--
       (1) In general.--The boundaries of the corridor are 
     predominately the western counties of the State of South 
     Carolina, extending from the western Piedmont along the 
     Savannah Valley to Augusta, Georgia, along the route of the 
     old Southern Railroad, along the Ashley River to Charleston.
       (2) Included counties.--The Corridor shall consist of the 
     following counties of South Carolina, in part or in whole, as 
     the Commission may specify upon the recommendation of the 
     units of local government within the corridor area:
       (A) Oconee.
       (B) Pickens.
       (C) Anderson.
       (D) Abbeville.
       (E) Greenwood.
       (F) McCormick.
       (G) Edgefield.
       (H) Aiken.
       (I) Barnwell.
       (J) Orangeburg.
       (K) Bamberg.
       (L) Dorchester.
       (M) Colleton.
       (N) Charleston.
       (3) Detail.--The boundaries shall be specified in detail in 
     the Corridor Management Action Plan prepared and approved 
     pursuant to this Act.

     SEC. 5. THE SOUTH CAROLINA NATIONAL HERITAGE CORRIDOR 
                   COMMISSION.

       (a) Establishment.--
       (1) In general.--There is established the South Carolina 
     National Heritage Corridor Commission.
       (2) Responsibilities.--The Commission shall assist Federal, 
     State, and local authorities and the private sector in 
     developing and implementing an integrated management action 
     plan for the Corridor.
       (b) Membership.--The Commission shall be composed of 23 
     members, appointed by the Secretary as follows:
       (1) The Director of the National Park Service, ex officio, 
     or a delegate of the Director.
       (2) Six members shall be appointed from nominations 
     submitted by the Governor, as follows:
       (A) One member shall represent the interests of the South 
     Carolina Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism or a 
     successor agency of the Department.
       (B) One member shall represent the South Carolina 
     Department of Natural Resources or a successor agency of the 
     Department.
       (C) One member shall represent the South Carolina Arts 
     Commission or a successor agency of the Commission.
       (D) One member shall represent the South Carolina Museum 
     Commission or a successor agency of the Commission.
       (E) One member shall represent the South Carolina State 
     Historic Preservation Office or a successor agency of the 
     Office.
       (F) One member shall represent the South Carolina 
     Department of Commerce or a successor agency of the 
     Department.
       (3) Fourteen members shall be appointed from nominations 
     submitted by the county commissioners of which one member 
     shall be appointed from each of the counties of Oconee, 
     Pickens, Anderson, Abbeville, Greenwood, McCormick, 
     Edgefield, Aiken, Barnwell, Orangeburg, Bamberg, Dorchester, 
     Colleton, and Charleston of the State of South Carolina. The 
     nominations submitted by each county shall be based upon 
     recommendations from community visitor councils located 
     within the county.
       (4) One member with knowledge and experience in the field 
     of historic preservation, shall be appointed from nominations 
     submitted by the Director of the National Park Service.
       (5) One member shall be appointed from recommendations 
     submitted by the South Carolina Downtown Development 
     Association.
       (c) Period of Appointment.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), each 
     member of the Commission shall be appointed to serve for a 
     term of 3 years and, on the expiration of a term, may be 
     reappointed to serve for one or more additional terms.
       (2) Limited appointments.--The members appointed pursuant 
     to paragraphs (2), (4), and (5) of subsection (b) shall be 
     appointed to serve for a term of 2 years and, on the 
     expiration of a term, may be reappointed to serve for one or 
     more additional terms.
       (d) Initial Appointments.--Not later than 180 days after 
     the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall 
     appoint the initial members of the Commission.
       (e) Vacancies.--Any vacancy in the Commission shall be 
     filled in the same manner in which the initial appointment 
     was made. Any member of the Commission appointed to fill a 
     vacancy shall serve for the remainder of the term for which 
     the initial member was appointed. Any member of the 
     Commission appointed for a definite term may serve after the 
     expiration of the term until a successor is appointed.
       (f) Chairperson.--The members of the Commission shall elect 
     a Chairperson from among the members of the Commission. The 
     Chairperson shall serve as Chairperson for the duration of 
     the term for which the Chairperson was appointed.
       (g) Quorum.--A simple majority of Commission members shall 
     constitute a quorum, but a lesser number may hold public 
     meetings. The affirmative vote of not less than 11 members of 
     the Commission shall be required to approve the budget of the 
     Commission.
       (h) Meetings.--The Commission shall meet at least quarterly 
     or at the call of the Chairperson or a majority of its 
     members. Meetings of the Commission shall be subject to 
     section 552b of title 5, United States Code (relating to open 
     meetings).
       (i) Personnel Matters.--
       (1) Compensation of members.--Each member of the Commission 
     who is not an officer or employee of the Federal Government 
     shall serve without compensation. Each member of the 
     Commission who is an officer or employee of the Federal 
     Government shall serve without compensation in addition to 
     compensation received for service as officers or employees of 
     the Federal Government.
       (2) Travel expenses.--The members of the Commission, when 
     engaged in Commission business, shall be allowed travel 
     expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates 
     authorized for persons employed intermittently in the 
     Government service under section 5703 of title 5, United 
     States Code.
       (j) Staff.--
       (1) In general.--The Commission may, without regard to 
     civil service laws and regulations, appoint and fix the 
     compensation of such staff as may be necessary to enable the 
     Commission to carry out its duties. The Commission may 
     appoint a Director and other officers as the Commission 
     considers necessary or appropriate. The Commission may 
     appoint to the staff such specialists as the Commission 
     considers necessary or appropriate to carry out the duties of 
     the Commission, including specialists in the areas of 
     planning, community development, interpretive services, 
     historic preservation, recreation, natural resources, 
     commerce and industry, education, financing, and public 
     relations.
       (2) Compensation.--The Commission may fix the compensation 
     of the Director and other personnel without regard to the 
     provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of 
     title 5, United States Code, relating to classification of 
     positions and General Schedule pay rates, except that no 
     individual so appointed may receive pay in excess of the 
     annual rate payable for grade GS-15 of the General Schedule.
       (k) Experts and Consultants.--Subject to such rules as may 
     be adopted by the Commission, the Commission may procure 
     temporary and intermittent services under section 3109(b) of 
     title 5, United States Code, at rates determined by the 
     Commission to be reasonable.
       (l) Detail of Government Employees.--Upon request of the 
     Commission, the head of any Federal agency may detail, on a 
     reimbursable basis, the personnel of such agency to the 
     Commission to assist the Commission in carrying out the 
     duties of the Commission. The Commission may accept the 
     services of personnel detailed from the State of South 
     Carolina, or any political subdivision of such State, and may 
     reimburse the State or political subdivision for the 
     services.
       (m) Administrative Support.--The Administrator of General 
     Services shall provide such administrative support services 
     as the Commission may request, on a reimbursable basis.

     SEC. 6. POWERS OF THE COMMISSION.

       (a) Public Meetings.--The Commission may, for the purpose 
     of carrying out this Act, hold such public meetings, sit and 
     act at such times and places, take such testimony, and 
     receive such evidence, as the Commission considers 
     appropriate. The Commission may not issue subpoenas or 
     exercise subpoena authority.
       (b) Bylaws.--The Commission may make such bylaws, rules, 
     and regulations, consistent with this Act, as it considers 
     necessary to carry out its functions under this Act.
       (c) Powers of Members and Agents.--Any member or agent of 
     the Commission, if so authorized by the Commission, may take 
     any action which the Commission is authorized to take under 
     this section.
       (d) Mails.--The Commission may use the United States mails 
     in the same manner and under the same conditions as other 
     departments and agencies of the United States.
       (e) Use of Funds To Obtain Money.--The Commission may use 
     its funds to obtain money from any source under any program 
     or law requiring the recipient of such money to make a 
     contribution in order to receive such money.
       (f) Retaining Revenues.--The Commission may retain revenue 
     from the sale or lease of any goods or services.
       (g) Gifts.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Commission may seek and accept gifts, bequests, and donations 
     of funds, property, or services from private individuals, 
     foundations, corporations, and other private entities, and 
     from public entities for the purpose of carrying out its 
     duties. For purposes of section 170(c) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986, any donation to the Commission shall be 
     deemed to be a gift to the United States.
       (h) Acquisition and Disposition of Real Property.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and 
     (3), the Commission may not acquire real property, or 
     interests in real property.
       (2) Conditions for acquisition.--Subject to paragraph (3), 
     the Commission may acquire real property, or interests in 
     real property, in the Corridor--
       (A) by gift or devise;
       (B) by purchase from a willing seller using donated or 
     appropriated land acquisition funds; or
       (C) by exchange.
       (3) Conveyance.--Any real property or interest in real 
     property acquired by the Commission under paragraph (2) shall 
     be conveyed by the Commission to an appropriate public agency 
     or private nonprofit organization, as determined by the 
     Commission--
       (A) as soon as practicable after such acquisition; and
       (B) on the condition that the real property or interest in 
     real property limits use of the property to uses that are 
     consistent with this Act.
       (4) Disposal of property.--The Commission may with approval 
     of the Secretary, sell any real property or interest in real 
     property acquired pursuant to subparagraphs (A) and (B) of 
     paragraph (2) and retain the revenue from the sale.
       (i) Technical Assistance.--For the purposes of implementing 
     the Corridor Management Action Plan, the Commission may 
     provide technical assistance to Federal agencies, the State 
     of South Carolina, political subdivisions of the State, and 
     persons (including corporations).
       (j) Advisory Groups.--The Commission may establish public 
     technical advisory groups to assist the Commission in 
     carrying out the duties of the Commission with respect to the 
     areas of economic development, historic preservation, natural 
     resources, tourism, recreation and open space, and 
     transportation. The Commission may establish such additional 
     advisory groups as are necessary to carry out the duties of 
     the Commission and ensure open communication with and 
     assistance from interested persons (including organizations), 
     the State of South Carolina, and political subdivisions of 
     the State.
       (k) Local Authority and Private Property Rights.--Nothing 
     in this Act is intended to affect or to authorize the 
     Commission to interfere with--
       (1) the rights of any person with respect to private 
     property; or
       (2) any local land use ordinance or plan of the State of 
     South Carolina or a political subdivision of the State.

     SEC. 7. DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION.

       (a) In General.--The Commission shall exercise powers 
     authorized by section 6 to coordinate activities of Federal, 
     State, and local governments and private businesses and 
     organizations to further historic preservation, cultural 
     conservation, natural area protection, soil conservation, 
     timber management, and economic development in a manner 
     consistent with this Act and in accordance with the Plan 
     developed pursuant to subsection (b).
       (b) Corridor Management Action Plan.--
       (1) Period for development.--Not later than 18 months after 
     the date on which the Commission conducts its first meeting, 
     the Commission shall submit a Corridor Management Action Plan 
     for the Corridor to the Secretary and to the Governor for 
     review and approval.
       (2) Plan requirements.--The Plan shall take into 
     consideration State, county, and local plans existing on the 
     date on which the Plan is prepared. The Plan shall--
       (A) provide an inventory that includes any real property in 
     the Corridor that should be conserved, protected, preserved, 
     restored, managed, developed, or maintained because of the 
     natural, cultural, historic, recreational, or scenic 
     significance of the property;
       (B) provide an analysis of then current and potential land 
     uses within the corridor that affect the character of the 
     Corridor;
       (C) determine the boundaries of the Corridor on basis of 
     the information collected pursuant to subparagraphs (A) and 
     (B);
       (D) recommend advisory standards and criteria applicable to 
     the construction, preservation, restoration, alteration, and 
     use of real property of natural, cultural, historic, 
     recreational, or scenic significance within the corridor;
       (E) include a heritage interpretation plan to interpret the 
     resources and values of the Corridor, and to provide for 
     appropriate educational, recreational, and tourism 
     opportunities and development of the Corridor;
       (F) identify the full range of public and private technical 
     and financial assistance programs available to implement the 
     Plan, and detail how appropriate Federal, State, and local 
     programs may best be coordinated to promote the purposes of 
     this Act; and
       (G) contain a coordinated implementation plan that--
       (i) specifies the activities of Federal, State, and local 
     governments; and
       (ii) includes cost estimates, schedules, and a commitment 
     of resources for the accomplishment of the implementation 
     plan.
       (c) Approval of the Plan.--
       (1) Approval by the governor.--Not later than 60 days after 
     receiving a Plan submitted by the Commission pursuant to 
     subsection (b), the Governor shall approve or disapprove the 
     Plan.
       (2) Approval by the secretary.--A Plan approved by the 
     Governor under paragraph (1) shall be submitted to the 
     Secretary for approval or disapproval. Not later than 30 days 
     after receipt of the Plan, the Secretary shall approve or 
     disapprove the Plan.
       (3) Criteria for decision.--The Governor and the Secretary 
     shall approve a Plan if--
       (A) the Plan will adequately protect the significant 
     natural, cultural, historic, recreational, and scenic 
     resource values and functions of the Corridor;
       (B) the Commission has afforded adequate opportunity for 
     public involvement in the preparation of the Plan; and
       (C) the Secretary and the Governor receive adequate 
     assurances from appropriate officials of the State of South 
     Carolina that the recommended implementation program 
     identified in the Plan will be initiated within a reasonable 
     time after the date of approval of the Plan.
       (d) Disapproval of Plan.--
       (1) In general--If either the Secretary or the Governor 
     disapproves a Plan, the Secretary or the Governor, as 
     appropriate, shall--
       (A) advise the Commission in writing of the reasons for the 
     disapproval; and
       (B) recommend revisions to the Plan.
       (2) Revision of disapproved plan.--Not later than 90 days 
     after the receipt of a notice of disapproval under paragraph 
     (1), the Commission shall revise and resubmit the Plan for 
     approval in accordance with subsection (c).
       (e) Implementation of Plan.--
       (1) In general.--After the Secretary and the Governor 
     review and approve a Plan, the Commission shall implement the 
     Plan by taking appropriate steps to--
       (A) conserve, protect, restore, preserve, and interpret the 
     natural, cultural, and historic resources of the Corridor;
       (B) promote the educational and recreational resources and 
     opportunities with respect to the Corridor that are 
     consistent with the resources of the Corridor; and
       (C) support public and private efforts to achieve economic 
     revitalization, in a manner consistent with the goals of the 
     Plan.
       (2) Steps.--The steps referred to in paragraph (1) may 
     include--
       (A) assisting State and local governmental entities and 
     nonprofit organizations in planning and implementing 
     programs, projects, or activities in a manner consistent with 
     this Act, including visitor use facilities, tour routes, and 
     exhibits;
       (B) encouraging, by appropriate means, enhanced economic 
     development in the corridor in a manner consistent with the 
     goals of the Plan; and
       (C) promoting public awareness and appreciation for 
     historical, cultural, natural, recreational, and scenic 
     resources and associated values of the Corridor.
       (f) Annual Reports.--
       (1) Report of the commission.--As soon as practicable after 
     the end of the first fiscal year during which the Commission 
     is established, and annually thereafter, the Commission shall 
     submit a report to the Secretary. The report shall describe, 
     for the fiscal year that is the subject of the report--
       (A) the expenses and income of the Commission; and
       (B) a general description of the activities of the 
     Commission.
       (2) Report of the secretary.--As soon as practicable after 
     the date on which the Commission submits a report to the 
     Secretary under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit a 
     report to Congress that includes--
       (A) for the fiscal year that is the subject of the report--
       (i) a description of the loans, grants, and technical 
     assistance provided by the Secretary, and from other Federal 
     and non-Federal sources, to carry out the purposes of this 
     Act; and
       (ii) an analysis of the adequacy of actions taken to carry 
     out this Act; and
       (B) the anticipated funds and personnel to be made 
     available to carry out this Act by the Secretary for the 
     fiscal year following the fiscal year that is the subject of 
     the report.

     SEC. 8. TERMINATION OF THE COMMISSION.

       (a) Termination.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in subsection (b), the 
     Commission shall terminate on the date that is 12 years after 
     the date of enactment of this Act.
       (2) Transfer of property.--Notwithstanding the provisions 
     of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 
     1949 (40 U.S.C. 471 et seq.), any property or funds of the 
     Commission remaining upon the expiration of the Commission 
     shall be transferred by the Commission to the Secretary, to a 
     State or local government agency, to a private nonprofit 
     organization referred to in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 which is exempt from income taxes under 
     section 501(a) of such Code, or to any combination of the 
     foregoing.
       (b) Extensions.--The Commission may be extended for a 
     period of not more than 5 years beginning on the date 
     referred to in subsection (a) if, not later than 180 days 
     before such date--
       (1) the Commission determines such extension is necessary 
     to carry out this Act;
       (2) the Commission submits the proposed extension to the 
     Committee on Natural Resources of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural 
     Resources of the Senate before the termination date; and
       (3) the Secretary and the Governor each approve such 
     extension.

     SEC. 9. DUTIES OF THE SECRETARY.

       (a) Assistance.--Upon request of the Commission, and 
     subject to the availability of funds directly appropriated 
     for this purpose, or made available on a reimbursable basis, 
     the Secretary shall provide administrative, technical, 
     financial, development, and operations assistance. Such 
     assistance may include--
       (1) general administrative support in planning, finance, 
     personnel, procurement, property management, environmental 
     and historical compliance, and land acquisition;
       (2) personnel;
       (3) office space and equipment;
       (4) planning and design services for visitor use 
     facilities, trails, interpretive exhibits, publications, 
     signs, and natural resource management;
       (5) development and construction assistance, including 
     visitor use facilities, trails, river use and access 
     facilities, scenic byways, signs, waysides, and 
     rehabilitation of historic structures; and
       (6) operations functions, including interpretation and 
     visitor services, maintenance, and natural resource 
     management services conducted within the boundaries of the 
     corridor.
       (b) Loans, Grants, and Cooperative Agreements.--For the 
     purposes of assisting in the development and implementation 
     of the Plan, the Secretary may, in consultation with the 
     Commission, make loans and grants to, and enter into 
     cooperative agreements with, the State of South Carolina (or 
     a political subdivision thereof), private nonprofit 
     organizations, corporations, or any person.
       (c) Land Transfers.--The Secretary may accept transfers of 
     real property from the Commission within the boundaries of 
     the corridor as established in the Corridor Management Action 
     Plan.

     SEC. 10. DUTIES OF OTHER FEDERAL ENTITIES.

       Any Federal entity conducting or supporting activities 
     directly affecting the corridor shall--
       (1) consult with the Secretary and the Commission with 
     respect to such activities;
       (2) cooperate with the Secretary and the Commission in 
     carrying out their duties under this Act and, to the maximum 
     extent practicable, coordinate such activities with the 
     carrying out of such duties; and
       (3) to the maximum extent practicable, conduct or support 
     such activities in a manner which the Commission determines 
     will not have an adverse effect on the corridor.

     SEC. 11. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Subject to subsection (b), there are 
     authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to 
     carry out this Act.
       (b) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) Federal share.--The Federal share of the funding 
     provided to the Commission to carry out this Act for any year 
     may not exceed 50 percent of the total cost of--
       (A) the expenditures of the Commission for administrative 
     matters for that year;
       (B) the expenditures of the Commission for the development 
     and implementation of the Corridor Management Action Plan for 
     that year; and
       (C) the expenditures of the Commission for land acquisition 
     for that year.
       (2) Nonfederal share.--The non-Federal share of the 
     expenditures referred to subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of 
     paragraph (1) may be in the form of cash, services, or in-
     kind contributions, fairly valued.
                                  ____


                               Exhibit 1


                                  South Carolina State Museum,

                                     Columbia, SC, April 19, 1994.
     Joan Davis,
     Community Development Division, South Carolina Department of 
         Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Columbia, SC.
       Dear Joan: I am intrigued with the concept of developing a 
     Heritage Corridor in fourteen counties along South Carolina's 
     western boundary. Stretching from Charleston to the mountains 
     the proposed corridor would take in all of the elements that 
     have characterized South Carolina for the past three 
     centuries.
       Beginning in Charleston, one of the most cosmopolitan of 
     American cities before 1860, the corridor follows the route 
     of the old South Carolina Railroad through Colleton, Bamberg, 
     Barnwell and into Aiken County. When completed in 1831 this 
     was the longest railroad in the world. Prior to the Civil War 
     this area was dotted with cotton plantations, the predominant 
     economic factor in the state's antebellum years. In Aiken's 
     Horsecreek Valley the state's textile industry was born 
     during the 1830's. Only a few miles away the Savannah River 
     Site was the nation's supplier of plutonium for nuclear 
     weapons during the Cold War years. From North August, the 
     terminus of the old South Carolina Railroad, the proposed 
     corridor follows the Savannah Valley to the foothills in 
     Oconee County.
       Also a major cotton producing area before 1860, Edgefield 
     County was home to ten governors, a remarkable number for a 
     small county. Beginning in the 1820's the production of 
     alkaline glazed stoneware began in Edgefield and subsequently 
     spread throughout the South. Originally produced as 
     utilitarian storage ware, today Edgefield pottery is a highly 
     prized collectible.
       The corridor continues along the Savannah Valley through 
     once prosperous cotton fields into Anderson County, a major 
     center of the state's textile industry. Around Anderson one 
     finds both traditional textile companies as well as a recent 
     influx of major multinational corporations.
       The last section of the corridor takes one to the foothills 
     of the Appalachian Mountains. A journey through the proposed 
     corridor encompasses all of South Carolina's past and 
     present. From cosmopolitan Charleston in the 1700's with its 
     wealthy merchants and rice planters to the challenges facing 
     low income residents of the Appalachians, the corridor 
     crosses not only the state's entire geography, but also 
     encompasses all of the state's people.
       Historic sites, natural resources, cultural diversity and 
     modern manufacturing successes are all part of the proposed 
     corridor. A visitor who journeys through the corridor 
     certainly departs with an understanding of South Carolina's 
     history and development, as well as an appreciation for the 
     state's diverse geography and natural features.
       This proposed corridor has several components of national 
     significance. As the cotton culture spread through this area 
     more and more planters became entrenched in defending 
     slavery, contributing to the forces that lead to the Civil 
     War. Leading proslavery advocates John C. Calhoun and James 
     Henry Hammond lived in the corridor. As residences of the 
     area their theories on states rights and slavery evolved from 
     personal experiences.
       After the war the development of the textile industry in 
     the corridor changed the focus of South Carolina's economy 
     from an agricultural to an industrial base, a phenomena which 
     subsequently spread across the South. Finally, the location 
     of the Savannah river Site in the center of the corridor 
     reflects not only the Cold War strategy of the United States, 
     but also the challenge of the cleanup facing all the nuclear 
     production facilities across the country.
           Sincerely,

                                             Rodger E. Stroup,

                                           Director of Collections
                                               and Interpretation.
                                  ____


                               Exhibit 2

                                          State of South Carolina,


                                       Office of the Governor,

                                      Columbia, SC, April 1, 1994.
     Hon. Strom Thurmond,
     Russell Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator: Developing the economies of the rural areas 
     of our state often requires that we employ creative non-
     traditional economic development methods. One such method is 
     the application of a deliberate strategy to capitalize on the 
     economic value of the rich cultural heritage and natural 
     resources embodied in many of the rural areas of our state. 
     Cultural or heritage tourism is one of the fastest growing 
     trends in tourism. The resulting potential for job creation 
     and tourism-related investment, if properly managed, can be a 
     significant factor in the economic growth of these rural 
     communities.
       The proposed designation of a fourteen country region of 
     our state as a South Carolina National Heritage Corridor 
     represents a significant step forward in our efforts to 
     recognize and capture this valuable economic resource. This 
     is an area rich in cultural and natural resources with an 
     important American story to tell. What happened along this 
     corridor set in motion a style of socio-economic development 
     that spread throughout the lower South and Southwest and 
     eventually led to the industrialization of the region as well 
     as war between the states. It tells the story of the 
     development of agriculture, industry and transportation in 
     the South.
       To direct this effort from the state level, I have 
     designated the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism 
     through its Community Development program, to be responsible 
     for staffing this effort and providing a broad array of 
     support for the South Carolina Heritage Corridor.
       We all recognize the tremendous importance and long-range 
     benefit of the initiative for South Carolina, and are 
     particularly pleased that the proposed area includes your 
     hometown of Edgefield.
       Thank you for your assistance.
           Sincerely,
                                         Carroll A. Campbell, Jr.,
                                                         Governor.

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I am privileged today to join with 
Senator Thurmond in introducing the South Carolina National Heritage 
Corridor Act of 1994. This act aims to protect, restore, and promote 
the South Carolina National Historic Corridor--a 200-mile-long, 13-
county swath in the western part of the State, running along the 
Savannah River Valley from the foothills of the Piedmont to North 
Augusta, at which point it follows the route of the old Hamburg-to-
Charleston railroad all the way to Charleston.
  This act has several objectives. It would protect the significant 
land and water resources of the national heritage corridor. It would 
support, through financial and technical assistance, the State and 
local governments, as well as the private sector, in developing a 
management action plan for the corridor. And it would create a 
management framework to bring together the State and local governments 
to jointly develop policies and programs to conserve and enhance the 
cultural, natural, economic, recreational, and scenic resources of the 
corridor.
  Mr. President, the historic corridor concept has been used by a 
variety of public and private groups across the Nation to encourage 
historic and natural preservation, and to promote tourism and economic 
revitalization. The approach has been used successfully in the 
Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor in Rhode Island and 
Massachusetts, in the lower Eastern Shore of Maryland, in the 
Lackawanna River Valley in Pennsylvania, and elsewhere. The heritage 
corridor concept offers a flexible way for government and private 
organizations to work together to promote economic growth and job 
creation.
  Mr. President, with industry concentrated in a limited number of 
urban areas, it is no secret that small, scenic towns and rural areas 
are looking to tourism as a means of strengthening and diversifying 
their declining economies. The heritage corridor concept offers an 
opportunity for many communities to work cooperatively and pool their 
resources in order to boost tourism.
  The South Carolina Heritage Corridor originated with a tourism 
committee in the city of Abbeville, and has grown to include 14 
counties and over 40 towns and rural communities. This is a grassroots 
movement that has captured the imagination and enthusiasm of citizens 
across the western part of my State. The South Carolina Heritage 
Corridor is well conceived and holds tremendous promise for my State. I 
urge my colleagues' support for this important bill.
                                 ______

      By Mr. BUMPERS:
  S. 2039. A bill to require the Secretary of the Interior to convey 
the Corning National Fish Hatchery to the State of Arkansas; to the 
Committee on Environment and Public Works.


       the corning national fish hatchery conveyance act of 1994

 Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, today, I am introducing 
legislation that would transfer the property rights in the Corning 
National Fish Hatchery from the Federal Government to the State of 
Arkansas. In 1983, the Fish and Wildlife Service closed this hatchery 
because of budget constraints. Because the State of Arkansas was 
interested in maintaining the Corning facility as part of its State 
hatchery system, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service signed a memorandum 
of understanding with the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission 
transferring the operation of the Corning Hatchery to the Arkansas Game 
and Fish Commission. The hatchery has even been renamed the William H. 
Donham State Fish Hatchery.
  Mr. President, its time to give the State of Arkansas clear title to 
this property. The State has been operating and maintaining it for 10 
years without any Federal funding and it has become an important 
component of the State's fisheries program. The proposed transfer not 
only has the support of the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission but also 
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this legislation and 
look forward to its speedy passage.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the bill 
be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2039

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Corning National Fish 
     Hatchery Conveyance Act of 1994.''

     SEC. 2. CONVEYANCE OF THE CORNING NATIONAL FISH HATCHERY TO 
                   THE STATE OF ARKANSAS.

       (a) Conveyance Requirement.--The Secretary of the Interior 
     shall convey to the State of Arkansas, without reimbursement 
     and by no later than December 31, 1994, all right, title, and 
     interest of the United States in and to the property 
     described in subsection (b), for use by the Arkansas Game and 
     Fish Commission as part of the State of Arkansas fish culture 
     program.
       (b) Property Described.--The property refereed to in 
     subsection (a) is the property formally known as the Corning 
     National Fish Hatchery, and now known as the William H. 
     Donham State Fish Hatchery, located one mile west of Corning, 
     Arkansas, on Arkansas State Highway 67 in Clay County, 
     Arkansas, consisting of 137.34 acres, (more or less) and all 
     improvements and related personal property under the control 
     of the Secretary that is located on that property, including 
     buildings, structures, and equipment.
       (c) Reversionary Interest of United States.--If after the 
     conveyance required by subsection (a) any of the property 
     described in subsection (b) is used for purposes other than 
     as described in subsection (a), all right, title, and 
     interest conveyed under this section shall revert to the 
     United States.
                                 ______

      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Kempthorne, Mr. 
        Sasser, Mr. Craig, and Mr. Mathews):
  S. 2040. A bill to amend title 5, United States Code, to provide for 
assignment of employees of federally funded research and development 
centers and Federal employees between Federal agencies and federally 
funded research and development centers; to the Committee on 
Governmental Affairs.


              amending the intergovernmental personnel act

 Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, today, I am introducing a bill to 
amend the Intergovernmental Personnel Act to allow employees of all 
federally funded research and development centers [FFRDC's] to utilize 
the Intergovernmental Personnel Act to be placed in Federal agencies 
and Federal employees to use the act to be placed at all FFRDC's. I am 
pleased that Senator Domenici, Senator Kempthorne, Senator Sasser, 
Senator Craig, and Senator Mathews have joined me in cosponsoring this 
bill. I am also pleased that my House colleague from New Mexico, 
Congressman Schiff, is today introducing identical legislation in the 
House together with Congresswoman Lloyd.
  The specific problem which I am trying to address in this bill arises 
as a result of the change in the nature of the contract at Sandia 
National Laboratories last year as that laboratory transitioned from a 
no fee contract under AT&T management to an incentive fee contract 
under Martin Marietta management. Sandia employees have long served 
with distinction in a host of Federal agencies under the 
Intergovernmental Personnel Act. They have served at the Department of 
Defense, the Department of Energy, the Department of Commerce, the 
intelligence community, and elsewhere. They bring special expertise in 
a broad range of technical areas to the executive branch.

  Unfortunately, unless this bill is passed, that long history of 
service will be disrupted starting this fall. The reason is that the 
new contract with Martin Marietta is an incentive fee contract, whereas 
the old contract with AT&T was a no-profit, no-fee contract. Because of 
the way the Intergovernmental Personnel Act currently is drafted, this 
has made Sandians ineligible to utilize the IPA to be placed in Federal 
agencies. This is clearly an unintended consequence of contract 
management reform at the Department of Energy. And I believe that both 
the Department of Energy and other agencies that have benefited from 
the involvement of Sandia employees in their offices support the change 
I am proposing. I also understand that there is support for this bill 
within the Office of Personnel Management.
  The bill will also immediately allow employees of Oak Ridge National 
Laboratory to utilize the IPA mechanism to be placed in Federal 
agencies. Like Sandia, they lost their eligibility a decade ago when 
the initial Oak Ridge contractor, Union Carbide, declined to continue 
to operate that laboratory and Martin Marietta won the competition to 
operate the lab on an incentive fee basis. Depending on who wins the 
contract to operate Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, a 
competition currently underway, Federal agencies would also benefit if 
this bill is enacted by being able to utilize the IPA mechanism to 
bring in employees from that laboratory as well.
  In light of the thrust of management reform at the Department of 
Energy, which is toward the use of incentive fee contracts with private 
sector contractors, as opposed to continued use of university or 
nonprofit contractors, I believe many of the other DOE FFRDC's will 
soon also require the statutory change I am proposing. It strikes me as 
incongruous that FFRDC's who happen to be run by universities or 
nonprofits, whether on a fixed fee or incentive fee basis, as well as 
FFRDC's who are run by private sector firms on a fixed fee basis, 
qualify to use the IPA. But FFRDC's run by private sector firms on a 
incentive fee basis do not. This needs to be corrected. And our bill 
would do that.
  I hope that this bill can be given prompt consideration, and look 
forward to working with my colleagues to obtain its enactment this 
year.
  I request unanimous consent that the full text of the bill appear in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2040

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. ASSIGNMENTS OF EMPLOYEES BETWEEN FEDERAL AGENCIES 
                   AND FEDERALLY FUNDED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 
                   CENTERS.

       (a) Authority.--Section 3371(4) of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (B);
       (2) by striking out the period at the end of subparagraph 
     (C) and inserting in lieu thereof ``; or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(D) a federally funded research and development 
     center.''.
       (b) Provisions Governing Assignments.--Section 3372 of 
     title 5, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(e) Under regulations prescribed pursuant to section 3376 
     of this title--
       ``(1) an assignment of an employee of a Federal agency to 
     an other organization, and an employee so assigned, shall be 
     treated in the same way as an assignment of an employee of a 
     Federal agency to a State or local government, and an 
     employee so assigned, is treated under the provisions of this 
     subchapter governing an assignment of an employee of a 
     Federal agency to a State or local government; and
       ``(2) an assignment of an employee of an other organization 
     to a Federal agency, and an employee so assigned shall be 
     treated in the same way as an assigned of an employee of a 
     State or local government to a Federal agency, and an 
     employee so assigned, is treated under the provisions of this 
     subchapter governing an assignment of an employee of a State 
     or local government to a Federal agency.''.
                                 ______

      By Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself and Mr. Roth):
  S. 2041. A bill to encourage beneficiary developing countries to 
provide adequate protection of intellectual property rights, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.


  rights of intellectual property owners fairness facilitation act of 
                                  1994

 Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, along with Senator Roth, I am 
introducing legislation to address a problem that costs American 
industry and workers billions of dollars every year: piracy of American 
intellectual property rights by foreign countries. The administration 
has placed an annual price tag on foreign piracy of American ideas and 
inventions at $50 billion. Every dollar lost to foreign violations 
undermines our economy and puts American jobs at risk.
  For many years I have been concerned that our trade policy has been 
at odds with our development policy because so many recipients of U.S. 
benefit programs--such as duty-free Generalized System of Preferences 
[GSP] import privileges--have habitually denied adequate protection for 
the fruits of American invention and creativity.
  The bill we are introducing today would create a stronger link 
between the newly negotiated international GATT standard for 
intellectual property and the GSP development program. To preserve 
benefits under the GSP program, the bill would require countries to 
comply with the new international standards for intellectual property 
in a more timely way than the GATT requires.
  Mr. President, the negotiators at the Uruguay round of the GATT 
achieved some real progress in the area of intellectual property 
rights. The Round's Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual 
Property Rights--commonly called the TRIPS Agreement--represents an 
important milestone in the pursuit of strong worldwide intellectual 
property protection. For the first time, it establishes important 
international intellectual property standards.

  Unfortunately, the agreement gives foreign countries a very long 
time--up to 11 years in some cases--to comply with those standards 
although the United States has only 1 year to come into compliance with 
the TRIPS obligations under the GATT.
  While the newly negotiated intellectual property standards are 
relatively good, Mr. President, 11 years is simply too long a 
transition period. Because the GATT negotiations are completed, there 
is nothing the United States can now do within the context of the GATT 
to bring about an earlier compliance date.
  However, we can use our own benefit programs to urge earlier 
compliance. We ought to use every appropriate tool at our disposal to 
expedite compliance with those standards.
  GSP is one such tool. GSP is not a right; it is a benefit. Nearly 150 
countries benefit from the GSP program, which enables some 4,400 
products to enter the United States duty free. The program creates 
significant leverage for our Government because we can unilaterally 
confer and deny GSP status to eligible countries without being 
subjected to the GATT's multilateral dispute settlement mechanism. It 
is entirely appropriate that we use this powerful tool to encourage 
developing countries to come into compliance more expeditiously with 
the international standards set by the GATT.
  Mr. President, the new GATT TRIPS Agreement enters into force in 
1995. All compliance deadlines follow that 1995 date. Under the GATT, 
developing countries will have 5 years, or until the year 2000, to come 
into compliance with the new international intellectual property 
standards. They will have an additional 5 years, or until the year 
2005, to change their laws to meet the product patent protection 
standard.
  The bill I am introducing today would require developing countries to 
come into compliance with all TRIPS standards--including patents--
within 2 years, or by the year 1997. The President would need to 
certify 1 year after TRIPS enters into force that developing countries 
are at least making ``overall, significant'' progress toward 
implementing the TRIPS standards. If they do not, they will not be able 
to preserve their GSP benefits.
  Under the GATT, least developed countries will have 11 years, or 
until the year 2006, to meet the TRIPS standards. I recognize that 
these countries may have difficulties in meeting even the minimal TRIPS 
standards as quickly as developed or even other developing countries. 
That is why under my bill, the least developed countries will have 5 
years, or until the year 2000, to change their laws to meet the 
international standard. If they do not, they will not retain their GSP 
benefits.
  Why is this bill necessary? Because our current GSP law is not tough 
enough to bring the developing nations of the world into compliance 
with the TRIPS standards more quickly. Under existing law, when making 
decisions about a country's GSP eligibility, the President need only 
take into consideration the extent to which a country is providing 
``adequate and effective means under its laws for foreign nationals to 
secure, to exercise, and to enforce exclusive rights in intellectual 
property * * *.'' The existing law does not specify deadlines for 
compliance. It is not explicitly linked to the new international GATT 
standard on intellectual property. It will not create real pressure to 
bring the developing countries of the world into compliance sooner.
  Mr. President, although it has been on the books for many years, the 
existing law has yielded extremely limited results. To it's credit, the 
United States Trade Representative has worked under the existing law to 
secure improvements in intellectual property protection. It did suspend 
a limited amount of GSP benefits from Brazil, India, and Thailand 
because of their failure to provide adequate intellectual property 
protection. The Administration considered Thailand and India to be the 
most flagrant violators of American intellectual property rights by 
designating them ``priority countries'' for 3 years in a row and 
suspended some benefits. Brazil, which had long been of concern, 
received the same ``priority'' designation last year. Consequently, 
over the years, some GSP benefits were suspended for these countries.
  However, although some benefits were removed, India continued 
importing into the United States almost 80 percent of all eligible 
products free of duty last year. Thailand continued to import over 65 
percent of its products duty-free. Brazil continued to import over 72 
percent of eligible products into the United States duty-free in 1933.
  Unfortunately, the loss of some GSP benefits brought about only 
limited improvements. Intellectual property protection in these and 
many other countries is still woefully inadequate. Tremendous progress 
still needs to be made.
  Even more, while the USTR has documented specific deficiencies in 
intellectual property rights throughout the world in it's annual report 
outlining major barriers to trade, not one country--other than the 
three I have already mentioned--has ever lost even a portion of its GSP 
benefits for violations of intellectual property rights. Nonetheless, 
their intellectual property laws remain inadequate.
  Clearly, the message is not getting through to the offending 
countries that the United States expects GSP beneficiary countries to 
clean up their act on intellectual property protection. The bill I am 
introducing today will help the USTR get that message across.
  Mr. President, I do not want or intend to tie the President's hands. 
I know that the President and the USTR share my goal of bringing about 
greater cooperation from the international community on this important 
issue. When I discussed this issue with USTR Kantor at a hearing last 
year in the Commerce, Justice, State Appropriations Subcommittee, he 
said the administration--

     should look at the possibility of using every tool at its 
     disposal to convince countries that they should protect 
     intellectual property as well as investment as well as live 
     up to their agreements in a way that would be beneficial not 
     only to our workers and our business but beneficial to them 
     if they expect to receive the kind of assistance that they 
     have been receiving.

  I want to help the administration convince these countries to provide 
such protection.
  Nonetheless, I recognize there may be situations in which the 
administration may need to make an exception for overriding reasons. 
That is why my bill includes a waiver which would enable the President 
to grant privileges to a country which would otherwise be disqualified 
if he determines it would be in the United States' national economic 
interest.
  The bill is not intended to restrict the President's ability to ask 
countries to go beyond the TRIPS standards. It is not intended to 
restrict his ability to deny GSP benefits before the deadlines 
established in the bill.
  I also recognize that foreign countries may need some assistance to 
help them improve intellectual property protection. To that end, the 
bill outlines additional measures--such as technical assistance 
programs through the Department of Commerce and Agency for 
International Development--that can be implemented to help countries 
move in the right direction.
  Mr. President, the legislation I am introducing today helps address 
many of the problems encumbering the present system of intellectual 
property rights protection. It establishes common, minimal standards--
the TRIPS standards--which all countries should be able to meet. It 
sets a common, predictable U.S. response for each country which fails 
to meet those standards. It reduces the extended period of time 
developing countries--those who receive American foreign aid and import 
products into the United States duty-free--would be exempt from the 
TRIPS standards. Finally, it gives the President the flexibility to 
make exceptions for least developed countries and others he deems would 
be in our national economic interest.
  The bill has been endorsed by the Intellectual Property Committee, 
the Intellectual Property Owners, the International Intellectual 
Property Alliance, the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association, and 
Absolute Entertainment, Inc. I ask unanimous consent that copies of 
their letters endorsing this bill be included in the Record. I ask 
unanimous consent that a copy of the bill be included in the Record.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2041

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Rights of Intellectual 
     Property Owners Fairness Facilitation Act of 1994''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) United States industry loses billions of dollars each 
     year to countries that do not provide adequate protection of 
     intellectual property rights.
       (2) According to the Department of Commerce, United States 
     companies lose approximately $50,000,000,000 annually as a 
     result of violations of intellectual property rights by 
     foreign countries.
       (3) It is in the interest of the United States to leverage 
     its foreign policy to achieve certain trade policy 
     objectives, such as adequate, effective, and timely 
     protection of intellectual property rights.
       (4) Several countries that qualify under the generalized 
     system of preferences provisions have been identified under 
     section 182 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2242) as 
     countries that do not provide adequate and effective 
     protection of patents, copyrights, and trademarks or deny 
     fair and equitable market access to United States persons 
     that rely on intellectual property rights protection.
       (5) Several countries that receive United States foreign 
     assistance also have been identified under section 182 of the 
     Trade Act of 1974 as countries that do not provide adequate 
     and effective protection of patents, copyrights, and 
     trademarks or deny fair and equitable market access to United 
     States persons that rely on intellectual property rights 
     protection.

     SEC. 3. COUNTRIES INELIGIBLE FOR GSP TREATMENT.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Implementation of agreement on trips.--Section 502(b) 
     of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2462(b)) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (6),
       (B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (7) and 
     inserting ``; and'',
       (C) by inserting immediately after paragraph (7) the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(8) if such country is not implementing parts I, II, and 
     III of the Agreement on TRIPS--
       ``(A) beginning on the date that is 1 year (2 years in the 
     case of a country with respect to which the President has 
     made a qualified certification) after the date the Agreement 
     enters into force and effect, or
       ``(B) beginning on the date that is 5 years after the date 
     the Agreement enters into force and effect in the case of a 
     least-developed beneficiary developing country.'',
       (D) in the last sentence, by striking ``(4), (6), (7), and 
     (8)'' and inserting ``(4), (5), (6), (7), and (8)'', and
       (E) by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``For 
     purposes of paragraph (8)(A), a `qualified certification' 
     means a certification by the President to the Congress that 
     is made within 1 year after the date the Agreement on TRIPS 
     enters into force and effect and that states that a country 
     is making overall significant progress in implementing parts 
     I, II, and III of the Agreement.''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--Section 502(a) of such Act (19 
     U.S.C. 2462(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(5) For purposes of this title--
       ``(A) the term `Agreement on TRIPS' means the Agreement on 
     Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights entered 
     into as part of the Uruguay Round Agreements, and
       ``(B) the term `Uruguay Round Agreements' means the trade 
     agreements resulting from the Uruguay Round of multilateral 
     trade negotiations under the auspices of the General 
     Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.''.
       (b) Designation as Eligible GSP Country.--Section 502 of 
     such Act (19 U.S.C. 2462) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(f) Designation Where Country Adheres to the Agreement on 
     TRIPS; Annual Reports.--
       ``(1) Designation as beneficiary developing country.--A 
     country--
       ``(A) which has been denied designation as a beneficiary 
     developing country on the basis of subsection (b)(8), or
       ``(B) with respect to which such designation has been 
     withdrawn or suspended based on subsection (b)(8),

     may be designated as a beneficiary developing country under 
     this title, if the President determines that the country is 
     fully implementing parts I, II, and III of the Agreement on 
     TRIPS and reports the determination to the Congress.
       ``(2) Annual report.--Not later than the date that is 1 
     year after the date the Agreement on TRIPS enters into force 
     and effect, and annually thereafter, the President shall 
     determine whether each country designated as a beneficiary 
     developing country under this title is fully implementing 
     parts I, II, and III of the Agreement and shall report such 
     findings to the Congress.''.

     SEC. 4. COORDINATION OF TRADE POLICY AND FOREIGN POLICY.

       (a) Other Efforts To Improve Protection of Intellectual 
     Property Rights.--The United States Trade Representative 
     shall notify the Secretary of State, the Secretary of 
     Commerce, and the Administrator of the Agency for 
     International Development on a regular basis of any country 
     which is not fully implementing parts I, II, and III of the 
     Agreement on TRIPS.
       (b) Encouraging Implementation of Agreement on TRIPS.--The 
     Secretary of State, the Secretary of Commerce, and the 
     Administrator of the Agency for International Development 
     shall cooperate with the United States Trade Representative 
     by encouraging any country that receives foreign assistance 
     and is not fully implementing the Agreement on TRIPS to enact 
     and enforce laws that will enable the country to implement 
     the Agreement on TRIPS. To further this objective, the 
     Secretary of State shall instruct the head of each United 
     States diplomatic mission abroad to include intellectual 
     property rights protection as a priority objective of the 
     mission.
       (c) Other Actions To Encourage Protection of Intellectual 
     Property Rights.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     the President is authorized to undertake the following 
     actions, where appropriate, with respect to a developing 
     country to encourage and help the country improve the 
     protection of intellectual property rights:
       (1) Provide Overseas Private Investment Corporation 
     insurance for intellectual property assets.
       (2) Require foreign assistance programs to provide support 
     for the development of national intellectual property laws 
     and regulations and for the development of the infrastructure 
     necessary to protect intellectual property rights.
       (3) Establish technical cooperation committees on 
     intellectual property standards within regional 
     organizations.
       (4) Establish, as a joint effort between the United States 
     Government and the private sector, a council to facilitate 
     and provide intellectual property-related technical 
     assistance through the Agency for International Development 
     and the Department of Commerce.
       (5) Require United States representatives to multilateral 
     lending institutions to seek the establishment of programs 
     within the institutions to support strong intellectual 
     property rights protection in recipient countries that have 
     fully implemented parts I, II, and III of the Agreement on 
     TRIPS.
       (d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       (1) Agreement on trips.--The term ``Agreement on TRIPS'' 
     means the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual 
     Property Rights entered into as part of the trade agreements 
     resulting from the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade 
     negotiations under the auspices of the General Agreement on 
     Tariffs and Trade.
       (2) Developing country.--The term ``developing country'' 
     means any country which is--
       (A) eligible to be designated a beneficiary developing 
     country pursuant to title V of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 
     U.S.C. 2461 et seq.), or
       (B) designated as a least-developed beneficiary developing 
     country pursuant to section 504(c)(6) of such Act (19 U.S.C. 
     2464(c)(6)).

                              Intellectual Property Committee,

                                   Washington, DC, April 18, 1994.
     Hon. Frank R. Lautenberg,
     U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Lautenberg: The Intellectual Property 
     Committee (IPC) whose members represent the broad spectrum of 
     private sector U.S. intellectual property interests, endorses 
     the Intellectual Property Protection Act of 1994, which you 
     recently introduced.
       Your legislation demonstrates a clear understanding that 
     strong worldwide protection of U.S. intellectual property is 
     critical to the continued competitiveness of U.S. industry 
     and to our nation's ability to create good jobs here in the 
     United States. The intellectual property (TRIPS) agreement 
     which was recently completed as part of the GATT Uruguay 
     Round of trade negotiations, provides for the first time 
     international standards of protection and enforcement across 
     a broad range of intellectual property elements. When fully 
     implemented, the TRIPS Agreement will require all countries--
     developing as well as industrialized countries--to provide 
     strong intellectual property protection. Unfortunately, 
     developing countries do not have to implement the TRIPS 
     provisions in their countries' laws and regulations for five 
     to ten years. Until then, these countries will be able to 
     continue to pirate U.S. technology and copy our creative 
     works without fear of any international sanctions.
       The legislation that you have introduced properly seeks to 
     accelerate TRIPS implementation in GSP-recipient countries by 
     linking continued eligibility for the U.S. program to full 
     and accelerated implementation of TRIPS-level protection. 
     Through such linkage, your legislation will provide U.S. 
     negotiators with the leverage necessary to gain improved 
     worldwide protection of U.S. intellectual property. In the 
     absence of this type of leverage, the United States will face 
     real difficulty in achieving the critical goal of improved 
     worldwide intellectual property protection in a timely 
     manner. In addition, your legislation will underscore the 
     importance of adequate and effective property protection in 
     stimulating economic growth in GSP-beneficiary countries, 
     which will lead to expanded export opportunities for U.S. 
     goods and services.
       The IPC commends your continued efforts on behalf of strong 
     intellectual property protection and economic growth in the 
     United States.
           Sincerely,
     Charles S. Levy,
       IPC Counsel.
     Jacques J. Gorlin,
       Consulting Economist.
                                  ____



                                 Intellectual Property Owners,

                                   Washington, DC, April 20, 1994.
     Senator Frank R. Lautenberg,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Lautenberg: Intellectual Property Owners 
     strongly endorses your proposal for legislation that will use 
     GSP to encourage countries to comply at an early date with 
     the agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual 
     Property Rights (TRIPS).
       U.S. industry and the U.S. economy will benefit enormously 
     if Congress can stop the losses that are resulting from 
     inadequate and ineffective protection of intellectual 
     property rights abroad. According to the U.S. Department of 
     Commerce, such losses are about $50 billion annually.
       The Uruguay round GATT agreement gives development and 
     least-developed countries 5 to 11 years to implement the 
     TRIPS standards. If GSP can be used as an incentive for 
     countries to implement within 2 to 5 years, U.S. industry 
     will avoid many billions of dollars of losses. In the long 
     run, early adoption of standards to encourage research, 
     development, and creativity will strengthen the world economy 
     and help all countries.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Roger S. Smith,
                                                        President.
                                  ____

                                        International Intellectual


                                            Property Alliance,

                                   Washington, DC, April 21, 1994.
     Hon. Frank R. Lautenberg,
     U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Lautenberg: On behalf of the International 
     Intellectual Property Alliance and its eight association 
     members, we applaud your leadership in introducing the 
     International Intellectual Property Protection Act of 1994 
     which seeks to assist in ensuring that less developed country 
     members of the GATT/WTO bring their domestic intellectual 
     property regimes into compliance with their TRIPS obligations 
     before the expiration of the 4- and 10-year transition 
     periods permitted them under the TRIPS text.
       The IIPA represents the U.S. copyright-based industries 
     which are vitally interested in securing adequate and 
     effective protection for their copyrighted works--movies, 
     computer software, books and journals, music and audio 
     recordings--and fair and equitable market access to those 
     products protected by copyright laws. As the attached Fact 
     Sheet on our industries demonstrates, the U.S. copyright 
     industries are growing faster, employ new workers faster, and 
     contribute more significantly to U.S. exports than all but a 
     very few sectors of our economy. At the same time, worldwide 
     piracy is these industries' most acute market access barrier. 
     They lose an estimated $15-$17 billion annually to piracy 
     worldwide--an inexcusable drain on the U.S. economy and 
     threat to our international competitiveness.
       The TRIPS Agreement has several major inadequacies, one of 
     which is its overly long transition periods--in the case of 
     copyrights the period is generally four years longer than in 
     developed countries (least developed countries have a total 
     additional ten years). Many of our trading partners that 
     continue to allow widespread piracy within their borders are, 
     as a result of U.S. bilateral pressure and engagement under 
     Special 301 and under the existing GSP Program, are very 
     close to remedying these problems. We cite as examples 
     Thailand, Turkey, Egypt, Venezuela and many others. Your 
     Bill would deny continued participation in the GSP Program 
     unless TRIPS-level protection were introduced before the 
     expiration of these transition periods. The Bill is 
     intended to provide added leverage to the U.S. government 
     to ensure that continued losses were not sustained as a 
     result of necessary resort to the transition period. By 
     linking acceleration of GSP beneficiary countries to 
     earlier implementation of the TRIPS obligations, leverage 
     may be increased and losses to the U.S. economy reduced.
       While we share and support the objectives of your Bill 
     which is fully consistent with IIPA's goal to accelerate 
     TRIPS compliance, there are two important clarifications/
     modifications that we would urge you to make. First, we urge 
     you to make clear in your Bill that adherence to the TRIPS 
     obligations alone, and without more, does not necessarily 
     meet the test of ``adequate and effective'' protection and 
     enforcement which is the standard to which all GSP 
     beneficiaries must adhere. We have urged the Administration 
     to make this critical change in the current GSP Program (and 
     in other trade/IP programs) in recognition that the TRIPS 
     standards are deficient in some respects and, moreover, tend 
     to be static while technology is rapidly changing. What is 
     ``adequate and effective'' protection will, in the copyright 
     area certainly, change rapidly with technology in the next 
     years. We believe that any legislation in this area must make 
     clear that adequate and effective protection must be afforded 
     by GSP beneficiaries, notwithstanding that the country might 
     have implemented TRIPS or the provisions of any particular 
     multilateral or bilateral agreement. We have also proposed to 
     the Administration making the same changes to the Caribbean 
     Basin Economic Recovery Act (which operates similarly to the 
     GSP Program specifically for the CBI region) as well as to 
     the Andean Trade Preferences Act.
       Second, we are concerned that by establishing fixed time 
     frames for implementation and rigid statutory grace periods, 
     leverage can actually be diminished with countries that are 
     capable of earlier TRIPS compliance. We understand that the 
     Administration shares this view and we hope that you and the 
     Administration can reach an accord that permits flexibility 
     at the same time as ensuring the result that your Bill and 
     our industries seek.
       We support as well the objectives of Section 4 of the bill 
     to bring into coordination the activities of AID and other 
     agencies in ensuring full protection for U.S. intellectual 
     property. We strongly believe that all agencies must work 
     together to ensure full worldwide protection for one of our 
     country's most important resources--its creativity.
       We acknowledge and commend all your many contributions to 
     the protection of intellectual property over the years, 
     including the legislation you have just introduced.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Eric H. Smith,
                           Executive Director and General Counsel.
                                  ____



                                 Absolute Entertainment, Inc.,

                           Upper Saddle River, NJ, April 19, 1994.
     Re proposed legislation regarding generalized system of 
         preferences [GSP].

     Senator Frank R. Lautenberg,
     Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Lautenberg: I have been discussing with Stuart 
     Brown and Cathy Carpino of your staff the bill which I 
     understand you are planning to introduce which will tie 
     receipt of Generalized System of Preferences (``GSP'') 
     benefits by beneficiary developing countries to improved 
     protection of intellectual property rights in such countries.
       I strongly support your bill, as does my company, Absolute 
     Entertainment, Inc.
       Absolute Entertainment, Inc., an Upper Saddle River company 
     with 73 employees, is one of 170 U.S. companies which develop 
     and sell Nintendo video games. Absolute's success is 
     dependent on its ability to reap the rewards of the video 
     games which it develops. Unfortunately, Absolute, like many 
     creators of video games, can not sell its products in many 
     less developed countries because pirates have virtually 
     saturated these markets. Accordingly, Absolute strongly 
     supports your bill because, over time, it should enable 
     Absolute to sell its products in markets from which it is 
     presently excluded.
       The U.S. video game industry has been severely injured by 
     copyright piracy in GSP countries. Your bill should provide 
     these countries with an incentive to improve the protection 
     of intellectual property rights. It is only fair that 
     countries which receive the right to export products to the 
     United States on a duty-free basis should be required to 
     provide strong intellectual property protection for U.S. 
     products.
       I am particularly concerned that less developed countries 
     rely on the inordinately long transition periods for 
     implementing the provisions of the Agreement on Trade-Related 
     Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (``TRIPS''). Your 
     bill will give the United States Trade Representative 
     leverage to obtain more expeditious implementation of the 
     TRIPS provisions.
       We hope you are able to emphasize that beneficiary 
     developing countries should not construe your bill as 
     indicating that the TRIPS provisions constitute the optimum 
     level of intellectual property protection, but rather the 
     reverse--that these are the minimum acceptable standards of 
     protection. In fact, TRIPS falls short of what U.S. companies 
     like Absolute need for adequate and effective protection of 
     their intellectual property rights. It is my understanding 
     that this bill, when passed into law, will not preclude the 
     United States Trade Representative from seeking higher levels 
     of intellectual property protection than those in TRIPS, and 
     we recommend the bill or its legislative history make this 
     point clear!
       I am arranging for samples of authentic and counterfeit 
     Absolute-produced video games and color prints to be provided 
     to you by Arter & Hadden for your use during introduction of 
     the bill. Please ask a member of your staff to contact Ingrid 
     Voorhees of Arter & Hadden at (202) 775/7981 to return the 
     samples.
       The staff and management of Absolute Entertainment 
     sincerely appreciate the interest you have shown in 
     protecting U.S. intellectual property rights. This is an 
     issue which is near and dear to all of our hearts. U.S. 
     companies need this protection if we are to be able to 
     compete in international markets.
       Best regards.
           Yours sincerely,

                                              James I. Charne,

                                             Vice President, Legal
                                     and Business Affairs.

 Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I am pleased to be joining my good 
colleague, Senator Lautenberg, in cosponsoring legislation on an issue 
I feel very strongly about--the need for early and full adoption of the 
Uruguay round agreement on intellectual property rights. While these 
new rules generally represent a significant achievement and will be of 
major benefit to U.S. inventors and other holders intellectual 
property, there is one serious overall problem with the agreement that 
must be addressed--the long transition periods that are provided to 
developing countries. The legislation I am cosponsoring today offers 
one approach to addressing this problem by tying future GSP benefits to 
the extent to which a developing country has fully implemented key 
parts of this agreement.
  Infringement of U.S. intellectual property is no small matter. The 
Commerce Department has estimated that U.S. companies lose $50 billion 
every year from intellectual property piracy. Much of this piracy 
occurs in the developing world where three are often few, if any, rules 
protecting intellectual property rights, and little enforcement of such 
rules where they exist. Under the Uruguay round agreement, developing 
countries can wait up to 10 years before fully implementing the new 
TRIPS agreement. I think most of us would agree that this is 
unacceptable. Consequently, we must look at what steps we can take to 
accelerate this process of implementation.
  It is my intention to ensure that this problem is effectively 
addressed in the implementing legislation on the Uruguay round and I 
look forward to working with Senator Lautenberg and the rest of my 
colleagues on this very important matter.

                          ____________________