[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 53 (Thursday, May 5, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: May 5, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

                                 ______

      By Mr. CAMPBELL (for himself, Mr. Brown, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Reid, 
        Mr. Bryan, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Domenici, and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 2078. A bill to amend the National Trails System Act to designate 
the Old Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail 
for potential inclusion into the National Trails System, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.


                the old spanish trail study act of 1994

  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I am sending legislation to the 
desk to designate the Old Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of the 
Old Spanish Trail for study for potential addition to the National 
Trails System.
  I know of the President pro tempore's interest and considerable 
knowledge of American history, and I believe he will find this bill of 
great interest. The Old Spanish Trail has rightly been called the 
longest, crookedest, most arduous pack mule route in the history of 
America. It certainly is that, and more.
  The Old Spanish Trail spans not only a great distance--1,200 miles 
from Santa Fe to Los Angeles--but it also bridges hundreds of years in 
our Nation's history and connects the colorful, diverse cultures that 
are really the soul of the American Southwest.
  According to an early historian, the trail ``* * * headed northwest 
from Santa Fe * * * eased over the continental divide in northern New 
Mexico, cut through a spur of the Rocky Mountains into Colorado, forded 
* * * the Colorado and the Green (rivers) * * * dipped over the rim of 
the Great Basin into Utah, and crept southwest through desert stretches 
of Nevada and California to Los Angeles.'' In my State of Colorado, the 
trail passed near the very town I live in, the small town of Ignacio, 
as well as the towns of Durango, Mancos, Dolores, Cortez, and Dove 
Creek; then followed the Dolores River west into Utah. The Northern 
Branch of the trail was used by trappers and traders to access 
northwestern Colorado and northeastern Utah. This trail entered 
Colorado near the towns of Alamosa and Monte Vista and passed the 
present day towns of Gunnison, Montrose, Delta, and Grand Junction. 
From Grand Junction, the trail followed the Colorado River for some 50 
miles, and then struck out across the desert and joined the main 
Spanish Trail 20 miles southeast of the Green River crossing, which was 
a major rendezvous point for the old-time trappers in the West.
  Parts of the trail began as a footpath for Native Americans. It later 
witnessed more than two centuries of Spanish use, a quarter-century of 
Mexican use, and, finally, a half-century of American travel before 
transcontinental railroads replaced it. In that sense, the Old Spanish 
Trail is an integral part of our national heritage, and a route truly 
deserving of further study.
  The Old Spanish Trail had its origins in prehistoric trade routes 
used by Ute Indians of the Colorado Rockies to reach the native Pueblos 
of northern New Mexico. After the settlement of New Mexico by 
Spaniards, Utes led mounted Spaniards north into their homelands in the 
mountains and the Great Basin. These early Spanish travels included an 
early, though failed attempt to reach California by the Franciscan 
fathers Dominguez and Escalante in 1776, the year of the American 
Revolution. This use by the Spanish eventually gave the trail its name.
  Although the Old Spanish Trail enjoyed a heyday of 50 years or so in 
the 19th century as annual caravans traded New Mexican woolen blankets 
for California mules and horses, its dramatic story covers two 
centuries of recorded history. Few routes, if any, pass through as much 
relatively pristine country. And despite the destruction of time, 
remnants of the Old Spanish Trail remain for study: Native petroglyphs, 
early exploration journals, even wagon ruts cut into the rock. It is 
time to study and save our common heritage.
  Already a number of independent scholars have begun examination of 
portions of the trail. An Old Spanish Trail Association has been 
founded in Colorado, and its members have located wagon ruts worn into 
the rock in the San Luis Valley--which happens to be the oldest settled 
community in Colorado--along the North Branch of the trail. Grassroots 
support is strong for continued study and recognition of this historic 
trail. I have received resolutions of support from more than 20 
municipalities in Colorado, and from the Colorado General Assembly. I 
have also received dozens of letters of support from citizens in 
Colorado and volunteer groups who are anxious to offer their expertise 
and time to this long overdue endeavor. The time has come to 
acknowledge the national historic importance of the Old Spanish Trail. 
Mr. President, this bill to designate the Old Spanish Trail for study 
for potential addition to the National Trails System promotes the 
recognition, protection, and interpretation of our Nation's Western 
history. By introducing this legislation today, we pay tribute to the 
diverse cultures of the West.
  I did bring a map here to show where it originally started. The trail 
started at Santa Fe, went through what is currently Espanola, where the 
native pueblo is and has been for several centuries. The people in the 
pueblos were thought to be the Anasazi, or the ancient ones, that 
inhabited Mesa Verde, which is just south of the southern part of the 
Spanish Trail as it came through Cortez. Mesa Verde is just on the 
outskirts of the town of Cortez.
  The trail split, and the northern part went through the little town 
of San Luis and connected back to Green River, UT, and then went 
further west. I know of portions of this because part of it came 
through my little town, and it is certainly a part of our very colorful 
American history.
  Most of the Western Senators are cosponsors of this bill. I would 
like to thank Senator Brown of Colorado, Senator Bennett of Utah, 
Senator Reid of Nevada, Senator Bryan of Nevada, Senator Bingaman of 
New Mexico, Senator Domenici of New Mexico, and Senator Feinstein of 
California for cosponsoring this legislation with me.
  I urge my colleagues to support swift passage of this legislation.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and 
additional material be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2078

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

     SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

       Section 5(c) of the National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 
     1244(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       (36) The Old Spanish Trail, beginning in Santa Fe, New 
     Mexico, proceeding through Colorado and Utah, and ending in 
     Los Angeles, California, and the Northern Branch of the Old 
     Spanish Trail, beginning near Espanola, New Mexico, 
     proceeding through Colorado, and ending near Crescent 
     Junction, Utah.
                                  ____



                                                   Pueblo, CO,

                                                    March 8, 1994.
     Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell,
     c/o Trudy Karaous, Russell Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Campbell: I speak for many Coloradans, as well 
     as our associates in New Mexico, Utah, Nevada and California 
     when I commend you for supporting a National Park Service 
     study of the Old Spanish Trail as a National Historic Trail. 
     This 1,200-mile route, which passes near your hometown of 
     Ignacio, Colo., is one of modern America's best opportunities 
     to understand its multi-cultural heritage, and explore the 
     greatness and courage of our collective forebears.
       Ute Indians once descended part of this route from the 
     Colorado mountains to reach Spaniards in New Mexico for 
     trade. The Spaniards of colonial New Mexico (about 1720-1821) 
     then followed Ute guides northwest into the Great Basin, also 
     for trade. After Mexican independence from Spain in 1821, 
     merchant Antonio Armijo in 1829-30 made the first journey 
     from Santa Fe to Los Angeles and back. In 1830-31, Americans 
     William Wolfskill and George Yount made the first journey 
     along the route now known as the ``Old Spanish Trail.'' A 
     half-century of travel over this route commenced. After 1846 
     the Mormons of Utah used the western end of the trail to 
     reach California.
       Thus the Old Spanish Trail is a trail of many cultures, and 
     the country it traverses remains quite pristine in many 
     areas. The chances of identifying significant historic sites 
     along it are high, and it rivals, if not exceeds the historic 
     significance of many trails already designated National 
     Historic Trails.
       A number of Coloradans, and associates in the OST's other 
     four states, have--as usual with Americans--not waited for 
     official action. We've formed the Old Spanish Trail 
     Association, for study and preservation of this historic 
     trail.
       We're heartened that you've taken interest in this matter 
     and we applaude your efforts on our behalf.
       The cost of a National Park Service feasibility study, and 
     the annual appropriation to maintain the NPS's management of 
     the trail, will pay untold dividends in raising awareness of 
     our nation's multi-cultural heritage, and in the tolerance 
     and mutual respect that that awareness engenders. If there is 
     anything the Old Spanish Trail Association can do to help, 
     please get in touch.
           Sincerely,
                                                      Phil Carson.
                                  ____

                                          Rio Grande County Museum


                                          and Cultural Center,

                                    Del Norte, CO, March 15, 1994.
     Hon. Ben Campbell,
     c/o Trudy Karaous, Russell Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Campbell: The Rio Grande County Museum 
     wholeheartedly supports study of the North Branch of the Old 
     Spanish Trail by the National Park Service. The Museum 
     participated in the formation of the OST Association and has 
     been awarded grants from the Colorado Historical Society 
     Preservation Fund for the recording of petroglyph sites near 
     the trail. Because of development and vandalism, it is 
     important that a study of the trail be done soon.
           Sincerely,
                                                     Mark Allison,
                                                         Director.
                                  ____



                                    Rio Grande County Sheriff,

                                    Del Norte, CO, March 16, 1994.
     Re: Old Spanish Trail.
     Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell,
       Senator Campbell: I am writing in reference to the proposal 
     to make the Old Spanish Trail a historical sight. Please 
     consider this a plea to do whatever you can to make this 
     happen.
       This particular trail has a great deal of history behind it 
     for my family. My grandfather, as a child, traveled by foot 
     along this trail to bring messages from the Capulin area to 
     the Del Norte area. My grandfather's ancestors are Ute.
       The Harness and Saddle Club, which I am a member, have been 
     re-tracing the Old Spanish Trail by wagon train for several 
     years. We have been fighting hard to preserve the history and 
     make it available to those interested in seeing it.
       Again I respectfully request that you do whatever you can 
     to preserve this wonderful part of history for my family.
                                           Sheriff J. Desi Medina,
                                                Rio Grande County.
                                  ____

                                          Robb, Beckner, Achziger,


                                               McInnis & Palo,

                               Grand Junction, CO, April 11, 1994.
     Re Old Spanish Trail and its Northern Branch.
     Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell,
     U.S. Senator, Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Ben: Thank you for your letter of March 24, 1994. 
     Enclosed is a copy of a Resolution which was adopted by the 
     Grand Junction/Mesa County Riverfront Commission supporting 
     the study of the Old Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of 
     the Old Spanish Trail.
       We are delighted that you will be introducing this bill 
     shortly after the Easter recess.
       I am sending a copy of this letter to Senator Brown and 
     Congressman McInnis. I recently received a newsletter from 
     the Old Spanish Trail Association and Ron Kessler in Monte 
     Vista. The author of that newsletter incorrectly stated that 
     Congressman McInnis was introducing a study bill. It is my 
     understanding that you will be introducing the legislation 
     and that it will be co-sponsored by Senator Brown and 
     Congressman McInnis.
       We appreciate your efforts and the efforts of your staff 
     concerning this matter.
       If there is anything that Bill Chenoweth or I can do to 
     assist, please be back in touch with us. Best personal 
     regards.
           Sincerely,
                                                    James M. Robb.
                                  ____

                                          Rio Grande County Museum


                                          and Cultural Center,

                                    Del Norte, CO, March 15, 1994.
     Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell,
     c/o Trudy Karaous, Russell Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Campebell: Recent efforts to form the National 
     Association of the Old Spanish Trail (north branch) are to be 
     encouraged and applauded and the possibility of the National 
     Park Service to aid in research of this trail, which passed 
     through six Southwestern states, must be continued.
       Historic sites such as this rutted trail must be preserved. 
     Please lets not loose this excellent opportunity for research 
     by the National Park Service.
           Sincerely,
                                                      Suzanne Off,
                                                          Curator.
                                  ____

                                        Mosca, CO, March 30, 1994.
     Hon. Ben Campbell,
     c/o Trudy Karaous, Russell Building, Washington, DC.
       Senator Campbell: I am writing to you today to express my 
     support for your bill authorizing the National Park Service 
     to make a study of the Old Spanish Trail for possible 
     inclusion in the National Historic Trails System. Your 
     introduction of this bill shows a great understanding of the 
     importance of the historical Spanish influence on the entire 
     southern Colorado region.
       The northern branch of the Old Spanish Trail which 
     traversed the San Luis Valley brought in much of the Spanish 
     influence which we see today in our geography and culture of 
     the Valley. This historical connection to these early 
     explorers and pioneers should be preserved for both posterity 
     and the public interest and curiosity about the Spanish 
     lifestyle and the exploration and development of ``the Old 
     West''.
       The timing is very appropriate for a thorough study of this 
     historic route which helped to blend the Native American, 
     Spanish and Anglo cultures together even before this part of 
     Colorado belonged to the United States. Thanks again for your 
     support of the preservation of this national treasure.
           Sincerely,
                                                      John Koshak.
                                  ____



                                            State of Colorado,

                                        Mosca, CO, March 30, 1994.
     Hon. Ben Campbell,
     c/o Trudy Karaous, Russell Bldg.,
     Washington, DC.
       Senator Campbell: Last fall, the Colorado State Parks Board 
     went on record as supporting the development and preservation 
     of the Old Spanish Trail as a National Landmark. The staff of 
     San Luis Lakes State Park definitely supports your 
     introduction of the bill authorizing the National Park 
     Service to make a study of the Old Spanish Trail for possible 
     inclusion in the National Historic Trails System. Your 
     efforts on behalf of this bill show an understanding of the 
     importance of the historic Spanish influence on the entire 
     southern Colorado region and the unlimited interest and 
     unique opportunity for visitors and residents of our state to 
     follow in the footsteps of these early explorers.
       The northern branch of the Old Spanish Trail which 
     traversed the San Luis Valley brought in much of the Spanish 
     influence which we see today in our geography and culture of 
     the Valley. This historical connection to these early 
     explorers and pioneers should be preserved for both posterity 
     and the public interest and the inherent curiosity about the 
     Spanish lifestyle and the exploration and development of 
     ``the Old West''. The possibilities for interpretation of 
     this unique resource will provide exciting historical 
     learning and experiences for each and every visitor to the 
     path of the Old Spanish Trail.
       The timing is very appropriate for a thorough study of this 
     historic route which helped to blend the Native American, 
     Spanish and Anglo cultures together even before this part of 
     Colorado belonged to the United States. Thanks again for your 
     support of the preservation of this national treasure.
           Sincerely,
                                         John Koshak, Park Ranger.
                                  ____

     Hon. Ben Campbell,
     c/o Trudy Karaous, Russell Bldg., Washington, DC.
       Dear Sir: I have learned that you will present a bill to 
     Congress in April proposing support of the National Park 
     Services for study of ``the Old Spanish Trail to 
     California'', with special interest in the ``North Branch'' 
     of that trail which runs the length of our San Luis Valley.
       I thank you for your work to get this historic route 
     acknowledged, especially the 100 mile stretch on the San Luis 
     Valley which then leads west through Colorado mountains to 
     join the southern Sante Fe-Chama or NW route at Green River, 
     Utah.
       The San Luis Valley Chapter of the Trail to California has 
     been formed by Ron Kessler, Monte Vista and a group of very 
     interested people. They are working to inform and place signs 
     on this trail which is a living symbol of three Southwest 
     heritages which used it for centuries--Pueblo and Ute 
     Indians, the Colonial Spanish, New Mexican Spanish, and 
     finally Anglo Mountain men, U.S. surveyors, soldiers; and 
     settlers from eastern U.S.A. and northern European countries.
       Ron Kessler is a mover and shaker on this trail. In the 
     past 4 years he has explored, studied and located historical 
     events on it. He has traveled it by horse and wagon, by 4-
     wheel drive, foot and airplane. He has contacted and gained 
     the support of knowledgeable local people in the Valley, out 
     of state people and made contacts with institutions such 
     as newspapers and the Bureau of Land Management. He has 
     organized meetings and from them created the ``San Luis 
     Valley Chapter'' of the old Spanish trail to California. 
     He is devotedly working to have the route identified with 
     signs, interpreted to the public by brochures, news 
     articles, lectures, a book.
       For years I have explored, located, photographed, lectured 
     and written on historic trails and wagon roads of the Valley 
     and Northern New Mexico, but never organized public 
     understandings as has Ron Kessler. The time is ripe for help 
     from outside powers such as the National Park Service.
       May I affirm here the importance and wonder of this 100 
     mile long trail which runs north-south the length of our 
     Valley. It is a beautiful, precious, unspoiled, historic 
     heirloom, available for experience today by car, horse, 
     bicycle or on foot. Rich in history which needs to be 
     presented.
       (1) It was the legendary trail used by Pueblo Indians of 
     the Rio Grande in Northern New Mexico who came to the Great 
     Valley for buffalo, turquoise and waterfowl feathers for 
     ceremonial use.
       (2) It was a ceremonial trail which brought them to the 
     shallow San Luis Lakes area west of todays Sand Dunes 
     National Monument, the mythical ``Place of their Emergence.'' 
     (Smithsonian archaeologists are working this area considered 
     to be the 10,000 year old Folsom Site).
       (3) In 1694 Gov. Don Diego de Vargas used and recorded in 
     his journal the southern section of this route in present 
     Costilla and Conejos counties.
       (4) In 1779 Gov. Bautista de Anza used both west side and 
     east side routes in the Valley on his campaign against the 
     Comanche. His Journal and the Vargas Journal are extent; 
     they name land marks an league distances identifiable 
     today.
       (5) In 1807 Zebulon Pike trod winter snows south on ``the 
     road to Santa'' when arrested by Spanish soldiers.
       (6) During the 1820's to 1840's U.S. and French-Canadian 
     trappers and traders used the classic route to Ute country 
     for fur trade and then as the North Branch of the Trail to 
     California.
       (7) By mid-1800s New Mexican pobbadores were coming north 
     on the trail to make plaza-forms along rivers Conejos ???? 
     and the Rio Grande.
       (8) During the rest of the 1800s sheep flocks made seasonal 
     drives from Conejos to the La Garita Mountains. The ancient 
     route became known as ``La Vereda de los Borregas'' the 
     ``Trail of the Ewe Sheep''.
       (9) After 1870 and discovery of gold on the San Juan 
     Mountains, prospectors and miners from Summersville, via Del 
     Norte, called the route ''the Old Conejos Lane'', for they 
     used the classic trail to go file their mine claims at the 
     Conejos Court House for there was no Rio Grande County until 
     1874. during these years Jesuit Fathers traveled the trail-
     road to serve Catholic missions at Del Norte and La Garita.
       (10) In the 1950s I saw wooden posts with metal signs 
     placed by the Bureau of Land Management, marking the route, 
     saying ``Center Stock Drive''.
       Our nation has been enriched by acknowledgment of many 
     historic trails, among them The Wilderness Trail, The Santa 
     Fe Trail, the Chihuahua Trail, The Oregon Trail. With the 
     help of local people here and the power of institutions such 
     as the National Park Service the North Branch of the Old 
     Spanish Trail to California can become known and experienced. 
     And so help Americans understand the brave Indian, Spanish 
     and Anglo contributions to our nation's story in this part of 
     the Southwest.
       Again, Senator Campbell, thank you for your interest and 
     help. We would love to guide you on this living history 
     landscape while you are on one of your visits to our Valley.
           Sincerely,
                                                Ruth Marie Cohidle
       P.S. Pardon the hand-script. My typist is not available. To 
     wait for her would delay the letter to you.
                                  ____



                                                 Crestone, CO,

                                                   March 16, 1994.
     Hon. Ben Campbell,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Campbell: Please support legislation for a 
     National Parks Service study giving historic designation for 
     the North Branch of the Old Spanish Trail. I know that you 
     have received information documenting the significance of 
     this trail to southern Colorado's history. Within the San 
     Luis Valley it has the unique status of being as integral to 
     the heritage of the east side of the Valley as to the west 
     side as both the East and West forks were used by indigenous 
     Athabaskan and Shoshonean peoples, two 17th and 18th Century 
     Spanish governors, mountain men and traders like Antoine 
     Robidoux and Antoine Leroux, transcontinental explorers 
     including Fremont and Gunnison, the photographer William 
     Henry Jackson, and finally numerous families coming to settle 
     land grants or to homestead public lands.
       As education director of the San Luis Valley Information 
     and Education Center in Monte Vista, I know that today's 
     travelers and tourists are very much interested in local 
     history. Los Caminos Antiguos, which connects the Great Sand 
     Dunes National Monument with the historic communities of San 
     Luis and Conejos has drawn considerable attention, and we 
     encourage our visitors to make a circle tour of the route. 
     Awareness of the use and location of the North Branch of the 
     Old Spanish Trail would be a valuable contribution not only 
     historically but also culturally and perhaps even 
     economically.
       We have formed both a national association and a regional 
     chapter to work towards identifying and preserving the Old 
     Spanish Trail to help promote public awareness and knowledge 
     about this important and valuable link in Colorado's early 
     history.
           Very truly yours,
                                            Patricia Joy Richmond,
                                              Vice President OSTA.
                                  ____


                        Resolution No. 19, 1993

       Whereas, the Colorado General Assembly, in their Joint 
     Resolution 93-3, sponsored by Senator Tilman M. Bishop and 
     Representative Tim Foster, have requested the Congress of the 
     United States to adopt legislation that dedicates the Old 
     Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish 
     Trail as an historic trail; and
       Whereas, between 1829 and 1848, a major trade route was 
     established between Santa Fe and Los Angeles which stretched 
     approximately 1,121 miles; and
       Whereas, the Old Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of 
     the Old Spanish Trail proceeded through much of Western 
     Colorado and followed part of the route travelled by the 
     Dominguez-Escalante Expedition of 1776; and
       Whereas, the Old Spanish Trail and its Northern Branch were 
     instrumental in the creation and establishment of many of 
     Western Colorado's towns and communities, including Alamosa, 
     Monte Vista, Saguache, Gunnison, Montrose, Olathe, Delta, 
     Whitewater, Grand Junction, Fruita, Loma, Pagosa Springs, 
     Durango, Mancos, Dolores, and Dove Creek; and
       Whereas, very little information is recorded about the 
     Northern Branch, and much more can be learned about the Old 
     Spanish Trail: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the City Council of the City of Delta, 
     Colorado, That the City of Delta supports the designation of 
     the Old Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old 
     Spanish Trail as an historic trail: be it further
       Resolved, That the United States Senators from Colorado, 
     Hank Brown and Ben Nighthorse Campbell, and United States 
     Representative Scott McInnis are hereby requested to initiate 
     appropriate legislation to dedicate the Old Spanish Trail and 
     the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail as an historic 
     trail; and be it further
       Resolved, That copies of this Resolution be sent to 
     Senators Brown and Campbell and to Representative McInnis, to 
     all other members of Colorado's congressional delegation, and 
     to all members of the Utah congressional delegation.
                                  ____


                          Resolution R-1993-19

       Whereas, the Colorado General Assembly, in their Joint 
     Resolution 93-3, sponsored by Senator Tillman M. Bishop and 
     Representative Tim Foster, has requested the Congress of the 
     United States to adopt legislation that dedicates the Old 
     Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish 
     Trail as an historic trail; and
       Whereas, between 1829 and 1848, a major trade route was 
     established between Santa Fe and Los Angeles which stretched 
     approximately 1,121 miles; and
       Whereas, the Old Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of 
     the Old Spanish Trail proceeded through much of Western 
     Colorado and followed part of the route traveled by the 
     Dominguez-Escalante Expedition of 1776; and
       Whereas, the promixity of many southwestern Colorado 
     communities, including Durango, to the routes of Dominguez 
     and Escalante and the Old Spanish Trail emphasizes the 
     historic importance of those routes; and
       Whereas, very little information is recorded about the 
     Northern Branch and much more can be learned about the Old 
     Spanish Trail: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the City Council of the City of Durango, 
     Colorado, That:
       Section 1. The City Council of the City of Durango hereby 
     supports the designation of the Old Spanish Trail and the 
     Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail as an historic 
     trail.
       Section 2. The Congress of the United States is hereby 
     requested to adopt legislation which dedicates the Old 
     Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish 
     Trail as an historic trail.
                                  ____


Resolution Designating the Old Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of 
               the Old Spanish Trail as an Historic Trail

       Whereas, the Colorado General Assembly, in Senate Joint 
     Memorial 93-3, sponsored by Senator Tilman M. Bishop and 
     Representative Tim Foster, have memorialized the Congress of 
     the United States to adopt legislation that dedicates the Old 
     Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish 
     Trail as an historic trail; and
       Whereas, between 1829 and 1848, a major trade route was 
     established between Santa Fe and Los Angeles which stretched 
     approximately 1,121 miles; and
       Whereas, the Old Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of 
     the Old Spanish Trail proceeded through much of Western 
     Colorado and followed part of the route travelled by the 
     Dominquez-Escalante Expedition of 1776; and
       Whereas, the Old Spanish Trail and its Northern Branch was 
     instrumental in the creation and establishment of many of 
     Western Colorado's towns and communities, including Alamosa, 
     Monte Vista, Saquache, Gunnison, Montrose, Olathe, Delta, 
     Whitewater, Grand Junction, Fruita, Loma, Pagosa Springs, 
     Durango, Mancos, Dolores, and Dove Creek; and
       Whereas, very little information is recorded about the 
     Northern Branch and much more can be learned about the Old 
     Spanish Trail: Therefore be it
       Resolved by the Grand Junction/Mesa County Riverfront 
     Commission, That the Grand Junction/Mesa County Riverfront 
     Commission hereby supports the designation of the Old Spanish 
     Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail as an 
     historic trail: Be it further
       Resolved, That United States Senators from Colorado, Hank 
     Brown and Ben Nighthorse Campbell, and United States 
     Representative, Scott McInnis, are hereby requested to 
     initiate appropriate legislation to dedicate the Old Spanish 
     Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail as an 
     historic trail; and be it further
       Resolved, That copies of this Resolution be sent to U.S. 
     Senators Hank Brown, Ben Nighthorse Campbell, and U.S. 
     Representative, Scott McInnis, and to all other members of 
     Colorado's congressional delegation, and to all members of 
     the Utah congressional delegation.
                                  ____


                           Resolution No. 31

       Whereas, the Colorado General Assembly, in their Joint 
     Resolution 93-3, sponsored by Senator Tilman M. Bishop and 
     Representative Tim Foster, have requested the Congress of the 
     United States to adopt legislation that dedicates the Old 
     Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish 
     Trail as an historic trail; and
       Whereas, between 1829 and 1848, a major trade route was 
     established between Santa Fe and Los Angeles which stretched 
     approximately 1,121 miles; and
       Whereas, the Old Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of 
     the Old Spanish Trail proceeded through much of Western 
     Colorado and followed part of the route travelled by the 
     Dominguez-Escalante Expedition of 1776; and
       Whereas, the Old Spanish Trail and its Northern Branch was 
     instrumental in the creation and establishment of many of 
     Western Colorado's towns and communities, including Alamosa, 
     Monte Vista, Saguache, Gunnison, Montrose, Olathe, Delta, 
     Whitewater, Grand Junction, Fruita, Loma, Pagosa Springs, 
     Durango, Mancos, Dolores, and Dove Creek; and
       Whereas, very little information is recordered about the 
     Northern Branch and much more can be learned about the Old 
     Spanish Trail: Therefore be it
       Resolved by the City of Grand Junction, Colorado, acting 
     through its duly elected City Council, That the City of Grand 
     Junction, hereby supports the designation of the Old Spanish 
     Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail as an 
     historic trail, and be it further
       Resolved, That United States Senators from Colorado, Hank 
     Brown and Ben Nighthorse Campbell, and United States 
     Representative, Scott McInnis, are hereby requested to 
     initiate appropriate legislation to dedicate the Old Spanish 
     Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail and an 
     historic trail.
                                  ____


                           Resolution 1993-17

       Whereas, the Colorado General Assembly, in their Joint 
     Resolution 93-3, sponsored by Senator Tilman M. Bishop and 
     Representative Tim Foster, have requested the Congress of the 
     United States to adopt legislation that dedicates the Old 
     Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish 
     Trail as an historic trail; and
       Whereas, between 1829 and 1848, a major trade route was 
     established between Sante Fe and Los Angeles which spanned 
     approximately 1,121 miles; and
       Whereas, the Old Spanish Trail and its Northern Branch was 
     instrumental in the creation and establishment of many of 
     Western Colorado's towns and community, including Alamosa, 
     Monte Vista, Saguache, Gunnison, Montrose, Olathe, Delta, 
     Whitewater, Grand Junction, Fruita, Loma, Pagosa Springs, 
     Durango, Mancos, Dolores, and Dove Creek; and
       Whereas, very little information is recorded about the 
     Northern Branch and much more can be learned about the Old 
     Spanish Trail: Therefore be it
       Resolved by the City of Fruita, Colorado, That the City 
     hereby supports the designation of the Old Spanish Trail and 
     the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail as an historic 
     trail, and be it further
       Resolved, That United States Senators from Colorado, Hank 
     Brown and Ben Nighthorse Campbell, and Representative Scott 
     McInnis, are hereby requested to initiate appropriate 
     legislation to dedicate the Old Spanish Trail and the 
     Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail as an historic trail 
     and that copies of this Resolution be sent to them and to all 
     other members of Colorado and Utah congressional delegation.
                                  ____


                         Resolution No. 1993-34

       Whereas, the Colorado General Assembly, in their Joint 
     Resolution 39-3, sponsored by Senator Tilman M. Bishop and 
     Representative Tim Foster, have requested the Congress of the 
     United States to adopt legislation that dedicates the Old 
     Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish 
     Trail as an historic trail; and
       Whereas, between 1829 and 1848, a major trade route was 
     established between Santa Fe and Los Angeles which stretched 
     approximately 1,121 miles; and
       Whereas, the Old Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of 
     the Old Spanish Trail proceeded through much of Western 
     Colorado and followed part of the route traveled by the 
     Dominquez-Escalante Expedition of 1776; and
       Whereas, the Old Spanish Trail and its Northern Branch were 
     instrumental in the creation and establishment of many of 
     Western Colorado's towns and communities; and
       Whereas, very little information is recorded about the 
     Northern Branch and much more can be learned about the Old 
     Spanish Trail: Now, therefore be it
       Resolved by the Board of County Commissioners of the County 
     of La Plata, Colorado as follows:
       1. That the County of La Plata hereby supports the 
     designation of the Old Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch 
     of the Old Spanish Trail as an historic trail.
       2. That the United States Senators from Colorado, Hank 
     Brown, and Ben Nighthorse Campbell, and the United States 
     Representative, Scott McInnis, are hereby requested to 
     initiate appropriate legislation to dedicate the Old Spanish 
     Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail as an 
     historic trail.
       3. That copies of this Resolution be sent to all members of 
     Colorado's congressional delegation.
                                  ____


                            Resolution 1-93

       Whereas, the Colorado General Assembly, in their Joint 
     Resolution 93-3, sponsored by Senator Tilman M. Bishop and 
     Representative Tim Foster, have requested the Congress of the 
     United States to adopt legislation that dedicates the Old 
     Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish 
     Trail as an historic trail; and
       Whereas, between 1829 and 1848, a major trade route was 
     established between Santa Fe and Los Angeles which stretched 
     approximately 1,121 miles; and
       Whereas, the Old Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of 
     the Old Spanish Trail proceeded through much of Western 
     Colorado and followed part of the route traveled by the 
     Dominguez-Escalante Expedition of 1776; and
       Whereas, the Old Spanish Trail and its Northern Branch was 
     instrumental in the creation and establishment of many of 
     Western Colorado's towns and communities, including Alamosa, 
     Monte Vista, Saguache, Gunnison, Montrose, Olathe, Delta, 
     Whitewater, Grand Junction, Fruita, Loma, Pagosa Springs, 
     Durango, Mancos, Dolores and Dove Creek; and
       Whereas, very little information is recorded about the 
     Northern Branch and much more can be learned about the Old 
     Spanish Trail: Therefore be it
       Resolved by the Town of Saguache, Colorado, acting through 
     its duly elected Town Council, that the Town of Saguache, 
     hereby supports the designation of the Old Spanish Trail and 
     the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail as an historic 
     trail; be it further
       Resolved, That United States Senators from Colorado, Hank 
     Brown and Ben Nighthorse Campbell, and United States 
     Representative, Scott McInnis, are hereby requested to 
     initiate appropriate legislation to dedicate the Old Spanish 
     Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail as an 
     historic trail; and be it further
       Resolved, That copies of this Resolution be sent to U.S. 
     Senators Hank Brown, Ben Nighthorse Campbell, and U.S. 
     Representative Scott McInnis, and to all other members of the 
     Utah congressional delegation.
                                  ____



                                          City of Monte Vista,

                                                     July 2, 1993.
     Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell,
     U.S. Senator,
     Denver, CO.
       My Dear Senator Campbell: Enclosed is a copy of the 
     Resolution adopted July 1, 1993, at the regular City Council 
     meeting of the City of Monte Vista. This Resolution declares 
     the support of the City of Monte Vista for the designation of 
     the Old Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old 
     Spanish Trail as an historic trail. Such designation would 
     greatly enhance tourism efforts in Western Colorado.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Janeen Martinez,
                                                       City Clerk.

                            Resolution 3-93

       Whereas, the Colorado General Assembly, in their Joint 
     Resolution 93-3, sponsored by Senator Tilman M. Bishop and 
     Representative Tim Foster, have requested the Congress of the 
     United States to adopt legislation that dedicates the Old 
     Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish 
     Trail as an historic trail; and
       Whereas, between 1829 and 1848, a major trade route was 
     established between Santa Fe and Los Angeles which stretched 
     approximately 1,121 miles; and
       Whereas, the Old Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of 
     the Old Spanish Trail proceeded through much of Western 
     Colorado and followed part of the route travelled by the 
     Dominguez-Escalante Expedition of 1776; and
       Whereas, the Old Spanish Trail and its Northern Branch was 
     instrumental in the creation and establishment of many of 
     Western Colorado's towns and communities, including Alamosa, 
     Monte Vista, Saguache, Gunnison, Montrose, Olathe, Delta, 
     Whitewater, Grand Junction, Fruita, Loma, Pagosa Springs, 
     Durango, Mancos, Dolores, and Dove Creek; and
       Whereas, very little information is recorded about the 
     Northern Branch and much more can be learned about the Old 
     Spanish Trail: Therefore be it
       Resolved by the City of Monte Vista, Colorado, acting 
     through its duly elected City Council, That the City of Monte 
     Vista hereby supports the designation of the Old Spanish 
     Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail as an 
     historic trail; be it further
       Resolved, That United States Senators from Colorado, Hank 
     Brown and Ben Nighthorse Campbell, and United States 
     Representative, Scott McInnis, are hereby requested to 
     initiate appropriate legislation to dedicate the Old Spanish 
     Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail as an 
     historic trail; and be it further
       Resolved, That copies of this Resolution be sent to United 
     States Senators Hank Brown and Ben Nighthorse Campbell, and 
     United States Representative Scott McInnis, and to all other 
     members of Colorado's congressional delegation, and to all 
     members of the Utah congressional delegation.
                                  ____


                               Resolution

       Whereas, the Colorado General Assembly, in Senate Joint 
     Memorial 93-3, sponsored by Senator Tilman M. Bishop and 
     Representative Tim Foster, have memorialized the Congress of 
     the United States to adopt legislation that dedicates the Old 
     Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish 
     Trail as an historic trail; and
       Whereas, between 1829 and 1848, a major trade route was 
     established between Santa Fe and Los Angeles which stretched 
     approximately 1,121 miles; and
       Whereas, the Old Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of 
     the Old Spanish Trail proceeded through much of Western 
     Colorado and followed part of the route travelled by the 
     Dominguez-Escalante Expedition of 1776; and
       Whereas, the Old Spanish Trail and its Northern Branch was 
     instrumental in the creation and establishment of many of 
     Western Colorado's towns and communities, including Alamosa, 
     Monte Vista, Saguache, Gunnison, Montrose, Olathe, Delta, 
     Whitewater, Grand Junction, Fruita, Loma, Pagosa Springs, 
     Durango, Mancos, Dolores, and Dove Creek; and
       Whereas, very little information is recorded about the 
     Northern Branch and much more can be learned about the Old 
     Spanish Trail. Therefore be it
       Resolved by the Colorado Division of Parks and Outdoor 
     Recreation, That the Colorado Division of Parks and Outdoor 
     Recreation hereby supports the designation of the Old Spanish 
     Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail as an 
     historic trail; be it further
       Resolved, That the United States Senators from Colorado, 
     Hank Brown and Ben Nighthorse Campbell, and United States 
     Representative Scott McInnis, are hereby requested to 
     initiate appropriate legislation to dedicate the Old Spanish 
     Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail as an 
     historic trail; and be it further
       Resolved, That copies of this Resolution be sent to U.S. 
     Senators Hank Brown, Ben Nighthorse Campbell, and U.S. 
     Representative Scott McInnis, and to all other members of 
     Colorado's congressional delegation, and to all members of 
     the Utah congressional delegation.

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, prior to the distinguished Senator from 
Colorado leaving the floor, I wish to compliment him on this 
outstanding piece of legislation.
  Last September, I had the opportunity to spend 1 day going over the 
immigrant trails to California. As my friend from Colorado knows, these 
trails, of course, went through Nevada. It was a wonderful experience 
to see the wagon ruts that crossed this land, some of the last people 
having gone across here well over 100 years ago. And so it was, to say 
the least, exciting to see where they had gone, where they had had to 
use ropes in certain parts of it to get the wagons down huge cliffs, 
places where they had to go out of their way to get water. It was a 
great experience for me, and I am doing what I can to help designate 
and preserve the California trails.
  The Spanish Trail, of course, has a much longer history. And I am 
very excited about the studies being conducted. Hopefully we can do 
something to preserve this.
  I introduced legislation a couple of years ago to designate the Pony 
Express Trail, and that passed. Now we are working to do a better job 
so that people will really know where to Pony Express Trail went. A 
good share of the Pony Express Trail now goes through inhabited areas. 
But most of the Pony Express Trail is still out of cities through 
Nevada. We have some stake in this.
  So I compliment and applaud the Senator from Colorado for an 
outstanding piece of legislation. The Senator from Colorado knows more 
than anyone in this Chamber the importance of tradition and heritage. 
This Spanish trail is part of our heritage, part of the heritage of the 
Senator from Colorado. We should support him and do everything we can 
in this area and other areas to preserve the heritage that we have in 
this great country.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield just for a 
moment, I might add that some of these trails are paved over. We cannot 
find them anymore, obviously. But there are still many places in the 
American West where you not only can trace the trail, but you can find 
inscriptions in the rocks that people left there when they were moving 
west in the covered wagons, where they would chisel something in the 
stone. In southwest Utah, there are is a place called Church Rock. In 
fact, there a number of inscriptions. In Wyoming, there is one I 
believe called Inscription Rock. They are huge landmarks, standing out 
above the plain of the American West.
  But if you could see those and read some of the inscriptions, and 
also some of the lonely grave sites of people who were on these wagon 
trains and who helped settle the American West, it is a form of history 
that we rarely read about in the books. It is certainly the kind of 
thing that should be included in our history books, for the youngsters 
to know the difficulty that the people had in those days.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, the truth is stranger than fiction. On the 
eastern side of Nevada where one of these trails is, these people would 
walk across miles and miles and miles of desert. The first water they 
came to, the early people did not know, but it was boiling. And they, 
of course, would come to this water literally dying of thirst. But they 
could not drink it because it was too hot. They would have to cool it. 
There were many examples of animals, because of thirst, falling in 
there and actually being boiled alive. There is a town in Nevada called 
Gerlach.
  So as I say, what these people went through--you could not write a 
book of fiction that would be any more exciting and interesting, and 
somewhat unbelievable about what these people went through.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. If the Senator would yield further, he is absolutely 
right about stranger than fiction. In the Senator's State, there is a 
place called the Humboldt Sink. Normally, when people would go west 
they would assume that when you would follow the banks of the river, 
sooner or later it would get somewhere where the river would get 
broader and finally come to perhaps a large river or a lake or the 
ocean. But in the case of the Humboldt Sink, it is the only river I 
ever heard of where the further you go the smaller it gets, going 
downstream until finally it disappears into the sand. And you cannot 
find it at all. I understand there is even some exploration going on 
now to try find where the heck the water went.
  But if you could imagine that free-flowing river going out and just 
disappearing. They say that when people followed that river and they 
got to the end of it, it suddenly disappeared into the sand, and some 
people actually went mad and committed suicide, or ran off from the 
wagon trains, or did a number of things because it was just an 
unbelievable experience for them.
  Mr. REID. The Senator from Colorado and I could tell stories here for 
a long time. Near Gerlach there is the largest area of a dry lake in 
the United States. It is so large that if someone parks their car, and 
you hit the curvature of the Earth you cannot see the car anymore. Many 
people have gotten lost because they simply could not find their way. 
For the early settlers, the only way they could find their way across, 
of course, were the ruts and the tracks of other people.
  It was in this area that the Donner Party decided to go a different 
route. That is history.
 Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I am a cosponsor of the bill 
introduced by Senator Campbell to study the designation of the Old 
Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail as a 
national historic trail.
  This trail, and its Northern Branch, were instrumental in the 
creation and establishment of many of Colorado's towns and communities 
in the Southwest. Established between 1839 and 1848 as a trade route 
between Santa Fe and Los Angeles, the Old Spanish Trail spanned nearly 
1,121 miles, entering Colorado south of Pagosa Springs, and passing 
through Arboles, Ignacio, Durango, Mancos, Dolores, and Dove Creek 
before heading west to Utah.
  The Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail was used by fur trappers 
and slave traders to access northwestern Colorado and northeastern 
Utah. It followed along the east side of the Rio Grande River from Taos 
to present-day Alamosa. From Alamosa, the Northern Branch headed west 
to Monte Vista, Saguache, Gunnison, Montrose, Delta, Grand Junction, 
Fruita, and Loma before entering Utah.
  Our national trails system consists of tens of thousands of miles 
nationwide, including 19 national scenic and historic trails. In 
addition to providing greater access to some of our country's most 
beautiful scenic vistas, trails also serve an educational role in 
heightening awareness of our cultural heritage. National historic 
trails, such as the Old Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of the 
Old Spanish Trail, enable people all across this country to hike, bike, 
or walk along routes which played an important part in America's 
history.
  One lesser known benefit of our trails system is the positive 
economic impact trails can have on surrounding communities. For 
example, each year an estimated $122 billion is spent on outdoor 
recreation. Recreation opportunities in our national forests generate 
nearly $3 billion and almost $190 million in jobs for nearby 
communities.
  Our national trails system also fosters an increased appreciation and 
responsibility for our public lands. Our trails give people a better 
perspective of our role in nature and how we can manage our public 
lands to allow for sustainable development while preserving our natural 
heritage.
                                 ______

      By Mr. ROTH:
  S. 2079. A bill to amend the Controlled substances Act to provide 
penalties for the distribution or manufacture of a controlled substance 
within 1,000 feet of a Head Start facility; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.


                       drug free head start zones

  Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that will 
amend our current drug control laws. The amendment I am proposing 
closes a loophole in our existing Federal laws that established drug 
free school zones. Originally part of the Omnibus Anti-Substance Abuse 
Act of 1988, which I cosponsored, the existing law creates ``Islands of 
Safety'' for children who are in, or on their way to schools. People 
who distribute illegal drugs within 1,000 feet of a school are subject 
to double the penalty under that law.
  This popular provision of the law has been strongly endorsed by 
police, educators, and community anti-drug coalitions across the 
Nation. Many states have also adopted similar State laws. The fact that 
currently there are 47 States with drug free school zone statutes is a 
good indication that local communities consider such laws to be of 
considerable value.
  Mr. President, the protection provided to children by the Federal 
statute is not limited just to schools. It also protects them in other 
places where they congregate such as public swimming pools, video 
arcades, and youth centers. However, the law fails to protect great 
numbers of our most vulnerable children, preschoolers who attend public 
and private developmental programs such as Head Start. Head Start 
programs frequently operate in facilities that do not qualify as drug 
free school zones under existing Federal and State laws.
  The escalating levels of violence resulting from drug feuds is 
spilling over into locations previously thought to be safe, and 
increasingly these wanton acts are killing or wounding children and 
other innocent bystanders. Just a few short weeks ago, the St. Paul 
Head Start Program in Chicago shut down early because of an outbreak of 
drug-related violence in the Robert Taylor Holmes project where it is 
housed, and attendance has dropped significantly since it reopened. One 
4-year-old at the center was overheard saying, ``Mommy, don't get 
shot.'' In addition, an immunization program at that same public 
housing project was discontinued because workers did not feel safe 
going on their rounds.
  We are not talking about a mere handful of kids. Head Start has 
become a major, bipartisan Federal initiative. Since its inception in 
1965, Head Start has become the largest publicly funded childhood 
development program in America. The annual appropriation is $3.3 
billion, there were 714,000 preschoolers enrolled in fiscal year 1993, 
and programs are operated in nearly 13,000 locations across the 
country. The program targets children from families whose annual 
earnings are beneath poverty levels and reserves slots for handicapped 
youths. The numbers are likely to increase in the future.
  The chart shows the types of facilities used by Head Start programs 
across the Nation. As of May 1993, more Head Start programs operated 
out of public schools, 29 percent, than any other type of facility. 
Public and private schools at all levels and youth centers qualify for 
status as drug free school zones. But, more than half of Head Start 
programs are operated out of churches or synagogues, 21 percent, 
government buildings, 24 percent, privately owned space, public 
housing, and private homes, 19 percent, with a much smaller number of 
centers, 7 percent using other facilities, including portable 
classrooms, community centers, tribal buildings, and families' homes. 
These facilities do not qualify as drug free school zones under current 
Federal or State laws.
  In my own State of Delaware, Head Start enrolls 1,455 children. I 
have personally visited a new and relatively large Head Start center in 
Wilmington, DE. This center consolidates many smaller programs in one 
location, and its site in the Riverside section was selected because of 
its close proximity to public housing projects where many children 
enrolled in Head Start live. In other parts of Wilmington, there are 
Head Start programs that operate from churches and public buildings. 
Some, like the one at Ninth and Franklin Streets, are located near drug 
trafficking areas, and they are not near enough to any school to fall 
into a drug free school zone. These are precisely the programs that my 
bill is designed to protect.
  Mr. President, we need to continue sending drug dealers a consistent 
message: If you do your evil business in places where you endanger our 
children, the punishment is going to be doubled. That message must be 
sent loud and clear across the Nation. The police do increase their 
presence in drug free school zones, the current statutes are being 
used, and defendants are getting stiffer penalties. In Delaware in 
1992, there were 72 convictions, and in 1993 there were 152 convictions 
for violations of Delaware's drug-free school zone law. Delaware 
Federal prosecutors use the Federal drug-free school zone statute as 
well: Over 14 percent of defendants in Federal-drug trafficking cases 
in Delaware were sentenced under the Federal drug-free school zone 
statute.

  There is also evidence that drug dealers on the street have taken 
notice of the signs proclaiming a drug-free school zone. In a case 
prosecuted in Yakima County, WA, a drug dealer told an undercover 
police officer, ``Wait * * * we'll have to move some down the road * * 
* we're too close to the school.'' They moved and completed their drug 
deal, but the drug dealer's sense of distance wasn't too good. He 
completed the drug sale only 650 feet from the school. That dealer got 
busted and he got extra time too.
  Mr. President, we had for some years been making considerable 
progress in reducing drug usage among our Nation's youth. In fact, 
adolescent drug usage decreased steadily from 1979 to 1992. However, in 
the past 2 years, there has been a dramatic upsurge in certain drug 
usage among children in the 8th, 10th, and 12th grades. More 
disturbing, increased usage has been accompanied by a softening of the 
antidrug attitudes that were so vigorously inculcated in our children 
during the 1980's. America is receiving a wakeup call, Mr. President--a 
warning that we must continue to apply pressure to every aspect of the 
drug problem.
  Establishing more drug-free school zones is not enough by itself to 
protect our youth from the violence and despair drug trafficking 
causes. But, to not extend the protection to programs like Head Start, 
when we know that these programs enroll children who frequently live in 
dangerous communities, and who are highly vulnerable, would be a grave 
mistake. I call upon my colleagues to help me close this loophole now.
  I ask unanimous consent that the 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. 2079

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

     SECTION 1. DISTRIBUTION OR MANUFACTURING IN OR NEAR HEAD 
                   START PROGRAMS.

       (a) Penalty.--The first sentence of section 419(a) of the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 860(a)) is amended by 
     striking ``or a playground'' and inserting ``or a playground 
     or Head Start facility''.
       (b) Second Offenders.--The first sentence of section 419(b) 
     of the Controlled Substances Act is amended by striking ``or 
     a playground'' and inserting ``or a playground or Head Start 
     facility''.
       (c) Definition.--Section 419(d) of the Controlled 
     Substances Act is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) The term `Head Start facility'--
       ``(A) means a facility that is used to carry out a Head 
     Start program under the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9831 et 
     seq.); and
       ``(B) includes--
       ``(i) a private residence;
       ``(ii) a church or synagogue;
       ``(iii) a facility owned by a fraternal organization;
       ``(iv) a government facility;
       ``(v) a facility owned by an Indian tribe, within the 
     meaning of section 4(e) of the Indian Self-Determination and 
     Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b(e)); and
       ``(vi) a facility owned by a recipient of assistance under 
     the Head Start Act,

     that is used to carry out such a program.
                                 ______

      By Mr. HATFIELD (for himself, Mr. Nunn, Mr. Kennedy, and Mr. 
        Harkin):
  S. 2080. A bill to designate a site for the relocation of the public 
facility of the National Museum of Health and Medicine, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.


      relocation of the national museum of health and medicine act

 Mr. HATFIELD. Mr. President, today I am joined by my 
colleagues, Senators Harkin, Kennedy, and Nunn in introducing 
legislation to highlight an existing national resource, which will 
serve to move us closer to the goal of healthy, better-informed 
America. The National Museum of Health and Medicine Site Designation 
Act identifies a site adjacent to the Hubert Humphrey Building, located 
just off of the National Mall, for relocation of the National Museum of 
Health and Medicine. This new location will bring to the National Mall 
an increased emphasis on America's impressive history in health and 
medicine, and an array of exhibits to strengthen the concept of 
responsibility and self-care as it relates to staying healthy in 
America.
  As the Congress moves to enact comprehensive health care reform, the 
awareness among the general public of the array of issues around health 
care delivery is growing daily. Yet, there remains a surprising lack of 
emphasis on the role every individual can play in insuring his own 
health and general welfare. In Healthy People 2000, a 1990 report 
outlining national health promotion and disease prevention objectives 
issued by the Public Health Service, the link between effective health 
education and healthier citizens is clearly drawn. The report 
establishes a number of ambitious goals for increased provision of 
basic health education in this country--basic education which a 
surprising number of students in our schools are going without. That we 
should expect youth growing up in our society today to embark upon 
healthy lives without the most basic, proper information about disease 
prevention and health is not only foolish, but dangerous. My 
legislation proposes to bring our national collection of health-related 
artifacts back to a central position on the National Mall so that they 
may be seen and appreciated by millions of Americans.
  While the site which this legislation designates is a new site for 
the museum, it is not in a neighborhood unfamiliar to the museum. From 
1888 to 1968, the National Museum of Health and Medicine, then known as 
the Army Medical Museum, was located on the National Mall along side 
the Smithsonian Castle in a building known as ``the Old Red Brick.'' 
During this time it was one of the most widely visited and popular 
museums in the Nation's Capital and in the country.
  It also served an important educational purpose. During the years it 
was on The Mall, I visited the museum many times with my children and 
it made a strong impression. My daughter went on to nursing school, 
worked for 10 years as an emergency room nurse and then returned to 
medical school. While many things influenced that decision, the museum 
provided her with her earliest exposure to the wonders of the human 
body and to medical science.
  Then it was torn down. The museum was demolished in 1968 to make way 
for the Hirshhorn Museum of Modern Art. Its national historic landmark 
status was transferred to its collections, and they were moved to the 
Walter Reed Army Medical Center. This out of the way location 
drastically reduced the number of visitors from nearly 1 million each 
year to as few as 25,000.
  After more than a decade of decline, actions to ensure the museum's 
viability were taken in 1986 with the appointment of a new director who 
created a blue-ribbon panel, made up of representatives from the public 
and private sector, and charged them with helping to chart a course for 
the future. The panel's findings were clear: the Nation needed a 
revitalized and relocated National Museum of Health and Medicine. 
Shortly thereafter, a private organization, the National Museum of 
Health and Medicine Foundation, was formed to help implement the 
panel's goals. The driving force behind the Foundation and its efforts 
to return the museum to The Mall has been its Chairman, the esteemed 
former Surgeon General of the United States, Dr. C. Everett Koop. It 
has been my pleasure to work closely with Dr. Koop in the effort to 
develop support for the museum's return to The Mall.
  While my legislation sets aside a site for construction of a new 
public facility for the museum, it does not authorize or fund 
construction, nor does it usurp the authority of either the National 
Capital Planning Commission or the Commission of Fine Arts in deciding 
what type of structure will be built. Those issues will be addressed in 
the future. This bill simply asserts congress' belief that the 
promotion of health education is of vital importance to our national 
security and that a facility dedicated to that purpose belongs on the 
National Mall.
  When this museum returns to The Mall, Mr. President, it will be as a 
working laboratory for creating and implementing effective 
communication strategies of reaching people with important health 
information. The programs and curriculum developed for this purpose 
will be accessible to far more than the 25 million visitors to The Mall 
each year. When the museum is back on The Mall it will continue to 
serve as the centerpiece of an national outreach effort, bringing 
together science museums and schools in every State, to share health-
related exhibits and programs providing innovative, effective health 
education across the country.
  There is one additional reason why this museum should be relocated 
along side the Hubert Humphrey Building. Hubert Humphrey the public 
servant was also Hubert Humphrey the health professional. As a 
pharmacist, he knew first hand the value of health education and 
information and its role in keeping people healthy. And he understood 
that the Federal Government has a role to play in providing health 
information to the American people, a mission which today is at the 
heart of the Department of Health and Human Services housed in the 
building which bears his name.
  In light of their shared missions, the museum hopes to be more than 
just a neighbor to the Department of Health and Human Services. There 
is a synergy between the two institutions which should allow for 
productive and meaningful interaction. I am pleased to report that Dr. 
Koop has met with Secretary Shalala about the project and she is 
enthusiastic about a revitalized and relocated National Museum of 
Health and Medicine. The museum has already received funds through the 
Public Health Service which have been used for planning for the new 
facility and programs.
  The museum's longest relationship with a Federal agency has, of 
course, been with the Department of Defense, which has supported the 
facility throughout its history and strongly does so today through the 
Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. Indeed, the operational support 
DOD has provided the museum since the 1800's has been what has kept it 
alive and serving the public. The museum looks forward to continued and 
enhanced relations with the Department of Defense. These two agencies 
together with the Department of Veterans Affairs have worked together 
since 1926 to provide direction and support to the museum.
  Despite the long history of Federal support and interest in this 
facility, it is clearly a priority, in this time of fiscal austerity, 
that this project be supported by the private sector as well. 
Currently, the National Museum of Health and Medicine Foundation is 
leading a major campaign to develop private support for exhibits and 
programs in the new facility. They have secured a pledge of $1 million 
from the Kellogg Co. for a state of the art exhibit and related 
educational programs on diet and nutrition. More private resources for 
both exhibits and construction continue to be actively sought by Dr. 
Koop and the museum's Foundation.
  I am sorry that American youth today do not now have the opportunity 
that my daughter did when she visited the National Mall as a youngster. 
While there is much to see and learn--history, art, air and space--
there is no institution primarily dedicated to explaining the wonders 
of the human body or to inspire youngsters to stay healthy or even take 
up careers in the health care profession. The Mall is a living, 
breathing testament to what we as Americans deem important. This museum 
and the educational experience it will provide should be a part of our 
national priorities.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and 
additional material be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2080

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

     SECTION 1. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) the United States faces critical health care problems, 
     solutions for which will arise from an attentive and educated 
     citizenry;
       (2) there is a great need for an increased emphasis to be 
     placed on public health education and the development of 
     scientific literacy concerning health care issues;
       (3) when the National Museum of Health and Medicine, 
     formerly the Army Medical Museum, was located on the Mall in 
     Washington, District of Columbia, from 1888 to 1968, it was 
     one of the most popular and well-visited museums in the 
     Nation's Capital;
       (4) with the removal of the museum from the Mall to the 
     grounds of the Walter Reed Army Medical Center in 1968, there 
     was no longer a national education facility devoted to this 
     purpose located within the District of Columbia within easy 
     access to the up to 25,000,000 individuals who visit the Mall 
     each year; and
       (5) the American taxpayer, through the United States 
     Government, pays approximately 30 percent of the costs of all 
     health care services, services which could be reduced with 
     the advent of better educated, informed Americans.
       (b) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this Act to designate a 
     site for the relocation of the public facility of the 
     National Museum of Health and Medicine so that it may serve 
     as a central resource of instruction about and involvement in 
     the critical health issues which confront all American 
     citizens.

     SEC. 2. SITE OF FACILITY.

       The public facility of the National Museum of Health and 
     Medicine shall be located on the following adjacent areas of 
     land owned by the Federal Government in the District of 
     Columbia:
       (1) The east plaza of the Hubert Humphrey Building, 
     presently occupied by the Department of Health and Human 
     Services.
       (2) The entire portion of 2nd Street, S.W., that is located 
     between C and Washington Streets, S.W.
       (3) A triangular park, known as Square N-580, that lie 
     immediately to the east of 2nd Street, S.W.

     SEC. 3. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION AUTHORIZATION.

       In accordance with procedures of the District of Columbia, 
     the General Services Administration is authorized to apply 
     for the closing and transfer of jurisdiction over the entire 
     portion of 2nd Street, S.W., the District of Columbia located 
     between C and Washington Streets, S.W., and the transfer of 
     jurisdiction of Square N-580, from the District of Columbia 
     to the General Services Administration for the purpose of 
     locating the National Museum of Health and Medicine.

     SEC. 4. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.

       Nothing in this Act shall be construed as limiting the 
     authority or responsibilities of the National Capital 
     Planning Commission or the Commission of Fine Arts.

     SEC. 5. DEFINITION.

       As used in this Act, the term ``the Mall'' means--
       (1) the land designated as ``Union Square'', District of 
     Columbia Reservation 6A;
       (2) the land designated as the ``Mall'', District of 
     Columbia Reservations 3, 4, 5, and 6;
       (3) the land designated as the ``Monument Grounds'', 
     District of Columbia Reservation 2; and
       (4) the land designated as ``West Potomac Park'', District 
     of Columbia Reservations 3, 3, and 2.
                                  ____

                                     National Museum of Health and


                                          Medicine Foundation,

                                      Washington, DC, May 3, 1994.
     Hon. Mark Hatfield,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Hatfield: As United States Surgeon General, I 
     had the opportunity to visit much of this country. My travels 
     have allowed me great insight into the lives of everyday 
     Americans and the challenges they face in staying healthy. 
     When I left the Federal government and reentered private 
     life, I had become convinced that we need to make a stronger 
     commitment to innovative, effective health education in this 
     country. Millions of people become needlessly ill and saddled 
     with unnecessary medical problems simply due to a lack of 
     understanding about the most basic health information.
       Where do we begin in reestablishing that commitment? A good 
     start would be the creation of a central, national resource 
     for health education, accessible to all Americans. We have 
     some of the finest educational institutions in the world here 
     in the nation's capital. We have the most impressive museums 
     imaginable on the national Mall, each of which has dedicated, 
     important missions. They promote exposure to and appreciation 
     of fine art, provide a meaningful interpretation of America's 
     history and its place in the world, and illustrate the 
     brilliant wonders of science and technology. These 
     institutions are valuable pieces of our national character 
     and they deserve their places on the Mall. What should be 
     there as well is the National Museum of Health and Medicine.
       As you know, the National Museum of Health and Medicine was 
     on the Mall, located where the Hirshhorn Museum of Modern Art 
     now stands, for 80 years before its building was torn down 
     and its collections moved to the Armed Forces Institute of 
     Pathology at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. Most of the 25 
     million Americans who visit the Mall each year have no idea 
     what the National Museum of Health and Medicine was or is, 
     much less where it is located. That is a shame, because it is 
     these generations we most need to reach with effective health 
     messages.
       We'll be reaching far more than those 25 million mall 
     visitors each year, of course, once the Museum is up and 
     running. Its outreach programs will involve science museums 
     and schools in every state and it will be a credible resource 
     for the development of health education programs and 
     curriculum for those institutions. Further, it will establish 
     in no uncertain terms, there at the foot of the United States 
     Capitol, that this is a nation which places a premium on the 
     education and health of its people.
       And finally, it will inspire young people to consider 
     careers in the healthcare professions. I know of countless 
     stories of youngsters who visited the Museum when it was on 
     the Mall and who count that experience as pivotal in their 
     beginning fascination with the human body and their 
     subsequent decisions to become nurses or doctors or physical 
     therapists. Most kids today know only about the health and 
     medical professions in the context of an occasional visit to 
     the doctor or dentist or through confusing talk they hear 
     from their parents about healthcare reform. And some, sadly 
     enough, know nothing at all.
       We can, and must, reach more of these youth and more of 
     America. The revitalization and relocation of the National 
     Museum of Health and Medicine is one means of doing that. 
     Your agreement to introduce this legislation, per the 
     Foundation's request, is a vital first step in creating the 
     public-private partnership which will bring the Museum back 
     to the Mall. And we both agree that the legislation will have 
     no impact on the actions or responsibilities of the National 
     Capital Planning Commission or the Commission of Fine Arts, 
     each of which will retain their important roles in 
     decisionmaking about design and construction of the facility.
       Thank you for your hard work on this important project. I 
     appreciate your efforts and salute your commitment to the 
     health and education of the American people.
           Sincerely,

                                     C. Everett Koop, M.D.

                                 ______

      By Mr. GREGG:
  S. 2081. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to treat 
recycling facilities as exempt facilities under the tax-exempt bond 
rules, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.


         the environmental infrastructure financing act of 1994

 Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce 
legislation called the Environmental Infrastructure Financing Act of 
1994. The bill will amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to treat 
recycling facilities as exempt under the tax-exempt bond rules.
  A continuing problem to the development of recycling efforts is the 
need for markets for the materials that are being collected. Processes 
exist for remanufacturing the recycled materials into new products, but 
they frequently require extensive capital investment.
  An approach that is often attempted is the use of the federal tax 
exempt bond program, which does have a subcategory for solid waste 
projects. Solid waste recycling facilities should constitute a 
legitimate application of these funds, however, certain sections of the 
Tax Code define solid waste as being ``material without value.'' With 
recycled materials now being traded as commodities, they do in fact 
have value, making the facilities which might process them ineligible 
for tax exempt financing. This definitional problem impedes the 
construction of recycling facilities, and hurts the development of 
recycling materials markets.
  My bill will allow recycling facilities to obtain tax exempt 
financing. In doing so, the Environmental Infrastructure Financing Act 
of 1994 will foster the further development of the recycling industry 
and promote increased recycling.
                                 ______

      By Mr. KENNEDY:
  S. 2084. A bill to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.


                    the pesticide reform act of 1994

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, today I am introducing the 
administration's Pesticide Reform Act of 1994. The unprecedented 
cooperation between the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department 
of Agriculture, and the Food and Drug Administration provides a unique 
opportunity for long overdue pesticide reform. I commend the commitment 
of the Clinton administration to deal effectively with this vital 
public health issue.
  The current Federal regulatory regime is plagued by loopholes that 
permit dangerous chemicals to remain on the market because of vague 
cost-benefit analyses and the absence of complete information about 
their health effects. We are gambling with public health on a broad 
range of potentially cancer-causing and toxic pesticides.
  Since 1958, the provision of federal law known as the Delaney clause 
has prohibited the use of pesticides that have been shown to induce 
cancer in animals or humans. But this so-called zero tolerance standard 
is more loophole than law. In some cases, chemicals in use prior the 
1958 Act are permitted to remain on the market, even though current 
scientific knowledge would require their prohibition. In other cases, 
more sophisticated scientific techniques developed in the past 35 years 
are able to detect minute traces of cancer-causing residues that could 
not have been detected when the Delaney clause was enacted in 1958.
  At the core of this legislation is the fundamental concept that the 
legal limits of pesticides in food should fully protect human health. 
Most Americans probably assume that this is the law today. But it is 
not.
  Central to the goal of reform is the creation of a single regulatory 
standard for all foods. Currently, pesticide residues in fresh fruits 
and vegetables are not regulated as strictly as in processed foods. The 
legislation remedies this inconsistency by specifying that no pesticide 
residues may exceed levels that pose more than a negligible risk of 
adverse effects on human health.
  The principle that food must be safe is especially important for 
children. I commend the administration for incorporating a number of 
the safeguards for children recommended by the landmark 1993 study of 
the National Academy of Sciences on pesticides and children. We know 
that infants and children are uniquely vulnerable and 
disproportionately at risk. But current policies do not adequately 
address the front-end loading of risk that pesticides pose for 
children.
  Because of their food consumption patterns and low bodyweight, 
children can receive a disproportionate share of their lifetime cancer 
risk from a pesticide at an early age. The bill establishes a mechanism 
to assure that infants and children are not exposed to more than a 
negligible risk from pesticides. The legislation also requires the EPA 
to collect data on the unique risks that neurotoxins pose to children's 
physical and intellectual development. We cannot consider the food 
supply to be truly safe unless we are confident that it is safe for 
infants and children. This legislation takes a major step toward that 
goal.
  The President is also to be commended for making clear, for the first 
time, that the burden of proof that a pesticide is safe rests squarely 
on those seeking to use pesticides, not the public. Under this 
legislation, if manufacturers do not have the data to prove that a 
pesticide is safe, it will not be approved.
  Finally, this legislation proposes to reduce the overall use of 
pesticides by offering incentives for the development of less risky 
chemicals. It expedites registration for the safer pesticides that are 
being prepared by sophisticated research techniques in biotechnology.
  The Clinton administration deserves credit for its commitment to deal 
with these complex and difficult issues, to deal with them 
comprehensively, and to do so with one voice. Congressman Waxman and I 
have introduced separate pesticide reform legislation earlier in this 
Congress. I look forward to working with the administration and my 
Senate and House colleagues to enact the reforms so urgently needed to 
protect the public health, especially the health of children.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and 
a summary be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2084

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; REFERENCE; TABLE OF CONTENTS

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Pesticide 
     Reform Act of 1994''.
       (b) Reference.--Whenever in this Act an amendment or repeal 
     is expressed in terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a 
     section or other provision, the reference shall be considered 
     to be made to a section or other provision of the Federal 
     Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.).
       (c) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; reference; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Definitions.
Sec. 3. Tolerances and exemptions for pesticide chemical residues.
``Sec. 408. Tolerances and exemptions for pesticide chemical residues.
``(a) Requirement for tolerance or exemption.
``(b) Tolerances.
``(c) Exemptions.
``(d) Petitions and action on the initiative of the Administrator.
``(e) Temporary tolerance or exemption.
``(f) Confidentiality of data.
``(g) Existing pesticide chemical residues.
``(h) Food and Drug Administration monitoring of pesticide chemical 
              residues.
``(i) Fees.
``(j) Judicial review.
Sec. 4. Embargo authority.
Sec. 5. Civil Money Penalties.
Sec. 6. Recall.
Sec. 7. Evaluation of existing pesticide chemical residue tolerances 
              and exemptions.
Sec. 8. Fees.
Sec. 9. General definitions.

      SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       (a) Pesticide.--
       (1) Pesticide chemical.--Section 201(q) (21 U.S.C. 321(q) 
     is amended to read as follows: ``(q)(1) The term `pesticide 
     chemical' means substance that is a pesticide, as defined in 
     section 2(u) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 
     Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136(u)), including each active 
     ingredient and inert ingredient, as defined in paragraphs (a) 
     and (m) of section 2 of such Act, of the pesticide.
       ``(2) The term `pesticide chemical residue' means on 
     residue in or on food of--
       ``(A) any pesticide chemical or a component of such 
     chemical; or
       ``(B) any other substance that is present in or on the 
     commodity or food as a result of the metabolism or other 
     degradation of a pesticide chemical,
       (2) Person.--Section 201(s) (21 U.S.C. 321(s)) is amended--
       (A) by striking paragraphs (1) and (2) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(1) pesticide chemical residue; or''; and
       ``(B) by redesignating paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) as 
     paragraphs (2), (3), and (4), respectively.
       (3) Raw agricultural commodity.--Paragraph (r) of section 
     201 (21 U.S.C. 321) is repealed
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 201 (21 U.S.C. 321) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:
       ``(gg) The term `Administrator' means the Administrator of 
     the Environmental Protection Agency.''.
       (2) Section 402(a)(2) (21 U.S.C. 342(a)(2)) is amended--
       (A) in clause (A)(1), to read as follows:
       ``(i) a pesticide chemical residue'';
       (B) in clause (b), to read as follows: ``(B) if it bears or 
     contains a pesticide chemical residue that is unsafe 
     within the meaning of section 408 (a);''; and
       (C) in clause (C), by striking ``: Provided, That where a 
     pesticide chemical'' through ``section 512''.
       (3) Section 403(1) (21 U.S.C. 343(1)) is amended by 
     striking ``raw agricultural commodity'' and ``commodity'' 
     each time it occurs and inserting ``food''.

     SEC. 3. TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEMICAL 
                   RESIDUES.

       Section 408 (21 U.S.C. 346a) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 408. TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEMICAL 
                   RESIDUES.

       ``(a) Requirement For Tolerance or Fxemption.--
       ``(1) General rule.--Any pesticide chemical residue shall 
     be deemed unsafe for the purpose of section 402(a)(2)(B) 
     unless--
       ``(A) a tolerance for such residue is in effect under this 
     section and such residue conforms with such tolerance; or
       ``(B) an exemption for such residue is in effect under this 
     section and such residue conforms with such exemption.
       ``(2) Effect of a tolerance or exemption.--While a 
     tolerance or exemption from the requirement for a tolerance 
     is in effect under this section for a pesticide chemical 
     residue with respect to any food, such food shall not by 
     reason of bearing or containing any amount of such residue be 
     considered to be adulterated within the meaning of section 
     402(a)(1).
       ``(3) Derived food.--A tolerance or exemption for a 
     pesticide chemical residue established for a food shall apply 
     to all foods derived from such food unless a tolerance 
     specifies otherwise.
       ``(b) Tolerances.--
       ``(1) Authority.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Administrator may promulgate 
     regulations establishing, modifying, or revoking a tolerance 
     for a pesticide chemical residue--
       ``(i) in response to a petition filed under subsection 
     (d)(1); or
       ``(ii) on the initiative of the Administrator under 
     subsection (d)(4).
       ``(B) Expiration date.--A regulation under this paragraph 
     shall contain an expiration date for a tolerance for a 
     pesticide chemical established by the regulation. Such date 
     shall be not later than--
       ``(i) the expiration date (if any) for such pesticide 
     chemical established by the Administrator under section 3 of 
     the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, or
       ``(ii) 18 years after the date such tolerance is 
     established, whichever occurs first.
       ``(C) Separate tolerances.--Under subparagraph (A), the 
     Administrator may establish a separate tolerance, which more 
     closely reflects actual exposure or which is necessary for 
     more efficient enforcement, and which is based on reliable 
     data and information relating to the appropriate sampling, 
     for a pesticide chemical residue with respect to food at any 
     point in the chain of production or marketing, including--
       ``(i) at the time the food is harvested,
       ``(ii) at the time the food is purchased at retail, and
       ``(iii) after the food is processed.
       ``(2) Standard.--
       ``(A) Assurance of safety.--
       ``(i) General rule.--A tolerance for a pesticide chemical 
     residue in or on food shall not be established or left in 
     effect unless the residue permitted under the tolerance is 
     safe.
       ``(ii) Cancer.--For pesticides found to induce cancer when 
     ingested by humans or animals or determined on the basis of 
     reliable scientific evidence to pose a potential dietary risk 
     of cancer in humans, a tolerance shall not be established or 
     left in effect unless the Administrator finds on the basis of 
     conservative methods of risk assessment that the risk is 
     negligible for all anticipated consumer exposures to such 
     residue, including all other anticipated consumer exposures 
     for which there is reliable information, and taking into 
     account information concerning the special vulnerabilities of 
     children and sensitive subpopulations.
       ``(iii) Risk Other than Cancer.--For pesticide chemical 
     residues that may pose a potential dietary risk of adverse 
     health effects other than cancer in humans, a tolerance shall 
     provide an ample margin of safety.
       ``(iv) Definitions.--As used in this section:
       ``(I) Safe.--The term `safe' means with respect to a 
     tolerance for a pesticide chemical residue that there is a 
     reasonable certainty that no harm will result from all 
     anticipated consumer exposures to such residue, including all 
     anticipated dietary exposures and all other anticipated 
     exposures for which there is reliable information, and taking 
     into account information concerning the special 
     vulnerabilities of children and sensitive subpopulations.
       ``(II) Margin of safety.--A margin of safety is considered 
     ample if the Administrator determines there is a reasonable 
     certainty of no harm to significant subpopulations from 
     exposure to the pesticide chemical reside in the diet and 
     from exposure to the pesticide chemical by other pathways. In 
     making this determination, the Administrator shall give due 
     consideration to the exposure level which is determined not 
     to cause adverse effects in animal studies or in observations 
     of exposed humans and to the application of appropriate 
     factors. These factors may include factors to account for 
     differences in sensitivity between and within species, 
     adequacy of the study or studies, and completeness of the 
     available data to assess potential for adverse effects.
       ``(III) Risk assessment procedures.--The Administrator 
     shall periodically review the risk assessment procedures used 
     to make safety determinations under this paragraph, including 
     methodologies with respect to estimating exposure to 
     pesticide chemicals and evaluating risks to significant 
     subpopulations. The Administrator periodically shall revise 
     the risk assessment procedures accordingly to incorporate 
     advances in science and risk assessment. The Administrator 
     may determine that a method of risk assessment different from 
     the method required by subclause (II) is appropriate if the 
     Administrator finds that the alternative risk assessment 
     method will fully protect the public health.
       ``(B) Factors.--In determining whether to establish, 
     modify, or revoke a tolerance under subparagraph (A) for a 
     pesticide chemical residue on a food, the Administrator--
       ``(i) except as provided in clause (ii), shall in 
     estimating the anticipated dietary exposure to such residue 
     assume that all food for which the pesticide chemical residue 
     has or will have a tolerance bears or contains residues of 
     the pesticide chemical equal to the levels established by 
     their respective tolerances and where separate tolerances for 
     a pesticide chemical residue in the same food are established 
     for different points in the chain of production or marketing 
     pursuant to subsection (b)(1)(C), the Administrator shall 
     assume that the food bears or contains residues of the 
     pesticide chemical equal to the level established by the 
     tolerance set at the point closest to the time the food is 
     purchased at retail;
       ``(ii) may use data regarding the percent of a crop treated 
     by a pesticide chemical to estimate dietary exposure to such 
     residue only if the Administor--
       ``(I) finds that the data are reliable and provide a valid 
     basis to show what percentage of the food derived from such 
     crop is likely to contain such pesticide chemical residue;
       ``(II) finds that the exposure estimate does not understate 
     exposure for any significant subpopulation group;
       ``(III) if data are available on pesticide use and 
     consumption of food in a particular area, finds that the 
     population in such area is not dietarily exposed to residues 
     above those estimated by the Administrator; and
       ``(IV) provides for the periodic reevaluation of the 
     estimate of anticipated dietary exposure;
       ``(iii) shall fully account for available information on 
     the probable consumption of foods for which there is or will 
     be a tolerance for residues of the pesticide chemical, 
     including, to the extent possible, consumption by significant 
     subpopulations with differing food consumption patterns, 
     including infants, children, and other subpopulations with 
     disproportionately high consumption of particular foods;
       ``(iv) shall fully account for available information on the 
     cumulative effect of such residue and any chemically or 
     pharmacologically related substances in the human diet, and 
     other ways in which the consumer may be exposed to such 
     residue and substances, including, to the extent 
     representative data permit, through drinking water;
       ``(v) shall fully account for valid scientific information 
     regarding any estrogenic or other hormonal effects associated 
     with the residue; and
       ``(vi) shall apply safety factors which after consultation 
     with experts qualified by scientific training and experience 
     to evaluate the safety of pesticide chemical residues 
     determine are appropriate for use in connection with animal 
     experimentation or other relevant data.
       ``(C) Exposure of infants and children.--In determining 
     whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance for a 
     pesticide chemical residue, the Administrator, in addition to 
     the requirements of subparagraph (B)--
       ``(i) shall assess the risk of the pesticide chemical 
     residue based on the following:
       ``(I) Available information about consumption patterns 
     among infants and children that are likely to result in 
     disproportionately high consumption of foods containing or 
     bearing such residue among infants and children in comparison 
     to the general population.
       ``(II) Available information concerning the special 
     susceptibility of infants and children to the pesticide 
     chemical residues, including neurological differences between 
     infants and children and adults, and effects of in utero 
     exposure to pesticide chemicals.
       ``(III) Available information concerning the cumulative 
     effects on infants and children of such residues and other 
     substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity;
       ``(ii) shall--
       ``(I) ensure that there is an ample margin of safety for 
     infants and children and impose other requirements necessary 
     to ensure that exposure to the pesticide chemical residues 
     will be safe; and
       ``(II) publish a specific determination regarding the 
     safety of the pesticide chemical residue for infants and 
     children.

     The Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Secretary 
     of Agriculture, in consultation with the Administrator, shall 
     conduct surveys to document dietary exposure to pesticides 
     among infants and children. For the purpose of subclause (I), 
     an additional 10-fold margin of safety for the pesticide 
     chemical residue and other sources of exposure shall be 
     applied for children and infants to take into account 
     potential pre- and postnatal toxicity and completeness of the 
     data with respect to exposure to infants and children. 
     Notwithstanding this requirement for an additional factor, 
     the Administrator may determine that a margin of safety for a 
     pesticide chemical residue is considered ample for children 
     and infants if, on the basis of reliable data, such margin 
     will fully protect the public health.
       ``(D) Unavoidable persistence.--If a tolerance or an 
     exemption from the requirement for a tolerance for a 
     pesticide chemical residue is revoked and the Administrator 
     finds the pesticide chemical residue will unavoidably persist 
     in the environment and be found in food, the Administrator 
     shall establish a new tolerance under subsection (d)(4) for 
     the pesticide chemical residue. The level permitted by the 
     tolerance shall not be greater than and may be less than 
     the lowest level that permits only such unavoidable levels 
     to remain in food. The Administrator shall evaluate any 
     such tolerance at least every 5 years to determine whether 
     modification of such tolerance is necessary so that the 
     tolerance provides only for no greater than the level of 
     the pesticide chemical residue that is unavoidable.
       ``(E) Practical Methods of Analysis.--
       ``(i) General rule.--Except as provided in clause (ii), a 
     tolerance for a pesticide chemical residue shall not be 
     established or left in effect unless the Administrator 
     determines, after consultation with the Secretary, that--
       ``(I) there is a multi-residue method for detecting and 
     measuring the levels of such pesticide chemical residue in or 
     on a food that will measure the residue at the level 
     established by the tolerance; and
       ``(II) such method can be performed by the Secretary on a 
     routine basis as part of surveillance and compliance sampling 
     of foods for pesticide chemical residues with the personnel, 
     equipment, and other resources available to the Secretary.
       ``(ii) Exception.--If the Administrator is not able to make 
     the determination described in clause (i), the Administrator 
     shall identify, after consultation with the Secretary, the 
     method for detecting and measuring levels of such pesticide 
     chemical residue in or on a food that will measure the 
     residue at the level established by the tolerance. The 
     Administrator shall, every 2 years after the date of the 
     determination under this clause, reevaluate the 
     determination.
       ``(iii) Pesticide reference standard.--
       ``(I) Provision to the administrator.--A registrant of a 
     pesticide chemical for which a tolerance has been established 
     shall provide the Administrator, upon request, with an 
     appropriate pesticide reference standard for such pesticide 
     chemical, including standards for all residues of 
     toxicological significance. Each pesticide reference standard 
     provided to the Administrator shall be certified by a 
     competent laboratory for both identity and purity.
       ``(II) Administrator actions.--The Administrator shall 
     maintain a repository of pesticide reference standards, audit 
     the certification of such standards, and make such standards 
     available to any private, public, domestic, or foreign 
     laboratory requesting the standard. The Administrator may 
     also request pesticide reference standards for pesticide 
     chemical manufactured or used in foreign countries. To the 
     extent that the Administrator obtains standards for pesticide 
     chemicals manufactured or used in foreign countries, the 
     Administrator shall certify such standards for identity and 
     purity and make them available to any private, public, 
     domestic, or foreign laboratory requesting such standard.
       ``(III) Definition.--For purposes of this clause, the term 
     `pesticide reference standard' means a pesticide chemical of 
     known identify, purity, and composition that is required for 
     comparison purposes in laboratory analysis to measure the 
     amount and confirm the identity of a pesticide chemical 
     residue in food.
       ``(3) Consistent application.--The Administrator shall 
     issue guidelines providing for the consistent application of 
     the requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2). The lack of 
     guidelines does not affect the authority of the Administrator 
     to implement such paragraphs.
       ``(4) Reevaluation period.--Each tolerance for a pesticide 
     chemical residue established under this subsection shall 
     prescribe the period (at least every 5 years) for 
     reevaluating the estimate of the amount of dietary exposure 
     to such residue made under paragraph (2)(B)(ii).
       ``(5) Tolerances in effect on date of enactment.--For 
     pesticide chemical residue tolerances in effect on the date 
     of enactment of the Pesticide Reform Act of 1994 this 
     subsection shall apply as prescribed by section 7 of such 
     Act.
       ``(c) Exemptions.--
       ``(1) Authority.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Administrator may promulgate 
     regulations establishing or revoking an exemption from the 
     requirement for a tolerance for a pesticide chemical 
     residue--
       ``(i) in response to a petition filed under subsection 
     (d)(1); or
       ``(ii) on the initiative of the Administrator under 
     subsection (d)(4).
       ``(B) Expiration date.--Such a regulation may provide for 
     an expiration date for the exemption.
       ``(2) Standard.--
       ``(A) Authority and Risk Standard.--
       ``(i) Establishment.--An exemption may be established for a 
     pesticide chemical residue if such residue is not a human or 
     animal carcinogen and presents no risk to human health at any 
     level that is reasonably likely to occur under extreme 
     conditions of use, including the health of the subpopulations 
     identified in subsection (b)(2)(B)(iii), from dietary 
     exposure to such residue.
       ``(ii) Revocation.--An exemption shall be revoked unless 
     the residue is not a human or an animal carcinogen and 
     otherwise presents no risk to human health at any level that 
     is reasonably likely to occur under extreme conditions of 
     use, including the health of subpopulations identified in 
     subsection (b)(2)(B)(iii), from dietary exposure to such 
     residue.
       ``(B) Exposure.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), in 
     determining dietary exposure to a pesticide chemical residue, 
     the Administrator shall--
       ``(i) use only reliable information regarding the dietary 
     exposure resulting from the consumption of the food for which 
     the exemption for such residue is proposed or is in effect;
       ``(ii) fully account for all other exemptions in effect for 
     such residue;
       ``(iii) fully account for all other sources of dietary 
     exposure to the pesticide chemical and to chemically or 
     pharmacologically related chemicals if there is adequate 
     information about such sources of exposure; and
       ``(iv) consider the exposure to be the level of exposure 
     that would occur if human exposure to the pesticide chemical 
     residue at the level that is reasonably likely to occur under 
     extreme conditions of use occurs for a period equal to a 
     lifetime.
       ``(3) Consistent application.--The Administrator shall 
     issue guidelines providing for the consistent application of 
     the requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2). The lack of 
     guidelines does not affect the authority of the Administrator 
     to implement such paragraphs.
       ``(4) Exemptions in effect on date of enactment.--For 
     pesticide chemical residue exemptions in effect on the date 
     of enactment of the Pesticide Reform Act of 1994 this 
     subsection shall apply as prescribed by section 7 of such 
     Act.
       (d) Petitions and Action on the Initiative of the 
     Administrator.--
       ``(1) General rule.--Any person may file with the 
     Administrator a petition proposing the issuance of a 
     regulation establishing, modifying, or revoking a tolerance 
     or exemption for a pesticide chemical residue. Sections 553 
     and 554 of title 5, United States Code, shall not apply with 
     respect to procedures concerning such petitions.
       ``(2) Requirements for petitions.--A petition under 
     paragraph (1) to establish a tolerance or exemption for a 
     pesticide chemical residue shall contain--
       ``(A) an informative summary of the petition and of the 
     data, information, and arguments submitted or cited in 
     support of the peition, including--
       ``(i) a summary of the reports required under subparagraph 
     (D); and
       ``(ii) a characterization of--
       ``(I) the exposure to the pesticide chemical residue due to 
     any tolerance or exemption already granted for such residue; 
     and
       ``(II) the additional exposure to such residue that would 
     result if the requested tolerance or exemption were granted;
       ``(B) a proposed tolerance for such residue, if a tolerance 
     is proposed;
       ``(C) the name, chemical identity, and composition of the 
     pesticide chemical that produces such residue;
       ``(D) reports of tests and investigations made with respect 
     to the safety of such pesticide chemical residue, including 
     complete information as to the methods and controls used in 
     conducting such tests and investigations;
       ``(E) data showing the amount, frequency, method, and time 
     of application of such pesticide chemical;
       ``(F) reports of tests and investigations made with respect 
     to the nature and amount of the pesticide chemical residue 
     that is likely to remain in or on food when ready for sale to 
     consumers, including a description of the analytical methods 
     used;
       ``(G) a description of methods for detecting and measuring 
     the levels of such chemical residue in or on the food, which 
     methods meet the requirements of subsection (b)(2)(E);
       ``(H) reports of investigations conducted on the effects of 
     processing methods used to produce food on the level and 
     identity of such pesticide chemical residue;
       ``(I) if the petition is for a pesticide chemical residue 
     that is described in subsection (b)(2)(A)(ii), all relevant 
     data bearing on the physical or other technical effect the 
     pesticide chemical involved is intended to have and the 
     quantity of the pesticide chemical residue required to 
     accomplish such effect;
       ``(J) the pesticide reference standard (as defined in 
     subsection (b)(2)(E)(iii)) for the pesticide chemical 
     residue;
       ``(K) such other data and information as the Administrator 
     may require to support the petition; and
       ``(L) the data referred to in subsection (b)(2)(B)(ii)(III) 
     if available.
       ``(3) Actions on petitions.--
       ``(A) Filing determination.--
       ``(i) In general.--Within 45 days of the filing of a 
     petition under paragraph (1) for the establishment, 
     modification, or revocation of a tolerance or an exemption, 
     the Administrator shall determine if the petition complies 
     with the requirements of paragraph (2) or applicable 
     requirements for petitions to modify or revoke tolerances or 
     exemptions from tolerances. If the Administrator determines 
     that the petition complies with such requirements, the 
     Administrator shall publish a notice of the filing of the 
     petition. If the Administrator determines that the petition 
     does not comply with such requirements, the Administrator 
     shall notify the petitioner of such determination.
       ``(ii) Contents of notice of filing.--A notice under clause 
     (i) shall--
       ``(I) if it is a notice of the filing of a petition to 
     establish a tolerance or exemption, announce the availability 
     of a complete description of the analytical methods available 
     to the Administrator for the detection and measurement of the 
     pesticide chemical residue with respect to which the petition 
     is filed and include the summary required by paragraph 
     (2)(A); and
       ``(II) if it is a notice of the filing of a petition to 
     modify or revoke a tolerance or exemption, contain the full 
     petition or a summary of the petition.
       ``(B) Action.--The Administrator shall, within one year of 
     the publication of a notice under subparagraph (A) with 
     respect to a petition, and after giving due consideration to 
     the petition, any comments on the petition, and any other 
     information available to the Administrator--
       ``(i) issue a final regulation in accordance with the 
     petition establishing, modifying, or revoking a tolerance or 
     exemption for the pesticide chemical residue;
       ``(ii) issue a proposed regulation establishing, modifying, 
     or revoking a tolerance or exemption for the pesticide 
     chemical residue, which tolerance or exemption is different 
     from the tolerance or exemption requested in the petition; or
       ``(iii) issue an order denying the petition.
       ``(C) Comments.--If the Administrator issues a notice of 
     the filing of a petition under subparagraph (A)(i) or a 
     proposed regulation under subparagraph (B)(ii), the 
     Administrator shall allow at least 30 days for comments on 
     such notice or proposed regulation.
       ``(D) Final regulation.--If the Administrator issues a 
     proposed regulation under subparagraph (B)(ii), the 
     Administrator shall issue a final regulation within 180 days 
     of the date of the publication of the proposed regulations.
       ``(E) Priorities.--The Administrator shall give priority to 
     petitions for the establishment or modification of a 
     tolerance for a pesticide chemical residue that appears to 
     pose a significantly lower risk to human health from dietary 
     exposure than pesticide chemical residues that have 
     tolerances in effect for the same or similar uses.
       ``(4) Action on the Administrator's initiative.--
       ``(A) General rule.--The Administrator may, on the 
     initiative of the Administrator, issue a final regulation 
     establishing, modifying, or revoking a tolerance or exemption 
     for a pesticide chemical residue.
       ``(B) Notice.--Before issuing a final regulation under 
     subparagraph (A), the Administrator shall issue a notice of 
     proposed rulemaking and provide a period of not less than 30 
     days for public comment on the proposed regulation unless the 
     Administrator finds that such notice and comment would be 
     contrary to the public interest and states the reasons for 
     the finding in the notice of the final regulation. If the 
     Administrator makes such a finding and issues such a 
     regulation, the Administrator shall provide at least 30 days 
     for comment on the regulation after it is issued.
       ``(5) Effective Date.--
       ``(A) General rule.--Except as provided in subparagraph 
     (B), a final regulation issued under paragraph (3) or (4) 
     shall take effect upon publication.
       ``(B) Delay.--
       ``(i) General rule.--If a regulation issued under paragraph 
     (3) or (4) revokes or modifies a tolerance for a pesticide 
     chemical residue or revokes an exemption for a pesticide 
     chemical residue, the Administrator may, in accordance with 
     clause (ii), delay the effective date of the regulation to 
     permit the tolerance or exemption to remain in effect at a 
     level not to exceed the level in effect immediately before 
     such regulation is issued only--
       ``(I) for foods that contain such pesticide chemical 
     residue in an amount that is not more than the amount that 
     would remain if the pesticide chemical had been legally 
     applied on the date the Administrator acted under paragraph 
     (3) or (4); and
       ``(II) if dietary exposure to the pesticide chemical 
     residue in or on the foods described in subclause (I) is safe 
     during the period of delay of the effective date.
       ``(ii) Period of delay.--If the Administrator finds that 
     delay of the effective date of such a revocation or 
     modification is consistent with the public health, the 
     Administrator may delay such date under clause (i), for each 
     type of food that contains such pesticide chemical residue, 
     for the period that is required for such food to be sold to 
     consumers in the course of the usual practice for persons 
     engaged in the production, processing, transportation, 
     storage, and distribution of the food.
       ``(6) Required Submission of Data.--
       ``(A) General rule.--If the Administrator finds that 
     additional data are required to determine whether an existing 
     tolerance or exemption from a tolerance meets the safety 
     standard in subsection (b)(2) or (c)(2), the Administrator 
     shall publish an order--
       ``(i) requiring one or more interested persons to notify 
     the Administrator that such person will submit the required 
     data;
       ``(ii) describing the type of data required to be 
     submitted;
       ``(iii) describing the reports required to be made during 
     and after the collection of the data; and
       ``(iv) establishing deadlines for the actions described in 
     clauses (i), (ii), and (iii).
       ``(B) Deadlines.--If an order is issued under subparagraph 
     (A) with respect to a tolerance or an exemption and the 
     Administrator finds that a deadline or other condition in the 
     order is not met, the Administrator may revoke, pursuant to 
     the procedures in paragraph (4), the tolerance or exemption 
     for failure to comply with such order.
       ``(C) Extensions.--
       ``(i) Extension request.--Any person may request the 
     Administrator to issue an order to extend the schedule 
     established under subparagraph (A) before the expiration of a 
     deadline in the schedule.
       ``(ii) Grant of request.--The Administrator may grant a 
     request under clause (i) only if the Administrator finds that 
     extraordinary circumstances beyond the control of such person 
     prevented such person from submitting the required data.
       ``(iii) Extension.--If the Administrator issues an order 
     extending a schedule, the Administrator may extend the 
     deadline for a period no longer than such time as is 
     necessary for such person to submit the data.
       ``(7) Tolerance for use of pesticides under an emergency 
     exemption.--If the Administrator grants an exemption under 
     section 18 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 
     Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136p) for a pesticide chemical, the 
     Administrator shall establish a tolerance or exemption from a 
     tolerance for the residue of the pesticide chemical. Such a 
     tolerance or exemption from a tolerance shall have an 
     expiration date. The Administrator may establish such a 
     tolerance or exemption without providing notice or a period 
     for comment on the tolerance or exemption. The Administrator 
     shall promulgate regulations within 365 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this paragraph governing the 
     establishment of tolerances and exemptions under this 
     paragraph. Such regulations shall be consistent with the 
     safety standard under subsection (b)(2) and with section 18 
     of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
       ``(e) Experimental Permits.--To the extent consistent with 
     the public health, the Administrator shall promulgate 
     regulations for exempting from the operation of this section 
     new pesticide chemicals intended solely for investigational 
     use by experts qualified by scientific training and 
     experience to investigate the safety of pesticide chemicals. 
     Such regulations may, in the discretion of the Administrator, 
     among other conditions relating to the protection of the 
     public health, provide for--
       ``(1) conditioning such exemption upon the establishment 
     and maintenance of such records, and
       ``(2) the making of such reports to the Secretary, by the 
     manufacturer or the sponsor of the investigation of such 
     article, of data (including analytical reports by 
     investigators) obtained as a result of such investigational 
     use of such article, as well as enable the Administrator to 
     evaluate the safety of such article in the event of the 
     filing of an application pursuant to this section. Such 
     regulations, among other things, shall set forth 
     the conditions (if any) upon which food treated with such 
     pesticide chemicals may be marketed for food use.
       ``(f) Confidentiality of Data.--
       ``(1) Access to data and information.--
       ``(A) General rule.--Except as provided in paragraphs (2) 
     and (3), the Administrator shall not make public data or 
     information submitted to the Administrator or cited to the 
     Administrator in a petition under subsection (d)(1) and data 
     and information otherwise considered by the Administrator in 
     issuing a proposal or final regulation or order under this 
     section which contains or relates to trade secrets or 
     commercial or financial information obtained from a person 
     and is privileged or confidential. The person submitting 
     information which they believe are privileged or confidential 
     information shall notify the Administrator of such 
     information. If a notice is not made to the Administrator, 
     the Administrator may make such information public.
       ``(B) Notice.--Except as to data or information disclosed 
     under paragraph (2), 30 days before disclosing data or 
     information claimed as privileged or confidential under 
     subparagraph (A), the Administrator shall notify the person 
     who submitted or cited the data or information of the intent 
     to disclose the data or information to the public.
       ``(2) Authorized disclosure for governmental purposes.--
     Data and information that are entitled to confidential 
     treatment under paragraph (1)--
       ``(A) shall be disclosed to either House of Congress, to 
     the extent of matter within its jurisdiction, to any 
     committee or subcommittee of the Congress and to any joint 
     committee of the Congress or subcommittee of such a joint 
     committee and to the Comptroller General of the United 
     States;
       ``(B) shall be disclosed to any officer or employee of the 
     United States or of any State--
       ``(i) in connection with the official duties of such 
     officer or employee under any law for the protection of 
     health or the environment, or
       ``(ii) for specific law enforcement purposes;
       ``(C) shall be disclosed, under such security requirements 
     as the Administrator may provide, to contractors with the 
     United States and employees of such contractors, if such 
     disclosure is necessary for the satisfactory performance by 
     the contractor of a contract with the United States or for 
     work in connection with this section or other statutes 
     administered by the Administrator;
       ``(D) shall be disclosed to the extent the Administrator 
     determines disclosure is necessary to protect the public 
     health; and
       ``(E) may be disclosed when relevant in any proceeding 
     under this section, except that disclosure in such a 
     proceeding shall be made in such manner as to preserve 
     confidentiality to the extent practicable.
       ``(3) Disclosure of health effects data and residue data.--
       ``(A) General rule.--All data and information concerning 
     any test of a pesticide chemical residue or a pesticide 
     chemical to determine the potential effects of such residue 
     or chemical on human health or concerning the levels of such 
     residue in or on food shall be available for disclosure to 
     the public except to the extent such data or information 
     include--
       ``(i) manufacturing or quality control processes,
       ``(ii) methods for detecting the quantity of any 
     deliberately added inert ingredient of a pesticide chemical 
     other than methods for detecting residues of the inert 
     ingredient in or on food, or
       ``(iii) the identity or quantity of any deliberately added 
     inert ingredient of a pesticide chemical other than an inert 
     ingredient which is the subject of a petition under 
     subsection (d)(1) or an action of the Administrator under 
     subsection (d)(4).
       ``(B) Data and information also submitted under fifra.--
     Data and information described in subparagraph (A) which were 
     also submitted to the Administrator under the Federal 
     Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act shall be 
     available for disclosure to the public in accordance with 
     section 10(g) of such Act (7 U.S.C. 136h(g)).
       ``(g) Existing a Pesticide Chemical Residues.--
       ``(1) Presticide chemical residues under regulations under 
     section 406.--Regulations affecting pesticide chemical 
     residues promulgated, in accordance with sections 701(e) and 
     406, upon the basis of public hearings instituted before 
     January 1, 1953, shall be deemed to be tolerances issued 
     under this section and shall be subject to modification or 
     revocation under subsection (d).
       ``(2) Pesticide chemical residues under regulations.--
     Regulations establishing, modifying, or revoking tolerances 
     for pesticide chemical residues under this section and 
     section 409 or exemptions for pesticide chemical residues 
     under this section on or before the date of the enactment of 
     this section shall be deemed to be tolerances or exemptions 
     issued under this section and shall be subject to 
     modification or revocation under subsection (d).
       ``(3) Generally recognized as safe pesticide chemical 
     residues.--
       ``(A) General rule.--Presticide chemical residues that, on 
     the day before the date of the enactment of the Pesticide 
     Reform Act of 1994, do not have tolerances or exemptions from 
     tolerances under this section because the residues are 
     generally recognized as safe under this section or section 
     201(s) shall, until the expiration of the period prescribed 
     by subparagraph (C), not be considered unsafe under section 
     402(a)(2)(B) solely because the residues to not have such a 
     tolerance or exemption.
       ``(B) List.--The Administrator shall--
       ``(i) not later than 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of such Act, publish a list of all pesticide 
     chemical residues that the Administrator has determined are 
     generally recognized, on the day before the date of the 
     enactment of such Act, as safe under this section or 
     section 201(s); and
       ``(ii) require that any person who, before the date of the 
     enactment of such Act, distributed in commerce as a pesticide 
     chemical, a pesticide chemical that produces a pesticide 
     chemical residue that is not on the list described in clause 
     (i), and that such person determined such pesticide chemical 
     is generally recognized as safe under this section or section 
     201(s), shall within 6 months of the date of the publication 
     of the list under clause (i), report to the Administrator the 
     data that supports the claim that the pesticide chemical 
     residue is generally recognized as safe.
       ``(C) Determination of the Administrator.--Not later than 
     2\1/2\ years after the date of the enactment of the Pesticide 
     Reform Act of 1994, the Administrator shall determine if each 
     pesticide chemical reported to the Administrator in 
     accordance with subparagraph (B)(ii) is generally recognized 
     as safe. If the Administrator determines, by order, that such 
     pesticide chemical residue is generally recognized as safe, 
     the residue of such pesticide chemical shall be considered a 
     pesticide chemical residue subject to an exemption under this 
     section, which exemption shall be subject to modification or 
     revocation under subsection (d).
       ``(h) Monitoring of Pesticide Chemical Residues.--
       ``(1) Sampling.--The Secretary shall conduct a 
     comprehensive surveillance and compliance enforcement 
     monitoring program for domestic and imported food for 
     pesticide chemical residues to determine if the pesticide 
     chemical residues are in compliance with this section. In 
     carrying out this paragraph, the Secretary shall give 
     priority to--
       ``(A) sampling foods for pesticide chemical residues 
     included in a notice under paragraph (2);
       ``(B) sampling foods that are high consumption items for 
     infants and children;
       ``(C) analyzing pesticides most likely to result in 
     violation of this section;
       ``(D) conducting incidence and level monitoring; and
       ``(E) collecting data on dietary intake of pesticide 
     residues on food as it is consumed.
       ``(2) Notification.--The Administrator shall notify the 
     Secretary of the pesticide chemical residues that the 
     Administrator determines, in the administration of this 
     section--
       ``(A) are above the standard prescribed by subsection 
     (b)(2); or
       ``(B) are not above such standard but that may under 
     certain circumstances reach or exceed such standard.
       ``(i) Fees.--The Administrator shall by regulation require 
     the payment of such fees as will in the aggregate, in the 
     judgment of the Administrator, be sufficient over a 
     reasonable term to provide, equip, and maintain an adequate 
     service for the performance of the functions of the 
     Administrator under this section. Under such regulations, the 
     performance of the services or other functions of the 
     Administrator under this section may be conditioned upon 
     the payment of such fees. Such regulations may further 
     provide that the continuation in effect of a tolerance or 
     exemption shall be conditioned upon the payment of an 
     annual fee and for waiver or refund of fees in whole or in 
     part when, in the judgment of the Administrator, such 
     waiver or refund is equitable and not contrary to the 
     purposes of this subsection. Such fees shall be deposited 
     in the Treasury and shall be credited to the appropriation 
     account of the Administrator for salaries and expenses and 
     shall be available for costs incurred in carrying out this 
     section in accordance with appropriation Acts until 
     expended without fiscal year limitation.
       ``(j) Judicial Review.--A petition for review of any final 
     order of the Administrator issued under subsection (d) or any 
     regulation that is the subject of such an order may be filed 
     by an adversely affected person only in the United States 
     Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Any 
     such petition for review must be filed within sixty days of 
     the issuance of such order or regulation. Judicial review 
     shall be in accordance with sections 701 through 706 of Title 
     5 of the United States Code, and the challenged order or 
     regulation shall be sustained unless it is found to be 
     arbitrary, capricious, and abuse of discretion, or not in 
     accordance with law. Orders and regulations of the 
     Administrator with respect to which review could have been 
     obtained under this subsection shall not be subject to 
     judicial review in civil or criminal proceedings for 
     enforcement or other judicial proceedings.''.

     SEC. 4. EMBARGO AUTHORITY.

       (a) Administrative Embargo Authority.--Section 304(g) (21 
     U.S.C. 334(g)) is amended by redesignating paragraph (2) as 
     paragraph (3) and adding after paragraph (1) the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(2) If an officer or employee of the Department has 
     reason to believe that any article of food is adulterated 
     within the meaning of section 402(a)(2)(B), the officer or 
     employee may order the food detained (in accordance with 
     regulations prescribed by the Secretary) for a reasonable 
     period which may not exceed 20 days (or 10 days, in the case 
     of a perishable food) unless the Secretary determines that a 
     longer period of detention is required to institute an action 
     under subsection (a) or section 302, in which case the 
     Secretary may authorize a detention period of not more than 
     30 days (or not more than 15 days, in the case of a 
     perishable food). Regulations of the Secretary shall require 
     that before a food may be detained, the Secretary or an 
     officer or employee designated by the Secretary shall approve 
     the detention order. Such an order may require the labeling 
     or marking of a food during the period of its detention for 
     the purpose of identifying the food as detained.''.
       (b) Prohibition on Removal.--Paragraph (3) of section 
     304(g) (21 U.S.C. 334(g)), as redesignated by subsection (a), 
     is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``a device subject to 
     a detention order issued under paragraph (1)'' and inserting 
     ``an article subject to a detention order under paragraph (1) 
     or (2)'',
       (2) in the matter preceding clause (i) of sub-paragraph 
     (B), by striking ``a device subject to a detention order 
     under paragraph (1)'' and inserting ``an article subject to a 
     detention order under paragraph (1) or (2)'', and
       (3) in subparagraph (B) (ii), by striking ``if'' and 
     inserting ``in the case of a device''.
       (c) Prohibited Act.--Section 301(r) (21 U.S.C. 331(r)) is 
     amended by inserting ``or a food'' after ``device'' each time 
     it appears.

     SEC. 5. CIVIL MONEY PENALTIES.

       Section 303(f) (21 U.S.C. 333(f)) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (2), (3), and (4) as 
     paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), respectively,
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
       ``(2) Any person who introduces into interstate commerce or 
     delivers for introduction into interstate commerce an article 
     of food that is adulterated within the meaning of section 
     402(a)(2)(B) shall be subject, in addition to any other 
     penalties that may be prescribed by law, to a civil money 
     penalty of not more than $50,000 in the case of an individual 
     and $250,000 in the case of any other person for such 
     introduction or delivery.'',
       (3) in paragraph (3), as so redesignated, by striking 
     ``paragraph (1)'' each place it occurs and inserting 
     ``paragraph (1) or (2)'', and
       (4) in paragraph (5), as so redesignated, by striking 
     ``(3)'' each place it occurs and inserting ``(4)''.

     SEC. 6. RECALL.

       (a) Authority.--Chapter III is amended--
       (1) by redesignating sections 309 and 310 as section 310 
     and 311, respectively, and
       (2) by adding after section 308 the following:

                                ``RECALL

       ``Sec. 309. (a) General Rule.--If the Secretary has reason 
     to believe that an article of food is adulterated within the 
     meaning of section 401(a)(2)(B), the Secretary may require 
     the manufacturer, processor, or distributor of such article 
     to take immediately all action necessary to recall such 
     article from all wholesale and retail establishments. A 
     recall order of the Secretary under this subsection shall be 
     a final agency action subject to review by the United States 
     district court for the judicial district in which the 
     manufacturer, processor, or distributor resides or transacts 
     business or in which is located the article of food that is 
     the subject of such order.
       ``(b) Report.--Manufacturers, processors, and distributors 
     shall report promptly to the Secretary any recall of a food 
     undertaken by the manufacturer, processor, or distributor, 
     including any recall required under subsection (a) or section 
     302 and any recall conducted at the initiative of the 
     manufacturer, processor, or distributor on the grounds that 
     the food may be adulterated within the meaning of section 
     402(a)(2)(B).
       ``(c) Scope of Order.--For purposes of this section, an 
     order under subsection (a) with respect to an article of food 
     shall include an order to retrieve or replace such 
     article.''.
       (b) Prohibited Act.--Section 301 (21 U.S.C. 331) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(w) The failure to comply with a recall order under 
     section 309(a) or a requirement to report a recall under 
     section 309(b).''.

     SEC.  7. EVALUATION OF EXISTING PESTICIDE CHEMICAL RESIDUE 
                   TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS.

       (a) Classification.--
       (1) Identification.--Within 180 days of the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency shall, for each pesticide chemical residue 
     that has a tolerance or exemption in effect on such date, 
     identify each tolerance or exemption which does not appear to 
     meet the requirements of section 408(b)(2) or 408(c)(2) of 
     the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and publish a notice 
     summarizing the data and analysis upon which such 
     determination is made. The notice published pursuant to this 
     paragraph shall include all tolerances for a pesticide 
     chemical, if the cumulative risk from exposure for any 
     pesticide chemical residue, calculated by the methodology in 
     paragraph (2), appears not to meet the requirements of 
     section 408(c)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 
     Act.
       (2) Factors.--In making the determination under paragraph 
     (1) with respect to tolerances for a pesticide chemical 
     residue, the Administrator shall--
       (A) use the toxicological conclusions, including 
     appropriate factors where applicable, used in the most 
     current risk assessment for the pesticide chemical residue 
     performed by the Administrator on or before the date of 
     enactment;
       (B) assume that all food for which the pesticide chemical 
     residue has a tolerance bears or contains residues of the 
     pesticide chemical equal to the levels established by their 
     respective tolerances.
       (2) Objections.--Any person adversely affected by the 
     Administrator's action under paragraph (1) may file 
     objections to the action with the Administrator. Such 
     objections must be filed within 30 days of publication of the 
     notice required in paragraph (1). The Administrator shall act 
     on such objections within 60 days of the receipt of the 
     objections.
       (4) Subsequent Identifications.--On a yearly basis in the 4 
     year period after the date of enactment of this Act, if the 
     Administrator concludes that any additional tolerances or 
     exemptions do not appear to meet the requirements of section 
     408(b)(2) and 408(c)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and 
     Cosmetic Act, the Administrator shall identify such 
     tolerances and exemption and publish a notice summarizing the 
     data and analysis upon which such identification is made. 
     Prior to identifying any additional tolerances or exemptions 
     under this paragraph, the Administrator shall publish the 
     identification as a proposal and seek public comment.
       (b) Data Submission.--
       (1) Deadline for Submission of Data on Apparently 
     Unacceptable Pesticide Chemical Residues.--For any pesticide 
     chemical residue for which the Administrator makes the 
     identification described in subsection (a)(1) or (a)(4), 
     any person wanting to maintain the tolerance or exemption 
     for such pesticide chemical shall have 2 years from the 
     publication of the notices in subsection (a) to submit 
     data or information on such chemical relative to the 
     safety standard in section 408(b)(2) or 408(c)(2) of the 
     Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
       (2) Deadline for submission of data on all other pesticide 
     chemical residues.--For any other pesticide chemical residue 
     that had a tolerance or exemption from a tolerance on the 
     date of enactment of this Act, any person wanting to maintain 
     the tolerance or exemption for such pesticide chemical 
     residue shall have not more than 5 years from such date of 
     enactment, subject to any schedule imposed under paragraph 
     (3), to submit data or information relative to the safety 
     standards in such section 408(b)(2) or 408(c)(2) of the 
     Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
       (3) Schedule.--For any pesticide chemical residue for which 
     the Administrator does not make the identification described 
     in subsection (a), the Administrator may establish a schedule 
     for the submission of data for the tolerance or exemption for 
     such pesticide chemical residue which data shall be the basis 
     for a determination by the Administrator as to whether the 
     tolerance or exemption meets the requirements of such section 
     408(b)(2) or 408(c)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and 
     Cosmetic Act.
       (4) Extensions.--
       (A) Request.--Any person may request the Administrator to 
     issue an order to extend a deadline established under 
     paragraph (1), (2), or (3) before expiration of the deadline.
       (B) Grant of request.--The Administrator may grant such a 
     request only if the Administrator finds that extraordinary 
     circumstances beyond the control of such person prevented 
     such person from submitting the required data.
       (C) Extension.--If the Administrator issues an order 
     extending a deadline--
       (i) the Administrator may extend the deadline for a period 
     no longer than such time as is necessary for such person to 
     submit the data; and
       (ii) the Administrator may extend the deadline in paragraph 
     (1) for no more than 1 year and any deadline established 
     under paragraph (2) or (3) so long as such extension does not 
     extend the deadline beyond 6 years from the date of enactment 
     of the Act.
       (c) Deadlines For Action.--
       (1) 3-Year deadline.--Within 3 years of the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall issue a final 
     decision for 75 percent of the tolerances and exemptions of 
     the pesticide chemical residues identified in subsection 
     (a)(1) by classifying such tolerances and exemptions as 
     meeting or not meeting the requirements of section 408(b)(2) 
     or 408(c)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. 
     Such decisions shall be based only on data received by the 
     Administrator before the deadline in subsection (b)(1) or 
     before the expiration of an extension granted 
     under subsection (b)(4), whichever is later.
       (2) 4-Year deadline.--Within 4 years of the date of 
     enactment of the Act, the Administrator shall issue a final 
     decision for 100 percent of the tolerances and exemptions of 
     the pesticide chemical residues identified in subsection 
     (a)(1) by classifying such tolerances and exemptions as 
     meeting or not meeting the requirements of section 408(b)(2) 
     or 408(c)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. 
     Such decision shall be based only on data received by the 
     Administrator before the deadline in subsection (b)(1) or 
     before the expiration of an extension granted under 
     subsection (b)(4), which ever is later.
       (3) Deadline for subsequently identified tolerances and 
     exemptions.--Within 4 years of the date of identification of 
     a tolerance or exemption under subsection (a)(4) or 7 years 
     from the date of enactment, whichever is sooner, the 
     Administrator shall issue a final decision classifying such 
     tolerance or exemption as meeting or not meeting the 
     requirements of section 408(b)(2) or 408(c)(2) of the Federal 
     Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Such decision shall be based 
     only on data received by the Administrator before the 
     deadline in subsection (b)(1) or before the expiration of an 
     extension granted under subsection (b)(4), whichever is 
     later.
       (4) 7-Year deadline.--Within 7 years of the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall determine if 
     each tolerance or exemption in existence on the date of 
     enactment of this Act and not identified in subsection (a) 
     meets the requirements of section 408(b)(2) or 408(c)(2) of 
     the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Such determination 
     shall be based only on data received by the Administrator 
     before the deadline in subsection (b)(2) or the deadline in a 
     schedule established by the Administrator for the pesticide 
     chemical residue under subsection (b)(3) or the expiration of 
     an extension granted under subsection (b)(4), whichever is 
     later.
       (5) Revocation proceedings.--If the Administrator 
     determines under this subsection that any tolerance or 
     exemption does not meet the requirements of section 408(b)(2) 
     or 408(c)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the 
     Administrator shall promptly initiate revocation proceedings 
     for such tolerance or exemption under section 408(d) of such 
     Act.
       (d) Expiration of a Tolerance or Exemption.--
       (1) General rule.--No later than six and one-half years but 
     not before six years from the date of the enactment of this 
     Act, the Administrator shall publish a list of tolerances and 
     exemptions for pesticides chemical residues which shall 
     expire 7 years after such date of enactment, unless the 
     Administrator--
       (A) has issued a decision finding that such pesticide 
     chemical residue meets the requirements of section 408(b)(2) 
     or 408(c)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or
       (B) has granted an extension under paragraph (2).
       (2) Extension.--Upon petition of any person, the 
     Administrator may grant an extension beyond the 7-year period 
     in section (d)(1), of not more than 1 year for the term of 
     tolerance or exemption for a pesticide chemical residue if 
     the Administrator finds that a person seeking to support 
     such tolerance or exemption has met all applicable 
     requirements for the submission of information or data 
     required by subsection (b), the Administrator has not 
     completed review of the data submitted pursaunt to 
     subsection (b), and the extension would not adversely 
     affect public health. Any tolerance granted an extension 
     under this paragraph shall expire when the extension 
     expires, unless prior to expiration of the extension the 
     Administrator makes the finding in subparagraph (A).
       (3) List--The Administrator shall include on the list 
     established under paragraph (1) each tolerance and exemption 
     which was identified under subsection (a)(1) or (a)(4) for 
     which the Administrator has not issued a decision classifying 
     it as meeting or not meeting the requirements of section 408 
     (b)(2) or 408 (c)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 
     Act, and which the Administrator now determines do not appear 
     to meet such requirements. The Administrator shall develop 
     such list using the methodology specified in subsection 
     (a)(2)(B) and is only required to consider data submitted on 
     or before the expiration of the deadlines for data submission 
     in subsection (b).
       (4) Objections--Any person adversely affected by the 
     Administrator's action under paragraph (1) may file 
     objections to the action with the Administrator. The person 
     filing the objection must file it within 30 days of the 
     publication of the list specified in paragraph (1), and must 
     demonstrate, using the methodology specified in subsection 
     (a)(2)(B) and considered only data submitted on or before the 
     expiration of the deadlines for data submission in subsection 
     (b), that the tolerance or exmeption which was identified 
     under subsection (a)(1) or (a)(4) should not be included on 
     the list under paragraph (1). The Administrator shall act on 
     such objections within 60 days of the receipt of the 
     objections.
       (e) Transitional Revocation Rule.--
       (1) General Rule.--If the Administrator determines under 
     section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act that 
     a tolerance for a pesticide chemical residue should be 
     revoked or if a tolerance will expire within 1 year based on 
     operation of subsection (d), the Administrator may, upon a 
     petition from any person, extend the tolerance for a period 
     not longer than 5 years after such determination if the 
     Administrator finds--
       (A) the risk to health presented by exposure to such 
     residue is equal to or less than 10 times the risk allowed 
     under section 408(b)(2) of such Act, and
       (B)(i) that the health benefits to the person exposed to 
     such residue are greater than the dietary risks to health 
     presented to such person by such exposure, or
       (ii) that such extension is necessary to avoid a 
     significant disruptive in domestic food production.

     The Administration may not extend a tolerance under this 
     paragraph for a period which extends beyond 10 years after 
     the date of enactment of this Act.
       (2) Modification.--The Administrator may modify or revoke 
     a tolerance or exemption extended under paragraph (1), if 
     the Administrator determines that circumstances no longer 
     justify the continuation of such tolerance or exemption as 
     extended.
       (3) Definitions.--For the purposes of this subsection, the 
     term ``health benefits'' means the benefits which occur when 
     the application of a pesticide chemical residue to a food 
     directly reduces the incidence of illness or disease but such 
     term does not include benefits from an adequate, wholesome, 
     or economical food supply.
       (f) Deadline Suits, Judicial Review.--
       (1) Deadline suits.--Any person may commence a civil action 
     on such person's own behalf against the Administrator in the 
     United States District Court for the District of Columbia 
     where there is alleged a failure of the Administrator to 
     perform any of the nondiscretionary acts required by 
     subsections (c)(2), (c)(3), or (c)(4). The court shall have 
     jurisdiction in actions brought under this paragraph to order 
     the Administrator to perform such act. For suits involving 
     subsections (c)(2) or (c)(3), if the court finds that the 
     Administrator has failed to perform a non-discretionary act, 
     the court shall have jurisdiction to order the Administrator 
     to perform such act within a specified period of time, but 
     that period may not exceed 8 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act. Suits involving subsections (c)(2) or 
     (c)(3) must be brought within 6 years of the date of the 
     enactment of this Act. No action may be commenced prior to 60 
     days after the plaintiff has given notice of such action to 
     the Administrator.
       (2) Judicial review.--A petition for review of a final 
     action of the Administrator under subsection (a)(3), (a)(4), 
     (d)(2), (d)(3) or (e)(1) may be filed by any adversely 
     affected person only in the United States Court of Appeals 
     for the District of Columbia Circuit. Any such petition for 
     review must be filed within 60 days of the issuance of the 
     final action. Judicial review shall be in accordance with 
     sections 701 through 706 of title 5 of the United States 
     Code, and the challenged action shall be sustained unless it 
     is found to be arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, 
     or not in accordance with law. Any determinations made by the 
     Administrator under subsections (b) or (c), shall be subject 
     to judicial review only in a petition for review of a final 
     action of the Administrator under section 408(d) of the 
     Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act pursuant to section 
     408(j) of such Act. In reviewing a final action of the 
     Administrator under subsection (a)(3), the court may not 
     extend the deadline for data submission in subsection (b)(1). 
     Actions of the Administrator with respect to which review 
     could have been obtained under this subsection shall not be 
     subject to judicial review in civil or criminal proceedings 
     for enforcement or other judicial proceedings.
       (g) Report to Congress.--The Administrator shall annually 
     submit a report to Congress that lists the tolerances which 
     have been revoked pursuant to Tolerance Review. The report 
     shall also provide an analysis of the impacts of tolerance 
     revocation.
       (h) Construction.--Any reference under this section to any 
     provision of section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and 
     Cosmetic Act is a reference to such provision as amended by 
     this Act.

     SEC. 8. FEES.

       (a) General Rule.--The Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency shall by regulation require the payment of 
     such fees as will in the aggregate, in the judgment of the 
     Administrator, be sufficient over a reasonable term to 
     provide, equip, and maintain an adequate service for the 
     performance of the functions of the Administrator under this 
     Act. The fee requirement of this subsection shall not apply 
     to any agency of the Federal Government.
       (b) Deposit, Etc.--Such fees shall be deposited in the 
     Treasury and shall be credited to the appropriation account 
     of the Administrator for salaries and expenses and shall be 
     available for costs incurred in carrying out this section in 
     accordance with appropriation Acts until expended without 
     fiscal year limitation.

     SEC. 9. GENERAL DEFINITIONS.

       As used in sections 4 and 5 of this Act:
       (1) In general.--The terms that are also used in section 
     408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act shall have 
     the meanings given the terms by sections 201 and 408 of such 
     Act.
       (2) Dietary exposure.--The term ``dietary exposure'' means 
     dietary exposure as determined under section 408(b)(2)(C) of 
     the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
       (3) Exemption.--The term ``exemption'' means an exemption 
     from the requirement for a tolerance under section 408 of the 
     Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
                                  ____


    Pesticide Reform Act of 1994 Section by Section Summary--FFDCA 
                               Provisions

       Section 1. Short Title, Reference, and Table of Contents.
       Section 2. Definitions:
       Definition of raw agricultural commodity dropped because 
     all foods, raw and processed, will be governed under FFDCA 
     section 408.
       Section 3. Tolerances and Exemptions for Pesticide Chemical 
     Residues:
       Establishes a new Sec. 408.
       Establishes expiration dates for all tolerances; new 
     tolerances expire in 18 years. [Sec. 408(b)(1)(B)]
       Authorizes EPA to establish a separate tolerance for a 
     pesticide chemical residue at any point in the distribution 
     chain. Separate tolerances for a pesticide chemical may be 
     established at the farm and retail levels. 
     [Sec. 408(b)(1)(C)]
       Standard. Tolerances shall not be established unless the 
     residue is ``safe,'' defined as ``a reasonable certainty that 
     no harm will result from all anticipated consumer exposures'' 
     to the residue, including the exposure of children and 
     sensitive subpopulations. [Sec. 408(b)(2)]
       Carcinogenic pesticides must pose a ``negligible risk'' 
     from all anticipated consumer exposures.
       Tolerances for non-carcinogenic pesticides must provide an 
     ``ample margin of safety.''
       Factors. When establishing, modifying, or revoking 
     tolerances, EPA must consider:
       1) anticipated dietary exposure, consumption data, 
     cumulative effects of chemically or pharmacologically related 
     substances in the diet, estrogenic or other hormonal effects, 
     and other appropriate safety factors. [Sec. 408(b)(2)(B)(iv)] 
     In establishing dietary exposure, EPA is required to use 
     tolerance levels as the level of residue expected in food. 
     EPA must use the tolerance closest in the chain of food 
     distribution to the retail level. Where adequate data are 
     available, EPA must use per cent of crop tested information 
     in estimating dietary exposure.
       2) the specific risks to infants and children, and apply an 
     additional margin of safety. EPA also must publish a specific 
     determination regarding its evaluation of these risks.
       Surveys. Requires HHS and USDA to conduct surveys to 
     document dietary exposure of infants and children to 
     pesticide residues. [Sec. 408(b)(2)(C)]
       Unavoidable persistence. Requires EPA to establish and 
     review every 5 years tolerances for pesticides that have had 
     tolerances revoked, but which unavoidably persist in the 
     environment. [Sec. 408(b)(2)(D)]
       Practical Methods of Analysis. As a prerequisite for a 
     tolerance, requires that a practical method for detecting and 
     measuring the residue in food be available. Statute 
     establishes a preference for multi-residue analysis 
     analytical methods. Requires registrants to provide EPA with 
     reference standards for each pesticide chemical. 
     [Sec. 408(b)(2)(E)]
       Risk assessment procedures. Requires EPA to periodically 
     review and revise risk assessment procedures to incorporate 
     advances in science and risk assessment.
       Exemptions from a tolerance. Authorizes EPA to establish an 
     exemption from a tolerance for any pesticide chemical that 
     presents no risk to human health at any level that is 
     reasonably likely to occur. [Sec. 408(c)]
       Petitions to establish a tolerance. Sets forth the 
     requirements for petitions to establish a tolerance or 
     exemption, e.g., summary of the petition, summary of reports 
     of safety tests and investigations, description of analytical 
     methods to detect and measure the residue in foods, etc. Sets 
     deadlines for EPA action on petitions and issuance of final 
     regulations. Drops the objection and hearing procedures in 
     current law. Requires EPA to give priority to petitions for 
     ``lower risk'' pesticides. [Sec. 408(d)]
       Allows EPA to act on its own initiative to establish, 
     modify, or revoke a tolerance.
       Pipeline provision. Allows EPA to delay the effective date 
     of a regulation to revoke or modify a tolerance, in order to 
     allow foods having residues at the previous tolerance to work 
     their way through commerce, provided that the dietary 
     exposure is safe during the period of delay. [Sec. 408(d) 
     (5)]
       Emergency exemptions. Requires EPA to establish a tolerance 
     whenever EPA authorizes an emergency use of a pesticide under 
     Section 18 of FIFRA. Requires EPA to issue regulations 
     setting forth this procedure. [Sec. 408(d)(7)]
       Confidentiality. Prohibits EPA from releasing any trade 
     secrets, and commercial or other privileged information 
     contained in a petition, except to Congress and other 
     government agencies, and under certain other circumstances. 
     Requires public disclosure of data concerning the effects of 
     the pesticide on human health. [Sec. 408(f)]
       Grandfather provision. Deems regulations issued prior to 
     the date of enactment that affect pesticides under 
     Sec. Sec. 406, 409, and 701(e), or pesticides that are 
     generally recognized as safe, to be tolerances. [Sec. 408(g)]
       Monitoring. requires HHS to conduct a comprehensive 
     surveillance and compliance enforcement monitoring program 
     for pesticide residues in food. [Sec. 408(h)]
       Fees. Authorizes EPA to collect fees to cover the costs of 
     administering section 408. [Sec. 408(i)]
       Judicial Review. Sets forth procedures to request judicial 
     review of any regulation by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 
     District of Columbia Circuit.
       Section 4. Embargo Authority.
       Authorizes FDA to embargo foods that contain illegal 
     pesticide residues.
       Section 5. Civil money penalties.
       Authorizes FDA to assess civil money penalties for 
     violations related to illegal pesticide residues.
       Section 6. Recall authority.
       Authorizes FDA to require the recall of foods containing 
     illegal pesticide residues.
       Section 7. Evaluation of existing pesticide chemical 
     residue tolerances and exemptions:
       Requires EPA to identify within 180 days of enactment 
     tolerances or exemptions for pesticides that do not appear to 
     meet the safety standard contained in Sec. Sec. 408(b)(2) or 
     408(c)(2). Sets a deadline of 2 years to submit data in 
     support of a tolerance. Authorizes EPA to establish schedules 
     or to extend a deadline for data submission for other 
     pesticides. [Section 7(a-b)]
       Sets deadlines for EPA to complete its determinations as to 
     whether tolerances for pesticide residues meet the new safety 
     standard. Within 4 years, EPA must issue a determination for 
     100% of tolerances that appear to not meet the standard. If a 
     deadline is missed, anyone may sue to place EPA on a 
     schedule; schedule cannot exceed 7 or 8 years. [Section 7(c)]
       Tolerance Expiration:
       Tolerances or exemptions would under certain circumstances 
     expire 7 years after enactment unless EPA has found that the 
     pesticide meets the safety standard or has granted an 
     extension. Six and one-half years after enactment, EPA must 
     publish a list of the tolerances and exemptions that will 
     expire after 7 years after enactment. EPA may grant an 
     extension of one year, if the registrant has submitted all 
     required data, and the extension would not adversely affect 
     public health. [Section 7(d)]
       Transitional revocation rule. Allows EPA to extend an 
     existing tolerance (that does not meet the standard) for a 
     maximum of 10 years after enactment, provided that (1) the 
     risk to health is less than 10 times the risk allowed by 
     Sec. 408(b)(2), and (2) the health benefits are greater than 
     the dietary risks, or (3) the extension is needed to prevent 
     a disruption in domestic food production.
       Deadline suits/Judicial review. Allows EPA to be sued for 
     failure to meet its deadlines. Allows judicial review of 
     final EPA actions in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 
     District of Columbia.
       Report to Congress. Requires EPA to report to Congress the 
     tolerances which have been revoked pursuant to the tolerance 
     review, and an analysis of the impact of the revocation.
       Section 8. Fees.
       Authorizes EPA to collect fees to carry out its 
     responsibilities under the FFDCA.
       Section 9. General Definitions.
                                 ______

      By Mr. THURMOND:
  S.J. Res. 184. A joint resolution designating September 18, 1994, 
through September 24, 1994, as ``Iron Overload Diseases Awareness 
Week''; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


                 iron overload diseases awareness week

  Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce today a joint 
resolution designating the week of September 18-24, 1994 as ``Iron 
Overload Diseases Awareness Week.''
  Hemochromatosis is an inherited disorder which causes individuals to 
absorb too much iron from their diet. Because the body has no way to 
eliminate iron except by bleeding, over time the accumulated iron 
assaults body tissue and major organs. Hemochromatosis is often 
overlooked by doctors because its symptoms--fatigue, weakness, 
abdominal pain, aching joints--are often attributed to other diseases. 
More than 1.5 million Americans are affected by this disease, which can 
cause a variety of problems, including diabetes, cancer, arthritis, 
cirrhosis of the liver and heart disease.
  There is a treatment for this disease, but early diagnosis cannot be 
made unless there is proper screening. The four necessary tests are: 
serum iron, TIBC (total iron binding capacity), percent saturation and 
serum ferritin. Only these tests will give an accurate picture of a 
patient's iron status.
  Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this 
joint resolution which brings attention to this common but 
underdiagnosed condition. I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 
joint resolution be printed at the end of my remarks.
  There being no objection, the joint resolution was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                              S.J. Res 184

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled,
       Whereas 1 United States resident in 200 is estimated to 
     carry double genes that cause accumulation of excessive iron 
     stores, resulting in diseases of the heart, liver, sex 
     glands, pancreas, and the joints, with ultimate fatality if 
     untreated;
       Whereas our Nation's carrier rate of the single 
     hemochromatosis gene is estimated to be 26 in 200; and
       Whereas many doctors and their patients are not aware of 
     this incidence: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That 
     September 18, 1994, through September 24, 1994, is designated 
     as ``Iron Overload Diseases Awareness Week,'' and citizens of 
     the United States are urged to participate in protecting 
     their health by informing themselves of this common but 
     underdiagnosed condition.
                                 ______

      By Mr. PELL (for himself, Mr. Akaka, Mr. Biden, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. 
        Bradley, Mr. Bryan, Mr. D'Amato, Mr. Ford, Mr. Grassley, Mrs. 
        Hutchison, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Kohl, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. 
        Mack, Mr. Mathews, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Moynihan, Mr. Murkowski, 
        Mrs. Murray, Mr. Payor, Mr. Reid, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. 
        Sarbanes, Mr. Shelby, and Mr. Wellstone):
  S.J. Res. 185. A joint resolution to designate October 1994, as 
``National Breast Cancer Awareness Month;'' to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.


                 national breast cancer awareness month

  Mr. PELL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a joint resolution 
designating October 1994, as National Breast Cancer Awareness Month. I 
am very pleased that 25 of our colleagues have joined as original 
cosponsors of this very important resolution.
  This is the fifth year I have introduced this measure and it is my 
hope that the Senate will move swiftly to pass it. I believe that this 
resolution has heightened awareness and enhanced education programs to 
combat this life-threatening disease.
  The statistics are all too familiar. Breast cancer is the second 
leading cause of cancer death among women. In 1994, breast cancer will 
strike an estimated 182,000 women and 1,000 men, and kill 46,000 women 
and 300 men. Currently, in my State alone, the Rhode Island Breast 
Cancer Coalition reports that there are approximately 15,000 women with 
breast cancer.
  These figures are alarming. But numbers don't tell the stories of the 
families who face this battle, which takes a major emotional, physical, 
and economic toll on all those involved. The numbers don't tell the 
stories of the women who have lost the battle, leaving husbands, 
children, siblings, parents, and friends behind; nor do they tell the 
stories of those who struggled against the disease--and survived.
  And, Mr. President, there are many survivors. As our resolution 
states, early detection--through self-examination, clinical examination 
by a qualified health care provider, and screening mammography--can 
significantly reduce breast cancer mortality. According to the American 
Cancer Society, early detection procedures have increased the 5-year 
survival rate for localized breast cancer from 78 percent in the 1940's 
to 93 percent today.
  Although the scientific community has discovered more about the 
diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer in recent years, there is 
still much work to do in getting the message out to women. Many women 
still do not know how to self-examine, and many who would benefit from 
a screening mammogram do not seek one because of fear, cost, or lack of 
access to information.
  Health care organizations, providers, and advocates are working to 
educate people about breast cancer and to explain that while breast 
cancer can kill, it can also be conquered.
  Mr. President, Congress can help send this message of hope by once 
again establishing the month of October as ``National Breast Cancer 
Awareness Month.''

                          ____________________