[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.''
____________________