[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 86 (Thursday, June 30, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: June 30, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 2250. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permit 
tax-exempt financing of certain transportation facilities; to the 
Committee on Finance.


        alameda transportation corridor tax-exempt financing act

 Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today my colleague, Senator 
Feinstein, and I are introducing legislation critical to helping the 
largest port complex in the United States expand its trade with the 
countries of the Pacific rim. Our bill would help provide more 
efficient cargo transportation by granting tax exempt financing for the 
Alameda transportation corridor improvement project. These improvements 
will speed the transport of international cargo between the San Pedro 
Bay ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to the Interstate Highway 
System and the national railroad network. The corridor will be a 
segment of the proposed National Highway System.
  The Alameda corridor project is a rail consolidation plan for the Los 
Angeles-Long Beach ports and has major economic and environmental 
benefits, plus 10,000 construction jobs. The corridor project would 
consolidate more than 90 miles of rail into a single 20-mile high 
capacity corridor, eliminating 200 at-grade roadway crossings. The 
project will also widen and improve the truck route paralleling the 
rail facility to expedite port truck traffic.
  This line will comprise two pairs of tracks leading directly from the 
port to switching yards in central Los Angeles. By eliminating the 
railroad crossings, the project would sharply reduce traffic 
congestion--saving 15,000 hours of delay by vehicles now waiting for 
trains to pass each day--with consequential benefits to the local air 
quality.
  The estimated total cost of the project is $1.8 billion. More than 
half will be financed by the ports and port users. The ports will 
contribute $400 million and State and Federal governments are expected 
to contribute $700 million. The balance, about a third of the total 
cost, will come from tax-exempt bond financing. Fees paid by shippers 
using the corridor will be used to retire the bonds.
  Our bill clarifies the scope of the current tax exemption for docks 
and wharves by specifically including related transportation facilities 
to ensure that State and local governments will be permitted to tax-
exempt finance those transportation facilities which are reasonably 
required for the efficient use of publicly-owned port infrastructure.
  The bill provides that transportation facilities--including trackage 
and rail facilities, but not rolling stock--shall be treated as ``docks 
and wharves'' for purposes of the exempt facility bond rules if at 
least 80 percent of the annual use of such transportation facilities is 
to be in connection with the transport of cargo to or from docks or 
wharves. For example, rail facilities for transporting cargo from a 
port area to the major railyard some miles away would qualify as an 
exempt port facility provided that 80 percent of the cargo transported 
on the facilities is bound for or arriving from the port. It is 
intended that use--for purposes of the 80-percent test--be computed in 
any reasonable fashion including, for example, on the basis of ton-
miles or car-miles.

  The bill provides that for purposes of the governmental ownership 
requirement for docks and wharves, related transportation facilities 
that are leased by a government agency shall be treated as owned by 
such agency if the lessee makes an irrevocable election not to claim 
depreciation or an investment credit with respect to such facilities 
and the lessee has no option to purchase the facilities other than at 
fair market value.
  This bill is a critical step needed to help provide the most 
efficient transportation network possible to these vital ports. The 
Alameda Transportation Corridor project will create a transportation 
system of truly national significance.
  The Pacific rim is the largest and fastest growing market in the 
global economy. U.S.-Pacific rim trade is expected to double in the 
next 15 to 20 years. In the Los Angeles region alone, more than 900 
Asian and other Pacific rim firms employ more than 63,000 workers in 
local operations. More than 200,000 regional jobs are supported by the 
movement of goods through the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. They 
are critical components of our national economy. In fact, 25 percent of 
all U.S. waterborne international trade moves through the ports 
representing $116 billion in trade each year.
  The ports have joined forces on a $4 billion, 2,000-acre terminal 
expansion program. Completion of the program will result in a dramatic 
expansion between the ports' cities and the Pacific rim. The value of 
that trade is estimated to reach $253 billion by the year 2010. 
Employment linked to this trade is also expected to grow from 2.5 
million to 5.7 million jobs. Further, the growing trade will generate 
nearly $20 billion in additional Federal revenue by 2010.
  The United States spends nearly $1 trillion a year--17 percent of our 
gross domestic product--on transportation services. A 1-percent 
improvement in the overall efficiency of our transportation system 
would translate into nearly $100 billion in savings across the economy 
within a decade. Meanwhile, half of our Nation's ports face growing 
congestion. Adequate access to our ports, which handled 450 billion 
dollars' worth of commerce in 1990, is a national priority. Total port 
commerce is expected to triple over the next three decades.
  Mr. President, I hope our colleagues will support this legislation 
that is critical to our national efforts to complete as a nation in the 
global marketplace. To be successful we must modernize, and we must 
have the most efficient tools as possible to promote jobs prosperity 
across our country.
 Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today Senator Boxer and I 
introduce legislation that will allow for the Alameda Corridor 
Transportation Authority to issue tax-free bonds to help construct the 
Alameda corridor, probably the most important transportation project 
currently under consideration anywhere in the United States.
  The Alameda corridor is a $1.8 billion project that will allow the 
San Pedro Bay Ports--Los Angeles and Long Beach--to expand and grow 
well into the 21st century. The project, in the years ahead, will 
require a Federal authorization of $700 million, the necessary Federal 
commitment. The ports have committed well over $400 million to purchase 
railroad rights-of-way.
  But, initial construction will be funded by the issuance of bonds, 
and that is why this bill is so vital. Tax-free bonds can currently be 
issued for construction of harbor and port facilities, but under 
current law, the corridor would not apply since the major distribution 
center is 20 miles inland from the port. This legislation would extend 
the ability to issue tax-free bonds for transportation facilities, 
which would include trackage and rail facilities, if 80 percent of the 
cargo transported on the tracks is to and from the port, which is 
otherwise eligible for the issuance of tax-free bonds. Additionally, 
the facility must be publicly owned. This bill will reduce the cost of 
the corridor's construction by approximately $200 million.
  Currently, to handle the cargo going in and out of the ports, 
according to the Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority, the San 
Pedro Bay ports now generate approximately 20,000 truck trips and 29 
train movements per day. By the year 2020, truck traffic is projected 
to increase to 49,000 daily trips and 97 daily train movements.
  Today, three railroads on three separate tracks serve the San Pedro 
Bay Ports, with 90 miles of track and over 200 grade crossings between 
the ports and inland cargo dispersal sites. Santa Fe's railroad alone 
has 92 crossings within a 20-mile span. Trucks carrying goods from the 
ports to dispersal sites farther inland face numerous stops and 
traffic.
  With the projected increase in trade and cargo transport needs, the 
current transportation system will simply be inadequate to handle 
future demands.
  The Alameda corridor project would consolidate the existing railways 
into a single corridor that would be depressed, and all crossing 
streets would bridge over the top. This would avoid the terrible delays 
as a result of the grade crossings. The corridor would also accommodate 
truck traffic.
  Make no mistake, the Alameda corridor is a project of national 
significance.
  The benefit of constructing the corridor will go far beyond the Los 
Angeles region, and well beyond the California borders. Every State in 
this Nation is impacted by the trade along the Pacific rim, and thus by 
the activities of Pacific ports. Trucks and trains must move the goods 
out of the ports. Workers must unload the goods from ships, put them on 
trains or trucks, and then once they arrive at a destination, more 
workers must unload these goods, before they are delivered to their 
final stop. Trade creates jobs in every sector of the economy.
  Put simply, trade means jobs.
  All of the Nation's coastal States understand the importance of 
trade, seagoing trade in particular. In 1992, the last year for which 
statistics are available, this Nation exported 1.58.4 billion dollar's 
worth of goods through its seaports, and imported $293.1 billion of 
goods through the same ports of entry.
  The San Pedro Bay ports are the busiest containerport facility in the 
world. Combined, 109 billion dollar's worth of cargo moved through the 
Los Angeles and Long Beach ports. Trade on the Pacific rim is only 
expected to grow.
  We must be able to support the projected growth in international 
commerce, and the development of the Alameda corridor will help us 
insure that we do so.
                                 ______

      By Mr. JOHNSTON (by request):
  S. 2251. A bill to amend the Energy Policy and Conservation Act to 
manage the strategic petroleum reserve more effectively, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.


         energy policy and conservation act amendments of 1994

 Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, at the request of the Department 
of Energy, I send to the desk a bill to amend the Energy Policy and 
Conservation Act to manage the strategic petroleum reserve more 
effectively and for other purposes.
  I ask unanimous consent that the bill, the communication, and a 
sectional analysis prepared by the Department of Energy by printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2251

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this 
     Act may be cited as the ``Energy Policy and Conservation Act 
     Amendments Act''.
       Sec. 2. Section 2 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 6201) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1) by striking ``standby'' and ``, 
     subject to congressional review, to impose rationing, to 
     reduce demand for energy through the implementation of 
     conservation plans, and''; and
       (2) by striking paragraphs (3) and (6).
       Sec. 3. Title I of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 6211-6251) is amended--
       (a) by striking section 102 (42 U.S.C. 6211);
       (b) in section 105 (42 U.S.C. 6213)--
       (1) by amending subsection (a) to read as follows--
       ``(a) The Secretary of the Interior shall prohibit the 
     bidding for any right to develop crude oil, natural gas, and 
     natural gas liquids on any lands located on the Outer 
     Continental Shelf by any person if more than one major oil 
     company, more than one affiliate of a major oil company, or a 
     major oil company and any affiliate of a major oil company, 
     has or have a significant ownership interest in that person, 
     when the Secretary determines prior to any lease sale that 
     this bidding would adversely affect competition or the 
     receipt of fair market value.''; and
       (2) by striking subsections (c) and (e);
       (c) by striking section 106 (42 U.S.C. 6214);
       (d) in section 151 (42 U.S.C. 6231)--
       (1) in subsection (a) by striking ``limited'' and ``short-
     term''; and
       (2) by amending subsection (b) to read as follows:
       ``(b) It is the policy of the United States to provide for 
     the creation of a Strategic Petroleum Reserve for the 
     shortage of up to 1 billion barrels of petroleum products to 
     reduce the impact of disruptions in supplies of petroleum 
     products or to carry out obligations of the United States 
     under the international energy program.'';
       (e) in section 152 (42 U.S.C. 6232)--
       (1) by striking paragraph (1), and
       (2) in paragraph (11) by striking ``, the Early Storage 
     Reserve'';
       (f) by striking section 153 (42 U.S.C. 6233);
       (g) in section 154 (42 U.S.C. 6234)--
       (1) by amending subsection (a)(1) to read as follows:
       ``(a)(1) A Strategic Petroleum Reserve for the storage of 
     up to 1 billion barrels of petroleum products shall be 
     created pursuant to this part.'';
       (2) by amending subsection (b) to read as follows:
       ``(b) The Secretary, acting through the Strategic Petroleum 
     Reserve Office and in accordance with this part, shall 
     exercise authority over the development, operation, and 
     maintenance of the Reserve.''; and
       (3) by striking subsection (c), (d), and (e).
       (h) by striking section 155 (42 U.S.C. 6235);
       (i) in section 156(b) (42 U.S.C. 6236(b)), by striking ``To 
     implement the Early Storage Reserve Plan or the Strategic 
     Petroleum Reserve Plan which has taken effect pursuant to 
     section 159(a), the'' and inserting ``The'';
       (j) by amending section 157 (42 U.S.C. 6237)--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``The Strategic 
     Petroleum Reserve Plan shall provide for the establishment 
     and maintenance of'' and insert ``The Secretary shall 
     establish and maintain as part of the Strategic Petroleum 
     Reserve'', and
       (2) in subsection (b), by striking ``To implement the 
     Strategic Petroleum Reserve Plan, the Secretary shall 
     accumulate and maintain'' and inserting ``The Secretary shall 
     establish and maintain as part of the Strategic Petroleum 
     Reserve'';
       (k) by striking section 158 (42 U.S.C. 6238);
       (l) by amending the heading for section 159 (42 U.S.C. 
     6239) to read, ``Development, Operation, and Maintenance of 
     the Reserve'';
       (m) in section 159 (42 U.S.C. 6239)--
       (1) by striking subsections (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e);
       (2) by amending subsection (f) to read as follows:
       ``(f) In order to develop, operate, or maintain the 
     Strategic Petroleum Reserve, the Secretary may:
       ``(1) issue rules, regulations, or orders;
       ``(2) acquire by purchase, condemnation, or otherwise, land 
     or interests in land for the location of storage and related 
     facilities;
       ``(3) construct, purchase, lease, or otherwise acquire 
     storage and related facilities;
       ``(4) use, lease, maintain, sell, or otherwise dispose of 
     storage and related facilities acquired under this part, 
     under such terms and conditions as the Secretary may deem 
     necessary or appropriate;
       ``(5) acquire subject to the provisions of section 160 by 
     purchase, exchange, or otherwise, petroleum products for 
     storage in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve;
       ``(6) store petroleum products in storage facilities owned 
     and controlled by the United States or in storage facilities 
     owned by others if those facilities are subject to audit by 
     the United States;
       ``(7) execute any contracts necessary to develop, operate, 
     or maintain the Strategic Petroleum Reserve;
       ``(8) require an importer of petroleum products or refiner 
     to acquire and to store and maintain, in readily available 
     inventories, petroleum products in the Industrial Petroleum 
     Reserve, under section 156;
       ``(9) require the storage of petroleum products in the 
     Industrial Petroleum Reserve, under section 156, on 
     terms that the Secretary specifies in storage facilities 
     owned and controlled by the United States or in storage 
     facilities other than those owned by the United States if 
     those facilities are subject to audit by the United 
     States;
       ``(10) require the maintenance of the Industrial Petroleum 
     Reserve; and
       ``(11) bring an action, when the Secretary considers it 
     necessary, in any court having jurisdiction over the 
     proceedings, to acquire by condemnation any real or personal 
     property, including facilities, temporary use of facilities, 
     or other interests in land, together with any personal 
     property located on or used with the land.'';
       (3) in subsection (g)--
       (A) by striking ``implementation'' and inserting 
     ``development''; and
       (B) by striking ``Plan'';
       (4) by striking subsections (h) and (i); and
       (5) by amending subsection (j) to read as follows:
       ``(j) When a pattern of appropriations for fill of the 
     Strategic Petroleum Reserve develops such that a 750 million 
     barrel inventory can reasonably be expected to be reached 
     within five years by a continuation of that pattern, a plan 
     for expansion will be submitted to the Congress.'';
       (6) by amending subsection (1) to read as follows:
       ``(1) During any period in which drawdown and distribution 
     are being implemented, the Secretary may issue rules, 
     regulations, or orders to implement the drawdown and 
     distribution of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in accordance 
     with section 523 of this Act, without regard to the 
     requirements of section 553 of title 5, United States Code, 
     and section 501 of the Department of Energy Organization Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 7191).'';
       (n) in section 160 (42 U.S.C. 6240)--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking all before the dash and 
     inserting the following--
       ``(a) To the extent funds are available under section 
     167(b) (2) and (3) and for the purposes of implementing the 
     Strategic Petroleum Reserve, the Secretary may acquire, place 
     in storage, transport, or exchange'';
       (2) in subsection (b), by striking ``including the Early 
     Storage Reserve'' and paragraph (2); and
       (3) by striking subsections (c), (d), and (e); (o) in 
     section 161 (42 U.S.C. 6241)--
       (1) by striking subsections (b) and (c);
       (2) by amending subsection (d)(1) to read as follows:
       ``(d)(1) No drawdown and distribution of the Strategic 
     Petroleum Reserve may be made unless the President has found 
     drawdown and distribution is required by a severe energy 
     supply interruption or by obligations of the United States 
     under the international energy program.'';
       (3) by amending subsection (e) to read as follows:
       ``(e)(1) The Secretary shall sell any petroleum product 
     withdrawn from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve at public sale 
     to the highest qualified bidder in the amounts, for the 
     period, and after a notice of sale the Secretary considers 
     proper, and without regard to Federal, State, or local 
     regulations controlling sales of petroleum products.
       ``(2) The Secretary may cancel in whole or in part any 
     offer to sell petroleum products as part of any drawdown and 
     distribution under this Section.''; and
       (4) in subsection (g)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Distribution Plan'' and 
     inserting ``distribution procedures'', and
       (B) by striking paragraphs (2) and (6);
       (p) by striking section 164 (42 U.S.C. 6244);
       (q) by amending section 165 (42 U.S.C. 6245) to read as 
     follows--
       ``Sec. 165. The Secretary shall report annually to the 
     President and the Congress on actions taken to implement this 
     part. This report shall include--
       ``(1) a detailed statement of the status of the Strategic 
     Petroleum Reserve, including--
       ``(A) the capacity of the Reserve and the scheduled annual 
     fill rate for achieving this capacity;
       ``(B) the scheduled annual fill rate for the fiscal year 
     for which the report is transmitted;
       ``(C) the type and quality of crude oil to be acquired for 
     the Reserve under the schedule described in subparagraph (A);
       ``(D) the schedule of construction of any facilities, 
     including a description of the type and location of the 
     facilities, and of enhancements and improvements to existing 
     facilities;
       ``(E) a description of the current method of drawdown and 
     distribution to be utilized; and
       ``(F) an explanation of any changes made in the matters 
     described in subparagraphs (A) through (E) since the 
     transmittal of the previous report under this section;
       ``(2) a summary of the actions taken to develop, operate, 
     or maintain the Strategic Petroleum Reserve;
       ``(3) a summary of the financial transactions in the 
     Strategic Petroleum Reserve and SPR Petroleum Account; and
       ``(4) a summary of existing problems with respect to 
     operation or maintenance of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve; 
     and
       ``(5) any recommendation for supplemental legislation the 
     Secretary considers necessary or appropriate to implement 
     this part.'';
       (r) in section 166 (42 U.S.C. 6246) by striking all after 
     ``appropriated'' and inserting ``the funds necessary to 
     implement this part.'';
       (s) in section 167 (42 U.S.C. 6247)--
       (1) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by inserting ``test sales of petroleum products from 
     the Reserve,'' after ``Strategic Petroleum Reserve,'';
       (B) by striking paragraph (1);
       (C) in paragraph (2), by striking ``after fiscal year 
     1982''; and
       (2) by amending subsection (e) to read as follows
       ``(e) The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 681-
     688) applies to funds made available under subsection (b).'';
       (t) in section 172 (42 U.S.C. 6249a) by striking 
     subsections (a) and (b);
       (u) by striking section 173 (42 U.S.C. 6249b); and
       (v) in section 181 (42 U.S.C. 6251), by striking ``1994'' 
     each time it appears and inserting ``1999''.
       Sec. 4. Title II of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 6211-6251) is amended--
       (a) by striking Part A (42 U.S.C. 201 through 204);
       (b) in section 252 (42 U.S.C. 6272)--
       (1) in subsections (a)(1) and (b), by striking ``allocation 
     and information'' and inserting ``emergency response'';
       (2) in subsection (d)(3), by striking ``known'' and 
     inserting after ``circumstances'' ``known at the time of 
     approval'';
       (3) in subsection (e)(2) by striking ``shall'' and 
     inserting ``may'';
       (4) in subsection (f)(2) by inserting ``voluntary agreement 
     or'' after ``approved'';
       (5) by amending subsection (h) to read as follows--
       ``(h) Section 708 of the Defense Production Act of 1950 
     shall not apply to any agreement or action undertaken for the 
     purpose of developing or carrying out--
       ``(1) the international energy program, or
       ``(2) any allocation, price control, or similar program 
     with respect to petroleum products under this Act.'';
       (6) in subsection (i) by inserting ``annually, or'' after 
     ``least'' and by inserting ``during an international energy 
     supply emergency'' after ``months'';
       (7) in subsection (k) by amending paragraph (2) to read as 
     follows--
       ``(2) The term `emergency response provisions of the 
     international energy program' means--
       (A) the provisions of the international energy program 
     which relate to international allocation of petroleum 
     products and to the information system provided in the 
     program, and
       (B) the emergency response measures adopted by the 
     Governing Board of the International Energy Agency (including 
     the July 11, 1984 decision by the Governing Board on ``Stocks 
     and Supply Disruptions'') for the coordinated drawdown of 
     stocks of petroleum products held or controlled by 
     governments and complementary actions taken by governments 
     during an existing or impending international oil supply 
     disruption, whether or not international allocation of 
     petroleum products is required by chapters III and IV of the 
     international energy program.''; and
       (8) by amending subsection (1) to read as follows--
       ``(1) The antitrust defense under subsection (f) 
     applies only to the development or carrying out of 
     voluntary agreements and plans of action to implement the 
     emergency response provisions of the international energy 
     program, except that in the event the International Energy 
     Agency seeks advice and information concerning preparation 
     and implementation of measures by governments on the 
     coordinated drawdown of stocks of petroleum products and 
     complementary actions as described in subsection 
     (k)(2)(B), the antitrust defense also applies but only to 
     advising and consulting with and providing information or 
     data to the International Energy Agency according to 
     procedures set forth in a voluntary agreement or plan of 
     action, unless the Attorney General, after consultation 
     with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Energy, and 
     the Federal Trade Commission, determines that additional 
     actions are necessary or appropriate to fulfill the 
     purposes of this section; provided that the antitrust 
     defense shall not extend to the international allocation 
     of petroleum products unless allocation is required by 
     chapters III and IV of the international energy program 
     during an international energy supply emergency.'';
       (c) by adding at the end of section 256(h), ``There are 
     authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years 1996 through 
     1999, such sums as may be necessary.''
       (d) by striking Part C (42 U.S.C. 271 through 272); and
       (e) in section 281 (42 U.S.C. 6285), by striking ``1994'' 
     each time is appears and inserting ``1999''.
       Sec. 5. (a) Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 6291-6327, 6361-6374d) is amended--
       (1) in section 365(f) (42 U.S.C. 6325(f)) by amending 
     paragraph (1) to read as follows:
       ``(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), for the purpose 
     of carrying out this part, there are authorized to be 
     appropriated for fiscal years 1995 through 1999, such sums as 
     may be necessary.''; and
       (2) section 397 (42 U.S.C. 6371f) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``For the purpose of carrying out this part, there are 
     authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years 1995 through 
     1999, such sums as may be necessary.''.
       (b) Section 422 of the Energy Conservation and Production 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 6872) is amended to read as follows:
       ``Sec. 422. For the purposes of carrying out the 
     weatherization program under this part, there are authorized 
     to be appropriated for fiscal years 1995 through 1999, such 
     sums as may be necessary.''.
       Sec. 6. Title V of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 6381-6422) is amended--
       (1) by striking section 507 (42 U.S.C. 6385), and
       (2) by striking section 522 (42 U.S.C. 6392).
                                  ____



                                          Secretary of Energy,

                                     Washington, DC, May 23, 1994.
     Hon. Albert Gore,
     President of the Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. President: Enclosed is a legislative proposal 
     cited as the ``Energy Policy and Conservation Act Amendments 
     Act of 1994.'' This proposal would amend and extend certain 
     authorities in the Energy Policy and Conversation Act that 
     have expired or will expire September 30, 1994. Not all 
     sections of the current act are proposed for extension. It 
     also would extend authorization of appropriations for the 
     Weatherization Assistance Program under the Energy 
     Conservation and Production Act.
       The Energy Policy and Conservation Act was passed in 1975. 
     Title I authorizes the creation and maintenance of the 
     Strategic Petroleum Reserve that would mitigate shortages 
     during an oil supply disruption. Title II contains 
     authorities essential for meeting key United States 
     obligations to the International Energy Agency, our method of 
     coordinating Energy Emergency Response Programs with other 
     countries. The current antitrust defense that is provided to 
     American companies by the Act when they cooperate with 
     International Energy Administration programs is very limited 
     and would be expanded by the proposed legislation. Titles I 
     and II expire on September 30, 1994. Title III contains 
     authorities for energy efficiency and conservation, some of 
     whose appropriation authorization have expired. These 
     successful and very cost-beneficial programs, designed to 
     encourage and subsidize demand reducing investment and 
     manufacturing, are proposed for extension without amendment. 
     Title IV made amendments to the Emergency Petroleum 
     Allocation Act, which expired in 1981. Title V contains 
     provisions pertaining to energy data bases and information 
     and general and administrative matters that were residual 
     from the Federal Energy Administration and should be made 
     current.
       The proposed legislation would extend the Strategic 
     Petroleum Reserve, participation in the International Energy 
     Program, and conservation and efficiency authorities to 
     September 30, 1999. It will also revise or delete certain 
     provisions that are outdated or unnecessary. The proposed 
     legislation and a sectional analysis are enclosed.
       The Office of Management and Budget advises that enactment 
     of this proposal would be in accord with the program of the 
     President. We look forward to working with the Congress 
     toward enactment of this legislation.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Hazel R. O'Leary.
                                  ____


                      Section-by-Section Analysis


           SECTION 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE STATEMENT OF PURPOSES

       Section 2 of the bill would amend section 2 of the Energy 
     Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA).
       Paragraph (1) would strike language referring to standby 
     energy conservation and rationing authorities in title II, 
     part A, which expired June 30, 1985.
       Paragraph (2) would strike paragraphs (3) and (6) of the 
     Statement of Purposes to reflect the bill's elimination of 
     sections 102 (Incentive to develop underground coal mines) 
     and 106 (Production of oil or gas at the maximum efficient 
     rate and temporary emergency production rate).


                 SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS TO TITLE I OF EPCA

       Subsection (a) would strike section 102 of EPCA.
       Section 102 of EPCA provides a loan guaranty program to 
     encourage the opening of underground coal mines. Coal supply, 
     however, is abundant, and the loan guarantee program has been 
     inactive since the early 1980s. Because there is no current 
     or foreseeable need for the program authorized by section 102 
     of EPCA, it is appropriate to delete the section.
       Subsection (b) would amend section 105(a) of EPCA by 
     providing that the Secretary of the Interior may allow joint 
     bidding by major oil companies unless he or she determines 
     that this bidding would adversely affect competition or the 
     receipt of fair market value. If the Secretary finds that a 
     prohibition must be issued, it may be done without issuing a 
     rule, as previously required. This change would render 
     unnecessary the exemption process required in section 105(c). 
     The report required in section 105(e) has been issued to 
     Congress.
       Subsection (c) would strike section 106 of EPCA.
       Section 106 of EPCA directs the Secretary of the Interior 
     of determine the maximum efficient rate of production and the 
     temporary emergency rate of production, if any, for each 
     field on Federal lands which produces or is capable of 
     producing significant volumes of crude oil or natural gas. 
     The President may then require production at those rates, and 
     the owner may sue for damages if economic loss is incurred.
       Subsection (d) would amend section 151 of EPCA to clarify 
     the policy for establishing a strategic reserve of petroleum 
     products, and delete references to the Early Storage Reserve, 
     the objectives of which have been achieved.
       Subsection (e) would amend section 152 of EPCA by deleting 
     the definition of ``Early Storage Reserve.'' Requirements for 
     and all references to this part of the program would be 
     delete by this bill.
       Subsection (f) would strike section 153 of EPCA and amend 
     section 154 to reflect the transfer of the Strategic 
     Petroleum Reserve Office from the Federal Energy 
     Administration to the Department of Energy.
       Subsection (g) would amend section 154 of EPCA to eliminate 
     requirements for a Strategic Petroleum Reserve Plan, and for 
     specified fill rates and schedules, but would retain 
     authority for a one billion barrel Reserve.
       The Strategic Petroleum Reserve Plan is largely obsolete 
     because the sites that are described for development in the 
     Plan have now been developed. The need for the Drawdown and 
     Distribution Plan, contained in Plan Amendment 4, is 
     eliminated by the amendment to section 159, which would 
     codify competitive sale as the drawdown and distribution 
     policy and eliminate allocation as a method of distribution.
       Subsection (h) would delete section 155 of EPCA, which 
     requires the establishment of an Early Storage Reserve. All 
     of the volumetric goals for the Early Storage Reserve have 
     been accomplished, and there is no longer a distinction 
     between the Early Storage Reserve and any other facilities or 
     petroleum that make up the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
       Subsection (i) would amend section 156(b) of EPCA on the 
     Industrial Petroleum Reserve authority to remove references 
     to the Early Storage Reserve and the Strategic Petroleum 
     Plan, which are being deleted by other amendments.
       Subsection (j) would amend section 157 of EPCA to remove 
     references to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve Plan.
       Subsection (k) would delete 158 of EPCA.
       Section 158 requires reports to Congress on Utility 
     Reserves, Coal Reserves, and Remote Crude Oil and Natural Gas 
     Reserves within six months of passage of the original Act. 
     This requirement has been fulfilled.
       Subsection (l) would amend the heading for section 159 of 
     EPCA to reflect amendment to its contents.
       Subsection (m) would amend section 159 of EPCA.
       Paragraph (l) would eliminate subsections (a) through (e) 
     of section 159 of EPCA, which require Congressional review of 
     the Strategic Petroleum Reserve Plan and provide for Plan 
     amendments, to reflect the deletion of the requirement for a 
     Strategic Petroleum Reserve Plan in subsection (g) of this 
     amendment.
       Paragraph (2) would amend subsection 159(f) of EPCA to 
     eliminate references to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve Plan 
     and the Early Storage Reserve Plan. This amendment also would 
     clarify and make explicit the Secretary's discretionary 
     authority to lease, sell, or otherwise dispose of 
     underutilized Strategic Petroleum Reserve facilities. If 
     necessary or appropriate, lease terms could exceed the five-
     year limitation of section 649(b) of the Department of Energy 
     Organization Act.
       Paragraph (3) would remove references in subsection (g) of 
     section 159 of EPCA to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve Plan.
       Paragraph (4) would delete subsections 159(h) and (i) of 
     EPCA. Subsection 159(h) deals with interim storage facilities 
     which provide for storage of petroleum prior to the creation 
     of Government-owned facilities. That authority is no longer 
     needed since the Reserve has 750 million barrels of capacity, 
     of which approximately 160 million barrels are empty. 
     Subsection 159(i) required the submission of a report to 
     Congress within 18 months after enactment of the 1990 EPCA 
     Amendments on the results of contract negotiations conducted 
     pursuant to part C of EPCA. The Department did not conclude 
     any contracts pursuant to part C, and the reporting provision 
     has expired by its own terms.
       Paragraph (5) would amend subsection 159(j) of EPCA to 
     reflect the elimination of the statutory requirement for an 
     Strategic Petroleum Reserve Plan by amendment of section 154 
     of the Act. This amendment would continue the requirement for 
     submission to Congress of proposed plans for expansion of 
     storage capacity following a determination by the Secretary 
     that a pattern of funding has been established which will 
     fill the Reserve to 750 million barrels within five years. 
     This reflects the situation that financing of fill for the 
     available capacity in the Reserve is problematic, and that 
     premature planning for capacity expansion beyond current 
     capacity is unwise and costly.
       Paragraph (6) would amend subsection 159(l) to eliminate 
     the reference to the Distribution Plan, but would retain the 
     Secretary's authority, during drawdown and distribution of 
     the Reserve, to promulgate regulations necessary to the 
     drawdown and distribution without regard to rulemaking 
     requirements in section 553 of title 5, United States Code 
     and section 501 of the Department of Energy Organization Act.
       Subsection (n) would amend section 160 of EPCA.
       Paragraph (l) would amend subsection 160(a) of EPCA to 
     provide that the Secretary's authority to acquire petroleum 
     products for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is contingent on 
     the availability of funds.
       Paragraph (2) would amend subsection 160(b) of EPCA by 
     striking the reference to the Early Storage Reserve, which 
     would be eliminated by this bill.
       Paragraph (3) would strike subsections 160(c), (d) and (e) 
     of EPCA.
       Subsection 160(c) of EPCA requires minimum fill rates. 
     These requirements have proved unrealistic given changes in 
     oil markets and availability of financing. The proposed 
     amendment gives the Secretary flexibility to fill the Reserve 
     contingent upon the availability of funds.
       Subsection 160(d) links sales authority for the United 
     States' share of crude oil at Naval Petroleum Reserve 
     Numbered 1 to a fill level of 750,000,000 barrels or a fill 
     rate of 75,000 barrels per day. The requirement for Strategic 
     Petroleum Reserve fill is dependent on the availability of 
     financing for Strategic Petroleum Reserve acquisition, and 
     the logistics of moving Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 
     crude oil to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve have proved to 
     be very problematic.
       Subsection 160(e) describes various exceptions to the 
     linkage between the Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 crude 
     oil sales authority and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve fill 
     rate, which would be eliminated by this bill.
       Subsection (o) would amend section 161 of EPCA.
       Paragraph (1) would strike subsections 161 (b) and (c) of 
     EPCA, because they refer to both the Strategic Petroleum 
     Reserve Plan and the Early Storage Reserve Plan which would 
     be eliminated by this bill.
       Paragraph (2) would amend subsection 161(b) of EPCA by 
     eliminating the references to the Distribution Plan contained 
     in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve Plan but would not change 
     the existing conditions for Presidential decision to draw 
     down and distribute the Reserve.
       Paragraph (3) would amendment subsection 161(e) of EPCA to 
     require the Secretary to distribute oil from the Reserve via 
     a public competitive sale to the highest qualified bidder. 
     The amendment eliminates the Secretary's allocation 
     authority.
       The amendment also would make explicit the authority of the 
     Secretary to cancel a sale in progress. This authority would 
     enable the Secretary to respond to inordinately low bids, 
     changes in market conditions, or a sudden reversal in the 
     nature of the shortage or emergency.
       Paragraph (4) would amend subsection 161(g) of EPCA.
       Subparagraph (4)(A) would amend subsection 161(g)(1) of 
     EPCA to substitute ``distribution procedures'' for 
     ``Distribution Plan.''
       Subparagraph (4)(B) would strike subsection 161(g)(2) of 
     EPCA because it refers to the Distribution Plan eliminated by 
     the bill, and subsection 161(g)(6) of EPCA because it refers 
     to the minimum required fill rate eliminated by the bill.
       Subsection (p) would strike section 164 of EPCA. Section 
     164 of EPCA required a study of the use of Naval Petroleum 
     Reserve No. 4 jointly by the Secretaries of Energy, the 
     Interior and the Navy, with a report to Congress within 180 
     days of the passage of the original Act. The study and report 
     were completed.
       Subsection (q) would amend section 165 of EPCA by deleting 
     the requirement for quarterly reports on the operation of the 
     Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and requiring instead an annual 
     report consistent with other parts of this amendment. 
     Quarterly reports, considered important during the early 
     growth period of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to inform 
     the Congress of progress in construction and the rate of 
     fill, are now unnecessary, and their deletion would save 
     administrative costs. Subsection (q) would also eliminate 
     references to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve Plan, the 
     Distribution Plan, and the Early Storage Reserve, which are 
     eliminated by the bill.
       Subsection (r) would amend section 166 of EPCA to authorize 
     appropriations necessary to implement the Strategic Petroleum 
     Reserve, and to delete year specific authorizations for the 
     early years of the Reserve.
       Subsection (s) would amend section 167 of EPCA to recognize 
     explicitly that funds generated by test sales will be 
     deposited in the SPR Petroleum Account. The amendment would 
     remove language specific to fiscal year 1982 which limited 
     the amount of money in the SPR Petroleum Account that year. 
     The amendment also would delete reference to the use of funds 
     for interim storage, which will no be needed because the 
     permanent facilities are complete for the storage of 750 
     million barrels of oil.
       Subsection (t) would amend section 172 of EPCA to delete 
     subsections (a) and (b). The exemption in subsection (a) from 
     the requirement for a Strategic Petroleum Reserve Plan 
     amendment is no longer necessary because the bill eliminates 
     the requirement for the Plan.
       Subsection (b), which provides for treatment of part C 
     contract oil coming out of the Reserve for purposes of 
     calculating fill rates, is unnecessary since the requirement 
     for specific fill rates is deleted by amendment of section 
     160 of the Act.
       Subsection (u) would delete section 173 of EPCA which 
     requires congressional review and, therefore, public scrutiny 
     of the details of contracts even though no implementing 
     legislation is needed, and requires a 30-day ``lie before'' 
     period before the contract can go into effect. This 
     requirement is a substantial impediment to acquisition of oil 
     for the Reserve by ``leasing'' and other alternative 
     financing methods authorized by EPCA, part C.
       Subsection (v) would amend section 181 of EPCA by extending 
     the expiration date of title I, parts B and C from September 
     30, 1994 to September 30, 1999.


                 SEC. 4. AMENDMENTS TO TITLE II OF EPCA

       Subsection (a) would strike part A of EPCA title II, which 
     contains the authorities for gasoline rationing and other 
     mandatory energy conservation measures which expired on July 
     1, 1995.
       Subsection (b) would amend section 252 of EPCA, which makes 
     available to United States oil companies a limited antitrust 
     defense and breach of contract defense for actions taken to 
     carry out a voluntary agreement or plan of action to 
     implement the ``allocation and information provisions'' of 
     the Agreement on an International Energy Program (``IEP''). 
     These limited defenses are now available only in connection 
     with the companies' participation in planning for and 
     operation of the IEP's emergency oil sharing and information 
     programs. The amendment would extend the section 252 
     antitrust defense (but not the breach of contract defense) to 
     U.S. companies when they assist the International Energy 
     Agency (``IEA'') in planning for and implementing the 
     coordinated drawdown of government-owned or government-
     controlled petroleum stocks. In 1984, largely at the urging 
     of the United States, the IEA's Governing Board adopted a 
     decision on ``Stocks and Supply Disruptions'' which 
     established a framework for coordinating the drawdown of 
     member countries' government-owned and government-controlled 
     petroleum stocks in those oil supply disruptions that appear 
     capable of causing severe economic harm, whether or not 
     sufficient to activate the IEP emergency oil sharing and 
     information programs. During the 1990-91 Persian Gulf crisis 
     the IEA successfully tested the new coordinated stockdraw 
     policy.
       Paragraph 1 would amend subsections 252(a) and (b) of EPC 
     by substituting the term ``emergency response provisions of 
     the international energy program'' for the term ``allocation 
     and information provisions of the international energy 
     program.'' The new term, which would be defined in amended 
     subsection (k)(2), establishes the scope of oil company 
     activities covered by the antitrust defense and includes 
     actions to assist the IEA in implementing coordinated 
     drawdown of petroleum stocks.
       Paragraph 2 would amend paragraph 252(d)(3) of EPCA to 
     clarify that a plan of action submitted to the Attorney 
     General for approval must be as specific in its description 
     of proposed substantive actions as is reasonable ``in light 
     of circumstances known at the time of approval'' rather than 
     ``in light of known circumstances.''
       Paragraph 3 would amend paragraph 252(e)(2) of EPCA to give 
     the Attorney General flexibility in promulgating rules 
     concerning the maintenance of records by oil companies 
     related to the development and carrying out of voluntary 
     agreements and plans of action.
       Paragraph 4 would amend paragraph 252(f)(2) of EPCA to 
     clarify that the antitrust defense applies to oil company 
     actions taken to carry out an approved voluntary agreement as 
     well as an approved plan of action.
       Paragraph 5 would amend subsection 252(h) of EPCA to strike 
     the reference to section 708(A) of the Defense Production Act 
     of 1950, which was repealed by Public Law 102-558 (October 
     28, 1992), and the reference to the Emergency Petroleum 
     Allocation Act of 1973, which expired in 1981.
       Paragraph 6 would amend subsection 252(i) of EPCA to 
     require the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission 
     to submit reports to Congress and to the President on the 
     impact of actions authorized by section 252 on competition 
     and on small businesses annually rather than every six 
     months, except during an ``international energy supply 
     emergency,'' when the reports would be required every six 
     months.
       Paragaph 7 would amend paragraph 252(k)(2) of EPCA by 
     substituting a definition of the term ``emergency response 
     provisions of the international energy program'' for the 
     present definition of ``allocation and information provisions 
     of the international energy program.'' The new term, which 
     establishes the scope of company actions covered by the 
     antitrust defense, covers (A) the allocation and information 
     provisions of the IEP and (B) emergency response measures 
     adopted by the IEA Governing Board for the coordinated 
     drawdown of stocks of petroleum products held or controlled 
     by governments and complementary actions taken by governments 
     during an existing or impending international oil supply 
     disruption, whether or not international allocation of 
     petroleum products is required by the IEP.
       Paragraph 8 would amend subsection 252(l) of EPCA to 
     clarify that the antitrust defense applies only to company 
     actions to implement the IEA's emergency oil sharing system 
     and IEA emergency response measures on coordinated stockdraw. 
     With respect to stockdraw measures, the antitrust defense 
     applies only to advising and consulting with or providing 
     information or data to the IEA, unless the Attorney General, 
     after consultation with the Departments of State and Energy, 
     determines that additional actions are necessary or 
     appropriate. However, the amendment makes clear that no 
     antitrust defense would be available for oil companies to 
     participate voluntarily in so-called ``subtrigger'' or 
     ``subcrisis'' international oil allocation.
       Subsection (c) would amend subsection 256(h) of EPCA to 
     authorize appropriations for fiscal years 1996 through 1999 
     for the activities of the interagency working group and 
     interagency working subgroups established by section 256 of 
     EPCA to promote exports of renewable energy and energy 
     efficiency products and services.
       Subsection (d) would strike EPCA part C, which was added to 
     the EPCA by the Energy Emergency Preparedness Act of 1982 and 
     which required the submission to Congress of reports on 
     energy emergency legal authorities and response procedures. 
     The reporting requirement was fulfilled in 1982.
       Subsection (e) would amend section 281 of EPCA by extending 
     the expiration date of title II from September 30, 1994 to 
     September 30, 1999.


 sec. 5. amendments to title iii of epca and section 422 of the energy 
                    conservation and production act

       Subsection (a) would amend sections 365 and 397 of EPCA, 
     which provide authorization for appropriations for fiscal 
     years 1991, 1992, and 1993 for State Energy Conservation 
     programs and the Energy Conservation Program for Schools and 
     Hospitals. The amendment would authorize appropriation of 
     such funds as may be necessary for fiscal years 1995 through 
     1999.
       Subsection (b) would amend section 422 of the Energy 
     Conservation and Production Act, which provides authorization 
     for appropriations for fiscal years 1992, 1993, and 1994 for 
     the Weatherization Assistance Program. The amendment would 
     authorize appropriation of such funds as may be necessary for 
     the program for fiscal years 1995 through 1999.


                 sec. 6. amendments to title v of epca

       Paragraph 1 would delete section 507 of the Act, which 
     provides that the Energy Information Administration must 
     continue to gather the same data on pricing, supply and 
     distribution of petroleum products as it did on September 1, 
     1981. This section hinders the flexibility of the 
     Administrator to collect information that is currently 
     meaningful. There is no reason to have a statutory 
     prohibition against modifying and amending the types of data 
     collected.
       Paragraph 2 would delete section 522 of the Act, which 
     provides conflict of interest disclosure requirements for the 
     Federal Energy Administration. This section was superseded by 
     the Department of Energy Organization Act.
                                 ______

      By Mr. HATCH (for himself, Mr. Inouye, Mr. McCain, and Mr. 
        Bennett):
  S. 2252. A bill to amend section 17 of the Act of August 27, 1954 (25 
U.S.C. 667p), relating to the distribution and taxation of assets and 
earnings, to clarify that distributions of rents and royalties derived 
from assets held in continued trust by the Government, and paid to the 
mixed-blood members of the Ute Indian Tribe, their Ute Indian heirs, or 
Ute Indian legatees, are not subject to Federal or State taxation at 
the time of distribution, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Finance.


                       UTE indian tax status act

    
    
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I am joined today by my colleagues, 
Senators Inouye, McCain, and Bennett, to introduce a bill of great 
importance to the Ute Indians, a native population of my home State of 
Utah.
  This legislation will restore the tax status of the Ute mixed blood 
Indians with regard to proceeds received from a trust created by the 
Federal Government as agreed in a settlement between the Federal 
Government and the tribe in 1954.
  Until recently, the Federal Government has respected the intent of 
Congress to exempt this income from Federal and State taxation. 
However, in a recent tenth circuit decision the court construed the 
intent of Congress as allowing the tax exemption on the settlement 
proceeds to lapse. This bill is necessary to clarify the legislative 
intent of Congress and reinstate the exemption.
  In my view, it was the intent of Congress in the 1954 settlement to 
exempt from Federal and State taxation the income derived from the 
assets held in continued trust by the Federal Government for, and paid 
to, the mixed blood Ute Indians. This has been the law for nearly four 
decades and should remain the law.
  Historically, with regard to all settlements between the Federal 
Government and numerous Indian nations, the proceeds from settlements 
have been exempt from Federal and State taxation. The mixed blood Ute 
Indians have been singled out and treated differently since the tenth 
circuit's decision. This bill clarifies the 1954 settlement and simply 
restores the tax status of the mixed blood members of the tribe.
  I believe all of my Senate colleagues will recognize this legislation 
as both fair and necessary. I am pleased to have the support of the 
chairman and ranking Republican member of the Senate Indian Affairs 
Committee as well as my Utah colleague, Senator Bennett. I urge all 
Senators to help us clarify this exemption.
                                 ______

      By Mr. NICKLES (for himself and Mr. Boren):
  S. 2253. A bill to modify the Mountain Park Project in Oklahoma, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.


                 The Mountain Park Project Act of 1994

 Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I am pleased today to introduce 
legislation on behalf of myself and Senator Boren to allow the Mountain 
Park Conservancy District in Oklahoma to prepay, or refinance, its 
obligation to the Bureau of Reclamation for the Mountain Park project. 
This prepayment will be equal to the fair market value of the 
district's debt, and is necessary to prevent a possible default by the 
district on their obligation.
  To provide some background on this issue, Mr. President, the Mountain 
Park Master Conservancy District was formed by the Oklahoma communities 
of Altus, Frederick, and Snyder in the early 1970's. The district 
contracted with the Bureau of Reclamation for construction of the 
Mountain Park project in response to projections that the local 
population would increase significantly in the future and that 
additional water supply would be needed. Unfortunately, such population 
growth never developed, creating a very difficult financial situation 
for the district and the Federal Government.
  Later this year, one of the municipalities obligated to the district 
may default on its loan payment to the district. Such a default would, 
in turn, likely cause the district to default on its obligation to the 
Bureau.
  Since 1992, the district has worked with the Oklahoma congressional 
delegation to obtain relief from the financial burden caused by its 
obligation to repay the water supply costs associated with the Mountain 
Park project. The district has requested that they be allowed to 
purchase or prepay this obligation by making a one-time payment to the 
United States of the fair market value of such repayment obligation as 
of the date of such prepayment. Similar transactions have been allowed 
in the past in connection with not only certain Bureau projects, but 
those of other Federal agencies, as well.
  During the 102d Congress, legislation I introduced to help the 
district was consolidated into the Reclamation Projects Authorization 
and Adjustment Act of 1992 and enacted as Public Law 102-575. As 
finally approved, however, Public Law 102-575 placed more stringent 
requirements on the district than those historically required by OMB in 
that it placed a cap on the discount factor which could be used in 
determining the discounted present value of the district's obligation, 
limiting the discount factor to a rate consisting of the current market 
yield on Treasury securities of comparable maturities.
  Following an analysis of this legislation, the Bureau's own financial 
adviser recently noted, ``[b]ecause the legislation prohibits the 
Secretary from basing the interest rate of discount factor on third 
party and open market factors a market value for the obligation cannot 
be established.'' Thus, Public Law 102-575 essentially prohibits the 
Secretary from accepting a prepayment in an amount equal to the fair 
market value of the district's obligation.
  Public Law 102-575 also directed the Secretary to offer a revised 
schedule of payments to the district not later than 12 months following 
its enactment. Since January 1994, when the Secretary's offer was 
received, the district has been working with the Bureau to find an 
answer to the cities' financial problems. These discussions resulted in 
a request by the district for legislation to modify the language in 
Public Law 102-575 and allow the Secretary to accept a payment equal to 
the fair market value of this obligation. In addition, the district has 
proposed that a portion project's water supply be reallocated for 
environmental purposes to further reduce their municipal water supply 
repayment obligation.
  It is urgent that Congress enact this legislation this year, Mr. 
President. The Mountain Park Conservancy District is acting in a 
responsible manner to solve this financial problem while protecting the 
interest of the Federal Government, and I believe we should accommodate 
that effort in a timely manner. I have spoken with the chairman of the 
Senate authorizing subcommittee, Senator Bradley, and he has assured me 
that he will cooperate to move this legislation as soon as 
possible.
 Mr. BOREN. Mr. President, I introduce with Senator Nickles a 
bill to restructure the debt owed by the Mountain Park Conservancy 
District to the Federal Government. Several years ago, Congress passed 
legislation allowing the Mountain Park District to restructure debt 
owed to the Bureau of Reclamation. Unfortunately, the legislation that 
passed did not give the district the desired relief.
  Today, the communities of the district are faced with a tough choice. 
Either default on the loan to the Federal Government or face 
bankruptcy. Neither of these choices will benefit the community nor the 
Federal Treasury.
  Both the House and Senate have recognized the need to provide relief 
to the district and protect the financial investment made by the Bureau 
of Reclamation. Congressional action is needed this year to modify the 
original legislation and prevent default by the district.
  I would have preferred to solve this problem on the Energy and Water 
appropriations bill, as it is most likely guaranteed of passing both 
the House and Senate this year. However, I do understand the reluctance 
to approve authorizing legislation on an appropriations bill. I would 
like to thank Senator Bradley for his pledge to work out a solution in 
the Energy Committee and his Subcommittee on Water and Power as soon as 
possible. I also appreciate his understanding of the urgency of this 
matter and his commitment to work together and pass a solution before 
Congress adjourns for the year.
                                 ______

      By Mr. BIDEN:
  S. 2254. A bill to amend the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 to 
establish an Independent Nuclear Safety Board, and for other purposes; 
to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.


              independent nuclear safety board act of 1994

 Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I introduce a bill to establish an 
independent nuclear safety board. The function of this board will be to 
conduct impartial investigations of events which threaten human health 
and safety at Nuclear Regulatory Commission [NRC] licensed facilities.
  I introduce this measure, not to replace the NRC, but because I have 
continuing questions about the NRC's ability to both regulate the 
nuclear industry and simultaneously ensure that the public's health, 
safety and welfare predominates. I originally introduced this 
legislation in 1987 during the 100th Congress, and it passed the Senate 
as part of an overall reorganization of the NRC. I reintroduced it 
during the 101st Congress and again during the 102d Congress as an 
amendment to S. 2166, the national energy strategy legislation.
  The need to establish an independent safety board first became clear 
to me in 1983 when an accident occurred at the Salem nuclear generating 
plant in New Jersey, one of the largest operating nuclear facilities in 
the country. The complex-owned and operated by Public Service Electric 
and Gas, is located just across the Delaware River from my home town of 
Wilmington. The subsequent handling of the accident by the NRC raised 
several concerns regarding its ability to safeguard the public.
  In 1983, a so-called fail-safe mechanism--Salem I's automatic 
shutdown system--failed. In fact, there were two failures over a 4-day 
period. What made the situation worse, to me and many others, was that 
the NRC seemed unwilling to require improvements in the plant and 
allowed for a restart with no assurances that the plant was safe. After 
pressure was placed on the NRC, it took another look at the situation 
and eventually fined the utility $850,000, at the time the largest fine 
ever handed down. Since operations began at Salem over 17 years ago, 
the utility has been fined for violations 10 times. And even more 
important, in my view, is the fact that in the case of more than 20 NRC 
findings of violations at Salem, the utility was not fined at all.
  Among those violations that went unfined, was the November 1991 
explosion of the Salem II steam turbine. The explosion, which resulted 
in a fire that caused $75 million in containment and damage costs at 
the plant, and which the NRC concluded was caused in most part by 
involved personnel error, insufficient preventative maintenance and 
inadequate surveillance, did not result in any fine whatsoever for the 
utility. One factor in determining that a fine should not be imposed, 
according to the NRC, was the fact that the utility reported the 
accident to the NRC.
  Mr. President, the latest in a long list of incidents at Salem 
occurred in April of this year. The sequence of events I will briefly 
summarize would seem almost comical if the potential for life-
threatening consequences were not so serious.
  The problem that initiated the incident itself would have been 
considered minor, river grasses that clogged cooling water intake 
valves. It was also a problem that was well known to the utility's 
management months before and could have been easily rectified if the 
management had made the needed modifications to the plant. However, it 
was never properly addressed and workers at the plant, for some time, 
had been addressing it by manually hosing off the circulating filter 
screens. The hosing was not sufficient to stop the clogging and a 
decrease in the quantity of water entering the plant occurred. If the 
workers at the plant had simply let the reactor trip, the plant would 
have shutdown. That did not happen. In an effort to keep the plant 
operational, workers started a chain of events full of operational and 
mechanical errors which could only be described as a serious breakdown 
in Salem operations.
  The day after the incident occurred, the NRC sent an augmented 
inspection team [AIT] to investigate. While investigating, the team 
discovered a hydrogen and nitrogen gas bubble in the reactor vessel 
head. The operator had ignored the indicator that showed there was 
water displacement in the reactor and the equipment had not even been 
checked.
  After the April 7 incident, I wrote to NRC Chairman Ivan Selin on two 
separate occasions. In these letters, I asked the NRC to thoroughly 
review all aspects of Salem's operations and to provide assurances that 
much needed management improvements were already in place before 
granting a restart at the Salem I facility.
  Mr. President, despite my concerns and requests, a little over a 
month after this incident occurred, Salem I was granted permission by 
the NRC to restart the facility. When justifying their reason for 
permitting the restart, the NRC concluded that ``near-term and long-
term actions initiated by the licensee appear to be sufficient to cause 
improvement if management maintains their commitment of the program.''

  Unfortunately, those same commitments have been made over and over 
again by the utility. Just last year, in a May 13 letter to the NRC, 
PSE&G acknowledged weaknesses in management and the need to take 
corrective action. According to the NRC ``a state of denial existed 
previously.''
  Yet, in 1991, the operator provided the NRC with assurances that 
management deficiencies would be corrected. And in 1989, when I visited 
the plant, the same assurances, with equal fervor and enthusiasm, were 
given to me.
  Mr. President, what concerns me most is that a state of denial may 
still exist, and if history is any guide, we have no reason to believe 
that the operator has truly resolved its problems. In fact, just 1 
month before the April 7 incidence, the NRC had fined Salem $50,000 for 
maintenance violations blaming ``continued demonstrated weaknesses'' of 
the plant's management.
  At what point does the NRC say: ``We're not going to let you fool us 
again?'' When public safety and health has been compromised? At that 
point it is too late to take corrective action.
  After the NRC granted permission to restart Salem, my staff and I met 
with Chairman Selin. While concurring with my observations of repeated 
and continuous problems at the plant, Chairman Selin nonetheless 
supported the NRC staff recommendation to allow the restart. As I told 
the Chairman, experience offers little hope that the promises made this 
time will be followed any better than in the past.
  Mr. President, serious problems at nuclear powerplants and 
insufficient regulatory scrutiny by the NRC are not limited to the 
Salem facility. One example involves the Millstone plant in Connecticut 
and an incident that took place there in August 1993, an incident that 
an NRC official later declared had the potential to be another Three 
Mile Island.
  The problem began when a leak occurred in a safety valve at the 
facility. Instead of temporarily shutting the plant down to replace the 
valve, the operator continued to keep the plant running while repairing 
the valve. The repair consisted of drilling holes in the valves and 
pouring in a sealant to stop the leak.
  This method of drilling was used more than 30 times over a period of 
73 days. Finally, so much stress had been placed on the bolts holding 
the valve that one of the bolts broke. The plant was finally shutdown 
and the valve fixed properly.
  The NRC was aware of the leaky valve from the beginning and allowed 
the operators at Millstone to use this very rudimentary repair method. 
In fact, an NRC investigator was stationed at the facility during that 
period. At the time of the incident, the NRC severely underplayed the 
seriousness of the situation. Only later was the public informed of the 
real dangers that could have resulted from such handling by the 
operator.
  Mr. President, questionable NRC practices such as those that have 
occurred at Salem and Millstone must be corrected. The public has a 
right to demand and expect only the highest of standards from a 
regulatory agency where safety should be of utmost singular importance. 
That level of strict oversight has not been present and will not be, in 
my view, if the NRC continues to investigate its own regulatory 
failings. That is the underlying conflict the independent safety board 
seeks to resolve.
  By establishing an independent body to conduct accident 
investigations at nuclear powerplants, there will be a much greater 
assurance that all facts and circumstances surrounding an incident and 
its subsequent investigation are not hidden from public view. Most 
critically, the inherent conflict of NRC staff investigating accidents 
which exhaustive NRC oversight might have precluded is removed through 
outside independent investigation.
  Other shortfalls of current investigatory practices are also 
addressed in my bill. The causes and contributing factors to accidents 
will be reviewed by experienced, not first-time, investigators. Those 
who do the investigating will be in a position to assure that the 
Board's recommendations are answered by the NRC. As practices stand 
now, accident investigators are returned to their normal duties and are 
not in a good position to assure that their recommendations are ever 
addressed or result in changes in nuclear plants.
  The Board will have only limited financial and staff resources. It 
will be impossible for the Board called for in my legislation to become 
a mini-NRC. The Board will have broad authority to investigate what it 
deems important, but the limited resources will force it to focus on 
the highest priority accidents or concerns.
  Again Mr. President, it is my belief that an Independent Nuclear 
Safety Board will dramatically improve the NRC's regulatory 
accountability. The public should not have to live in an environment 
where questionable regulatory and enforcement methods can and do lead 
to serious safety risks. The Federal Government has the responsibility 
to do all it can to eliminate such risks.
  I ask unanimous consent that a brief summary and the text of the bill 
be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2254

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Independent Nuclear Safety 
     Board Act of 1994''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that there is a great need 
     for--
       (1) vigorous investigation of events at facilities, or 
     involving materials, licensed or otherwise regulated by the 
     Nuclear Regulatory Commission that could adversely affect 
     public health or safety; and
       (2) continual review and assessment of licensing and other 
     regulatory practices of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
     which may result in conclusions critical of the Nuclear 
     Regulatory Commission or officials of the Commission.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to establish an 
     Independent Nuclear Safety Board which shall promote nuclear 
     safety by--
       (1) conducting independent investigations of events at 
     facilities, or involving materials, licensed or otherwise 
     regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that could 
     adversely affect public health or safety;
       (2) reviewing and assessing the licensing and other 
     regulatory practices of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission;
       (3) recommending to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
     improvements in licensing and related regulatory practices; 
     and
       (4) informing Congress of findings and recommendations of 
     the Board that result from the investigations referred to in 
     paragraph (1).

     SEC. 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF NUCLEAR SAFETY BOARD.

       Title II of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (42 
     U.S.C. 5841 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 212. INDEPENDENT NUCLEAR SAFETY BOARD.

       ``(a) Establishment.--There is established a board to be 
     known as the `Independent Nuclear Safety Board' (referred to 
     in this section as the `Board').
       ``(b) Membership.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Board shall be composed of 3 members 
     appointed by the President, by and with the advice and 
     consent of the Senate, from among respected experts in the 
     field of commercial nuclear energy with a demonstrated 
     competence and knowledge relevant to the independent 
     investigative and prescriptive functions of the Board. Not 
     more than 2 members of the Board shall be members of the same 
     political party. Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this section, the President shall submit the 
     nominations for appointment to the Board.
       ``(2) Vacancies.--Any vacancy in the membership of the 
     Board shall be filled in the same manner in which the 
     original appointment was made.
       ``(3) Financial interests.--No member of the Board shall--
       ``(A) have any significant financial relationship in any 
     firm, company, corporation, or other business entity that is 
     engaged in an activity regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory 
     Commission (referred to in this section as the `Commission') 
     as a licensee or contractor; or
       ``(B) have had such a relationship within the 2-year period 
     preceding the appointment of the member.
       ``(c) Chairperson.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Chairperson and Vice Chairperson of 
     the Board shall be designated by the President. The 
     Chairperson and Vice Chairperson may be reappointed.
       ``(2) Functions.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Chairperson shall be the chief 
     executive officer of the Board and shall, subject to such 
     policies as the Board may establish, exercise the functions 
     of the Board with respect to--
       ``(i) the appointment and supervision of personnel employed 
     by the Board;
       ``(ii) the organization of any administrative units 
     established by the Board; and
       ``(iii) the use and expenditure of funds.
       ``(B) Delegation.--The Chairperson may delegate any of the 
     functions under this paragraph to any other member of the 
     Board or to any appropriate employee or officer of the Board.
       ``(3) Vice chairperson.--The Vice Chairperson shall act as 
     Chairperson in the case of the absence or incapacity of the 
     Chairperson or in the case of a vacancy in the office of 
     Chairperson.
       ``(d) Terms of Members.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     each member of the Board shall serve for a term of 6 years. A 
     member of the Board may be reappointed.
       ``(2) Initial members.--Of the members first appointed to 
     the Board--
       ``(A) 1 member shall be appointed for a term of 2 years;
       ``(B) 1 member shall be appointed for a term of 4 years; 
     and
       ``(C) 1 member shall be appointed for a term of 6 years;

     as designated by the President at the time of appointment.
       ``(3) Special terms.--Any member appointed to fill a 
     vacancy occurring before the expiration of the term of office 
     for which the predecessor of the member was appointed shall 
     be appointed only for the remainder of the term. A member may 
     serve after the expiration of the term of the member until a 
     successor has taken office.
       ``(4) Removal.--Any member of the Board may be removed by 
     the President for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or 
     malfeasance in office.
       ``(e) Quorum.--Two members of the Board shall constitute a 
     quorum, but a lesser number may hold hearings.
       ``(f) Functions and Authorities.--
       ``(1) Investigations.--
       ``(A) In general.--
       ``(i) Investigations by board.--The Board shall investigate 
     any event at any facility, or involving any material, 
     licensed or otherwise regulated by the Commission, that the 
     Board determines to be significant because the event could--

       ``(I) adversely affect public health or safety; or
       ``(II) be the precursor of an event that could adversely 
     affect public health or safety.

       ``(ii) Investigations by commission.--The Board may request 
     the Commission to carry out an investigation of an event 
     described in clause (i) and to report the findings of the 
     Commission to the Board in a timely fashion. Whenever the 
     Commission concludes such an investigation, the Board may 
     analyze the findings of the Commission for the purpose of 
     making its own conclusions and recommendations.
       ``(B) Purpose of investigations.--The purpose of a Board 
     investigation of an event under this paragraph shall be--
       ``(i) to ascertain information concerning the circumstances 
     of the event, and the implications of the event for public 
     health and safety;
       ``(ii) to determine whether the event is part of a pattern 
     of similar events at 1 or more facilities, or involving any 
     material, licensed or otherwise regulated by the Commission 
     that could--

       ``(I) adversely affect public health or safety; or
       ``(II) be the precursor of an event that could adversely 
     affect public health or safety; and

       ``(iii) to provide such recommendations to the Commission 
     for changes in licensing, safety regulations and 
     requirements, and other regulatory policy as may be prudent 
     or necessary.
       ``(2) Analysis of operational data.--For purposes of 
     carrying out this section, the Board shall have access to and 
     may systematically analyze--
       ``(A) operational data from any facility, or involving any 
     material, licensed or otherwise regulated by the Commission 
     to determine whether there exist certain patterns of events 
     that indicate safety problems; and
       ``(B) operational data of the Commission including 
     personnel and files.
       ``(3) Special studies.--The Board may conduct special 
     studies pertaining to nuclear safety at any facility, or 
     involving any material, licensed or otherwise regulated by 
     the Commission.
       ``(4) Evaluation of suggestions.--The Board may evaluate 
     suggestions received from the scientific and industrial 
     communities, and from the interested public, on specific 
     measures to improve safety at any facility, or involving any 
     material, licensed or otherwise regulated by the Commission.
       ``(5) Recommendations to commission.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Board shall recommend to the 
     Commission specific measures that should be adopted to 
     minimize the likelihood that events will occur at any 
     facility, or involving any material, licensed or otherwise 
     regulated by the Commission, that could adversely affect 
     public health or safety. The Commission shall respond in 
     writing to the recommendations of the Board not later than 
     120 days after receipt of the recommendations. The written 
     response shall detail specific measures adopted by the 
     Commission in response to the recommendations, and 
     explanations for the inaction of the Commission on 
     recommendations the Commission chose to reject.
       ``(B) Submission to congress.--The recommendations of the 
     Board made pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall be submitted to 
     Congress.
       ``(6) Reporting requirements.--
       ``(A) In general.--For purposes of investigations, the 
     Board shall establish reporting requirements that shall be 
     binding on--
       ``(i) any person who operates, designs, supplies, 
     maintains, or is otherwise involved with the operation or 
     construction of, a facility licensed or otherwise regulated 
     by the Commission; and
       ``(ii) any person who processes, stores, transports, uses, 
     or possesses a material licensed or otherwise regulated by 
     the Commission.
       ``(B) Protected material.--
       ``(i) Reporting.--The information that the Board may 
     require to be reported under this paragraph may include any 
     material designated as classified material pursuant to the 
     Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.), or any 
     information designated as safeguards information and 
     protected from disclosure under section 147 of such Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 2167).
       ``(ii) Public access.--Information received by the Board 
     shall be made available to the public in accordance with the 
     applicable provisions of subsections (a) and (b) of section 
     306 of the Independent Safety Board Act of 1974 (49 U.S.C. 
     App. 1905).
       ``(7) Hearings.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Board or, on the authorization of 
     the Board, any member of the Board, may, for the purpose of 
     carrying out this section, hold such hearings and sit and act 
     at such times and places, administer such oaths, and require, 
     by subpoena or otherwise, the attendance and testimony of 
     such witnesses and the production of such evidence as the 
     Board or the authorized member determines advisable.
       ``(B) Subpoenas.--
       ``(i) In general.--A subpoena may be issued only under the 
     signature of the Chairperson, or any member of the Board 
     designated by the Chairperson, and shall be served by any 
     person designated by the Chairperson or the member. The 
     attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence may be 
     required from any place in the United States at any 
     designated place of hearing in the United States.
       ``(ii) Oaths.--Any member of the Board may administer an 
     oath or affirmation to a witness appearing before the Board.
       ``(iii) Enforcement.--Any person who willfully neglects or 
     refuses to qualify as a witness, or to testify, or to produce 
     any evidence in obedience to any subpoena duly issued under 
     the authority of this paragraph, shall be fined not more than 
     $5,000, or imprisoned for not more than 180 days, or both. 
     Upon certification by the Chairperson of the Board of the 
     facts concerning any willful disobedience by any person to 
     the United States attorney for any judicial district in which 
     the person resides or is found, the attorney may proceed by 
     information for the prosecution of the person for the 
     offense.
       ``(8) Reports.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Board shall issue periodic reports 
     that shall be made available to Congress, and to Federal, 
     State, and local government agencies concerned with safety at 
     a facility, or involving any material, licensed or otherwise 
     regulated by the Commission. The reports shall be made 
     available to other interested persons on request.
       ``(B) Contents.--Each report shall contain--
       ``(i) the major findings of the Board investigations; and
       ``(ii) recommendations of--

       ``(I) specific measures to reduce the likelihood of a 
     recurrence of nuclear events similar to events investigated 
     by the Board; and
       ``(II) corrective steps implemented or required by the 
     Commission to enhance or improve safety conditions at 
     facilities investigated by the Board and other facilities as 
     considered appropriate by the Board.
       ``(9) Staff and consultants.--In accordance with the civil 
     service laws and regulations, the Chairperson of the Board 
     may hire staff and employ consultants for the purpose of 
     carrying out the functions and duties of the Board under this 
     subsection.
       ``(10) Events.--As used in this subsection, the term 
     `event' includes an action or failure to act by any person, 
     including the Commission as an organization and the staff of 
     the Commission, or a continuing series of actions or failures 
     to act by any such person, including operational failures, 
     that the Board determines have a potentially adverse effect 
     on public health or safety as described in paragraph (1).
       ``(g) Transfer of Functions.--There are transferred to the 
     Board--
       ``(1) all functions of the Office for Analysis and 
     Evaluation of Operational Data of the Commission relating to 
     the functions of the Board described in subsection (f); and
       ``(2) such personnel from the Office for Analysis and 
     Evaluation of Operational Data as the Director of the Office 
     of Management and Budget determines are necessary to carry 
     out the functions described in subsection (f).
       ``(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 
     $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1995 through 2000.
       ``(i) Termination.--The Board shall terminate on September 
     30, 2000.''.
                                  ____


       Independent Nuclear Safety Board Act of 1994--Bill Summary

       Bill Title: The Independent Nuclear Safety Board Act of 
     1994.
       Purpose: To establish an Independent Nuclear Safety Board.
       The Board established by this bill would conduct 
     independent investigations of events at facilities, review 
     and assess NRC licensing and regulatory practices, recommend 
     improvements to those practices, and report to Congress on 
     these.
       The Board would consist of three bipartisan and experienced 
     members who have no financial relationships with nuclear 
     business entities. Board members would have access to all 
     data, including classified documents. The Board may also hold 
     public hearings to which witnesses may be subpoenaed. 
     Witnesses refusing to comply with subpoenas will be fined not 
     more than $5,000, or imprisoned for up to 180 days, or both
       The bill authorizes $10 million for each of fiscal years 
     1995 through 2000. The bill terminates the Board on September 
     30, 2000.
                                 ______

      By Mr. GORTON:
  S. 2255. A bill to amend the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 to 
establish a new budget point of order against any amendment, bill, or 
conference report that directs increased revenues from additional 
taxation of Social Security or Railroad Retirement benefits to a fund 
other than the Social Security trust fund or the Social Security 
equivalent benefit account; to the Committee on the Budget and the 
Committee on Governmental Affairs, jointly, pursuant to the order of 
August 4, 1977, with instructions that if one committee reports, the 
other committee has 30 days to report or be discharged.


         the social security trust fund protection act of 1994

 Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation 
entitled ``The Social Security Trust Fund Protection Act of 1994.'' It 
is legislation that will protect the Social Security trust fund from 
the greedy hands of a Government looking for any way possible to raise 
revenue. It is a hands-off Social Security bill.
  In the early 1980's, Social Security was on the brink of bankruptcy. 
The promise of a secure retirement was in jeopardy and people lost 
confidence in the system. It was only the quick action of Congress that 
saved it. Now it is solvent well into the future.
  As part of that bailout, Congress made a deal with seniors. We said 
that in return for taxing up to 50 percent of their Social Security 
benefits, we would help ensure the integrity of the trust fund by 
placing those revenues back into the Social Security system.
  It was a commitment we made--a promise we are beholden to honor. 
Revenues raised from the taxation of Social Security benefits were to 
strengthen, or fortify, the Social Security trust fund.
  Last year's tax bill, however, reneged on that deal. The tax bill 
included a massive tax hike on Social Security benefits, raising the 
taxable portion from 50 percent to 85 percent. I vehemently opposed 
that tax hike and actively worked to strip it from the bill. In fact, I 
voted for five separate amendments, both in the Budget Committee and on 
the Senate floor, to eliminate this onerous tax. Unfortunately, we 
failed, and the tax hike was signed into law.

  Beyond my steadfast opposition to the tax hike, I was outraged by 
where the money was to be deposited. It was not, as we promised in the 
1980's, placed back into the trust fund. Instead, it was diverted away 
to fund other Government programs. Congress broke its promise--as if it 
never mattered--and for the first time ever, revenues from the taxation 
of benefits are now used to fund other Government programs.
  Mr. President, that is wrong. That was not part of the deal seniors 
made and seniors know it. It was simply a back door raid on the trust 
fund. I have been contacted by many seniors and other citizens of my 
home State of Washington about this issue. They believe that the 
Government should stick by its deal, and that Social Security money 
should stay in the Social Security system.
  I listened, and I agree. That is why I am introducing the Social 
Security Trust Fund Protection Act of 1994, to restore the deal 
Congress made.
  This legislation is simple. It creates a 60-vote budget point-of-
order against any bill, amendment, or conference report that directs 
revenues derived from an increased tax on Social Security benefits away 
from the Social Security trust fund. It covers instances where the 
taxable portion of Social Security benefits is raised, and instances 
where the threshold levels are readjusted below the current levels. It 
covers revenues raised from Railroad Retirement tier I benefits in the 
same manner.
  Its effects will be dependent on the type of underlying bill. For 
reconciliation bills, this point of order will combine with an already 
existing point of order to make it much more difficult to tax Social 
Security benefits at all. If additional revenues raised from a tax hike 
are placed into the trust fund, the reconciliation bill is subject to 
the existing point of order. If it places revenues anywhere else, it is 
subject to this new point of order. In essence, my bill makes it almost 
impossible, on a reconciliation bill, for Congress to take away more of 
a senior's Social Security checks through higher taxation.
  For all other types of bills, there is no current prohibition on 
placing new revenues into the trust fund. So my new point of order 
would simply mandate that any additional revenues raised from a tax 
hike be placed back into the trust fund.
  Mr. President, I am outraged that Congress succeeded in raising the 
tax on Social Security benefits, and am dismayed that the Government 
uses that money to fund other Government programs. And I am worried 
that since this tax increase and revenue diversion slipped through 
once, it could happen again.

  Congress may soon decide that it needs more revenues and may once 
again look into the pockets of seniors to get that revenue. My bill 
will make Social Security off limits in the future. It will eliminate 
the incentive to tax Social Security benefits to fund other Government 
programs. No longer will Social Security be considered a cash cow, 
providing vast amounts of money to fund Government programs. It means 
that if Congress ever passes another tax hike on Social Security 
benefits, seniors will know that the money has to be used only to 
further strengthen the system.
  I listened to the concerns of the people of Washington State on this 
matter, and I am responding. I am introducing legislation designed to 
protect the Social Security trust fund in the future, and encourage my 
colleagues to join this fight with me and cosponsor the bill.
  Mr. President, I ask that a letter from the Seniors Coalition in 
support of this bill appear in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                        The Seniors Coalition,

                                                    June 29, 1994.
     Hon. Slade Gorton,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Gorton: Speaking for the two million members 
     and supporters of The Seniors Coalition, I would like to 
     thank you for your leadership in introducing the Social 
     Security Trust Fund Protection Act of 1994.
       We have been gravely concerned with the tax increase on 
     Social Security benefits approved in the 1993 budget. 
     However, we have been more concerned with the direction and 
     use of those revenues. It is unconscionable that the revenues 
     generated by this tax on senior citizens are being funneled 
     into government programs, and not into the Social Security 
     Trust Fund. The continual and blatant ``raiding'' of the 
     Social Security Trust Fund by Congress must end.
       The Social Security Trust Fund Protection Act of 1994 is 
     precisely the type of legislation that serves the senior 
     citizens of this country best. This measure helps to secure 
     the fiscal integrity of the trust fund and guarantees that 
     senior citizens will not be targeted as a quick source of 
     revenue for more government spending.
       Senator Gorton, you are to be applauded for your efforts to 
     protect the senior citizens of America. Please do not 
     hesitate to contact myself, or Kimberly Schuld at (703) 591-
     0663 if we can be of assistance to you on this measure.
           Sincerely,
                                                      Jake Hansen,

                           Director of Government Affairs.

                                 ______

      By Mr. ROBB:
  S. 2256. A bill to exclude from Federal income taxation amounts 
received in settlement of refund claims for State or local income taxes 
on Federal retirement benefits which were not subject to State or local 
income taxation on the same basis as State or local retirement 
benefits; to the Committee on Finance.


                   The Federal Retirees Fairness Act

 Mr. ROBB. Mr. President, I introduce a bill to prevent a 
serious injustice from occurring, and to ask that my Senate colleagues 
join me as cosponsors of an important piece of legislation. This 
measure, the Federal Retirees Fairness Act, will guarantee fair 
treatment for military and Federal retirees who had their retirement 
benefits improperly taxed by States and are now seeking recompense.
  In 1991, the Supreme Court ruled in Davis versus Michigan that States 
cannot tax the retirement benefits of military and Federal retirees 
differently than State retirees. In some instances, States compelled to 
discontinue this practice have begun to issue refunds to the retirees 
for the improperly collected State income taxes.
  This legislation will ensure that these retirees do not pay Federal 
taxes a second time on their retirement benefits.
  When these retirement benefits were initially received by the 
retirees, they were properly taxed by the Federal Government. State 
income taxes were also collected on the benefits, albeit improperly. 
Some retirees deducted from their Federal taxes the amount of State tax 
they paid on their benefits. Many others took the standard deduction 
and did not deduct the amount of State tax.
  With State refunds forthcoming, those retirees who took the Federal 
standard deduction face the very real possibility of being taxed again 
on the same income. Should the IRS consider the refund as original 
income, these standard deduction filers would be forced to pay tax a 
second time on their retirement benefits. I think all my colleagues 
will agree that this is entirely unfair and should be prevented.
  This bill will do just that by spelling out clearly that these 
refunds shall be exempt from Federal taxation. Adoption of this 
legislation will ensure that Federal and military retirees, in several 
States across the Nation, will not be subjected to double taxation on 
their retirement benefits by the Federal Government.
  I fully understand that this measure could create a slight windfall 
for retirees who filed itemized returns and deducted from their Federal 
taxes the amount of State tax paid on their benefits. However, since 
these benefits have been subject to Federal tax once, it is important 
to note that the only interest the Federal Government has in these 
refunds is in recouping the amounts which retirees deducted from 
Federal taxes.
  Considering the demographics involved in this matter and the fact 
that a majority of retirees were likely better off taking the standard 
deduction, it is very reasonable to assume that the number of filers 
who itemized is quite small. Consequently, the amount of foregone 
Federal revenues could also be quite small, meaning that the cost to 
the IRS of collecting that tax may very well exceed the benefits to the 
Federal Government.
  Mr. President, this bill is ultimately about fairness. Should a 
Federal or military retiree, who, in a very real sense, was forced to 
make a multiyear, interest-free loan to the State, be subjected to a 
double tax by the Federal Government? I think not, and I would argue 
that this body does not either. I respectfully request that my 
colleagues stand up for fairness for our Nation's Federal and military 
retirees and cosponsor this worthwhile legislation.
                                 ______

      By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself, Mr. Durenberger, Mr. Mitchell, Mr. 
        Moynihan, Mr. Mathews, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Bingaman, Mrs. 
        Boxer, and Mr. Dorgan):
  S. 2257. A bill to amend the Public Works and Economic Development 
Act of 1965 to reauthorize economic development programs, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.


            economic development reauthorization act of 1994

 Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I introduce a bill to reauthorize 
programs within the Economic Development Administration. It is with 
great pleasure that I am joined by my colleagues, Senators Durenberger, 
Mitchell, Mathews, Cohen, Pryor, Bingaman, Boxer, Moynihan, and Dorgan.
  Mr. President, programs under the jurisdiction of the Economic 
Development Administration have not been reauthorized for more than a 
decade. Despite the uncertainty and instability this has created, EDA 
has become the cornerstone for efforts to strengthen and diversify the 
economies of our Nation's communities.
  Since its inception in 1965, the EDA has established an impressive 
track record of helping communities to help themselves. These bootstrap 
efforts have allowed communities to meet economic challenges in a 
variety of ways--making public works improvements to attract new 
businesses and provide technical assistance and planning grants that 
allow a community to plan for their future, for example.
  In just three words, I can tell you why I've become a strong believer 
in EDA: Libby, Havre, and Poplar. These words may not mean much to 
people in this town. But, to me, they are communities--they are 
people--they are names, faces, families, and Montanans--that I care 
deeply about. Unfortunately, each of these communities has experienced 
hard economic times.
  Libby, for instance, is a timber dependent community in Montana's 
northwest corner. The timber mill that is Libby's largest employer 
recently changed hands and cut its workforce by half, costing about 300 
jobs.
  At the other end of the State, on the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, 
lies Poplar. In the face of Poplar's historically high unemployment, A 
& S Tribal Industries became a success story. Most recently, this firm 
delivered vital supplies to our forces in Operation Desert Storm. As a 
tribal run defense procurement contractor, A & S developed into 
Montana's largest manufacturer. But the end of the Cold War has meant 
the loss of almost 400 jobs at A & S.
  And, finally, there's Havre. Located along the old Great Northern 
line, Havre is primarily a railroad town. In 1992, we were all shocked 
to learn that the Burlington Northern Railroad planned to shut the 
doors on its machine shop, costing Havre 300 jobs.
  They say that tough times never last, but tough people do. I know 
this applies to folks in Libby, Poplar, and Havre and economically 
troubled communities all across America. With hard work and a strong 
spirit, these communities are fighting to rebuild their economic base--
to bring jobs back. And, in each case, EDA has been there; not offering 
a handout; but, rather a helping hand by empowering people to help 
themselves.
  Havre is an excellent example. With the help of EDA's revolving loan 
fund, strong community teamwork attracted a new manufacturing business. 
There is an excellent chance that this new business will ultimately 
employ more than the 300 people thrown out of work by the BN shutdown.
  EDA has also been instrumental in responding to and assisting areas 
affected by natural disasters. In Florida and Louisiana, EDA was there 
to help businesses affected by the devastation of Hurricane Andrew. And 
EDA is still working with those areas of the Midwest devastated by the 
disastrous floods of 1993.
  The programs within the EDA have become even more critical to 
Congress' efforts to alleviate and address job losses due to the 
closure and realignment of military bases around the country.
  The EDA's programs are effective tools that are used on the local 
level--working hand-in-hand with local governments and businesses to 
develop future economic investment strategies. By acting as a catalyst, 
economic development funds are used to attract significant private 
contributions and support.
  Despite efforts to dismantle EDA, the agency has matured in its 
approach to local economic development efforts. But the lack of 
authorization has not allowed Congress to make necessary changes to the 
statute and mission of EDA. As with any program, there are some areas 
that are working well and other areas that need to be refined. The lack 
of authorization has left some aspects of EDA's programs outdated or 
unnecessary. That is why I am introducing this bill today--a bill to 
streamline and advance EDA's successful programs.
  The bill starts with the basic strengths of EDA and improves its 
process for delivering assistance to areas that are economically 
distressed. It streamlines the grant application and review process 
while also requiring that applicants prove the economic distress of 
their area.
  The bill calls for a greater role for EDA to coordinate the efforts 
of various agencies that have economic development programs to reduce 
duplication and promote cooperation among those agencies.
  It is my intention to act quickly on this legislation and I encourage 
my colleagues to take a look at this bill.
  Mr. President, our country is faced with many challenges. Many of our 
communities are in economic transition and we need to strengthen and 
diversify the economies of those communities. We need to reauthorize 
EDA. It is high time that we recognize the important role that EDA 
plays in the future of this country. And ask unanimous consent that the 
full text of my bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2257

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Economic 
     Development Reauthorization Act of 1994''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Direct and supplementary grants.
Sec. 3. Grants for public works facilities.
Sec. 4. Repeal of financial assistance for sewer facilities.
Sec. 5. Relationship of overall economic development plan to public 
              works and development facility loans.
Sec. 6. Elimination of overall economic development program.
Sec. 7. Redevelopment area loan program.
Sec. 8. Technical assistance, research, and information.
Sec. 9. Business outreach center demonstration project.
Sec. 10. Office of Strategic Economic Development Planning and Policy.
Sec. 11. Authorization of appropriations for technical assistance, 
              research, and information.
Sec. 12. Redevelopment areas.
Sec. 13. Annual review.
Sec. 14. Economic development districts.
Sec. 15. Applications for assistance.
Sec. 16. Performance evaluations of grant recipients.
Sec. 17. Transfer of funds.
Sec. 18. Extension of benefits.
Sec. 19. Supervision of Regional Counsels.
Sec. 20. Purpose.
Sec. 21. Base closings and realignments.
Sec. 22. Outreach to communities adversely affected by closures and 
              realignments of military installations.
Sec. 23. Treatment of revolving loan funds.
Sec. 24. Sale of financial instruments in revolving loan funds.
Sec. 25. Special economic development and adjustment assistance.
Sec. 26. Compliance with Buy American Act.

     SEC. 2. DIRECT AND SUPPLEMENTARY GRANTS.

       (a) Direct Grants.--Section 101(a)(1) of the Public Works 
     and Economic Development Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3131(a)(1)) 
     is amended--
       (1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
     ``acquisition, construction'' and inserting ``acquisition, 
     design, engineering, construction'';
       (2) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the 
     following new subparagraph:
       ``(C) the area for which the project is to be undertaken 
     has an approved overall economic development plan as provided 
     in section 402 and such project is consistent with such plan; 
     and''; and
       (3) in subparagraph (D)--
       (A) by striking ``so designated under section 401(a)(6),'' 
     and inserting ``described in section 401(a)(7),''; and
       (B) by striking ``area.'' and inserting ``area; and''.
       (b) Considerations for Supplementary Grants.--Section 
     101(c) of such Act is amended--
       (1) in the second and third sentences, by striking 
     ``designated as such under section 401(a)(6) of this Act.'' 
     and inserting ``described in section 401(a)(7).''; and
       (2) in the last sentence--
       (A) by striking ``the area, the'' and inserting ``the area 
     and the''; and
       (B) by striking ``, and the amount of such'' and all that 
     follows and inserting a period.

     SEC. 3. GRANTS FOR PUBLIC WORKS FACILITIES.

       Section 105 of the Public Works and Economic Development 
     Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3135) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 105. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     title $175,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1995 through 
     1997. Such sums shall remain available until expended. Not 
     less than 15 percent and not more than 35 percent of the 
     amounts appropriated for any of fiscal years 1995 through 
     1997 under this section shall be expended in redevelopment 
     areas described in section 401(a)(7).''.

     SEC. 4. REPEAL OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR SEWER FACILITIES.

       (a) In General.--Title I of the Public Works and Economic 
     Development Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3131-3137) is amended--
       (1) by repealing section 106;
       (2) by redesignating section 107 as section 104; and
       (3) by moving such section 104 to appear after section 103.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 211(b)(3) of the 
     Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965 (40 U.S.C. App. 
     211(b)(3)) is amended in the last sentence by striking 
     ``Notwithstanding'' and all that follows through ``education-
     related'' and inserting ``An education-related''.

     SEC. 5. RELATIONSHIP OF OVERALL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO 
                   PUBLIC WORKS AND DEVELOPMENT FACILITY LOANS.

       Section 201(a) of the Public Works and Economic Development 
     Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3141(a)) is amended by striking 
     paragraph (5) and inserting the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) such area has an approved overall economic 
     development plan as provided in section 402 and the project 
     for which financial assistance is sought is consistent with 
     such plan.''.

     SEC. 6. ELIMINATION OF OVERALL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.

       Section 202(b) of the Public Works and Economic Development 
     Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3142(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Such financial 
     assistance shall not be extended'' and inserting ``The 
     applicant for such financial assistance shall include, in the 
     application of the applicant for such assistance, an 
     assurance that the assistance will not be used''; and
       (2) in paragraph (10), by striking ``there shall be 
     submitted to and approval of the Secretary an overall program 
     for the economic development of the area and'' and inserting 
     ``the applicant shall submit to the Secretary under section 
     402, and obtain approval of, an overall economic development 
     plan and there is''.

     SEC. 7. REDEVELOPMENT AREA LOAN PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Section 204(a) of the Public Works and 
     Economic Development Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3144(a)) is 
     amended by striking the last two sentences.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 2 of the Act entitled ``An Act to amend the 
     Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 to extend 
     the authorizations for title I through IV through fiscal year 
     1971'', approved July 6, 1970 (42 U.S.C. 3162 note) is 
     repealed.
       (2) Section 6 of the Act entitled ``An Act to amend the 
     Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 to extend 
     the authorizations for a one-year period'', approved June 18, 
     1973 (42 U.S.C. 3162 note) is amended--
       (A) in subsection (a), by striking ``(a)''; and
       (B) by striking subsection (b).

     SEC. 8. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, RESEARCH, AND INFORMATION.

       Section 301(a)(1) of the Public Works and Economic 
     Development Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3151(a)(1)) is amended by 
     striking ``areas which he has designated as redevelopment 
     areas under this Act,'' and inserting ``redevelopment 
     areas,''.

     SEC. 9. BUSINESS OUTREACH CENTER DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.

       Section 303 of the Public Works and Economic Development 
     Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3152) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 303. BUSINESS OUTREACH CENTER DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.

       ``(a) Definition.--As used in this section, the term 
     `isolated small business' means a small business that is 
     unable to effectively access small business services provided 
     by a Federal, State, or local government due to linguistic, 
     cultural, or geographic barriers, as determined by the 
     Secretary.
       ``(b) Demonstration Project.--Using funds made available 
     under this title, the Secretary shall conduct a demonstration 
     project in each of fiscal years 1994 through 1996 for the 
     purpose of demonstrating methods of assisting isolated small 
     businesses to access small business services provided by 
     Federal, State, and local governments.
       ``(c) Establishment of Centers.--In conducting the 
     demonstration project under this section, the Secretary shall 
     establish 3 business outreach centers. At least 1 of the 
     centers shall be located in a rural area.
       ``(d) Duties of Centers.--Each business outreach center 
     established under this section shall--
       ``(1) provide a one-stop clearinghouse to assist isolated 
     small businesses in accessing small business services 
     provided by Federal, State, and local governments; and
       ``(2) improve efficiency in the delivery of such services.
       ``(e) Services To Be Provided.--Each business outreach 
     center established under this section shall provide each of 
     the following services:
       ``(1) Outreach to isolated small businesses.
       ``(2) Assessment of the need of isolated small businesses 
     for assistance services.
       ``(3) Referral of isolated small businesses to small 
     business assistance agencies.
       ``(4) Preparation of materials required by isolated small 
     businesses for participation in small business assistance 
     programs.
       ``(5) Case management to ensure follow-up and quality 
     control of business services.
       ``(6) Coordination of networking among isolated small 
     businesses.
       ``(7) Quality control of small business assistance 
     services.''.

     SEC. 10. OFFICE OF STRATEGIC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING 
                   AND POLICY.

       Title III of the Public Works and Economic Development Act 
     of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3151-3153) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new section:

     ``SEC. 305. OFFICE OF STRATEGIC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING 
                   AND POLICY.

       ``(a) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish in the 
     Economic Development Administration an Office of Strategic 
     Economic Development Planning and Policy (referred to in this 
     section as the `Office').
       ``(b) Director.--The Office shall be headed by a Director, 
     who shall be appointed by the Secretary and who shall report 
     to the Assistant Secretary for Economic Development.
       ``(c) Duties.--The duties of the Director are as follows:
       ``(1) Research, evaluation, and demonstration projects.--
     The Director shall support research, evaluation, and 
     demonstration projects to study and assess best practices in 
     economic development and to examine trends and changes in 
     economic conditions that affect regional development. The 
     Director shall conduct a study of innovative economic 
     development financing tools that may be employed to further 
     economic development of States, regions, and localities.
       ``(2) Policy development.--The Director shall develop and 
     submit to the Secretary recommendations on both short- and 
     long-term policies regarding economic development issues and 
     programs, to help foster the diffusion of innovative, best 
     practices in economic development throughout the Department 
     of Commerce.
       ``(d) Federal Coordinating Council for Economic 
     Development.--
       ``(1) In general.--There is established a Federal 
     Coordinating Council for Economic Development (referred to in 
     this subsection as the `Council').
       ``(2) Composition of the council.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Council shall be composed of 
     representatives from Federal agencies, appointed by the heads 
     of the agencies, involved in matters that affect regional 
     economic development. The Secretary shall determine the 
     Federal agencies that are involved in matters that affect 
     regional economic development.
       ``(B) Vacancies.--Any vacancy in the Council shall not 
     affect the powers of the Council, but shall be filled in the 
     same manner as the original appointment.
       ``(3) Duties.--The Council shall assist the Secretary in 
     providing a unifying framework for economic development 
     efforts and shall develop a governmentwide strategic plan for 
     economic development. The Council shall work to improve 
     coordination of Federal economic development efforts to 
     eliminate duplication and to direct Federal resources to 
     improve economic conditions.
       ``(4) Travel expenses.--The members of the Council shall 
     not receive compensation for service on the Council but shall 
     be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of 
     subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies 
     under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States 
     Code, while away from the homes or regular places of business 
     of the members in the performance of services for the 
     Council.
       ``(5) Facilities, supplies, and personnel.--
       ``(A) In general.--Upon the request of the Council, the 
     Secretary shall provide to the Council any facilities, 
     supplies, and personnel necessary for the Council to carry 
     out the responsibilities of the Council under this 
     subsection.
       ``(B) Details.--In the case of a detail of a Federal 
     Government employee under paragraph (1), the employee may be 
     detailed to the Council without reimbursement. The detail 
     shall be without interruption or loss of civil service status 
     or privilege.
       ``(6) Hearings.--The Council may hold such hearings, sit 
     and act at such times and places, take such testimony, and 
     receive such evidence as the Council considers advisable to 
     carry out this subsection.
       ``(7) Information from federal agencies.--The Council may 
     secure directly from any Federal department or agency such 
     information as the Council considers necessary to carry out 
     this subsection. Upon request of the Council, the head of 
     such department or agency shall furnish such information to 
     the Council.
       ``(8)  Postal services.--The Council may use the United 
     States mails in the same manner and under the same conditions 
     as other departments and agencies of the Federal Government.
       ``(9) Termination.--The Council shall terminate 1 year 
     after the date of the establishment of the Council.''.

     SEC. 11. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR TECHNICAL 
                   ASSISTANCE, RESEARCH, AND INFORMATION.

       Title III of the Public Works and Economic Development Act 
     of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3151-3153) (as amended by section 10) is 
     further amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``SEC. 306. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     title $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1995 through 1997. 
     Such sums shall remain available until expended.''.

     SEC. 12. REDEVELOPMENT AREAS.

       Section 401 of the Public Works and Economic Development 
     Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3161) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 401. AREA ELIGIBILITY.

       ``(a) Certification.--An applicant seeking assistance under 
     this Act to undertake a project for an area shall certify, as 
     part of an application for such assistance, that the area on 
     the date of submission of such application meets 1 or more of 
     the following criteria:
       ``(1) The per capita income of the area is 80 percent or 
     less of the per capita income of the United States.
       ``(2) The average rate of unemployment in the area 
     (seasonally adjusted), as determined by the Secretary of 
     Labor for the most recent 24-month period for which 
     statistics are available, minus the national average rate of 
     unemployment (seasonally adjusted), as so determined, is 
     equal to or exceeds 1 percent.
       ``(3) The average rate of unemployment in the area 
     (seasonally adjusted), as determined by the Secretary of 
     Labor for the most recent 12-month period for which 
     statistics are available, minus the national average rate of 
     unemployment (seasonally adjusted), as so determined, is 
     equal to or exceeds 2 percent.
       ``(4) The area has experienced or is about to experience a 
     sudden economic dislocation resulting in job loss that is 
     significant both in terms of the number of jobs eliminated 
     and the effect on the rate of unemployment in the area (if 
     information on such rate is available), as such rate is 
     determined by the Secretary of Labor.
       ``(5) The population growth rate of the United States, as 
     determined by the Secretary of Commerce for an appropriate 
     period, minus the population growth rate of the area, as so 
     determined, is equal to or exceeds 3 percent.
       ``(6) The area has experienced a decline in total 
     employment that is equal to or exceeds 2 percent over the 
     most recent 5-year period for which statistics are available, 
     as such employment is determined by the Secretary of Labor, 
     acting through the Commissioner of Labor Statistics.
       ``(7) The area is a community or neighborhood (defined 
     without regard to political or other subdivisions or 
     boundaries) that the Secretary determines has 1 or more of 
     the following conditions:
       ``(A) A large concentration of low-income persons.
       ``(B) A rural area having substantial outmigration or 
     substantial economic deterioration and unemployment.
       ``(C) Substantial unemployment.
       ``(b) Documentation.--
       ``(1) Data and statistics.--A certification made under 
     subsection (a) shall be supported by Federal data, if 
     available, and in other cases by data available through the 
     appropriate State government. The applicant shall use the 
     most recent statistics available to support the 
     certification.
       ``(2) Acceptance of data.--The Secretary shall accept the 
     data unless the Secretary determines that the data are 
     inaccurate.
       ``(c) Special Rule.--With respect to a redevelopment area 
     described in subsection (a)(7)--
       ``(1) the project to be carried out in the area shall not 
     be subject to section 101(a)(1)(A);
       ``(2) the area shall not be subject to section 
     101(a)(1)(C); and
       ``(3) the area shall not be considered to be a 
     redevelopment area for purposes of section 403(a)(1)(B).
       ``(d) Prior Designation.--Any designation of a 
     redevelopment area for the purposes of this Act that was made 
     before the date of enactment of the Economic Development 
     Reauthorization Act of 1994 shall not be effective after such 
     date.
       ``(e) Definition.--As used in this Act, the term 
     `redevelopment area' means an area that is the subject of a 
     certification that is--
       ``(1) described in subsection (a); and
       ``(2) submitted by an applicant as part of an application 
     for assistance--
       ``(A) that is described in subsection (a); and
       ``(B) for which the applicant obtains the approval of the 
     Secretary.''.

     SEC. 13. ANNUAL REVIEW.

       (a) In General.--Section 402 of the Public Works and 
     Economic Development Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3162) is amended 
     to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 402. OVERALL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND INVESTMENT 
                   STRATEGY.

       ``(a) Overall Economic Development Plan and Investment 
     Strategy.--The Secretary may provide assistance under this 
     Act to an applicant for a project to be undertaken in an area 
     only if the applicant has prepared and submitted to the 
     Secretary, and obtained approval of, an overall economic 
     development plan or an investment strategy. Such an overall 
     economic development plan or investment strategy shall--
       ``(1) identify the economic development problems to be 
     addressed using such assistance;
       ``(2) identify past, present, and projected further 
     economic development investments in such area and public and 
     private participants and sources of funding for such 
     investments; and
       ``(3) set forth a strategy for addressing the economic 
     development problems identified pursuant to paragraph (1) and 
     describe how the strategy will solve such problems.
       ``(b) Application Requirements.--In submitting an 
     application for assistance under title I or II, an applicant 
     shall describe how the proposed project implements the plan 
     or strategy, provide estimates of costs and timetables for 
     completion for the project, and provide a summary of public 
     and private resources expected to be available for the 
     project.
       ``(c) Existing Plans and Investment Strategies.--To the 
     maximum extent practicable, the Secretary shall approve under 
     subsection (a) overall economic development plans, and 
     overall economic development programs, that were approved by 
     the Secretary under this Act before the date of enactment of 
     the Economic Development Reauthorization Act of 1994 and that 
     substantially meet the requirements of this section.
       ``(d) Definition.--As used in this Act, the term `economic 
     development plan' includes--
       ``(1) a plan or program described in subsection (c) and 
     submitted for approval under subsection (a); and
       ``(2) an investment strategy submitted for approval under 
     subsection (a) in lieu of such a plan.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Trade act of 1974.--Section 273(c)(2) of the Trade Act 
     of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2373(c)(2)) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``overall economic development program'' 
     and inserting ``overall economic development plan or 
     investment strategy''; and
       (B) by striking ``section 202(b)(10)'' and inserting 
     ``section 402''.
       (2) Community economic development act of 1981.--Section 
     626(b)(1) of the Community Economic Development Act of 1981 
     (42 U.S.C. 9815(b)(1)) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``Publc'' and inserting ``Public'';
       (B) by striking ``overall economic development program'' 
     and inserting ``overall economic development plan or 
     investment strategy''; and
       (C) by striking ``section 202(b)(10)'' and inserting 
     ``section 402''.

     SEC. 14. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS.

       (a) Relationship to Overall Economic Development Plans.--
     Section 403 of the Public Works and Economic Development Act 
     of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3171) is amended--
       (1) in subsections (a)(1)(C), (a)(1)(D), (a)(2)(A), 
     (a)(3)(A), (a)(4)(B), (e), and (i) by striking ``overall 
     economic development program'' and inserting ``overall 
     economic development plan'';
       (2) in subsection (a)(1)(D), by striking ``program'' the 
     second place the term appears and inserting ``plan''; and
       (3) in subsections (b) and (b)(2)(B), by striking ``overall 
     economic development programs'' and inserting ``overall 
     economic development plans''.
       (b) Relationship to Redevelopment Area.--Section 403(a)(4) 
     of such Act is amended by striking ``(designated under 
     section 401)''.
       (c) Economic Development District Defined.--Section 403(d) 
     of such Act is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     sentence: ``Such term includes any economic development 
     district designated by the Secretary under this section 
     before the date of enactment of the Economic Development 
     Reauthorization Act of 1994, unless the Secretary terminates 
     the designation.''.
       (d) Funding.--Section 403 of such Act is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (g) and inserting the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(g) Amounts authorized to be appropriated under other 
     sections of this Act shall be available for purposes of 
     carrying out paragraphs (3) and (4) of subsection (a).'';
       (2) by striking subsection (h); and
       (3) by redesignating subsections (i) and (j) as subsections 
     (h) and (i), respectively.

     SEC. 15. APPLICATIONS FOR ASSISTANCE.

       (a) Expedited Processing.--Title VI of the Public Works and 
     Economic Development Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3201-3204) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 605. EXPEDITED PROCESSING OF APPLICATIONS.

       ``(a) Guidelines.--Not later than 60 days after the date of 
     enactment of this section, the Assistant Secretary for 
     Economic Development shall--
       ``(1) develop and publish in the Federal Register 
     guidelines that establish procedures to expedite the 
     processing of applications for assistance under this Act; and
       ``(2) transmit to the Committee on Public Works and 
     Transportation of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a 
     report containing such guidelines.
       ``(b) Contents.--Guidelines to be developed and published 
     under subsection (a) shall, at a minimum, provide for--
       ``(1) increased reliance on self-certification by 
     applicants for such assistance to establish compliance with 
     other Federal laws;
       ``(2) greater use of uniform application forms and 
     procedures;
       ``(3) delegation of decisionmaking authority to regional 
     offices of the Economic Development Administration; and
       ``(4) reduction in the time and number of reviews conducted 
     by offices of the Department of Commerce other than the 
     Economic Development Administration.''.
       (b) Uniform Application Form.--Title VI of such Act (as 
     amended by subsection (a)) is further amended by adding at 
     the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 606. UNIFORM APPLICATION FORM.

       ``(a) Development.--The Secretary shall, in cooperation 
     with the heads of appropriate Federal departments and 
     agencies, develop a general, simplified application form for 
     grant assistance under this Act that may be used by all 
     Federal departments and agencies that provide grant 
     assistance.
       ``(b) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this section, the Secretary shall transmit to 
     Congress a report on use of the form developed pursuant to 
     subsection (a) by Federal departments and agencies.''.

     SEC. 16. PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS OF GRANT RECIPIENTS.

       Title VI of the Public Works and Economic Development Act 
     of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3201-3204) (as amended by subsections (a) 
     and (b) of section 15) is further amended by adding at the 
     end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 607. PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS OF GRANT RECIPIENTS.

       ``(a) In General.--At least once every 2 years, the 
     Secretary shall conduct an evaluation of each university 
     center receiving assistance under title III (referred to in 
     this section as a `university center') and economic 
     development district receiving grant assistance under this 
     Act to assess the performance and contribution toward job 
     creation of the recipient.
       ``(b) Criteria.--
       ``(1) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish 
     criteria for use in conducting evaluations under subsection 
     (a).
       ``(2) Criteria for university centers.--The criteria for 
     evaluation of a university center shall, at a minimum, 
     provide for an assessment of the contribution of the center 
     to providing technical assistance, conducting applied 
     research, and disseminating results of the activities of the 
     center.
       ``(3) Criteria for economic development districts.--The 
     criteria for evaluation of an economic development district 
     shall, at a minimum, provide for an assessment of management 
     standards, financial accountability, and program performance.
       ``(c) Peer Review.--In conducting an evaluation of a 
     university center under subsection (a), the Secretary shall 
     provide for the participation in the evaluation of at least 1 
     other university center on a cost-reimbursement basis.''.

     SEC. 17. TRANSFER OF FUNDS.

       Section 708 of the Public Works and Economic Development 
     Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3218) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Secretary may accept such transfers of funds from other 
     departments and agencies of the Federal Government as the 
     Secretary determines to be appropriate and use such funds to 
     carry out objectives of this Act, if the Secretary uses the 
     funds to carry out objectives for which (and in accordance 
     with the terms under which) the funds are specifically 
     authorized and appropriated. Not more than 5 percent of such 
     funds may be transferred to the account relating to salaries 
     and expenses of the Economic Development Administration.''.

     SEC. 18. EXTENSION OF BENEFITS.

       Section 715 of the Public Works and Economic Development 
     Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3225) is amended by striking ``such 
     areas as may be designated as `redevelopment areas' or 
     `economic development centers' under the authority of section 
     401 or 403 of this Act:'' and inserting ``redevelopment areas 
     and such areas as may be designated as `economic development 
     centers' under section 403:''.

     SEC. 19. SUPERVISION OF REGIONAL COUNSELS.

       Title VII of the Public Works and Economic Development Act 
     of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3211-3226) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new section:

     ``SEC. 717. SUPERVISION OF REGIONAL COUNSELS.

       ``The Secretary shall take such actions as may be necessary 
     to ensure that individuals serving as Regional Counsels of 
     the Economic Development Administration report directly to 
     their respective Regional Directors.''.

     SEC. 20. PURPOSE.

       The first sentence of section 901 of the Public Works and 
     Economic Development Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3241) is amended 
     by striking ``It is the purpose of this title'' and inserting 
     ``The purposes of title I and of this title are''.

     SEC. 21. BASE CLOSINGS AND REALIGNMENTS.

       Section 903 of the Public Works and Economic Development 
     Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3243) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(e)(1) In any case in which the Secretary determines that 
     a need exists for assistance under subsection (a) due to the 
     closure or realignment of a military installation, the 
     Secretary may make such assistance available to an eligible 
     recipient for a project to be carried out on the military 
     installation or for a project to be carried out in a 
     community adversely affected by the closure or realignment.
       ``(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Secretary may provide to an eligible recipient any assistance 
     available under this title for a project to be carried out on 
     a military installation that is closed or scheduled for 
     closure or realignment, without requiring that the eligible 
     recipient have title to the property on which the 
     installation is located, or a leasehold interest in the 
     property, for any specified term.''.

     SEC. 22. OUTREACH TO COMMUNITIES ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY 
                   CLOSURES AND REALIGNMENTS OF MILITARY 
                   INSTALLATIONS.

       Title IX of the Public Works and Economic Development Act 
     of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3241-3245) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating section 905 as section 908; and
       (2) by inserting after section 904 the following new 
     section:

     ``SEC. 905. OUTREACH TO COMMUNITIES ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY 
                   CLOSURES AND REALIGNMENTS OF MILITARY 
                   INSTALLATIONS.

       ``(a) Designation of Agency Representatives.--The Assistant 
     Secretary for Economic Development shall designate for each 
     State in which communities are adversely affected by closures 
     and realignments of military installations, an individual to 
     serve as a representative of the Economic Development 
     Administration. Such individual may be the State Economic 
     Development Agency Representative or another qualified 
     individual.
       ``(b) Responsibilities.--Individuals appointed as agency 
     representatives under subsection (a) shall provide outreach 
     and technical assistance, to communities adversely affected 
     by closures and realignments of military installations, on 
     obtaining assistance from the Economic Development 
     Administration.''.

     SEC. 23. TREATMENT OF REVOLVING LOAN FUNDS.

       Title IX of the Public Works and Economic Development Act 
     of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3241-3245) (as amended by section 22) is 
     further amended by inserting after section 905 the following 
     new section:

     ``SEC. 906. TREATMENT OF REVOLVING LOAN FUNDS.

       ``(a) In General.--An amount made available through a grant 
     made under this title that is used by an eligible recipient 
     to establish a revolving loan fund shall not be treated, 
     except as provided by subsection (b), as an amount derived 
     from Federal funds for the purposes of any Federal law after 
     such amount is loaned from the fund to a borrower and repaid 
     to the fund.
       ``(b) Exceptions.--An amount described in subsection (a) 
     that is loaned from a revolving loan fund to a borrower and 
     repaid to the fund--
       ``(1) may be used only for a project that is consistent 
     with the purposes of this title; and
       ``(2) shall be subject to the financial management, 
     accounting, reporting, and auditing standards that were 
     originally applicable to such amount on the date on which the 
     Secretary made the amount available to the recipient through 
     a grant described in subsection (a).
       ``(c) Regulations.--Not later than 30 days after the date 
     of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall issue 
     regulations to carry out subsection (a).
       ``(d) Public Review and Comment.--Before issuing any final 
     guidelines or administrative manuals governing the operation 
     of revolving loan funds established using amounts from grants 
     made under this title, the Secretary shall provide reasonable 
     opportunity for public review of and comment on such 
     guidelines and administrative manuals.''.

     SEC. 24. SALE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS IN REVOLVING LOAN 
                   FUNDS.

       Title IX of the Public Works and Economic Development Act 
     of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3241-3245) (as amended by section 23) is 
     further amended by inserting after section 906 the following 
     new section:

     ``SEC. 907. SALE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS IN REVOLVING LOAN 
                   FUNDS.

       ``Any loan, loan guarantee, or other financial instrument 
     in the portfolio of a revolving loan fund described in 
     section 906 may be sold, at the discretion of the grant 
     recipient that established the fund, to a third party. The 
     proceeds of the sale--
       ``(1) shall be deposited in the fund and only used for 
     projects that are consistent with the purposes of this title; 
     and
       ``(2) shall be subject to the financial management, 
     accounting, reporting, and auditing standards that were 
     originally applicable to the financial instrument on the date 
     on which the financial instrument was entered into.''.

     SEC. 25. SPECIAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ADJUSTMENT 
                   ASSISTANCE.

       Section 908 of the Public Works and Economic Development 
     Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3245) (as redesignated by section 
     22(1)) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 908. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``(a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     to carry out this title $124,800,000 for fiscal year 1995 and 
     $81,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1996 and 1997. Such sums 
     shall remain available until expended.
       ``(b) Set-Aside for Activities Related to Closures and 
     Realignments of Military Installations.--Of the amounts 
     appropriated pursuant to subsection (a) for fiscal year 1995, 
     not less than $80,000,000 shall be available for purposes of 
     assisting eligible recipients in carrying out activities 
     related to closures and realignments of military 
     installations.
       ``(c) Additional Amounts.--In addition to the 
     appropriations authorized by subsection (a), there are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this title such 
     sums as may be necessary to provide assistance for activities 
     related to closures and realignments of military 
     installations and to provide assistance in the case of a 
     natural disaster for each of fiscal years 1995, 1996, and 
     1997. Such sums shall remain available until expended.''.

     SEC. 26. COMPLIANCE WITH BUY AMERICAN ACT.

       None of the funds made available under this title, or any 
     amendment made by this title, may be expended to acquire 
     articles, materials, or supplies, or to procure services, in 
     violation of the applicable provisions of sections 2 through 
     4 of title III of the Act of March 3, 1933 (commonly known as 
     the ``Buy American Act'') (41 U.S.C. 10a-10b-1).
                                 ______


By Mr. WARNER (for himself, Mr. Graham, Mr. DeConcini, Mr. Metzenbaum, 
                      Mr. Chafee, and Mr. Cohen):

  S. 2258. A bill to create a Commission on the Roles and Capabilities 
of the U.S. Intelligence Community, and for other purposes; to the 
Select Committee on Intelligence.


                    commission creation legislation

  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I am rising today to introduce legislation 
that would establish a Presidential Commission to examine the roles and 
missions of the U.S. intelligence community.
  It was not too many years ago, Mr. President, that there was a solid 
consensus in Congress in support of the intelligence budget and our 
intelligence agencies. During the decade of the 1980's, for example, 
the intelligence authorization bill was so noncontroversial that it was 
often passed during a late night session on a voice vote without debate 
or amendment. That era is now gone, and the intelligence authorization 
bill seems to attract more debate and discussion every year.
  I anticipate that this year the Senate will establish a new record 
for the length of time that it debates the intelligence authorization 
bill. We will consider counterintelligence legislation in connection 
with the intelligence bill this year; we will probably face amendments 
aimed at cutting the intelligence budget, as we have each of the last 
few years; and the Senate may revisit the issue of declassifying the 
intelligence budget totals. Some Senators have indicated they may seek 
to convene the Senate in executive session to debate classified 
programs. That is a procedure I always support.
  As my colleagues are aware, the Department of Defense has been the 
subject of extensive reviews in recent years. The Bottom-Up Review 
being the most recent. In 1986, both Houses of Congress overwhelmingly 
approved the Goldwater-Nichols Act, which strengthened the Unified 
Combatant Commands and the Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs 
of Staff. A Presidential commission has been established to review the 
roles and mission of our Armed Forces. These have been very productive 
and necessary steps, and I believe that a comparable review of the 
intelligence community is now, timely. Such a review, I predict, will 
result in the strengthening of the Nation's intelligence.
  The bill that I am introducing today, together with Senator Graham of 
Florida, chairman of the Intelligence Committee, is intended to provide 
a thorough and fully independent review of the organization and mission 
of the intelligence community. While the Jacobs' panel looked at part 
of our intelligence structure, and made a valuable contribution, this 
proposed commission would be the first fully independent review of the 
roles and missions of the entire intelligence community since the 
establishment of the CIA in 1947.

  Our bill has a number of important features.
  First, the Commission would be composed of four Members of Congress 
appointed by our leadership in consultation with the chairman and vice 
chairman of the Intelligence Committee as well as seven individuals 
from the private sector appointed by the President. In order to ensure 
an independent perspective, we have stipulated in the bill that the 
members of the Commission shall not have previously held leadership 
positions in the intelligence community.
  Second, we have provided funds so that the Commission can have a 
clearance staff to handle classified material, and will therefore not 
need to depend on intelligence community officials for information and 
analysis.
  Third, we have provided the Commission the time necessary to do a 
thorough and detailed study. Its report would not be due until December 
1996.
  Finally, I think it is important for my colleagues to understand that 
our bill tasks the Commission with reviewing the full range of issues 
that have arisen with regard to the intelligence community in recent 
years. For example, under our bill, the Commission would be charged 
with reviewing the budgets of the intelligence community as well as 
their roles and missions; the role of economic intelligence would be 
addressed, as would the issue of declassifying the intelligence budget.
  I want the record to reflect the fact that this bill was a 
collaborative effort involving myself, Senator DeConcini, and Senator 
Graham of Florida. Over the last couple of months, I have been publicly 
outspoken regarding the need for a Presidential Commission, and on May 
19 I wrote the President urging his support for such a Commission. But 
my initial idea had been to have a Presidential Commission that would 
have focused primarily on the CIA and its relations with other 
organizations. Senator Graham at that point approached me expressing 
support for a Presidential Commission, suggesting however that its 
purview be expanded to include the entire intelligence community. 
Senator Graham and our distinguished chairman, Senator DeConcini, both 
had ideas for topics the Commission should consider that have been 
incorporated in this bill. So my colleagues from Florida and Arizona 
are not only cosponsors, but coauthors of this legislation.
  I strongly believe that the world is a more complex and difficult 
place in many respects than it was during the cold war. There is no 
doubt in my mind that an independent Commission will validate the 
continued need for clandestine human and technical intelligence 
collection to support U.S. national security interests. Nevertheless, 
the Commission may very well recommend changes that eliminate waste or 
duplication and increase the performance and effectiveness of the 
intelligence community. We need an independent review at this time, to 
scrub the existing structure and provide both the Congress and the 
public with assurances that the intelligence organization and 
activities we support are consistent with our great Nation's values, 
budgets, and interests. I have no doubt that the intelligence community 
will pass this test and emerge with renewed public and congressional 
support.
  I hope that my colleagues, the administration and the public will 
review the bill and comment on it so that we can make any needed 
changes or improvement prior to the time the intelligence authorization 
bill comes to the floor of the Senate. It would be my intention, and I 
know that of our distinguished chairman and the distinguished Senator 
from Florida, to offer this bill as an amendment to the intelligence 
authorization bill at that time.
  Mr. President, in closing, I ask unanimous consent that a letter I 
wrote to the President on this topic last month be included in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:


                                                  U.S. Senate,

                                                     May 19, 1994.
     The President,
     The White House,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. President: I am writing today to urge you to 
     consider establishing a Presidential Commission to review the 
     roles, mission, funding level and organizational structure of 
     the Central Intelligence Agency as well as its integral role 
     as the lead agency in the Intelligence Community.
       As you know, the CIA has come under intense public scrutiny 
     as a result of the Ames case. My own view is that much of 
     this criticism is unjustified. Nevertheless, this tragic case 
     has triggered many of my colleagues (and their constituents) 
     to pose constructively, a broad range of important questions, 
     not only about the CIA's counterintelligence practices, but 
     more fundamentally, the appropriate role of clandestine 
     activities in a world devoid of the Soviet threat. As I, 
     Chairman DeConcini, and others, support the Intelligence 
     Authorization bill (and subsequent appropriations) on the 
     floor, it would be helpful to refer to a decision by you to 
     initiate an in-depth study by a Presidential Commission.
       For nearly a quarter of a century, I have worked with the 
     CIA. Unequivocally, I believe that the CIA continues to play 
     a unique and vital role in supporting U.S. national security 
     interests. The threat of nuclear conflicts has diminished, in 
     the wake of the demise of the Soviet Union, but the dramatic 
     collapse of that vast empire has produced a heightened 
     instability throughout not only the former Soviet Union, but 
     the world.
       Further, as you well know, in the minds of many the world 
     is more complex and unpredictable than it was before the 
     collapse of the Soviet Union. The time for a hard look at the 
     CIA is now. I am confident that the Agency will pass ``the 
     test,'' no matter how vigorously examined, and that 
     constructive new ideas, which neither you nor I now have, 
     will emerge to change and strengthen intelligence.
       In recent years, other parts of the national security 
     apparatus have undergone fundamental reforms. The Goldwater-
     Nichols bill reformed important structures within the 
     Department of Defense and was approved overwhelmingly by both 
     Houses of Congress. It was enacted in 1986, following 
     vigorous efforts by the Senate Armed Services Committee. Last 
     Year, the Defense Department conducted a ``bottom-up review'' 
     in order to assure that we have an appropriate balance 
     between U.S. military objectives and force structure. More 
     recently, Congress directed, and you appointed, a panel to 
     review the roles and missions of the armed forces. A 
     Presidential Commission, however, is essential in this case.
       In my view, an independent appraisal of the Agency, in the 
     context of it's partners, would restore a sense of confidence 
     in the Agency and in Congress.
       Congress, in its oversight capacity, is undertaking, to a 
     limited extent, its own review; but, in my judgment would 
     welcome an independent analysis. In keeping with past 
     practice, I recommend that such a commission be composed of 
     individuals appointed by yourself and the leaders of the 
     House and Senate and be directed to report back to you in 
     less than a year.
       Senator Boren and Senator Cohen worked very successfully 
     with a group--with similar objectives--known as the ``Jacobs 
     Panel.'' Both Senators, unsolicited, support the concept of 
     your appointing a group and suggest that one or more of the 
     ``Jacobs Panel'' be included to achieve a measure of 
     continuity.
       In closing, I would urge that this panel examine the 
     question of economic intelligence, for I foresee growing 
     problems as other nations are becoming more active in this 
     area and economic competition intensifies.
       If you support the idea of a Presidential Commission, I 
     would be happy to offer an amendment authorizing such a 
     commission during Senate consideration of the Fiscal Year 
     1995 Intelligence Authorization bill. I appreciate your 
     consideration of this important issue.
           Respectfully yours,
                                                    John Warner.  

  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senators Warner and 
DeConcini in introducing legislation to establish a blue ribbon 
commission on the roles and capabilities of the United States 
intelligence community.
  The purpose of this Commission is to commence an analysis of the 
missions, roles, functions, and relationships of the intelligence 
community and its responsiveness to consumers' needs, based on the 
post-cold war environment.
  With the collapse of the Soviet Eastern bloc we face a dramatically 
changed world. Rather than one principle enemy, we now confront a world 
where regional instability presents a variety of threats.
  As the world is changing, so must our approach to intelligence 
gathering. We must chart a new course. The Commission which we are 
today proposing will play a critical role in charting that new course.
  I believe, as my colleague and friend from Virginia has stated, this 
is the time to step back to take a long view and a fresh look at our 
intelligence priorities. Where changes are needed we need to make them. 
New thinking is required and nothing is sacrosanct. Most importantly in 
an environment of reduced resources we must match means to ends.
  Intelligence is critical to the security of our Nation and will 
remain so. As we reduce our defense spending the role of intelligence 
becomes even more critical. Good intelligence is invaluable, it can 
tell us where the next threat will arise and how we should best deploy 
resources to address it.
  I am also well aware that recent events, such as the Ames spy case, 
have focused a critical light on the intelligence community and 
generated renewed concerns for an evaluation.
  Mr. President the time is right for a comprehensive review. I would 
like to highlight three issues which the commission will evaluate 
closely:
  First, the roles and missions of the intelligence community in terms 
of providing support to its traditional customers--the defense and 
foreign policy establishments.
  Second, whether intelligence efforts are prepared to address 
emergency needs--such as increasingly sophisticated economic 
intelligence for new customers.
  Third, available requirements and resources--both human and 
material--are they properly watched and allocated within the 
intelligence community.
  A particular concern is whether the recruitment, training, and 
promotion policies of the intelligence community will achieve the human 
resources needed in a world in which human intelligence capabilities 
will be increasingly required.
  I am particularly concerned that at a time when I suspect that human 
intelligence, as distinct from technological means of gathering 
intelligence, will assume greater importance, particularly in places in 
the 60 emerging hot spots around the world, that we have the capability 
to recruit, train and lead our humans who will be providing that human 
intelligence.
  The proposed Commission would consist of 11 members: 7 appointed by 
the President; one member each appointed by the Senate majority leader 
and minority leader; and one member each appointed by the Speaker of 
the House and the House minority leader.
  This proposed Commission would ensure an independent evaluation with 
executive and legislative branch collaboration, to provide a review 
that could serve to strengthen the support and refine the management of 
these vital capabilities essential for our national security. The 
structure of this Commission will ensure its independence.
  I look forward to its creation and receiving its recommendations by 
December 31, 1996.
  Mr. President, I appreciate this time and join my colleague from 
Virginia in looking forward to the creation and the receipt of the 
report of the Commission by December 31, 1996.
                                 ______

      By Mrs. MURRAY (for herself, Mr. Hatfield, Mr. Gorton, Mr. 
        Inouye, and Mr. Bradley):
  S. 2259. A bill to provide for the settlement of the claims of the 
Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation concerning their 
contribution to the production of hydropower by the Grand Coulee Dam, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Indian Affairs.


                    grand coulee dam settlement act

 Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, today I am proud to introduce the 
Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation Grand Coulee Dam 
Settlement Act.
  This legislation would codify an historic agreement recently reached 
between the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation and the 
United States. Since the Federal construction of the Grand Coulee Dam, 
the people of Washington State and the Nation have benefited greatly 
from the power produced from the waters of the Columbia. But few have 
sacrificed as much for these gains as the Confederated Tribes of the 
Colville Reservation, on whose land the Grand Coulee Dam was built. 
This bill would resolve this inequity, settling the tribe's long-
standing claims against the United States for compensation of the 
reservation lands taken for Grand Coulee Dam construction and 
operation.
  In 1933, the Federal Power Commission granted a permit to develop the 
water resources at the site that is now the Grand Coulee Dam on the 
Columbia River in Washington State. The dam was to be constructed under 
a Federal Power Act license, and the tribe was to receive annual 
payments for tribal lands taken and used for the production of power. 
The tribe testified before Congress, that their best lands would be 
lost and their ability to fish would be destroyed. The Secretary of the 
Interior, Harold Ickes, supported the tribes, affirming that they 
should be compensated according to the power produced by the dam.
  Even so, when the United States completed the dam and began producing 
electricity in 1942, the tribe received nothing for its contribution to 
the production of electricity.
  The tribe then commenced to pursue its claim in the Federal courts. 
For almost 50 years--nearly a generation--the tribe filed claims 
litigation seeking compensation. The tribe first brought suit against 
the United States under the 1946 Indian Claims Commission Act for the 
taking of its property and the use of its lands. Finally, in 1992, the 
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a previously 
dismissed claim, thereby opening the door for settlement negotiations 
between the tribe, the Justice Department, and the Bonneville Power 
Administration [BPA] to begin.
  The settlement agreement negotiated between the United States and the 
tribe is a fair, equitable and final settlement for tribal compensation 
claims. Over 6 months of negotiations, representatives of the 
Department of Justice, the Department of Interior, and the BPA agreed 
with the Colville Tribe on the Settlement Agreement represented by this 
act.

  The purposes of this act are as follows. First, to approve and ratify 
the Settlement Agreement entered to by the United States and the 
Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation in Washington State. 
And second, to direct the BPA to carry out payment obligations under 
the Settlement Agreement.
  Under the Settlement Agreement, the United States has agreed to pay 
$53 million to the tribe as settlement for past unpaid annual charges. 
The BPA will pay the tribe an annual payment for the continued use of 
reservation lands. The first payment will be for $15.25 million and 
will be made by March 1, 1996. Additional payments will be subject to a 
formula set forth in the agreement. These payments will fluctuate 
according to the amount of power produced annually at the Grand Coulee 
Dam and BPA's average sale price for power.
  Mr. President, The Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation 
have contributed greatly to the success of my region of the country, 
and will continue to do so for many generations to come. It is time for 
the United States to recognize the contributions that have been made. 
Therefore, it is with conviction that I urge my colleagues to vote with 
me for passage of this act. Thank you.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of my statement 
be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2259

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Confederated Tribes of the 
     Colville Reservation Grand Coulee Dam Settlement Act''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       As used in this Act:
       (1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the 
     Administrator of the Bonneville Power Administration;
       (2) Bonneville power administration.--The term ``Bonneville 
     Power Administration'' means the Bonneville Power 
     Administration of the Department of Energy or any successor 
     agency, corporation, or entity that markets power produced at 
     the Dam.
       (3) Dam.--The term ``Dam'' means the Grand Coulee Dam--
       (A) operated by the Bureau of Reclamation of the Department 
     of the Interior, and
       (B) with respect to which power is marketed by the 
     Bonneville Power Administration of the Department of Energy.
       (4) Confederated tribes v. united states.--The term 
     ``Confederated Tribes v. United States'' means the case 
     pending before the United States Court of Claims arising from 
     the claim filed with the Indian Claims Commission with the 
     docket number 181-D that--
       (A) was transferred to the United States Court of Claims 
     pursuant to the Federal Courts Improvement Act of 1982 (96 
     Stat. 25) as Confederated Tribes v. United States (20 Cl. Ct. 
     31);
       (B) with respect to which an appeal was filed in the United 
     States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit (964 F.2d 1102) 
     (Fed. Cir. 1992); and
       (C) on the basis of the appeal, was remanded in part by the 
     United States Court of Appeals to the United States Court of 
     Claims.
       (5) Minor.--The term ``minor'' means a child who has not 
     attained the age of 18.
       (6) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (7) Settlement agreement.--The term ``Settlement 
     Agreement'' means the Settlement Agreement entered into 
     between the United States and the Confederated Tribes of the 
     Colville Reservation, signed by the United States on April 
     21, 1994, and by the Tribe on April 16, 1994, to settle the 
     claims of the Tribe under Confederated Tribes v. United 
     States.
       (8) Tribe.--``Tribe'' means the Confederated Tribes of the 
     Colville Reservation, a federally recognized Indian tribe.

     SEC. 3. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) An action by the Confederated Tribes of the Colville 
     Reservation against the United States is pending before the 
     United States Court of Federal Claims.
       (2) In such action, the Tribe seeks to recover damages 
     under section 2(5)) of the of the Indian Claims Commission 
     Act (60 Stat. 1050 (formerly 25 U.S.C. 70a(5)) relating to 
     fair and honorable dealings.
       (3) Although the matter that is the subject of such action 
     is in dispute, the potential liability of the United States 
     is substantial.
       (4) The claim filed by Tribe with respect to such action 
     alleges that--
       (A) after the construction of the Grand Coulee Dam, the 
     United States has used land located in the Colville 
     Reservation in connection with the generation of electric 
     power;
       (B) the United States will continue to use such land during 
     such time as the Grand Coulee Dam produces power; and
       (C) the United States has promised to pay the Tribe for the 
     use referred to in subparagraph (A), but has failed to make 
     such payment.
       (4) After years of litigation, the United States has 
     negotiated a Settlement Agreement with the Tribe that was 
     signed by the appropriate officials of the Department of 
     Justice, the Bonneville Power Administration, and the 
     Department of the Interior.
       (5) The Settlement Agreement is contingent on the enactment 
     of enabling legislation to approve and ratify the Settlement 
     Agreement.
       (6) Upon the enactment of this Act, the Settlement 
     Agreement will--
       (A) provide mutually agreeable compensation for the past 
     use (as determined under such Agreement) of land of the 
     Colville Reservation in connection with the generation of 
     electric power at Grand Coulee Dam;
       (B) establish a method to ensure that the Tribe will be 
     compensated for future use (as determined under such 
     Agreement) of land of the Colville Reservation in the 
     generation of electric power at Grand Coulee Dam; and 
     approved; and
       (C) settle the claims of the Tribe against the United 
     States brought under the Indian Claims Commission Act.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are as follows:
       (1) To approve and ratify the Settlement Agreement entered 
     into by the United States and the Tribe.
       (2) To direct the Bonneville Power Administration to carry 
     out the obligations of the Bonneville Power Administration 
     under the Settlement Agreement.

     SEC. 4. APPROVAL, RATIFICATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF 
                   SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT.

       (a) In General.--The Settlement Agreement is hereby 
     approved and ratified.
       (b) Duties of the Bonneville Power Administration.--The 
     Bonneville Power Administration shall--
       (1) on an annual basis, make payments to the Tribe in a 
     manner consistent with the Settlement Agreement; and
       (2) carry out any other obligation of the Bonneville Power 
     Administration under the Settlement Agreement.
       (c) Implementation of Settlement Agreement.--
       (1) In general.--In a manner consistent with the negotiated 
     terms of the Settlement Agreement, the United States shall 
     join in the motion that the Tribe has agreed to file in 
     Confederated Tribes of Colville Reservation v. United States, 
     for the entry of a compromise final judgment in the amount of 
     $53,000,000.00.
       (2) Requirements for payment.--The United States shall pay 
     the amount specified in paragraph (1) from funds appropriated 
     pursuant to section 1304 of title 31, United States Code. The 
     amount paid as a judgment may not be not reimbursed by the 
     Bonneville Power Administration.

     SEC. 5. DISTRIBUTION OF THE SETTLEMENT FUNDS.

       (a) Lump Sum Payment.--The payment made under section 
     4(c)(1) (including any interest that accrues on the payment) 
     shall be deposited by the Secretary of the Treasury in a 
     trust fund established for the Tribe pursuant to of Public 
     Law 93-134 (25 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.) for use by the tribal 
     governing body of the Confederated Tribes of the Colville 
     Reservation, pursuant to a distribution plan developed by the 
     Tribe and approved by the Secretary of the Interior pursuant 
     to section 3 of Public Law 93-134 (25 U.S.C. 1403), except 
     that--
       (1) under the distribution plan developed pursuant to this 
     subsection any payment to be made to a minor shall be held by 
     the United States in trust for the minor until the later of--
       (A) the date the minor attains the age of 18; or
       (B) the date of graduation of the secondary school class 
     with respect to which the minor is scheduled to be a member; 
     and
       (2) the Secretary may, pursuant to regulations prescribed 
     by the Secretary relating to the administration of the Bureau 
     of Indian Affairs, authorize the emergency use of trust funds 
     for the benefit of a minor.
       (b) Annual Payments.--In addition to the lump sum payment 
     described in subsection (a), the appropriate official of the 
     Federal Government shall make annual payments directly to the 
     Tribe in accordance with the Settlement Agreement. The Tribe 
     may use any amount received as an annual payment under this 
     subsection in the same manner as the Tribe may use any other 
     income received by the Tribe from the lease or sale of 
     natural resources.

     SEC. 6. REPAYMENT CREDIT.

       (a) In General.--Beginning with fiscal year 2000, and 
     ending at the end of the last fiscal year during which the 
     Tribe receives an annual payment pursuant to the Settlement 
     Agreement, the Administrator shall deduct from the interest 
     payable to the Secretary of the Treasury from net proceeds 
     (as defined in section 13(b) of the Federal Columbia River 
     Transmission System Act (16 U.S.C. 838(b)) an amount equal to 
     26 percent of the payment made to the Tribe for the 
     immediately preceding fiscal year.
       (b) Credit of Interest.--
       (1) In general.--Each deduction made under this section 
     shall--
       (A) be credited to the amount of interest payments that 
     would otherwise be payable by the Administrator to the 
     Secretary of the Treasury during the fiscal year in which the 
     deduction is made; and
       (B) be allocated on a pro rata basis to all interest 
     payments on debt associated with the generation function of 
     the Federal Columbia River Power System that are payable 
     during the fiscal year specified in subparagraph (A).
       (2) Special allocation rule.--If, for any fiscal year a 
     deduction calculated pursuant to paragraph (1) would be 
     greater than the amount of interest due on debt associated 
     with the generation function described in paragraph (1)(B) 
     for such fiscal year, the amount by which the deduction 
     exceeds the interest due on debt associated with the 
     generation function shall be allocated on a pro rata basis as 
     a credit for the payment of any other interest that is 
     payable by the Administrator by the Secretary for such fiscal 
     year.

     SEC. 7. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.

       (a) Liens and Forfeitures.--Funds paid or deposited to the 
     credit of the Tribe pursuant to the Settlement Agreement or 
     this Act, any interest or investment income earned or 
     received on such funds, any payment authorized by the Tribe 
     or the Secretary of the Interior to be made from such funds 
     to members of the Tribe, and any interest or investment 
     income earned on any such payment earned or received and 
     deposited in a trust pursuant to this section for a member of 
     the Tribe, may not be subject to any levy, execution, 
     forfeiture, garnishment, lien, encumbrance, seizure, or 
     taxation by the Federal Government or a State or political 
     subdivision of a State.
       (b) Eligibility for Federal and Federally Funded 
     Programs.--None of the funds described in subsection (a) may 
     be treated as income or resources or otherwise used as the 
     basis for denying or reducing the financial assistance or 
     other benefits to which the Tribe, a member of the Tribe, or 
     a household of the Tribe would otherwise be entitled under 
     the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) or any 
     program of the Federal Government or program that receives 
     assistance from the Federal Government.
       (c) Trust Responsibility.--This Act and the Settlement 
     Agreement may not be construed to affect the trust 
     responsibility of the United States to the Tribe or to any of 
     the members of the Tribe.

                          ____________________