[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 101 (Thursday, July 28, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: July 28, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
               RADON AWARENESS AND DISCLOSURE ACT OF 1994

  Mr. MOAKLEY. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 491 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 491

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule 
     XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 2448) to improve the accuracy of radon testing 
     products and services, to increase testing for radon, and for 
     other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be 
     dispensed with. General debate shall be confined to the bill 
     and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled 
     by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee 
     on Energy and Commerce. After general debate the bill shall 
     be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It 
     shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the 
     purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment 
     in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on 
     Energy and Commerce now printed in the bill. Each section of 
     the committee amendment in the nature of substitute shall be 
     considered as read. At the conclusion of consideration of the 
     bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the 
     bill to the House with such amendments as may have been 
     adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House 
     on any amendment adopted in the Committee on the Whole to the 
     bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute. The previous question shall be considered as 
     ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage 
     without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with 
     or without instructions.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. 
Moakley] is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield 
the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from California [Mr. Dreier], 
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, all time yielded is for the purposes of debate only.
  (Mr. MOAKLEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Madam Speaker, House Resolution 491 is an open rule 
providing for consideration of the Radon Awareness and Disclosure Act 
of 1994. The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate, equally 
divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of 
the Energy and Commerce Committee. It makes in order the Energy and 
Commerce Committee amendment in the nature of a substitute now printed 
in the bill as an original bill for the purpose of debate. The rule 
provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
  Madam Speaker, House Resolution 491 will allow the House to consider 
the Radon Awareness and Disclosure Act. This bill expands and improves 
the radon activities of the EPA to reduce the danger of radon to the 
American public.
  The bill ensures that anyone buying or leasing a house will receive a 
warning about the dangers of radon before they sign on the dotted line. 
Buyers will have the opportunity to request a radon test and to insist 
upon a remedy--if indoor radon hazards are present--before they make 
their purchase.
  The bill also requires EPA to develop standards for new construction 
in high radon areas, and creates a new program of performance and 
efficiency standards for radon products and services.
  Madam Speaker, radon is a known carcinogen. The Surgeon General, and 
other top health officials, have warned that radon is the second 
leading cause of fatal lung cancer in this country, just behind smoking 
cigarettes.
  It is a hazard which can be prevented without a great deal of effort 
or expense if people have the information they need to make decisions, 
and some confidence that they have reliable products and services to 
fix that problem.
  House Resolution 491 is an open rule that will expedite consideration 
of this very important legislation. I urge my colleagues to support the 
rule and the bill.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1250

  Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, yesterday the Committee on Rules called an 
emergency meeting to grant this rule providing for the consideration of 
the Radon Awareness and Disclosure Act. As it turned out, the emergency 
was not--the emergency was that there was not enough legislation ready 
for floor consideration to keep the House busy for the next couple of 
days. We had one recorded vote on Monday, and yesterday we completed 
our legislative business in less than 4 hours. This Congress has a lot 
to do and very little time in which to do it. We need to use that time 
to address the real emergencies facing our Nation, welfare reform, 
crime control, items like that.
  However, today we are considering this legislation to encourage radon 
awareness and disclosure and testing, and I do rise in support of this 
marvelously open rule. The legislation is well intentioned, and I think 
it is important to insure that the public is fully informed on the 
consequences of radon exposure, and radon testing should be more 
aggressively encouraged.
  However, I do not support the provisions of this bill which will 
require ordinary homeowners and others to provide certain information 
regarding radon to potential buyers during real estate transactions. I 
do not think that it is wise Federal policy to allow the Environmental 
Protection Agency to get into the real estate business, nor do I 
believe that the EPA has the manpower or the economic resources 
necessary to implement and administer such a massive regulatory 
program. These matters are best regulated by State and local 
governments. In fact, 35 States already have some form of radon 
disclosure requirements, and I am sure that others will follow.
  Madam Speaker, I think that there are better ways to inform the 
public about radon than to make it the responsibility of property 
owners. This open rule will allow Members to address their concerns 
over these disclosure provisions. One of the brilliant amendments we 
will have considered is the Oxley amendment, which cuts out some of 
that bureaucratic red tape, with other amendments we will see down the 
line. I do urge adoption of the rule, but I have grave concerns about 
the bill itself.
  Madam Speaker, I would submit the following information to be printed 
in the Record.

                                  OPEN VERSUS RESTRICTIVE RULES 95TH-103D CONG.                                 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Open rules       Restrictive rules
                      Congress (years)                       Total rules ---------------------------------------
                                                              granted\1\  Number  Percent\2\  Number  Percent\3\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
95th (1977-78).............................................          211     179         85       32         15 
96th (1979-80).............................................          214     161         75       53         25 
97th (1981-82).............................................          120      90         75       30         25 
98th (1983-84).............................................          155     105         68       50         32 
99th (1985-86).............................................          115      65         57       50         43 
100th (1987-88)............................................          123      66         54       57         46 
101st (1989-90)............................................          104      47         45       57         55 
102d (1991-92).............................................          109      37         34       72         66 
103d (1993-94).............................................           80      21         26       59         74 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Total rules counted are all order of business resolutions reported from the Rules Committee which provide for
  the initial consideration of legislation, except rules on appropriations bills which only waive points of     
  order. Original jurisdiction measures reported as privileged are also not counted.                            
\2\Open rules are those which permit any Member to offer any germane amendment to a measure so long as it is    
  otherwise in compliance with the rules of the House. The parenthetical percentages are open rules as a percent
  of total rules granted.                                                                                       
\3\Restrictive rules are those which limit the number of amendments which can be offered, and include so-called 
  modified open and modified closed rules, as well as completely closed rule, and rules providing for           
  consideration in the House as opposed to the Committee of the Whole. The parenthetical percentages are        
  restrictive rules as a percent of total rules granted.                                                        
                                                                                                                
Sources: ``Rules Committee Calendars & Surveys of Activities,'' 95th-102d Cong.; ``Notices of Action Taken,''   
  Committee on Rules, 103d Cong., through July 27, 1994.                                                        


                                                        OPEN VERSUS RESTRICTIVE RULES: 103D CONG.                                                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Rule                                      Amendments                                                                  
   Rule number date reported      type       Bill number and subject         submitted         Amendments allowed         Disposition of rule and date  
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Res. 58, Feb. 2, 1993......  MC        H.R. 1: Family and medical     30 (D-5; R-25)..  3 (D-0; R-3)..............  PQ: 246-176. A: 259-164. (Feb. 3,
                                           leave.                                                                       1993).                          
H. Res. 59, Feb. 3, 1993......  MC        H.R. 2: National Voter         19 (D-1; R-18)..  1 (D-0; R-1)..............  PQ: 248-171. A: 249-170. (Feb. 4,
                                           Registration Act.                                                            1993).                          
H. Res. 103, Feb. 23, 1993....  C         H.R. 920: Unemployment         7 (D-2; R-5)....  0 (D-0; R-0)..............  PQ: 243-172. A: 237-178. (Feb.   
                                           compensation.                                                                24, 1993).                      
H. Res. 106, Mar. 2, 1993.....  MC        H.R. 20: Hatch Act amendments  9 (D-1; R-8)....  3 (D-0; R-3)..............  PQ: 248-166. A: 249-163. (Mar. 3,
                                                                                                                        1993).                          
H. Res. 119, Mar. 9, 1993.....  MC        H.R. 4: NIH Revitalization     13 (d-4; R-9)...  8 (D-3; R-5)..............  PQ: 247-170. A: 248-170. (Mar.   
                                           Act of 1993.                                                                 10, 1993).                      
H. Res. 132, Mar. 17, 1993....  MC        H.R. 1335: Emergency           37 (D-8; R-29)..  1(not submitted) (D-1; R-   A: 240-185. (Mar. 18, 1993).     
                                           supplemental Appropriations.                     0).                                                         
H. Res. 133, Mar. 17, 1993....  MC        H. Con. Res. 64: Budget        14 (D-2; R-12)..  4 (1-D not submitted) (D-   PQ: 250-172. A: 251-172. (Mar.   
                                           resolution.                                      2; R-2).                    18, 1993).                      
H. Res. 138, Mar. 23, 1993....  MC        H.R. 670: Family planning      20 (D-8; R-12)..  9 (D-4; R-5)..............  PQ: 252-164. A: 247-169. (Mar.   
                                           amendments.                                                                  24, 1993).                      
H. Res. 147, Mar. 31, 1993....  C         H.R. 1430: Increase Public     6 (D-1; R-5)....  0 (D-0; R-0)..............  PQ: 244-168. A: 242-170. (Apr. 1,
                                           debt limit.                                                                  1993).                          
H. Res. 149 Apr. 1, 1993......  MC        H.R. 1578: Expedited           8 (D-1; R-7)....  3 (D-1; R-2)..............  A: 212-208. (Apr. 28, 1993).     
                                           Rescission Act of 1993.                                                                                      
H. Res. 164, May 4, 1993......  O         H.R. 820: Nate                 NA..............  NA........................  A: Voice Vote. (May 5, 1993).    
                                           Competitiveness Act.                                                                                         
H. Res. 171, May 18, 1993.....  O         H.R. 873: Gallatin Range Act   NA..............  NA........................  A: Voice Vote. (May 20, 1993).   
                                           of 1993.                                                                                                     
H. Res. 172, May 18, 1993.....  O         H.R. 1159: Passenger Vessel    NA..............  NA........................  A: 308-0 (May 24, 1993).         
                                           Safety Act.                                                                                                  
H. Res. 173 May 18, 1993......  MC        S.J. Res. 45: United States    6 (D-1; R-5)....  6 (D-1; R-5)..............  A: Voice Vote (May 20, 1993)     
                                           forces in Somalia.                                                                                           
H. Res. 183, May 25, 1993.....  O         H.R. 2244: 2d supplemental     NA..............  NA........................  A: 251-174. (May 26, 1993).      
                                           appropriations.                                                                                              
H. Res. 186, May 27, 1993.....  MC        H.R. 2264: Omnibus budget      51 (D-19; R-32).  8 (D-7; R-1)..............  PQ: 252-178. A: 236-194 (May 27, 
                                           reconciliation.                                                              1993).                          
H. Res. 192, June 9, 1993.....  MC        H.R. 2348: Legislative branch  50 (D-6; R-44)..  6 (D-3; R-3)..............  PQ: 240-177. A: 226-185. (June   
                                           appropriations.                                                              10, 1993).                      
H. Res. 193, June 10, 1993....  O         H.R. 2200: NASA authorization  NA..............  NA........................  A: Voice Vote. (June 14, 1993).  
H. Res. 195, June 14, 1993....  MC        H.R. 5: Striker replacement..  7 (D-4; R-3)....  2 (D-1; R-1)..............  A: 244-176.. (June 15, 1993).    
H. Res. 197, June 15, 1993....  MO        H.R. 2333: State Department.   53 (D-20; R-33).  27 (D-12; R-15)...........  A: 294-129. (June 16, 1993).     
                                           H.R. 2404: Foreign aid.                                                                                      
H. Res. 199, June 16, 1993....  C         H.R. 1876: Ext. of ``Fast      NA..............  NA........................  A: Voice Vote. (June 22, 1993).  
                                           Track''.                                                                                                     
H. Res. 200, June 16, 1993....  MC        H.R. 2295: Foreign operations  33 (D-11; R-22).  5 (D-1; R-4)..............  A: 263-160. (June 17, 1993).     
                                           appropriations.                                                                                              
H. Res. 201, June 17, 1993....  O         H.R. 2403: Treasury-postal     NA..............  NA........................  A: Voice Vote. (June 17, 1993).  
                                           appropriations.                                                                                              
H. Res. 203, June 22, 1993....  MO        H.R. 2445: Energy and Water    NA..............  NA........................  A: Voice Vote. (June 23, 1993).  
                                           appropriations.                                                                                              
H. Res. 206, June 23, 1993....  O         H.R. 2150: Coast Guard         NA..............  NA........................  A: 401-0. (July 30, 1993).       
                                           authorization.                                                                                               
H. Res. 217, July 14, 1993....  MO        H.R. 2010: National Service    NA..............  NA........................  A: 261-164. (July 21, 1993).     
                                           Trust Act.                                                                                                   
H. Res. 220, July 21, 1993....  MC        H.R. 2667: Disaster            14 (D-8; R-6)...  2 (D-2; R-0)..............  PQ: 245-178. F: 205-216. (July   
                                           assistance supplemental.                                                     22, 1993).                      
H. Res. 226, July 23, 1993....  MC        H.R. 2667: Disaster            15 (D-8; R-7)...  2 (D-2; R-0)..............  A: 224-205. (July 27, 1993).     
                                           assistance supplemental.                                                                                     
H. Res. 229, July 28, 1993....  MO        H.R. 2330: Intelligence        NA..............  NA........................  A: Voice Vote. (Aug. 3, 1993).   
                                           Authority Act, fiscal year                                                                                   
                                           1994.                                                                                                        
H. Res. 230, July 28, 1993....  O         H.R. 1964: Maritime            NA..............  NA........................  A: Voice Vote. (July 29, 1993).  
                                           Administration authority.                                                                                    
H. Res. 246, Aug. 6, 1993.....  MO        H.R. 2401: National Defense    149 (D-109; R-    ..........................  A: 246-172. (Sept. 8, 1993).     
                                           authority.                     40).                                                                          
H. Res. 248, Sept. 9, 1993....  MO        H.R. 2401: National defense    ................  ..........................  PQ: 237-169. A: 234-169. (Sept.  
                                           authorization.                                                               13, 1993).                      
H. Res. 250, Sept. 13, 1993...  MC        H.R. 1340: RTC Completion Act  12 (D-3; R-9)...  1 (D-1; R-0)..............  A: 213-191-1. (Sept. 14, 1993).  
H. Res. 254, Sept. 22, 1993...  MO        H.R. 2401: National Defense    ................  91 (D-67; R-24)...........  A: 241-182. (Sept. 28, 1993).    
                                           authorization.                                                                                               
H. Res. 262, Sept. 28, 1993...  O         H.R. 1845: National            NA..............  NA........................  A: 238-188 (10/06/93).           
                                           Biological Survey Act.                                                                                       
H. Res. 264, Sept. 28, 1993...  MC        H.R. 2351: Arts, humanities,   7 (D-0; R-7)....  3 (D-0; R-3)..............  PQ: 240-185. A: 225-195. (Oct.   
                                           museums.                                                                     14, 1993).                      
H. Res. 265, Sept. 29, 1993...  MC        H.R. 3167: Unemployment        3 (D-1; R-2)....  2 (D-1; R-1)..............  A: 239-150. (Oct. 15, 1993).     
                                           compensation amendments.                                                                                     
H. Res. 269, Oct. 6, 1993.....  MO        H.R. 2739: Aviation            N/A.............  N/A.......................  A: Voice Vote. (Oct. 7, 1993).   
                                           infrastructure investment.                                                                                   
H. Res. 273, Oct. 12, 1993....  MC        H.R. 3167: Unemployment        3 (D-1; R-2)....  2 (D-1; R-1)..............  PQ: 235-187. F: 149-254. (Oct.   
                                           compensation amendments.                                                     14, 1993).                      
H. Res. 274, Oct. 12, 1993....  MC        H.R. 1804: Goals 2000 Educate  15 (D-7; R-7; I-  10 (D-7; R-3).............  A: Voice Vote. (Oct. 13, 1993).  
                                           America Act.                   1).                                                                           
H. Res. 282, Oct. 20, 1993....  C         H.J. Res. 281: Continuing      N/A.............  N/A.......................  A: Voice Vote. (Oct. 21, 1993).  
                                           appropriations through Oct.                                                                                  
                                           28, 1993.                                                                                                    
H. Res. 286, Oct. 27, 1993....  O         H.R. 334: Lumbee Recognition   N/A.............  N/A.......................  A: Voice Vote. (Oct. 28, 1993).  
                                           Act.                                                                                                         
H. Res. 287, Oct. 27, 1993....  C         H.J. Res. 283: Continuing      1 (D-0; R-0)....  0.........................  A: 252-170. (Oct. 28, 1993).     
                                           appropriations resolution.                                                                                   
H. Res. 289, Oct. 28, 1993....  O         H.R. 2151: Maritime Security   N/A.............  N/A.......................  A: Voice Vote. (Nov. 3, 1993).   
                                           Act of 1993.                                                                                                 
H. Res. 293, Nov. 4, 1993.....  MC        H. Con. Res. 170: Troop        N/A.............  N/A.......................  A: 390-8. (Nov. 8, 1993).        
                                           withdrawal Somalia.                                                                                          
H. Res. 299, Nov. 8, 1993.....  MO        H.R. 1036: Employee            2 (D-1; R-1)....  N/A.......................  A: Voice Vote. (Nov. 9, 1993).   
                                           Retirement Act-1993.                                                                                         
H. Res. 302, Nov. 9, 1993.....  MC        H.R. 1025: Brady handgun bill  17 (D-6; R-11)..  4 (D-1; R-3)..............  A: 238-182. (Nov. 10, 1993).     
H. Res. 303, Nov. 9, 1993.....  O         H.R. 322: Mineral exploration  N/A.............  N/A.......................  A: Voice Vote. (Nov. 16, 1993).  
H. Res. 304, Nov. 9, 1993.....  C         H.J. Res. 288: Further CR, FY  N/A.............  N/A.......................  .................................
                                           1994.                                                                                                        
H. Res. 312, Nov. 17, 1993....  MC        H.R. 3425: EPA Cabinet Status  27 (D-8; R-19)..  9 (D-1; R-8)..............  F: 191-227. (Feb. 2, 1994).      
H. Res. 313, Nov. 17, 1993....  MC        H.R. 796: Freedom Access to    15 (D-9; R-6)...  4 (D-1; R-3)..............  A: 233-192. (Nov. 18, 1993).     
                                           Clinics.                                                                                                     
H. Res. 314, Nov. 17, 1993....  MC        H.R. 3351: Alt Methods Young   21 (D-7; R-14)..  6 (D-3; R-3)..............  A: 238-179. (Nov. 19, 1993).     
                                           Offenders.                                                                                                   
H. Res. 316, Nov. 19, 1993....  C         H.R. 51: D.C. statehood bill.  1 (D-1; R-0)....  N/A.......................  A: 252-172. (Nov. 20, 1993).     
H. Res. 319, Nov. 20, 1993....  MC        H.R. 3: Campaign Finance       35 (D-6; R-29)..  1 (D-0; R-1)..............  A: 220-207. (Nov. 21, 1993).     
                                           Reform.                                                                                                      
H. Res. 320, Nov. 20, 1993....  MC        H.R. 3400: Reinventing         34 (D-15; R-19).  3 (D-3; R-0)..............  A: 247-183. (Nov. 22, 1993).     
                                           Government.                                                                                                  
H. Res. 336, Feb. 2, 1994.....  MC        H.R. 3759: Emergency           14 (D-8; R-5; I-  5 (D-3; R-2)..............  PQ: 244-168. A: 342-65. (Feb. 3, 
                                           Supplemental Appropriations.   1).                                           1994).                          
H. Res. 352, Feb. 8, 1994.....  MC        H.R. 811: Independent Counsel  27 (D-8; R-19)..  10 (D-4; R-6).............  PQ: 249-174. A: 242-174. (Feb. 9,
                                           Act.                                                                         1994).                          
H. Res. 357, Feb. 9, 1994.....  MC        H.R. 3345: Federal Workforce   3 (D-2; R-1)....  2 (D-2; R-0)..............  A: VV (Feb. 10, 1994).           
                                           Restructuring.                                                                                               
H. Res. 366, Feb. 23, 1994....  MO        H.R. 6: Improving America's    NA..............  NA........................  A: VV (Feb. 24, 1994).           
                                           Schools.                                                                                                     
H. Res. 384, Mar. 9, 1994.....  MC        H. Con. Res. 218: Budget       14 (D-5; R-9)...  5 (D-3; R-2)..............  A: 245-171 (Mar. 10, 1994).      
                                           Resolution FY 1995-99.                                                                                       
H. Res. 401, Apr. 12, 1994....  MO        H.R. 4092: Violent Crime       180 (D-98; R-82)  68 (D-47; R-21)...........  A: 244-176 (Apr. 13, 1994).      
                                           Control.                                                                                                     
H. Res. 410, Apr. 21, 1994....  MO        H.R. 3221: Iraqi Claims Act..  N/A.............  N/A.......................  A: Voice Vote (Apr. 28, 1994).   
H. Res. 414, Apr. 28, 1994....  O         H.R. 3254: NSF Auth. Act.....  N/A.............  N/A.......................  A: Voice Vote (May 3, 1994).     
H. Res. 416, May 4, 1994......  C         H.R. 4296: Assault Weapons     7 (D-5; R-2)....  0 (D-0; R-0)..............  A: 220-209 (May 5, 1994).        
                                           Ban Act.                                                                                                     
H. Res. 420, May 5, 1994......  O         H.R. 2442: EDA                 N/A.............  N/A.......................  A: Voice Vote (May 10, 1994).    
                                           Reauthorization.                                                                                             
H. Res. 422, May 11, 1994.....  MO        H.R. 518: California Desert    N/A.............  N/A.......................  PQ: 245-172 A: 248-165 (May 17,  
                                           Protection.                                                                  1994).                          
H. Res. 423, May 11, 1994.....  O         H.R. 2473: Montana Wilderness  N/A.............  N/A.......................  A: Voice Vote (May 12, 1994).    
                                           Act.                                                                                                         
H. Res. 428, May 17, 1994.....  MO        H.R. 2108: Black Lung          4 (D-1; R-3)....  N/A.......................  A: VV (May 19, 1994).            
                                           Benefits Act.                                                                                                
H. Res. 429, May 17, 1994.....  MO        H.R. 4301: Defense Auth., FY   173 (D-115; R-    ..........................  A: 369-49 (May 18, 1994).        
                                           1995.                          58).                                                                          
H. Res. 431, May 20, 1994.....  MO        H.R. 4301: Defense Auth., FY   ................  100 (D-80; R-20)..........  A: Voice Vote (May 23, 1994).    
                                           1995.                                                                                                        
H. Res. 440, May 24, 1994.....  MC        H.R. 4385: Natl Hiway System   16 (D-10; R-6)..  5 (D-5; R-0)..............  A: Voice Vote (May 25, 1994).    
                                           Designation.                                                                                                 
H. Res. 443, May 25, 1994.....  MC        H.R. 4426: For. Ops. Approps,  39 (D-11; R-28).  8 (D-3; R-5)..............  PQ: 233-191 A: 244-181 (May 25,  
                                           FY 1995.                                                                     1994).                          
H. Res. 444, May 25, 1994.....  MC        H.R. 4454: Leg Branch Approp,  43 (D-10; R-33).  12 (D-8; R-4).............  A: 249-177 (May 26, 1994).       
                                           FY 1995.                                                                                                     
H. Res. 447, June 8, 1994.....  O         H.R. 4539: Treasury/Postal     N/A.............  N/A.......................  A: 236-177 (June 9, 1994).       
                                           Approps 1995.                                                                                                
H. Res. 467, June 28, 1994....  MC        H.R. 4600: Expedited           N/A.............  N/A.......................  PQ: 240-185 A:Voice Vote (July   
                                           Rescissions Act.                                                             14, 1994).                      
H. Res. 468, June 28, 1994....  MO        H.R. 4299: Intelligence        N/A.............  N/A.......................  A: Voice Vote (July 19, 1994).   
                                           Auth., FY 1995.                                                                                              
H. Res. 474, July 12, 1994....  MO        H.R. 3937: Export Admin. Act   N/A.............  N/A.......................  A: Voice Vote (July 14, 1994).   
                                           of 1994.                                                                                                     
H. Res. 475, July 12, 1994....  O         H.R. 1188: Anti. Redlining in  N/A.............  N/A.......................  A: Voice Vote (July 20, 1994).   
                                           Ins.                                                                                                         
H. Res. 482, July 20, 1994....  O         H.R. 3838: Housing & Comm.     N/A.............  N/A.......................  A: Voice Vote (July 21, 1994).   
                                           Dev. Act.                                                                                                    
H. Res. 483, July 20, 1994....  O         H.R. 3870: Environ. Tech. Act  N/A.............  N/A.......................  A: Voice Vote (July 26, 1994).   
                                           of 1994.                                                                                                     
H. Res. 484, July 20, 1994....  MC        H.R. 4604: Budget Control Act  3 (D-2; R-1)....  3 (D-2; R-1)..............  PQ: 245-180 A: Voice Vote (July  
                                           of 1994.                                                                     21, 1994).                      
H. Res. 491, July 27, 1994....  O         H.R. 2448: Radon Disclosure    N/A.............  N/A.......................  .................................
                                           Act.                                                                                                         
H. Res. 492, July 27, 1994....  O         S. 208: NPS Concession Policy  N/A.............  N/A.......................  .................................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--Code: C-Closed; MC-Modified closed; MO-Modified open; O-Open; D-Democrat; R-Republican; PQ: Previous question; A-Adopted; F-Failed.              

  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, some things are best handled at the local and State 
and city level, but if the gentleman from California took a look at 
this map and saw the dark areas which represent places where radon is 
found----
  Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I cannot see the map. Could the gentleman 
hold it up?
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Madam Speaker, I am sorry, I thought the gentleman's 
eyes were better.
  Madam Speaker, the gentleman's house is right here in the dark area.
  Mr. DREIER. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Madam Speaker, I think it is a very important rule. Yes, 
we have brought it up on the emergency calendar, but it was not the 
only other business that we wanted to call up the Rules Committee 
specifically for. We had other legislative matters before us.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, let me just say in response to the words of 
my very distinguished chairman that the other emergency item that was 
up was the parks concession bill, which fell under that same category 
as emergency.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Ohio [Mr. Oxley], the author of the amendment to which I referred. 
It is one of the most thoughtful amendments we will be considering on 
this bill.
  Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding this time 
to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I would just simply state that I support the rule 
because it does give me an opportunity to offer a commonsense solution 
to this problem that was caused by the legislation that was initially 
debated on and voted on in the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
  I think the debate will show that efforts at the State and local 
levels are far more important and better able to address the problem of 
radon than a Federal solution that gets the Environmental Protection 
Agency involved in every home sale in this country.
  With that, in support of the rule I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Waxman].
  Mr. WAXMAN. I thank the chairman of the Committee on Rules for 
yielding this time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, we will have an open rule on this bill, and I do support 
the rule. But I did want to respond to the statements made by the 
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley]. He will be proposing to strike out the 
guts of this legislation which is to inform people at the time they are 
about to buy a house that they may want to consider, but it is up to 
them, whether they want to get a test for radon.
  Mr. Speaker, radon is a radioactive gas, it causes lung cancers, it 
is a serious health problem, and the General Accounting Office said 
that people really were not doing the testing.
  The argument the gentleman advances is that this will interfere with 
real estate transactions. I point out to the Members that all the 
industries involved with real estate, including the National 
Association of Realtors, the National Association of Home Builders, the 
Mortgage Bankers Association, the National Apartment Association, all 
these groups support the bill and oppose the idea of the Oxley 
amendment which would take away from the public, from the consumer, 
this additional information that would be provided.
  Mr. Speaker, I did not want to leave that comment unresponded to. I 
would urge support for the rule and urge support for the bill and 
against any amendments to it.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, does the gentleman from California have any 
more vignettes?
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I have as many vignettes to offer as the 
gentleman has maps to offer at this point, if he would like to share 
any further with us. I have no other speakers who have requested time.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on this spectacular open rule, and 
I praise the chairman of the Committee on Rules and my colleagues on 
both sides of the aisle upstairs who reported out this open rule. It is 
a very good way to approach this emergency legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, I 
yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on 
the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 491 and rule 
XXIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 2448.

                              {time}  1259


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole 
House of the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 
2448) to improve the accuracy of radon testing products and services, 
to increase testing for radon, and for other purposes, with Mrs. 
Schroeder in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having 
been read the first time.
  Under the rule, the gentleman from California [Mr. Waxman] will be 
recognized for 30 minutes, and the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley] will 
be recognized for 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California [Mr. Waxman].

                              {time}  1300

  Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Chairman, today we are considering H.R. 2448, the Radon 
Awareness and Disclosure Act. This is important legislation that 
deserves serious attention and quick action.
  Radon gas is radioactive and a known human lung carcinogen. It poses 
a serious environmental threat to American families. The facts speak 
for themselves:
  Radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer in the United 
States.
  Radon causes 14,000 deaths each year--more than drowning and fires 
combined.
  Six million U.S. homes--1 out of every 15--have dangerous radon 
levels.
  Hundreds of thousands of Americans live in homes that have more 
radioactive radon than would be allowed in a uranium mine.
  It is important to point out that these findings are not the 
conclusions of one or two scientists or one or two studies. The 
conclusion that radon, a radioactive gas, is a human lung carcinogen 
and a cause of thousands of deaths each year is a medical and 
scientific consensus. Let me read you a list of the major scientific 
and health organizations that agree with this conclusion: National 
Cancer Institute; National Academy of Sciences; U.S. Surgeon General; 
Centers for Disease Control; Environmental Protection Agency; National 
Institute of Occupational Safety and Health; American Lung Association, 
and American Cancer Society.
  Despite the health threat from exposure to the radioactive gas radon, 
we lack an effective Federal program to protect the public. According 
to GAO, fewer than 10 percent of the homes in American have been tested 
for radon hazards.
  The legislation we consider today--H.R. 2448--takes a major step 
forward in protecting families from radioactive radon. It is an 
innovative, pro-consumer, market-oriented approach to curbing radon 
exposures. It promises to increase radon awareness and testing 
dramatically by insuring that consumers receive information about the 
risks of radon when they need it most--before they buy a home.
  The legislation has been endorsed by the Clinton administration, 
State and local governments, health groups, and the affected business 
organizations.
  In fact, there is no interest group that is opposing this 
legislation. During the subcommittee markups at my subcommittee and 
Chairman Swift's subcommittee, and at the full committee markup, we 
negotiated this legislation with every affected interest group. These 
groups made valuable suggestions and we were able to accommodate their 
concerns.
  As a result, this bill has support from organizations as divergent as 
the National Association of Realtors and the National Association of 
Homebuilders, on the one hand, and the Consumer Federation of America 
and the Sierra Club, on the other.
  Let me read to you the list of organizations supporting this 
legislation:


                         Business organizations

  National Association of Realtors; National Association of 
Homebuilders; Mortgage Bankers Association of America; National Multi-
Housing Council, and National Apartment Association.


                      State and local Governments

  National Association of Counties and Conference of Radiation Control 
Program Directors.


                      Public Health Organizations

  American Lung Association; American Cancer Society; American Academy 
of Pediatrics, and American Public Health Association.


                   Consumer and Environmental Groups

  Consumers Federation of America; Citizen Action; Sierra Club, and 
U.S. PIRG.
  Unfortunately, despite this consensus in favor of H.R. 2448 from 
across the spectrum, there will be an attempt today to gut this 
legislation.
  The key provision of H.R. 2448 requires realtors and home sellers to 
give home buyers a radon pamphlet describing the risks of radon before 
selling the home. This pamphlet is essential to protect the consumer. 
It informs the consumer about the risks of radon so that the consumer 
is in a position to decide for him or herself whether to inspect the 
home for radon.
  I want to underscore the point that the legislation does not require 
radon inspections. Nor does it require radon mitigation. These 
decisions--whether to inspect for radon and whether to mitigate radon--
are left entirely to the buyer and the seller.
  The problem we face today is that very few people test for radon 
because very few people are aware of the health risks of exposure to 
this radioactive gas. H.R. 2448 fixes this problem by giving people 
information about radon when they most need it--before they buy a home.
  Unfortunately, Mr. Oxley will offer an amendment to gut this 
provision. This makes no sense. His amendment fails to protect the 
consumer; it is opposed by the realtors; and it would deny State and 
local governments an important Federal program that the State and local 
governments want. This amendment should be rejected.
  In closing, I want to commend the Members of this body who has worked 
so hard on this bill--the chairman of the Hazardous Materials 
Subcommittee, Al Swift, the chairman of the full committee, John 
Dingell, Congressman Jim Slattery, and of course, the sponsor of the 
bill and the leader of radon protection in this body, Ed Markey.
  Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of our time.
  Mr. OXLEY. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. OXLEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. OXLEY. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to the legislation. 
At the appropriate time, I will have an amendment that addresses my 
specific concerns, but I would like to take this opportunity to make 
some general comments about the bill.
  I would like to focus on several of the factual statements that will 
be made during this debate in support of the bill. We have already 
heard, for example, the statement that EPA has determined that radon 
gas is the second leading cause of lung cancer, causing between 7,000 
and 30,000 lung cancer deaths each year. That is, in fact, what EPA 
says, and I do not have any information today to challenge that 
statement. But I think it's important for my colleagues to understand 
how EPA came up with these numbers.
  The first thing to understand is that EPA's estimates of lung cancer 
deaths caused by radon in the general population are extrapolated from 
data on lung cancer deaths among uranium miners. Scientists have 
identified a strong correlation between uranium mining and lung cancer. 
Since uranium is a major source of radon, scientists have concluded 
that radon causes lung cancer.
  However, the environment in a uranium mine is much different than the 
environment in a home. Levels of radon are higher, there are other 
pollutants in the air, and most of the miners were smokers. Several 
years ago, at EPA's request, the National Academy of Sciences tried to 
figure out how much less risk there is from radon in homes as compared 
to uranium mines. That's how EPA came up with the estimate of 7,000 to 
30,000 lung cancer deaths caused each year by radon. But even the 
National Academy of Sciences admitted that there is still a lot more we 
need to know about how low levels of radon affect human health. 
Unfortunately, recent epidemiological studies have provided conflicting 
answers. EPA has another NAS study to combine the results of these 
studies to see if there are indications that exposure to low levels of 
radon is harmful.
  It's also important to understand that EPA's estimates of deaths 
caused by radon in the general population are purely estimates; there 
is no clinical evidence that exposure to low levels of radon, such as 
those typically found in homes, causes lung cancer. In other words, so 
far as I know, no coroner has ever identified exposure to low levels of 
radon as the cause of death. Obviously, when lung cancer is the cause 
of death, it is very difficult to know what actually caused the lung 
cancer, especially if the individual was not a smoker.
  Another statement we will hear in today's debate is that 1 in 15 of 
the homes in the United States have radon levels over EPA's action 
level of 4 picocuries. That statement is correct. According to a 
credible EPA study, 6 percent of the homes in the United States have 
elevated levels of radon. The important thing to remember, however, is 
that most of these homes are clustered together in specific geographic 
areas. Radon is not a problem uniformly across the country. It is a 
regional and local problem and it should be addressed, where possible, 
with regional and local solutions.
  This brings me to my primary concern with this legislation, the real 
estate disclosure provisions of the bill that would make ordinary 
homeowners subject to penalties under the Federal Toxic Substances 
Control Act and which apply to every homeowner in the United States, 
regardless of whether that homeowner lives in a place where radon is a 
problem.
  I represent an area where radon can be a problem. People are 
generally aware of this and there are State laws to address the 
problem. I think that's the appropriate response. At the appropriate 
time, I'll offer an amendment to correct this particular problem with 
the bill. I urge my colleagues to give my amendment serious 
consideration.
  Finally, Madam Chairman, I would like to say just a word about two 
organizations that are supporting this legislation, the National 
Association of Home Builders and the National Association of Realtors. 
I understand why the homebuilders are supporting this bill, but I am 
not so sure I understand why the realtors have endorsed the bill.
  With respect to the homebuilders, when this legislation was first 
introduced, it gave EPA the authority to require State and local 
building code organizations to adopt standards for minimizing the 
infiltration of radon gas into newly constructed buildings. The 
homebuilders and I were both concerned that it would be unworkable to 
give EPA the authority to enforce building codes throughout the United 
States. So we worked with Chairman Swift and Chairman Waxman to develop 
a compromise. That compromise, which is part of the bill before the 
House today, does not require any jurisdiction to adopt any particular 
building standard. However, it does require EPA to develop model 
standards for radon resistant construction and to work with model 
building code organizations to encourage States and localities to adopt 
such standards. The compromise also requires builders in certain high-
radon areas to tell the purchasers of new homes whether they used 
radon-resistant construction techniques. I think this is a fair 
compromise and that is appropriate for the National Association of Home 
Builders to support the compromise.
  With respect to the National Association of Realtors, I must admit 
that I do not understand why they are supporting this bill. The bill 
says that whenever a residential or commercial property is sold or 
leased, the seller must comply with certain disclosure requirements 
which are enforceable under the Federal Toxic Substances Control Act. 
The bill also says that whenever a real estate agent is involved in 
such a transaction, the real estate agent becomes liable along with the 
seller or lessor.
  I talked with representatives of the National Association of Realtors 
and they told me that they support the bill because they support 
disclosure of known hazards in real estate transactions, including 
potential environmental hazards such as radon.
  I agree that sellers should disclose known hazards, but I do not 
think its necessarily a Federal responsibility to mandate such 
disclosure. Ohio is one of a growing number of States that have a 
mandatory real estate disclosure law. When I talked to representatives 
of the Ohio Association of Realtors they were confused about why their 
national representatives would support such legislation instead of 
working to develop appropriate and tailored disclosure requirements in 
every State. I continue to share their confusion over why the National 
Association of Realtors would support this legislation.

                              {time}  1310

  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes, and I take this 
time to explain why the National Association of Realtors supports this 
legislation and would oppose the Oxley amendment.
  The realtors support this bill and the disclosure to the respective 
buyer about the radon problem, simply just telling them about the radon 
problem and that tests could be taken should they so desire, because it 
is the right thing to do, it is the responsible thing to do, because 
they are aware that it is a national public health problem and it makes 
good business sense for them because they are caught in a dilemma. If 
the seller tells the realtor not to disclose some information, the 
realtor has to decide either to not disclose that information in order 
to please the seller whom that realtor is representing, most likely, or 
to disclose the information anyway and then anger the seller. But they 
fear that they will be later sued by someone for not disclosing the 
information about radon.
  We went over this with the National Association of Realtors. Maybe in 
Ohio, if they had not thought about the issue and heard the arguments, 
they were puzzled by it, but the fact of the matter was that the 
National Association of Realtors in looking at this issue decided to go 
along with the same provision that we have under Federal law today 
requiring the disclosure of information about lead. That is under 
Federal law today, and the lead problem, which is a serious problem, 
especially for children, is one that the consumer would be informed 
about. The realtors supported it, and everybody supported it. This 
House adopted it, and it is now law.
  The information would be given out in tests, if the buyer so desired, 
that could be taken before the transaction occurred. The test for 
radon, just for people's information, comes to around $30 a test. It is 
a very simple one and an inexpensive one. The mitigation is not that 
expensive either. But the important point is to get the information to 
the public.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Washington [Mr. Swift], the chairman of the subcommittee of the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce that also has jurisdiction over this 
issue.
  Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding this time 
to me.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to underline the point that the gentleman 
has just made with regard to the fact that we are not breaking any new 
ground here in terms of asking at the Federal level that there be 
certain disclosures. I suppose that reasonable people can disagree as 
to what is a Federal responsibility or a State responsibility, but the 
fact is that the Congress has already said it is a Federal 
responsibility. We have done that in legislation passed by this 
Congress in the past. This merely adds a radioactive gas to the list of 
things that have to be disclosed.
  Mr. Chairman, H.R. 2448, the Radon Awareness and Disclosure Act of 
1994 is a fair, effective, and carefully crafted piece of legislation 
with broad support from consumer groups, environmental groups, public 
health organizations, State and local government organizations, and 
business organizations in the housing and real estate markets. This 
bill attacks the problem of radon exposure in a systematic way. First, 
the bill places special emphasis on those areas of the country in which 
we know there is a higher potential for elevated indoor radon levels by 
targeting the model construction standards to those areas. Second, to 
address the fact that as few as 10 percent of private homes in America 
have been tested for radon, the bill ties disclosure and information 
dispersal requirements to real estate transactions--an especially 
effective time to encourage testing. Third, the bill establishes a 
performance program for radon products and services, so that consumers 
may make safer, more informed choices.
  This bill is the result of an extensive process of negotiation to 
meet the concerns of interested parties. It is important for Members to 
understand that the bill we consider today has changed significantly 
from the bill as introduced.
  The bill as introduced contained a provision that some interpreted as 
a mandatory radon test during real estate transactions. The bill we 
consider today does not require testing. Rather, it requires the seller 
or lessor of a vulnerable premises to disclose to the buyer or lessee 
the results of any known radon testing and the presence of any known 
radon mitigation systems. The seller or lessor must additionally 
include in the contract a radon warning statement, and give the buyer 
or lessee a radon information pamphlet.

  The bill as introduced provided for mandatory radon resistant 
construction in high radon areas. That section has been changed; the 
construction standards are voluntary in this bill. Sellers of new 
vulnerable premises in high radon areas must disclose to the buyer 
whether the premises has been or will be constructed in compliance with 
EPA model standards. This requirement drops for subsequent sales after 
the premises has been occupied.
  Finally, concern was expressed that the penalties provisions of the 
bill were too severe. This section was also amended and the penalties 
greatly reduced. The bill no longer contains criminal penalties, nor 
does it provide for citizen suits against private parties for 
violations.
  The Environmental Protection Agency has determined that radon is 
second only to smoking as the leading cause of lung cancer in this 
country. Passage of this effective legislation in much needed to 
address this serious health hazard. I urge my colleagues to vote in 
favor of passage.

                              {time}  1320

  Mr. OXLEY. Madam Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Moorhead], the ranking member of the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
  Mr. MOORHEAD. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to certain 
portions of this bill.
  Before I describe my concerns with this bill, I want to commend the 
work of Mr. Markey, Mr. Waxman, Mr. Swift, and Chairman Dingell in 
moving this legislation to reauthorize EPA's indoor radon program. 
While there is still one important area of disagreement on the bill, I 
think it is important to point out that we have worked closely with our 
colleagues on the Energy and Commerce Committee to make a number of 
improvements. I especially want to recognize my republican colleagues, 
Mr. Bliley and Mr. Oxley, the ranking members of the subcommittees of 
jurisdiction, for their efforts to improve this legislation.

  To begin with, let me say that I do not oppose reauthorization of 
EPA's indoor radon programs. I agree that EPA should be looking at 
whether radon presents serious health risks. I understand that EPA has 
provided significant funding for the National Research Council to study 
whether exposure to low levels of radon causes lung cancer. I think 
this is important work that should continue.
  My concern with this legislation is with the provision on real estate 
transactions. That section says that before anyone can sell a house 
located anywhere in the United States, the seller must provide the 
buyer with several different kinds of information on radon.
  As a southern Californian, I have several problems with this part of 
the bill. First, California already has a law that requires sellers to 
disclose environmental hazards to buyers, including radon.
  Second, radon is not a big problem in California. We have other 
problems like floods and fires and earthquakes. I do not think that my 
constituents should be subjected to these Federal radon disclosure 
requirements when radon is such a comparatively minor problem.
  In this respect, California is like a number of other States in the 
country. For example, Texas, Louisiana, and Arkansas have very low 
amounts of radon. It just does not make sense to impose these 
requirements on homeowners across the board.
  I am also concerned that this legislation would make ordinary 
homeowners subject to penalties under the Federal Toxic Substances 
Control Act. Where radon is a problem, State and local laws should be 
the way to deal with the problem.
  At the appropriate time, Mr. Oxley will have an amendment to correct 
this problem with the bill. I urge my colleagues to support the Oxley 
amendment. And if the Oxley amendment fails, I urge them to vote 
against the bill.
  Mr. OXLEY. Madam Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Markey], the primary architect of 
this legislation.
  Mr. MARKEY. Madam Chairman, I would like to thank the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Waxman] and the gentleman from Washington State [Mr. 
Swift] for their long, hard work on this bill to bring it out here on 
the floor. I would like to thank all of the Members and all of the 
interests that have spent so much time and effort in dealing with this 
issue.
  This is a quite unique situation. The issue, for example, of tobacco 
and the role that it plays in inducing cancer, lung cancer in American 
citizens, has been quite contentious over this past session of 
Congress. On the one side, there are the health-related groups, and on 
the other side is an industry that bitterly disputes the conclusions 
which have been reached by the health groups on the effect which 
tobacco has upon the lungs of Americans.
  Here we have just the opposite case. Here we have agreement between 
the health groups, the environmental groups, the consumer groups, the 
home builders, the realtors, and every other interest that would have a 
view on this issue. And we have resolved it, I think in almost a model 
of cooperation that should be respected and supported, rather than 
undermined, even though there are no dissenting voices among those that 
are affected by this legislation.
  Radon does have a role in creating lung cancer in this country. There 
is no question about it. All of the experts and the industries accept 
that fact, and they have been willing to in fact accept this compromise 
legislation.
  I think that answers the question as to why these industries have 
accepted this legislation. It is not some mystery as to why they have 
accepted it. It is because there is compromise in the legislation. It 
is because on each one of the major points, the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Waxman] and the gentleman from Washington [Mr. Swift] 
were willing to sit down with the industries to work out their 
legitimate concerns and to give them the kinds of concessions they said 
they needed in order to support legislation.
  Those concessions were made. It is not onerous, but yet at the same 
time it does give the information and the protection to Americans 
against the threat of radon inducing lung cancer in their families. I 
think this is the kind of process that has to be respected. If it 
cannot be respected out here on the floor, then legislation is going to 
be increasingly difficult to pass in areas of this nature.
  It is not the American Tobacco Association against the American Lung 
Association. We do not have that debate out here. We have all parties 
agreeing. This legislation should be overwhelmingly supported, and any 
attempts to undermine it with gutting amendments should be resisted 
vigorously or else we undermine the very committee process that has 
produced a piece of legislation that has consensus out here on the 
floor today.

                              {time}  1330

  Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the committee amendments in the nature of a 
substitute shall be considered under the 5-minute rule by section, and 
each section shall be considered as read.
  The Clerk will designate section 1.
  The text of section 1 is as follows:

       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 ``Radon Awareness and 
     Disclosure Act of 1994''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to section 1?
  The Clerk will designate section 2.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the 
remainder of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute be 
printed in the Record and open to amendment at any point.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
California?
  There was no objection.
  The text of the remainder of the committee amendment in the nature of 
a substitute is as follows:

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds the following:
       (1) The Environmental Protection Agency has determined that 
     radon is second only to smoking as the leading cause of lung 
     cancer, resulting in an estimated 7,000 to 30,000 deaths each 
     year.
       (2) Testing for elevated levels of radon is relatively 
     simple and inexpensive.
       (3) There is not an adequate effort by Federal agencies to 
     encourage testing for radon.
       (4) Efforts to encourage testing have had limited results, 
     reaching only a small percentage of homes to date.
       (5) The lack of a mandatory certification process leads to 
     inaccurate radon testing, ineffective radon mitigation, 
     erosion of public confidence in the industry, and a waste of 
     consumer investment.
       (6) Increased public awareness of the dangers of radon gas 
     and the means to mitigate its effects will lead to more 
     informed decision making and a more productive use of 
     resources.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       Section 302 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 
     2662) is amended by adding the following at the end thereof:
       ``(5) The term `vulnerable premises' means any frequently 
     occupied space below the third floor of any building (other 
     than a building used for industrial purposes).
       ``(6) The term `high radon area' means any county 
     designated by the Administrator as having a predicted average 
     indoor screening level for radon greater than 4 pCi/L, using 
     the methodology described by the Environmental Protection 
     Agency in the report entitled `Map of Radon Zones: National 
     Report (December 3, 1993)', including any amendments or 
     revisions thereto.''.

     SEC. 4. NEW CONSTRUCTION.

       Section 304 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 
     2664) is amended as follows:
       (1) By striking the section heading thereof and inserting 
     ``NEW CONSTRUCTION.''.
       (2) By inserting ``(a) Model Standards and Techniques.--'' 
     before the first sentence and striking the last 2 sentences.
       (3) By adding the following at the end:
       ``(b) Finalization of Model Standards.--Not later than 3 
     months after enactment of this subsection, the Administrator 
     shall promulgate model construction standards for controlling 
     radon levels in new vulnerable premises which are located in 
     high radon areas and which are covered by the model standards 
     published by the Administrator on March 21, 1994 (59 Fed. 
     Reg. 13402). Not later than 2 years after the enactment of 
     this subsection, the Administrator shall promulgate model 
     construction standards for controlling radon levels in new 
     vulnerable premises which are located in high radon areas and 
     which are not covered by such proposed model standards. The 
     model standards shall achieve significant radon risk 
     reduction and be technologically achievable and readily 
     implementable. The Administrator may, where appropriate, 
     promulgate model standards for controlling radon levels in 
     new vulnerable premises in other areas designated by the 
     Administrator.
       ``(c) Promotion of Code and State Adoption.--(1) The 
     Administrator shall work to ensure that organizations 
     responsible for developing national model codes for new 
     vulnerable premises adopt, and State and local authorities 
     which regulate construction of new vulnerable premises adopt 
     and enforce, the model construction standards promulgated 
     under subsection (b).
       ``(2) If the Administrator determines that an organization 
     responsible for developing national model codes for new 
     vulnerable premises has adopted standards for controlling 
     radon levels in new vulnerable premises that are at least as 
     protective of human health and the environment as the model 
     construction standards promulgated under subsection (b), such 
     standards shall be certified as equivalent to the model 
     construction standards promulgated under subsection (b).
       ``(3) At the same time that the Administrator promulgates 
     model construction standards under subsection (b), the 
     Administrator shall publish a pamphlet that describes the 
     standards and their costs and benefits. The Administrator 
     shall work with interested parties to achieve the broad 
     distribution of the pamphlet. Such distribution may be 
     coordinated with the distribution of the pamphlet distributed 
     under section 310.
       ``(d) Incentive for Voluntary Compliance.--(1) In addition 
     to the disclosure requirements of section 310, the following 
     disclosure requirements shall apply to sales of new buildings 
     (or any portion thereof) with vulnerable premises in high 
     radon areas, or other designated areas, covered by model 
     construction standards promulgated under subsection (b):
       ``(A) Any person who sells such a new vulnerable premises 
     shall, prior to the signing of a sales contract--
       ``(i) provide the purchaser with the pamphlet on radon 
     prevention in construction published under paragraph (3) of 
     subsection (c),
       ``(ii) inform the purchaser in writing that the premises 
     are located in a high radon area (or other area designated 
     under subsection (b)) and that the Administrator recommends 
     that such premises be constructed in compliance with the 
     model construction standards promulgated under subsection (b) 
     or other construction standards certified as equivalent to 
     such standards under subsection (c)(2), and
       ``(iii) accurately disclose in writing to the purchaser 
     whether the premises have been, or will be, constructed in 
     compliance with such model construction standards or other 
     construction standards certified as equivalent to such 
     standards under subsection (c)(2).
       ``(B) The radon warning statement under section 310 
     included in any contract for purchase and sale of any such 
     new vulnerable premises shall include an acknowledgement 
     signed by the purchaser that the purchaser has--
       ``(i) received the pamphlet on radon prevention in 
     construction published under paragraph (3) of subsection (c),
       ``(ii) been informed in writing that the premises are 
     located in a high radon area (or other area designated under 
     subsection (b)) and that the Administrator recommends that 
     such premises be constructed in compliance with the model 
     construction standards promulgated under subsection (b) or 
     other construction standards certified as equivalent to such 
     standards under subsection (c)(2), and
       ``(iii) received a written disclosure indicating whether 
     the premises has been, or will be, constructed in compliance 
     with such model construction standards or other construction 
     standards certified as equivalent to such standards under 
     subsection (c)(2).
       ``(2) If the Administrator determines that a State or local 
     authority which regulates construction of new vulnerable 
     premises in a high radon area (or other area designated under 
     subsection (b)) has adopted and is enforcing in such area 
     either the model construction standards promulgated under 
     subsection (b) or other standards for controlling radon 
     levels in new vulnerable premises that are at least as 
     protective of human health and the environment as such model 
     standards, any person who constructs a new vulnerable 
     premises in such area after such determination shall be 
     exempt from the disclosure requirements of paragraph (1). Any 
     State or local authority may submit to the Administrator 
     State or local standards for controlling radon levels in new 
     vulnerable premises. The Administrator shall determine within 
     60 days after the date of such submission whether such 
     standards are as protective of human health and the 
     environment as the model standards.
       ``(3) The requirements of this subsection shall take effect 
     on the later of (A) the date 31 months after promulgation of 
     the model construction standards under subsection (b) 
     covering the new vulnerable premises concerned, or (B) the 
     effective date of the requirements under section 310. Six 
     months before the requirements of this subsection take effect 
     in a high radon area (or other area designated under 
     subsection (b)), the Administrator shall provide notice of 
     such requirements to the State in which such area is located.
       ``(4) Not later than 1 year prior to the effective date 
     established in paragraph (3), the Administrator shall, after 
     notice and opportunity for comment, publish a list of the 
     areas to which the model construction standards concerned are 
     applicable, together with a map of all such areas.
       ``(5) A violation of this subsection shall be considered a 
     violation of section 310.
       ``(e) Report to Congress.--Not later than 5 years after the 
     date of enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall 
     report to Congress on the extent to which State and local 
     authorities which regulate construction of new vulnerable 
     premises have adopted and are enforcing the model 
     construction standards promulgated under subsection (b), and 
     new vulnerable premises are being constructed in compliance 
     with such standards. Such report shall contain a list of 
     State and local authorities in areas covered by model 
     standards which have adopted and are enforcing such standards 
     and a list of those which have not adopted or are not 
     enforcing such standards. Such report shall identify any 
     obstacles that may exist to--
       ``(1) adoption and enforcement by such State and local 
     authorities of such model construction standards, and
       ``(2) construction in compliance with such model 
     construction standards,

     and shall make recommendations for overcoming such obstacles.
       ``(f) Guidance for Certain Premises.--Not later than 2 
     years after the enactment of this subsection, the 
     Administrator shall promulgate guidance for measuring and 
     mitigating radon levels in existing vulnerable premises not 
     covered by the proposed model standards published by the 
     Administrator on April 12, 1993 (58 Fed. Reg. 19097).
       ``(g) Other Disclosure Requirements.--The Administrator may 
     consolidate the requirements applicable under this section 
     with the disclosure requirements applicable under other 
     authority of law.
       ``(h) Validity of Contracts and Liens.--Nothing in this 
     section shall affect the validity or enforceability of any 
     sale or contract for the purchase and sale or lease of any 
     interest in real property or any loan, loan agreement, 
     mortgage, or lien made or arising in connection with a 
     mortgage loan, nor shall anything in this section create a 
     defect in title.''.

     SEC. 5. AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 306 OF TSCA.

       Section 306 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 
     2666) is amended as follows:
       (1) In subsection (e), by striking ``In the event that 
     State applications for funds exceed the total funds available 
     in a fiscal year, the'' and inserting ``The''.
       (2) By amending subsection (e) to add the following new 
     paragraph at the end thereof:
       ``(5) The potential for the activity or project to advance 
     the strategy developed under section 316 (relating to 
     strategy to identify and reduce exceptionally high indoor 
     radon levels).''.
       (3) In subsection (f), strike ``in the third year'' and 
     insert ``thereafter''.
       (4) In subsection (g) by inserting ``(1)'' before the first 
     sentence thereof and by adding the following at the end 
     thereof:
       ``(2) The Administrator may set aside a percentage of the 
     grants made to States under this section to be paid by such 
     States to local governments in high radon areas. Such amounts 
     shall be used for eligible activities under subsection (c). 
     In the case of any State not receiving a grant under this 
     section, the Administrator may make grants directly to local 
     governments in such State for such purposes. Subsection (f) 
     shall not apply to any grant to a local government described 
     in the preceding sentence or to any portion of a grant to a 
     State under this section which is paid to a local government 
     as provided in this paragraph.''.

     SEC. 6. PERFORMANCE PROGRAM FOR RADON PRODUCTS AND SERVICES.

       Section 309 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C 
     2669) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 309. PERFORMANCE AND PROFICIENCY PROGRAM FOR RADON 
                   PRODUCTS AND SERVICES.

       ``(a) Performance and Proficiency Program.--(1) Within one 
     year after the enactment of the Radon Awareness and 
     Disclosure Act of 1994, the Administrator shall promulgate 
     regulations establishing a program to require each of the 
     following--
       ``(A) Any product for the measurement of radon shall meet 
     performance criteria that insure the effectiveness of such 
     product.
       ``(B) Any person offering a service to the public for the 
     measurement or mitigation of radon shall meet a level of 
     proficiency that insures the effectiveness of such service.

     Effective on the date 2 years after the enactment of the 
     Radon Awareness and Disclosure Act of 1994, no person may 
     introduce into commerce any product for the measurement of 
     radon unless such product meets the performance criteria 
     established under subparagraph (A) and no person may offer a 
     service to the public for the measurement or mitigation of 
     radon unless such person meets the level of proficiency 
     established under subparagraph (B).
       ``(2) The program established as provided in paragraph (1) 
     shall include each of the following--
       ``(A) Procedures for ordering the recall of any product 
     introduced in commerce for the measurement of radon which 
     does not meet the performance criteria established under 
     paragraph (1)(A).
       ``(B) Procedures for ordering the discontinuance of any 
     service offered to the public for the measurement or 
     mitigation of radon which does not meet the levels of 
     proficiency established under paragraph (1)(B).
       ``(C) Procedures for establishing adequate quality 
     assurance requirements for each radon measurement product 
     introduced into commerce and for each radon measurement or 
     mitigation service offered to the public.
       ``(b) Effectiveness of Products; Public Awareness.--The 
     Administrator shall develop and make each of the following 
     available to the public:
       ``(1) A list of all radon measurement products which meet 
     minimum performance criteria under paragraph (1)(A) of 
     subsection (a).
       ``(2) A summary of current radon measurement and mitigation 
     methods and products. Such summary shall include information 
     about the accuracy, effectiveness, cost, and resistance to 
     tampering of such products and methods.
       ``(c) User Fee.--(1) Within one year after the enactment of 
     the Radon Awareness and Disclosure Act of 1994, the 
     Administrator shall promulgate rules imposing user fees on 
     persons who manufacture or import any product described in 
     subsection (a)(1)(A) and for persons who offer any service 
     described in subsection (a)(1)(B). The amount of such fees 
     shall be designed to cover the annual operating costs of the 
     Environmental Protection Agency in carrying out the program 
     established under subsection (a), except that the 
     Administrator may reduce the amount of such fees during the 
     first 3 fiscal years after the promulgation of regulations 
     under subsection (a) in order to promote the availability of 
     radon measurement and mitigation products and services. Such 
     fees shall be structured such that any person's liability for 
     such fees is reasonably based on the proportion of the 
     program's operating costs that relate to such person, and 
     such person's liability for such fees shall not be based on 
     the income of such person.
       ``(2) The fee established under paragraph (1) shall not 
     apply with respect to persons who are employees of public and 
     nonprofit child care facilities, schools, hospitals, nursing 
     homes, or other care facilities and who are providing 
     services described in subsection (a)(1)(B) at such 
     facilities.
       ``(d) Use of Funds.--Amounts received for user fees under 
     subsection (c) shall be deposited in a Radon Service Account 
     established in the Treasury of the United States for use by 
     the Administrator, to the extent provided in appropriations 
     Acts, in carrying out the program established under 
     subsection (a).''.

     SEC. 7. DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION CONCERNING RADON.

       Section 310 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 
     2670) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 310. DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION CONCERNING RADON.

       ``(a) Disclosure in Purchase and Sale or Lease.--
       ``(1) Radon.--Not later than 1 year after the enactment of 
     this section, the Administrator shall promulgate regulations 
     providing for the disclosure of radon in vulnerable premises 
     whenever any such premises is offered for sale or lease. The 
     regulations shall require that, prior to the signing of a 
     sales contract or lease, the seller or lessor shall--
       ``(A) provide the purchaser or lessee with a radon hazard 
     information pamphlet as prescribed in subsection (b); and
       ``(B) disclose to the purchaser or lessee the presence of 
     any known radon measurement report prepared for, or received 
     by, the seller or lessor and any known radon mitigation 
     systems in the vulnerable premises concerned.
       ``(2) Contract for purchase and sale.--Regulations 
     promulgated under this section shall provide that every 
     contract for the purchase and sale of any vulnerable premises 
     shall include a Radon Warning Statement with an 
     acknowledgement signed by the purchaser that the purchaser 
     has--
       ``(A) read the Radon Warning Statement;
       ``(B) received a radon hazard information pamphlet; and
       ``(C)(i) requested and been provided with the opportunity 
     to conduct a test of the premises for radon, on terms and 
     conditions mutually agreeable to purchaser and seller, or
       ``(ii) agreed to purchase the premises without further 
     testing of the premises for radon.

     The acknowledgement shall identify which option (clause (i) 
     or (ii)) the purchaser has agreed to.
       ``(3) Contents of radon warning statement.--The Radon 
     Warning Statement referred to in this section shall contain 
     the following text printed in large type on a separate sheet 
     of paper attached to the contract:

        `The U.S. Surgeon General has determined that prolonged 
              exposure to radon can be a serious health hazard. Testing 
              is available to detect the presence of radon. The seller 
              is required to provide the buyer with any information on 
              radon from tests in the seller's possession and notify 
              the buyer of any radon mitigation systems.'.

       ``(4) Compliance assurance.--Whenever a seller or lessor 
     has entered into a contract with an agent for the purpose of 
     selling or leasing a vulnerable premises, the regulations 
     promulgated under this section shall require the agent, on 
     behalf of the seller or lessor, to ensure compliance with the 
     requirements of this section.
       ``(b) Radon Hazard Information Pamphlet.--Not later than 1 
     year after the enactment of this section, and after notice 
     and opportunity for comment, the Administrator shall publish 
     a radon hazard information pamphlet. The pamphlet shall, at a 
     minimum--
       ``(1) describe the prevalence and risks of radon exposure 
     at different levels;
       ``(2) provide information evaluating products and services 
     for the measurement and mitigation of radon;
       ``(3) advise persons as to how to obtain a list of products 
     for the measurement of radon which meet the performance 
     criteria established under section 309(a)(1) and a list of 
     persons providing radon measurement or mitigation services 
     who meet the proficiency levels established under section 
     309(a)(1);
       ``(4) explain that a prospective buyer or lessee has a 
     right to negotiate an opportunity to conduct a test of the 
     premises to detect radon; and
       ``(5) state that the Administrator recommends that buyers 
     and lessees ascertain the radon level of any vulnerable 
     premises to be purchased or leased.

     The Administrator shall from time to time review and revise 
     such pamphlet.
       ``(c) Penalties for Violations.--
       ``(1) Civil liability.--Any person who knowingly violates 
     the provisions of this section shall be jointly and severally 
     liable to the purchaser or lessee in an amount equal to the 
     reasonable costs of radon mitigation incurred by such person 
     at the vulnerable premises.
       ``(2) Costs.--In any civil action brought for damages 
     pursuant to paragraph (1), the appropriate court may award 
     court costs to any prevailing or substantially prevailing 
     party, together with reasonable attorney fees and any expert 
     witness fees.
       ``(3) Limitation on penalty amount.--For purposes of 
     applying civil penalties under section 16 in the case of any 
     violation of this section by a seller or lessor, the maximum 
     penalty applicable under section 16 shall be $2,000 in the 
     case of a seller and an amount equal to 2 months rent in the 
     case of a lessor. For purposes of applying such penalties to 
     any such violation, the second sentence of section 16(a)(1) 
     shall not apply.
       ``(4) Exemption from criminal penalties and citizens 
     suits.--No criminal penalties shall be imposed under section 
     16(b) for any violation of this section and no action may be 
     brought under section 20(a)(1) for any such violation.
       ``(d) Other Disclosure Requirements.--The Administrator may 
     consolidate the requirements applicable under this section 
     with the disclosure requirements applicable under other 
     authority of law.
       ``(e) Validity of Contracts and Liens.--Nothing in this 
     section shall affect the validity or enforceability of any 
     sale or contract for the purchase and sale or lease of any 
     interest in real property or any loan, loan agreement, 
     mortgage, or lien made or arising in connection with a 
     mortgage loan, nor shall anything in this section create a 
     defect in title.
       ``(f) Short Term Leases.--This section shall not apply to 
     any lease which is for a term of one year or less and does 
     not, by its terms, provide for an extension.
       ``(g) Effective Date.--The regulations under this section 
     shall take effect 2 years after the date of the enactment of 
     this title.''.

     SEC. 8. AUTHORIZED STATE PROGRAMS.

       Section 311 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 
     2671) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 311. AUTHORIZED STATE PROGRAMS.

       ``(a) Approval.--Any State which seeks to administer and 
     enforce a State program containing the standards, 
     regulations, or other requirements established under section 
     304(d) (relating to incentives for voluntary compliance), 
     section 309(a)(1)(B)(relating to services for the measurement 
     or mitigation of radon), or 310 (relating to disclosure of 
     information concerning radon), or any combination thereof, 
     may, after notice and opportunity for public comment, develop 
     and submit to the Administrator an application, in such form 
     as the Administrator shall require, for authorization of such 
     a State program. Any such State may also certify to the 
     Administrator at the time of submitting such program that the 
     State program meets the requirements of paragraphs (1) and 
     (2) of subsection (b) of this section. Upon submission of 
     such certification, the State program shall be deemed to be 
     authorized under this section, and shall apply in such State 
     in lieu of the corresponding Federal program under section 
     304(d), 309(a)(1)(B) or 310, or any combination thereof, as 
     the case may be, until such time as the Administrator 
     disapproves the program or withdraws the authorization.
       ``(b) Approval or Disapproval.--Within 180 days following 
     submission of an application under subsection (a), the 
     Administrator shall approve or disapprove the application. 
     The Administrator shall disapprove the application if, after 
     notice and after opportunity for public hearing, the 
     Administrator finds that--
       ``(1) the State program is not at least as protective of 
     human health and the environment as the Federal program under 
     section 304(d), 309(a)(1)(B) or 310, or any combination 
     thereof, as the case may be, or
       ``(2) such State program does not provide adequate 
     enforcement.

     Upon authorization of a State program under this section, it 
     shall be unlawful for any person to violate or fail or refuse 
     to comply with any requirement of such program.
       ``(c) Withdrawal of Authorization.--If a State is not 
     administering and enforcing a program authorized under this 
     section in compliance with standards, regulations, and other 
     requirements of this title, the Administrator shall so notify 
     the State and, if corrective action is not completed within a 
     reasonable time, not to exceed 180 days, the Administrator 
     shall withdraw authorization of such program and establish a 
     Federal program pursuant to this title.
       ``(d) Model State Program.--Within 12 months after the 
     enactment of this section, the Administrator shall promulgate 
     a model State program which may be adopted by any State which 
     seeks to administer and enforce a State program under this 
     section. Such program shall encourage reciprocity among the 
     States.
       ``(e) Other State Requirements.--Nothing in this title 
     shall be construed to prohibit any State or political 
     subdivision thereof from imposing any requirements which are 
     more stringent than those imposed by this title.
       ``(f) Existing State and Local Programs.--The regulations 
     under this title shall, to the extent appropriate, encourage 
     States to seek program authorization and to use existing 
     State and local programs and procedures for carrying out such 
     program.
       ``(g) Fees.--Each State program authorized under this 
     section containing the standards, regulations, or other 
     requirements established under section 309(a)(1)(B) (relating 
     to services for the measurement or mitigation of radon) may 
     include user fees applicable to persons who offer any service 
     described in subsection 309(a)(1)(B) in an amount designed to 
     cover, in whole or in part, the annual operating costs of 
     such program. The user fees under section 309(b) shall not 
     apply to persons subject to user fees under such a State 
     program.''.

     SEC. 9. ENFORCEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS.

       Title III of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 
     2661 et seq.) is amended by adding the following new sections 
     after section 311:

     ``SEC. 312. PROHIBITED ACTS.

       ``It shall be unlawful for any person to fail or refuse to 
     comply with any provision of this title or any rule or order 
     under this title.

     ``SEC. 313. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS.

       ``The provisions of section 411 shall apply to regulations 
     issued under this title in the same manner and to the same 
     extent as such provisions apply to regulations issued under 
     title IV.

     ``SEC. 314. CONTROL OF RADON AT FEDERAL FACILITIES.

       ``Each department, agency, and instrumentality of 
     executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal 
     Government and each officer, agent, or employee thereof, 
     shall be subject to, and comply with, all Federal, State, 
     interstate, and local requirements, both substantive and 
     procedural (including any requirement for certification, 
     licensing, recordkeeping, or reporting or any provisions for 
     injunctive relief and such sanctions as may be imposed by a 
     court to enforce such relief) respecting radon in the same 
     manner, and to the same extent as any nongovernmental entity 
     is subject to such requirements, including the payment of 
     reasonable service charges. The Federal, State, interstate, 
     and local substantive and procedural requirements referred to 
     in this subsection include, but are not limited to, all 
     administrative orders and all civil and administrative 
     penalties and fines regardless of whether such penalties or 
     fines are punitive or coercive in nature, or whether imposed 
     for isolated, intermittent or continuing violations. The 
     United States hereby expressly waives any immunity otherwise 
     applicable to the United States with respect to any such 
     substantive or procedural requirement (including, but not 
     limited to, any injunctive relief, administrative order, or 
     civil or administrative penalty or fine referred to in the 
     preceding sentence, or reasonable service charge). The 
     reasonable service charges referred to in this section 
     include, but are not limited to, fees or charges assessed for 
     certification and licensing, as well as any other 
     nondiscriminatory charges that are assessed in connection 
     with a Federal, State, interstate, or local radon program. No 
     agent, employee, or officer of the United States shall be 
     personally liable for any civil penalty under any Federal, 
     State, interstate, or local law relating to radon with 
     respect to any act or omission within the scope of his 
     official duties.

     ``SEC. 315. REGULATIONS.

       ``The Administrator is authorized to issue such 
     regulations, including recordkeeping and reporting 
     requirements, as may be necessary to carry out the provisions 
     of this title.''.

     SEC. 10. STRATEGY TO IDENTIFY AND REDUCE EXCEPTIONALLY HIGH 
                   INDOOR RADON LEVELS.

       Title III of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 
     2661 et seq.) is amended by adding the following new section 
     after section 315:

     ``SEC. 316. STRATEGY TO IDENTIFY AND REDUCE EXCEPTIONALLY 
                   HIGH INDOOR RADON LEVELS.

       ``(a) Development of the Strategy.--Within 9 months of the 
     date of enactment of the Radon Awareness and Disclosure Act 
     of 1994, the Administrator shall, in consultation with other 
     Federal agencies and scientific experts in radon health 
     effects, detection, and mitigation, using relevant and 
     available information, develop and provide to Congress a 
     strategy using the authorities of the Administrator for 
     identifying areas and buildings within the United States with 
     exceptionally high levels of radon and for reducing such 
     radon levels. The Administrator shall revise the strategy as 
     necessary to incorporate additional relevant information.
       ``(b) Implementation of the Strategy.--No later than 9 
     months after the date of enactment of the Radon Awareness and 
     Disclosure Act of 1994, the Administrator shall begin to 
     implement the provisions of the strategy required under 
     subsection (a).
       ``(c) Report to Congress.--21 months after the date of 
     enactment of the Radon Awareness and Disclosure Act of 1994, 
     the Administrator shall report to Congress on the results of 
     Federal, State, and local efforts to implement the strategy 
     developed under subsection (a).''.

     SEC. 11. MEDICAL COMMUNITY OUTREACH.

       Title III of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 
     2661 et seq.) is amended by adding the following new section 
     after section 316:

     ``SEC. 317. MEDICAL COMMUNITY OUTREACH.

       ``(a) In General.--The Administrator, in cooperation with 
     the Secretary of Health and Human Services, shall develop and 
     implement an outreach program to provide information about 
     radon to the medical community.
       ``(b) Information.--(1) The Administrator, in consultation 
     with the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the 
     Surgeon General, shall develop informational material 
     concerning radon tailored to doctors in general practice and 
     in specialties related to lung cancer. Such information 
     shall, at a minimum--
       ``(A) explain the health threats posed by exposure to 
     radon;
       ``(B) explain the association of radon with smoking and 
     other causes of lung cancer;
       ``(C) identify appropriate steps to determine exposure to 
     radon in the home; and
       ``(D) identify sources of additional information.
       ``(2) Not later than one year after the date of the 
     enactment of this section, the Administrator shall transmit 
     the information developed pursuant to this section to--
       ``(A) doctors in the United States in general practice;
       ``(B) doctors in specialties related to lung cancer;
       ``(C) all doctors employed by the Federal Government;
       ``(D) all hospital administrators; and
       ``(E) other physicians and officials determined by the 
     Administrator to be appropriate.
       ``(c) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this section, the Administrator, in consultation 
     with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, shall report 
     to Congress concerning the implementation of this section and 
     recommendations for measures to improve radon information 
     dissemination to the medical community.''.

     SEC. 12. UNBIASED PRESENTATION OF RISK INFORMATION.

       Title III of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 
     2661 et seq.) is amended by adding the following new section 
     after section 317:

     ``SEC. 318. UNBIASED PRESENTATION OF RISK INFORMATION.

       ``The Administrator, in carrying out his or her 
     responsibilities under this title, shall ensure that the 
     presentation of information on the health risks associated 
     with exposure to radon and radon progeny is unbiased and 
     informative. To the extent feasible, documents made available 
     to the general public which describe the degree of risk from 
     exposure to radon and radon progeny shall, at a minimum, 
     characterize the population or populations addressed by any 
     risk estimates; state the expected risk for the specific 
     population; and state the reasonable range of uncertainty.''.

     SEC. 13. AUTHORIZATION FOR RADON ABATEMENT PROVISIONS OF 
                   TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT.

       (a) In General.--Title III of the Toxic Substances Control 
     Act (15 U.S.C. 2661 et seq.) is amended by adding the 
     following new section after section 318:

     ``SEC. 319. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out the 
     provisions of this title (other than section 307) such sums 
     as may be necessary for the fiscal years 1994 through 
     1997.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--The following sections of title 
     III of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2661 et 
     seq.) are repealed:
       (1) Section 305(f).
       (2) Section 306(j).
       (3) Section 308(f).

     SEC. 14. TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

       The Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2601 and 
     following) is amended as follows:
       (1) In the first sentence of subsection (a) of section 11 
     strike ``mixtures, or products subject to title IV'' and 
     insert ``mixtures or products subject to title III or title 
     IV''.
       (2) In paragraph (1) of subsection (b) of section 11, 
     strike ``mixtures, or products subject to title IV'' and 
     insert ``mixtures, or products subject to title III or IV''.
       (3) In paragraph (1) of section 13(a), strike ``6, or title 
     IV'' in each place it appears and insert ``6, or title III or 
     IV'' and strike ``7 or title IV'' and insert ``7 or title III 
     or IV''.
       (4) In section 16, strike ``or 409'' and insert ``, 312, or 
     409'' each place it appears.
       (5) In section 17:
       (A) In subsection (a)(1)(A) strike ``or 409'' and insert 
     ``, 312, or 409''.
       (B) Strike ``title IV'' in each place it appears in 
     subparagraphs (B) and (D) of subsection (a)(1) and in 
     subsection (b) and insert ``title III or title IV''.
       (6) In section 19 in the first sentence of subsection 
     (a)(1)(A), after ``title II'' insert ``, III,''.
       (7) In section 20(a)(1) after ``title II'' insert ``, 
     III,'' in each place it appears.
       (8) Subsection (a)(2) of section 305 is amended by striking 
     out ``Operation'' and inserting ``Until a program is in 
     effect under section 309, operation''.
       (9) Subsection (h)(3) of section 306 is amended by 
     inserting before the period at the end of the first sentence 
     ``or, after the date 2 years after the enactment of the Radon 
     Awareness and Disclosure Act of 1994, a proficiency program 
     under section 309''.
       (10) The table of contents for title III of such Act 
     (contained in section 1 of the Act) is amended as follows:
       (A) Amend the item relating to section 304 to read as 
     follows:

``Sec. 304. New construction.''.

         (B) Strike out the items relating to section 309 through 
     311 and insert the following:

``Sec. 309. Performance and proficiency program for radon products and 
              services.
``Sec. 310. Disclosure of information concerning radon.
``Sec. 311. Authorized State programs.
``Sec. 312. Prohibited acts.
``Sec. 313. Administrative proceedings.
``Sec. 314. Control of radon at Federal facilities.
``Sec. 315. Regulations.
``Sec. 316. Strategy to identify and reduce exceptionally high indoor 
              radon levels.
``Sec. 317. Medical community outreach.
``Sec. 318. Unbiased presentation of risk information.
``Sec. 319. Authorization of appropriations.''.

     SEC. 15. ESTABLISHMENT OF PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON RADON 
                   AWARENESS.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established a commission to be 
     known as the President's Commission on Radon Awareness 
     (hereinafter in this Act referred to as the ``Commission'').
       (b) Duties.--The Commission shall--
       (1) examine public awareness programs in effect on the date 
     of the enactment of this Act which are--
       (A) implemented through various segments of mass media; and
       (B) intended to raise public awareness of the health 
     threats of radon and the benefits of testing for radon;
       (2) act as an administrative and coordinating body for the 
     voluntary donation of resources to assist the implementation 
     of new programs and national strategies for dissemination of 
     information intended to raise awareness of the health threats 
     of radon;
       (3) encourage media outlets throughout the country to 
     provide information aimed at increasing radon awareness, 
     including public service announcements and advertisements; 
     and
       (4) evaluate the effectiveness and assist in the update of 
     programs and national strategies formulated with the 
     assistance of the Commission.
       (c) National Radon Education Campaign.--
       (1) In general.--The Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency, in collaboration with the Commission, 
     shall establish a national education campaign to increase 
     public awareness concerning radon health risks and motivate 
     public action to reduce radon levels. The national education 
     campaign shall include the use of funds for the purchase and 
     production of public educational materials. The Administrator 
     is authorized to enter into cooperative agreements to carry 
     out this section.
       (2) Radon awareness week.--As part of the national 
     education campaign, the Administrator may designate an annual 
     national radon awareness week.
       (d) Membership and Operation of Commission.--
       (1) Number and appointment.--The Commission shall be 
     composed of 12 members appointed by the President within 30 
     days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and should 
     include representatives of--
       (A) advertising agencies;
       (B) television, radio, cable communications, and print 
     media;
       (C) the health industry;
       (D) other segments of the business sector of the United 
     States;
       (E) experts in the field of radiation science;
       (F) consumer groups;
       (G) the radon testing and remediation industry; and
       (H) other Federal agencies, as designated by the President.
       (2) Terms.--
       (A) Except as provided in subparagraphs (B) and (C), 
     members shall be appointed for terms of 3 years.
       (B) Any member appointed to fill a vacancy occurring before 
     the expiration of the term for which such member's 
     predecessor was appointed shall be appointed only for the 
     remainder of such term.
       (C) A member may serve after the expiration of the member's 
     term until a successor to the member has taken office.
       (3) Basic pay and expenses.--(A) Except as provided in 
     subparagraph (B), members of the Commission shall serve 
     without pay.
       (B) While away from their homes or regular places of 
     business in the performance of services for the Commission, 
     members shall be allowed travel expenses, including a per 
     diem allowance in lieu of subsistence, in the same manner as 
     persons serving intermittently in the Government services are 
     allowed travel expenses under section 5703 of title 5, United 
     States Code.
       (4) Procedures, meetings, staff, etc.--The Commission shall 
     establish such rules regarding meetings, including rules 
     regarding quorum, voting and procedure, and regarding staff, 
     experts and consultants as the Commission deems appropriate. 
     The Commission may use the United States mails in the same 
     manner and under the same conditions as other departments and 
     agencies of the United States. The Administrator of General 
     Services shall provide to the Commission on a reimbursable 
     basis such administrative support services as the Commission 
     may request.
       (5) Report.--The Commission shall transmit to the President 
     and to each House of Congress a report not later than July 31 
     of each year which contains a detailed statement of the 
     activities of the Commission during the preceding year, 
     including a summary of the number of public service 
     announcements produced by the Commission and published or 
     broadcast.
       (6) Termination.--The Commission shall terminate on a date 
     which is 3 years after the date on which members of the 
     Commission are first appointed, unless the President, by 
     Executive order, extends the authority of the Commission.

  The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to the remainder of the bill?


                    amendments offered by mr. oxley

  Mr. OXLEY. Madam Chairman, I offer amendments.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendments offered by Mr. Oxley: Page 15, strike line 13 
     and all that follows down through line 9 on page 17.
       Page 17, line 10, strike ``(b)'' and insert ``(a)''.
       Page 18, line 11, after the period insert: ``The 
     Administrator shall implement a program to distribute the 
     pamphlet to high radon areas and shall coordinate with the 
     President's Commission on Radon Awareness established under 
     section 15 of the Radon Awareness and Disclosure Act of 1994 
     with organizations in the real estate and building 
     construction industry and with State and local governments to 
     achieve the broad dissemination of the pamphlet in such areas 
     and in other areas deemed appropriate by the 
     Administrator.''.
       Page 18, strike line 12 and all that follows down through 
     line 6 on page 20.


                          conforming amendment

       Page 9, strike lines 3 and 4 and insert:
       ``(5) Penalties for Violations.--
       ``(A) Civil liability.--Any person who knowingly violates 
     the provisions of this section shall be jointly and severally 
     liable to the purchaser in an amount equal to the reasonable 
     costs of radon mitigation incurred by such person at the 
     vulnerable premises.
       ``(B) Costs.--In any civil action brought for damages 
     pursuant to subparagraph (A), the appropriate court may award 
     court costs to any prevailing or substantially prevailing 
     party, together with reasonable attorney fees and any expert 
     witness fees.
       ``(C) Limitation on penalty amount.--For purposes of 
     applying civil penalties under section 16 in the case of any 
     violation of this section by a seller, the maximum penalty 
     applicable under section 16 shall be $2,000. For purposes of 
     applying such penalties to any such violation, the second 
     sentence of section 16(a)(1) shall not apply.
       ``(D) Exemption from criminal penalties and citizens 
     suits.--No criminal penalties shall be imposed under section 
     16(b) for any violation of this section and no action may be 
     brought under section 20(a)(1) for any such violation.

  Mr. OXLEY (during the reading). Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous 
consent that the amendments be considered as read and printed in the 
Record, and that the amendments be considered en bloc.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Ohio?
  There was no objection.
  (Mr. OXLEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. OXLEY. Madam Chairman, this amendment is to section 7 of the 
bill, which is the section that requires homeowners and other building 
owners throughout the United States to provide certain information 
concerning radon to buyers and lessees at the time of the sale or lease 
of the property.
  I want to begin by discussing what this section of the bill does and 
does not do. The proponents of the bill have stated that the bill does 
not require anyone to conduct a radon test. That is correct. But what 
the bill does do is require sellers and lessors to comply with a number 
of other requirements, all of which are enforceable by penalties under 
the Federal Toxic Substances Control Act and can result in a homeowner 
being sued in Federal court.
  Let me discuss just one requirement of the bill. The bill says that 
before a homeowner can sell his house, he must obtain a ``radon hazard 
information pamphlet'' from EPA and provide it to the prospective 
buyer. This requirement applies not just to homes located in parts of 
the country with high levels of radon, but everywhere in the United 
States, to everyone who wants to sell a residential or commercial 
property.
  It seems to me that this provision raises several problems. First of 
all, how are ordinary homeowners supposed to know about this new 
Federal requirement? As we all know, ordinary people don't read the 
Federal Register. Ordinary people are used to looking to State and 
local law for rules on how real estate is bought and sold. This 
legislation presents a real problem when it comes to giving ordinary 
homeowners fair notice about the legal requirements that will apply to 
them.
  And that's not the end of the ordinary homeowner's problems. Assuming 
that a seller knows about the law, he's got to comply with it. That 
means getting a copy of the ``radon hazard information pamphlet'' from 
EPA and providing it to the prospective purchaser. Let me underscore 
the impact of this particular section of the bill: If this bill becomes 
law, virtually no residential or commercial property in the United 
States can be sold until the seller provides the buyer with a copy of 
EPA's ``radon hazard information pamphlet.''
  Its worth noting that there are more than 4\1/2\ million homes sold 
every year, and countless more homes and businesses leased. Congressman 
Bliley and I wrote to EPA several months ago asking how EPA will ensure 
that copies of its pamphlets are available everywhere real estate could 
be either sold or leased. It seems to me that this will be an 
undertaking not unlike what the IRS has to do to get Federal tax forms 
out every year, except that EPA will have to ensure that its ``radon 
hazard information pamphlets'' are available at all times during the 
year, not just prior to April 15.
  EPA's response to our question was less than satisfying. EPA said 
that it would work with organizations such as the American Lung 
Association and the Consumer Federation of America to make sure that 
its pamphlets are made available throughout the United States. While I 
don't question the desire and the opportunity of these groups to assist 
EPA in distributing its pamphlet, I would note that the legal burden is 
on the homeowner and not on EPA or third-party groups. This puts the 
homeowner in a difficult position because his ability to comply with 
the law becomes dependent on someone who has no legal obligation.
  There are other requirements in this section of the bill that I will 
mention only briefly. In addition to providing EPA's pamphlet to a 
prospective buyer or lessee, the seller or lessor must disclose the 
results of any radon tests that have been conducted in the dwelling. 
And finally, the seller must include a special ``radon warning 
statement'' in the sales contract, and the buyer must acknowledge in 
writing that he read the warning statement and received a copy of EPA's 
pamphlet.
  The problem with these requirements--in addition to being complicated 
and confusing--is that they are enforceable through penalties under the 
Federal Toxic Substances Control Act and a seller or lessor could be 
sued in Federal court.
  I support the goals of this section of the bill, that is, to provide 
the public with accurate and useful information on the risks from 
exposure to radon.
  The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley] has 
expired.
  (By unanimous consent, Mr. Oxley was allowed to proceed for 2 
additional minutes.)
  Mr. OXLEY. Madam Chairman, I don't agree that we need to make 
ordinary homeowners subject to liability under the Federal Toxic 
Substances Control Act to accomplish this goal.
  What this bill does is create a massive pamphlet distribution scheme 
that's enforceable under Federal law. I don't think that makes sense. I 
think it makes more sense for EPA to use its resources to work with 
States to identify areas where radon levels can be reduced. That's what 
section 10 of the bill does, by requiring EPA to develop a strategy for 
identifying areas in the United States that have exceptionally high 
levels of radon and working to reduce those levels. That's where the 
real health benefits will come from under this legislation.
  And that's what my amendment would do. My amendment would eliminate 
the mandates and penalties and civil liability on homeowners and other 
property owners and direct EPA to make its pamphlet available in areas 
where radon levels are known to be high. It would also direct EPA to 
work with existing third-party groups to achieve the widest possible 
distribution of information on radon risks among the general public. 
What we need are more focused, cooperative efforts and less emphasis on 
mandates and enforcement. I urge the House to adopt my amendment.
  Madam Chairman, I would ask that my amendment be adopted because 
somebody has to stand up for the homeowner, the homeowner who wants to 
sell his property and is already worried about too much Federal redtape 
and regulation in the home selling process.
  This is an opportunity for the House to speak loud and clear in 
support of the homeowners of this country who want nothing more than to 
provide basic information to the buyers but do not want to be involved 
in more and more Federal redtape and certainly do not want to be 
involved in the potential liability that this bill would require.

                              {time}  1340

  The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley] has 
expired.
  (On request of Mr. Waxman and by unanimous consent, Mr. Oxley was 
allowed to proceed for 2 additional minutes.)
  Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OXLEY. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Chairman, I am curious to know why the gentleman 
thinks it is a burden on a homeowner to simply say to a prospective 
buyer, to say, ``Here is a pamphlet. It warns you about the dangers of 
radon, a radioactive gas,'' why that is any bigger problem than what is 
now in Federal law, that they be given a pamphlet about lead and 
information about the fact that there can be a test to see if there is 
lead in the home.
  Mr. OXLEY. Madam Chairman, obviously the potential for liability is 
huge when we are expecting every homeowner in this country to know that 
he has to provide this pamphlet when he is selling his home.
  Madam Chairman, I would suggest to the gentleman from California [Mr. 
Waxman] that he has a lot more faith in people understanding all of the 
laws that we pass here every day. So many of those people are going to 
walk blindly into this and face potential liability.
  The gentleman from Massachusetts told us this is a voluntary program. 
I would suggest it is not a voluntary program. If you are a homeowner 
and you face potential liability under TSCA and potential civil 
liability in the courts, that to me is an unwanted burden on the 
homeowner. We can talk all we want about lead and everything else, but 
the potential liability for the homeowner is great.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Chairman, if the gentleman will continue to yield, 
under the law now the homeowner has to give information about lead, a 
pamphlet about that. This bill would say give a pamphlet about radon. I 
expect the two pamphlets would be combined. There is not a tremendous 
liability on the part of the homeowner, simply a requirement to give 
out a pamphlet.
  Realtors will all know to advise their sellers to do that, but an 
individual who sells a home now has to comply with the law on the lead 
pamphlet. They will get a form for a contract and that form on the 
contract will say that ``You have to give information on radon,'' just 
as the form now says ``You have to give information on lead.'' It is 
just not a big burden. There is no great liability involved.
  Mr. OXLEY. Madam Chairman, I would suggest to the gentleman from 
California that he has not been through too many real estate closings 
lately, because they are very complicated and confusing.
  Mr. WAXMAN. I beg to differ with the gentleman, Madam Chairman.
  Mr. SWIFT. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley].
  Madam Chairman, the Oxley amendment does a lot more than simply help 
the individual homeowner who might want to sell their house by 
themselves. It essentially eliminates from the bill the entire 
disclosure section. I must say, I am a little puzzled that anyone would 
consider this provision of the bill anything new or anything radical.
  Madam Chairman, I can recall back in the sixties when the big debate 
was over truth in labeling and truth in packaging. I remember a Member 
of Congress who was opposed to doing that at that time because they 
thought it was a terribly radical idea, pointing out the incongruity in 
the difference in the size between a pound of feathers and a pound of 
lead. She went on at enormous length about how this was going to cause 
confusion in the marketplace and so forth and so on.
  Madam Chairman, truth in labeling and truth in packaging is so 
commonly accepted now that consumers use it regularly, and anyone who 
seriously tried to say that there was some incongruity between a pound 
of feathers and a pound of lead would be a laughingstock. Yet here we 
are in 1994, Madam Chairman, hearing on the floor that disclosure of 
the possible presence of a radioactive gas in a house one is proposing 
to buy is some strange, exotic, unusual, unwarranted prospect.
  What the bill says is that ``you will disclose what you know about 
Radon.'' What the Oxley amendment does is to strike that provision and 
says. ``You don't have to tell anybody anything that you may know about 
a radioactive gas that may exist in the house you are trying to sell to 
somebody.'' How can Members vote for that?
  In addition, I might point out that the word ``liable'' has been used 
kind of like ``boo,'' ``liability.'' Let us examine what the liability 
is if we violate the disclosure provision. The maximum fine that exists 
in any ordinary TSCA sanction is $10,000 per day. In this bill, it is 
$2,000, period.
  There are no criminal penalties in this bill, none, no criminal 
penalties, and compensatory damages for knowing violations are 
restricted to just the reasonable cost of mitigation. That can run from 
$1,000 to $2,000.
  In the case of a landlord, the minimum fine is even lower, just two 
months' rent, so it must be clearly understood that this amendment does 
not simply help Mrs. Murphy, who might want to sell her house without 
using a real estate agent. It in fact strikes all of the disclosure 
provisions of the bill.
  Madam Chairman, the second thing is that as we hear liability, the 
liability has been reduced to something that should provide a concern, 
so that people will not want to knowingly violate this, but on the 
other hand, is not going to break anybody up in business.
  Madam Chairman, one last point that I would like to make, and I think 
the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley] was quite right when he said that 
buying or selling a house these days is a very complicated business. He 
says it takes a couple of lawyers, at least, to do it, and I think he 
is absolutely accurate when he says that.
  The idea that we are going to have someone who is going to go out and 
complete a whole real estate transaction all by themselves is virtually 
impossible. The idea that they are going to do it without a realtor, 
without a lawyer, without a standard contract, is preposterous. It will 
never happen. Any realtor and any lawyer and any standard contract is 
going to have this language in the contract, so the idea that someone 
is going to kind of accidentally wander out is impossible.
  The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Washington [Mr. Swift] 
has expired.
  (By unanimous consent, Mr. Swift was allowed to proceed for 2 
additional minutes.)
  Mr. SWIFT. Madam Chairman, the idea that someone is going to 
accidentally wander out and sell their house without knowledge that 
these things exist and then somehow get trapped in the liability 
section is a fantasy. It will never happen, because real estate 
transactions are complicated, not made complicated by this law, but 
made complicated by a whole series of State and local and some Federal 
provisions that already exist, and the requirements that this bill 
makes with regard to disclosure will be well known by the lawyers, will 
be well known by the realtors, will be included in all standard 
contracts, and therefore, the idea that someone is going to innocently 
become liable is nonsense. it will not happen.
  The places we would have to go in order to be able to complete the 
sale of our homes, no matter how much we tried to do ourselves, will 
ultimately bring us to someone who has this knowledge and we will be 
able to comply with the law.
  Therefore, Madam Chairman, I urge Members to understand that the 
Oxley amendment does not just help Mrs. Murphy, it, in fact, strikes 
the entire disclosure section from the bill, and that the penalties are 
not massive and onerous, and that compliance with this law is going to 
happen almost automatically as an individual goes about talking with 
those professionals one has to deal with in order to sell a home in the 
modern world.
  Mr. BLILEY. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  (Mr. BLILEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BLILEY. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Ohio.
  Madam Chairman, when you look at the real estate section of this 
bill, you have to conclude that all it does is use a Federal penalty as 
a means to distribute a pamphlet on radon. We simply do not need a new 
Federal penalty scheme for every public information campaign.
  Let me explain how I have come to this conclusion. First, the bill 
gives a buyer the right to ask for an opportunity to conduct a radon 
test in a house. But that is something that a buyer can do even without 
this legislation. We do not need a Federal law to give buyers the right 
to ask questions about the houses they want to buy.
  Second, the bill gives the buyer the right to receive the results of 
any radon tests that have been done. Telling the buyer whether there is 
radon in the house is something that a lot of State laws are requiring, 
including in my own State of Virginia. Again, I do not think we need a 
Federal law to require sellers to tell the truth to buyers.
  So the last thing this legislation would do is require the seller to 
give the buyer a pamphlet. And to make sure this happens, the bill 
would impose not only penalties on homeowners under the Toxic 
Substances Control Act but also make homeowners liable for damages in 
Federal court. In other words, what we have got with this legislation 
is an enormous regulatory machine to make sure that people hand out a 
pamphlet.
  That is why I like Mr. Oxley's amendment. Mr. Oxley's amendment would 
accomplish the very same thing that the bill would accomplish--maybe 
even more--but without all of the costs, and the burdens on ordinary 
homeowners and the unnecessary litigation. At a time when we are 
supposedly concerned about the size of Federal Government, and with an 
administration that supposedly favors local solutions to problems, I am 
amazed and troubled that we are even having this discussion.
  How does H.R. 2448 affect Mrs. Murphy?
  Mrs. Murphy must comply with the requirements of the bill if she 
sells any residential or commercial property.
  Mrs. Murphy must comply with the requirements of the bill if she 
leases residential or commercial property for more than a year--or if 
the lease, by its terms, can be extended for more than a year.
  If Mrs. Murphy is covered by H.R. 2448, what must she do? (1) Give 
prospective purchasers or lessees a copy of EPA's ``radon hazard 
information pamphlet,'' (2) disclose any radon test results, and (3) 
for sellers, include a radon warning statement in the contract.
  What are the penalties?
  For sales, penalties under the Toxic Substances Control Act of up to 
2 months rent and possible liability in Federal court for the costs of 
mitigation.
  For leases, penalties under the Toxic Substances Control Act of up to 
2 months rent and possible liability in Federal court for the costs of 
mitigation.
  Madam Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the Oxley amendment.

                              {time}  1350

  Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  Madam Chairman, the reason I rise in opposition to this amendment is 
to again for us the Members' attention on what is at stake in dealing 
with the radon radioactive gas problem. This is a health problem. It is 
a radioactive substance that is the second leading cause of lung cancer 
in the United States.
  Would not most Americans want to know if there is a problem and be 
able to do something about it before they make the largest investment 
they may be making in their lives, purchasing a home? Would not they 
want to know about it before they move their family into a situation 
where there may be a danger, especially since the danger can be so 
easily rectified? Easily rectified by less than $1,000, putting a pipe 
to ventilate that radon gas so that it does not adversely affect them. 
The reason that so many people do not take these steps is that they 
just do not know about the problem. And when they should be informed 
about it is when they are about to buy that home.
  The amendment of the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley], it seems to me 
a very unwise idea. It guts the bill. It goes so far as to say that if 
a seller knows there is a radon problem in that house, the seller can 
keep that information quiet. That is what the amendment of the 
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley] would do. The Oxley amendment strikes 
the sections that simply provide the opportunity for a prospective 
buyer to get a pamphlet that talks about the radon problem, informs 
them of that information, and tells them they could get a test if they 
want to. If they do not want to, that is their business.
  This amendment is anticonsumer. It would assure that buyers are not 
warned about radioactive gas in the homes they purchase. The sellers 
already have to hand out pamphlets on lead. All sellers, whether they 
have a realtor or not, have to comply with laws on back taxes, on 
termite inspections, on lead, whatever it might be; how to apportion 
the back taxes. These are things the sellers have to know about. It is 
not so difficult to know about giving out this pamphlet.
  Madam Chairman, I want to point out that the importance of this 
legislation is such that the groups that might be focused on this issue 
got tougher and we negotiated with them. The realtors had some 
concerns, legitimate ones, and we worked those out. The homebuilders 
had concerns, legitimate ones, and we worked them out. They are all 
supporting this bill and they are all against the Oxley amendment.
  I want to read the list of organizations that urge you to vote 
against the Oxley amendment and for this legislation.
  Mr. OXLEY. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. WAXMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. OXLEY. Madam Chairman, I am not informed that the realtors or the 
homeowners or anyone else has come out opposed to my amendment. Does 
the gentleman have some proof of that?
  Mr. WAXMAN. We have been in touch with the realtors. We negotiated 
this bill with them. In negotiating this bill, they supported the 
provisions of the legislation. They said they would support the bill 
and oppose amendments that would gut it. They are against the Oxley 
amendment if they are for the provisions that we negotiated.
  Mr. OXLEY. Does the gentleman have something we could see?
  Mr. WAXMAN. I have the list in my hand.
  Mr. OXLEY. I understand the gentleman has a list, but I am talking 
about the amendment itself.
  Mr. WAXMAN. I must tell the gentleman I have personally talked to the 
representatives of the National Association of Realtors. I want to 
point out, we do have a letter that we will be happy to furnish and to 
put into the Record. But these are the groups that are against the 
Oxley amendment. These are the groups from all perspectives that say 
this is a good bill, do not mess with it, do not gut it with the Oxley 
amendment:

       The National Association of Realtors.
       The National Association of Holebuilders.
       The Mortgage Bankers Association.
       The National Apartment Association.
       The National Association of Counties.
       The Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors.
       The Consumer Federation of America.
       Citizen Action.
       The Sierra Club.
       U.S. PIRG.
       The American Cancer Society.
       The American Lung Association.
       The American Public Health Association.
       The American Academy of Pediatrics.

  Madam Chairman, they all have looked at this from different 
perspectives. They say it makes sense. It makes sense to protect the 
people that need to be protected and in order to take steps to deal 
with the problem, they need to be informed of it. Let us not try to 
keep information from those that ought to have it.
  Madam Chairman, I have in front of me a letter from the National 
Association of Realtors for the information of the gentleman from Ohio 
[Mr. Oxley] dated March 10, 1994, to members of the Committee on Energy 
and Commerce:

                             National Association of Realtors,

                                   Washington, DC, March 10, 1994.
       To Members of the Energy and Commerce Committee: The 
     National Association of Realtors (NAR) believes that every 
     American should have the opportunity to live in safe and 
     decent housing where risks to health are minimized. To that 
     end, NAR supports H.R. 2448, the ``Radon Awareness and 
     Disclosure Act of 1993''. We believe that this is a 
     reasonable compromise and urge its adoption by the House 
     Energy and Commerce Committee.
       The legislation would provide homebuyers and renters with 
     important information regarding the potential hazards of 
     radon while minimizing the imposition of burdensome and 
     unnecessary requirements on sales transactions. We note some 
     differences remain between H.R. 2448 and the Senate version 
     of the radon legislation. We look forward to continuing to 
     work with you to resolve these remaining differences in a way 
     amenable to all interested parties.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Robert H. Elrod,
                                                        President.

  Madam Chairman, they think it makes sense, the public health groups 
say it makes sense, and I think that we ought to support the bill and 
defeat the Oxley amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from California [Mr. Waxman] 
has expired.
  (At the request of Mr. Oxley and by unanimous consent, Mr. Waxman was 
allowed to proceed for 2 additional minutes.)
  Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. WAXMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. OXLEY. I did not hear any mention of the Oxley amendment in the 
letter. When was that letter dated?
  Mr. WAXMAN. If the gentleman will listen again to this. The National 
Association of Realtors believes that people ought to have this 
information. ``We believe that this is a reasonable compromise,'' 
meaning the compromise that is in the bill. And they urge its adoption.
  Does the gentleman have any indication that they support his 
amendment?
  Mr. OXLEY. The question was whether they opposed it.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Their last statement on the issue is they support the 
compromise they worked out in developing this legislation.
  We went to great lengths to hear their concerns and we dealt with 
them in a very legitimate way. And they are supporting the bill.

                              {time}  1400

  By supporting the bill I would think they would oppose the 
gentleman's amendment which guts the information that they think ought 
to be provided to consumers.
  Mr. OXLEY. I would simply point out to the gentleman from California 
that 23 States have mandatory requirements and 13 States have voluntary 
disclosure. The gentleman's State, the State of Massachusetts, the 
State of Ohio, and the State of Washington all have mandatory 
requirements.
  What the gentleman is trying to do is put a mandate on all of the 
States and all of the homeowners when indeed this kind of issue should 
remain at the State level.
  Mr. WAXMAN. If I can reclaim my time, we are doing what is existing 
law for the lead information, and we are doing it in a way where the 
National Association of Counties, which are the local level, thinks it 
makes sense. We allow the States to adopt their own program, to 
supersede any Federal program, and it is one where it will be 
effective. We are proposing something effective because the General 
Accounting Office says notwithstanding all of the information in the 
press, only 10 percent of the homeowners have bothered to get tested, 
primarily because they do not even know of the danger.
  Mr. SCHAEFER. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number 
of words.
  (Mr. SCHAEFER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SCHAEFER. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of the Oxley 
amendment.
  The bill, as currently written, will require the Environmental 
Protection Agency to regulate every real estate transaction in the 
United States, even lease agreements. We are talking about 4.5 million 
sales of homes and about 12 million lease agreements every year. I have 
a difficult time believing that the EPA has either the resources or the 
desire to undertake this task.
  Radon is a serious health consideration--as my own constituents in 
Colorado know all too well--and there are many positive steps this bill 
takes to strengthen radon awareness. But H.R. 2448 seriously oversteps 
these bounds with its heavy-handed disclosure requirements and extreme 
civil penalties. These provisions are so expansive, so burdensome, that 
they are unenforceable in the real world. Contrary to what some have 
said here, this provision is not good for the American consumer, and it 
is not good Government policy. While headed for the right goal, this 
bill definitely takes a wrong turn.
  The Oxley amendment would simply remove a number of these regressive 
requirements and penalties and replace them with a more balanced policy 
of education and awareness. By eliminating the EPA's proposed new role 
of real estate policeman, the agency will have the resources to focus 
on more constructive avenues for achieving radon awareness and 
disclosure. It will also ensure that American taxpayers are not 
subjected to the threat of Federal penalties every time a buyer closes 
on a new house for a renter signs a lease This amendment simply gets 
the bill headed back in the right direction.
  Radon is a significant problem across much of our country. The Oxley 
amendment will be a major benefit for the millions of those Americans 
whose homes are affected by radon contamination. I urge your support 
for this helpful and thoughtful addition.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words, and I rise in opposition to the Oxley amendment.
  Again, reference was made to Mrs. Murphy in an earlier part of this 
debate by a proponent of this amendment. I know Mrs. Murphy. Mrs. 
Murphy is a friend of mine. Mrs. Murphy lives in my district, and I 
know that when Mrs. Murphy is purchasing a home, maybe the only home 
she will ever purchase, after having scoured every exit off of every 
highway in order to inspect every single home that she might decide 
that she would live in with her children, for the rest of her life, 
that this is probably the most important decision, the major purchase 
which she is going to make in her life. It seems to me that if it is 
possible legally for a seller of a home to withhold the fact that the 
seller knows that there is an exposure to radon greater than a uranium 
mine on the premises, and does not disclose it to Mrs. Murphy, then 
Mrs. Murphy has taken the life savings of that family and put it into a 
home which they are going to live in forever, regretting having put the 
children in that kind of a circumstance.
  It seems to me that the minimum that Mrs. Murphy is entitled to, and 
every Mrs. Murphy across the country is that when they make that most 
important decision that they will ever make where they are going to buy 
a home for their children to grow up in, next to the schools that they 
want to be nearby, that they would know their children will be safe 
inside of that home. That is all this bill requires, and that is all 
the gentleman's amendment seeks to eliminate, to just take away from 
Mrs. Murphy that very fundamental information. It seems to me if we are 
going to give that information for lead, and we have States that 
recognize the inherent rights of purchasers of homes to have certain 
fundamental information, if we know that realtors will just hand over 
the information to the seller as they are getting the contract to sell 
the home so that they will include it in any packet that is being 
handed out to the purchaser, then that is very minimal, it seems to me, 
to shoulder if Mrs. Murphy will have the information she needs to 
determine whether she wants to put her children, where she wants to put 
her family for the rest of their lives. I would hope that the Oxley 
amendment would be resoundingly rejected.
  The National Association of Realtors and of Home Builders and the 
National Cancer Institute all have rejected anything more than the 
compromise which we bring out here on the floor. They have accepted 
this compromise that Mrs. Murphy should get this information, and it 
would be a terrible legislative mistake for this body to then reject 
that compromise, which the home builders, the realtors have accepted, 
and to move to a point where Mrs. Murphy has no information to protect 
her family.

  Mr. OXLEY. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MARKEY. I am glad to yield to the gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. OXLEY. Madam Chairman, I appreciate my friend from Massachusetts 
yielding.
  Mrs. Murphy, who is residing in Medford I am sure would be glad to 
know that the Massachusetts statute already provides for her protection 
in mandatory requirements of notification. So the gentleman's 
apocryphal Mrs. Murphy is indeed already covered under Massachusetts 
statute, which is the appropriate forum, it seems to me, to provide 
that kind of protection.
  By the way, someday Mrs. Murphy might want to sell that house, and I 
would suggest to the gentleman from Medford that perhaps the shoe would 
be on the other foot in that regard, and that she may not have a 
capability of getting the pamphlet, and would indeed be subject to up 
to a $2,000 fine. I am sure that the gentleman from Medford would not 
like that.
  Mr. MARKEY. If I may reclaim my time, again the legislation protects 
all of the Mrs. Murphys of the United States of America, not just those 
that live in Medford and my district. Moreover, the bill does more than 
that. It creates performance standards for radon testing and services, 
requires the disclosure of a radon hazard in residences, creates model 
State programs and radon programs for grants for States and localities, 
and it also establishes a Presidential Commission on Radon Awareness, 
so it does a lot more than anything that any individual State, 
including Massachusetts, had done thus far, toward the goal of ensuring 
that all of those Mrs. Murphys purchasing homes have the information 
they need, and conversely, that when Mrs. Murphy is selling her home if 
she knows that there is a problem, and she is selling it to another 
woman, another family and knows that radon there could in fact endanger 
the children moving into that home, that she has no right to keep that 
information from the new woman, the new family moving into that home.
  Reject the Oxley amendment.
  Mr. MOORHEAD. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number 
of words and I rise in support of the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Ohio.
  Madam Chairman, I think it is a very good thing that most of the Mrs. 
Murphys around the country are now protected under the State laws of 
the larger States of the Union so that most of the people reside in 
States that are protected. In my State of California we have very fine 
disclosure laws which I strongly support. I have been helped by those 
disclosure laws on occasion. I think it is important that we let the 
people know when they buy a house from us about any kind of defect that 
there is in the house, including radon or any other defect that might 
be present there.

                             {time}   1410

  I do have a great deal of concern, however, that this section treats 
every part of the United States in the same way. I come from southern 
California where radon is not a serious problem. I should note that 
there are a few areas of the State that may have elevated levels of 
radon, but the State geologists have done a good job of identifying 
those areas and making people aware of the problem.
  In my part of the country, the real problems are earthquakes and 
fires and even floods and other things of that sort. What this bill 
would do is make my constituents in southern California spend their 
time and attention on what the Federal Government thinks is important, 
not on what my constituents really know is important. I cannot in good 
conscience vote for a provision that treats every property owner in the 
United States whether they have a problem with a particular area or not 
in exactly the same way.
  The States can do this job. They know what the problems are in their 
States, and they are taking pretty darn good care of the problems that 
are within their States.
  The other concern I have with the real estate disclosure provisions 
of this bill is the impact those provisions would have on the number of 
lawsuits filed in State and Federal courts. I think everyone in this 
room knows if you file in Federal court you are going to spend an awful 
lot of money. There are nowhere near the number of lawyers that 
traditionally practice in the Federal courts. The price you are going 
to pay for those legal suits is going to be far more than it would be 
if you filed in the municipal court or in the State court of a State. 
This bill is going to push those cases up into the higher courts where 
you have much longer delays, much more expense. Why can they not sue in 
the State court where it will do the most good if they need to, where 
it will take the least amount of time and the least amount of money?
  This bill says that if a homeowner fails to comply with the 
complicated and confusing disclosure requirements of the bill, he or 
she can be sued in the Federal court for the costs of mitigating 
whatever radon problem there will be.
  This can be, if the amount would be relatively small, be a rather 
ridiculous situation.
  I think that the civil liability provision will attract an enormous 
number of lawsuits. There are probably millions of disputes that arise 
every year from real estate transactions. I am quite sure that lawyers 
will find ways to use the new Federal cause of action created by this 
bill to litigate more than just disputes related to radon.
  Madam Chairman, laws and regulations concerning real estate 
transactions are best administered at the State and local level. That 
is where virtually all the real estate laws are at the present time. 
The States control the transactions within their States.
  There is no reason for us to think that State and local governments 
are not equally concerned about, and equally capable of, responding to 
the legitimate health and safety concerns of our citizens. These 
penalty provisions would interfere with the local government's ability 
to address these concerns.
  You know, we have heard this talk about this pamphlet. I do not care 
whether they distribute a pamphlet or not, if they want to. I do not 
think 1 person out of 100 would read the pamphlet, but if they wanted 
to distribute the pamphlet, go ahead and distribute it. It is the other 
problems that are co-related that give me the most difficulty.
  I think we have a good bill without this provision. I think we are 
moving forward. I do not think this guts the bill, because if all the 
bill is is passing a pamphlet out and if all the bill is is letting 
people go to Federal courts instead of State courts, then we do not 
have much of a bill here.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Oxley amendment.
  Mr. Oxley's amendment would correct these problems and encourage EPA 
to work to distribute public information as widely as possible.
  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the requisite 
number of words.
  Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of the Oxley amendment. This 
amendment would strike the Federal penalties and other liability 
provisions of section 7 and would simply direct the EPA to work with 
interested organizations to achieve the broadest possible distribution 
of information on radon.
  According to the EPA, 6 percent of homes in the United States are 
anticipated to have radon levels above the EPA's action level of four 
picocuries per liter. Most of these high levels are located in 
identifiable geological regions, such as areas up the east coast and 
throughout the Midwest. Other parts of the county in the South and in 
my home State of Texas, contain very small amounts of radon. It does 
not make sense to require homeowners and other property owners in these 
parts of the country to spend the same time and effort disclosing 
information concerning radon.
  Texas has already taken action in this arena by requiring mandatory 
disclosure of radon by law. The seller's disclosure notice by the Texas 
Association of Realtors has radon listed with a variety of other 
environmental conditions which must be reported. If the seller 
misrepresents the condition of the property, then the buyer is entitled 
to a remedy through the rescission of the sales contract. H.R. 2448 
authorizes States to administer their own program, but only if their 
program provides adequate enforcement. This language could mean that 
States would have to adopt and enforce all the penalties included in 
this bill, including penalties on individual homeowners.
  Real estate is typically regulated at the State and local level and I 
strongly believe that it should stay that way. The Federal Government 
should not be directly regulating real estate transactions.
  Madam Chairman, I am not opposed to the intent of this legislation to 
promote awareness and provide as much information as possible of the 
potential risks of exposure to radon to prospective purchasers of real 
estate. We do need to strike this section imposing Federal penalties on 
ordinary homeowners. I strongly urge my colleagues to support the Oxley 
amendment.
  Mr. CANADY. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of my friend, Mr. Oxley's 
amendment to the Radon Awareness and Disclosure Act. Let me begin by 
congratulating the chairman and all those on the Energy and Commerce 
Committee whose hard work removed many troublesome provisions from this 
bill.
  However, the issue of real estate transaction disclosure requirements 
remains unresolved. I believe the requirements outlined in section 11 
of this bill are unworkable and inappropriate. And I question whether 
the benefit to the public from these requirements justifies the cost of 
compliance. I am opposed to the language in the committee-reported bill 
for several reasons
  First, I see this action as yet another Federal Government intrusion 
into an issue that has traditionally been within the realm of the 
States and local governments. Real estate and the requirements of 
disclosure are often tailored by the individual State legislatures and 
local entities to suit their individual needs.
  Given the geographic differences from State to State and even 
locality to locality, it is imperative that we retain the necessary 
flexibility of the current system. This allows local planners to 
appropriately respond to the level of radon risk in their communities. 
To introduce the heavy hand of the Federal Government into this problem 
and impose a one-size-fits-all solution to radon disclosure 
requirements is clearly not the best way to respond to the radon 
problem.
  To find an example of this, look no further than my State of Florida. 
Our State government has been aggressive in attempting to mitigate 
randon levels found around the State. It has already adopted a number 
of point-of-sale disclosure requirements which are the subject of some 
controversy among builders in my district. These disclosure 
requirements are already written into our State's real estate 
transaction procedures.
  To add the EPA and more burdensome Federal requirements to the mix 
would, in my opinion, be confusing and costly to the homeowner and 
would serve no real educational benefit to the homebuyer.
  Additionally, Madam Chairman, I am very concerned about the provision 
in this section which makes individual homeowners subject to Federal 
penalties under the Toxic Substances Control Act. Is it reasonable to 
expect that every individual homeowner who sells or leases property in 
the United States will be familiar with the detailed requirements of 
this complex law?
  While I understand progress has been made in committee on reducing 
the penalties under this legislation, I object to the whole premise. 
There is only so much we can expect from the homeowner. Is it fair to 
hold him responsible under threat of Federal penalties for yet another 
set of point-of-sale disclosures? I don't think so.
  The amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio, in my opinion, is a 
reasonable approach to this problem. It strikes the federally 
enforceable disclosure requirements in the bill and encourages EPA to 
work with the States and other interested parties to ensure that public 
information materials on radon achieve maximum distribution to 
homeowners and homebuyers.
  Madam Chairman, this bill has come a long way since it was introduced 
last year. And for that I congratulate my colleagues on Energy and 
Commerce. The improvements made by the Oxley amendment, however, ensure 
that the bill will be true to its intent. I thank him for his efforts 
and urge my colleagues to support passage of the amendment.

                              {time}  1420

  Mr. PAXON. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of the amendment offered by 
my colleague, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley].
  As a member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, I have had the 
opportunity to work on H.R. 2448, the Radon Awareness and Disclosure 
Act in two subcommittees and in the full committee.
  During committee consideration, this bill has been greatly improved 
and many problems have been worked out. Unfortunately, this legislation 
in its present form is still unacceptable due to the provisions of 
section 7.
  Section 7 of this bill requires homeowners to distribute information 
on radon and disclose the results of any prior radon test during a real 
estate transaction, or be faced with Federal penalties under the Toxic 
Substances Control Act and possible civil action in Federal court.
  I would like to make it very clear to all Members--under this bill, 
every American who sells or leases their home is opening themselves up 
to a $2,000 fine by EPA and the possibility of being sued in Federal 
court by the purchaser.
  It is my opinion that the creation of homeowner liability for failure 
to provide the proper information or disclosure, will actually 
discourage individuals from testing their homes for radon. Under this 
bill, the only sure way to be free of all liability would be to avoid 
radon testing altogether.
  Do not misunderstand what I am saying. In some parts of this country 
high levels of radon gas can be a health hazard. However, the goal of 
radon awareness legislation should be to inform the public and 
encourage radon testing in high radon areas.
  Unfortunately, H.R. 2448 does not accomplish this goal. Instead of 
educating the public, this legislation discourage and even punishes 
homeowners.
  For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to support Mr. Oxley's 
amendment to strike the real estate disclosure and liability provisions 
and instead direct EPA to work with interested groups to widely 
disseminate information on radon to homeowners.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Madam Chairman, I think we are ready to vote on this bill and this 
amendment, but I would like to point out, in light of the comments of 
the previous speaker when he suggested we get interested groups 
together and work out a way to inform the consumers about the dangers 
of radon, that that is exactly what we have done in this legislation, 
and that is why the realtors, the homebuilders and others, consumers 
and environmentalists, public health people, support the idea that we 
make the information available.
  There is no requirement for a test, and what the Oxley amendment 
would do would be to strike giving the information to consumers. In 
fact, the Oxley amendment would strike the requirement that if a seller 
knows about a problem, that he give that information to the consumer as 
well.
  Madam Chairman, I urge support for the legislation and urge 
opposition to the Oxley amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there further debate on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley]?
  Mr. OXLEY. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley] 
is recognized.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. OXLEY. I thank the Chair. I will not take all 5 minutes. I 
appreciate the debate on this issue.
  Madam Chairman, this has come down to a real question of special 
interests versus the public interest. If you want the special interests 
to determine what legislation passes and they all sign off after they 
have cut their deals, that is fine, support the legislation without the 
Oxley amendment. But if you believe in the right of the homeowner to 
have some degree of ability to sell his home without the tentacles of 
the EPA and the Federal Government and the potential for fines from the 
Federal Government involved, then I would suggest that you support the 
Oxley amendment to give the real interested party here--that is, the 
homeowner--the ability to sell his house without this kind of 
legislation hanging around his neck.
  Madam Chairman, we went through this same concept, really, with the 
acid rain debate. If you will recall, back when we debated the clean 
air bill, we passed the clean air bill before the NAPAP report came 
out. After the NAPAP report came out, it was clear that most of the 
wailing about acid rain and most of the scare tactics about acid rain 
turned out to be fraudulent. In fact, we passed a multibillion-dollar 
acid rain provision that penalizes my area of the country for no good 
reason. We are paying that price now.
  Now the sponsors of this legislation want to foist this kind of 
responsibility and potential liability on the homeowner. I say enough 
is enough.
  If you are tired of bureaucracy, if you are tired of the involvement 
of the Federal bureaucracy into an arrangement to be able to sell your 
home, you will support the Oxley amendment. If you believe that it is 
impossible for people in rural areas. Alaska and other places, to get 
the ability to get that pamphlet or to have the knowledge about the 
pamphlet, then you will support the Oxley amendment.
  If you believe that the lead legislation that we passed which creates 
criminal penalties for the first time without giving that kind of 
information out was a good idea, then you will oppose the Oxley 
amendment. I happen to think the lead provision was a major mistake 
that is going to come back and haunt this Congress.
  We have an opportunity this time to stand up for the homeowners of 
this country, say enough is enough, support the Oxley amendment, and 
then we can pass the legislation the way it should have been passed in 
the first place.
  The CHAIRMAN. There being no further debate, the question is on the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley].
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. OXLEY. Madam Chairman, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present, and I make the point of order that a quorum is 
not present.
  The CHAIRMAN. Evidently, a quorum is not present. Pursuant to clause 
2, rule XXIII, the Chair announces that she will reduce to a minimum of 
5 minutes the period of time within which a vote by electronic device, 
if ordered, will be taken on the pending question following the quorum 
call. Members will record their presence by electronic device.
  The call was taken by electronic device.
  The following Members responded to their names:

                             [Roll No. 359]

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allard
     Andrews (ME)
     Andrews (NJ)
     Andrews (TX)
     Applegate
     Archer
     Armey
     Bacchus (FL)
     Bachus (AL)
     Baesler
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barca
     Barcia
     Barlow
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bateman
     Becerra
     Beilenson
     Bentley
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Bevill
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boucher
     Brewster
     Brooks
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burton
     Buyer
     Byrne
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Castle
     Chapman
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clinger
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coleman
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Coppersmith
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Darden
     de la Garza
     de Lugo (VI)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Dellums
     Derrick
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Durbin
     Edwards (CA)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Faleomavaega (AS)
     Farr
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Fields (TX)
     Filner
     Fingerhut
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Ford (MI)
     Ford (TN)
     Fowler
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Furse
     Gallegly
     Gallo
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Geren
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gingrich
     Glickman
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Grams
     Grandy
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamburg
     Hamilton
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Herger
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hoagland
     Hobson
     Hochbrueckner
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Holden
     Horn
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Huffington
     Hughes
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hutto
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Inslee
     Istook
     Jacobs
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Johnston
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kennedy
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klein
     Klink
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kopetski
     Kreidler
     Kyl
     LaFalce
     Lancaster
     Lantos
     LaRocco
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lehman
     Levin
     Levy
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (FL)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     Lloyd
     Long
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Machtley
     Maloney
     Mann
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Matsui
     Mazzoli
     McCloskey
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McCurdy
     McDermott
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Meyers
     Mfume
     Mica
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Mineta
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Molinari
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moorhead
     Moran
     Morella
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Myers
     Nadler
     Neal (MA)
     Neal (NC)
     Norton (DC)
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Orton
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Parker
     Pastor
     Paxon
     Payne (NJ)
     Payne (VA)
     Pelosi
     Penny
     Peterson (FL)
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pickle
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quillen
     Quinn
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Ravenel
     Reed
     Regula
     Reynolds
     Richardson
     Ridge
     Roberts
     Roemer
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Romero-Barcelo (PR)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rose
     Rostenkowski
     Roth
     Roukema
     Rowland
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sangmeister
     Santorum
     Sarpalius
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schaefer
     Schenk
     Schiff
     Schroeder
     Schumer
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sharp
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shepherd
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (IA)
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Snowe
     Solomon
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Studds
     Stump
     Stupak
     Swett
     Swift
     Synar
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Tejeda
     Thomas (CA)
     Thomas (WY)
     Thompson
     Thornton
     Thurman
     Torkildsen
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Towns
     Traficant
     Tucker
     Underwood (GU)
     Unsoeld
     Upton
     Valentine
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Volkmer
     Vucanovich
     Walker
     Walsh
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weldon
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Wynn
     Yates
     Young (AK)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                              {time}  1446

  The CHAIRMAN. Four hundred and fifteen Members have answered to their 
names, a quorum is present, and the Committee will resume its business.


                             recorded vote

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand of the gentleman 
from Ohio [Mr. Oxley] for a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 193, 
noes 227, not voting 19, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 360]

                               AYES--193

     Allard
     Applegate
     Archer
     Armey
     Baesler
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barlow
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bateman
     Bentley
     Bereuter
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bunning
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Castle
     Chapman
     Clinger
     Coble
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Condit
     Cox
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cunningham
     Danner
     DeLay
     Derrick
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Emerson
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fields (TX)
     Fowler
     Franks (NJ)
     Gallegly
     Gallo
     Gekas
     Gillmor
     Gingrich
     Glickman
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Grams
     Grandy
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Horn
     Houghton
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hutto
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, Sam
     Johnston
     Kanjorski
     Kasich
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kyl
     LaFalce
     Lancaster
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lehman
     Levy
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (FL)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     Lucas
     Machtley
     Manzullo
     Mazzoli
     McCandless
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     McMillan
     Meyers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Molinari
     Moorhead
     Murphy
     Myers
     Neal (NC)
     Nussle
     Orton
     Oxley
     Packard
     Paxon
     Penny
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Portman
     Poshard
     Pryce (OH)
     Quillen
     Quinn
     Ramstad
     Ravenel
     Regula
     Ridge
     Roberts
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roth
     Royce
     Santorum
     Saxton
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Sensenbrenner
     Shaw
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (IA)
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Solomon
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Talent
     Tanner
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas (CA)
     Thomas (WY)
     Torkildsen
     Underwood (GU)
     Upton
     Valentine
     Volkmer
     Vucanovich
     Walker
     Walsh
     Weldon
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                               NOES--227

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Andrews (ME)
     Andrews (NJ)
     Andrews (TX)
     Bacchus (FL)
     Barca
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Beilenson
     Berman
     Bevill
     Bilbray
     Bishop
     Blackwell
     Boehlert
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boucher
     Brewster
     Brooks
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Byrne
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Cooper
     Coppersmith
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Darden
     de la Garza
     de Lugo (VI)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Durbin
     Edwards (CA)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ehlers
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Faleomavaega (AS)
     Farr
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Fingerhut
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Ford (MI)
     Ford (TN)
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (CT)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Geren
     Gibbons
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hamburg
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings
     Hefner
     Hinchey
     Hoagland
     Hochbrueckner
     Holden
     Hoyer
     Huffington
     Hughes
     Inslee
     Jacobs
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     Klein
     Klink
     Kopetski
     Kreidler
     Lambert
     Lantos
     LaRocco
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lloyd
     Long
     Lowey
     Maloney
     Mann
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Matsui
     McCloskey
     McCurdy
     McDermott
     McHale
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Mfume
     Miller (CA)
     Mineta
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moran
     Morella
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal (MA)
     Norton (DC)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Parker
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Payne (VA)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (FL)
     Pickle
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Reynolds
     Richardson
     Roemer
     Romero-Barcelo (PR)
     Rose
     Rostenkowski
     Roukema
     Rowland
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sangmeister
     Sarpalius
     Sawyer
     Schenk
     Schroeder
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sharp
     Shays
     Shepherd
     Skaggs
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Snowe
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Studds
     Stupak
     Swett
     Swift
     Synar
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Tejeda
     Thompson
     Thornton
     Thurman
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Towns
     Traficant
     Tucker
     Unsoeld
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Wynn
     Yates

                             NOT VOTING--19

     Bachus (AL)
     Carr
     Conyers
     Dreier
     Fish
     Gilchrest
     Hayes
     Hilliard
     Inhofe
     Laughlin
     Margolies-Mezvinsky
     McDade
     Michel
     Slattery
     Sundquist
     Washington
     Wheat
     Whitten
     Young (FL)

                              {time}  1456

  Mr. TANNER changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  Mr. SHAYS, and Mrs. ROUKEMA changed their vote from ``aye'' to 
``no.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

                              {time}  1500


                   amendment offered by mr. traficant

  Mr. TRAFICANT. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Traficant: At the end of the bill, 
     add the following new section:

     SEC.   . SENSE OF CONGRESS; REQUIREMENT REGARDING NOTICE

       (a) Purchase of American-made Equipment and Products.--In 
     the case of any equipment or products that may be authorized 
     to be purchased with financial assistance provided under this 
     Act, it is the sense of the Congress that entities receiving 
     such assistance should, in expending the assistance, purchase 
     only American-made equipment and products.
       (b) Notice to Recipients of Assistance.--In providing 
     financial assistance under this Act, the head of each Federal 
     agency shall provide to each recipient of the assistance a 
     notice describing the statement made in subsection (a) by the 
     Congress.

  Mr. TRAFICANT (during the reading). Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous 
consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the 
Record.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Ohio?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Madam Chairman, there is going to be gas on this bill. 
It might as well be American gas.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment. The 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant] is a 
bipartisan amendment. We have no objection, and urge Members to vote 
for it.
  Mr. OXLEY. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Madam Chairman, I have no objection to the amendment. I still stand 
opposed to the bill, however,
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant].
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the committee amendment in the 
nature of a substitute, as amended.
  The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended, 
was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
  Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Wise) having assumed the chair, Mrs. Schroeder, Chairman of the 
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that 
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2448) to 
improve the accuracy of radon testing products and services, to 
increase testing for radon, and for other purposes, pursuant to House 
Resolution 491, she reported the bill back to the House with an 
amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on the amendment to the committee 
amendment in the nature of a substitute adopted by the Committee of the 
Whole? If not, the question is on the Committee amendment in the nature 
of a substitute, as amended.
  The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute as amended, was 
agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.


                             recorded vote

  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 255, 
noes 164, not voting 15, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 361]

                               AYES--255

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Andrews (ME)
     Andrews (NJ)
     Andrews (TX)
     Applegate
     Bacchus (FL)
     Barca
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Beilenson
     Berman
     Bevill
     Bilbray
     Bishop
     Blackwell
     Boehlert
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boucher
     Brewster
     Brooks
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Byrne
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clinger
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Condit
     Cooper
     Coppersmith
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Darden
     de la Garza
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Derrick
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Dooley
     Durbin
     Edwards (CA)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ehlers
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Fingerhut
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Ford (MI)
     Ford (TN)
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gallegly
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Geren
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gilman
     Glickman
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamburg
     Hamilton
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings
     Hefner
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hoagland
     Hochbrueckner
     Holden
     Horn
     Hoyer
     Huffington
     Hutto
     Inslee
     Jacobs
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnston
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     Klein
     Klink
     Kopetski
     Kreidler
     LaFalce
     Lambert
     Lantos
     LaRocco
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lehman
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lloyd
     Lowey
     Machtley
     Maloney
     Mann
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Matsui
     Mazzoli
     McCloskey
     McCurdy
     McDermott
     McHale
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Meyers
     Mfume
     Miller (CA)
     Mineta
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moran
     Morella
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal (MA)
     Neal (NC)
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Parker
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Payne (VA)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (FL)
     Peterson (MN)
     Pickle
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Reed
     Reynolds
     Richardson
     Ridge
     Roemer
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rose
     Rostenkowski
     Roukema
     Rowland
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sangmeister
     Sawyer
     Schenk
     Schroeder
     Schumer
     Scott
     Sharp
     Shays
     Shepherd
     Skaggs
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Snowe
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Studds
     Stupak
     Swett
     Swift
     Synar
     Tauzin
     Tejeda
     Thompson
     Thornton
     Thurman
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Towns
     Traficant
     Tucker
     Unsoeld
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Wynn
     Yates

                               NOES--164

     Allard
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus (AL)
     Baesler
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barlow
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bateman
     Bentley
     Bereuter
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bunning
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Castle
     Chapman
     Coble
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Conyers
     Cox
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Deal
     DeLay
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Emerson
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fields (TX)
     Fowler
     Gallo
     Gekas
     Gillmor
     Gingrich
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Grams
     Grandy
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Houghton
     Hughes
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Johnson, Sam
     Kasich
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kyl
     Lancaster
     Levy
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (FL)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Linder
     Livingston
     Long
     Lucas
     Manzullo
     McCandless
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     McMillan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Molinari
     Moorhead
     Myers
     Orton
     Oxley
     Packard
     Paxon
     Penny
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Quillen
     Quinn
     Ravenel
     Regula
     Roberts
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Roth
     Royce
     Santorum
     Sarpalius
     Saxton
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Sensenbrenner
     Shaw
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (IA)
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Solomon
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Talent
     Tanner
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas (CA)
     Thomas (WY)
     Torkildsen
     Valentine
     Volkmer
     Vucanovich
     Walker
     Walsh
     Weldon
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                             NOT VOTING--15

     Carr
     Dreier
     Fish
     Hayes
     Inhofe
     Laughlin
     Margolies-Mezvinsky
     Michel
     Serrano
     Slattery
     Sundquist
     Washington
     Wheat
     Whitten
     Young (FL)

                              {time}  1520

  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________