[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 112 (Friday, August 12, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: August 12, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. BINGAMAN:
  S. 2382. A bill to amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to provide parity 
between the United States and certain free-trade agreement countries 
with respect to the exemption for personal and household effects 
purchased abroad by returning residents, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Finance.


                       Border Tariffs Act of 1994

 Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I offer a bill to correct an 
inequity that has developed along our border with Mexico with respect 
to tariffs on goods crossing the border.
  The United States currently permits duty-free entry of $400 of retail 
goods for personal consumption each month. There is a 10 percent duty 
on the next 1,000 dollars' worth of purchases brought into the United 
States. Mexico, by contrast, limits the amount of goods that can be 
imported for personal consumption to $50 per day. Goods above that 
amount have a duty of approximately 33 percent.
  Mr. President, this difference in policy obviously hampers trade 
along our borders. It is ironic that this problem exists at a time when 
both the United States and Mexico have made a commitment to increasing 
trade through enactment of the North American Free-Trade Agreement.
  Initially, I hoped that this problem could be corrected 
administratively. I wrote to the Secretary of State about this issue. 
With my fellow border Senators, I also contacted the Commissioner of 
Customs in our country and President Salinas in Mexico. All, 
ultimately, to no avail.
  There are two tracks we can take to persuade the Government of Mexico 
to increase its duty-free limit, and I believe that we should pursue 
both of them. The first is to get our government to negotiate with the 
Government of Mexico to equalize the duties. My good friend and 
colleague from Arizona, Senator DeConcini, inserted language in the 
Commerce, State, Justice Appropriations report that would direct the 
U.S. Trade Representative to make doing so a priority. Simultaneously, 
I believe that we should change the exemption provided for in our 
tariff laws to match that of Mexico's. Together, these two actions can 
help ensure that retail businesses on both sides of the border are on 
the same footing.
  So, today, I rise to offer legislation that would equalize the amount 
of personal retail goods that can cross the border duty-free in either 
direction. This legislation simply says that our duty will not be lower 
than Mexico's.
  It is my hope that this measure, which provides equity for our border 
business and ultimately promotes trade, will win speedy 
approval.
                                 ______

      By Mr. DeCONCINI:
  S. 2385. A bill to require the Secretary of Agriculture to establish 
and carry out a Sustainable Ecosystems and Economies Demonstration 
Program, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, 
Nutrition, and Forestry.


         sustainable ecosystems and economies demonstration act

{time}  Mr. DeCONCINI. Mr. President, I am today introducing the 
Sustainable Ecosystems and Economies Demonstration Act. This bill 
authorizes a demonstration program to implement ecosystem management 
practices on lands within our National Forest System. This will be 
accomplished through the use of ecosystem management contracts and 
includes every region of the country.
  We must begin managing our public lands by looking at the entire 
ecosystem. This holistic approach will take into account the 
vegetation, the wildlife, the water, the land, the air, and the 
people--the people that make their living from the resources as well as 
those who come to visit.
  Our national forests have been very much in the news lately. The news 
has not been good--the forests are burning. Hundreds of thousands of 
acres have been destroyed. The lives of expert and courageous 
firefighters have been lost trying to save not only the natural 
resources but the lives and the homes of those in the path of the 
fires.
  Should we fight all natural fires? Should we use fire as a management 
tool to eliminate fuel loading and thus reduce the number of large 
fires? Are these fires natural occurrences that we must learn to live 
with or have our past management practices added fuel to this problem? 
Have our logging practices, our grazing methods, our fire management 
contributed to this problem or is it merely the human intrusion into 
pristine areas bringing this issue to the boiling point? What 
strategies can the Forest Service use to limit the harmful effect of 
fire on the resources and the humans who live in the area?
  These same questions just posed regarding fires can also be asked for 
the management of disease, insects, and soil erosion. Mr. President, we 
must find a balanced use of our natural resources. The goal must be to 
maintain a healthy ecosystem and be sensitive to the economic and 
social effects of these management strategies. The effects of natural 
disasters, the extraction of commodities such as minerals and timber, 
and the management of the national forests for recreation, wildlife 
habitat, and other resources have an effect on those that live in the 
area, own adjacent property, and rely on the resources for their 
livelihood.
  The Forest Service must have more tools to effectively deal with the 
future of our forests. This act provides two important new tools.
  Mr. President, let me explain these two new initiatives. The first 
tool is a mechanism to fund the demonstration areas. Numerous separate 
accounts are currently utilized to fund the Forest Service which 
cumulatively result in inadequate amounts. The General Accounting 
Office, in 1987, concluded that the current funding mechanisms 
prevented land managers at the forest and district levels from 
implementing end-results management practices. This bill designs 
demonstration areas to be self funding with no appropriations required. 
The Federal portion of the receipts generated from sales of timber 
within the demonstration area will be placed in an account to be used 
within the area for projects that benefit the ecosystem. That portion 
of the forest revenue shared with local government will continue. The 
concept is not to divert money from the treasury but to target areas 
with significant problems, especially where there are major conflicts 
between resource issues and local needs.
  The second tool is a mechanism to create land management service 
contracts. The idea is to create a contract between the Forest Service 
and a third party for certain activities such as wildlife habitat 
improvement, reforestation, wetlands enhancement, recreation 
opportunity development, et cetera, as determined by the local Forest 
Service official. Again, the funding for this contract will be from the 
receipts generated as I just discussed.
  Beginning in 1987, according to report language I had included in the 
Interior appropriations, the Forest Service was able to try the concept 
in several forests in the southwest. After several years of developing 
the concept, the Forest Service reported that current laws prevent the 
exchange of timber receipts for services.
  The fiscal year 1992 Interior appropriations bill included bill 
language at my request to authorize stewardship end-result contract 
projects in the Dixie and Kaibab National Forests. In a floor colloquy 
with Senator Leahy we discussed the purposes of the program. Senator 
Leahy made the point that the amendment would ``* * * provide the 
authority aggressively move forward in implementing a pilot project.'' 
Senator Leahy also clarified the fact that the language did not amend 
any environmental statutes and that the contracts should be used to 
promote ecosystem-based programs. He also said that the treatments 
should be tailored to localized conditions and examine a wide range of 
products, services, and management options.
  The Forest Service feels there is great potential in the contract 
approach. What has been discovered is that these demonstration 
contracts in effect now allow more coordinated, effective, and less 
costly treatments.
  The purpose of any pilot program is to find out what works and does 
not work. These pilot projects in the southwest have provided a lot of 
information. It is time to apply what we have learned on a national 
scale and continue gaining knowledge on the most effective methods to 
accomplish ecosystem management.
  This bill offers a 5-year national program to provide for more 
diverse experiences. The only limitation in the bill is that contracts 
be restricted to two districts in two forests in each region to ensure 
equitable distribution. I recommend to the authorizing committee that 
flexibility be provided to the Forest Service in selecting the 
demonstration areas; however, the bill is written to allow a 
grandfathering of the forests where the program was initiated in the 
fiscal year 1992 and 1993 appropriations acts.
  This bill gives priority to communities which have been severely 
impacted by reductions in timber sales due to endangered species or 
other environmental concerns. This demonstration program is 
experimental and should provide the Forest Service an expanded role in 
dealing with local government and local issues.
  I would like to thank Jim Magner and Jim Matson, organizers of the 
Sustainable Ecosystem Coalition, and those in the Forest Service who 
have been so creative in exploring solutions to the complex issues in 
this area. Additionally, I am most appreciative of the work provided by 
Dr. Dave Garrett of the Northern Arizona University School of Forestry. 
Finally, I would like to thank Senator Leahy, the chairman of the 
Agriculture Committee, for his early support and guidance for the 
demonstration program and Senator Byrd for his leadership and support.
  I urge my colleagues to give this bill serious consideration. I ask 
unanimous consent that the text of the bill be included in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2385

       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 ``Sustainable Ecosystems and 
     Economies (SEE) Demonstration Act of 1994''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The successful implementation of new and innovative 
     processes is required to assist in determining ecosystem 
     management practices for Federal lands.
       (2) A reduction in timber sales and the available volume of 
     timber has had significant adverse impacts on the economic 
     health and well-being of many small communities that are 
     dependent on Federal timber resources.
       (3) Conditions in many forests, including heavy fuel loads, 
     tree density, and increasing threats from catastrophic fires, 
     disease, and insect infestations adversely affect the 
     biodiversity, health, and sustainability of forests.
       (4) The achievement of ecosystem management will be greatly 
     hindered, unless the Federal Government determines a means of 
     balancing sustainable ecosystem requirements with the growing 
     demands on timber resources in an expeditious manner.
       (5) The authority granted to managers of Federal lands does 
     not provide for the distribution of receipts of revenue from 
     timber and other products to fund actions properly or to 
     achieve ecosystem management.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are as follows:
       (1) To provide for demonstration projects to establish and 
     implement new ecosystem management practices on specific 
     lands managed by--
       (A) the Secretary and the heads of other Federal agencies; 
     and
       (B) States and private landowners.
       (2) To test the feasibility of ecosystem management 
     contracts.
       (3) To improve the health of forest resources.
       (4) To provide for needed flexibility in contracting and 
     funding practices and distribution of receipts of revenue 
     from timber and other products to ensure that Federal land 
     managers have the necessary means to implement ecosystem 
     management.
       (5) To provide an economic stimulus to communities that are 
     profoundly dependent on Federal timber resources.
       (6) To provide the Secretary of Agriculture the authority 
     to enter into ecosystem management demonstration contracts to 
     achieve management requirements prescribed in the following 
     provisions of law:
       (A) The Multiple Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960 (16 U.S.C. 
     528 et seq.).
       (B) The Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning 
     Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1600 et seq.).
       (C) The Act of June 7, 1924 (commonly known as the 
     ``Clarke-McNary Act of 1924'') (43 Stat. 653, chapter 348).
       (D) The Act entitled ``An Act to facilitate and simplify 
     national-forest administration'', approved June 15, 1940 (54 
     Stat. 398; 41 U.S.C. 20a).
       (E) The Soil and Water Resources Conservation Act of 1977 
     (16 U.S.C. 2001 et seq.).
       (F) The last paragraph in the matter under the heading 
     ``FOREST SERVICE.'' in the Act of May 23, 1908 (popularly 
     referred to as the ``Twenty-Five Percent Fund Act'') (35 
     Stat. 260, chapter 192; 16 U.S.C. 500).

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       As used in this Act:
       (1) Account.--The term ``Account'' means the Sustainable 
     Ecosystems and Economies Account established under section 5.
       (2) Coordinator.--The term ``Coordinator'' means the 
     Coordinator for the Forest Service selected by the Secretary 
     under section 4(b).
       (3) Demonstration project.--The term ``demonstration 
     project'' means a demonstration project carried out under the 
     Program.
       (4) Ecosystem management contract.--The term ``ecosystem 
     management contract'' means a contract that a local land use 
     manager enters into pursuant to section 4 to carry out a 
     demonstration project.
       (5) Ecosystem management area.--The term ``ecosystem 
     management area'' means any unit of a national forest 
     selected by a local land manager, in consultation with the 
     Coordinator, as a site for a demonstration project pursuant 
     to section 4(c).
       (6) Local land manager.--The term ``local land manager'' 
     means the supervisor of each national forest selected as a 
     site for demonstration projects pursuant to section 4(d).
       (7) Program.--The term ``Program'' means the Sustainable 
     Ecosystems and Economies Demonstration Program established 
     under section 4.
       (8) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Agriculture.

     SEC. 4. SUSTAINABLE ECOSYSTEMS AND ECONOMIES DEMONSTRATION 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish and 
     implement in the Forest Service a Sustainable Ecosystems and 
     Economies (SEE) Demonstration Program to investigate and 
     demonstrate strategies to provide for new management 
     practices to--
       (1) ensure sustainable ecosystems; and
       (2) provide technical and economic assistance to forest 
     resource-dependent communities.
       (b) Ecosystem Management Contracts.--Each local land 
     manager may enter into an ecosystem management contract with 
     a qualified non-Federal entity. The contract shall contain a 
     description of the elements of the demonstration project, 
     including the following:
       (1) Site-specific criteria.
       (2) Clearly delineated treatments and services.
       (c) Application of Product Value.--A local land manager who 
     is an official of the Forest Service may apply all or part of 
     the revenues received from the sale of timber or any other 
     forest product removed from within an ecosystem management 
     area pursuant to an ecosystem management contract as an 
     offset against the cost of stewardship services to carry out 
     a demonstration project under the Program. Such services may 
     include site preparation, recreation, replanting, wildlife 
     habitat enhancement, silviculture programs, watershed 
     improvements, and other enhancements made pursuant to the 
     demonstration project to achieve the ecosystem management 
     objectives prescribed in the contract.
       (d) Coordinator for the Forest Service.--As soon as 
     practicable after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
     Secretary shall appoint an individual to serve as Coordinator 
     for the Forest Service. The Coordinator shall--
       (1) administer the Program; and
       (2) provide, upon request, support and technical assistance 
     to local land managers.
       (e) Designation of Ecosystem Management Areas.--Not later 
     than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     the Secretary, acting through the Coordinator, shall 
     designate locations for ecosystem management areas, including 
     the following:
       (1) Not more than two districts located in each of two 
     national forests located in each region of the Forest 
     Service.
       (2) Districts within a forest authorized to enter into a 
     stewardship end result contract, as described in the twenty-
     third paragraph in the matter under the heading 
     ``administrative provisions, forest service'' under the 
     heading ``Forest Service'' under title II of the Department 
     of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1993 
     (Public Law 102-381; 106 Stat. 1403).
       (f) Research and Other Technical Assistance.--
       (1) In general.--To the maximum extent feasible, in hiring 
     part-time employees for conducting inventories and related 
     activities, the Secretary shall ensure that priority is given 
     to qualified unemployed individuals in rural communities in 
     close proximity to national forests.
       (2) Participation by non-federal individuals and 
     entities.--The Secretary shall ensure that non-Federal 
     individuals or entities are involved in the design, 
     monitoring, and evaluation of a sufficient number of 
     demonstration projects conducted under this section to 
     provide an adequate assessment of such processes.
       (g) Sustainable Ecosystems and Economies Demonstration 
     Program Account.--The Secretary, acting through the 
     Coordinator, shall advise the Secretary of the Treasury 
     concerning the administration of the Sustainable Ecosystems 
     and Economies Demonstration Program Account established under 
     section 5.
       (h) Requirements for Selection of Ecosystem Management 
     Areas and Implementation of Program.--To the maximum extent 
     practicable, in selecting ecosystem management areas and 
     implementing the Program, the Secretary, acting through the 
     Coordinator, shall provide for the use of existing land use 
     plans, public review processes, and current administrative 
     review processes in effect at the time of the implementation, 
     and consult with appropriate existing advisory councils.
       (i) Project Priorities.--To the maximum extent practicable, 
     the demonstration projects shall be designed--
       (1) to serve communities that have been designated by the 
     Secretary as timber dependent or have significant 
     unemployment rates attributable to land management decisions 
     made by the Federal Government, as determined by the 
     Secretary;
       (2) to maximize the employment of qualified local 
     individuals; and
       (3) to initially give priority to wildland interface areas 
     (as defined by the Secretary) with respect to reducing 
     wildfire hazards and minimizing the effects of insect or 
     disease infestation in a manner consistent with ecosystem 
     management objectives established by the local land manager.
       (j) Regulations.--To the maximum extent possible the 
     Secretary shall carry out the Program without prescribing 
     additional regulatory requirements.
       (k) Application of Small Business Act.--In carrying out 
     this Act, the Secretary shall give such preferential 
     treatment to small businesses, including small business 
     concerns (within the meaning of section 3(a) of the Small 
     Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632(a))), under existing laws and 
     policies relating to the allocation of timber sales programs 
     in the Forest Service.
       (l) TSPIRS.--Any timber offset made pursuant to subsection 
     (k), and any other value for timber that is approved by the 
     Secretary as an offset pursuant to a demonstration project, 
     shall be credited as a revenue for the purposes of the Timber 
     Sales Program Information Reporting System (commonly referred 
     to as the ``TSPIRS'') of the Forest Service.
       (m) Acres Treated.--A local land manager may use the number 
     of acres subject to treatments and services prescribed under 
     an ecosystem management contract as a standard for assessing 
     the relative merit of a demonstration project.
       (n) Payment to Local Governments.--The Secretary (acting 
     through the Chief of the Forest Service) shall consider the 
     tract value (as defined and determined by the Secretary) of 
     timber or other product (as defined and determined by the 
     Secretary) removed pursuant to a demonstration project as 
     money received for the purposes of computing and distributing 
     payments to States under the last paragraph in the matter 
     under the heading ``FOREST SERVICE.'' in the Act of May 23, 
     1908 (popularly referred to as the ``Twenty-Five Percent Fund 
     Act'') (35 Stat. 260, chapter 192; 16 U.S.C. 500).
       (o) Joint or Cooperative Demonstration Projects.--As part 
     of the Program, the Secretary may enter into agreements and 
     memoranda of understanding to conduct joint or cooperative 
     demonstration projects with--
       (1) the heads of other Federal agencies;
       (2) appropriate officials of the governments of States and 
     political subdivisions of States; and
       (3) appropriate officials of other public and private 
     entities that the Secretary considers appropriate for 
     carrying out a demonstration project.
       (p) Compliance With Environmental Laws.--The Secretary 
     shall ensure that the entity that intends to carry out the 
     demonstration project has met all applicable Federal 
     environmental laws (as determined by the Secretary).
       (q) Termination of Program.--The Program established under 
     this section shall terminate 5 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act. A demonstration project established 
     under the Program shall terminate not later than 5 years 
     after the date on which a management contract is executed, or 
     with respect to a demonstration project described in 
     subsection (o), 5 years after the date the Secretary executes 
     an agreement or enters into a memorandum of understanding 
     under such subsection.

     SEC. 5. SUSTAINABLE ECOSYSTEMS AND ECONOMIES DEMONSTRATION 
                   PROGRAM ACCOUNT; SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING.

       (a) Purpose.--There is hereby established in the Treasury 
     of the United States a Sustainable Ecosystems and Economies 
     Account. The Secretary of the Treasury shall maintain a 
     subaccount in the Account for each national forest that is 
     selected as a site for demonstration projects under section 
     4.
       (b) Administration of Account.--The Secretary of the 
     Treasury shall administer the Account in consultation with 
     the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Coordinator.
       (c) Deposits.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     the Secretary of the Treasury shall deposit in the Account 
     the amount of revenues received from demonstration projects 
     in excess of any amount required to offset the cost of 
     stewardship services pursuant to section 4(b).
       (d) Expenditures.--On the request of the Secretary, acting 
     through the Coordinator, the Secretary of the Treasury shall 
     make available to the Secretary of Agriculture from the 
     appropriate subaccount of the Account, funds directly related 
     to the development, planning, and implementation of 
     demonstration projects carried out in a national forest in an 
     amount equal to the revenues received in the subaccount from 
     the sale of forest products from such national forest.
       (e) Termination Date for Deposits.--No deposits may be made 
     into the Account after the earlier of--
       (1) the date that is 5 years after the date of enactment of 
     this Act; or
       (2) the date on which all demonstration projects authorized 
     under this Act have been terminated.
       (f) Transfer of Funds.--Upon the termination of the 
     Account, funds remaining in the Account shall be transferred 
     to the general fund of the Treasury.
       (g) Supplemental Funds.--In addition to using funds from 
     the Account established under this section, the Secretary may 
     use funds made available to the Secretary by appropriations 
     to carry out the mission of the Forest Service (as defined 
     and determined by the Secretary).

     SEC. 6. DISSEMINATION OF RESEARCH AND DEMONSTRATION RESULTS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall disseminate to public 
     and private forest owners the results of the research and 
     demonstration projects carried out under section 4 that may 
     be beneficial to such forest owners.
       (b) Application of Authorities.--In carrying out this 
     section, the Secretary may exercise the authorities related 
     to the dissemination of information granted to the Secretary 
     under the following provisions of law:
       (1) The Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Research 
     Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 1641 et seq.).
       (2) The Act commonly known as the ``McIntyre-Stennis Act of 
     1962'' (Public Law 87-788).
       (3) The Wood Residue Utilization Act of 1980 (16 U.S.C. 
     1681 et seq.).
       (c) Reports to Congress.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     date of termination of each demonstration project, the 
     Secretary shall prepare and submit to Congress a summary and 
     evaluation of the elements of the demonstration project (as 
     described in the applicable ecosystem management contract) 
     and the results of the demonstration project. The report may 
     include the following:
       (1) A summary of the beneficial and adverse environmental 
     impacts associated with the activities conducted pursuant to 
     the demonstration project.
       (2) The functional role of the ecosystem management area 
     that is the site of the demonstration project with respect 
     to--
       (A) the ecosystem encompassing the ecosystem management 
     area and other associated ecosystems; and
       (B) the long-term demands of the health and biodiversity of 
     the forest.
       (3) The economic impacts on local employment and adjacent 
     rural communities of the activities conducted under the 
     demonstration project.
       (4) The project costs and revenues and cost savings, if 
     any, resulting from coordinated treatments, including an 
     identification of revenues realized from the sale of forest 
     products.
       (5) With respect to the ecosystem management contract, a 
     summary of the following:
       (A) The benefits and limitations of the ecosystem 
     management contract.
       (B) The number of applicants for participation in the 
     demonstration project.
       (C) A description of the regulatory process that governs 
     the ecosystem management contract.
       (D) The effectiveness of the ecosystem management contract 
     in defining and achieving results in the demonstration 
     project.
       (6) The impacts on small businesses.
       (7) The effectiveness of the public involvement process in 
     the development and implementation of the demonstration 
     project.
       (8) The number and nature of appeals associated with the 
     development and implementation of the demonstration project.
       (9) The use of research in developing and implementing the 
     development project.
       (10) An evaluation of the work conducted under agreements 
     or contracts with institutions of higher education (as 
     defined in section 1201(a) of the Higher Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 1141(a))) or other appropriate educational or 
     research institutions (including a nonprofit corporation, a 
     private foundation, or a consortium of such institutions) to 
     carry out research, establish project criteria, or conduct 
     project end-result evaluations.
       (11) A determination of measurable units that were used to 
     measure progress or improvement toward achieving 
     sustainability for the ecosystem.
       (12) The relative effectiveness of the provisions under the 
     last paragraph in the matter under the heading ``FOREST 
     SERVICE.'' in the Act of May 23, 1908 (popularly referred to 
     as the ``Twenty-Five Percent Fund Act'') (35 Stat. 260, 
     chapter 192; 16 U.S.C. 500) in determining the amounts of 
     payments to local governments in comparison with the 
     effectiveness of the determinations made under the 
     demonstration projects.

     SEC. 7. REPORT BY THE PRESIDENT.

       (a) In General.--The President shall submit to Congress an 
     annual report concerning the status of the Program. The 
     President shall submit the first report not later than 1 year 
     after the date of enactment of this Act, and shall submit a 
     final report not later than 1 year after the date on which 
     the Program terminates.
       (b) Final Report.--The final report submitted by the 
     President under this section shall contain the following:
       (1) An evaluation of the results of the demonstration 
     projects conducted under the Program and an evaluation of the 
     Program, on the basis of--
       (A) costs and the quantities of outputs; and
       (B) environmental costs and benefits.
       (2) Such recommendations concerning the achievement of 
     ecosystem management and other matters related to the Program 
     as the President determines to be appropriate.
                                 ______

      By Mrs. HUTCHISON:
  S. 2386. A bill to authorize the Administrator of General Services to 
enter into agreements for the construction and improvement of border 
stations on the United States international borders with Canada and 
Mexico, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works.


               the border infrastructure enhancement act

 Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I introduce a bill that will 
facilitate much-needed enhancement of border crossing infrastructure by 
permitting the Federal Government to take advantage of private and 
local financing for border stations. This legislation permits the 
Federal Government to lease these facilities from local governments or 
private entities on an annual basis for use by Federal agencies. 
Passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement [NAFTA] provides an 
excellent opportunity to focus on the issues and problems related to 
cross-border trade. In Texas these trade flow problems precede NAFTA. 
Trade with Mexico has increased 250 percent since the 1980's. Seventy-
four percent of this trade crosses at Texas border crossings. 
Therefore, Texas is long familiar with lengthy, idling, lines at the 
border crossings--which generate air pollution and impose enormous 
economic costs on cross-border trade. These environmental and 
efficiency problems are only growing with increases in NAFTA trade.
  Many of the problems that impede the efficient flow of goods across 
our southern border are unique to that border; however, there are also 
many similarities between the northern and southern borders, especially 
inadequate infrastructure financing. Growth in north-south trade is 
straining the border station infrastructure at the northern frontier as 
well. My bill is designed to address this problem on both borders and 
in a way that empowers local communities, and draws upon their 
resources and expertise in international trade.

  Much-needed border crossings are not being constructed because, in 
this era of increasing budgetary constraints, the Federal Government 
cannot afford the cost of constructing the accompanying border stations 
which house Customs, INS and the U.S. Department of Agriculture 
inspection services. The $360 million Congress authorized in 1988 for 
the Southwest Border Capital Improvements Program to construct 40 new 
and expanded border stations along the United States-Mexico border have 
been exhausted. Yet, the need for these facilities continues to grow.
  Just recently, citizens in the border city of Pharr, TX, expressed 
their frustration about this situation to me. A much-needed new bridge 
will open in Pharr next year, yet Pharr will need to spend $500,000 
building temporary facilities for Customs and INS to use until the 
General Services Administration is able to build permanent facilities 
in 1996. Under the legislation I am introducing today, local government 
or private entities would have been able to construct the border 
station by the time the bridge opened. The border communities in my 
State indicate that hey are more than willing to provide the up-front 
financing necessary for the construction of these needed border 
stations and enter into long term leases with the Government, if only 
Washington will cooperate.
  This bill permits, indeed I would hope encourages, the Federal 
Government to enter into 30 year leases with local governments or 
corporate entities for these facilities. It allows Congress to 
appropriate the sums necessary on an annual basis, rather than require 
an appropriation equal to the cost of the lease in the first year of 
the lease. This legislation will save Federal dollars because it allows 
the Government to get out of the border stations construction business. 
Local governments or private parties will be able to bring necessary 
border stations on line more quickly and efficiently than the current 
multi-year process the Government undertakes to plan and construct 
border stations.
  Similar legislation has been introduced in the House of 
Representatives by House Agriculture Committee Chairman de la Garza, 
with whom I am working very closely on this and other border 
infrastructure issues. I look forward to working with all the border 
State representatives as we look for innovative ways to enhance 
hemispheric trade and improve the quality of life in our border 
communities, our nation's gateways for NAFTA trade.
                                 ______


By Mr. ROCKEFELLER (for himself, Mr. DeConcini, Mr. Daschle, Mr. Akaka, 
    Mr. Murkowski, Mr. Thurmond, Mr. Simpson, Mr. Specter, and Mr. 
                               Jeffords):

  S. 2387. A bill to amend the Service Members Occupational Conversion 
and Training Act of 1992 to permit a period of training under the Act 
of more than 18 months, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Veterans Affairs.


        service members occupational conversion and training act

 Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, as chairman of the Committee 
on Veterans' Affairs, I have today introduced S. 2387, a bill to amend 
the Service Members Occupational Conversion and Training Act [SMOCTA], 
Public Law 102-484.
  SMOCTA authorizes payment of a subsidy to employers who train 
recently separated service members whose military skills do not 
transfer to the civilian job market. The subsidy is 50 percent of the 
training wage payable over a period of 18 months up to a maximum of 
$10,000, or $12,000 in the case of a disabled veteran.
  Under current law, the 18-month limitation on payment of the subsidy 
is phrased in terms of an 18-month limit on the period of training. 
This limitation has prevented veterans from entering into some training 
programs for stable, well-paying jobs.
  The proposed amendment would, among other things, allow an employer 
and veteran to agree to a training program that lasts longer than 18 
months if they are willing to do so without the benefit of a subsidy 
for the extended training period. Removing the 18-month cap on training 
will not increase the amount of the subsidy payable under a training 
program.
  Another provision in the bill would clarify that the existing 
provision that requires employers to pay a wage normally paid to other 
employees in the same or comparable training programs, refers to other 
employees and programs in the community where the veteran is being 
trained. It also clarifies that this provision will be applicable 
throughout the entire training period, not just during the period that 
a training subsidy is paid.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2387

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

     SECTION 1. IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVICE MEMBERS OCCUPATIONAL 
                   CONVERSION AND TRAINING ACT OF 1992.

       (A) Period of Training.--
       (1) Elimination of 18 month cap on period.--Section 4485(d) 
     of the Service Members Occupational Conversion and Training 
     Act of 1992 (10 U.S.C. 1143 note) is amended by striking out 
     ``or more than 18 months''.
       (2) Standard for wages and benefits.--
       (A) In general.--Section 4486(d)(2) of such Act (10 U.S.C. 
     1143 note) is amended by striking out the period at the end 
     thereof and inserting in lieu thereof the following: ``in the 
     community during the entire program period of the eligible 
     person.''.
       (B) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subparagraph (A) 
     shall apply to programs of training under the Service Members 
     Occupational Conversion and Training Act of 1992 that are 
     begun on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (b) Payments.--Section 4487(a)(1) of such Act (10 U.S.C. 
     1143 note) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking out ``subparagraph 
     (B)'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``subparagraphs (B), (C), 
     and (D)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end thereof the following new 
     subparagraphs:
       ``(C) In determining under the third sentence of 
     subparagraph (A) the amount of the payment which an employer 
     shall receive on behalf of an eligible person, the number of 
     hours for which payment will be received may not exceed the 
     number of hours equivalent to 18 months of training.
       ``(D) Assistance may be paid under this subtitle on behalf 
     of an eligible person to that person's employer for training 
     under two or more programs of job training under this 
     subtitle if such employee has not received on that person's 
     behalf assistance in an aggregate amount in excess of the 
     applicable amount set forth in subparagraph (B).''.
       (c) Entry Into Program of Job Training.--Section 4488(a) of 
     such Act (106 Stat. 2764; 10 U.S.C. 1143 note) is amended by 
     striking out the third sentence thereof and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``The eligible person may begin such program of job 
     training with the employee on the day that notice is 
     transmitted to such official by means prescribed by such 
     official. However, assistance under this subtitle may not be 
     provided to the employer if such official, within two weeks 
     after the date on which such notice is transmitted, 
     disapproves the eligible person's entry into that program of 
     job training in accordance with this section.''.

                          ____________________