[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 134 (Thursday, August 10, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12215-S12290]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. MURKOWSKI:
  S. 1144. A bill to reform and enhance the management of the National 
Park System, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources.


               the national park service enhancement act

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the National 
Park Service Enhancement Act.
  This legislation, when enacted, will revamp the National Park 
Concession Policy Act by creating a true and equal private/public 
partnership while offering more competition, less regulation, 
consistent inter- and intra-agency policies and at the same time 
increase returns to the Federal Government.
  This legislation also addresses fee increases to our national parks, 
needed improvements to land management employee housing, and the 
establishment of strict criteria by which areas are considered for 
national park status.
  Finally, the bill sets forth a simplified and cost-saving mechanism 
by which the Federal Government determines the fee schedules for ski 
operators who use portions of lands under the jurisdiction of the 
National Forest System.
  The 1916 Organic Act creating the National Park Service gave the 
agency a dual mission--to care for the Nation's parks in such a way as 
to preserve the resources for future generations while at the same time 
providing for public use and enjoyment of the same resources. I must 
say, Mr. President, that after hearing the General Accounting Office 
report on the current state of the National Park System, the Service 
needs major assistance in meeting their legislative mandate and they 
need to improve their accountability as well. I offer the National Park 
Service Enhancement Act as a way to help the National Park Service to: 
First, reap the benefits of viable partnerships with the private 

[[Page S 12216]]
sector; second, become more user-friendly; and third, begin the long 
road back to being the flagship conservation system that was once the 
envy of the world.
  Mr. President, on March 7 of this year, the General Accounting Office 
testified at a hearing before the Subcommittee on Parks, Historic 
Preservation and Recreation that the National Park System is in failing 
health. The addition of numerous new areas to the System, increased 
visitation, and unfunded mandates have stretched the financial 
resources of the Service so far that basic visitor services are being 
cut, infrastructure maintenance is deferred, and accountability is 
sorely lacking.
  In addition, the National Park Service has other problems it cannot 
solve under existing law. Many park employees live in Government 
housing that most of us, even those with Spartan tastes, would find 
unacceptable as decent living quarters. Yet these employees are afraid 
that if their housing is brought up to standard, their rent will go 
beyond the range of their ability to pay. Private companies acting as 
partners with the National Park Service and other land management 
agencies to provide needed accommodations, facilities and services to 
park visitors are subject to ridiculous regulation and redtape under 
existing laws. With this legislation, I propose to correct this 
problem. Simply put, if we can't afford to take care of the caretakers, 
how can we hope to take care of the resources under their charge?
  The current park admission and special use fee systems need revamping 
so that fees are fair for all types of visitors, whether they bring 
their own car into the parks or arrive by commercial bus.
  Mr. President, I would like to give a brief outline of provisions of 
the National Park Service Enhancement Act, which I believe will solve 
the problems I just described.
  Title I of the bill reforms National Park Service concessions policy. 
It provides clear definitions of concessioners and commercial use 
contractors and establishes similar procedures for awarding and 
managing contracts with both types of businesses. An example of how 
ridiculous the existing system is comes from my home State of Alaska. 
At Glacier Bay National Park, commercial cruise ships that come into 
the bay between June and August operate under 100-page concession 
contracts; the rest of the year they operate under 2-page commercial 
use licenses. Two sets of paperwork for one kind of service. The 
problem is further exacerbated from region to region and from park to 
park. There is no consistency for the issuance of a simple permit. This 
legislation, when enacted, provides uniformity and user-friendly 
systems.
  In addition, this title will relieve the National Park Service of 
having to approve a concessioner's rates and charges for every single 
sales item and service where nearby competition will allow market 
forces to set a reasonable price. This alone should free National Park 
Service concessions specialists from spending weeks deciding what a hot 
dog should cost at Padre Island National Seashore, only to reach a 
determination that there is no hot dog to compare it to. My bill, when 
enacted, will correct this sort of overregulation.
  Other key provisions in title I include possessory interest, probably 
the most controversial
 aspect of concessions reform. Other legislation introduced would do 
away with possessory interest. As a former banker, I have to wonder 
what financial institution is going to loan funds to a business for 
real estate improvements which are not expected to hold their value? 
What sense does it make to amortize possessory interest so that all 
assets constructed or improved by concessioners would eventually be 
owned by the Government? The National Park Service, by its own 
admission, has billions of dollars in infrastructure maintenance 
backlog. Why would we want to add to the backlog when everyone on this 
floor knows the National Park Service cannot afford to maintain what it 
already has?

  On the issue of competition, discussion has focused on the current 
preferential right of renewal. I feel very strongly that it is in the 
best interest of both the National Park Service and the visiting public 
to maintain continuity where existing concessioners have a track record 
of good service. My bill creates incentive for high quality service by 
awarding good concessioners with a credit of extra points to apply 
toward the total points that the Secretary may award proposals 
submitted by bidders. There is no reason to have turnover for the sake 
of turnover--continuation of high quality service only makes sense, and 
it is good business.
  The combination of provisions in title I of this bill should result 
in higher franchise fees offered by bidders because they know that 
their investment in improvements will not be depreciated to zero for 
non-tax purposes, and that they will have incentive to provide superior 
services to the public. Commercial use contractors will be less subject 
to inconsistent application of Park Service policy and enjoy the 
benefits of a binding contract, just as concessioners do.
  These provisions add up to good business sense for the private 
sector, the public, and the National Park Service. Ultimately, they 
will add up to good sense for the U.S. Forest Service, the Bureau of 
Land Management, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as they are 
directed to adopt consistent regulations for substantially similar 
commercial and non-recreational uses on lands within their 
jurisdiction.
  Title II amends the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act sections 
relating to admission, recreation, and special use fees. It is only 
realistic that actual park users shoulder more responsibility for 
maintaining the national parks and visitor services provided in the 
parks than those who are not users. This bill raises fees to a 
reasonable level for the Golden Eagle Passport, the annual park pass, 
and establishes a uniform per-visit fee at parks that charge admission 
fees.
  Commercial tour use fees will be set solely according to vehicle 
capacity, without the addition of a per person charge. This flat fee 
rate relieves the ranger at the gate to Yosemite National Park from 
holding up a commercial motor coach for 15 minutes in order to see 
which riders have Golden Age, Access or Eagle Passports exempting them 
from additional entrance fees. Multipassenger commerical vehicles will 
no longer be penalized for what should be recognized as an 
environmentally sound practice--providing a national park experience to 
many people at one time while using only a single vehicle. The results 
are less pollution and less congestion in our busier parks.
  Reforming National Park Service fee programs will not make the agency 
self-supporting. That is not the intent of my legislation. However, 
current admission fees are below what anyone would reasonably expect. 
Fees should be more uniformly applied across the System and should 
contribute to offset diminished appropriations. To that end this bill 
removes many of the prohibitions on collecting admission fees at 
certain types of National Park System units. If we are to restore the 
System, everyone must contribute. Exceptions must be extremely limited 
or eliminated. What is fair is fair for everyone.
  Title III of the National Park Service Enhancement Act relates to ski 
area permits on national forest lands. It would establish a ski area 
permit fee that returns fair value to the United States. The fee 
formula outlined in the bill is simple, equitable and consistent, and 
will simplify the administrative burdens on both the ski area 
permittees and the Forest Service personnel who administer the permits.
  Title IV will make it much more difficult to add units to the 
National Park System without careful consideration. The National Park 
System should be a collection of the finest and most fitting examples 
of our national heritage, maintained accordingly. Dilution of the 
System by less than suitable sites threatens to bring the National Park 
System down to the lowest common denominator.
  The National Park Service will develop a comprehensive plan to guide 
the direction of the National Park System into the next century. The 
plan will include clarification of the Park Service role and mission in 
preserving our national heritage in concert with other such efforts by 
Federal, State, and local entities. New criteria for inclusion of areas 
in the System will be 

[[Page S 12217]]
developed. Topics and themes not represented in the System will be 
identified and a priority list for representation developed.
  I mentioned the need for housing reform earlier. Title V of the bill 
will give the Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture greater authority 
to provide housing for their employees, both within and outside of 
national park boundaries.
  For employees at Dry Tortugas National Park, who live for 8 days at a 
time on a tiny island, the bill will enable the National Park Service 
to rent housing on the Florida mainland for them to use when they come 
off the island for their days off. In the past, rangers and other 
employees were forced to rent motel rooms at tourist season rates or 
sleep in their cars just to be able to wash their clothes and buy 
groceries before going back out to their remote duty stations.
  Agencies will be able to work with the private sector to construct, 
develop, rehabilitate, manage, and lease housing for their employees. 
This proposal has the potential to remove huge financial and 
administrative burdens from those agencies. In addition, employees will 
be assured that their rent, as paid to their Government landlords, will 
not be more than a reasonable percentage of their pay.
  Title VI establishes a system for disposition of receipts collected 
by the National Park Service as admission, recreation, special use, and 
franchise fees. As allowed now, parks collecting admission and 
recreation fees may retain amounts equal to their direct costs of 
collecting such fees to cover those costs. Receipts equal to those 
currently going into the general Treasury will continue to be deposited 
there, as well as half the additional receipts. The other 50 percent of 
additional receipts will go into a newly established National Park 
Service account in the Treasury, known as the park improvement fund.
  Moneys in the park improvement fund will go back to the national 
parks to take care of operational and project needs. Seventy-five 
percent of fund receipts collected at a specific park as part of a 
particular fee program will go back to that park. The remaining 25 
percent will be distributed among other parks that may not collect that 
type of fee. To ensure accountability, parks must submit requests for 
spending their returned funds for approval by the Secretary of the 
Interior, who in turn forwards them to Congress for review.
  The final title of the bill renews the recently expired authority for 
the National Park System Advisory Board and charges it with conducting 
two important studies. Within a year of enactment of this legislation, 
the advisory board, working in consultation with the National Park 
Service, must review most units of the National Park System to 
determine whether greater or equal resource protection and visitor use 
could be achieved through alternative management of those areas. 
Additionally, as part of this study, the advisory board will use the 
organic legislation of the National Park Service and of its units to 
develop criteria to guide the Congress and the Secretary of Interior in 
establishing and supporting new additions to the National Park System. 
The second task of the advisory board is to review existing visitor 
services at each unit of the National Park System for adequacy and to 
identify specific park needs for new or additional services.
  Mr. President, I offer this legislation as a way to help the National 
Park Service, other land management agencies, and even Congress to do 
the right thing. The National Park System is strained to the breaking 
point by poorly conceived additions. We must reexamine the definition 
of a worthy unit and ensure that any additions to the System meet the 
new definition.
  We must assist the National Park Service and other agencies in 
establishing businesslike, and mutually beneficial relationships with 
partners in the private sector, including park concessioners and others 
who provide needed commerical services on public lands. Often these 
agencies operate with a rather one-sided view of what partnership 
means. A partnership is a two-way street--this legislation takes us 
down that road.
  Mr. President, the National Park Service Enhancement Act is a course 
correction which will help the National Park Service get back on track 
in preserving and protecting our national heritage and allowing and 
encouraging opportunities for people to enjoy that heritage.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and 
a section-by-section analysis appear in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:
                                S. 1144

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``National Park Service 
     Enhancement Act''.

                       TITLE I--CONCESSION REFORM

     SEC. 101. FINDINGS

       In addition to the findings and policy stated in Public Law 
     89-249 (79 Stat. 969; 16 U.S.C. 20-20G), entitled ``An Act 
     relating to the establishment of concession policies in the 
     areas administered by the National Park Service and for other 
     purposes'' (hereinafter referred to as the ``1965 Act''), the 
     Congress finds that--
       (1) provisions of accommodations, facilities, and services 
     to the public in units of the National Park Service by 
     concessioners and commercial use contractors, as defined in 
     section 102(a), will be enhanced by revising the existing 
     policies and procedures for soliciting proposals for 
     concession and commercial use contracts, selecting bidders, 
     and evaluating concession and commercial use operations;
       (2) such revisions will result in quality accommodations, 
     services and facilities for public use and enjoyment at 
     reasonable rates if there are proper incentives for capital 
     investment in the construction, rehabilitation and 
     maintenance of those facilities and equipment in the national 
     parks which are for the primary use of concessioners 
     operating therein and that such investment should be provided 
     by private funds to the maximum extent practicable; and
       (3) encouragement of such private capital investment 
     requires that a concessioner be accorded a compensable 
     possessory interest in such facilities and equipment.

     SEC. 102. AMENDMENTS TO THE 1965 ACT

       (a) Definitions.--Section 2 of the 1965 Act (P.L. 89-249 
     (79 Stat. 969); 16 U.S.C. 20a) is renumbered as section 2, 
     with the following new section inserted before it:
       ``Sec. 2. As used in this Act,
       ``(a) `bidder' means a person, corporation or other entity 
     who has submitted, or may submit, a proposal, whether or not 
     such bidder is also the concessioner or commercial use 
     contractor, respecting the accommodations, facilities or 
     services which are the subject of such proposal;
       ``(b) `commercial use contractor' means a person, 
     corporation, or other entity acting under a contract for 
     recurring commercial activities which are generally initiated 
     and terminated outside the park, and are not conducted from 
     permanent facilities within the park: Provided, That 
     permanent facilities do not include cabins, tent platforms or 
     other similar structures possessed by commercial use 
     contractors used in connection with guided or outfitted 
     activities;
       ``(c) `contract' means a formal, written agreement between 
     the Secretary and the concessioner or commercial use 
     contractor to provide accommodations, facilities, or services 
     at a park;
       ``(d) `concessioner' means a person, corporation, or other 
     entity operating from permanent facilities within a park and 
     acting under a contract with the Secretary;
       ``(e) `franchise fee' means the fee required by a contract 
     to be paid to the United States, which may be expressed as, 
     but not required to be, a percentage of gross receipts 
     derived therefrom, and which shall be in addition to fees 
     required to be paid to the United States for the use of 
     federally-owned buildings or facilities;
       ``(f) `park' means a unit of the National Park System;
       ``(g) `proposal' means the complete proposal for a contract 
     offered by a bidder in response to the solicitation for such 
     contract issued by the Secretary;
       ``(h) `prospectus' means a document or documents issued by 
     the Secretary and included with a solicitation setting forth 
     the minimum requirements for the award of a contract;
       ``(i) `renewal incentive' means a credit of points toward 
     the score awarded by the Secretary to a concessioner or 
     commercial use contractor performing above the satisfactory 
     performance level on such concessioner's commercial use 
     contractor's proposal submitted in response to a solicitation 
     for the renewal of such contract;
       ``(j) `Secretary' means the Secretary of the Interior, 
     unless otherwise noted;
       ``(k) `selected bidder' means the bidder selected by the 
     Secretary for the award of a concession or commercial use 
     contract until such bidder becomes the concessioner or 
     commercial use contractor under such contract;
       ``(l) `solicitation' means a request by the Secretary for 
     proposals in response to a prospectus; and
       ``(m) `sound value' means the value of any structure, 
     fixture or improvement, determined upon the basis of 
     reconstruction cost 

[[Page S 12218]]
     less depreciation evidenced by its condition and prospective 
     serviceability in comparison with a new unit of like kind, 
     but not to exceed fair market value.''.
       (b) Section 3 of the 1965 Act (P.L. 89-249) (79 Stat. 969); 
     16 U.S.C. 20a) is further amended by striking ``and 
     corporations (hereinafter referred to as `concessioners')'' 
     and replacing it with ``, corporations and other entities.''
       (c) Existing section 3(a) is amended by renumbering it as 
     section 4(a) and by striking ``may'' from the first and 
     second sentences and replacing it with ``shall''.
       (d) Section 3(b) is renumbered as section 4(b).
       (e) Rates and Charges to the Public.--Section 3(c) of the 
     1965 Act (P.L. 89-249 (79 Stat. 969); 16 U.S.C. 20b(c)) is 
     renumbered as section 4(c) and amended to read as follows:
       ``(c) In general, rates and charges to the public shall be 
     set by the concessioner or commercial use contractor. A 
     concessioner's or commercial use contractor's rates and 
     charges to the public shall be subject to the approval of the 
     Secretary only in those instances where the Secretary 
     determines that sufficient competition for such facilities 
     and services does not exist within or in close proximity to 
     the park in which the concessioner or commercial use 
     contractor operates. In those instances, the contract shall 
     state that the reasonableness of the concessioner's or 
     commercial use contractor's rates and charges to the public 
     shall be reviewed and approved by the Secretary primarily by 
     comparison with those rates and charges for facilities and 
     services of comparable character under similar conditions, 
     with due consideration for length of season, seasonal 
     variations, average percentage of occupancy, accessibility, 
     availability and costs of labor and materials, type of 
     patronage, and other factors deemed significant by the 
     Secretary.''.
       (f) Method of Determining Franchise Fees.--Section 3(d) of 
     the 1965 Act (P.L. 89-249 (79 Stat. 969); 16 U.S.C. 20b(d)) 
     is renumbered as section 4(d) and amended to read as follows:
       ``(d) Franchise fees, however stated, shall be fixed at the 
     time of commencement of the contract as stated in the 
     selected proposal. The Secretary shall determine the 
     suggested minimum franchise fee in any prospectus in a manner 
     that will provide the concessioner or commercial use 
     contractor with a reasonable opportunity to realize a profit 
     under the contract taken as a whole, commensurate with the 
     capital invested and the obligations assumed. The Secretary 
     may temporarily or permanently reduce franchise fees under a 
     contract if the Secretary determines that such reduction is 
     equitable under the circumstances.''
       (g) New or Additional Services.--Section 4 of the 1965 Act 
     (P.L. 89-249 (79 Stat. 969); 16 U.S.C. 20c) is renumbered as 
     section 5 and amended by striking ``, other than the 
     concessioner holding a preferential rights,'' from the last 
     sentence.
       (h) Repeal of Existing Renewal Preference.--Section 5 of 
     the 1965 Act (P.L. 89-249 (79 Stat. 969); 16 U.S.C. 20d) is 
     repealed: Provided, That the renewal of contracts entered 
     into before enactment of this title (including the renewal of 
     expired contracts where the concessioner or commercial use 
     contractor has continued to operate under a temporary 
     extension) shall be subject to such section 5 for the first 
     renewal which becomes effective after the date of enactment 
     of this title.
       (i) Protection of Concessioner's Possessory Interest.--
     Section 6 of the 1965 Act (P.L. 89-249 (79 Stat. 969); 16 
     U.S.C. 20e) is amended by:
       (1) replacing the fifth sentence with ``Just compensation 
     shall be an amount equal to the sound value of such 
     structure, fixture, or improvement at the time of taking by 
     the United States or expiration of the contract.''; and
       (2) striking the last sentence and designating the existing 
     text as subjection (a) and by adding the following subsection 
     (b):
       ``(b) Not less than twelve months before the expiration of 
     any contract which recognizes a possessory interest, if the 
     amount of compensation shall not
      have previously been agreed between the Secretary and the 
     concessioner, the concessioner shall submit to the 
     Secretary an independent appraisal of the sound value of 
     the structures, fixtures or improvements in which the 
     concessioner has an investment interest. Such appraisal 
     must be performed by an appraiser with significant 
     experience in the appraisal of assets similar to those 
     valued thereunder, and be conducted and dated as of a date 
     not earlier than eighteen months before the expiration of 
     the concession contract or as of the date of taking, if 
     earlier. In determining the fair market value of any such 
     structure, fixture or improvement which is primarily used 
     for the production of income, such appraiser shall employ 
     the income approach to valuation in a manner consistent 
     with the procedures and assumptions then generally 
     employed for similar income-producing assets by appraisers 
     who are members of the American Institute of Real Estate 
     Appraisers or the Society of Real Estate Appraisers: 
     Provided, That such appraisal shall assume a future 
     franchise fee equal to the average annual franchise fee 
     payable by the concessioner during the term of such 
     concessioner's existing contract. With respect to any 
     structure, fixture or improvement which is not primarily 
     used for the production of income, the fair market value 
     shall be equal to the reconstruction cost of such 
     structure, fixture, or improvement, less depreciation 
     evidenced by its condition and prospective serviceability 
     in comparison with a new unit of like kind. Any 
     structures, fixtures, or improvements acquired or 
     constructed after the date of such appraisal in which the 
     concessioner holds an investment interest shall be deemed 
     to have sound values as of the date of such acquisition or 
     construction equal to the concessioner's original cost. 
     The amount to be paid to the concessioner for the 
     concessioner's investment interest on the date of taking 
     by the United States or at the expiration of the contract 
     shall equal the appraised sound value or the 
     concessioner's original cost for newly-constructed or 
     acquired structures, fixtures or improvements, as 
     applicable, increased by the percentage increase in the 
     Consumer Price Index--All Urban Consumers reported by the 
     United States Department of Labor from the month including 
     the date of such appraisal (or the date of construction or 
     acquisition of structures, fixtures or improvements 
     acquired or constructed after the date of such appraisal) 
     to and including the month prior to the date of taking by 
     the United States or expiration of the contract. If the 
     Secretary disagrees with the appraisal submitted by the 
     concessioner, he may present the concessioner with an 
     independent appraisal performed by an appraiser with 
     significant experience in the appraisal of assets similar 
     to those valued thereunder, dated as of the same date as 
     the concessioner's appraisal and prepared in a manner 
     consistent with the manner of preparation of the 
     concessioner's appraisal, as specified above, not less 
     than three months after receipt of the concessioner's 
     appraisal. If the concessioner and the Secretary are 
     unable to agree on the sound value of the concessioner's 
     possessory interest, the Secretary and the concessioner 
     may agree to direct the Secretary's appraiser and the 
     concessioner's appraiser to choose a third appraiser, who 
     shall recommend either the concessioner's appraisal or the 
     Secretary's appraisal as the more accurate appraisal of 
     such sound value to the Secretary. The concessioner shall 
     pay the cost of the concessioner's appraiser and the 
     United States shall pay the cost of the Secretary's 
     appraiser, if any. If a third appraiser is selected as 
     provided above, the cost of such appraiser shall be shared 
     equally by the concessioner and the United States.''.
       (j) Technical Amendments.--The 1965 Act (P.L. 89-249 (79 
     Stat. 969); 16 U.S.C. 20) is amended by renumbering existing 
     sections 7 through 9 as sections 11 through 13 accordingly.
       (k) Competitive Selection Process, Contracts, and 
     Performance Evaluation.--The 1965 Act (P.L. 89-249 (79 Stat. 
     969); 16 U.S.C. 20) is amended by adding a new section 7, 8, 
     9, and 10 as follows:
       ``Sec. 7. (a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and 
     (c), and consistent with the provisions of subsection (h), 
     any contract entered in to pursuant to the National Park 
     Service Enhancement Act shall be awarded to the person, 
     corporation or other entity submitting the best proposal as 
     determined by the Secretary, through a competitive selection 
     process. Within 180 days after the date of enactment of the 
     National Park Service Enhancement Act, the Secretary shall 
     promulgate appropriate regulations establishing such process. 
     The regulations shall include provisions for establishing a 
     method or procedure for the resolution of disputes between 
     the Secretary and a concessioner or commercial use contractor 
     in those instances where the Secretary has been unable to 
     meet conditions or requirements or provide such services, if 
     any, as set forth in a prospectus as described below.
       ``Sec. 7. (b) The provisions in this Act shall be subject 
     to any limitation or special provision contained in the 
     Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 
     3101 et seq.). Subject to the provisions of section 1307 of 
     the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (16 
     U.S.C. 3197), a priority shall be given to commercial use 
     contractors operating cruise ships (defined as motor vessels 
     at or over 6,000 gross tonnage [International Convention 
     System], providing overnight accommodations for all 
     passengers, and operating with itineraries of 3 or more days) 
     who provide tours in Glacier Bay national park which 
     originate in Southeast Alaska.
       ``(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a), the 
     Secretary may award on a noncompetitive basis: (1) a 
     temporary contract for a term of not more than two years if 
     the Secretary determines such an award to be necessary in 
     order to avoid interruption of services to the public at a 
     park or (2) a contract which the Secretary estimates will 
     result in annual gross receipts of no more than $2,000,000, 
     if the Secretary determines that continuity and quality of 
     service, administrative savings, or the lack of potential 
     bidders do not require the solicitation of proposals. Prior 
     to making a determination to award a temporary contract, the 
     Secretary shall take all reasonable and appropriate steps to 
     consider alternative actions to avoid interruption of 
     services.
       ``(d) Prior to making a solicitation for a contract, other 
     than a contract subject to the provisions of subsection (c) 
     of this section, the Secretary shall prepare a prospectus for 
     such solicitation, shall publish a notice of its availability 
     at least once in such local or national newspapers or trade 
     publications as the Secretary determines appropriate, and 
     shall make such prospectus available upon request to all 
     interested parties. The prospectus shall include, but need 
     not be limited to, the following information: the 

[[Page S 12219]]
     suggested minimum requirements for such contract, including the minimum 
     suggested fee, which shall provide the selected bidder with a 
     reasonable opportunity to realize a profit on the selected 
     bidder's operation under the contract; the terms and 
     conditions of the existing contract awarded for such park, if 
     any, including all fees and other forms of compensation 
     provided to the United States by the concessioner or 
     commercial use contractor; other authorized facilities or 
     services which may be included in the proposal; facilities 
     and services to be provided by the Secretary to the 
     concessioner or commercial use contractor, if any, including 
     but not limited to, public access, utilities, and buildings; 
     minimum public services to be offered within a park by the 
     Secretary, including but not limited to, interpretive 
     programs, campsites, and visitor centers; and such other 
     information related to the concession operation or commercial 
     use activity available to the Secretary which is not 
     privileged or otherwise exempt from disclosure under Federal 
     law, as the Secretary determines is necessary to allow for 
     the submission of competitive proposals.
       ``(e) The Secretary may reject any proposal, 
     notwithstanding the amount of fees offered, even if such 
     proposal meets the minimum requirements established by the 
     Secretary, if he determines that the person, corporation, or 
     entity making such proposal is not qualified, or is likely to 
     provide unsatisfactory services, or that the proposal is not 
     sufficiently responsive to the objectives of protecting and 
     preserving park resources and of providing necessary and 
     appropriate facilities or services to the public at 
     reasonable rates. The Secretary may consider a proposal made 
     by a bidder which fails to meet the suggested minimum 
     requirements included in the prospectus, but shall not award 
     a contract to such a bidder if one or more other proposals 
     have met such minimum requirements unless all such other 
     proposals are rejected. If all proposals submitted are 
     rejected by the Secretary, he shall establish new suggested 
     minimum contract requirements and re-initiate the competitive 
     selection process.
       ``(f) In selecting the best proposal, the Secretary shall 
     consider the following primary factors: the responsiveness of 
     the proposal to the objectives of protecting and preserving 
     park resources, of providing high quality service to the 
     public, and of providing necessary and appropriate 
     accommodations, facilities and services to the public at 
     reasonable rates; the experience and related background of 
     the bidder, including, but not limited to, such bidder's 
     performance and expertise in providing the same or similar 
     accommodations, facilities or services, in each case taking 
     into account the experience and related background of any 
     entities which are affiliated with the bidder; and the 
     financial capability of the bidder submitting the proposal. 
     The Secretary may also consider such secondary factors as the 
     Secretary deems appropriate, including the proposed franchise 
     fee: Provided, That consideration of revenue to the United 
     States shall be subordinate to the primary factors as set 
     forth above.
       ``(g) The Secretary shall submit any proposal contract with 
     anticipated annual gross receipts in excess of $5,000,000 or 
     a duration in excess of 10 years to the Committee on Energy 
     and Natural Resources of the United States Senate and the 
     Committee on Resources of the United States House of 
     Representatives. The Secretary
      shall not ratify any such proposed contract until at least 
     60 days subsequent to the submission thereof to both 
     Committees.
       ``(h) To provide proper incentives for concessioners and 
     commercial use contractors to operate in a manner which 
     exceeds the minimum performance requirements of the contract, 
     each concessioner or commercial use contractor who meets the 
     requirements set forth below shall receive an automatic 
     credit of an additional 10% of the maximum points which are 
     available to be awarded by the Secretary to any proposal 
     which is submitted in response to a solicitation for the 
     renewal of such contract or license. In order to receive this 
     renewal incentive, the concessioner or commercial use 
     contractor must have received a performance rating of 
     ``good'' pursuant to section 9(a) for at least fifty percent 
     of the years of the contract term and must not have received 
     an unsatisfactory rating under such contract during any of 
     the five years prior to the renewal thereof. Concessioners 
     and commercial use contractors operating under temporary 
     contract, license or permit extensions granted by the 
     Secretary after expiration of their original contract, 
     license or permit term at the time of enactment of this 
     section shall retain any renewal incentive described above 
     earned under the original contract.
       ``(i) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (h), the 
     Secretary shall grant a preferential right of renewal to a 
     commercial use contractor for a contract which primarily 
     authorizes a such contractor to provide outfitting, guide, 
     river running, or other similar services within a park, and 
     which the Secretary estimates will have annual gross revenues 
     of no more than $1,000,000: Provided; That the commercial use 
     contractor has received a performance rating of ``good'' 
     pursuant to section 9(a) for at least fifty percent of the 
     years of the contract term and must not have received an 
     unsatisfactory rating under such contract during the any of 
     the five years prior to the renewal thereof. Commercial use 
     contractors operating under temporary contract, license or 
     permit extensions granted by the Secretary after expiration 
     of their original contract, license or permit term at the 
     time of enactment of this section shall retain any 
     preferential right of renewal described above earned under 
     the original contract.
       ``Sec. 8. (a) A contract entered into subsequent to 
     enactment of the National Park Service Enhancement Act shall 
     be awarded for a term not to exceed 10 years except that the 
     Secretary may award a contract for a longer term, not to 
     exceed 30 years, if the Secretary determines that it is in 
     the public interest. Where a concessioner or commercial use 
     contractor is required to make substantial investments in 
     structures, fixtures, or improvements in the park, the 
     Secretary shall provide for a contract term that is 
     commensurate with such investments.
       ``(b) No contract may be transferred, assigned, sold, or 
     otherwise conveyed by a concessioner or commercial use 
     contractor without prior written notification to, and 
     approval of, the Secretary, who shall not unreasonably 
     withhold or delay such approval but shall not approve the 
     transfer, assignment, sale, or conveyance of a contract to 
     any individual, corporation or other entity if the Secretary 
     determines that: (1) such individual, corporation or entity 
     is, or is likely to be, unable to completely satisfy all of 
     the requirements, terms, and conditions of the contract or 
     (2) such transfer, assignment, sale, or conveyance is not 
     consistent with the objectives of protecting and preserving 
     park resources, providing high quality service to the public, 
     and of providing necessary and appropriate facilities or 
     services to the public at reasonable rates. If the Secretary 
     decides to approve a transfer, assignment, sale, or other 
     conveyance of a contract with gross receipts for the most 
     recently completed calendar year in excess of $5,000,000, or 
     with a remaining term in excess of 10 years, he shall notify 
     the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the United 
     States Senate and Committee of Resources of the House of 
     Representatives of the request, including, but not limited 
     to, the names of the parties involved in the request. The 
     approval by the Secretary shall not take effect until 60 days 
     subsequent to the notification of both Committees.
       ``(c) A successor concessioner or commercial use contractor 
     to whom a contract has been transferred, assignee, sold or 
     conveyed shall be entitled to the benefit of any ``good'' 
     ratings received by the prior concessioner or commercial use 
     contractor during the term of the contract.
       ``Sec. 9. (a) Within 180 days after the date of enactment 
     of the National Park Service Enhancement Act, the Secretary 
     shall publish regulations establishing reasonable general 
     standards and criteria for evaluating the performance of a 
     concessioner or commercial use contractor on its overall 
     operation under a contract which shall provide for rating of 
     ``unsatisfactory'', ```satisfactory'', and ``good''. The 
     evaluation regulations shall address both operational 
     performance and contract compliance and shall identify both 
     positive and negative aspects of the operation. The standards 
     and criteria for a good rating shall require a level of 
     performance which clearly exceeds the minimum requirements 
     under the contract but which is reasonably attainable by a 
     competent concessioner of commercial use contractor based 
     upon the nature of such concessioner's
      or commercial use contractor's operation. Prior to entering 
     into a contract, the Secretary and selected bidder will 
     jointly develop rating criteria and standards for each 
     rating under the contract, consistent with such 
     regulations, against which the concessioner or commercial 
     use contractor will be evaluated annually.
       ``(b) The Secretary shall annually conduct an evaluation of 
     each concessioner and commercial use contractor or commercial 
     use contractor and shall assign an overall rating for each 
     concessioner or commercial use contractor for each year. The 
     procedure for any performance evaluation shall be provided in 
     advance to each concessioner and commercial use contractor, 
     and each shall be entitled to a complete explanation of any 
     rating given. If the Secretary's performance evaluation for 
     any year results in an unsatisfactory rating of the 
     concessioner or commercial use contractor, the Secretary 
     shall so notify the concessioner or commercial use contractor 
     in writing, and shall provide the concessioner or commercial 
     use contractor with a list of the minimum requirements 
     necessary to receive a rating of satisfactory. The Secretary 
     may terminate a contract if the concessioner or commercial 
     use contractor fails to correct and meet the minimum 
     requirements identified by the Secretary within the 
     limitations established by the Secretary at the time notice 
     of the unsatisfactory rating is provided to the concessioner 
     or commercial use contractor. If the Secretary terminates a 
     contract pursuant to this section, the outgoing concessioner 
     may be required to pay for costs incurred by the Secretary 
     associated with prospectus development and bidder proposal 
     evaluation, as well as the difference between the new 
     contract's franchise fee and that paid by the outgoing 
     concessioner, if the new franchise fee is lower.
       ``(c) The Secretary shall notify the Committee on Energy 
     and Natural Resources of the United States Senate and the 
     Committee on Resources of the United States House of 
     Representatives of each unsatisfactory rating and of each 
     contract terminated pursuant to this section.
       ``Sec. 10. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, each 
     contract awarded by the 
     DepartmentoftheInteriorforconcessioneror 

[[Page S 12220]]
     commercial use contractor-provided visitor services performed in whole 
     or in part of a State which is not contiguous with another 
     State and has an unemployment rate in excess of the national 
     average rate of unemployment as determined by the Secretary 
     of Labor shall include a provision requiring the concessioner 
     or commercial use contractor to employ, for the purpose of 
     performing that portion of the contract in such State this is 
     not contiguous with another State, individuals who are 
     residents of such State and who, in the case of any craft or 
     trade, possess or would be able to acquire promptly the 
     necessary skills.''

     SEC. 103. ISSUANCE OF CONTRACTS AND NONRECURRING COMMERCIAL/
                   NONRECREATIONAL USE PERMITS BY OTHER LAND 
                   MANAGEMENT AGENCIES.

       Within two years of the date of enactment of this title, 
     and to the extent practicable, the Secretary of the Interior 
     and Secretary of Agriculture shall adopt procedures 
     consistent with those established by this title for the 
     National Park Service for issuing contracts and nonrecurring 
     commercial/non-recreational use permits as described herein 
     for substantially similar services and activities taking 
     place on federal lands managed by the United States Forest 
     Service, Bureau of Land Management, and United States Fish 
     and Wildlife Service.

                      TITLE II--NATIONAL PARK FEES

     SEC. 201. FEES.

       (a) admission Fees.--Section 4(a) of the Land and Water 
     Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (P.L. 88-578; 16 U.S.C. 4601-
     6a(a)), is further amended as follows:
       (1) By deleting ``fee-free travel areas'' and ``lifetime 
     admission permit'' from the title of this section.
       (2) In the first sentence of paragraph (1)(a)(I), by 
     striking ``$25'' and inserting ``$50''.
       (3) By inserting at the end of clause (ii) of paragraph 
     (1)(A) the following: ``Such receipts shall be made 
     available, subject to appropriation, for authorized resource 
     protection, rehabilitation and conservation projects as 
     provided for by subsection (I), including projects to be 
     carried out by the Public Land Corps or any other 
     conservation corps pursuant to the Youth Conservation Corps 
     Act of 1970 (16 U.S.C. 1701 and following), or other related 
     programs or authorities, on lands administered by the 
     Secretary of the interior and the Secretary of 
     Agriculture.''.
       (4) In paragraph (a)(1)(B), by striking ``$15'' and 
     inserting ``$25''.
       (5) In paragraph (a)(2), by striking the fifth and sixth 
     sentences, and by amending the fourth sentence to read as 
     follows: ``The fee for a single-visit permit at any 
     designated area shall be not more than $6 per person.''.
       (6) In paragraph (a)(3), by inserting the word ``Great'' in 
     the third sentence before ``Smoky'', and by striking the last 
     sentence.
       (7) In paragraph (a)(4), by striking the second sentence in 
     its entirety and inserting in lieu thereof, ``Such permit 
     shall be nontransferable, shall be issued for a one-time 
     charge of $10, and shall entitle the permittee to free 
     admission into any area designated pursuant to this 
     subsection.''.
       (8) In paragraph (a)(4), by amending the third sentence to 
     read as follows: ``No fees of any kind shall be collected 
     from any persons who have a right of access for hunting or 
     fishing privileges under a specific provision of law or 
     treaty or who are engaged in the conduct of official Federal, 
     State, or local government business.''.
       (9) In paragraph (a)(5), by striking it in its entirety and 
     insert in lieu thereof: ``The Secretary of the Interior and 
     the Secretary of Agriculture shall establish procedures 
     providing for the issuance of a lifetime admission permit to 
     any citizen of, or person legally domiciled in, the United 
     States, if such citizen or person applies for such permit and 
     is permanently disabled. Such procedures shall assure that 
     such permit shall be issued only to persons who have been 
     medically determined to be permanently disabled. Such permit 
     shall be nontransferable, shall be issued without charge, and 
     shall entitle the permittee and one accompanying individual 
     to general admission into any area designated pursuant to 
     this subsection, notwithstanding the method of travel.''.
       (10) In paragraph (a)(6)(A), by striking the paragraph in 
     its entirety and inserting in lieu thereof: ``No later than 
     18 months after the enactment date of this sentence, the 
     Secretary of the Interior shall submit to the Committee on 
     Energy and Natural Resources of the United States Senate and 
     the Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives a 
     report on the admission fees proposed to be charged at units 
     of the National Park System. The report shall include a list 
     of units of the National Park System and the admission fee 
     proposed to be charged at each unit. The Secretary of the 
     Interior shall also identify areas where such fees are 
     authorized but not collected, including an explanation of the 
     reasons that such fees are not collected.''.
       (11) By striking paragraph (a)(9) in its entirety and by 
     renumbering current paragraph (10) as ``(9)''.
       (12) In paragraph (a)(11), by striking all but the last 
     sentence and renumbering it as ``(a)(10)''.
       (13) By renumbering paragraph (a)(12) as ``(a)(11)''.
       (b) Recreation Fees.--Section 4(b) of the Land and Water 
     Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (P.L. 88-578; 16 U.S.C. 460l-
     6a(b)), as amended, is further amended as follows:
       (1) By striking ``fees for Golden Age Passport permittees'' 
     from the title;
       (2) By striking ``personal collection of the fee by an 
     employee or agent of the Federal agency operating the 
     facility,'';
       (3) By striking ``Any Golden Age Passport permittee, or'' 
     and insert in lieu thereof ``Any''.
       (c) Criteria, Posting and Uniformity of Fees.--Section 4(d) 
     of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (P.L. 88-
     578; 16 U.S.C. 460l-6a(d)) is amended by deleting from the 
     first sentence, ``recreation fees charged by non-Federal 
     public agencies,'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``fees 
     charged by other public and private entities,''.
       (d) Penalty.--Section 4(e) of the Land and Water 
     Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (P.L. 88-578; 16 U.S.C. 460l-
     6a(e)) is amended by deleting ``of not more than $100.'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof, ``as provided by law.''.
       (e) Technical Amendments.--Section 4(h) of the Land and 
     Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (P.L. 88-578; 16 U.S.C. 
     460l-6a(h)), as amended, is further amended--
       (1) by striking ``Bureau of Outdoor Recreation'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof, ``National Park Service''
       (2) by striking ``Natural'' in ``Committee on Natural 
     Resources of the House of Representatives''; and
       (3) by striking ``Bureau'' and inserting in lieu thereof, 
     ``National Park Service''.
       (f) Time of Reimbursement.--Section 4(k) of the Land and 
     Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (P.L. 88-578; 16 U.S.C. 
     460l-6a(k)) is amended by striking the last sentence in its 
     entirety.
       (g) Charges for Transportation Provided by the National 
     Park Service.--Section 4(l)(1) of the Land and Water 
     Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 460l-6a(1)) is 
     amended by striking the word ``viewing'' from the section 
     title and inserting in lieu thereof ``visiting'', and by 
     striking the word ``view'' from the first sentence of 
     subparagraph (1) and inserting ``visit'' in lieu thereof.
       (h) Commercial Tour Use Fees.--Section 4(n) of the Land and 
     Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (P.L. 88-578; 16 U.S.C. 
     460l-6a(n)), as amended, is further amended--
       (1) by striking the first sentence of subsection (n)(1) and 
     inserting ``In the case of each unit of the National Park 
     System for which an admission fee is charged under this 
     section, the Secretary of the Interior shall establish, by 
     October 1, 1995, a commercial tour use fee in lieu of a per 
     person admission fee to be imposed on each vehicle entering 
     the unit for the purpose of providing commercial tour 
     services within the unit.''.
       (2) by striking the period at the end of subsection (n)(3) 
     and inserting ``with written notification of such adjustments 
     provided to commercial tour operators twelve months in 
     advance of implementation.''.
       (i) Fees for Special Uses.--Section 4 of the Land and Water 
     Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (P.L. 88-578; 16 U.S.C. 460l-
     6a)), as amended, is further amended by adding the following 
     at the end thereof:
       ``(o) Fees for Commercial/Non-Recreational Uses.--Using the 
     criteria established in section 4(d) (16 U.S.C. 460l-6a(d)), 
     the Secretary of the Interior shall establish reasonable fees 
     for non-recurring commercial or non-recreational uses of 
     National Park System units that require special arrangements, 
     including permits. At a minimum, such fees will cover all 
     costs of providing necessary services associated with such 
     use, except that at the Secretary's discretion, the Secretary 
     may waive or reduce such fees in the case of any organization 
     using an area within the National Park System for activities 
     which further the goals of the National Park Service. 
     Receipts equal to the cost of providing the necessary 
     services associated with such use may be retained at the park 
     unit in which the use takes place, and remain available to 
     cover such costs.''.
       (j) Conforming Amendments.--The following Public Laws shall 
     be amended as described below--
       (1) Section 3 of Public Law 70-805 (45 Stat. 1300), as 
     amended, is further amended by striking the last sentence;
       (2) Section 5(e) of Public Law 87-657 (76 Stat. 540; 16 
     U.S.C. 459c-5), as amended, is hereby repealed;
       (3) Section 3(b) of Public Law 87-750 (76 Stat. 747; 16 
     U.S.C. 398e(b)) is hereby repealed;
       (4) Section 4(e) of Public Law 92-589 (86 Stat. 1299; 16 
     U.S.C. 460bb-3), as amended, is further amended by striking 
     the first sentence;
       (5) Section 6(j) of Public Law 95-348 (92 Stat. 487) is 
     hereby repealed;
       (6) Section 207 of Public Law 96-199 (94 Stat. 77) is 
     hereby repealed;
       (7) Section 106 of Public Law 96-287 (94 Stat. 600) is 
     amended by striking the last sentence;
       (8) Section 5 of Public Law 96-428 (94 Stat. 1843) is 
     hereby repealed;
       (9) Section 204 of Public Law 96-287 (94 Stat. 601) is 
     amended by striking the last sentence; and
       (10) Public Law 100-55 (101 Stat. 371) is hereby repealed.

     SEC. 202. CHALLENGE COST-SHARE AGREEMENTS.

       The Secretary of the Interior is authorized to negotiate 
     and enter into challenge cost-share agreements with any Stat 
     or local government, public or private agency, organization, 
     institution, corporation, individual, or other entity for the 
     purpose of sharing costs or services in carrying out any 
     authorized 

[[Page S 12221]]
     functions and responsibilities of the Secretary with respect to any 
     unit of the National Park System (as defined in section 2(a) 
     of the Act of August 8, 1953 (16 U.S.C. 1c(a)), any 
     affiliated area, or designated National Scenic or Historic 
     Trail.

     SEC. 203. COST RECOVERY FOR DAMAGE TO NATIONAL PARK 
                   RESOURCES.

       Public Law 101-337 is amended as follows:
       (1) In section 1 (16 U.S.C. 19jj), by amending subsection 
     (d) to read as follows:
       ``(d) `Park system resource' means any living or nonliving 
     resource that is located within the boundaries of a unit of 
     the National Park System, except for resources owned by a 
     non-Federal entity.''.
       (2) In section 1 (16 U.S.C. 19jj), by adding at the end 
     thereof the following:
       ``(g) `Marine or aquatic park system resource' means any 
     living or non-living resource that is located within or is a 
     living part of a marine or aquatic regimen within the 
     boundaries of a unit of the National Park System, except for 
     resources owned by a non-Federal entity.'.
       (3) In section 2(b) (16 U.S.C. 19jj-1(b)), by striking 
     ``any park'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``any marine or 
     aquatic park''.
      TITLE III--SKI AREA PERMITS ON NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM LANDS

     SEC. 301. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       (1) Although ski areas occupy less than one-twentieth of 
     one percent of National Forest System lands nationwide, in 
     many rural areas of the United States, ski areas and 
     investments by ski area permittees on National Forest System 
     lands form the backbone of the local economy and a 
     preponderance of the employment base.
       (2) Ski area operations and their attendant communities 
     provide revenues to the United States in the form of permit 
     fees, income taxes, and other revenues which are extremely 
     significant in proportion to the limited Federal acreage and 
     Forest Service administration and contractual obligations 
     required to support such operations.
       (3) In addition to alpine skiing, many ski area permittees 
     provide multiseason facilities and enhanced access to 
     National Forest System lands, that result in greater public 
     use and enjoyment of such lands than would otherwise occur;
       (4) Unlike many other private sector users of Federal 
     Lands, ski areas in almost all cases assume the risk to 
     finance, construct, maintain, and market all recreational 
     facilities and improvements on such lands.
       (5) Many ski areas on National Forest System lands operate 
     in an extremely competitive environment with similar 
     facilities located on private or State lands, which requires 
     ski area permittees to maintain a high level of capital 
     investment to upgrade existing facilities and install new 
     facilities (such as lifts, trails, snowmaking and trail 
     grooming equipment, restaurants, and day care centers) to 
     serve the public.
       (6) Despite an outward appearance of economic well-being 
     resulting from an intensive capital infrastructure, many ski 
     area operations are marginally profitable due to the 
     competition and capital investments referred to in paragraph 
     (5), weather conditions, insurance premiums, the national 
     economy, and other factors beyond the control of the ski area 
     permittee.
       (7) Because of the contributions of ski areas to the 
     economies of the United States and the rural communities in 
     which they are located, and the enhanced use and enjoyment of 
     National Forest System lands resulting from ski areas, it is 
     in the national interest for the United States, where 
     consistent with national forest management objectives, to 
     take actions to promote the long-term economic health and 
     stability of ski areas and associated communities.
       (8) The National Forest Ski Area Permit Act of 1986 (U.S.C. 
     497b) has been of assistance to ski area operations on 
     National Forest System lands by providing longer term lease 
     tenure and contractual stability to ski area permittees, but 
     further adjustments and policy direction and warranted to 
     address problems related to permit fees and fee calculations 
     and conflicts with certain mineral activities.
       (b) Purpose.--In light of the findings of subsection (a), 
     it is the purpose of this title--
       (1) To legislate a ski area permit fee that returns fair 
     market value to the United States and at the same time--
       (A) provides ski area permittees and the United States with 
     a simplified, consistent, predictable, and equitable fee 
     formula that is commensurate with long-term planning, 
     financing, and operational needs of ski areas; and
       (B) simplifies bookkeeping and other administrative burdens 
     on ski area permittees and Forest Service personnel; and
       (2) to prevent future conflicts between ski area operations 
     and mining and mineral leasing programs by withdrawing lands 
     within ski area permit boundaries from the operation of 
     mining and mineral leasing laws.

     SEC. 302. SKI AREA PERMIT FEES AND WITHDRAWAL OF SKI AREAS 
                   FROM OPERATION OF MINING LAWS.

       The National Forest Ski Area Permit Act of 1986 (16 U.S.C. 
     497b) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     sections:

     ``SEC. 4. SKI AREA PERMIT FEES.

       ``(a) Ski Area Permit Fee.--After the date of enactment of 
     this section, the fee for all ski area permits on National 
     Forest System lands shall be calculated, charged, and paid 
     only as set forth in subsection (b) in order to--
       ``(1) return fair market value to the United States and 
     provide ski area permittees and the United States with a 
     simplified, consistent, predictable, and equitable permit 
     fee;
       ``(2) simplify administrative, bookkeeping, and other 
     requirements currently imposed on the Secretary of 
     Agriculture and ski area permittees on national forest lands; 
     and
       ``(3) save costs associated with the calculation of ski 
     area permit fees.
       ``(b) Method of Calculation.--
       ``(1) Determination of adjusted gross revenue subject to 
     fee.--The Secretary of Agriculture shall calculate the ski 
     area permit fee (SAPF) to be charged a ski area permittee by 
     first determining the permittee's adjusted gross revenue 
     (AGR) to be subject to the permit fee. The permittee's 
     adjusted gross revenue (AGR) is equal to the sum of the 
     following:
       ``(A) The permittee's adjusted gross revenues from alpine 
     lift ticket and alpine season pass sales plus revenue from 
     alpine ski school operations (LTA+SSA), with such total 
     multiplied by the permittee's slope transport feet percentage 
     (STFP) on National Forest System lands.
       ``(B) The permittee's adjusted gross revenues from Nordic 
     ski use pass sales and Nordic ski school operations 
     (LTN+SSN), with such total multiplied by the permittee's 
     percentage (NR) of Nordic trails on National Forest System 
     lands.
       ``(C) The permittee's gross revenues from ancillary 
     facilities (GRAF) physically located on National Forest 
     System lands, including all permittee or subpermittee 
     lodging, food service, rental shops, parking, and other 
     ancillary operations.
       ``(2) Depiction of Formula.--Utilizing the abbreviations 
     indicated in paragraph (1), the calculation of the adjusted 
     gross revenue (AGR) of a ski area permittee is illustrated by 
     the following formula:

     ``AGR=((LTA+SSA)STFP)+((LTN+SSN)NR)+GRAF
       ``(3) Determination of ski area permit fee.--The Secretary 
     shall determine the ski area permit fee (SAPF) to be charged 
     a ski area permittee by multiplying adjusted gross revenue 
     determined under paragraph (1) for the permittee by the 
     following percentages for each revenue bracket and adding the 
     total for each revenue bracket:
       ``(A) 1.5 percent of all adjusted gross revenue below 
     $3,000,000.
       ``(B) 2.5 percent of all adjusted gross revenue between 
     $3,000,000 and $15,000,000.
       ``(C) 2.75 percent for adjusted gross revenue between 
     $15,000,000 and $50,000,000.
       ``(D) 4.0 percent for the amount of adjusted gross revenue 
     that exceeds $50,000,000.
       ``(4) Slope transport feet percentage.--In cases where ski 
     areas are only partially located on National Forest System 
     lands, the slope transport feet percentage on national forest 
     land referred to in paragraph (1) is hereby determined to 
     most accurately reflect the percent of an alpine ski area 
     permittee's total skier service capacity which is located on 
     National Forest System land. It shall be calculated as 
     generally described in the Forest Service Manual in effect as 
     of January 1, 1992.
       ``(5) Annual adjustment of adjusted gross revenue.--In 
     order to insure that the ski area permit fee set forth in 
     this subsection remains fair and equitable to both the United 
     States and ski area permittees, the Secretary shall adjust, 
     on an annual basis, the adjusted gross revenue figures for 
     each revenue bracket in subparagraphs (A) through (D) of 
     paragraph (3) by the percent increase or decrease in the 
     national Consumer Price Index for the preceding calendar 
     year.
       ``(c) Minimum Rental Fee.--In cases where an area of 
     National Forest System land is under a ski area permit but 
     the permittee does not have revenue or sales qualifying for 
     fee payment pursuant to subsection (a), the permittee shall 
     pay an annual minimum rental fee of $2 for each acre of 
     National Forest System land under permit. Rental fees imposed 
     under this subsection shall be paid at the time specified in 
     subsection (d).
       ``(d) Time for Payment.--Unless otherwise mutually agreed 
     to by the ski area permittee and the Secretary, the ski area 
     permit set forth in subsection (b) shall be paid by the 
     permittee by August 31 of each year and cover all applicable 
     revenues received during the 12-month period ending on June 
     30 of that year. To simplify bookkeeping and fee calculation 
     burdens on the permittee and the Forest Service, the 
     Secretary shall no later than March 15 of each year provide 
     each ski area permittee with a standardized form and 
     worksheets (including annual fee calculation brackets and 
     rates) to be used for fee calculation and submitted with the 
     fee payment.
       ``(e) Exclusion of Revenue Obtained Outside of National 
     Forest Lands.--Under no circumstances shall ski area 
     permittee revenue or subpermittee revenue (other than lift 
     ticket, area use pass, or ski school sales) obtained from 
     operations physically located on non-national forest land be 
     included in the ski area permit fee calculation.
       ``(f) Definitions.--To simplify bookkeeping and 
     administrative burdens on ski area permittees and the Forest 
     Service, as used in this section, the terms ``revenue'' and 
     ``sales'' shall
      mean actual income from sales. Such terms shall not include 
     sales of operating equipment, refunds, rent paid to the 
     permittee by sublessees, sponsor contributions to special 
     events or any amounts attributable to employee gratuities, 
     discounts, complimentary lift tickets, or other goods or 
     services (except for bartered goods) for which the 
     permittee does not receive money.

[[Page S 12222]]

       ``(g) Effective Date For Fees.--The ski area permit fees 
     required by this section shall become effective on July 1, 
     1995 and cover receipts retroactive to July 1, 1994. If a ski 
     area permittee has paid fees for the 12-month period ending 
     on June 30, 1995, under the graduated rate fee system formula 
     in effect prior to the date of the enactment of this section, 
     such fees shall be credited toward the new ski area permit 
     fee due for that period under this section.
       ``(h) Transitional Ski Area Permit Fees.--
       ``(1) Determination of average fees.--In order to minimize 
     in any one year the effect of converting individual ski areas 
     from the fee system in existence on the date of enactment of 
     this section to the ski area permit fee required by 
     subsection (a), each ski area permittee subject to the new 
     fee shall determine the permittee's average existing fees 
     (AEF) for each year of the three-year period ending on June 
     30, 1994, and the permittee's proforma average ski area 
     permit fee (ASF) under subsection (a) for each year of that 
     period. Both (AEF) and (ASF) shall be determined by adding 
     together the fee payment made by the ski area or the 
     estimated payment that would have been paid under subsection 
     (a) for each year of that period and dividing by three.
       ``(2) Determination of transitional fees.--To calculate the 
     ski area permit fee required by subsection (a) for each year 
     in the five-year period ending on June 30, 1999, the 
     Secretary of Agriculture shall divide the ski area permit fee 
     required by subsection (a) by the ASF and then multiply by 
     the AEF. The resulting fee shall be called the Adjusted Base 
     Fee (ABF). After June 30, 1999, all ski areas will pay the 
     ski area permit fee required by subsection (a) without regard 
     to previous fees or rates paid.
       ``(3) Effect of low abf.--Should the ABF be less than the 
     ski area permit fee required by subsection (a), the ski area 
     permittee shall pay the lesser of the fee required by 
     subsection (a) or the ABF, which shall be adjusted by 
     multiplying the ABF by--
       ``(A) 1.1 for the fee required to be paid by August 31, 
     1995;
       ``(B) 1.2 for the fee required to be paid by August 31, 
     1996;
       ``(C) 1.3 for the fee required to be paid by August 31, 
     1997;
       ``(D) 1.4 for the fee required to be paid by August 31, 
     1998; and
       ``(E) 1.5 for the fee required to be paid by August 31, 
     1999.
       ``(4) Effect of high abf.--Should the ABF be greater than 
     the ski area permit fee required by subsection (a), the ski 
     area permittee shall pay the greater of the fee required by 
     subsection (a) or the ABF, which shall be adjusted by 
     multiplying the ABF by--
       ``(A) 0.9 for the fee required to be paid by August 31, 
     1995;
       ``(B) 0.8 for the fee required to be paid by August 31, 
     1996;
       ``(C) 0.7 for the fee required to be paid by August 31, 
     1997;
       ``(D) 0.6 for the fee required to be paid by August 31, 
     1998; and
       ``(E) 0.5 for the fee required to be paid by August 31, 
     1999.

     ``SEC. 5. WITHDRAWAL OF SKI AREAS FROM OPERATION OF MINING 
                   LAWS.

       ``Subject to valid existing rights, all lands located 
     within the boundaries of ski area permits issued prior to, 
     on, or after the date of enactment of this section pursuant 
     to the authority of the Act of March 4, 1915 (16 U.S.C. 497), 
     the Act of June 4, 1897 (16 U.S.C. 473 et seq.), or section 3 
     of this Act are hereby and henceforth automatically withdrawn 
     from all forms of appropriation under the mining laws and 
     from disposition under all laws pertaining to mineral and 
     geothermal leasing and all amendments to such laws. Such 
     withdrawal shall continue for the full term of the permit and 
     any modification, reissuance, or renewal of the permit. Such 
     withdrawal shall be canceled automatically upon expiration or 
     other termination of the permit. Upon cancellation of the 
     withdrawal, the land shall be automatically restored to all 
     appropriation not otherwise restricted under the public land 
     laws.''

     SEC. 303. STUDY OF SKI AREAS FOR POTENTIAL SALE.

       The Secretary of Agriculture shall conduct a study of ski 
     areas on National Forest System lands to determine the 
     feasibility and suitability of selling all or a portion of 
     such lands to the current permittees or other interested 
     parties. The study shall determine and identify whether any 
     continuing need for Federal retention of such lands exists. 
     It shall identify the cost savings and revenues to the 
     Federal government which might accrue as a result of such 
     sales as well as other benefits which might result from the 
     disposal of such lands. In addition, the study shall identify 
     criteria which should be used in considering the sale of such 
     assets. The Secretary shall complete the study within one 
     year from the date of enactment of this title and shall 
     transmit a report to the Committee on Energy and Natural 
     Resources of the United States Senate and the Committee on 
     Resources of the United States House of Representatives.
                 TITLE IV--NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM REFORM

     SEC. 401. PREPARATION OF NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM PLAN.

       (a) Preparation of Plan.--The Secretary of the Interior 
     (hereinafter in this title referred to as the ``Secretary''), 
     acting through the Director of the National Park Service, and 
     in consultation with the National Park System Advisory Board, 
     shall prepare a National Park System Plan (hereinafter in 
     this title referred to as the ``plan'') to guide the 
     direction of the National Park System into the next century. 
     The plan shall include each of the following:
       (1) Detailed criteria to be used in determining which 
     natural and cultural resources are appropriate for inclusion 
     as units of the National Park System.
       (2) Identification of what constitutes adequate 
     representation of a particular resource type and which 
     aspects of the national heritage are adequately represented 
     in the existing National Park System or in other protected 
     areas.
       (3) Identification of appropriate aspects of the national 
     heritage not currently represented in the National Park 
     System.
       (4) Priorities of the themes and types of resources which 
     should be added to the National Park System in order to 
     provide more complete representation of our Nation's 
     heritage.
       (5) A statement of the role of the National Park Service 
     with respect to such topics as preservation of natural areas 
     and ecosystems, preservation of industrial America, 
     preservation of non-physical cultural resources, and 
     provision of outdoor recreation opportunities.
       (6) A statement of what areas constitute units of the 
     National Park System and the distinction between units of the 
     system, affiliated areas, and other areas within the system.
       (b) Consultation.--During the preparation of the plan under 
     subsection (a), the Secretary shall consult with other 
     Federal land management agencies, State and local officials, 
     the National Park System Advisory Board, resource management, 
     recreation and scholarly organizations and other interested 
     parties as the Secretary deems advisable. These consultations 
     shall also include appropriate opportunities for public 
     review and comment. The plan shall take into consideration 
     the results and recommendations in the management systems 
     report conducted by the National Park System Advisory Board 
     as provided in section 702(a) of this Act.
       (c) Transmittal to Congress.--Prior to the end of the 
     second complete fiscal year commencing after the date of 
     enactment of this title, the Secretary shall transmit the 
     plan developed under this section to the Committee on Energy 
     and Natural Resources of the United States Senate and the 
     Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives.

     SEC. 402. STUDY OF THE NEW PARK SYSTEM AREAS.

       Section 8 of the Act of August 18, 1970, entitled ``An Act 
     to improve the Administration of the National Park System by 
     the Secretary of the Interior, and to clarify the authorities 
     applicable to the system, and for other purposes'' (P.L. 91-
     383, 84 Stat. 825; 16 U.S.C. 1a-1 and following) as amended, 
     is further amended as follows:
       (1) By inserting ``GENERAL AUTHORITY.--'' after ``(a)''.
       (2) By striking the second through the sixth sentences of 
     subsection (a).
       (3) By striking ``Natural'' from ``Committee on Natural 
     Resources of the United States House of Representatives'' in 
     the eighth sentence.
       (4) By redesignating the last two sentences of subsection 
     (a) as subsection (e) and inserting in such sentence before 
     the words ``For the purpose of carrying'' the following:
       ``(e) Authorization of Appropria- 
     tions.--''.
       (5) By inserting the following after subsection (a):
       ``(b) Studies of Areas for Potential Addition.--(1) At the 
     beginning of each calendar year, the Secretary shall submit 
     to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the 
     United Senate and the Committee on Resources of the House of 
     Representatives a list of areas recommended for study for 
     potential inclusion in the National Park System.
       ``(2) In developing the list to be submitted under this 
     subsection, the Secretary shall give consideration to those 
     areas that have the greatest potential to meet the 
     established criteria of national significance, suitability, 
     and feasibility. The Secretary shall give special 
     consideration to themes, sites, and resources not already 
     adequately represented in the National Park System as 
     identified in the National Park System Plan to be developed 
     under title IV, section 401 of the National Park Service 
     Enhancement Act. No study of the potential of an area for 
     inclusion in the National Park System may be initiated after 
     the date of enactment of this section, except as provided by 
     specific authorization of an Act of Congress. Nothing in this 
     Act shall limit the authority of the National Park Service to 
     conduct preliminary resource assessments, gather data
      on potential study areas, provide technical and planning 
     assistance, prepare or process nominations for 
     administrative designations, update previous studies, or 
     complete reconnaissance surveys of individual areas 
     requiring a total expenditure of less than $25,000. 
     Nothing in this section shall be construed to apply to or 
     affect or alter the study of any river segment for 
     potential addition to the national wild and scenic rivers 
     system or to apply to or to affect or alter the study of 
     any trail for potential addition to the national trails 
     system.

[[Page S 12223]]

       ``(c) Report.--The Secretary shall complete the study for 
     each area for potential inclusion into the National Park 
     System within three complete fiscal years following the date 
     of enactment of specific legislation providing for the study 
     of such area. Each study under this section shall be prepared 
     with appropriate opportunity for public involvement, 
     including at least one public meeting in the vicinity of the 
     area under study, and reasonable efforts to notify 
     potentially affected landowners and State and local 
     governments. In conducting the study, the Secretary shall 
     consider whether the area under study--
       ``(1) possesses nationally significant natural or cultural 
     resources, or outstanding recreational opportunities, and 
     that it represents one of the most important examples of a 
     particular resource type in the country; and
       ``(2) is a suitable and feasible addition to the system; 
     and
       ``(3) what the additional fiscal and personnel costs will 
     be if the area were added to the system.
       ``Each study shall consider the following factors with 
     regard to the area being studied: the rarity and integrity; 
     whether similar resources are already protected in the 
     National Park System or in other Federal, state or private 
     ownership; the public use potential; the interpretive and 
     educational potential; costs associated with acquisition, 
     development and operation; the socioeconomic impacts of any 
     designation; the level of local and general public support; 
     and whether the unit is of appropriate configuration to 
     ensure long term resource protection and visitor use. Each 
     study shall also consider whether direct National Park 
     Service management or alternative protection by other 
     agencies or the private sector is appropriate for the area. 
     Each such study shall identify what alternative or 
     combination of alternatives would, in the professional 
     judgment of the Director of the National Park Service, be 
     most effective and efficient in protecting significant 
     resources and providing for public enjoyment. The letter 
     transmitting each completed study to Congress shall contain a 
     recommendation regarding the Administration's preferred 
     management option for the area and detail the fiscal and 
     personnel costs if the preferred option is federal 
     management.
       ``(d) List of Areas.--At the beginning of each calendar 
     year, along with the annual budget submission, the Secretary 
     shall submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 
     of the United States Senate and the Committee on Natural 
     Resources of the House of Representatives a list of areas 
     which have been previously studied which contain primarily 
     cultural or historical resources and a list of areas which 
     have been previously studied which contain primarily natural 
     resources in numerical order of priority for addition to the 
     National Park System. In developing the list, the Secretary 
     should consider threats to resource values, cost escalation 
     factors, and other factors listed in subsection (c) of this 
     section.''.

                TITLE V--LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCY HOUSING

     SECTION 501. DEFINITIONS.

       As used in this title, the term--
       (1) ``public lands'' means Federal lands administrated by 
     the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of 
     Agriculture;
       (2) ``Secretaries'' means the Secretary of the Interior and 
     the Secretary of Agriculture;
       (3) ``housing'' means residential housing available for 
     rent or lease to Federal employees in or near a park or 
     public lands and its associated infrastructure; and
       (4) ``employee'' means an employee of the Federal 
     government and their families who by necessity reside in or 
     near a park or public lands for the purposes of the 
     management of those lands, including temporary and seasonal 
     employees and volunteers.

     SEC. 502. EMPLOYEE HOUSING.

       (a) Authority.--(1) To promote the recruitment and 
     retention of qualified personnel necessary for the effective 
     management of public lands, the Secretaries are authorized 
     to--
       (A) make employee housing available, subject to the 
     limitation set forth in paragraph (2), on or off public 
     lands, and
       (B) rent or lease such housing to employees of the 
     respective Department at a reasonable value.
       (2)(A) Housing made available to employees on public lands 
     shall be limited to those areas designated fir administrative 
     use.
       (B) No private lands or interests therein outside of the 
     boundaries of Federally administered areas may be acquired by 
     any means for the purposes of this title except with the 
     consent of the owner thereof.
       (b) Definitions.--The Secretaries shall provide such 
     housing in accordance with this title and section 5911 of 
     Title 5, United States Code, except that for the purposes of 
     this title, the term--
       (1) ``availability of quarters'' (as used in this title and 
     subsection (b) of section 5911) means the existence, within 
     thirty miles of the employee's duty station, of well-
     constructed and maintained housing suitable to the individual 
     and family needs of the employee, for which the rental rate 
     as a percentage of the employee's annual gross income does 
     not exceed the most recent Census Bureau American Housing 
     Survey median monthly housing cost for renters inclusive of 
     utilities, as a percentage of current income, whether paid as 
     part of rent or paid directly to a third party;
       (2) ``contract'' (as used in this title and subsection (b) 
     of section 5911) includes, but is not limited to, ``Build-to-
     Lease'', ``Rental Guarantee'', ``Joint Development'', or 
     other lease agreements entered into by the Secretary, on or 
     off public lands, for the purposes of sub-leasing to 
     Departmental employees; and
       (3) ``reasonable value'' (as used in this title and 
     subsection (c) of section 5911) means the lease rental rate 
     comparable to private rental rates for comparable housing 
     facilities and associated amenities: Provided, That the base 
     rental rate as a percentage of the employee's annual gross 
     income shall not exceed the most recent American Housing 
     Survey median monthly housing cost for renters inclusive of 
     utilities, as a percentage of current income, whether paid as 
     part of rent or paid directly to a third party.
       (c) Subject to appropriation, the Secretaries may enter 
     into contracts and agreements with public and private 
     entities to provide housing on or off public lands.
       (d) The Secretaries may enter into cooperative agreements 
     or joint ventures with local governmental and private 
     entities, either on or off public lands, to provide 
     appropriate and necessary utility and other infrastructure 
     facilities in support of employee housing facilities provided 
     under this Act.

     SEC. 503. SURVEY OF RENTAL QUARTERS.

       The Secretaries shall conduct a survey of the availability 
     of quarters at field units under each Secretary's 
     jurisdiction at least every five years. If such survey 
     indicates that government owned or suitable privately-owned 
     quarters are not available as defined in section 502(b)(1) of 
     this title for the personnel assigned to a specific duty 
     station, the Secretaries are authorized to provide suitable 
     quarters in accordance with the provisions of this title. For 
     the purposes of this section, the term ``suitable quarters'' 
     means well-constructed, maintained housing suitable to the 
     individual and family needs of the employee.

     SEC. 504. SECONDARY QUARTERS.

       (a) If the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of 
     Agriculture determines that secondary quarters for employees 
     who are permanently duty stationed at remote locations and 
     are regularly required to relocate for temporary periods are 
     necessary for the effective administration of an area under 
     the jurisdiction of the respective agency, such secondary 
     quarters are authorized to be made available to employees, 
     either on or off public lands, in accordance with the 
     provisions of this title.
       (b) Rental rates for such secondary facilities shall be 
     established so that the aggregate rental rate paid by an 
     employee for both primary and secondary quarters as a 
     percentage of the employee's annual gross income shall not 
     exceed the Census Bureau American Housing Survey median 
     monthly housing cost for renters inclusive of utilities as a 
     percentage of current income, whether paid as part of rent or 
     paid directly to a third party.

     SEC. 505. SURVEY OF EXISTING FACILITIES.

       (a) Housing Survey.--Within two years after the date of 
     enactment of this title, the Secretaries shall survey all 
     existing government-owned employee housing facilities under 
     the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior and the 
     Department of Agriculture, to assess the physical condition 
     of such housing and the suitability of such housing for the 
     effective prosecution of the agency mission. The Secretaries 
     shall develop an agency-wide priority listing, by structure, 
     identifying those units in greatest need of repair, 
     rehabilitation, replacement or initial construction, as 
     appropriate. The survey and priority listing study shall be 
     transmitted to the Committees on Appropriations and Energy 
     and Natural Resources of the United States Senate and the 
     Committees on Appropriations and Resources of the United 
     States House of Representatives.
       (b) Priority Listing.--Unless otherwise provided by law, 
     expenditure of any funds appropriated for construction, 
     repair or rehabilitation shall follow, in sequential order, 
     the priority listing established by each agency. Funding 
     available from other sources for employee housing repair may 
     be distributed as determined by the Secretaries.

     SEC. 506. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated $3,000,000 each 
     year for fiscal years 1996 through 2001 for the purposes of 
     this title.
                     TITLE VI--DISPOSITION OF FEES

     SEC. 601. SPECIAL ACCOUNT.

       A special account is hereby established in the Treasury of 
     the United States that shall be called the Park Improvement 
     Fund (hereinafter referred to in this title as ``the fund'').

     SEC. 702. COVERING OF FEES INTO PARK IMPROVEMENT FUND.

       Notwithstanding section 4(i) of the Land and Water 
     Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (P.L. 88-578; 16 U.S.C. 460l-
     6a(i)), beginning in fiscal year 1996 and in each fiscal year 
     thereafter, fifty percent of all revenues received by the 
     Federal government in excess of the amount that would have 
     been received in 1995 without enactment of this Act from 
     franchise fees, admission, special recreation, commercial 
     tour use, and commercial/non-recreational use fees shall be 
     covered into the fund; however, the Secretary of the Interior 
     may withhold from the fund such portion of all receipts 
     collected from fees imposed by titles I and II of this Act in 
     such fiscal year as the Secretary determines to be 

[[Page S 12224]]
     equal to the fee collection costs for the immediately preceding fiscal 
     year: Provided, That such costs shall not exceed 15 percent 
     of all receipts collected from fees imposed under titles I 
     and II of this Act in such immediately preceding fiscal year.

     SEC. 603. ALLOCATION AND USE FEES.

       (a) Allocation.--Notwithstanding section 4(j) of the Land 
     and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (P.O. 88-578; 16 
     U.S.C. 460l-6a(j)), receipts in the fund from the previous 
     fiscal year shall be available to the Secretary without 
     further appropriation and shall be allocated as follows: each 
     fiscal year, beginning in 1997, seventy-five percent of the 
     total receipts deposited in the fund for the previous fiscal 
     year from each unit of the National Park System collecting 
     franchise, admission, special recreation, commercial tour use 
     or commercial/non-recreational use fees shall be available 
     for expenditure only by that unit. The remaining receipts in 
     the fund may be allocated among units of the National Park 
     System, including those not collecting such fees, as 
     determined by the Secretary.
       (b) Use.--Expenditures from the fund shall be used solely 
     for infrastructure and operational needs by units of the 
     National Park System. By January 1 of each year, the 
     Secretary shall provide to the Committee on Energy and 
     Natural Resources of the United States Senate and the 
     Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives a list 
     of proposed expenditures from the fund for each unit for that 
     fiscal year and a report detailing expenditures, by unit, for 
     the previous fiscal year.

             TITLE VII--NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM ADVISORY BOARD

     SEC. 701. NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM ADVISORY BOARD.

       Section 3 of the Act of August 21, 1935 (49 Stat. 667; 16 
     U.S.C. 463) is amended as follows:
       (1) In section 3(a) by striking the first three sentences 
     and inserting in lieu thereof, ``There is hereby established 
     a National Park System Advisory Board, whose purpose shall be 
     to advise the Secretary on all matters pertaining to the 
     National Park System. The Board shall advise the Secretary on 
     matters submitted to the Board by the Secretary as well as 
     any other issues identified by the Board. The National Park 
     System Advisory Board, appointed by the Secretary for a term 
     not to exceed four years, shall be comprised of no more than 
     nine persons from among citizens of the United States having 
     a demonstrated commitment to the National Park System. Board 
     members shall be selected to represent various geographic 
     regions, including each of the seven administrative regions 
     of the National Park Service, and to ensure that the Board 
     contains expertise in natural or cultural resource 
     management, recreation use management, land use planning, 
     financial management, and business management. The Board 
     shall include one individual who is a locally elected 
     official representing an area adjacent to a national park 
     system unit, and one individual who owns land inside the 
     boundary of a national park system unit. The Board shall hold 
     its first meeting by no later than the date that is 30 days 
     after the date on which all members of the Advisory
      Board who are to be appointed have been appointed. Any 
     vacancy in the Board shall not affect its powers, but 
     shall be filled in the same manner in which the original 
     appointment was made. The Board may adopt such rules as 
     may be necessary to establish its procedures and to govern 
     the manner of its operations, organization, and personnel. 
     All members of the Board shall be reimbursed for travel 
     and per diem in lieu of subsistence expenses during the 
     performance of duties of the Board while away from home or 
     their regular place of business, in accordance with 
     chapter 1 of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code. 
     With the exception of travel and per diem as noted above, 
     a member of the Board who is otherwise an officer or 
     employee of the United States Government shall serve on 
     the Board without additional compensation.''.
       (2) By renumbering section 3(b) as 3(f) and by striking 
     from the first sentence thereof, ``1995'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof, ``2006''.
       (3) By renumbering section 3(c) as 3(g).
       (4) By adding the following new sections 3(b) through (e):
       ``Sec. 3. (b)(1) Subject to such rules and regulations as 
     may be adopted by the Board, the Board shall have the power 
     to--
       ``(A) appoint, terminate, and fix the compensation (without 
     regard to the provisions of title 5, United States Code, 
     governing appointments in the competitive service, and 
     without regard to the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter 
     III of chapter 53 of such title, or of any other provision of 
     law, relating to the number, classification, and General 
     Schedule rates) of an Executive Director of the Advisory 
     Board and of such other personnel as the Board deems 
     advisable to assist in the performance of the duties of the 
     Board, at rates not to exceed a rate equal to the maximum 
     rate of GS-18 of the General Schedule under section 5332 of 
     such title; and
       ``(B) procure, as authorized by section 3109 of title 5, 
     United States Code, temporary and intermittent services to 
     the same extent as is authorized by law for agencies in the 
     executive branch, but at rates not to exceed the daily 
     equivalent of the maximum annual rate of basic pay in effect 
     for grade GS-18 of such General Schedule.
       ``(2) Service of an individual as a member of the Board 
     shall not be considered as service or employment bringing 
     such individual within the provisions of any Federal law 
     relating to conflicts of interest or otherwise imposing 
     restrictions, requirements, or penalties in relation to the 
     employment of persons, the performance of services, or the 
     payment or receipt of compensation in connection with claims, 
     proceedings, or matters involving the United States. Service 
     as a member of the Board, or as an employee of the Board, 
     shall not be considered service in an appointive or elective 
     position in the Government for purposes of section 8344 of 
     title 5, United States Code, or comparable provisions of 
     Federal law.
       ``(c)(1) The Board is authorized to--
       ``(A) hold such hearings and sit and act at such times,
       ``(B) take such testimony,
       ``(C) have such printing and binding done,
       ``(D) enter into such contracts and other arrangements,
       ``(E) make such expenditures, and
       ``(F) take such other actions,

     as the Board may deem advisable. Any member of the Board may 
     administer oaths or affirmations to witnesses appearing 
     before the Board.
       ``(2) The Board is authorized to establish task forces 
     which include individuals appointed by the Board who are not 
     members of the Board only for the purpose of gathering 
     information on specific subjects identified by the Board as 
     requiring the knowledge and expertise of such individuals. 
     Any task force established by the Board shall be chaired by a 
     voting member of the Board who shall preside at any task 
     force hearing authorized by the Board. No compensation may be 
     paid to members of a task force solely for their service on 
     the task force, but the Board may authorize the reimbursement 
     of members of a task force for travel and per diem in lieu of 
     subsistence expenses during the performance of duties while 
     away from the home, or regular place of business, of the 
     member, in accordance with subchapter 1 of chapter 57 of 
     title 5, United States Code. The Board shall not authorize 
     the appointment of personnel to act as staff for the task 
     force, but may permit the use of Board staff and resources by 
     a task force for the purpose of compiling data and 
     information.
       ``(d) The provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
     shall not apply to the Board established under this section.
       ``(e)(1) The Board is authorized to secure directly from 
     any office, department, agency, establishment, or 
     instrumentality of the Federal Government such information as 
     the Board may require for the purpose of this section, and 
     each such officer, department, agency, establishment, or 
     instrumentality is authorized and directed to furnish, to the 
     extent permitted by law, such information, suggestions, 
     estimates, and statistics directly to the Board, upon request 
     made by a member of the Board.
       ``(2) Upon the request of the Board, the head of any 
     Federal department, agency, or instrumentality is authorized 
     to make any of the facilities and services of such 
     department, agency, or instrumentality available to the Board 
     and detail any of the personnel of such department, agency, 
     or instrumentality to the Board, on a nonreimbursable basis, 
     to assist the Board in carrying out its duties under this 
     section.
       ``(3) The Board may use the United States mails in the same 
     manner and under the same conditions as other departments and 
     agencies of the United States.''

     SEC. 702. ADVISORY BOARD STUDIES.

       (a) Management System Study.--(1) The Advisory Board, in 
     consultation with the National Park Service, shall conduct a 
     review of each unit of the National Park System, except for 
     those units designated as national parks, to determine 
     whether there are management alternatives that would result 
     in equal or better levels of resource protection, 
     interpretation, and visitor access, use, and enjoyment. The 
     Advisory Board shall review the organic legislation, and 
     history of the National Park Service and its units and shall 
     develop criteria to guide the Congress and the Secretary in 
     the addition of new units to the National Park System. The 
     Advisory Board shall complete its review within one year from 
     the date of enactment of this title and shall transmit its 
     report and recommendations to the Secretary, the Committee on 
     Energy and Natural Resources of the United States Senate and 
     the Committee on Resources of the United States House of 
     Representatives.
       (b) Visitor Services Study.--The Advisory Board, in 
     consultation with the National Park Service, shall conduct an 
     analysis and evaluation of the current conditions and future 
     needs of each unit of the National Park System for adequate 
     visitor service programs. Such analysis and evaluation shall 
     include, but not be limited to, the adequacy of information, 
     education, and concession-provided services, and shall 
     identify those units of the National Park System where new or 
     additional services should be provided. The Advisory Board 
     shall complete its evaluation within one year from the date 
     of enactment of this title and shall transmit its report to 
     the Secretary, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 
     of the United States Senate, and the Committee on Resources 
     of the United States House of Representatives.
       (c) Concession Oversight.--The National Park System 
     Advisory Board shall periodically monitor the performance 
     evaluation process as conducted annually by the Secretary for 
     concessioners and commercial use 

[[Page S 12225]]
     contractors for effectiveness and objectivity and summarize their 
     findings in an annual report to the Secretary, the Committee 
     on Energy and Natural Resources of the United States Senate 
     and the Committee on Resources of the United States House of 
     Representatives.

     SEC. 703. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to the National 
     Park System Advisory Board $700,000 per year to carry out the 
     provisions of this title, in addition to $275,000 for the 
     preparation of the management systems study referred to in 
     section 702(a) of this title and $275,000 for preparation of 
     the visitor services study referred to in section 702(b) of 
     this title.
                                                                    ____

   National Park Service Enhancement Act--Section-by-Section Analysis


               title i--national park concessions reform

       Section 101 sets forth Congressional findings.
       Section 102 amends sections of Public Law 89-249 (79 Stat. 
     969; 16 U.S.C. 20-20g), entitled ``An Act relating to the 
     establishment of concession policies administered in the 
     areas administered by the National Park Service and for other 
     purposes''.
       Subsection (a) renumbers section 2 of the 1965 Act as 
     section 3 and inserts a new section 2 into the 1965 Act which 
     defines terms used in the Act.
       Subsection (b) amends section 3 to conform with the 
     definitions in the previous subsection.
       Subsection (c) renumbers existing subsection 3(a) as 4(a) 
     and directs the Secretary of the Interior to include certain 
     terms and conditions in contracts.
       Subsection (d) renumbers existing subsection 3(b) as 4(b).
       Subsection (e) renumbers existing subsection 3(c) as 4(c) 
     and amends it to allow concessioners and commercial use 
     contractors to set their own rates and charges to the public 
     in national parks where sufficient competition for provided 
     facilities and services exists either within or near the park 
     in which the concessioner or commercial use contractor 
     operates. If the Secretary determines that such competition 
     does not exist, the contract will include the mechanism 
     included in the existing law that rates and charges will be 
     compared to those for the nearest comparable facilities and 
     services.
       Subsection (f) renumbers existing subsection 3(d) as 4(d) 
     and amends it to fix the franchise fees at the amount stated 
     in the selected proposal at the commencement of the contract 
     and authorizes the Secretary to reduce the franchise fee 
     during the contract term if deemed necessary. The suggested 
     minimum franchise fee will be included by the Secretary in 
     the bid solicitation prospectus, as indicated in subsection 
     102(k).
       Subsection (g) renumbers existing section 4 as section 5 
     and removes the reference to the renewal preference under 
     prior law which is deleted from this title.
       Subsection (h) repeals existing section 5 of the 1965 Act, 
     thereby eliminating preferential right of renewal with the 
     exception of contracts entered into prior to enactment of 
     this title.
       Subsection (i) amends section 6 by removing the definition 
     of ``sound value'' as redundant with new text, requires that 
     compensation be paid based on sound value, deletes the last 
     sentence, designates the existing text of the section as 
     subsection (a) and adds a subsection (b). The new subsection 
     outlines the process for determining the value of the 
     concessioner's possessor interest if the value of such 
     interest was not previously agreed upon by the concessioner 
     and the Secretary. The concessioner is directed to submit an 
     independent appraisal of the sound value of the structures, 
     fixtures, or improvements in which the concessioner has an 
     investment interest. If the Secretary disagrees with the 
     appraisal submitted by the concessioner, he may present the
      concessioner with an independent appraisal. For the 
     concessioner's income-producing structures, fixture, or 
     improvement, the method to be used by the concessioner's 
     appraiser and the Secretary's appraiser, when necessary, 
     shall be the income approach to valuation as is generally 
     used by real estate appraisers; for any structure, fixture 
     or improvement not primarily used for the production of 
     income, the fair market value is calculated as 
     reconstruction cost less depreciation to tie it to the 
     sound value definition, since an income approach is not 
     applicable. If in disagreement over the sound value, the 
     Secretary and the concessioner may direct their appraisers 
     to choose a third appraiser, who will recommend to the 
     Secretary one of the two appraisals as the more accurate. 
     A CPI adjustment is made to cover the period between the 
     date of the appraisal and the date of payment.
       Subsection (j) renumbers sections 7 through 9 as sections 
     11 through 13, respectively.
       Subsection (k) adds four new sections, numbered 7 through 
     10. The new section 7 establishes the selection process for 
     concessioners and commercial use contractors.
       Section 7(a) states that a contract shall be awarded to the 
     bidder submitting the best proposal as determined by the 
     Secretary, through a competitive selection process. The 
     Secretary is required to develop regulations establishing the 
     selection process as well as a dispute resolution process 
     where the Secretary has been unable to meet certain 
     conditions or requirements.
       Subsection (b) preserves the provisions of the Alaska 
     National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA), such as 
     those granting preference to Native Corporations and locals 
     for the provision of commercial visitor services in National 
     Park System units in Alaska, and states that subject to 
     rights of operation guaranteed by Section 1307 of ANILCA, a 
     priority shall be given to commercial use contractors 
     operating cruise ships who provide tours in Glacier Bay 
     National Park which originate in Southeast Alaska.
       Subsection (c) authorizes the Secretary to award small and 
     temporary contracts noncompetitively.
       Subsection (d) outlines the steps used by the Secretary to 
     distribute a prospectus and lists the minimum information to 
     be included in such prospectus, including the minimum 
     suggested franchise fee.
       Subsection (e) authorizes the Secretary to consider a 
     proposal which does not meet the suggested minimum 
     requirements but requires that certain conditions be met for 
     the Secretary to award a contract to a bidder submitting such 
     a proposal. The Secretary is authorized to reject proposals 
     which meet the requirements if it is determined that the 
     bidder is not qualified, or is likely to provide 
     unsatisfactory services. If all proposals are rejected, the 
     Secretary must establish new minimum suggested requirements 
     and reinitiate the competitive selection process.
       Subsection (f) outlines primary factors for the Secretary's 
     consideration in selecting the best proposal. The proposed 
     franchise fee shall be considered a secondary factor in 
     selecting a bidder.
       Subsection (g) requires Congressional notification for any 
     proposed contract over 10 years in length or with projected 
     annual gross receipts greater than $5 million.
       Subsection (h) establishes a renewal incentive for 
     concessioners and commercial use contractors who receive 
     performance evaluations, as conducted annually by the 
     Secretary, exceeding the satisfactory level for at least 50% 
     of the years of the contract's terms. Under these
      provisions, such renewal incentive consists of an automatic 
     credit of an additional 10% of the maximum points that the 
     Secretary may award to a proposal submitted for renewal 
     for a contract.
       Subsection (i) provides a preferential right of renewal for 
     commercial use contractors for contracts which primarily 
     provide outfitting, guide, river running, or other similar 
     services and which are expected to produce gross revenues of 
     no more than $1,000,000. In order to receive this 
     preferential right of renewal, such commercial use 
     contractors must receive performance evaluations, as 
     conducted annually by the Secretary, exceeding the 
     satisfactory level for at least 50% of the years of the 
     contract's term, with no unsatisfactory ratings received for 
     any of the five years prior to contract renewal.
       The new section 8 relates to length and transferability of 
     contracts. Subsection 8(a) establishes the basic contract 
     term as ten years but authorizes longer terms if the 
     Secretary finds it to be in the public interest. For 
     concessioners required to make substantial investments in 
     structure, fixtures and improvements in a park, the Secretary 
     is required to award a contract term commensurate with the 
     investments made.
       Subsection (b) describes the Secretary's reasonable right 
     to approve transfers of contracts, based on the competence 
     and financial capability of the transferee. Congressional 
     notification is required for certain transfers.
       Subsection (c) states that in cases of transfer or other 
     contract conveyance, successor concessioners and commercial 
     use contractors are entitled to any ``good'' performance 
     ratings received by the prior holder of the contract.
       The new section 9 establishes an annual performance 
     appraisal system for concessioners and commercial use 
     contractors. Subsection 9(a) directs the Secretary to publish 
     regulations for developing reasonable general standards and 
     criteria for evaluating concessioners and commercial use 
     contractors. Performance categories will consist of 
     ``unsatisfactory'', ``satisfactory'', and ``good''. The 
     Secretary and selected bidder will jointly develop specific 
     rating criteria and standards for the contract prior to 
     finalizing the contract.
       Subsection (b) directs the Secretary to conduct annual 
     performance evaluations. The Secretary must provide 
     concessioners or commercial use contractors receiving 
     unsatisfactory ratings with written notification, including 
     requirements for improving performance. Contracts may be 
     terminated by the Secretary if a concessioner or commercial 
     use contractor fails to improve performance to the 
     satisfactory level. Should a contract be terminated for 
     continued poor performance, the outgoing concessioner may be 
     required to pay for the cost to the Secretary for a new bid 
     solicitation and evaluation, plus the difference between the 
     old and new franchise fees, if the new fee is lower.
       Subsection (c) requires Congressional notification by the 
     Secretary for each unsatisfactory rating and each terminated 
     contract.
       The new section 10 directs the Secretary to include local 
     hiring preference provisions in contracts to provide visitor 
     services in noncontiguous states which have unemployment 
     rates exceeding the national average.
       Section 103 states that within two years of enacting this 
     title, the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior will 
     establish uniform procedures for issuing contracts and 
     nonrecurring commercial/non-recreational use permits for 
     substantially similar activities on
      Federal lands managed by the U.S. 

[[Page S 12226]]
     Forest Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Bureau of Land 
     Management which are consistent with this title.


                      Title II--National Park Fees

       Section 201 amends the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act 
     of 1965 (P.L. 88-578; 16 U.S.C. 460l) to make several 
     modifications to the fee program.
       Subsection (a) amends Section 4(a) of the LWCF Act relating 
     to admission fees.
       Subparagraph (1) deletes ``fee-free travel areas'' and 
     ``lifetime admission permit'' from the section title as they 
     were previously stricken from the text.
       Subparagraph (2) increases the maximum cost the Golden 
     Eagle Passport from $25 to $50;.
       Subparagraph (3) authorizes the use of Golden Eagle 
     Passport receipts for authorized protection, rehabilitation, 
     and conservation projects and notes authorization for their 
     use by the Youth Conservation Corps and others.
       Subparagraph (4) increases the maximum cost of an annual 
     pass for entry into a single park from $15 to $25;
       Subparagraph (5) sets a maximum entrance fee into a park at 
     $6 per person, instead of the present system of charging on a 
     per car basis;
       Subparagraph (6) corrects the name of Great Smoky Mountains 
     National Park and removes the prohibition on collection 
     entrance fees at urban units of the National Park System that 
     provide significant outdoor recreational opportunities and 
     have multiple access points.
       Subparagraph (7) limits use of the Golden Age Passport, 
     which allows a person 62 years of age or older lifetime free 
     admission into all parks, to the passport holder only, 
     instead of allowing free admission for all persons 
     accompanying the passport holder in a non-commercial vehicle.
       Subparagraph (8) prohibits collection of fees from persons 
     with right of access for fishing and hunting privileges under 
     a specific law or treaty or who are engaged in official 
     Federal, State, or local government business.
       Subparagraph (9) limits coverage under the Golden Access 
     Passport for the disabled to the individual and one 
     companion, regardless of method of travel.
       Subparagraph (10) directs the Secretary to provide to 
     Congress within 18 months after enactment a report outlining 
     the changes to be implemented.
       Subparagraph (11) deletes (a)(9), which states specific 
     areas where fees will not be charged. This provides an 
     opportunity to review those areas for possible collection of 
     fees, but does not guarantee that fees will be established.
       Subparagraph (12) deletes that portion of (a)(11) which 
     established special rates for Grand Teton, Yellowstone, and 
     Grand Canyon National Parks.
       Subparagraph (13) renumbers remaining sections accordingly.
       Subsection (b) amends section 4(b) of the LWCF Act to 
     remove personal collection of fees by an employee or agent of 
     the Federal agency from the list of criteria used in 
     determining whether a fee can be charged at a campground, and 
     removes the 50% discount in use fees for those 62 and over, 
     but retains that discount for the disabled.
       Subsection (c) amends section 4(d) of the LWCF Act to 
     include comparable recreation fees charged by other public 
     and private entities in the list of criteria for setting 
     recreation fees at Federally managed areas.
       Subsection (d) amends section 4(e) of the LWCF Act to 
     change the $100 cap on fines to comply with the Criminal Fine 
     Improvement Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-185), which established 
     maximum fine levels for all Federal petty offenses.
       Subsection (e) amends section 4(h) of the LWCF Act to 
     change committee and bureau names to reflect current titles 
     and conditions.
       Subsection (f) amends section 4(k) of the LWCF Act to 
     clarify that the non-Federal sale of Golden Eagle Passports 
     may be conducted on a consignment basis.
       Subsection (g) amends section 4(l) of the LWCF Act by 
     changing the term ``viewing'' to ``visiting''.
       Subsection (h) amends section 4(n) of the LWCF Act by 
     directing the Secretary to establish a per vehicle admission 
     fee, based on vehicle occupancy, in lieu of a per person 
     charge for commercial tours and by requiring the Secretary to 
     notify commercial tour operators of changes in the per 
     vehicle fee one year in advance.
       Subsection (i) amends section 4 of the LWCF Act to add a 
     new subsection (o). The subsection directs the Secretary to 
     establish reasonable fees for uses of park areas that require 
     special arrangements, such as the filming of movies of 
     television shows. The fee shall at least cover the costs of 
     providing necessary services associated with such use, and 
     the amount covering such costs will remain in the park where 
     such use occurs. The Secretary may reduce or waive the fee 
     for organizations whose activities further the goals of the 
     National Park Service.
       Subsection (j) amends a number of Public Laws to lift 
     prohibitions on admission fees at the following units of the 
     National Park System: War in the Pacific National Historical 
     Park; Virgin Islands National Park; Golden Gate National 
     Recreation Area; Statute of Liberty National Monument; Martin 
     Luther King National Historic Site; Point Reyes National 
     Seashore; Biscayne National Park; Dry Tortugas National Park; 
     Channel Islands National Park; and Mount Rushmore National 
     Memorial.
       Section 202 authorizes the Secretary to negotiate and enter 
     into challenge cost-share agreements.
       Section 203 amends Public Law 101-337, the National Park 
     System Resource Protection Act, to provide for cost recovery 
     for damages at additional units of the National Park System. 
     Public Law 101-337 limited recovery for such damages to 
     marine resources. As amended by section 203, that Act would 
     allow for cost recovery for damages to any living or non-
     living resource within any park unit.


          Title III--Ski Area Permits on National Forest Lands
       Section 301 sets forth Congressional findings and purpose. 
     The purpose of the title is to legislate a ski area permit 
     fee that returns fair market value to the United States and 
     to prevent future conflicts between ski area operations and 
     mining and mineral leasing programs.
       Section 302 amends the National Forest Ski Area Permit Act 
     of 1986 (P.L. 99-522, 100 Stat. 3000; 16 U.S.C. 497b) by 
     adding the following new sections as described below.
       Section 4(a), as added to Public Law 99-522, states that 
     ski area permit fees shall be calculated, charged, and paid 
     as described in subsection (b) in order to return fair market 
     value to the United States, provide ski area permittees with 
     a simplified, consistent, predictable and equitable permit 
     fee, simplify administrative, bookkeeping and other 
     requirements currently imposed on the Secretary of 
     Agriculture (``Secretary'' in this title) and ski area 
     permittees, and to save costs associated with the calculation 
     of ski area permit fees.
       Subsection (b), as added to Public Law 99-522, outlines the 
     method of calculating the ski area permit fee.
       Subparagraph (b)(1) directs the Secretary to calculate the 
     ski area permit fee by first determining the permittee's 
     adjusted gross revenue (AGR) to be subject to the fee. The 
     adjusted gross revenue is equal to the sum of the following: 
     The permittee's gross revenues from alpine lift tickets and 
     alpine season pass sales plus alpine ski school operations 
     (LTA+SSA), which are multiplied by the permittee's slope 
     transport fee percentage (STFP) on National Forest System 
     lands where a ski area is partially on federal land and 
     partially on private land. To that, add the sum of gross 
     revenues from Nordic ski use pass sales and Nordic ski school 
     operations (LTN+SSN), which have been multiplied by the 
     percentage of the Nordic trails on National Forest System 
     lands where operations are partially on federal land and 
     partially on private land. To that total, add the permittee's 
     gross revenues from ancillary facilities (GRAF) physically 
     located on National Forest System lands.
       Subparagraph (b)(2) uses the previous abbreviations to 
     depict the formula as follows: AGR=((LTA+SSA) x 
     STFP)+((LTN+SSN) x NR)+GRAF.
       Subparagraph (b)(3) directs the Secretary to determine the 
     ski area permit fee (SAPF) to be charged a ski area permittee 
     by multiplying the adjusted gross revenue (AGR) as determined 
     above, by percentages based on the ranges in which the AGR 
     falls and by adding the total for each revenue range.
       Subparagraph (b)(4) outlines the procedure for calculating 
     the fee for ski areas that are only partially located on 
     National Forest System lands.
       Subparagraph (b)(5) directs the Secretary to annually 
     adjust the adjusted gross revenue figures for each revenue 
     bracket by the percent increase or decrease in the national 
     Consumer Price Index for the preceding calendar year.
       Subsection (c), as added to Public Law 99-522, states that 
     in cases where an area of National Forest System land is 
     under a ski area permit, but the permittee does not have 
     revenue or sales qualifying for fee payment as outlined 
     above, the permittee shall pay an annual rental fee of $2 for 
     each acre of National Forest System land under permit. 
     Payment shall be made in accordance with the following 
     subsection.
       Subsection (d), as added to Public Law 99-522, states that 
     unless otherwise arranged with the Secretary, the ski area 
     permittee shall pay the permit fee by August 31 of each year 
     and cover all applicable revenues received during the 12-
     month period ending on June 30 of that year. The
      Secretary is directed to provide each ski area permittee 
     with a standardized form, worksheets, and annual fee 
     calculation brackets and rates.
       Subsection (e), as added to Public Law 99-522, excludes ski 
     area permittee or subpermittee revenue generated by 
     operations not located on National Forest System lands from 
     the permit fee calculation.
       Subsection (f), as added to Public Law 99-522, defines 
     ``revenue'' and ``sales'' as actual income from sales, 
     excluding sales of operating equipment, refunds, rent paid by 
     sublessees, sponsor contributions, or any amounts 
     attributable to employee gratuities, discounts, complimentary 
     lift tickets, or other goods or services (except for bartered 
     goods) for which the permittee does not receive money.
       Subsection (g), as added to Public Law 99-522, establishes 
     July 1, 1995 as the effective date for ski area permit fees 
     as described by this section, to cover receipts retroactive 
     to July 1, 1994. If a ski area permittee has paid fees for 
     the period ending June 30, 1995 under the prior graduated 
     rate fee system formula, such fees will be credited toward 
     the new permit fee due for that period under this section.

[[Page S 12227]]

       Subsection (h), as added to Public Law 99-522, describes 
     transitional ski area permit fees.
       Subparagraph (h)(1) states that to minimize the effect of 
     converting individual ski areas from the existing fee system 
     to the one described in this title, each permittee subject to 
     the new fee shall determine their average existing fees (AEF) 
     for each year of the three-year period ending on June 30, 
     1994, and the permittee's proforma average ski area permit 
     fee (ASF) under subparagraph (a) for each of the three years. 
     Both shall be determined by adding the fee payment made by 
     the ski area or the estimated payment that would have been 
     made under subparagraph (a) for each year of that period and 
     dividing by three.
       Subparagraph (h)(2) states that to calculate the ski area 
     permit fee required by subparagraph (a) for each year in the 
     five-year period ending on June 30, 1999, the Secretary shall 
     divide the ski area permit fee required by subparagraph (a) 
     by the ASF and then multiply by the AEF. The resulting fee is 
     called the Adjusted Base Fee (ABF). After June 30, 1999, 
     permittees shall pay the permit fee required by subparagraph 
     (a) without regard to previous fees or rates paid.
       Subparagraph (h)(3) states that if the ABF is less than the 
     ski area permit fee required by subparagraph (a), the 
     permittee shall pay the lesser of the fee required by 
     subparagraph (a) or the ABF as adjusted using provided 
     multipliers ranging from 1.1 to 1.5.
       Subparagraph (h)(4) states that if the ABF is greater than 
     the fee required by subparagraph (a) or the ABF as adjusted 
     using provided multipliers ranging from 0.5 to 0.9.
       Section 5, as added to Public Law 99-522, withdraws all 
     lands located within the boundaries of ski area permits from 
     all forms of appropriation under the mining laws and from 
     disposition under laws pertaining to mineral and geothermal 
     leasing. Withdrawal continues for the full term of the 
     permit, as well as reissuance and renewal. Termination or 
     expiration of the permit shall cancel such withdrawal and 
     restore the land to all appropriation not otherwise 
     restricted under other public land laws.
       Section 303 directs the Secretary of Agriculture to conduct 
     a study of ski areas on National Forest System lands to 
     determine the feasibility and suitability of selling all or a
      portion of such lands to permittees or other interested 
     parties. The study is to include a determination and 
     identification of continuing need for Federal retention of 
     such lands, cost savings, revenues, and other benefits 
     from their sale or disposal, and criteria to be used if 
     the sale of such lands is considered. The Secretary is 
     directed to provide a report to the Senate Committee on 
     Energy and Natural Resources and House Committee on 
     Resources within one year of enactment of this title.


                 title iv--national park system reform

       Section 401 describes the preparation of a National Park 
     System Plan (the ``plan'' as referred to in this title).
       Subsection (a) directs the Secretary of the Interior 
     (``Secretary'' in this title) to prepare a National Park 
     System Plan to guide the future direction of the National 
     Park System (``System'' as referred to in this title). The 
     plan shall include the following: (1) detailed criteria to 
     determine which natural and cultural resources are 
     appropriate for inclusion as units in the System; (2) 
     identification of what constitutes adequate representation of 
     a particular resource type and which aspects of the national 
     heritage are adequately represented as System units or other 
     protected areas; (3) identification of aspects of the 
     national heritage not represented in the system; (4) 
     priorities of themes and resources which would provide more 
     complete representation of the national heritage if added to 
     the System; (5) a statement of the role of the National Park 
     Service in preserving natural and cultural resources and 
     providing outdoor recreation opportunities; and (6) a 
     statement of what areas constitute units of the National Park 
     System and a distinction between such units, affiliated 
     areas, and other areas within the System.
       Subsection (b) directs the Secretary to consult with other 
     Federal agencies, State and local officials, the National 
     Park System Advisory Board, resource management, recreation 
     and scholarly organization and other interested parties as 
     deemed appropriate by the Secretary in preparing the plan, 
     and to include appropriate opportunities for public review 
     and comment.
       Subsection (c) directs the Secretary to transmit the plan 
     to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and 
     the House Committee on Resources prior to the end of the 
     second complete fiscal year after enactment of this title.
       Section 402 amends Public Law 91-383 (16 U.S.C. 1a-1 and 
     following), ``An Act to improve the Administration of the 
     National Park System by the Secretary of the Interior, and to 
     clarify the authorities applicable to the system, and for 
     other purposes'' (the ``1970 Act'' as referred to in this 
     title) by modifying existing subsections (a) and (b) and 
     adding new sections (c) through (e).
       Subparagraph (1) inserts the heading ``GENERAL AUTHORITY'' 
     after (a).
       Subparagraph (2) strikes the second through sixth sentences 
     of subsection (8)(a) of the 1970 Act regarding reports made 
     to Congress by the Secretary on new area studies.
       Subparagraph (3) corrects the name of the Committee on 
     Resources of the United States House of Representatives.
       Subparagraph (4) redesignates the last two sentences of 
     subsection (a) and (e) and provides a heading, 
     ``AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS'' for (e).
       Subparagraph (4) strikes subsection (8)(b) of the 1970 Act 
     and replaces it. New subsection (8)(b) directs the Secretary 
     to submit annually to the Senate Committee on Energy and 
     Natural Resources and the Committee on Resources of the House 
     a list of areas recommended for study for potential inclusion 
     in the System. The subsection further directs the Secretary 
     to give consideration to areas meeting established criteria 
     of national significance, suitability, and feasibility and to 
     themes, sites, and resources not already represented in the 
     National Park System, as noted in section 401 of this Act. 
     Following enactment of this title, studies of potential areas 
     to be included in the System must be authorized by Congress. 
     The National Park Service will retain authority to conduct 
     preliminary assessments, gather data on potential study 
     areas, provide technical and planning assistance, prepare or 
     process nominations for administrative designations, update 
     previous studies, or complete reconnaissance surveys of 
     individuals requiring a total expenditure of less than 
     $25,000. This subsection does not apply to or affect studies 
     on potential additions to the wild and scenic rivers system 
     or the national trails system.
       New subsection (8)(c) requires the Secretary to complete 
     each new area study authorized by Congress within three 
     fiscal years of authorization. Public involvement is required 
     during preparation of each study. The Secretary is directed 
     to consider an area's national significance of resources or 
     outstanding recreational opportunities, suitability, 
     feasibility, and costs to administer such an area if added to 
     the System. Additional considerations include: rarity and 
     integrity; existing representation in the System or 
     protection by other agencies or entities; public use, 
     educational, and interpretive potential; acquisition, 
     development and operational costs; socioeconomic impact of 
     any designation; level of public support; and appropriate 
     configuration to ensure long term protection and enjoyment. 
     Each study will also consider whether such area should be 
     managed by the National Park Service or another agency or 
     entity, with a recommendation for protecting resources and 
     providing public use of the area. Each study transmitted to 
     Congress shall include the Administration's preferred 
     management option and projected fiscal and personnel costs if 
     managed by the Federal government.
       New subsection (8)(d) directs the Secretary to submit 
     annually to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural 
     Resources and the House Resources Committee two prioritized 
     lists of areas previously studied, one for areas with 
     primarily natural resources, and one with primarily cultural 
     resources, for possible addition to the National Park System. 
     The Secretary is directed to consider threats to resource 
     values, cost escalation factors and those listed in 
     subsection (c) in developing the lists.


                Title V--Land Management Agency Housing

       Section 501 defines certain terms used in the bill.
       Section 502(a)(1) authorizes the Secretary of the Interior 
     and the Secretary of Agriculture (the ``Secretaries'') to 
     make employee housing available, subject to the limitations 
     in set forth in paragraph (2) on or off public lands (defined 
     as lands administered by either Secretary), and to rent or 
     lease such housing to employees of the respective Department 
     at a reasonable value.
       Paragraph (a)(2) provides that housing made available on 
     public lands shall be limited to those areas designated for 
     administrative use and that no private lands or interests 
     therein outside the boundaries of Federally administered 
     areas may be acquired for the purposes of this title without 
     the consent of the owner.
       Subsection (b) directs the Secretaries to provide such 
     housing in accordance with this title and section 5911 of 
     Title 5, United States Code, except that the terms 
     ``availability of quarters,'' ``contract,'' and ``reasonable 
     value'' shall have the meanings set forth in this subsection. 
     Significantly, ``reasonable value'' is defined to mean the 
     base rental rate comparable to private rental rates for 
     comparable housing facilities and associated amenities, so 
     long as the rate (as a percentage of the employee's annual 
     gross income) shall not exceed the median monthly housing 
     cost for renters as a percentage of current income, listed in 
     the Census Bureau's American Housing Survey.
       Subsection (c) authorizes the Secretaries, subject to 
     appropriation, to enter into contracts and agreements with 
     public and private entities to provide employee housing on or 
     off public lands.
       Subsection (d) permits the Secretaries to enter into 
     cooperative agreements or joint ventures with local 
     governmental and private entities, on or off public lands, to 
     provide appropriate and necessary utility and other 
     infrastructure facilities in support of employee housing.
       Section 503 directs the Secretaries to conduct a survey of 
     the availability of quarters at field units under each 
     Secretary's jurisdiction at least every five years. If such 
     survey indicates that government-owned or suitable privately-
     owned quarters are not available (as that term is defined in 
     section 

[[Page S 12228]]
     502(b)(1) for the personnel assigned to a specific duty station, the 
     Secretaries are authorized to provide suitable quarters in 
     accordance with the provisions of this title.
       As used in this section, the term ``fields units'' includes 
     administrative units that are located in national parks, 
     national wildlife refuges, national forest districts, BLM 
     resource areas, and other similar field areas. Specifically 
     excluded from the definition are central offices, such as 
     Washington, D.C. headquarters offices and regional and state 
     offices.
       Section 504(a) authorizes the Secretaries to make secondary 
     quarters available to employees who are permanently stationed 
     at remote locations and are regularly required to relocate 
     for temporary periods (such as at Channel Islands National 
     Park or Dry Tortugas National Park).
       Subsection (b) states that rental rates for such secondary 
     facilities shall be established so that the aggregate rental 
     rate paid by the employee for both primary and secondary 
     quarters as a percentage of the employee's annual gross 
     income shall not exceed the median monthly housing cost for 
     renters as a percentage of current income, listed in the 
     Census Bureau's American Housing Survey.
       Section 505(a) requires the Secretaries, within two years 
     after the date of enactment of this title, to survey all 
     existing government-owned employee housing facilities under 
     the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior and the 
     Department of Agriculture to assess the physical condition of 
     such housing and the suitability of such housing for the 
     effective prosecution of the agency mission. The Secretaries 
     are required to develop an agency-wide priority listing, by 
     structure, identifying those units in greatest need for 
     repair, rehabilitation,
      replacement or initial construction. The survey is to be 
     transmitted to the appropriate Congressional Committees.
       Subsection (b) provides that expenditures of any funds 
     appropriated for construction, repair or rehabilitation shall 
     follow in sequential order the priority listing established 
     in subsection (a), unless otherwise provided by law.
       Section 506 authorizes $3,000,000 each year for fiscal 
     years 1996-2001.


                     title vi--disposition of fees

       Section 601 establishes a special account in the Treasury 
     called the Park Improvement Fund (``the fund'' as used in 
     this title).
       Section 602 states that beginning in fiscal year 1996 and 
     in each following fiscal year, 50% of all revenues received 
     by the Federal government over the amount that would have 
     been received in 1995 without enactment of this Act from 
     franchise fees, admission, special recreation, commercial 
     tour use, and commercial/non-recreation use fees shall be 
     covered into the fund. The Secretary of the Interior 
     (``Secretary'' as used in this title) is authorized to 
     withhold from the fund the portion of fees equal to fee 
     collection costs for the previous fiscal year, not to exceed 
     15% of the total fees collected in accordance with title I 
     and II of this Act.
       Section 603(a) states that receipts in the fund from the 
     previous fiscal year shall be available to the Secretary 
     without further appropriation. The allocation is a 75/25% 
     split, with 75% of the total receipts deposited from each 
     unit of the National Park System collecting the types of fees 
     noted above made available to that unit for expenditure. The 
     remaining 25% may be allocated among all units of the 
     National Park System, including those not collecting such 
     fees.
       Subsection (b) states that fund expenditures shall only be 
     for infrastructure and operational needs of units of the 
     National Park System, and directs the Secretary to compile a 
     list of proposed expenditures from the fund for each unit 
     that fiscal year by January 1 of each year. Such list and a 
     report of expenditures for the previous fiscal year, by unit, 
     shall be provided to the Senate Committee on Energy and 
     Natural Resources and the House Committee on Resources.


             title vii--national park system advisory board

       Section 701 amends section 3 of Public Law 74-292 (44 Stat. 
     666; 16 U.S.C. 463) as amended, to establish National Park 
     System Advisory Board, as described below.
       Amended section 3(a) establishes a National Park System 
     Advisory Board, with 9 members selected by the Secretary for 
     terms not to exceed 4 years. The section outlines the general 
     composition of the Board, and authorizes the Board to 
     establish rules and procedures. Board members shall not 
     receive compensation except for travel and per diem 
     reimbursement when traveling to perform Board-related duties.
       Existing section 3(b) is renumbered as 3(f) and changed to 
     reflect January 1, 2006 as the termination date for the 
     Board.
       Existing section 3(c) is renumbered as 3(g).
       The new section 3(b) outlines the powers of the Board which 
     include authorization to appoint an executive director and 
     other staff as needed to carry out the duties of the Board.
       The new section 3(c) authorizes the Board to hold hearings, 
     enter into contracts, make such expenditures, and establish 
     task forces.
       The new section 3(d) exempts the Board from the provisions 
     of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
       The new section 3(e) authorizes the Board to secure 
     information from any office, department, agency, 
     establishment or instrumentality of the Federal government 
     and directs such Federal entities to provide such requested 
     information to the extent permitted by law. This subsection 
     also authorizes the head of any Federal department, agency or 
     instrumentality to make facilities, services, and personnel 
     of such department, agency or instrumentality available to 
     the Board on a nonreimbursable basis, and authorizes the 
     Board to use the United States mails in conducting its 
     duties.
       Section 702 outlines studies and annual reports that the 
     Board is charged with conducting and providing to Congress 
     and the Secretary of the Interior.
       Subsection (a) directs the Board in consultation with the 
     National Park Service, to conduct a management system study, 
     to be completed one year from enactment of this title and 
     transmitted to the Secretary, the Senate Committee on Energy 
     and Natural Resources, and the House Resources Committee. The 
     study shall consist of a review of each unit of the National 
     Park System, excepting units designated as national parks to 
     determine if alternative management would result in equal or 
     better visitor services and resource protection. The Board is 
     also directed to review the organic legislation and history 
     of the National Park Service and its units and to develop 
     criteria to guide the Congress and the Secretary in adding 
     new units to the National Park System.
       Subsection (b) directs the Board, in consultation with the 
     National Park Service, to analyze and evaluate the current 
     conditions and future needs of each unit of the National Park 
     System for adequate visitor services. The Board is also 
     directed to identify units where new or additional services 
     should be provided. This evaluation is to be completed and 
     referred to the Secretary, the Senate Committee on Energy and 
     Natural Resources, and the House Committee on Resources 
     within one year after the enactment of this section.
       Subsection (c) directs the Board to monitor the 
     effectiveness and objectivity of the Secretary's program of 
     annual performance evaluations for concessioners and 
     commercial use contractors operating under contracts in units 
     of the National Park System and to provide their summarized 
     findings to the Secretary, the Senate Committee on Energy and 
     Natural Resources, and the House Committee on Resources on an 
     annual basis.
       Section 703 authorizes an annual appropriation of $700,000, 
     in addition to $275,000 to conduct the management system 
     study and $275,000 to conduct the visitor services study.
                                 ______

      By Mr. FAIRCLOTH (for himself, Mr. Dole, and Mr. Abraham):
  S. 1145. A bill to abolish the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development and provide for reducing Federal spending for housing and 
community development activities by consolidating and eliminating 
programs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, 
and Urban Affairs.


             THE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES AND EMPOWERMENT ACT

  Mr. FAIRCLOTH.
   Mr. President, on this day 30 years ago, the Department of Housing 
and Urban Development was created. Today, however, I have introduced 
legislation, along with Senators Dole and Abraham that will 
dramatically reform our Nation's housing policy and in the process, 
eliminate the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

  Mr. President, HUD was created in 1965. When it was created, the 
purpose of this Department was to revitalize our urban areas and 
provide safe, decent housing for all Americans.
  Mr. President, in short, HUD has been an enormous failure. Since 
1965, HUD has spent hundreds of billions of dollars. Yet today, despite 
this massive spending, we are no better off.
  Mr. President, when considering whether we should reinvent HUD or end 
it, each of us has to ask ourselves these questions: Are our inner 
cities better off than they were 30 years ago?
  Is the state of public housing better today than it was 30 years ago?
  Is housing more affordable today?
  Has homelessness been reduced? In my view it was not even a problem 
30 years ago.
  The answers to these questions is no--absolutely no to all of them.
  In fact our cities are more decayed and more dangerous today than 
ever.
  Solving these problems was supposed to be HUD's mission. In each, it 
has failed miserably.
  Imagine if we applied a performance standard like this in the private 
sector. Would any business that had not met its goals in 30 years still 
be in business. No, of course not, it would have gone out of business 
long ago, and HUD should have gone.
  HUD is a massive bureaucracy with over 11,000 employees. It has over 
240 housing programs--so many that the Secretary of HUD did not even 
know he had that many. HUD has over $192 billion in unused budget 
authority.
  HUD has even entangled the American taxpayer in 23,000 long-term 
contracts that run until the year 2020. 

[[Page S 12229]]
These are contingent liabilities that will have to be met by the 
taxpayers of this country.
  HUD's spending is increasing so rapidly that by the year 2000, 
housing assistance will be the largest discretionary spending function 
in our budget.
  Frankly, knowing all of this, I do not think we can afford not to 
abolish HUD. We have to stop it and soon. We have to end it and we need 
to do it soon.
  The bill I am introducing today will save $17 billion in budget 
authority over the next 5 years. We need these kind of real savings if 
we have any hope of reducing this deficit. When compared to the 
Cisneros budget figures, I am told by the Congressional Budget Office 
that this bill will save $88 billion as compared to its reinvention.
  Mr. President, beyond eliminating HUD, this bill reforms housing 
policy that, in my opinion, will dramatically improve the state of 
housing in the United States.
  This bill ends subsidies to public housing, but provides housing 
vouchers to individuals. This way, people will no longer be trapped in 
substandard public housing, instead they can choose to live where they 
want--in the kind of housing they want.
  They will, for the first time, have the freedom to choose, and this 
is what the vouchers will do.
  The legislation will also create block grants for housing, community 
development, and special populations. The critical element here is that 
there will not be a HUD in Washington that will micromanage everything 
the States and localities do with the funds. Because of this, the money 
will be better spent.
  Finally, Mr. President, the bill will reform FHA so that it must risk 
share with the private sector. This will avoid FHA problems of the 
past, like fraud, and putting people in homes they cannot afford, 
knowing they cannot afford them when they put them in those houses, but 
that are 100-percent insured by the taxpayers.
  Now, the private sector's money will be at stake, and because of 
this, FHA will function better.
  Mr. President, on this day, 30 years ago, August 10, 1965, President 
Johnson signed the bill creating HUD.
  When he signed the bill, he said the new HUD ``would defeat the enemy 
of decay that exists in our inner cities.''
  Thirty years later, this much we know--the enemy of decay is not a 
$26 billion bureaucracy in Washington, which is what HUD is.
  To end decay in our cities we need hard work, traditional values, and 
two-parent families and not government handouts. These things will 
fight decay in our Nation's cities--not HUD.
  I want to thank my colleagues, especially Senator Dole who has been a 
leader on this issue, and Senator Abraham. I would urge my colleagues 
to join us on this bill so that we can really reform housing policy--
not just tinker with it on the margins. This bill will do it, and I ask 
for the support of my colleagues.
                                 ______

      By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Cohen, Mr. D'Amato, Mr. Jeffords, 
        Mr. Kerry, Mr. Lieberman, and Mr. Moynihan):
  S. 1146. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to clarify 
the excise tax treatment of draft cider; to the Committee on Finance.


                         excise tax legislation

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, today I am introducing tax legislation 
designed to stimulate the apple industry in the United States. I am 
pleased that Senators Cohen, D'Amato, Jeffords, Kerry, Lieberman, and 
Moynihan are joining me as original cosponsors of this bill. This 
legislation contains a couple of technical changes to a bill I 
introduced earlier this year, S. 401.
  This bill will revise the Federal excise tax on hard apple cider, 
more commonly known as draft cider, to beer tax rates. As the ranking 
member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, I believe this small tax 
change will be of great benefit to cider makers and apple growers 
across the country.
  Draft cider is one of the oldest categories of alcoholic beverages in 
North America. Back in colonial times, nearly every innkeeper served 
draft cider to his or her patrons during the long winter. In fact, 
through the 19th century, beer and draft cider sold equally in the 
United States.
  Recently, draft cider has made a comeback in the United States and 
around the world. Our tax law, however, unfairly taxes draft cider at a 
much higher rate than beer despite the two beverages sharing the same 
alcohol level and consumer market. This tax treatment, I believes, 
creates an artificial barrier to the growth of draft cider. My 
legislation will correct this inequity.
  Present law taxes draft cider, regardless of its alcohol level, as a 
wine at a rate of $1.07 per gallon. My bill would clarify that draft 
cider containing not more than 7 percent alcohol would be taxed at the 
beer rate of 22.6 cents per gallon.
  I believe this tax change would allow draft cider producers to 
compete fairly with comparable beverage makers. As draft cider grows in 
popularity, apple growers around the Nation should prosper because 
draft cider is made from culled apples, the least marketable apples.
  The growth of draft cider should convert these least marketable 
apples, which account for about 20 percent of the entire U.S. apple 
production, into a high value product, helping our struggling apple 
growers. Indeed, I have received letters from officials at 10 State 
agriculture departments--Arizona, Connecticut, Georgia, Maine, 
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont and 
Virginia--supporting the taxing of draft cider at the beer rate because 
this change would allow apple farmers in their States to reap the 
benefits of an expanded culled apple market.
  I have also heard from the Northeast McIntosh Apple Growers 
Association, the New York Apple Association, the New England Apple 
Council and many apple farmers, processors and cider producers that 
support revising the excise tax on draft cider.
  I believe this small tax change will have a large positive impact on 
the Nation's apple industry. I urge my colleagues to support it.
  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. 1146

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

     SECTION 1. CLARIFICATION OF TAX TREATMENT OF DRAFT CIDER.

       (a) Draft Cider Containing Not More Than 7 Percent Alcohol 
     Taxed as Wine.--Subsection (b) of section 5041 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to imposition and 
     rate of tax) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(6) On draft cider derived primarily from apples or apple 
     concentrate and water, containing no other fruit product, and 
     containing at least one-half of 1 percent and not more than 7 
     percent of alcohol by volume, 22.6 cents per wine gallon.''
       (b) Excluded From Small Producer Credit.--Paragraph (1) of 
     section 5041(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
     (relating to credit for small domestic producers) is amended 
     by striking ``subsection (b)(4)'' and inserting ``paragraphs 
     (4) and (6) of subsection (b)''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply on and after the date of the enactment of this 
     Act.
                                 ______

      By Mr. HOLLINGS:
  S. 1148. A bill to revitalize the American economy and improve 
enforcement of the trade laws of the United States, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Finance.


                the economic revitalization act of 1995

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill to 
revive the economy and restore our preeminence in manufacturing. During 
the cold war, this Nation willingly subordinated its economic interests 
in order to maintain the Western alliance against communism. Forty-five 
years of commitment and sacrifice paid off when the Berlin Wall 
collapsed and democracy triumphed over totalitarianism.
  Now we have entered a new era of global competition in which power 
and influence will be derived from economic strength, not through the 
barrel of a gun or the tip of a missile. This Nation now faces fierce 
competition for market share in the international economy. To compete 
in the global marketplace, we must devote the same degree of commitment 
and sacrifice to restoring our economic strength as we devoted to the 
cold war.

[[Page S 12230]]

  At the beginning of the cold war, President Truman had the vision and 
foresight to create the institutions that would unify the West and 
stand as a bulwark for freedom. To coordinate policy, the National 
Security Council would serve as the broker between the Departments of 
State and Defense.
  Now in the post-cold war era where economic competition is 
preeminent, we need to have the same coordination as our economic 
policy. That is why this legislation creates an Economic Security 
Council to set the course for U.S. economic policy.
  Mr. President, restoring our economic strength will also require that 
we rethink the failed policies of the past. Last week, the last 
American manufacturer of television sets was sold to South Korea's LG 
Industries. The sale was the culmination of two decades of failed trade 
policy. To no avail, Zenith tried to use our anti-dumping laws to half 
the predatory pricing by their competition. They tried to use the 
antitrust laws and faced the unseemly specter of the Justice Department 
appearing on behalf of the foreign manufacturer. Despite promising 
developments in high definition television, Zenith succumbed after 6 
straight years of losses. Now HDTV will be produced by the Koreans. In 
this new era of economic competition, we can no longer afford to sit 
idly by while American industry withers under the relentless assault of 
foreign predatory trade practices.
  Mr. President, a cost structure revolution has taken place in the 
international marketplace. In industry after industry, markets have 
been cartelized. By controlling distribution networks and reaping 
monopoly rewards in home markets, foreign companies have engaged in 
relentless dumping into our market. By holding down their fixed costs, 
these companies have been driving
 American companies out of business.

  To attack these predatory trade practices, this bill class on us to 
improve our antidumping laws to prevent the circumvention of dumping 
orders and to make it easer for industries to prevail in threat cases. 
it also updates the enforcement of the antitrust laws. The antitrust 
laws were written to prevent the Carnegies, Morgans and Mellons from 
dominating the economy. In a global economy, the concentration of 
economic power stretches across borders. My bill amended the antitrust 
laws to enable U.S. companies to attack the anti-competitive practices 
that keep them out of foreign markets.
  Mr. President, not all the problems that afflict our economy are the 
product of foreign competition. Many of our wounds are self-inflicted. 
Our securities laws need to be updated to emphasize the creation of 
patient capital--long-term shareholders who will stick with a company 
over the long haul. With that in mind, my bill calls for the 
elimination of quarterly reporting requirements which force U.S. 
companies to focus on short-term investments to enhance shareholder 
value rather than long-term investment to improve competitiveness.
  Furthermore, this bill attacks the enemy within--those former U.S. 
Government officials who turn around and represent foreign interests at 
the expense of U.S. workers. As a remedy, this bill places a 5-year ban 
on lobbying by former officials who work for foreign interests. And to 
jumpstart research and development spending which now lags behind our 
competitors, the bill reestablishes the permanent research and 
development tax credit. It is paid for by imposing an import surcharge 
to eliminate our enormous trade deficits.
  Finally, I need to say a word about reorganization of Government. 
Some have come to Washington with one goal in mind--to tear down the 
Government. Our mission should not be to tear it down but to make it 
work. For example, there are those who advocate eliminating the 
Commerce Department. But in this new era of global competition, that 
would be the same as eliminating the Department of Defense during the 
cold war.
  Instead of destroying the Commerce Department, we should be 
strengthening the Department and turn it into a real Department of 
Trade and Industry. We should move the Export-Import Bank and the 
Overseas Private Investment Corporation into the Department to provide 
exporters with one-stop shopping. This would create a powerful export 
promotion agency to compete with the economic powerhouses on the 
Pacific rim.
  Mr. President, for 20 years real wages have stagnated in America. We 
have lost 2 million manufacturing jobs and lost an edge in critical 
technologies. Once the land of opportunity, America is now a country 
with the worst income distribution in the industrial world.
  Unless we wake up from our economic daydream, we will find ourselves 
a two-tiered society divided between rich and poor. Let's go to work to 
rebuild our economy and renew the American dream.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the full text of this 
bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:
       Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives of the United States of America in Congress 
     assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Economic Revitalization 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.
Sec. 1. Short title.
Sec. 2. Table of contents.
Sec. 3. Economic Security Council.

           TITLE I--ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTY LAWS

Sec. 101. Proprietary information.
Sec. 102. Downstream dumping.
Sec. 103. Application of the countervailing duty law to nonmarket 
              economies.
Sec. 104. Determinations of injury in antidumping and countervailing 
              investigations.
Sec. 105. Circumvention of antidumping and countervailing duty orders.
Sec. 106. Private right of action.
Sec. 107. Annual report on antidumping and countervailing duty program.

               TITLE II--ADJUSTMENT TO IMPORT COMPETITION

Sec. 201. Import relief.

            TITLE III--INTERNATIONAL UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES

Sec. 301. Identification of trade liberalization priorities.
Sec. 302. Annual review of trade agreements.
Sec. 303. National Trade Estimate.

                TITLE IV--PROVISIONS RELATING TO IMPORTS

Sec. 401. Child labor.
Sec. 402. Slave labor.

                     TITLE V--NEGOTIATING AUTHORITY

Sec. 501. Negotiation of agreements regarding tariff barriers.
Sec. 502. Repeal of fast track procedures.
Sec. 503. Applicability of National Environmental Policy Act.
Sec. 504. Representations on advisory committees.

                   TITLE VI--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

Sec. 601. Scofflaw penalties for multiple customs law offenders.
Sec. 602. Authority to establish manufacturing subzones.
Sec. 603. Congressional disapproval resolution.
Sec. 604. Representation or advising of foreign persons.
Sec. 605. Payment of certain customs duties.
Sec. 606. Application of antitrust laws.
Sec. 607. Elimination of quarterly reports.
Sec. 608. Secretary of Labor to publish quarterly reports of runaway 
              plants.
Sec. 609. Mandatory Exon-Florio review of sale of critical technology 
              company.
Sec. 610. Additional IRS agents for transfer pricing cases.
Sec. 611. Transfer of ITC functions to Commerce Department; Termination 
              of ITC.
Sec. 612. Transfer of Overseas Private Investor Corporation and Export-
              Import Bank to Commerce Department.
Sec. 613. Establishment of NOAA as Independent Agency.
Sec. 614. Surcharge on imports; research and development tax credit.
     SEC. 3. ECONOMIC SECURITY COUNCIL.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established in the Executive 
     Office of the President a council to be known as the Economic 
     Security Council (hereinafter in this section referred to as 
     the ``Council'').
       (b) Membership of the Council.--(1) The Council shall be 
     composed of--
       (A) the President;
       (B) the Vice President;
       (C) the Secretary of State;
       (D) the Secretary of the Treasury;
       (E) the Secretary of Defense;
       (F) the Secretary of Agriculture;
       (G) the Secretary of Commerce;
       (H) the Secretary of Labor;
       (I) the United States Trade Representative; and
       (J) any other appropriate Federal official appointed by the 
     President to serve on the Council.
       (2) The President shall preside over meetings of the 
     Council. In the President's absence, the President may 
     designate a member of the Council to preside in the 
     President's place.
 
[[Page S 12231]]

       (c) Founctions of the Council.--The Council shall advise 
     the President with respect to the integration of national and 
     international policies relating to economics and trade so as 
     to enable the President and the departments and agencies of 
     the Federal Government to cooperate more effectively.
       (d) Employees of the Council.--The Council shall have a 
     staff to be headed by an Executive Secretary who shall be 
     appointed by the President. The Executive Secretary, subject 
     to the direction of the Council and in accordance with the 
     provisions of title 5, United States Code, may appoint and 
     fix the compensation of such personnel as may be necessary to 
     perform such duties as may be prescribed by the Council in 
     connection with the performance of its functions.
       (e) Recommendations and Reports.--
       (1) In general.--The Council shall, from time to time, make 
     such recommendations and such other reports to the President 
     as the Council considers to be appropriate or as the 
     President may require.
       (2) Annual testimony before senate committees.--The 
     Executive Secretary shall present testimony not less often 
     than once each year before the Committee on Banking, Housing, 
     and Urban Affairs, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation, and the Committee on Finance of the Senate, 
     on a date and topic to be established by the committees.

           TITLE I--ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTY LAWS

     SEC. 101. PROPRIETARY INFORMATION.

       Section 777 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1677f) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (b)(1)(B)(ii) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(ii) a statement that the information should not be 
     released under administrative protective order.'';
       (2) by striking subparagraph (A) of subsection (c)(1) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(A) In general.--Upon receipt of an application (before 
     or after receipt of the information requested), which 
     describes with particularity the information requested and 
     sets forth the reasons for the request, the administering 
     authority and the Commission may make proprietary information 
     submitted by any other party to the investigation available 
     under a protective order described in subparagraph (B).'';
       (3) by striking subparagraphs (C), (D), and (E) of 
     subsection (c)(1);
       (3) by inserting after ``paragraph (1),'' in subsection 
     (c)(2) the following: ``or the Commission denies a request 
     for proprietary information submitted by the petitioner or an 
     interested party in support of the petitioner concerning the 
     domestic price or cost of production of the like product,''; 
     and
       (5) by striking subsections (d) and (e) and redesignating 
     subsections (f) through (i) as (d) through (g), respectively.

     SEC. 102. DOWNSTREAM DUMPING.

       (a) In General.--Subtitle D of title VII of the Tariff Act 
     of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1677 et seq.) is amended by inserting 
     immediately after section 771B the following:

     SEC. 771C. DOWNSTREAM DUMPING.

       ``(a) Definitions.--As used in this section--
       ``(1) Downstream Dumping.--The term `downstream dumping' 
     means a course of conduct in which a product is routinely 
     used as a significant part, component, assembly, subassembly, 
     or material in the manufacture or production of merchandise 
     subject to investigation under subtitle B, and such product 
     is purchased at a price that--
       ``(A) is lower than the generally available price of the 
     product in the country of manufacture or production, or
       ``(B) is lower than the price at which the product would be 
     generally available in the country of manufacture or 
     production but for the artificial depression of of such 
     general available price by reason of any subsidy or other 
     sales at below foreign market value.
       ``(2) Significant part.--The term `significant part' means 
     a part the cost of which constitutes not less than 20 percent 
     of the total cost of the product.
       ``(b) Inclusion of Amount Attributable to Downstream 
     Dumping.--If the administering authority determines, during 
     the course of such an investigation, that downstream dumping 
     is occurring or has occurred with respect to any such 
     product, the administering authority, in calculating the 
     amount of any antidumping duty on such merchandise, shall 
     include an amount equal to the difference between--
       ``(1) the price at which the product was purchased, and
       ``(2) either--
       ``(A) the generally available price (referred to in 
     subsection (a)(1)) of the product, or
       ``(B) the price (referred to in subsection (a)(2)) of the 
     product that would pertain, but for the artificial 
     depression,

     whichever is appropriate.
       ``(c) Scope of Inquiry of Administering Authority.--The 
     administering authority is not required, in undertaking such 
     an investigation, to consider the presence of downstream 
     dumping, beyond that state in the manufacture or production 
     of the class or kind of merchandise that immediately precedes 
     the final manufacturing or production stage before export to 
     the United States, unless reasonably available information 
     indicates that such dumping has occurred or is occurring 
     before such immediately preceding stage and is having or has 
     had a substantial effect on the price of the merchandise.''.
       (b) Imposition of Antidumping Duties.--Section 731(2) of 
     the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1673(2)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (A)(ii);
       (2) by inserting ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (B); and
       (3) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
       ``(C) an industry producing a product used in the 
     manufacture or production of the foreign merchandise has been 
     materially injured or threatened with material injury, or the 
     establishment of such an industry in the United States has 
     been materially retarded,''.
       (c) Definition of Interested Party.--Subparagraphs (C), 
     (D), (E), and (F) of section 771(9) of the Tariff Act of 1930 
     (19 U.S.C. 1677(9) (C), (D), (E), and (F)) are each amended 
     by inserting immediately after ``product'' the following: 
     ``or a product that is used in the manufacture or production 
     of a like product''.
       (d) Conforming Amendment.--The table of contents for title 
     VII of the Tariff Act of 1930 is amended by inserting 
     immediately after the item relating to section 771B the 
     following:
``Sec. 771C. Downstream dumping.''.
     SEC. 103. APPLICATION OF THE COUNTERVAILING DUTY LAW TO 
                   NONMARKET ECONOMIES.

       Section 771(5) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 
     1677(5)) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C);
       (2) by striking ``subparagraph (A)'' in subparagraph (C), 
     as so redesignated, and inserting ``subparagraphs (A) and 
     (B)''; and
       (3) by inserting immediately after subparagraph (A) the 
     following:
       ``(B) Subsidies in nonmarket economy countries.--Benefits 
     that would constitute a countervailable subsidy under 
     subparagraph (A) shall be treated as a subsidy if provided to 
     an enterprise or industry, or group of enterprises or 
     industries, in a nonmarket economy country. In such cases, 
     the amount of the subsidy is equal to the difference between 
     the price at which the merchandise under investigation is 
     sold in the United States, and the weighted average of the 
     prices at which such or similar merchandise, for market 
     economy countries selected by the administering authority as 
     being at a stage of economic development comparable to that 
     of the country under investigation, is sold either--
       ``(i) for consumption in the home market of those 
     countries, or
       ``(ii) to other countries, including the United States,
     as such prices are established by public and private 
     statistical information, by information supplied by 
     cooperating industries in such selected countries, and by 
     price information submitted by the petitioner and not 
     rebutted by the foreign producer.''.

     SEC. 104. DETERMINATIONS OF INJURY IN ANTIDUMPING AND 
                   COUNTERVAILING DUTY INVESTIGATIONS.

       (a) Impact on Affected Domestic Industry.--Section 
     771(7)(C)(iii) of Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 
     1677(7)(C)(iii)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``(B)(iii)'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``(B)(i)(III)''; and
       (2) by striking the last sentence and inserting in lieu 
     thereof the following: ``In evaluating such factors, the 
     Commission shall consider what effect other factors, 
     including the existence of a national economic recovery, have 
     had upon such factors, and whether an increase in the sale of 
     imports compared to sales of domestic products indicates that 
     there is a likelihood that such declines will occur.''.
       (b) Standard for Material Injury Determination.--Section 
     771(7)(E)(ii) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 
     1677(7)(E)(ii)) is amended by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting the following: ``; except that factors other 
     than those enumerated in subparagraph (B)(i) shall not alone 
     be the basis for a determination of the Commission that there 
     is no material injury or threat of material injury to United 
     States producers.''.
       (c) Threat of Material Injury.--Section 771(7)(F)(i) of the 
     Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1677(7)(F)(i)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subclause (VIII);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of subclause (IX); 
     and
       (3) by adding at the end thereof the following:
       ``(X) capital formation and capital market constraints that 
     result from dumping.''.

     SEC. 105. CIRCUMVENTION OF ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING 
                   DUTY ORDERS.

       (a) Merchandise Completed or Assembled in United States.--
     Section 781(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1677j(a) 
     is amended--
       (1) by adding ``and'' at the end of paragraph (1)(A)(iii);
       (2) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (1)(B);
       (3) by striking paragraphs (1)(C) and (1)(D);
       (4) by striking paragraph (2) and redesignating paragraph 
     (3) as paragraph (2);
       (5) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph 
     (2) as subparagraphs (C) and (D), respectively; and
       (5) by inserting immediately after paragraph (2)(A), as 
     redesignated, the following new subparagraph:
       ``(B) the value of the imported parts and components 
     referred to in paragraph (1)(B) or the value of imported 
     parts and components from another country that were utilized 
     in the production or manufacture of the merchandise which was 
     the subject of such order or finding,''.

[[Page S 12232]]

       (b) Merchandise Completed or Assembled in Other Foreign 
     Countries.--Section 781(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 
     U.S.C. 1677j(b)) is amended--
       (1) by adding ``and'' at the end of paragraph (1)(B);
       (2) by striking paragraphs (1)(C) and (1)(D);
       (3) by redesignating subparagraph (E) as subparagraph (C);
       (4) by striking paragraph (2) and redesignating paragraph 
     (3) as paragraph (2);
       (5) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph 
     (2), as redesignated, as subparagraphs (C) and (D), 
     respectively; and
       (5) by inserting immediately after paragraph (2)(A), as 
     redesignated, the following new subparagraph:
       ``(B) the value of the imported parts and components 
     referred to in paragraph (1)(B) or the value of imported 
     parts and components from another country that were utilized 
     in the production or manufacture of the merchandise which was 
     the subject of such order or finding,''.

     SEC. 106. PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION.

       (a) Unfair Competition.--(1) Section 801 of the Act of 
     September 8, 1916 (15 U.S.C. 72), is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``Sec. 801. (a) No person shall import or sell within the 
     United States any article manufactured or produced in a 
     foreign country if--
       ``(1) such article is imported or sold within the United 
     States at a United States price which is less than the 
     foreign market value or constructed value of such article; 
     and
       ``(2) such importation or sale--
       ``(A) causes or threatens material injury to industry or 
     labor in the United States; or
       ``(B) prevents, in whole or in part, the establishment or 
     modernization of any industry in the United States.
       ``(b) Any interested party who shall be injured in his 
     business or property by reason of an importation or sale in 
     violation of this section may bring a civil action in the 
     district court of the District of Columbia or in the Court of 
     International Trade against any manufacturer or exporter of 
     such article or any importer of such article into the United 
     States who is related to such manufacturer or exporter.
       ``(c) In any action brought under subsection (b), upon a 
     finding of liability on the part of the defendant, the 
     plaintiff shall--
       ``(1)(A) be granted such equitable relief as may be 
     appropriate, which may include an injunction against further 
     importation into, or sale or distribution within, the United 
     States by such defendant of the articles in question, or (B) 
     if such injunctive relief cannot be timely provided or is 
     otherwise inadequate, recover damages for the injuries 
     sustained; and
       ``(2) recover the costs of the action, including reasonable 
     attorney's fees.
       ``(d) The standard of proof in any action filed under this 
     section is a preponderance of the evidence. Upon a prima 
     facie showing of the elements set forth in subsection (a), or 
     upon a final determination adverse to the defendant by the 
     Department of Commerce or the United States International 
     Trade Commission under section 735 of the Tariff Act of 1930 
     (19 U.S.C. 1673d) relating to imports of the article in 
     question for the country in which the manufacturer of the 
     article is located, which final determination shall be 
     considered a prima facie case for purposes of this Act, the 
     burden of rebutting such prima facie case shall be upon the 
     defendant.
       ``(e) Whenever it shall appear to the court that justice 
     requires that other parties be brought before the court, the 
     court may cause them to be summoned, without regard to where 
     they reside, and the subpoenas for such purpose may be served 
     and enforced in any district of the United States.
       ``(f) The acceptance by any foreign manufacturer, producer, 
     or exporter of any right or privilege conferred upon him to 
     sell his products or have his products sold by another party 
     in the United States shall be deemed equivalent to an 
     appointment by the foreign manufacturer, producer, or 
     exporter of the District Director of the United States 
     Customs Service of the Department of the Treasury for the 
     port through which the article is commonly imported to be the 
     true and lawful agent upon whom may be served all lawful 
     process in any action brought under this section.
       ``(g)(1) An action may be brought under this section only 
     if such action is commenced within four years after the date 
     on which the cause of action accrued.
       ``(2) The running of the statute of limitations provided in 
     paragraph (1) shall be suspended while any administrative 
     proceedings under section 731, 732, 733, 734, or 735 of the 
     Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1673-1673d) relating to the 
     importations in question, or any appeal of a final 
     determination in such proceeding, is pending and for one year 
     thereafter.
       ``(h) If a defendant in any action brought under subsection 
     (b) fails to comply with any discovery order or other order 
     or decree of the court, the court may--
       ``(1) enjoin the further importation into, or the sale or 
     distribution within, the United States by such defendant of 
     articles which are the same as, or similar to, those articles 
     which are alleged in such action to have been sold or 
     imported under the conditions described in subsection (b) 
     until such time as the defendant complies with such order or 
     decree; or
       ``(2) take any other action authorized by law or by the 
     Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including entering judgment 
     for the plaintiff.
       ``(i)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     confidential or privileged status accorded by law to any 
     documents, evidence, comments, or information shall be 
     preserved in any action under this section.
       ``(2) The court in any action brought under this section 
     may--
       ``(A) examine, in camera, any confidential or privileged 
     material;
       ``(B) accept depositions, documents, affidavits, or other 
     evidence under sale; and
       ``(C) disclose such material under such terms and 
     conditions as the court may order.
       ``(j) Any action brought under this section shall be 
     advanced on the docket and expedited in every way possible.
       ``(k) For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) The terms ``United States price', `foreign market 
     value', `constructed value', `subsidy', and `material 
     injury', shall have the meaning given such terms by title VII 
     of the Tariff Act of 1930.
       ``(2) If--
       ``(A) a subsidy is provided to the manufacturer, producer, 
     or exporter of any article, and
       ``(B) such subsidy is not included in the foreign market 
     value or constructed value of such article (but for this 
     paragraph), the foreign market value of such article or the 
     constructed value of such article shall be increased by the 
     amount of such subsidy.
       ``(l) The court shall permit the United States to intervene 
     in any action, suit, or proceeding under this section, as a 
     matter of right. The United States shall have all the rights 
     of a party.
       ``(m) Any order by a court under this section is subject to 
     nullification by the President pursuant to the President's 
     authority under section 203 of the International Emergency 
     Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1702).''.
       (2) Section 1 of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12) is amended 
     by inserting immediately after ``nineteen hundred and 
     thirteen;'' the following: ``section 801 of the Act of 
     September 8, 1916, entitled `An Act to raise revenue, and for 
     other purposes' (15 U.S.C. 72);''.
       (b) Private Enforcement Action.--(1) Chapter 95 of title 
     28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
``Sec. 1586. Private enforcement action.
       ``(a) Any interested party who shall be injured in his 
     business or property by a fraudulent or grossly negligent 
     violation of section 592(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 
     U.S.C. 1592(a)) may bring a civil action in the district 
     court of the District of Columbia or in the Court of 
     International Trade, without respect to the amount in 
     controversy.
       ``(b) Upon proof by an interested party that he has been 
     damaged by a fraudulent or grossly negligent violation of 
     section 592(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1592(a)), 
     such interested party shall--
       ``(1) be granted such equitable relief as may be 
     appropriate, which may include an injunction against further 
     importation into the United States of the articles or 
     products in question; or
       ``(2) if such injunctive relief cannot be timely provided 
     or is otherwise inadequate, recover damages for the injuries 
     sustained; and
       ``(3) recover the costs of suit, including reasonable 
     attorney's fees.
       ``(c) For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) The term `interested party' means--
       ``(A) a manufacturer, producer, or wholesaler in the United 
     States of a like product or competing product; or
       ``(B) a trade or business association a majority of whose 
     members manufacture, produce, or wholesale a like product or 
     competing product in the United States.
       ``(2) The term `like product' means a product which is 
     like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
     characteristics and uses to products being imported into the 
     United States in violation of section 592(a) of the Tariff 
     Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1592(a)).
       ``(3) The term `competing product' means a product which 
     competes with or is a substitute for products being imported 
     into the United States in violation of section 592(a) of the 
     Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1592(a)).
       ``(d) The court shall permit the United States to intervene 
     in any action, suit, or proceeding under this section, as a 
     matter of right. The United States shall have all the rights 
     of a party.''.
       (2) The chapter analysis of chapter 95 of title 28, United 
     States Code, is amended by adding immediately after the item 
     relating to section 1585 the following:
``1856. Private enforcement action.''.
     SEC. 107. ANNUAL REPORT ON ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING 
                   DUTY PROGRAM.

       (a) Report to Congress.--The Secretary of Commerce, with 
     the assistance of the Commissioner of Customs, shall submit 
     to Congress an annual report on the antidumping and 
     countervailing duty program.
       (b) Contents.--(1) The annual report submitted under 
     subsection (a) shall include--
       (A) information based on Department of Commerce and United 
     States Customs Service data, concerning (i) the status of the 
     antidumping and countervailing duty program, (ii) the status 
     of individual antidumping and countervailing duty orders, 
     (iii) key problems with the program, and (iv) agency plans 
     for improvement; and
       (B) reports on progress toward achieving the objectives 
     listed in paragraph (2).
       (2) The objectives referred to in paragraph (1)(B) are as 
     follows:
       (A) The revamping of Department of Commerce and United 
     States Customs Service program goals and management controls 
     to provide effective means for measuring the 

[[Page S 12233]]
     performance of the antidumping and countervailing duty program.
       (B) The establishment by the Customs Service of management 
     controls to provide oversight of the performance of Customs 
     Service field offices with respect to the antidumping and 
     countervailing duty program.
       (C) The completion by the Customs Service of planned 
     software enhancements to provide automated antidumping and 
     countervailing duty data on final duty assessments, 
     liquidations, billings, payments, and warehouse withdrawals.
       (D) The standardization and improvement of the creation, 
     maintenance, and use of the paper files at the Customs 
     Service that pertain to the antidumping and countervailing 
     duty program.
       (E) The elimination by the Customs Service and Department 
     of Commerce of their liquidation, billing protest, and scope 
     determination backlogs.
       (F) With respect to the determination of the scope of an 
     antidumping and countervailing duty order--
       (i) the establishment of a 30-day deadline for the 
     Department of Commerce to issue preliminary or final scope 
     determinations;
       (ii) the issuance of a national directive by the Customs 
     Service on handling imports subject to a pending scope 
     determination at the Department of Commerce; and
       (iii) the establishment by the Customs Service of a 
     national policy of suspending liquidation and assessing 
     duties on imports apparently within the scope of an 
     antidumping or countervailing duty order, unless otherwise 
     instructed by the Department of Commerce.
       (G) Improvement of procedures for Harmonized Tariff 
     Schedule classifications involving imports subject to an 
     antidumping or countervailing duty order or to a pending 
     dispute regarding the scope of such an order.
       (H) Completion by the Customs Service of its work to 
     replace its accounting software, strengthen its financial 
     controls, and implement the debt collection reforms 
     recommended in the 1990 Customs Revenue Accounting Study.
       (I) Correction of the Customs Service importer 
     identification database to eliminate multiple identification 
     numbers for single importers.
       (J) Institution of Customs Service procedures to prevent 
     importers from obtaining new or additional identification 
     numbers where the importers, or their affiliates or 
     predecessors, have delinquent debts to the Customs Service.
       (K) Establishment of Customs Service management controls to 
     ensure that its field offices issue timely bills for the 
     collection of antidumping or countervailing duties.
       (L) Streamlining of Department of Commerce procedures for 
     handling billing protests in a timely manner, together with 
     establishment of effective Customs Service procedures for 
     monitoring such protests.
       (M) Establishment of policies and procedures within the 
     Department of Commerce and Customs Service for prompt 
     response by their personnel to United States industry 
     requests for information on antidumping or countervailing 
     duty activities.
       (N) Implementation of policies and procedures at the 
     Department of Commerce and Customs Service for the prompt 
     investigation of complaints by United States industry 
     concerning antidumping or countervailing duty enforcement.

               TITLE II--ADJUSTMENT TO IMPORT COMPETITION

     SEC. 201. IMPORT RELIEF.

       (a) Secretary of Commerce To Assume ITC Functions.--Section 
     202 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2252) is amended by 
     striking ``the Commission'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``the Secretary of Commerce''.
       (b) Petitions and Adjustment Plans.--Section 202(a) of the 
     Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2252(a)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``the Office of the United States Trade 
     Representative and'' in paragraph (3);
       (2) by striking ``and the United States Trade 
     Representative (hereafter in this chapter referred to as the 
     `Trade Representative')'' in paragraph (4); and
       (3) by striking ``Trade Representative'' the first four 
     times it appears in paragraph (5) and inserting ``the 
     Secretary of Commerce''; and
       (4) by striking ``Trade Representative'' the last time it 
     appears in that paragraph and inserting ``Secretary of 
     Commerce''.
       (c) Substantial Cause Determinations.--Section 202(c)(1)(C) 
     of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2252(c)(1)(C)) is amended 
     by inserting before the period at the end the following: ``, 
     or a significant reduction in market share, profits, 
     employment, investment, or research and development which 
     would not have occurred in the absence of increased 
     quantities of imports, even though similar reductions due to 
     other causes might have occurred''.
       (d) Determination of Affected Domestic Industry.--Section 
     202(c)(4) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2252(c)(40) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (C) 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) shall, in a case involving a broad range of related 
     products, many or all of which are produced by the same 
     domestic producers, treat as such domestic industry the 
     producers of such products, even though the products may not 
     be like or directly competitive with one another.''.
       (e) Secretary of Commerce Recommendations.--Section 202(e) 
     of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2252(e)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``203(e)'' in paragraph (3) and inserting 
     ``203(d)'';
       (2) by striking clauses (ii) and (iii) of paragraph (5) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(ii) the extent to which workers and firms in the 
     domestic industry are--
       ``(I) benefiting from adjustment assistance and other 
     manpower programs, and
       ``(II) engaged in worker retraining efforts,
       ``(iii) the efforts being made, or to be implemented, by 
     the domestic industry (including the efforts included in any 
     adjustment plan or commitment submitted to the Secretary of 
     Commerce under section 201(b)) to make a positive adjustment 
     to import competition,'';
       (3) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (5)(B)(iv);
       (4) by striking the period at the end of paragraph 
     (5)(B)(v) and inserting in lieu thereof a comma; and
       (5) by adding at the end of paragraph (5)(B) the following:
       ``(vi) the extent to which there is diversion of foreign 
     exports to the United States market by reason of foreign 
     restraints,
       ``(vii) the potential for circumvention of any action taken 
     under this section, and
       ``(viii) the national security interests of the United 
     States.''.
       (f) Limitations on Investigations.--Section 202(h) of the 
     Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2252(h)) is amended by striking 
     ``section 203(a)(3)(A), (B), (C), or (E)'' and inserting the 
     following: ``section 202(e)(2)(A), (B), or (C), or section 
     202(e)(4)(A) with respect to orderly marketing agreements,''.

            TITLE III--UNFAIR INTERNATIONAL TRADE PRACTICES

     SEC. 301. IDENTIFICATION OF TRADE LIBERALIZATION PRIORITIES.

       (a) Extension of Period for Identification.--Section 310 of 
     the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2420) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``By no later than the date that is 30 days 
     after the date in calendar year 1989, and also the date in 
     calendar year 1990, on which the report required under 
     section 181(b) is submitted to the appropriate Congressional 
     committees,'' in subsection (a)(1) and inserting ``By no 
     later than September 30 of each calendar year,'';
       (2) by striking ``such report'' in subsection (B) and 
     inserting ``the most recent report submitted under section 
     181(b)'';
       (3) by inserting ``, Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation, Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban 
     Affairs, and Committee on Foreign Relations'' in subsection 
     (a)(1)(D) after ``Finance''; and
       (4) by inserting ``, Committee on Commerce, Committee on 
     Banking, Urban Affairs, and Committee on International 
     Relations'' in subsection (a)(1)(D) after ``Ways and Means''; 
     and
       (5) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(e) Petitions by Congressional Committees.--If the 
     Committee on Finance, Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation, Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban 
     Affairs, or Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, or 
     the Committee on Ways and Means, Committee on Commerce, 
     Committee on Banking, Urban Affairs, or Committee on 
     International Relations of the House of Representatives, 
     determines (by a resolution adopted by such Committee) that 
     an investigation under this chapter should be initiated with 
     respect to any barriers and market distorting practices of 
     any foreign country that such Committee determines to be a 
     country that maintains a consistent pattern of import 
     barriers or market distorting practices, such Committee shall 
     be eligible to file a petition under section 302(a) and shall 
     file a petition under section 302(a) with respect to such 
     barriers and practices.''.
       (b) Mandatory Action.--(1) Section 301(a)(1) of the Trade 
     Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2411(a)(1)) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (A);
       (B) by inserting ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (B)(ii); 
     and
       (C) by inserting after subparagraph (B)(ii), the following 
     new subparagraph:
       ``(C) a priority practice--
       ``(i) identified under section 310, or
       ``(ii) with respect to a priority foreign country 
     identified under section 310,

     constitutes an act, policy, or practice of a foreign country 
     which is unreasonable or discriminatory and burdens or 
     restricts United States Commerce;''.
       (2) Section 304(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 
     U.S.C. 2414(a)(1)(A)(ii)) is amended by striking 
     ``(a)(1)(B)'' and inserting ``(a)(1)(B), (a)(1)(C),''.
       (c) Estimation of Barriers to Market Access.--Section 
     181(a)(1)(C) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
     2241(a)(1)(C)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``, if feasible,''; and
       (2) by striking the period at the end and inserting the 
     following: ``; and if it is not feasible to make an estimate 
     under this subparagraph, the Trade Representative shall 
     provide an explanation of why such estimate is not 
     feasible.''.

     SEC. 302. ANNUAL REVIEW OF TRADE AGREEMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter I of title III of the Trade Act of 
     1974 (19 U.S.C. 2411 et seq.) is amended by inserting 
     immediately after section 306 the following new section:
     
[[Page S 12234]]


     ``SEC. 306A. ANNUAL REVIEW OF TRADE AGREEMENTS.

       ``(a) Request for Review.--
       ``(1)(A) An interested person may file with the Trade 
     Representative a written request for a review to determine 
     whether a foreign country is in compliance with any trade 
     agreement such country has with the United States. Such 
     request may be filed at any time after the date which is 
     within 30 days after the anniversary of the effective date of 
     such agreement, but not later than 90 days before the date of 
     expiration of such agreement.
       ``(B) A written request filed under subparagraph (A) 
     shall--
       ``(i) identify the person filing the request and the 
     interest of that person which is affected by the 
     noncompliance of a foreign country with a trade agreement 
     with the United States;
       ``(ii) describe the rights of the United States being 
     denied under such trade agreement; and
       ``(iii) include information reasonably available to the 
     person regarding the failure of the foreign country to comply 
     with such trade agreement.
       ``(C) For purposes of this subsection--
       ``(i) the term `interested person' means a person with a 
     significant economic interest that is affected by the failure 
     of a foreign country to comply with a trade agreement.
       ``(ii) The term `trade agreement' means an agreement with 
     the United States and does not include multilateral trade 
     agreements such as the General Agreement on Tariffs and 
     Trade.
       ``(b) Review and Determination.--
       ``(1) Upon the filing of a request under subsection (a), 
     the Trade Representative shall commence the requested review. 
     In conducting the review, the Trade Representative may, as 
     the Trade Representative determines appropriate, consult with 
     the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of Agriculture, or 
     the head of any other relevant Federal agency.
       ``(2)(A) On the basis of the review conducted under 
     paragraph (a), the Trade Representative shall determine 
     whether any act, policy, or practice of the foreign country 
     that is the subject of the review is in material 
     noncompliance with the terms of the applicable trade 
     agreement. Such determination shall be made no later than 90 
     days after the request for review was filed under subsection 
     (a).
       ``(B) In making a determination under paragraph (1) with 
     respect to a foreign country's compliance with a trade 
     agreement, the Trade Representative shall take into account, 
     among other relevant factors--
       ``(i) achievement of the objectives of the agreement,
       ``(ii) adherence to commitments given, and
       ``(iii) any evidence of actual patterns of trade that do 
     not reflect patterns of trade which would reasonably be 
     anticipated to flow from the concessions or commitments of 
     such country based on the international competitive position 
     and export potential of a United States industry.
       ``(C) The Trade Representative may seek the advice of the 
     Commission when considering the factors described in 
     subparagraph (B).
       ``(c) Further Action.--
       ``(1) If the Trade Representative determines under 
     subsection (b) that an act, policy, or practice of a foreign 
     country is in material noncompliance with the applicable 
     trade agreement, the Trade Representative shall determine 
     what further action to take under section 301(a).
       ``(2) For purposes of section 301, any determination made 
     under subsection (b) shall be treated as a determination made 
     under section 304(a)(1).
       ``(3) In determining what further action (including 
     possible sanctions) to take under paragraph (1), the Trade 
     Representative shall seek to minimize any adverse impact on 
     existing business relations or economic interests of United 
     States persons, including consideration of taking action with 
     respect to future products for which a significant volume of 
     current trade does not exist.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of contents of chapter 
     1 of title III of the Trade Act of 1974 is amended by 
     inserting immediately after the item relating to section 306 
     the following new item:
``Sec. 306A. Annual review of trade agreements.''.
       (c) International Obligations.--The amendments made by this 
     section shall not be construed to require actions 
     inconsistent with the international obligations of the United 
     States, including the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.

     SEC. 303. NATIONAL TRADE ESTIMATE.

       (a) Report to Appropriate Committees of Senate.--Section 
     181(b)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C.2241 (b)(1)) is 
     amended by striking the comma after ``President'' and ``the 
     Committee on Finance of the Senate, and appropriate 
     committees of'' and inserting ``and to the appropriate 
     committees of the Senate and the''.
       (b) Report to Include Top 10 Trade Deficits.--Section 
     181(b) of such Act (19 U.S.C. 2241(b)) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraph (3) as (4); and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
       ``(3) The National Trade Estimate shall include an 
     enumeration of the 10 most significant trade deficits between 
     the United States and other countries on an industry-by-
     industry basis.''.

                TITLE IV--PROVISIONS RELATING TO IMPORTS

     SEC. 401. CHILD LABOR.

       (a) Findings; Purpose; Policy.--
       (1) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
       (A) Principle 9 of the Declaration of the Rights of the 
     Child proclaimed by the General Assembly of the United 
     Nations on November 20, 1959, states that ``* * * the child 
     shall not be admitted to employment before an appropriate 
     minimum age; he shall in no case be caused or permitted to 
     engage in any occupation or employment which would prejudice 
     his health or education, or interfere with his physical, 
     mental, or moral development * * *''.
       (B) According to the International Labor Organization, 
     worldwide an estimated 200,000,000 children under age 15 are 
     working, many of them in dangerous industries like mining and 
     fireworks.
       (C) Children under age 15 constitute approximately 11 
     percent of the workforce in some Asian countries, 17 percent 
     in parts of Africa, and a reported 12-to-26 percent in many 
     countries in Latin America.
       (D) The number of children under age 15 who are working, 
     and the scale of their suffering, increase every year, 
     despite the existence of more than 20 International Labor 
     Organization conventions on child labor and laws in many 
     countries which purportedly prohibit the employment of 
     underage children.
       (E) In many countries, children under age 15 lack either 
     the legal standing or means to protect themselves from 
     exploitation in the workplace.
       (F) The employment of children under age 15 commonly 
     deprives the children of the opportunity for basic education 
     and also denies gainful employment to millions of adults.
       (G) The prevalence of child labor in many developing 
     countries is rooted in widespread poverty that is 
     attributable to unemployment and underemployment, precarious 
     incomes, low living standards, and insufficient education and 
     training opportunities.
       (H) The employment of children under age 15, often at 
     pitifully low wages, undermines the stability of families and 
     ignores the importance of increasing jobs, aggregate demand, 
     and purchasing power among adults as a catalyst to the 
     development of internal markets and the achievement of broad-
     based, self-reliant economic development in many developing 
     countries.
       (I) Adult workers in the United States and other developed 
     countries should not have their jobs imperiled by imports 
     produced by child labor in developing countries.
       (2) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to curtail 
     worldwide employment of children under age 15 by--
       (A) eliminating the role of the United States in providing 
     a market for foreign products made by underage children; and
       (B) encouraging other nations to join in a ban on trade in 
     such products.
       (3) Policy.--It is the policy of the United States--
       (A) to discourage actively the employment of children under 
     age 15 in the production of goods for export or domestic 
     consumption;
       (B) to strengthen and supplement international trading 
     rules with a view to renouncing the use of underage children 
     in production as a means of competing in international trade;
       (C) to amend United States law to prohibit the entry into 
     commerce of products resulting from the labor of underage 
     children; and
       (D) to offer assistance to foreign countries to improve the 
     enforcement of national laws prohibiting the employment of 
     children under age 15 and to alleviate the underlying poverty 
     that is often the cause of the commercial exploitation of 
     children under age 15.
       (b) Proposal for Worldwide Trade Ban.--In pursuit of the 
     policy set forth in this section, the President is urged to 
     propose, as soon as possible, to the United Nations Economic 
     and Social Rights Committee that the Convention for the 
     Rights of the Child, which is to be submitted to the General 
     Assembly of the United Nations, include a worldwide ban on 
     trade in products of child labor.
       (c) Identification of Foreign Countries Permitting Use of 
     Child Labor.--
       (1) Periodic reviews.--The Secretary of Labor shall 
     undertake periodic reviews (and the first such review shall 
     be undertaken within 180 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act) to identify any foreign country that--
       (A) has not adopted, or is not enforcing effectively, 
     prohibitions against the use of child labor in the production 
     of products within the country (including designated zones 
     therein); and
       (B) has on a continuing basis exported products of child 
     labor of the country to the United States.
       (2) Petition.--
       (A) Any person may file a petition with the Secretary of 
     Labor requesting that a particular foreign country be 
     identified under paragraph (1). The petition must set forth 
     the allegations in support of the request.
       (B) Within 90 days after receiving a petition under 
     subparagraph (A), the Secretary of Labor shall--
       (i) decide whether or not the allegations in the petition 
     warrant further action by the Secretary of Labor under 
     paragraph (1) with regard to the foreign country; and
       (ii) notify the petitioner of the decision under clause (i) 
     and the facts and reasons supporting the decision.
       (3) Pre-identification procedure.--Before identifying a 
     foreign country under paragraph (1), the Secretary of Labor 
     shall-- 

[[Page S 12235]]

       (A) consult with the United States Trade Representative, 
     the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of the Treasury 
     regarding such an action;
       (B) publish notice in the Federal Register stating that 
     such an identification is being considered and inviting the 
     submission within a reasonable time of written comment from 
     the public; and
       (C) take into account the information obtained under 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B).
       (4) Withdrawl of identification.--
       (A) Subject to subparagraph (B), the Secretary of Labor may 
     withdraw the identification of any foreign country under 
     paragraph (1) if information available to the Secretary 
     indicates that such action is appropriate.
       (B) No withdrawal under subparagraph (A) may take effect 
     earlier than the 60th day after the date on which the 
     Secretary submits to the Congress a written report--
       (i) stating that in the opinion of the Secretary of Labor 
     the foreign country concerned has adopted, and is effectively 
     enforcing, laws prohibiting the production of products with 
     child labor within the country (including designated zones 
     therein); and
       (ii) stating the facts on which such opinion is based and 
     any other reason why the Secretary of Labor considers the 
     withdrawal appropriate.
       (C) No withdrawal under subparagraph (A) may take effect 
     unless the Secretary of Labor--
       (i) publishes notice in the Federal Register that such a 
     withdrawal is under consideration and inviting the submission 
     within a reasonable time of written comment from the public 
     on such a withdrawal; and
       (ii) takes into account the information received under 
     clause (i) before preparing the report required under 
     subparagraph (B).
       (5) Publication of decisions; maintenance of list.--The 
     Secretary of Labor shall--
       (A) promptly following an identification decision under 
     paragraph (1) publish in the Federal Register--
       (i) the name of each foreign country so identified, and
       (ii) the text of each decision made under paragraph 
     (2)(B)(i) and a statement of the facts and reasons supporting 
     the decision;
       (B) promptly following a withdrawal decision under 
     paragraph (4) publish the name of each foreign country 
     regarding which an identification is so withdrawn; and
       (C) maintain in the Federal Register a current list of all 
     foreign countries identified under paragraph (1).
       (6) Report.--In furtherance of paragraph (1), the Secretary 
     of Labor shall transmit to the Congress, within 180 days 
     after the date of enactment of this Act, and not later than 
     March 1 of each subsequent year, a full and complete report 
     with respect to the national laws and practices of foreign 
     countries pertaining to the commercial exploitation of 
     children. In preparing such a report, the Secretary shall 
     consult with those officials listed in paragraph (3)(A). The 
     Secretary shall use all available information regarding the 
     commercial exploitation of children, including information 
     made available by the International Labor Organization, 
     international trade union secretariats, trade unions, 
     children's advocacy organizations, religious groups, and 
     human rights organizations. Each report shall include entries 
     on all foreign countries, shall describe which countries 
     condone the commercial exploitation of children by law or in 
     practice, and shall describe which countries by law and in 
     practice effectively discourage the commercial exploitation 
     of children, including the domestic mechanisms for the 
     enforcement of laws and penalties intended to deter the 
     commercial exploitation of children. Wherever possible, each 
     report shall also identify those industries within particular 
     foreign countries in which there is demonstrable evidence of 
     commercial exploitation of children.
       (d) Restrictions on Entry of Certain Articles.--
       (1) Entry prohibited.--
       (A) Except a provided in subparagraph (B), during the 
     effective identification period for a foreign country the 
     Secretary of the Treasury may not permit the entry of any 
     manufactured article that is a product of that country.
       (B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the entry of a 
     manufactured article--
       (i) for which a certification that meets the requirements 
     of paragraph (2) is provided;
       (ii) that is entered under any subheading in subchapter IV 
     or VI of chapter 98 (relating to personal exemptions) of the 
     Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States; or
       (iii) that was exported from the foreign country and was en 
     route to the United States before the first day of the 
     effective identification period for such country.
       (2) Documentation.--
       (A) The Secretary of the Treasury shall prescribe the form 
     and content of documentation, for submission in connection 
     with the entry of a manufactured article, that satisfies the 
     Secretary of the Treasury that the importer of the article 
     has undertaken reasonable steps to ensure, to the extent 
     practicable, that the article is not a product of child 
     labor.
       (B) The documentation required by the Secretary of the 
     Treasury under subparagraph (A) shall include written 
     evidence that the agreement setting forth the terms and 
     conditions of the acquisition or provision of the imported 
     article includes the condition that the article not be a 
     product of child labor.
       (e) Prohibitions; Penalties.--
       (1) Prohibition.--It is unlawful--
       (A) during the effective identification period applicable 
     to a foreign country, to attempt to enter any manufactured 
     article that is a product of that country if the entry is 
     prohibited under subsection (d)(1)(A); or
       (B) to violate any regulation prescribed under subsection 
     (f).
       (2) Civil penalty.--Any person who commits any unlawful act 
     set forth in paragraph (1) is liable for a civil penalty of 
     not to exceed $25,000.
       (3) Criminal penalty.--In addition to being liable for a 
     civil penalty under paragraph (2), any person who 
     intentionally commits any unlawful act set forth in paragraph 
     (1) is, upon conviction, liable for a fine of not less than 
     $10,000 and not more than $35,000, or imprisonment for 1 
     year, or both.
       (4) Application of customs law enforcement provisions.--The 
     violations set forth in paragraph (1) shall be treated as 
     violations of the customs laws for purposes of applying the 
     enforcement provisions of the Tariff Act of 1930, including--
       (A) the search, seizure, and forfeiture provisions;
       (B) section 592 (relating to penalties for entry by fraud, 
     gross negligence, or negligence); and
       (C) section 619 (relating to compensation to informers).
       (f) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe regulations 
     that are necessary or appropriate to carry out this section.
       (g) Special Rules; Definitions.--For purposes of this 
     section--
       (1) A manufactured article shall be treated as being a 
     product of child labor if the article--
       (A) was fabricated, assembled, or processed, in whole or 
     part,
       (B) contains any part that was fabricated, assembled, or 
     processed, in whole or part, or
       (C) was mined, quarried, pumped, or otherwise extracted,

     by one or more children who engaged in the fabrication, 
     assembly, processing, or extraction--
       (i) in exchange for remuneration (regardless to whom paid), 
     subsistence, goods or services, or any combination of the 
     foregoing;
       (ii) under circumstances tantamount to involuntary 
     servitude; or
       (iii) under exposure to toxic substances or working 
     conditions otherwise posing serious health hazards.
       (2) The term ``child'' means an individual who has not 
     attained age 15.
       (3) The term ``effective identification period'' means, 
     with respect to a foreign country, the period that--
       (A) begins on the date of that issue of the Federal 
     Register in which the identification of the country is 
     published under subsection (c)(5)(A); and
       (B) terminates on the date of that issue of the Federal 
     Register in which the withdrawal of the identification 
     referred to in clause (i) is published under subsection 
     (c)(5)(B).
       (4) The term ``entered'' means entered, or withdrawn from 
     warehouse for consumption, in the customs territory of the 
     United States.
       (5) The term ``foreign country'' includes any foreign 
     instrumentality. Any possession or territory of a foreign 
     country that is administered separately for customs purposes 
     shall be treated as a separate foreign country.
       (6) The term ``manufactured article'' means any good that 
     is fabricated, assembled, or processed. The term also 
     includes any mineral resource (including any mineral fuel) 
     that is entered in a crude state. Any mineral resource that 
     at entry has been subjected to only washing, crushing, 
     grinding, powdering, levigation, sifting, screening, or 
     concentration by flotation, magnetic separation, or other 
     mechanical or physical processes shall be treated as having 
     been processed for the purposes of this section.

     SEC. 402. SLAVE LABOR.

       (a) In General.--Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 
     U.S.C. 1307) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 307. PROHIBITION ON IMPORTATION OR TRANSPORTATION OF 
                   PROHIBITED PRODUCTS.

       ``(a) Findings and Policy.--
       ``(1) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       ``(A) some states in the international community employ 
     various forms of convict labor, forced labor, indentured 
     labor, and involuntary labor;
       ``(B) these forms of labor are used for several purposes, 
     including political coercion, education or punishment, 
     economic development, labor discipline, or racial, social, 
     national, or religious discrimination;
       ``(C) goods, wares, articles, and resources produced or 
     extracted by these forms of labor are exported, directly or 
     indirectly, to other states in the international community, 
     including the United States;
       ``(D) the use of forced or compulsory labor constitutes 
     disrespect for basic human rights and fundamental freedoms, 
     as set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 
     the Charter of the United Nations, and other international 
     covenants;
       ``(E) the Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes 
     the `right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and 
     favorable conditions of work' and prohibits slavery and the 
     slave trade `in all their forms';
       ``(F) the United States, as a sovereign state in the 
     international community, has pledged itself to protect and 
     defend human rights within its territory and to protect and 
     promote human rights, including the rights 

[[Page S 12236]]
     of individuals, to be free from forced labor and involuntary servitude, 
     throughout the world; and
       ``(G) this commitment to human rights, generally, and to 
     the termination of forced labor and involuntary servitude, 
     specifically, is consistent with the basic principles on 
     which the United States was founded, as embodied in such 
     documents as the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of 
     Rights, with the population against slavery in the Thirteenth 
     Amendment, and with the historical traditions of the United 
     States as a humanitarian nation; and
       ``(H) the Senate demonstrated the commitment of the United 
     States to the termination of forced labor and involuntary 
     servitude on May 14, 1991, when the Senate gave its advice 
     and consent to the ratification of the Convention Concerning 
     the Abolition of Forced Labor (Convention No. 105), adopted 
     by the International Labor Conference (40th session) at 
     Geneva, Switzerland, on June 25, 1957.
       ``(2) Policy.--It is the policy of the United States to--
       ``(A) take measures, to the maximum extent practicable, to 
     protect the rights of individuals to be free from force labor 
     and involuntary servitude;
       ``(B) enable the citizens of the United States to be free 
     from unknowingly supporting or subsidizing the policies of 
     states in the international community which employ forced 
     labor and involuntary servitude; and
       ``(C) deny United States economic support, by consumer 
     purchase, investment, lending, or otherwise, to states in the 
     international community which use forced labor.
       ``(b) Prohibition on Importation or Transportation.--
       (1)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), no 
     prohibited product may be imported into the United States nor 
     transported in interstate commerce.
       ``(B) The provisions of subparagraph (A) shall not apply to 
     items vital to national security.
       ``(2) No United States national or any other person subject 
     to the jurisdiction of the United States may invest in, or 
     make loans to, a foreign joint venture involving the use of 
     forced labor.
       ``(3) The Secretary of the Treasury shall prescribe such 
     regulations as may be necessary for the enforcement of this 
     subsection.
       ``(4) For purposes of this subsection--
       ``(A) the term `forced labor' means all work or service 
     which is exacted from any person under the menace of any 
     penalty for its nonperformance and for which the worker does 
     not offer himself voluntarily;
       ``(B) the term `prohibited product' means any goods, wares, 
     articles, merchandise, natural resources, and services 
     produced, mined, extracted, manufactured, or provided wholly 
     or in part in any foreign country by forced labor; and
       ``(C) the term `United States national' means--
       ``(i) a natural person who is a citizen of the United 
     States; and
       ``(ii) a corporation or other legal entity which is 
     organized under the laws of the United States or of any 
     State, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto 
     Rico, or the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, if 
     natural persons who are citizens of the United States own, 
     directly or indirectly, 50 percent or more of the outstanding 
     capital stock or other beneficial interest of such 
     corporation or entity.
       ``(c) Penalties.--(1) With respect to any violation of 
     subsection (b)(1) or (2), an order under this section shall 
     require the person or entity to pay a civil penalty of--
       ``(A) $10,000 for one violation;
       ``(B) $100,000 in the case of a person or entity previously 
     subject to one order under this section; or
       ``(C) $1,000,000 in the case of a person or entity 
     previously subject to more than one order under this section.
       ``(2)(A) Before imposing an order described in paragraph 
     (1) against a person or entity for a violation of subsection 
     (b)(2), the Secretary of the Treasury shall provide the 
     person or entity with notice and, upon request made within a 
     reasonable time (of not less than 30 days, as established by 
     the Secretary of the Treasury) of the date of the notice, a 
     hearing respecting the violation.
       ``(B) Any hearing so requested shall be conducted before an 
     administration law judge. The hearing shall be conducted in 
     accordance with the requirements of section 554 of title 5, 
     United States Code. The hearing shall be held at the nearest 
     practicable place to the place where the person or entity 
     resides or of the place where the alleged violation occurred. 
     If no hearing is so requested, the Secretary of the 
     Treasury's imposition of the order shall constitute a final 
     and unappealable order.
       ``(C) If the administrative law judge determines, upon the 
     preponderance of the evidence received, that a person or 
     entity named in the complaint has violated subsection (b)(1) 
     or (2), the administrative law judge shall state his findings 
     of fact and issue and cause to be served on such person or 
     entity an order described in paragraph (1).
       ``(3) The decision and order of an administrative law judge 
     shall become the final agency decision and order of the 
     Secretary of the Treasury unless, within 30 days, the 
     Secretary of the Treasury modifies or vacates the decision 
     and order, in which case the decision and order of the 
     Secretary of the Treasury shall become a final order under 
     this subsection. The Secretary of the Treasury may not 
     delegate his authority under this paragraph.
       ``(4) A person or entity adversely affected by a final 
     order respecting an assessment may, within 45 days after the 
     date the final order is issued, file a petition in the Court 
     of Appeals for the appropriate circuit for review of the 
     order.
       ``(5) If a person or entity fails to comply with a final 
     order issued under this subsection against the person or 
     entity, the Attorney General shall file a suit to seek 
     compliance with the order in any appropriate circuit court of 
     the United States. In any such suit, the validity and 
     appropriateness of the final order shall not be subject to 
     review.
       ``(d) Enforcement by Private Persons.--(1) The prohibitions 
     contained in subsection (b)(1) and (2) may be enforced by 
     civil actions in appropriate United States district courts 
     without regard to the amount in controversy and in 
     appropriate State or local courts of general jurisdiction. A 
     civil action shall be commenced within 1 year after plaintiff 
     obtains knowledge of the alleged violation of subsection 
     (b)(1) has occurred, or reasonably should have obtained 
     knowledge, except that the court shall continue such civil 
     case brought pursuant to this section from time to time 
     before bringing it to trial if an administrative hearing 
     pursuant to subsection (c)(2) has commenced and is being 
     diligently conducted so as to reach an expeditious 
     conclusion.
       ``(2)(A) Except as provided in paragraph (3)--
       ``(i) any person to whom any prohibited product has been 
     offered for purchase or in reasonable likelihood will be 
     offered for purchase, or
       ``(ii) any public interest group or human rights 
     organization, may commence a civil suit on behalf of that 
     person, group, or organization--
       ``(I) to enjoin any person, including the United States and 
     any other governmental instrumentality or agency (to the 
     extent permitted by the Eleventh Amendment to the 
     Constitution), who is alleged to be in violation of any 
     provision of this section or regulation issued under the 
     authority of this section;
       ``(II) to compel the Secretary of the Treasury to enforce 
     any prohibitions specified in subsection (b)(1) or (2) 
     through an order for penalties under subsection (c); or
       ``(III) to compel the Secretary of the Treasury to perform 
     any act or duty under subsection (b)(1) or (2) which is not 
     discretionary with the Secretary and which the Secretary has 
     failed to carry out.
       ``(B) The district court shall have jurisdiction, without 
     regard to the amount in controversy or the citizenship of the 
     parties, to enforce any such provision or regulation, or to 
     order the Secretary to perform such act or duty, as the case 
     may be.
       ``(3) No action may be commenced under paragraph (2)(A)--
       ``(A) if 60 days have not elapsed after written notice of 
     the violation has been given to the Secretary of the 
     Treasury, and to any alleged violator of this section or any 
     regulation issued under this section;
       ``(B) if the Secretary of the Treasury has commenced an 
     action to impose a penalty pursuant to subsection (c); or
       ``(C) if the United States has commenced and is diligently 
     prosecuting a criminal action in a court of the United States 
     or State to address a violation of any such provision or 
     regulations.
       ``(e) Treble Damages.--Any person in competition with a 
     person importing or transporting items, or investing or 
     loaning funds, in violation of subsection (b)(1) or (2), who 
     is injured as a result of such violation, may bring an action 
     in a United States district court and shall recover three-
     fold the amount of the damages sustained by such 
     violation.''.
       (b) Repeals.--Sections 1761 and 1762 of title 18, United 
     States Code, are repealed.

                     TITLE V--NEGOTIATING AUTHORITY

     SEC. 501. NEGOTIATION OF AGREEMENTS REGARDING TARIFF 
                   BARRIERS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1102(a) of the Omnibus Trade and 
     Competitiveness Act of 1988 (19 U.S.C. 2902(a)) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(a) Agreements Regarding Tariff Barriers.--Whenever the 
     President determines that one or more existing duties or 
     other import restrictions or any foreign country or the 
     United States are unduly burdening and restricting the 
     foreign trade of the United States and the purposes, 
     policies, and objectives of this title will be promoted 
     thereby, the President before June 1, 1993, may enter into 
     trade agreements with foreign countries.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1105(a)(2) of the 
     Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 (19 U.S.C. 
     2904(a)(2)) is amended by striking ``proclamation or'' each 
     place it appears.

     SEC. 502. REPEAL OF FAST TRACK PROCEDURES.

       (a) Repeal of Procedures in Trade Act of 1974.--Sections 
     151 through 154 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2191-
     2194) are repealed.
       (b) Repeal of Provisions in Omnibus Trade and 
     Competitiveness Act of 1988.--
       (1) Subsections (b), (c), (d), and (e) of section 1103 of 
     the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 (19 U.S.C. 
     2903) are repealed.
       (2) Paragraph (4) of section 1102(c) of the Omnibus Trade 
     and Competitiveness Act of 1988 (19 U.S.C. 2902(c)) is 
     repealed.
       (3) Paragraph (4) of section 1107(a) of the Omnibus Trade 
     and Competitiveness Act of 1988 (19 U.S.C. 2906(a)) is 
     repealed.
     
[[Page S 12237]]


     SEC. 503. APPLICABILITY OF NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.

       Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act 
     of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)) is amended by inserting 
     ``including bilateral and multilateral negotiations with 
     other countries on trade with other matters)'' immediately 
     after ``human environment''.

     SEC. 504. REPRESENTATION ON ADVISORY COMMITTEES.

       (a) Advisory Committee for Trade Policy and Negotiations.--
     Section 135(b)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
     2155)(B)(1)) is amended by inserting ``environmental 
     interests, health and safety interests,'' immediately after 
     ``retailers,''.
       (b) General Policy Advisory Committees.--Section 135(c)(1) 
     of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2155(c)(1)) is amended by 
     inserting ``environmental, consumer, health and safety,'' 
     immediately after ``defense,'' each place it appears.
       (c) Sectoral and Functional Advisory Committees.--Section 
     135(c)(2) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2155(c)(2)) is 
     amended by inserting ``environmental, consumer, health and 
     safety,'' immediately after ``agricultural,''.

                   TITLE VI--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

     SEC. 601. SCOFFLAW PENALTIES FOR MULTIPLE CUSTOMS LAW 
                   OFFENDERS.

       (a) Order by Secretary of Treasury.--
       (1) The Secretary of the Treasury shall by order prohibit 
     any person who is a multiple customs law offender from--
       (A) introducing, or attempting to introduce, foreign goods 
     into the customs territory of the United States; and
       (B) engaging, or attempting to engage, any other person for 
     the purpose of introducing, on behalf of the multiple customs 
     law offender, foreign goods into such customs territory. If 
     the multiple customs law offender is a firm, corporation, or 
     other legal entity, the order shall apply to all officers and 
     principals of the entity. The order shall also apply to any 
     employee or agent of the entity if that employee or agent was 
     directly involved in the violations of the customs laws 
     concerned.
       (2) The prohibition contained in the order issued under 
     paragraph (1) shall apply during the period which begins on 
     the 60th day after the date on which the order is issued and 
     ends on the 3rd anniversary of such 60th day.
       (b) Notifications by Agencies.--Each Federal agency shall 
     notify the Secretary of the Treasury of all final convictions 
     and assessments made incident to the enforcement of the 
     customs laws under the jurisdiction of such agency.
       (c) Penalties.--Whoever violates, or knowingly aids or 
     abets the violation of, an order issued by the Secretary of 
     the Treasury under this section shall be fined not more than 
     $250,000 or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.
       (d) Rulemaking.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall 
     prescribe rules to carry out this section, including rules 
     governing the procedures to be used in issuance of orders 
     under subsection (a). Such rules shall also include a list of 
     the customs laws.
       (e) Definitions.--For purposes of this section, the term--
       (1) ``customs laws'' means any Federal law providing a 
     criminal or civil penalty for an act, or failure to act, 
     regarding the introduction of, or the attempt to introduce, 
     foreign goods into the customs territory of the United 
     States, including sections 496 and 1001 (but only with 
     respect to customs matters), and any section of chapter 17 of 
     title 18, United States Code, and section 592 of the Tariff 
     Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1592); and
       (2) ``multiple customs law offender'' means a person that, 
     during any period of seven consecutive years after the date 
     of enactment of this act, was either convicted of, or 
     assessed a civil penalty for, three separate violations of 
     one or more customs laws finally determined to involve fraud 
     or criminal culpability.

     SEC. 602. AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH MANUFACTURING SUBZONES.

       The Foreign Trade Zones Act (19 U.S.C. 81a st seq.) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new section:
       ``Sec. 22. (a) After the date of enactment of this section, 
     the Board shall not authorize the establishment of a subzone 
     for manufacturing unless the Board finds, based on clear and 
     convincing evidence, that the establishment of such a subzone 
     will result in--
       ``(1) significant net public benefits, taking into account 
     significant adverse effects;
       ``(2) additional substantial exports from the United 
     States;
       ``(3) the encouragement of activity related to import 
     displacement or substitution;
       ``(4) the generation or sustaining of employment and 
     investment in the United States;
       ``(5) no negative effect on a remedial action or program 
     instituted by the United States to counter an international 
     unfair trade practice; and
       ``(6) no material harm to an existing industry in the 
     United States.
       ``(b) Decisions by the Board with respect to the 
     establishment of a subzone described in subsection (a) shall 
     be made by the Board members in their personal capacities, 
     and authority to make such decisions shall not be delegated 
     except in extraordinary circumstances.''.

     SEC. 603. CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL RESOLUTION.

       Subsection (f) of section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 
     1962 (19 U.S.C. 1862) is repealed.

     SEC. 604. REPRESENTATION OR ADVISING OF FOREIGN PERSONS.

       (a) FARA Definitions.--
       (1) Section 1(c) of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 
     1938 (22 U.S.C. 611(c)) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``agent of a foreign'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``representative of a foreign'';
       (B) by striking ``an agent of a foreign'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof `` a representative of a foreign''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``For 
     purposes of clause (1), a foreign principal shall be 
     considered to control a person in major part if the foreign 
     principal holds 50 percent or more equitable ownership in 
     such person.''.
       (2) Section 1(j) of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 
     1938 (22 U.S.C. 611(j)) is amended by striking ``propaganda'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``promotional material''.
       (3)(A) Section 1(d) of the Foreign Agents Registration Act 
     of 1938 (22 U.S.C. 611(d)) is amended by striking ``agent'' 
     each plane it appears and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``representative''.
       (B) Section 1(o) of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 
     1938 (22 U.S.C. 611(o)) is amended by striking ``propaganda'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``promotional material''.
       (C) Section (2)(a) and (f)) of the Foreign Agents 
     Registration Act of 1938 (22 U.S.C. 612(a) and (f) is amended 
     by striking ``an agent'' each place it appears and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``a representative''.
       (D) Section 2 of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 
     1938 (22 U.S.C. 612), as amended by subparagraph (C) of this 
     paragraph, is further amended by striking ``agent'' each 
     place it appears and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``representative''.
       (E) Section 3 of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 
     1938 (22 U.S.C. 613) is amended--
       (i) by striking ``agent'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``representative''; and
       (ii) in subsection (f)--
       (I) by striking ``an agent'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``a representative''; and
       (II) by striking ``any agent'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``representative''.
       (F) Section 4 of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 
     1938 (22 U.S.C. 614) is amended--
       (i) by striking ``an agent'' each place it appears and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``representative'';
       (ii) by striking ``propaganda'' each place it appears and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``promotional material'';
       (iii) by striking ``such agent'' each place it appears and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``such representative'';
       (iv) by striking ``agent'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``representative''; and
       (v) by striking ``any agent'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``any representative''.
       (G) Section 5 of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 
     1938 (22 U.S.C. 615) is amended--
       (i) by striking ``Every agent'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``Every representative'';
       (ii) by striking ``an agent'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``a representative''; and
       (iii) by striking ``every agent'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``every representative''.
       (H) Section 6 of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 
     1938 (22 U.S.C. 616) is amended--
       (i) by striking ``propaganda'' each place it appears and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``promotional material''; and
       (ii) by striking ``agent'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``representative''.
       (I) Section 7 of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 
     1938 (22 U.S.C. 617) is amended--
       (i) by striking ``an agent'' each place it appears and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``a representative''; and
       (ii) by striking ``such agent'' each place it appears and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``such representative''.
       (J) Section 8 of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 
     1938 (22 U.S.C. 618) is amended--
       (i) by striking ``propaganda'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``promotional material'';
       (ii) by striking ``an agent'' each place it appears and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``any representative''.
       (iii) by striking ``any agent'' each place it appears and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``any representative''; and
       (iv) by striking ``such agent'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``such representative''.
       (K) Section 11 of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 
     1938 (22 U.S.C. 621) is amended by striking ``propaganda'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``Promotional material''.
       (b) Exemptions.--
       (1) Section 3(d) of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 
     1938 (22 U.S.C. 613(d)) is amended by inserting immediately 
     before the semicolon at the end the following proviso: ``: 
     Provided, That any person relying on this subsection shall 
     notify the Attorney General of such reliance in such manner 
     and form as the Attorney General may prescribe by 
     regulation''.
       (2) Section 3(g) of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 
     1938 (22 U.S.C. 613(g)) is amended by striking ``or any 
     agency'' and all that follows except the period at the end.
       (3) Section 1(q) of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 
     1938 (22 U.S.C. 611(q)) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (ii) of the 
     proviso; and

[[Page S 12238]]

       (B) by inserting immediately before the period at the end 
     the following: ``, and (iv) such activities do not involve 
     the representation of the interests of the foreign principal 
     before any agency or official of the Government of the United 
     States other than providing information in response to 
     requests by such agency or official or as a necessary part of 
     a formal judicial or administrative proceeding, including the 
     initiation of such a proceeding''.
       (c) Civil Penalties; Subpoena Power.--Section 8 of the 
     Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 (22 U.S.C. 618) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(i)(1) Any person who is determined, after notice and 
     opportunity for an administrative hearing--
       ``(A) to have failed to file when such filing is required, 
     a registration statement under section 2(a) or a supplement 
     thereto under section 2(b),
       ``(B) to have omitted a material fact required to be stated 
     therein, or
       ``(C) to have made a false statement with respect to such a 
     material fact,

     shall be required to pay a civil penalty in an amount not 
     less than $2,000 or more than $5,000 for each violation 
     committed. In determining the amount of the penalty, the 
     Attorney General shall give due consideration to the nature 
     and duration of the violation.
       ``(2)(A) Whenever the Attorney General has reason to 
     believe that any person may be in possession, custody, or 
     control of any documentary material relevant to an 
     investigation regarding any violation of paragraph (1) or of 
     section 5, the Attorney General may, before bringing any 
     civil or criminal proceeding thereon, issue in writing, and 
     cause to be served upon such person, a civil investigative 
     demand requiring such person to produce such material for 
     examination.
       ``(B) Civil investigative demands issued under this 
     paragraph shall be subject to the applicable provisions of 
     section 1968 of title 18, United States Code.''.
       (d) Annual Report.--Section 11 of the Foreign Agents 
     Registration Act of 1938 (22 U.S.C. 621) is amended by 
     striking ``shall, from time to time, make a report'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``shall report annually''.
       (e) Separate Section of Criminal Division, Department of 
     Justice.--There is established within the Criminal Division 
     of the Department of Justice a separate section which shall 
     enforce the provisions of the Foreign Agents Registration Act 
     of 1938 and chapter 11 of title 18, United States Code, as 
     amended by this section, and the provisions of all other laws 
     relating to lobbying activities in the United States.
       (f) Amendments to Chapter 11 of Title 18, United States 
     Code.--
       (1)(A) Chapter 11 of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting immediately after section 207 the 
     following new section:
``Sec. 207a. Limitation on the representation or advising of foreign 
              persons by certain former Federal officers and employees 
              and members of the uniformed services
       ``(a)(1) Except as provided in subsection (d), any person 
     who serves as an officer or employee, or a member of a 
     uniformed service, described in subsection (c), may not, 
     during the period specified in paragraph (2), knowingly act 
     as an agent or attorney for or otherwise represent or advise, 
     for compensation--
       ``(A) a government of a foreign country or a foreign 
     political party;
       ``(B) a person outside of the United States, unless such 
     person is an individual who is a citizen of the United 
     States; or
       ``(C) a partnership, association, corporation, 
     organization, or other combination of persons organized under 
     the laws of or having its principal place of business in a 
     foreign country, if the representation or advice relates 
     directly to a matter in which the United States is a party or 
     has a direct and substantial interest. For purposes of this 
     paragraph, the term `compensation' means any payment, gift, 
     benefit, reward, favor, or gratuity which is provided, 
     directly or indirectly, for services rendered.
       ``(2) The period referred to in paragraph (1)--
       ``(A) in the case of a person who is an officer or employee 
     described under subsection (c)(1), (2), or (3), is the five-
     year period after that persons's service as such officer or 
     employee has ceased; and
       ``(B) in the case of a person who is an officer or employee 
     described under subsection (c)(4) or 5, is the two-year 
     period after that person's service as such officer or 
     employee has ceased.
       ``(b) Any person described in subsection (c) who violates 
     subsection (a) shall be punished as provided in section 216 
     of the title.
       ``(c) The prohibitions set forth in subsection (a) apply 
     to--
       ``(1) the President of the United States;
       ``(2) the Vice President of the United States;
       ``(3) an individual who serves in a position in levels I 
     and II of the Executive Schedule as listed in sections 5312 
     and 5313 of title 5, United States Code;
       ``(4) an individual who--
       ``(A) is appointed by the President under section 
     105(a)(2)(A) of title 3, United States Code;
       ``(B) is appointed by the Vice President under section 
     106(a)(1)(A) of such title 3;
       ``(C) is not described in paragraph (3) or subparagraph (A) 
     or (B) and serves in a position in level I, level II, level 
     III, level IV, or level V of the Executive Schedule; or
       ``(D) is a member of a uniformed service in a pay grade of 
     0-7 or higher and is serving on active duty; and
       ``(5) each Member of Congress.
       ``(d) The prohibitions set forth in subsection (a) shall 
     not apply to a person described under subsection (c) to the 
     extent the person is engaging only in--
       ``(A) the soliciting or collecting of funds and 
     contributions within the United States to be used only for 
     medical aid and assistance, or for food and clothing to 
     relieve human suffering, if such solicitation or collection 
     of funds and contributions is in accordance with applicable 
     law;
       ``(B) activities in furtherance of bona fide religious, 
     charitable, scholastic, academic, or scientific pursuits or 
     of the fine arts; or
       ``(C) activities in furtherance of the purposes of an 
     international organization of which the United States is a 
     member.
       ``(e)(1) For purposes of subsection (c)(4)(D), the term 
     `uniformed service' means the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine 
     Corps, Coast Guard, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration, and the Public Health Service.
       ``(2) For purposes of this section, the service of a member 
     or former member of a uniformed service shall be considered 
     to have ceased upon such member's discharge or release from 
     active duty.''.
       (B) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 11 of 
     title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting 
     immediately after the item relating to section 207 the 
     following new item:
``207a. Limitation on the representation or advising of foreign persons 
              by certain former Federal officers and employees and 
              members of the uniformed services.''.
       (2) Section 216 of title 18, United States Code, is amended 
     by inserting ``207a,'' immediately after ``207,'' each place 
     it appears.
       (3)(A) Subject to subparagraph (B), this subsection and the 
     amendments made by this subsection take effect January 1, 
     1996.
       (B) The amendments made by this subsection do not apply to 
     a person whose service as an officer or employee to which 
     such amendments apply terminated before the effective date of 
     such amendments.
       (C) Subparagraph (B) does not preclude the application of 
     the amendments made by this subsection to a person with 
     respect to service as an officer or employee by that person 
     on or after the effective date of such amendments.

     SEC. 605. PAYMENT OF CERTAIN CUSTOMS DUTIES.

       (a) Transaction Value of Imported Merchandise.--
       (1) Section 402(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 
     1401a(b)(1)) is amended--
       (A) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``and'';
       (B) in subparagraph (E), by striking the period and 
     inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon;
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(F) the cost of transporting the merchandise to the port 
     of entry in the United States; and
       ``(G) the cost of insuring the merchandise prior to entry 
     into the United States.''; and
       (D) by striking ``(A) through (E)'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``(A) through (G)''.
       (2) Section 402(b)(4)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 
     U.S.C. 1401a(b)(4)(A)) is amended by striking ``exclusive 
     of'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``including''.
       (b) Deductive Value.--Section 402(d)(3)(A) of the Tariff 
     Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1401a(d)(3)(A)) is amended--
       (1) by striking clause (ii); and
       (2) by redesignating clauses (iii) through (v) as clauses 
     (ii) through (iv), respectively.
       (c) Computed Value.--Section 402(e)(1) of the Tariff Act of 
     1930 (19 U.S.C. 1401a(e)(1)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' in subparagraph (C);
       (2) by striking the period in subparagraph (D) and 
     inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(E) the costs of transporting the merchandise to the port 
     of entry in the United States; and
       ``(F) the cost of insuring the merchandise prior to entry 
     into the United States.''.

     SEC. 606. APPLICATION OF ANTITRUST LAWS.

       (a) Export Foreclosure.--
       (1) In general.--The Attorney General shall take 
     appropriate action to initiate export foreclosure antitrust 
     cases under section 7 of the Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. 6a), and 
     under any other appropriate antitrust law. The Attorney 
     General shall develop and maintain a list of practices that 
     are to be the subject of such actions and the countries in 
     which those practices occur, organized in order of priority 
     based upon the economic impact of the practices.
       (2) Report.--The Attorney General shall, from time to time, 
     publish the list developed and maintained under paragraph 
     (1).
       (b) Best Evidence Rule Waived for Unreasonable Failure of 
     Foreign Defendants To Comply With Discovery Orders in Export 
     Foreclosure Antitrust Cases.--If the defendant in an export 
     foreclosure antitrust case unreasonably fails to respond to a 
     discovery request, then the application of Rule 1002 of the 
     Federal Rules of Evidence shall be waived with respect to 
     proof of the contents of a writing, recording, or photograph 
     that is the subject of the request.
       (c) Unrelated Home Market Arrangements May Be Taken in 
     Account in Determining Predatory Pricing.--In an export 
     foreclosure antitrust case brought under section 1 of the 
     Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. 1) 

[[Page S 12239]]
     against a foreign defendant for predatory pricing, the court may take 
     into account the amount, reasonableness, and relationship to 
     fair-market-value of rents received by the defendant in its 
     home market for the purpose of determining whether the 
     plaintiff has established the recoupment element.
       (d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       (1) Export foreclosure antitrust case.--The term ``export 
     foreclosure antitrust case'' means an action brought under 
     the antitrust laws of the United States against a person 
     engaged in antitrust competitive acts or practices outside 
     the United States that cause harm to the United States export 
     trade without regard to whether the United States consumers 
     are directly injured by such acts or practices.
       (2) Antitrust laws.--The term ``antitrust laws'' has the 
     meaning given it in subsection (a) of the first section of 
     the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12(a)).
       (3) Foreign defendant.--The term ``foreign defendant'' 
     means a defendant not--
       (A) a citizen or lawful resident of the United States;
       (B) a corporation organized under the laws of the United 
     States or of any State; or
       (C) a proprietorship, partnership, joint venture, or other 
     form of business organization not organized in the United 
     States or of any State.

     SEC. 607. ELIMINATION OF QUARTERLY REPORTS.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Section 13(a)(2) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 
     (15 U.S.C 78m(a)(2)) is amended by striking ``and such 
     quarterly reports (and such copies thereof),''.
       ((2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law or 
     regulation to the contrary, including section 240.13a-13 of 
     title 17, Code of Federal Regulations, neither the Securities 
     Exchange Commission nor any other agency or department of the 
     United States may require an issuer of securities required to 
     file an annual report under section 13 of the Securities 
     Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m) to file quarterly 
     reports.
       (b) Effective Date.--Subsection (a) takes effect with 
     respect to the first calendar quarter beginning more than 45 
     days after the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 608. SECRETARY OF LABOR TO PUBLISH QUARTERLY REPORTS OF 
                   RUNAWAY PLANTS.

       Section 283 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2394) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) The Secretary of Labor shall publish a quarterly 
     report of notices received under subsection (a).''.

     SEC. 609. MANDATORY EXON-FLORIO REVIEW OF SALE OF CRITICAL 
                   TECHNOLOGY COMPANY.

       Section 721(b) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 
     U.S.C. App. 2170(b)) is amended--
       (1) by inserting after ``United States.'' the following: 
     ``The President or the President's designee shall also make 
     such an investigation in any instance in which any person 
     seeks to engage in a merger, acquisition, or takeover which 
     could result in control of a person doing business in 
     interstate commerce in the United States engaged in critical 
     technologies.''; and
       (2) by striking ``Such investigation'' and inserting ``An 
     investigation under this subsection''.

     SEC. 610. ADDITIONAL IRS AGENTS FOR TRANSFER PRICING CASES.

       The Secretary of the Treasury shall increase the number of 
     officers and employees of the Internal Revenue Service whose 
     primary responsibility is the determination of taxable income 
     substantially affected by transfer pricing between related 
     entities.

     SEC. 611. TRANSFER OF ITC FUNCTIONS TO COMMERCE DEPARTMENT; 
                   TERMINATION OF ITC.

       (a) Transfer of Functions.--There are transferred from the 
     International Trade Commission to the Secretary of Commerce--
       (1) the personnel employed in connection with those 
     functions transferred to the Secretary by this Act; and
       (2) the assets, liabilities, contracts, property, records, 
     and unexpended balance of appropriations, authorizations, 
     allocations, and other funds employed, held, or used in 
     connection with the functions transferred to the Secretary 
     under this Act, arising from such functions or available, or 
     to be made available, in connection with such functions.

     Unexpended funds transferred pursuant to this subsection 
     shall be used only for the purpose for which the funds were 
     originally appropriated.
       (b) Termination.--
       (1) In general.--Upon the transfer of functions, as 
     specified herein, to the Secretary of Commerce, the 
     International Trade Commission shall terminate.
       (2) Savings provisions.--
       (A) All orders, determinations, rules, regulations, 
     licenses, and privileges which are in effect at the time this 
     section takes effect, shall continue in effect according to 
     their terms, insofar as they involve regulatory functions to 
     be retained by this section, until modified, terminated, 
     superseded, set aside, or revoked in accordance with law by 
     the Secretary or by a court of competent jursidction, or by 
     operation of law.
       (B) The provisions of this section shall not affect any 
     proceedings or any application for any license pending before 
     the International Trade Commission at the time this section 
     takes effect, insofar as those functions are retained and 
     transferred by this section; but such proceedings and 
     applications, to the extent that they relate to functions so 
     transferred, shall be continued. Orders shall be issued in 
     such proceedings, appeals shall be taken therefrom, and 
     payments shall be made pursuant to such orders, as if this 
     section had not been enacted; and orders issued in any such 
     proceedings shall continue in effect until modified, 
     terminated, superseded, or revoked by a duly authorized 
     official, by a court of competent jurisdiction, or by 
     operation of law. Nothing in this subsection shall be deemed 
     to prohibit the discontinuance or modification of any such 
     proceeding under the same terms and conditions and to the 
     same extent that such proceeding could have been discontinued 
     or modified if this section had not been enacted.
       (3) Transition regulations.--The Secretary may promulgate 
     regulations providing for the orderly transfer of pending 
     proceedings from the International Trade Commission.
       (4) Pending litigation.--Except as provided in paragraph 
     (6)--
       (A) the provisions of this section shall not affect suits 
     commenced prior to the date this section takes effect, and,
       (B) in all such suits, proceedings shall be had, appeals 
     taken, and judgments rendered in the same manner and effect 
     as if this section had not been enacted.
       (5) No abatement.--No suit, action, or other proceeding 
     commenced by or against any officer in his official capacity 
     as an officer of the International Trade Commission, insofar 
     as those functions are transferred by this section, shall 
     abate by reason of the enactment of this section. No cause of 
     action by or against the International Trade Commission, 
     insofar as functions are transferred by this section, or by 
     or against any officer thereof in his official capacity, 
     shall abate by reason of enactment of this section.
       (6) Continuation.--Any suit by or against the International 
     Trade Commission begun before the effective date of this 
     section shall be continued, with the Secretary substituted 
     for the Commission.
       (c) Reference.--With respect to any functions transferred 
     by this section and exercised after the effective date of 
     this section, reference in any other Federal law to the 
     International Trade Commission shall be deemed to refer to 
     the Secretary of Commerce.
       (d) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect 90 days 
     after the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 612. TRANSFER OF OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTOR CORPORATION 
                   AND EXPORT-IMPORT BANK TO COMMERCE DEPARTMENT.

       (a) Overseas Private Investor Corporation.--
       (1) Transfer to commerce department.--The Overseas Private 
     Investor Corporation is transferred to, and shall be deemed 
     to be a part of, the Department of Commerce, but shall retain 
     its organization, management, and status as a corporation.
       (2) Secretary of commerce to be chairman of board of 
     directors.--Section 233 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 
     (22 U.S.C. 2193(b)) is amended by striking ``Administrator of 
     the Agency for International Development'' and inserting 
     ``Secretary of Commerce''.
       (3) Conforming amendments.--Section 239 of that Act (22 
     U.S.C. 2199) is amended by striking ``Agency for 
     International Development'' in subsections (e) and (h) and 
     inserting ``Department of Commerce''.
       (b) Export-Import Bank.--
       (1) Transfer.--Notwithstanding section 3(a) of the Act of 
     July 31, 1945 (59 Stat. 517; 12 U.S.C. 635a(a)), the Export-
     Import Bank of the United States shall constitute an 
     independent agency of the United States within the Department 
     of Commerce.
       (2) Secretary of commerce to be chairman of board of 
     directors.--Section 3(c) of that Act (12 U.S.C. 635a(c)(1)) 
     is amended--
       (A) by striking ``President of the Export-Import Bank of 
     the United States who shall serve as Chairman, the First 
     Vice-President who shall service as Vice Chairman,'' in 
     paragraph (1) and inserting ``the Secretary of Commerce who 
     shall serve as Chairman, ex officio, the President of the 
     Export-Import Bank of the United States who shall service as 
     Vice Chairman, and the First Vice-President,'';
       (B) by inserting ``other than the Secretary of Commerce,'' 
     after ``Board,'' in paragraph (2); and
       (C) by inserting ``other than the Secretary of Commerce,'' 
     after ``President,'' in paragraph (8)(B).
       (c) Technical and Conforming Changes.--The Secretary of 
     Commerce shall, within 30 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, submit to the appropriate committees of the 
     Congress a draft of any technical, conforming, or other 
     changes in existing law necessary to effectuate fully and 
     effectively the transfers made by subsections (a) and (b).
       (d) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect 90 days 
     after the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 613. ESTABLISHMENT OF NOAA AS INDEPENDENT AGENCY.

       (a) In General.--The National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Agency is hereby established as an independent agency of the 
     United States. Neither the Agency nor any of its functions, 
     powers, or duties shall be transferred to or consolidated 
     with any other department, agency, or corporation of the 
     Government unless the Congress shall otherwise by law 
     provide.

[[Page S 12240]]

       (b) Transfer of Functions.--There are transferred from the 
     Department of Commerce to the Agency--
       (1) the personnel employed in connection with those 
     functions of the Agency on the date of enactment of this Act; 
     and
       (2) the assets, liabilities, contracts, property, records, 
     and unexpended balance of appropriations, authorizations, 
     allocations, and other funds employed, held, or used in 
     connection with the functions transferred to the Agency under 
     this Act, arising from such functions or available, or to be 
     made available, in connection with such functions.

     Unexpended funds transferred pursuant to this subsection 
     shall be used only for the purpose for which the funds were 
     originally appropriated.
       (3) Savings provisions.--
       (A) All orders, determinations, rules, regulations, 
     licenses, and privileges which are in effect at the time this 
     section takes effect, shall continue in effect according to 
     their terms, insofar as they involve regulatory functions to 
     be retained by this section, until modified, terminated, 
     superseded, set aside, or revoked in accordance with law by 
     the Agency or by a court of competent jurisdiction, or by 
     operation of law.
       (B) The provisions of this section shall not affect any 
     proceedings or any application pending before the Agency at 
     the time this section takes effect, insofar as those 
     functions are retained and transferred by this section; but 
     such proceedings and applications, to the extent that they 
     relate to functions so transferred, shall be continued. 
     Orders shall be issued in such proceedings, appeals shall be 
     taken therefrom, and payments shall be made pursuant to such 
     orders, as if this section had not been enacted; and orders 
     issued in any such proceedings shall continue in effect until 
     modified, terminated, superseded, or revoked by a duly 
     authorized official, by a court of competent jurisdiction, or 
     by operation of law. Nothing in this subsection shall be 
     deemed to prohibit the discontinuance or modification of any 
     such proceeding under the same terms and conditions and to 
     the same extent that such proceeding could have been 
     discontinued or modified if this section had not been 
     enacted.
       (3) Transition regulations.--The Agency may promulgate 
     regulations providing for the orderly transfer of pending 
     proceedings from the Department of Commerce.
       (4) Pending litigation.--Except as provided in paragraph 
     (6)--
       (A) the provisions of this section shall not affect suits 
     commenced prior to the date this section takes effect, and,
       (B) in all such suits, proceedings shall be had, appeals 
     taken, and judgments rendered in the same manner and effect 
     as if this section had not been enacted.
       (5) No abatement.--No suit, action, or other proceeding 
     commenced by or against any officer in his official capacity 
     as an officer of the Department of Commerce, insofar as those 
     functions are transferred by this section, shall abate by 
     reason of the enactment of this section. No cause of action 
     by or against the Department of Commerce, insofar as 
     functions are transferred by this section, or by or against 
     any officer thereof in his official capacity, shall abate by 
     reason of enactment of this section.
       (6) Continuation.--Any suit by or against the Department of 
     Commerce begun before the effective date of this section 
     shall be continued, with the Agency substituted for the 
     Secretary of Commerce.
       (c) Reference.--With respect to any functions transferred 
     by this section and exercised after the effective date of 
     this section, reference in any other Federal law to the 
     Agency as a part of the Department of Commerce shall be 
     deemed to refer to the Agency as an independent agency.
       (d) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect 90 days 
     after the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 614. SURCHARGE ON IMPORTS; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT TAX 
                   CREDIT.

       (a) Surcharge on Imports.--
       (1) Surcharge imposed.--There is hereby imposed on the 
     importation of any good that is the product of another 
     country an import surcharge of 10 percent of the duty 
     otherwise chargeable under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule.
       (2) Effective date.--The increase in duty imposed by 
     paragraph (1) applies to goods entered or withdrawn from 
     warehouse more than 30 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act.
       (b) Research and Development Tax Credit.--
       (1) Increase in percentage.--Section 41(a)(1) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to general rule for 
     credit for increasing research activities) is amended by 
     striking ``20 percent'' each place it appears and inserting 
     ``25 percent''.
       (2) Credit made permanent.--Section 41 of such Code 
     (relating to credit for increasing research activities) is 
     amended by striking subsection (h).
       (3) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection 
     apply to any amount paid or incurred after June 30, 1995.
                                 ______

      By Mr. SANTORUM:
  S. 1149. A bill to authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue 
a certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for 
employment in the coastwise trade for the vessel Babs, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.


                certificate of documentation legislation

 Mr. SANTORUM. 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. 1149

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

     SECTION 1. CERTIFICATE OF DOCUMENTATION.

       Notwithstanding section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920 
     (46 U.S.C. App. 883), section 8 of the Act of June 19, 1886 
     (24 Stat. 81, chapter 421; 46 U.S.C. App. 289), and section 
     12106 of title 46, United States Code, the Secretary of 
     Transportation may issue a certificate of documentation with 
     appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise trade 
     for the vessel BABS, United States official number 
     1030028.
                                 ______

      By Mr. SANTORUM:
  S. 1150. A bill to require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint 
coins in commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the Marshall Plan and 
George Catlett Marshall; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and 
Urban Affairs.


             the george c. marshall commemorative coin act

 Mr. SANTORUM. 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:
       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 ``George C. Marshall 
     Commemorative Coin Act''.

     SEC. 2. COIN SPECIFICATIONS.

       (a) Denominations.--The Secretary of the Treasury 
     (hereafter in this Act referred to as the ``Secretary'') 
     shall mint and issue the following coins in commemoration of 
     the 50th anniversary of the Marshall Plan and George Catlett 
     Marshall:
       (1) One dollar silver coins.--Not more than 700,000 one 
     dollar coins, each of which shall--
       (A) weigh 26.73 grams;
       (B) have a diameter of 1.500 inches; and
       (C) contain 90 percent silver and 10 percent copper.
       (2) Half dollar clad coins.--Not more than 500,000 half 
     dollar coins each of which shall--
       (A) weigh 11.34 grams;
       (B) have a diameter of 1.205 inches; and
       (C) be minted to the specifications for half dollar coins 
     contained in section 5112(b) of title 31, United States Code.
       (b) Legal Tender.--The coins minted under this Act shall be 
     legal tender, as provided in section 5103 of title 31, United 
     States Code.
       (c) Numismatic Items.--For purposes of section 5134 of 
     title 31, United States Code, all coins minted under this Act 
     shall be considered to be numismatic items.

     SEC. 3. SOURCES OF BULLION.

       The Secretary shall obtain silver for minting coins under 
     this Act only from stockpiles established under the Strategic 
     and Critical Materials Stock Piling Act.

     SEC. 4. DESIGN OF COINS.

       (a) Design Requirements.--
       (1) In general.--The design of the coins minted under this 
     Act shall be emblematic of the 50th anniversary of the 
     Marshall Plan, which gave Europe's war-ravaged countries the 
     economic strength by which they might choose freedom, and 
     George C. Marshall, the author of the plan.
       (2) Designation and inscriptions.--On each coin minted 
     under this Act there shall be--
       (A) a designation of the value of the coin;
       (B) an inscription of the year ``1997''; and
       (C) inscriptions of the words ``Liberty'', ``In God We 
     Trust'', ``United States of America'', and ``E Pluribus 
     Unum''.
       (3) Obverse side.--The obverse side of each coin minted 
     under this Act shall bear the likeness of George C. Marshall.
       (b) Selection.--The design for the coins minted under this 
     Act shall be--
       (1) selected by the Secretary after consultation with the 
     George C. Marshall Foundation, the Friends of George C. 
     Marshall, and the Commission of Fine Arts; and
       (2) reviewed by the Citizens Commemorative Coin Advisory 
     Committee.
     SEC. 5. ISSUANCE OF COINS.

       (a) Quality of Coins.--Coins minted under this Act shall be 
     issued in uncirculated and proof qualities.
       (b) Mint Facility.--Only 1 facility of the United States 
     Mint may be used to strike any particular combination of 
     denomination and quality of the coins minted under this Act.
       (c) Commencement of Issuance.--The Secretary may issue 
     coins minted under this Act beginning January 1, 1997.
       (d) Termination of Minting Authority.--No coins may be 
     minted under this Act after December 31, 1997.

     SEC. 6. SALE OF COINS.

       (a) Sale Price.--The coins issued under this Act shall be 
     sold by the Secretary at a price equal to the sum of--

[[Page S 12241]]

       (1) the face value of the coins;
       (2) the surcharge provided in subsection (d) with respect 
     to such coins; and
       (3) the cost of designing and issuing the coins (including 
     labor, materials, dies, use of machinery, overhead expenses, 
     marketing, and shipping).
       (b) Bulk Sales.--The Secretary shall make bulk sales of the 
     coins issued under this Act at a reasonable discount.
       (c) Prepaid Orders.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall accept prepaid orders 
     for the coins minted under this Act before the issuance of 
     such coins.
       (2) Discount.--Sale prices with respect to prepaid orders 
     under paragraph (1) shall be at a reasonable discount.
       (d) Surcharges.--All sales shall include a surcharge of--
       (1) $12 per coin for the one dollar coin; and
       (2) $4 per coin for the half dollar coin.

     SEC. 7. GENERAL WAIVER OF PROCUREMENT REGULATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), no 
     provision of law governing procurement or public contracts 
     shall be applicable to the procurement of goods and services 
     necessary for carrying out the provisions of this Act.
       (b) Equal Employment Opportunity.--Subsection (a) shall not 
     relieve any person entering into a contract under the 
     authority of this Act from complying with any law relating to 
     equal employment opportunity.

     SEC. 8. DISTRIBUTION OF SURCHARGES.

       (a) In General.--All surcharges received by the Secretary 
     from the sale of coins issued under this Act shall be 
     promptly paid by the Secretary in equal portions to--
       (1) the George C. Marshall Foundation for the purpose of 
     supporting the Foundation's educational and outreach programs 
     to promote the ideals and values of George C. Marshall; and
       (2) the Friends of George C. Marshall for the sole purpose 
     of constructing and operating the George C. Marshall Memorial 
     and Visitor Center in Uniontown, Pennsylvania.
       (b) Audits.--The Comptroller General of the United States 
     shall have the right to examine such books, records, 
     documents, and other data of the George C. Marshall 
     Foundation and the Friends of George C. Marshall as may be 
     related to the expenditures of amounts paid under subsection 
     (a).

     SEC. 9. FINANCIAL ASSURANCES.

       (a) No Net Cost to the Government.--The Secretary shall 
     take such actions as may be necessary to ensure that minting 
     and issuing coins under this Act will not result in any net 
     cost to the United States Government.
       (b) Payment for Coins.--A coin shall not be issued under 
     this Act unless the Secretary has received--
       (1) full payment for the coin;
       (2) security satisfactory to the Secretary to indemnify the 
     United States for full payment; or
       (3) a guarantee of full payment satisfactory to the 
     Secretary from a depository institution whose deposits are 
     insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the 
     National Credit Union Administration.
                                 ______

      By Mr. BURNS (for himself and Mr. Craig):
  S. 1151. A bill to establish a National Land and Resources Management 
Commission to review and make recommendation for reforming management 
of the public land, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy 
and Natural Resources.


                THE FEDERAL LANDS MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1995

  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, on behalf of myself and Senator Craig of 
Idaho, I rise to introduce legislation to help solve a problem that has 
increasingly plagued public lands States such as my own State of 
Montana and Senator Craig's State of Idaho.
  For over the past 100 years the Congress has passed many laws 
regarding the use and management of our public lands. These lands were 
critical to the development of our country, and especially to the 
development of the West. Therefore, early legislation focused on the 
production of commodities from these lands. And they did produce; they 
produced much of the minerals, timber, food products, and energy that 
enabled our ancestors to build this great Nation. They provided the 
lands and materials to develop our transportation and communications 
systems. And they provided lands for homesteading and for building our 
communities. Very special areas were also set aside in perpetuity as 
national parks, national monuments, and wildlife refuges.
  For the last 30 years the emphasis has been on environmental 
protection, conservation, and nonconsumptive uses. We have greatly 
expanded our national park and refuge systems from these lands. We have 
preserved millions of acres under special designations such as 
wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, and conservation areas. We have 
protected additional millions of acres for conservation purposes under 
special designations such as withdrawals, exclosures, and areas of 
critical environmental concern. We have enacted numerous pieces of 
legislation that require these lands be managed to protect 
environmental values in general, such as the National Environmental 
Protection Act, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, the 
National Forest Management Act, and the Forest Management Practices 
Act. We have enacted legislation which protects individual 
environmental values such as air and water quality, soil stability, 
fish and wildlife, and endangered species. We have passed legislation 
which requires public land managers to control hazardous and toxic 
materials and protect the public health and safety. And we have passed 
legislation which subjects these lands to State law and oversight. In 
many instances these laws are not well-crafted, and conflict with one 
another.
  We have been one busy group of legislators. These laws were developed 
and passed with very good intentions--to serve the public interest. 
After we completed our efforts, the Federal agencies went to work. And 
they
 have been busy too. The regulatory agencies have created a morasse of 
regulations, some of which attempt to establish their authorities as 
the ultimate priority for management of the public lands. Some of which 
abuse their authority by extending the interpretation of the laws 
beyond anything that Congress intended.

  During our debates on Federal agency abuse of regulation under 
regulatory reform, and other proposals, we have heard seemingly 
unending examples of such regulatory abuse. I need mention only a few 
of these laws to bring images of such abuse to mind--the Endangered 
Species Act, Superfund, and the Clean Water Act. These laws, and the 
regulations developed to implement them, have been used by the 
regulatory agencies and others to styme or prevent the legitimate use 
of our public lands for purposes that are supported by the public and 
approved by the Congress. Even where the intention of the laws were 
fulfilled in regulation, agencies often found conflicting requirements 
when attempting to implement them. Let me give you just one example. 
The Federal land management agencies find themselves gridlocked by the 
Clean Water Act and hazardous materials requirements in trying to 
mitigate environmental problems on old, abandoned mine sites. They 
would like to correct the water quality problems on these sites, which 
is their responsibility under the Clean Water Act. Up until now they 
have resisted, and rightly so. To do this would expose them, and thus 
the taxpayer, to liability for hazardous waste cleanup. Under the 
hazardous materials laws, that is the responsibility of the mine 
operator.
  Land management agencies complain of confused priorities and 
colliding mandates under their own authorities. This situation is the 
same as with the regulatory agencies--there is some justification for 
this claim, but in part it is a monster of their own creation. For 
example, land management agencies have had considerable trouble 
managing tracts of land for uses such as grazing and timber production 
while at the same time providing recreational opportunities. The 
reasons for this are many. To some extent it results from external 
factors such as conflicts, or perceived conflicts, between competing 
uses. To some extent it is the result of agency procedures, such as a 
complex, expensive, time-consuming planning process. These agencies go 
through the planning effort, which frequently results in an atmosphere 
of confrontation and deviseness among the user and interest 
communities, and usually find their efforts subject to further 
successful challenge. In many cases the plans are never implemented as 
written.
  Even though the agencies have similar mandates, unless otherwise 
directed these agencies have usually created their regulations 
independently. Their interpretations
 of the same piece of legislation may be different, and their 
requirements under a given act well may be entirely different if not in 
conflict. Such problems have become so widely recognized that multiple 
use of public lands is under legitimate challenge as a viable 
management concept.

  Because of all of this we see a public that is understandably 
disenchanted over complex and conflicting laws and regulations. And 
they are increasingly vocal in their frustration over their inability 
to make reasonable use of their 

[[Page S 12242]]
own lands and natural resources. Instead of fulfilling a widely 
supported and legally established goal of providing products and 
services from our public lands under the reasonable requirements of 
sustained yield and multiple use, we have natural resource management 
gridlock. And in this era of restructuring of government to improve our 
performance, there is a wide recognition of duplication of effort, 
inefficiency, and ineffectiveness of the multiple-use agencies in 
managing our natural resources.
  With this in mind, I am offering today, legislation which proposes to 
revamp the way the public's multiple-use lands are managed. This bill, 
if approved, will create a commission to evaluate and report to the 
Congress and the President changes to be made to improve the management 
of these lands to better meet the public's needs, desires, and 
expectations. The commission is directed to evaluate and make 
recommendations in three general areas of land management. They will 
look into improving the efficiency and effectiveness of current 
management practices. They are to evaluate the land ownership patterns 
and make recommendations to consolidate Federal holdings into a more 
rational pattern. And they are to propose how multiple-use agencies 
might be combined into one agency for the management of Federal 
multiple-use lands.
  In looking at ways to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of 
management practices the commission will evaluate several areas in 
particular. They will address ways to reduce costs of administrative 
overhead by 50 percent, and to reduce the cost of managing the lands 
overall by at least 30 percent. They are to evaluate ways to dedicate 
more agency resources to providing service to the public, and to 
improve the services which they offer to the public. They will propose 
ways to simplify the planning and appeals processes. They will review 
and recommend changes to improve the withdrawal process. And they will 
recommend ways to consolidate the laws under which the agencies 
operate. These are all areas that we have attempted to deal with in the 
past. We address the budget and service items in almost every 
appropriations bill.
 This bill provides us an opportunity to take a consolidated approach 
to dealing with these issues. And the time to do it has arrived.

  The commission will review and recommend rational changes to land 
ownership and jurisdiction patterns. They will make recommendations as 
to lands which more properly belong in private ownership or under State 
jurisdiction. Land ownership patterns alone have been the source of 
many of the problems and controversies, and much of the unnecessary 
expense, associated with the management of public lands. With the 
exception of administrative sites, these agencies have little reason to 
hold lands within city limits, but it is the situation in many western 
communities. Federal requirements for such lands are frequently in 
conflict with community development plans and desires. This causes 
needless problems for the management agencies and the communities 
involved.
  Similarly, there are many areas in the West where Federal holdings 
are intermingled with other ownerships. One good example of this is the 
checkerboard ownership patterns along the old railroad grant corridors. 
The ownership changes hands every other square mile. For a Federal 
agency or private landowner trying to manage their holdings this is an 
impossible situation, and we can and must do something to correct it.
  The commission will evaluate and recommend the actions needed to 
combine multiple-use management of public lands under one agency. The 
Congress has recognized the need, and has made unsuccessful attempts, 
to do this in the past. The reasons for previous failure are many. But 
the timing for this has never been more appropriate. We are seeing the 
public adamantly demand the elimination of waste, and improved 
efficiency, from their Federal Government. We in the Congress are 
making a wide-reaching attempt to find rational, reasonable ways to 
balance the budget and reduce regulatory burden. And the administration 
is restructuring the bureaucracy to reduce it's size and improve it's 
services to the public. This proposal will serve all of these goals.
  Finally, the commission is charged to prepare the report and 
legislation to implement their recommendations, for the consideration 
of the President and the Congress.
  The bill contains a fast-track provision. If the Congress can agree 
to the need to create this commission, and to the substance of the 
report and legislation that the commission is to prepare, then there 
should be little reason to delay consideration of the legislation 
needed to get this job done. To delay would only result in continuing 
the present inefficiencies, costs, conflicts, and duplication that we 
now see in the management of these public lands and resources.
  A plan is needed to bring these agencies within budget constraints. 
We have the opportunity to provide the public with efficiently managed 
lands while doing so. The recent election was a clear message that the 
public is ready for these changes. I hope that you will join me in 
approving this legislation to fulfill that public demand.
                                 ______

      By Mr. BURNS (for himself and Mr. Murkowski):
  S. 1152. A bill to amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 with 
commonsense amendments to strengthen the act, enhance wildlife 
conservation and management, augment funding, and protect fishing, 
hunting, and trapping; to the Committee on Environment and Public 
Works.


       the common sense amendments for all endangered species act

  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Common Sense 
Amendments for All Endangered Species Act.
  The purpose of the bill is to change specific features of the statute 
so that the ESA cannot be used to attack and diminish wildlife 
conservation programs, sport hunting opportunities, and traditional 
wildlife management. A better ESA and enhanced support for endangered 
species protection from America's traditional conservationists--hunters 
and anglers--will be the result of these amendments.
  Current law does not require that the consequences of listing and 
other actions on hunting and wildlife management be specifically 
examined. The National Environmental Policy Act mandates review of 
general environmental effects via environmental impact statements, but 
no specific review of effects on hunting is directed.
  This bill directs the U.S. Fish and Wildlife or Marine Fisheries 
Service to review the impacts on hunting, fishing, and fish and 
wildlife management. Simply put, ESA actions must consider effects on 
hunters.
  In addition, the current law prohibits the taking of protected 
species. Taking means harass, harm, et cetera. Harm is defined by FWS 
to prohibit any unintentional acts, including habitat modification, 
which annoys protected species. FWS determined that under this 
definition, alterations of habitat can be prohibited even if no listed 
animal suffers harm. This definition can result in the criminalization 
of innocent activities.
  My commonsense bill amends the Endangered Species Act to ensure 
wildlife management programs and operators are protected from 
unwarranted prosecution.
  Another aspect to the ESA which needs to be addressed is CITES 
[Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species]. The role 
that sport hunting plays in conservation is not recognized in CITES. 
FWS has failed to accept the determinations of countries of origin of 
which the animals are properly available for hunting and exporting or 
importing.
  The bill I am introducing today provides direction to FWS for the 
administration of the ESA and CITES. The bill reflects the positive 
role of hunting. The bill also requires that the United States will 
accept the determination of other countries.
  Section 5 of the bill addresses how other countries' laws interact 
with U.S. law. It is unclear whether an individual must comply with a 
country's Federal and provincial requirements to be in
 compliance with U.S. law. Under present law, all foreign violations 
can be treated as criminal acts in the United States--even if the 
American doesn't have knowledge of the violation.

  The commonsense bill provides only those laws which are related to 
wildlife 

[[Page S 12243]]
conservation, and can be clearly understood, should carry criminal 
consequences within the United States.
  One issue which must be addressed in the authorization is subspecies 
and population criteria. The ESA directs that species which are 
threatened or endangered be listed as protected under the terms of this 
act. The term ``species '' includes any subspecies and, in the case of 
vertebrate species, any distinct population segment which interbreeds 
when mature. This license to list subspecies and population segments is 
problematic, because it can result in protection of subspecies and 
populations that are still abundant generally. This splitting of the 
term ``species'' into a virtually infinite number of subclassifications 
often results in the application of the ESA to situations in which it 
originally was not intended to apply. This coupled with the look alike 
rules could severely diminish domestic hunting opportunities.
  This bill amends the ESA to direct the Department of the Interior to 
establish specific criteria to determine when a group of animals is 
sufficiently distinct to qualify as a subspecies or population.
  If we really want decisions related to the ESA to be made on sound 
science, peer review must be included. Under the current listing 
process, the Secretary of the Interior may decide to list a species as 
threatened or endangered, or any interested person can petition the 
Secretary to do so. In either case, the Secretary makes the decision on 
whether or not to list a species based upon determinations generated 
internally by the FWS. There are often no public hearings in this 
decisionmaking process wherein the FWS data is open to scrutiny and 
challenge.
  There is also no provision for peer review of the FWS data by 
qualified outside experts. Because the guts of the listing process is 
effectively closed to the public and to scientific peer review, its 
credibility can be suspect. The lack of genuine public scrutiny and 
scientific evaluation can undermine public support for listing 
decisions. The Department is also limited by this process. In very 
difficult issues, the lack of any adjudicative procedures or peer 
review process makes it hard to get the best scientific data available.
  The bill I am introducing today authorizes the Secretary to employ, 
at his discretion, an adjudicative process wherein the public has an 
opportunity to scrutinize, evaluate, and challenge the decision to list 
a species. Public participation can ensure that all relevant factors 
are considered, proper weight is given to each factor, and the impact 
of listing or not listing is given due consideration and effect.
  Finally, this bill begins to address the funding problem we face. 
With more environmental awareness, there has been an increasing cry for 
more funding of the Federal endangered species program. The hunting and 
fishing sector has traditionally developed its own mechanisms, such as 
excise taxes to fund such programs. The lion's share of the funding is 
derived from license sales, hunting and fishing stamps, and other 
sportsmen financed measures. Efforts should be made to develop similar 
programs which ensure that other wildlife supporters, including 
nonhunters, can financially support an enhanced ESA.
  The commonsense bill directs a study toward developing a funding 
program patterned after those supported by sportsmen. The policy would 
provide that augmented ESA funding would not draw on moneys generated 
by hunting and fishing activities.
  This bill is designed for sportsmen. These are the true 
conservationists. I believe we need to consider hunting and fishing 
activities when we discuss the reauthorization of the ESA.
  Also, I am a cosponsor of S. 768 which was introduced by Senator 
Gorton and others earlier this month. I believe S. 768 is a good bill. 
I think the commonsense bill I am introducing today, in conjunction 
with S. 768, should be considered as the reauthorization of the 
Endangered Species Act moves forward.
                                 ______

      By Mr. BURNS:
  S. 1154. A bill to authorize the construction of the Fort Peck Rural 
County Water Supply System, to authorize assistance to the Fort Peck 
Rural County Water District, Inc., a nonprofit corporation, for the 
planning, design, and construction of the water supply system, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.


              the fort peck rural water supply act of 1995

  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
designed to meet a critical need in a very rural area of my State of 
Montana. The bill I am introducing would authorize a rural water system 
for the area around Fort Peck, MT.
  Despite the fact that Fort Peck lies near one of the largest water 
reservoirs on the Missouri River, residents in this part of my State 
either rely on deep wells or they carry the water they need. In 
addition, the Fort Peck Indian Reservation lacks potable water.
  This bill would allow for the construction of a water system that 
will meet many of the water needs of that part of my State.
                                 ______

      By Mr. COCHRAN (for himself, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Coverdell, Mr. Helms, 
        Mr. Warner, Mr. Craig, Mr. Nunn, Mr. Lott, Mr. Johnston, Mr. 
        Breaux, Mr. Thurmond, Mr. Mack, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Akaka, Mr. 
        Bumpers, and Mr. McConnell):
  S. 1155. A bill to extend and revise agricultural price support and 
related programs for certain commodities, and for other purposes; to 
the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.


              THE AGRICULTURAL COMPETITIVENESS ACT OF 1995

 Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, today I am introducing the 
Agricultural Competitiveness Act of 1995.
  The future of U.S. agriculture depends upon its ability to compete in 
the world market. This year, U.S. agricultural exports are expected to 
have a value of nearly $50 billion. Agricultural exports will account 
for more than 1 million American jobs. By carefully balancing our 
policy concerns with fiscal restraint, this bill should enhance our 
overall economic health, ensure that U.S. agriculture remains 
competitive, and contribute to the elimination of the deficit of the 
Federal Government.
  The Agricultural Competitiveness Act makes substantial changes in 
current farm programs while dramatically increasing flexibility for 
farmers.
  This bill extends and seeks to improve farm policy including the 
marketing loan, which has allowed U.S. agriculture to remain 
competitive in the face of heavily subsidized foreign competition. 
Those foreign subsidies can be expected to continue under terms of the 
GATT Uruguay Round.
  This legislation also make significant changes in commodity programs 
that will ensure the American public of a continued source of 
affordable, safe and high quality food and fiber. Farmers will have 
greatly expanded cropping flexibility--through the modification and 
expansion of provisions first incorporated in the 1990 Farm Bill.
  Farmers and agriculture related businesses face new and complex 
uncertainties in the international marketplace, due in part to foreign 
government subsidies. To ensure fair play and to counteract the effect 
of unfair trade practices and governmental actions that put our farmers 
and national interests at a disadvantage, the U.S. Government must 
continue to play a partnership role with U.S. farmers.
  Senators should appreciate that previous reforms have caused 
Commodity Credit Corporation outlays for farm programs to decline from 
a high of $26 billion in fiscal year 1986 to less than $9 billion in 
fiscal year 1995, a reduction of 65 percent. According to the 
Congressional Budget Office, farm program outlays are projected to 
remain below this level for the next 7 years, even if no changes are 
made in current law. In considering changes in farm policies, Congress 
must consider: the high level of productivity that currently exists in 
U.S. agriculture, the narrowing profit margins faced by farmers and 
processors, the precarious nature of land values, the interdependence 
of rural economies and agriculture and the absolute necessity that a 
farm must secure financing to stay in business.
  The bill expands cropping flexibility from 25 percent to 100 percent. 
It allows farmers to respond to market conditions and grow virtually 
any crop they choose on their farms--without providing unnecessary 
financial incentives for production shifts. This bill 

[[Page S 12244]]
goes beyond traditional flexibility. Farmers will have the opportunity 
to expand their production of program crops beyond their historical 
planting area through the use of traditional soybean acres. This 
innovative proposal not only will enhance market responsiveness, but 
will help farmers implement crop rotations, yielding conservation and 
other environmental benefits. Modified acreage reduction requirements 
included in this Act will also enhance crop rotation by removing 
disincentives currently limiting double-cropping.
  This legislation requires that agriculture will again contribute its 
share of the savings necessary to achieve a balanced budget through 
modifications of existing programs, and it increases non-paid base 
program crop acres from 15 percent to 25 percent, significantly 
reducing outlays over the next 7 years, according to the Congressional 
Budget Office.
  The peanut program is substantially revised. It further opens the 
program to new producers and more closely ties production limits to 
market demand. The sugar program is also reformed to allow U.S. sugar 
policy to continue to operate at ``no cost'' to the U.S. sugar policy 
to continue to operate at ``no cost'' to the U.S. Treasury. In order to 
meet the new minimum import obligations require by the GATT and remain 
no cost, a system requiring private industry to equitably carry surplus 
stocks is proposed which is more market oriented and more reliable than 
current policy.
  The Agricultural Competitiveness Act of 1995 represents cost 
effective and comprehensive reform. I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that additional material be 
printed in the Record. 
  There being on objection, the summary was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:
   The Agricultural Competitiveness Act of 1995--Section-by-Section 
                                Summary


                 sec. 1. short title; table of contents

       Section 1 provides that this act may be cited as the 
     Agricultural Competitiveness Act of 1995 and sets out a table 
     of contents for the bill.


                  sec. 2. findings, policy and purpose

       Section 2 sets out certain findings of Congress and states 
     the purpose of the bill, namely to establish agricultural 
     price support and production adjustment programs for the 1996 
     through 2002 crop years that provide a structure for a sound 
     agricultural economy.


        sec. 3. sense of congress on ending the federal deficit

       Section 3 provides that it is the Sense of Congress that 
     significant Federal budget deficits harm the economic well-
     being of the United States and are detrimental to effective 
     agricultural policy. The section states that agricultural 
     programs should be implemented in a manner that is consistent 
     with the goals of ending Federal budget deficits and should 
     be modified as necessary to ensure that the programs comply 
     with applicable budget reconciliation instructions. Such 
     modifications should adhere to the policy set out in section 
     306 of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal 
     year 1996.

                             Title I--Wheat


sec. 101. Loans, payments, and acreage reduction programs for the 1996-
                          2002 crops of wheat

       Section 101 amends section 107B of the Agricultural Act of 
     1949 (the ``1949 Act'') to provide for a production 
     adjustment and price support program for the 1996-2002 crops 
     of wheat as follows:


                          loans and purchases

       Section 107B of the 1949 Act provides that the Secretary of 
     Agriculture shall make loans and purchases available to 
     producers of each of the 1996 through 2002 crops of wheat, 
     using harvested wheat as collateral. The statutory minimum 
     loan rate shall not be less than 85 percent of the simple 
     average price received by producers of wheat for the previous 
     5 crops of wheat, dropping the high and low years. The loan 
     rate cannot be reduced by more than 5 percent from the 
     previous year's rate.


                            marketing loans

       The Secretary shall permit producers to repay a wheat price 
     support loan at the world market price (adjusted to U.S. 
     quality and location) if it is below the loan level or the 
     Secretary may permit the wheat loan to be repaid at such 
     level as will minimize loan forfeitures and make U.S. wheat 
     competitive. Loan deficiency payments are available to 
     producers who agree to forgo obtaining such a loan.


                          deficiency payments

       Section 101B(c) of the 1949 Act requires the Secretary to 
     make deficiency payments available to producers of each of 
     the 1996-2002 crops of wheat. Deficiency payments received by 
     producers are the product of a national payment rate, the 
     producer's program payment yield, and the producer's payment 
     acres. The established (target) price for wheat shall not be 
     less than $4.00 per bushel. Deficiency payments are to be 
     made on the higher of the difference between the average 
     market price for the crop year, or the average price for the 
     first 5 months plus 10 cents per bushel, or the loan level.


                             payment acres

       Deficiency payments are made available with respect to 
     payment acres. Payment acres are the lesser of the acreage 
     planted to wheat or 75% of the wheat acreage base less any 
     reduced acreage (the ARP). This has been reduced from 85% in 
     current law.


                              0/85 program

       Producers who underplant (or plant to selected other crops) 
     their maximum wheat payment acres may receive deficiency 
     payments on a portion of their under planted acres through 
     the 0-85/92 program. The 0/92 program is in place for 
     prevented plantings, failed acres and certain other crops.


                             program yields

       Payment yields remain frozen as in the 1990 Act.


                       acreage reduction programs

       The Secretary may require an acreage reduction program 
     (ARP) on wheat if supplies are judged to be excessive in the 
     absence of such a program. If the Secretary estimates the 
     wheat stocks-to-use ratio to be more than 40%, the ARP shall 
     be between 10-20%; if the stocks-to-use ratio is equal or 
     less than 40%, the ARP can be no more than 15%. The ARP shall 
     be announced no later than June 1 of the preceding calendar 
     year, and adjustments can be made no later than July 31.
         sec. 102. nonapplicability of certificate requirements

       Section 102 provides that sections 379d through 379j of the 
     Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (the ``1938 Act'') shall 
     not be applicable to wheat processors or exporters during the 
     1996-2002 crop years. The provisions pertain to the 
     ``domestic use'' and export certificates.


   sec. 103. suspension of land use, wheat marketing allocation, and 
                    producer certificate provisions

       Section 103 suspends several sections of the 1938 Act 
     requiring land use penalties, marketing allocations and wheat 
     certificates for the 1996-2002 crops.


            sec. 104. suspension of certain quota provisions

       Section 104 suspends wheat marketing quotas established by 
     a joint resolution and the 1938 Act for the 1996-2002 crops.


 sec. 105. nonapplicability of section 107 of the agricultural act of 
                                  1949

       Section 105 provides that the Wheat Program under section 
     107 of the Agricultural Act of 1949 is not applicable to the 
     1996-2002 crops of wheat.

                         Title II--Feed Grains


sec. 201. loans, payments, and acreage reduction programs for the 1996-
                       2002 crops of feed grains

       Section 201 amends section 105B of the Agricultural Act of 
     1949 (the ``1949 Act'') to provide for a production 
     adjustment and price support program for the 1996-2002 crops 
     of feed grains as follows:


                                 loans

       The Secretary shall make price support loans and purchases 
     available to producers of the 1996 through 2002 crops of feed 
     grains. Authority is retained to establish the corn loan 
     level at the higher of 85% of average price received in last 
     5 years (dropping the high and the low), but may not be 
     reduced by more than 5% from the previous year's level. Other 
     feed grain loan rates are established relative to corn. The 
     Secretary is authorized to reduce the loan rate by up to 10% 
     based on stocks/use ratio and by an additional 10% to 
     maintain a competitive market position. If the world market 
     price for feed grains is less than the loan level, the 
     Secretary shall allow producers to repay the loan at the 
     adjusted world price or at such level as will minimize loan 
     forfeitures and maintain competitiveness.


                       established (target) price

       The established (target) price shall be $2.75/bushel for 
     corn; $2.61/bushel for grain sorghum; and not less than 
     $1.45/bushel for oats. The established price for barley shall 
     not be less than 85.8% of the established price for corn.


                          deficiency payments

       Participating producers are eligible to receive a 
     deficiency payment based on the difference between the 
     established (target) price and the higher of the loan rate or 
     the average price received.


                              0/85 program

       Producers who underplant (or plant to selected other crops) 
     their maximum feed grain payment acres may receive deficiency 
     payments on a portion of their under planted acres through 
     the 0-85/92 program. The 0/92 program is in place for 
     prevented plantings, failed acres and certain other crops.


                             program yields

       Payment yields remain frozen as in the 1990 Act.


                       acreage reduction program

       Section 105B(e) of the 1949 Act provides that the Secretary 
     is authorized to establish an acreage reduction program for 
     corn of 0 to 12.5% if previous year's stocks-to-use ratio is 
     less than or equal to 25% and 10 to 20% if stocks-to-use 
     ratio is greater than 25%.
     
[[Page S 12245]]



                          farmer-owner reserve

       The Secretary has authority to open the farmer-owner 
     reserve under specific conditions which may be mandatory or 
     discretionary, depending on trigger.


                          paid land diversion

       The Secretary is authorized to offer a paid-land diversion.

                           Title III--Cotton


sec. 301. loans, payments, and acreage reduction programs for the 1996-
                      2002 crops of upland cotton

       Section 301 amends section 103B of the Agricultural Act of 
     1949 (the ``1949 Act'') to provide for a production 
     adjustment and price support program for the 1996-2002 crops 
     of upland cotton as follows:


                                 loans

       Section 103B(a) of the 1949 Act provides that the Secretary 
     shall make available market based, non-recourse loans to 
     producers of upland cotton
      for the 1996-2002 crops. The loan shall be for an initial 
     term of 10 months. The base loan rate shall be the lower 
     of (1) 85% of the 5-year moving average U.S. spot market 
     price for upland cotton (dropping the high and the low) or 
     90% of the 15-week average of the 5 lowest priced growths 
     of upland cotton quoted for Northern Europe. The loan rate 
     may not be reduced by more than 5% from the previous 
     year's rate and may not be less than 50 cents per pound. 
     The loan level must be announced by November 1 of the year 
     preceding the marketing year for the crop and the loan 
     term may be extended for an additional 8 months if monthly 
     average U.S. cotton prices are not more than 130% of the 
     average price for upland cotton during the previous 36 
     months.


                            marketing loans

       In order to ensure that U.S. upland cotton maintains a 
     competitive market position, the Secretary shall allow 
     producers to repay an upland cotton price support loan at the 
     adjusted world price for upland cotton, as determined by the 
     Secretary. Loans may be repaid at the adjusted world price or 
     at any level between the loan rate and 70% of the loan rate 
     if the adjusted price is below the market-based U.S. loan 
     level.
       If the Secretary further determines U.S. cotton to be 
     uncompetitive in international markets, section 
     103B(a)(5)(c), (D) and (E) of the 1949 Act provide for a 
     three-step competitiveness plan whereby U.S. cotton will 
     maintain its competitiveness in world and domestic markets. 
     Under these steps (1) the Secretary may adjust the adjusted 
     world price in order to enhance U.S. competitiveness, (2) if 
     U.S. cotton is uncompetitive by more than 1.25 cents per 
     pound for a consecutive 4 week period, the Secretary may 
     issue marketing certificates to domestic users and exporters 
     of cotton in order to restore competitiveness, and (3) if 
     U.S. prices are not competitive for a consecutive 10 week 
     period, the Secretary may open a special import quota.


                            seed cotton loan

       The Secretary shall make a recourse loan program available 
     to producers of seed cotton.


                        loan deficiency payments

       Section 103B(b) of the 1949 Act authorizes the Secretary to 
     make loan deficiency payments available to producers who 
     agree to forgo obtaining a price support loan. Loan 
     deficiency payments are equal to the difference between the 
     upland cotton price support loan rate and the applicable loan 
     repayment rate.


                          Deficiency payments

       Section 103B(c) of the 1949 Act requires the Secretary to 
     make deficiency payments available to producers of each of 
     the 1996-2002 crops of upland cotton. Deficiency payments are 
     determined on the basis of the difference between the 
     established price for upland cotton and the calendar year 
     weighted price received (or the loan rate if higher than the 
     calendar year weighted price received). Deficiency payments 
     are determined by multiplying the payment rate by the payment 
     acres for the crop for the farm by the farm program payment 
     yield. The established price for upland cotton shall not be 
     less than 72.9 cents per pound for the 1996-2002 crops (the 
     current level).


                             payment acres

       Deficiency payments are made available only with respect to 
     payment acres. Payment acres equal the acreage planted to 
     upland cotton within the crop acreage base, less the reduced 
     acreage (ARP), less 25% of the crop acreage base.


                    50/85 program for upland cotton

       Section 103B(c)(1)(D) of the 1949 Act provides that if an 
     uplands cotton acreage reduction program is in effect, a 
     producer of upland cotton may devote a portion of the 
     producers' permitted upland cotton acreage to conserving or 
     other specified crops but still eligible to receive 
     deficiency payments on up to 85% of the producer's permitted 
     cotton acreage. There is a 50% planting requirements. The 
     deficiency payment rate under this section cannot be less 
     than that estimated at the time of sign-up for the upland 
     cotton program. A special 0/92 option is available to 
     producers who, due to disastrous weather, were prevented from 
     meeting the 50% planting requirement.


                      farm program payment yields

       Farm program payment yields are frozen at the levels 
     established in 1985.


                       acreage reduction programs

       Section 103B(e) of the 1949 Act provides that if the 
     Secretary determines that the total supply of upland cotton 
     will be excessive, the Secretary may implement an acreage 
     reduction program (ARP) for any of the 1996-2002 crops of 
     upland cotton. Under the ARP, the Secretary may require 
     producers to idle up to 25% of the crop acreage base for 
     upland cotton in any one crop year. The Secretary shall 
     implement an ARP program in such a way as to achieve a stocks 
     to use ratio of 29.5% for the 1996 crop and 29% for each of 
     the 1997-2000 crops. The Secretary shall announce the 
     preliminary ARP by November 1 of the year preceding the 
     marketing year for the crop and must announce that final ARP 
     by the following January 1.


                           crop acreage bases

       Crop acreage bases are established under title V of the 
     1949 but are established as the avarage of the acreage 
     planted and considered planted to upland cotton during the 
     most recent 3 crop years. Further, no upland
      cotton acreage base may be increased for any year the farm 
     is enrolled in the upland cotton program.


                  acreage devoted to conservation uses

       Under the ARP, producers must agree to devote a number of 
     acres on the farm to conservation uses (``reduced acres''), 
     in accordance with regulations issued by the Secretary. Such 
     regulations shall ensure protection of the acreage from weeds 
     and wind and water erosion. The Secretary may also authorize 
     the planting of approved crops on up to \1/2\ of such acres. 
     If such approved crops are planted, the Secretary shall 
     adjust the producer's level of deficiency payments. Haying 
     grazing may be allowed on reduced acreage except during any 5 
     month between April and September designated by the local 
     State Consolidated Farm Service Agency committee.


                        Targeted Option Payments

       Section 103B(e)(3) of the 1949 Act authorizes the Secretary 
     to allow producers to adjust any ARP announced upward by 10-
     25% or downward by 50%. If a producer is allowed to adjust 
     the applicable ARP under this program, the producer's 
     applicable established price shall be adjusted by the 
     Secretary in order to ensure this program is operated in a 
     budget neutral manner.


                        land diversion payments

       The Secretary may make land diversion payments available to 
     upland cotton producers if it is determined that such 
     payments are necessary to adjust the total national acreage 
     planted to upland cotton to desirable goals. The land 
     diversion program is a voluntary program. In return for a 
     payment offered by the Secretary, producers would agree to 
     idle a specified amount of their upland cotton base. The land 
     diversion payment rates may not be less than 35 cents per 
     pound if ending stocks are projected to be above 8 million 
     bales. Land diversion offers may not exceed 15% of the upland 
     cotton crop acreage base for the farm.


                        participation agreements

       Producers on a farm desiring to participate in the upland 
     cotton program will enter into a contract with the Secretary 
     setting out the terms and conditions of participation no 
     later than a date specified by the Secretary.


                      inventory reduction payments

       Section 103B(f) of the 1949 Act provides that the Secretary 
     may make payments available to producers who voluntarily 
     forgo deficiency payments and loans for upland cotton. The 
     producers who take advantage of this provision may reduce 
     their ARP requirement by 50% and retain eligibility for loan 
     deficiency payments.


                    cross and offsetting compliance

       Cross and offsetting compliance may not be required as a 
     condition of eligibility for loans, purchases or payments for 
     a crop of upland cotton.


                      limited global import quota

       Section 103b(n) of the 1949 Act provides for the 
     establishment of a special limited global import quota for 
     cotton whenever the average monthly price for U.S. cotton 
     exceeds 130 percent of the average price for cotton during 
     the preceding 36 months. The special limited quota shall be 
     established for 90 days and shall be equal to 21 days of 
     domestic mill consumption for upland cotton. The quota 
     established by subsection (n) and the quota established under 
     subsection (a) may not be opened at the same time.


                   sec. 302. extra long staple cotton

       Section 302 amends section 103(h) of the 1949 act to extend 
     the program for extra long staple cotton through the 2002 
     crop.


     secs. 303 and 304. Suspension of certain miscellaneous cotton 
                               provisions

       Section 303 and 304 suspend certain provisions of the 
     Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 and the 1949 Act from 
     application to any of the 1996-2002 crops of upland cotton.


                        sec. 305. skiprow cotton

       Section 305 amends section 374(a) of the Agricultural 
     Adjustment Act of 1938 to provide that, for the 1996-2002 
     crops of upland cotton, to continue the Secretary to allow 
     30-inch rows to be taken into account for classifying the 
     acreage planted to cotton and the area skipped.


sec. 306. Preliminary allotments under the agricultural adjustment act 
                                of 1938

       Section 306 establishes preliminary allotments for the 2003 
     crop at the levels previously established for the 1977 crop 
     of upland cotton as provided in section 379 of the 
     Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938.
     
[[Page S 12246]]



              sec. 307. cottonseed oil assistance program

       Section 307 authorizes the continuation of the Cottonseed 
     Oil Assistance program at levels consistent with the GATT 
     1994 agreement.


       sec. 308. extension of cotton statistics and estimates act

       Section 308 extends authorities contained in the section 3a 
     of the Act of March 3, 1927 (commonly known as the ``Cotton 
     Statistics and Estimates Act'').
                             Title IV--Rice


sec. 401. loans, payments, and acreage reduction programs for the 1996-
                          2002 crops of rice.

       Section 401 amends section 101B of the 1949 Act to provide 
     a rice program for the seven year period 1996-2002 (with 
     essentially the same terms and conditions as current law) as 
     follows:


                          loans and purchases

       The amended section 101B(a) provides for 9 months 
     nonrecourse loans during each year of the period 1996-2002 at 
     the greater of $6.50 per cwt. or 85% of the average prices 
     received by producers during the preceding 5 years, excluding 
     the years with the highest and lowest price. Announcement of 
     the loan level and target price must be made no later than 
     January 31 of the year in which the crop is to be harvested. 
     For the 1996 crop, the announcement must be made as soon as 
     practicable after enactment of this Act.


                            marketing loans

       The amended section 101B(a) also provides that the loans 
     shall be marketing loans which permit the producer to repay 
     the loan at the lesser of the loan level or the prevailing 
     world market price but not less than 70% of the loan level. 
     The Secretary is required to prescribe a formula to determine 
     the world market price that does not take into account prices 
     for sales of U.S. produced rice and arrange for periodic 
     announcements of the world price.
       The amended subsection also authorizes the Secretary to 
     require producers to buy transferable marketing certificates 
     redeemable in cash or CCC owned commodities equal in value to 
     \1/2\ the difference between the loan value and the loan 
     repayment rate.
       If the prevailing world market price is below the loan 
     repayment level, CCC is required to make payments to 
     producers participating in the program through the issuance 
     of transferable marketing certificates redeemable in CCC 
     owned commodities or cash as necessary to make U.S. rice 
     available at competitive world prices. The value of the 
     certificates is equal to the difference between the loan 
     level and the world price.


                        loan deficiency payments

       The amended section 101B(b) provides for loan deficiency 
     payments for those producers who are eligible to obtain a 
     loan but wish to forego the loan. The payment is equal to the 
     quantity of rice for which the producer wishes to forego a 
     loan multiplied by the difference between the loan rate and 
     the loan repayment rate. The Secretary is authorized to make 
     up to \1/2\ the payment in the form of marketing 
     certificates.


                          deficiency payments

       The amended section 101B(c) provides for deficiency 
     payments to be made available to producers for each of the 
     years 1996-2002. The amount of the payment is equal to the 
     payment rate multiplied by the payment acres and the program 
     yield. The payment rate is the difference between the 
     established (target) price (not less than $10.71 per cwt.) 
     and the greater of a computed market price or the loan level. 
     The computed market price used in this formula is the lesser 
     of national average market price received by producers during 
     the calendar year that includes the first months of the 
     marketing year, or the national average market price received 
     by producers during the first five months of the marketing 
     year plus a factor considered fair and equitable in relation 
     to wheat and feed grains.


                             payment acres

       Deficiency payments are made available only with respect to 
     payment acres. Payment acres are the lesser of the acreage 
     planted to rice or 75% of the rice acreage base less any 
     reduced acreage (the ARP). This has been reduced from 85% in 
     current law.


                             50/85 program

       The section also provides for a continuation of the 50/85 
     program if there is an acreage limitation program in effect. 
     If producers devote more than 15% of their maximum payment 
     acres to conservation uses, the amount so devoted in excess 
     of 15% is considered planted to rice and eligible for 
     payment. To be eligible, the producer must plant at least 50% 
     of the maximum payment acres to rice unless there is a 
     quarantine on the planting of rice or unless the producer is 
     prevented from planting or has a reduced yield because of a 
     natural disaster.
       In the event the producer is prevented from planting or has 
     a reduced yield, he may devote to conservation uses or to 
     certain alternative crops more than 8 percent of the maximum 
     payment acres and receive a payment as if the acreage were 
     planted to rice. This program is familiarly known as the 0/92 
     program. The alternative crops are limited to crops for 
     industrial use for which there is no substantial domestic 
     production or market.


                             crop insurance

       It is also provided that producers on the farm must obtain 
     catastrophic risk protection insurance coverage as a 
     condition of eligibility for loans and payments.
                             payment yields

       Section 101B(d) of the 1949 Act provides that farm program 
     yields shall be determined under title V, in the same manner 
     as in current law.


                       acreage reduction programs

       Amended section 101B(e) provides authority for a rice 
     acreage reduction program if the supply of rice will likely 
     be excessive, and requires the Secretary to conduct an 
     acreage reduction program so as to result in carry-over 
     stocks being equal to 16.5-20 percent of the average of the 
     total disappearance of rice for the 3 preceding marketing 
     years. If there is an acreage reduction program, a 
     preliminary announcement of the program, including the 
     uniform percentage reduction of the rice acreage base 
     (between 0 and 35%) must be made by December 1 of the year 
     preceding the year in which the crop is harvested, and a 
     final announcement must be made by the following January 31. 
     If there is an acreage reduction program in effect, producers 
     who exceed their permitted acreage of rice are not eligible 
     for loans or payments.
       The reduction in the base required by the acreage reduction 
     program must be devoted to conservation uses or up to \1/2\ 
     of the reduced acres may be devoted to certain designated 
     crops as specified in section 504(b)(1) in which event the 
     deficiency payment received by the producer must be reduced 
     accordingly.


                        targeted option payments

       The subsection also proves authority for targeted option 
     payments if there is in effect an acreage reduction program 
     of 20% or less. Under this option, producers may receive an 
     increase in the target price if they increase the acreage 
     limitation percentage (up to 5%) or a decrease in the target 
     price if they decrease the acreage limitation percentage (up 
     to \1/2\ the acreage limitation percentage. If offered, the 
     option may not result in any additional program outlays.


                          conserving use acres

       The acreage required to be devoted to conservation uses 
     must be protected from weeds and water erosion. Haying and 
     grazing is permitted on the conservation use acreage except 
     during a five consecutive month period between April and 
     October unless there is a natural disaster. Conservation use 
     acreage may also be converted to water storage uses, subject 
     to specified terms and conditions. The reduced acreage and 
     any additional diverted acreage may be devoted to wildlife 
     habitat.


                         land diversion program

       The Secretary is also authorized to provide for a land 
     diversion program to assist in adjusting the acreage of rice 
     to desirable goals. Payments may be determined through the 
     submission of bids or other means the Secretary deems 
     appropriate.


                      inventory reduction payments

       Amended section 101B(f) provides authority for the 
     Secretary to make inventory reduction payments available to 
     producers in the form of marketing certificates if they forgo 
     obtaining a loan and deficiency payment and reduce their rice 
     acreage by \1/2\ the acreage required to be diverted.


                             miscellaneous

       Amended sections 101B (g) to (n) contain the same 
     miscellaneous provisions as in current law. They provide 
     authority for equitable relief to producers who fail fully to 
     comply with the program, as well as for assignment of 
     payments, protection of tenants and sharecroppers, the 
     sharing of payments, and prohibits cross-compliance non-
     recourse, among others.

                           Title V--Oilseeds


  sec. 501. price support program for the 1996-2002 crops of oilseeds.

       Section 501 amends section 205 of the Agricultural Act of 
     1949 (the ``1949 Act'') to provide for a price support 
     program for the 1996-2002 crops of oilseeds as follows:


                                 loans

       Section 205 of the 1949 Act is amended to require the 
     Secretary to make available loans and purchases to producers 
     of soybeans, sunflower seed, canola, rapeseed, safflower, 
     flaxseed, mustard seed, and other oilseeds for the 1996 
     through 2002 crops.
       Loan and purchase levels shall be not less than the greater 
     of either 85% of average prices received by producers in 
     three of the previous five years (disregarding the high and 
     low years) or $5.50 per bushel for soybeans and $9.75 
     hundredweight for sunflower seed, canola, rapeseed, and 
     flaxseed. Loan and purchase levels for other oilseeds are 
     required to be established in relation to the level for 
     soybeans, except that the level for cottonseed may not be 
     lower than the level for soybeans on a per-pound basis.


                        adjustment in loan level

       If the Secretary determines that the loan and purchase 
     level for an oilseed crop will result in outlays in the form 
     of loan deficiency payments, the Secretary is required to 
     reduce the loan and purchase level for the crop in that year 
     to a level that will result in payments not being made. 
     However,
      the loan and purchase levels may not be established at less 
     than $5.00 per bushel for soybeans and $8.90 per 
     hundredweight for sunflower seed, canola, rapeseed, and 
     flaxseed.
       If the Secretary adjusts the level of loan and purchases 
     from an oilseed, the Secretary 

[[Page S 12247]]
     is required to submit a report to the House Committee on Agriculture 
     and the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and 
     Forestry certifying that the adjustment is necessary to 
     reduce outlays in the form of loan deficiency payments and 
     describing the production, stocks, and price circumstances 
     under which the adjustment is needed. Any reduction in the 
     loan and purchase level for an oilseed crop will not be 
     considered in determining the loan and purchase level for a 
     future crop of that oilseed.


                            marketing loans

       Section 205(d) of the 1949 Act provides that the Secretary 
     shall permit producers to repay loans at the lesser of the 
     loan and purchase level for the crop and either the 
     prevailing world price for the oilseed, adjusted to United 
     States quality and location, as determined by the Secretary, 
     or such other level not in excess of the loan and purchase 
     level that the Secretary determines will minimize potential 
     loan forfeitures, accumulation of oilseed stocks by the 
     Federal Government, and the cost of storing oilseeds by the 
     Federal Government, and allow oilseeds produced in the United 
     States to be marketed freely and competitively, both 
     domestically and internationally. The Secretary is required 
     to prescribe by regulation a formula for determining, and a 
     mechanism for periodically announcing, the world market price 
     for oilseeds.


                        loan deficiency payments

       The Secretary is required to offer eligible producers who 
     agree to forgo obtaining loans and purchases the option to 
     receive loan deficiency payments. Payments shall be 
     determined by multiplying the loan and purchase payment rate 
     by the quantity of oilseeds for which an eligible producer 
     forgoes the option to place under loan. The loan and purchase 
     rate shall be the difference between the loan and purchase 
     level for the crop and the level at which the loan may be 
     repaid. Payments may be made in the form of certificates 
     redeemable for agricultural commodities owned by the 
     Commodity Credit Corporation. Certificates shall be made 
     available to the extent necessary to minimize the 
     accumulation of oilseed stocks by the CCC.


                             marketing year

       The marketing year for soybeans shall be the one-year 
     period beginning on September 1 and ending on August 31. The 
     marketing years for other oilseeds shall be prescribed by the 
     Secretary by regulation. The Secretary shall announce the 
     loan and purchase level for a crop of oilseeds not later than 
     [15 days prior to the first day of the marketing year] in the 
     calendar year in which the crop is harvested.


                             loan maturity

       A loan made for a crop of oilseeds shall mature on the last 
     day of the 9th month following the month in which application 
     for the loan is made, except that the loan may not mature 
     later than the last day of the fiscal year in which the 
     application is made.


                        miscellaneous provisions

       The Secretary shall not require participation in any 
     production adjustment program for oilseeds or any other 
     commodity as a condition of eligibility for loans and 
     purchases for oilseeds. The Secretary may not authorize 
     payments to producers to cover the cost of storing oilseeds. 
     Oilseeds may not be considered an eligible commodity for any 
     reserve program.
       The Secretary is authorized to issue such regulations as 
     determined necessary to carry out this section, and shall 
     carry out the program authorized by this section through the 
     Commodity Credit Corporation.
       Section 205, as amended, shall be effective only for the 
     1996 through 2002 crop of oilseeds.

                           TITLE VI--PEANUTS


    sec. 601. suspension of marketing quotas and acreage allotments

       Section 601 of the bill makes section 358(a) through 
     (j)\1\, section 358a(a) through (j)\2\ section 359(a), (b), 
     (d), and (e), section 371\3\, and Part I of subtitle C of 
     title III\4\, of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 
     inapplicable to the 1996 through 2002 crops of peanuts.


       sec. 602. national poundage quotas and acreage allotments

       Section 602 of the bill makes various changes to the 
     current provisions of section 358-1 of the Agricultural 
     Adjustment Act of 1938 as follows:
       The bill directs the Secretary to estimate the quantity of 
     peanuts and peanut products to be imported into the United 
     States for the marketing year as part of the required annual 
     estimate of domestic consumption.
       The bill repeals the current floor (minimum level) at which 
     the national poundage quota may be established for any 
     marketing year.
       The bill repeals the authority to increase farm poundage 
     quotas based on undermarketings (the quantity by which a farm 
     poundage quota for a marketing year exceeds the actual 
     peanuts produced and marketed on the farm) from previous 
     years.
       The bill repeals the provisions authorizing a special 
     poundage quota allocation process for Texas.
       The bill authorizes the Secretary to annually allocate 
     temporary quota to each peanut producer for purposes of 
     acquiring seed for planting the producer's crop of peanuts 
     for that year.
       The bill tightens the eligibility criteria for the purposes 
     of determining if a farm's poundage quota should be 
     ``considered produced'' by allowing quota to either be 
     voluntarily released or leased (but not both) \6\ during 1 of 
     the 3 previous years.
       The bill repeals the current limitation \7\ on the 
     allocation of farm poundage quota that has been reduced or 
     voluntarily released to farms with no quota. The amended 
     provision requires the reallocation to farms without quota to 
     be limited only by the average production history of the 
     farms.


       sec. 603. sale, lease, or transfer of farm poundage quota

       Section 603 of the bill makes various changes to the 
     current quota transfer provisions of section 358b of the 
     Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 as follows:
       The bill allows farm poundage quota to be transferred to 
     another farm across county lines but within the same State if 
     both farms have been in common ownership or control for the 3 
     previous years or if both farms are located in a State with 
     10,000 tons or more quota (subject to an annual and an 
     overall limitation on the amount of quota that is eligible 
     for an out of county transfer).
       The bill allows farm poundage quota to be transferred after 
     the normal planting season (fall lease transfer) to another 
     farm across county lines but within the same State.


    sec. 604. marketing penalties; disposition of additional peanuts

       Section 604 of the bill extends the effective period of the 
     current provisions of section 358e of the Agricultural 
     Adjustment Act of 1938 \8\ to include the 1996 through 2002 
     crops and expands the application of the current penalty for 
     reentry of exported additional peanuts to include peanut 
     products.


              sec. 605. experimental and research programs

       Section 605 of the bill extends the effective period of 
     section 358c of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 \9\ 
     to include the 1996 through 2002 crops.


                    sec. 606. price support program

       Section 606 amends section 108B of the 1949 Act to extend 
     for 7 years the current law requirements for the Secretary to 
     provide price support to producers of peanuts through loans, 
     purchases, and other operations through the 2002 crop of 
     peanuts.
       The bill limits the allowable amount of decrease (as well 
     as increase) that may be made in the national average quota 
     support rate for a crop of peanuts to not more than 5 percent 
     of the rate for the preceding crop.
       The bill limits the eligibility for entry into or 
     participation in the New Mexico area marketing association 
     established pools to peanuts produced within the State of New 
     Mexico.
       The bill repeals the provision of current law that require 
     losses in one production area quota pool to be offset by 
     gains or profits from pools in other production areas (area 
     cross compliance). The bill adds a requirement that losses in 
     an area quota pool must be offset by any gains from the sale 
     of additional peanuts by any producer that is in the quota 
     pool.
       The bill adds a provision to clarify that all peanuts in 
     the domestic market, including imported peanuts, must comply 
     with all quality standards, and that importers must comply 
     with inspection, handling, storage, and processing 
     requirements, under Marketing Agreement No. 146. The bill 
     also adds a provision to require peanuts produced for export 
     to comply with inspection, handling, storage, and processing 
     requirements under Marketing Agreement No. 146.
       The bill extends the requirement for the Secretary to 
     provide for the collection of a marketing assessment, 
     applicable to each of the 1996 through
      2002 crops of peanuts, equal to 1.2 percent of the national 
     average support rate.

                            Title VII--Sugar

       Title VII of the bill amends section 206 of the Agriculture 
     Act of 1949 to authorize and direct the Secretary to provide 
     price support for the 1996 through 2002 crops of sugar beets 
     and sugar cane. Section 902 of the Food Security Act of 1985 
     provides that such sugar programs are to be operated in a 
     manner so as to be no cost to the U.S. Government; this 
     provision continues unamended. Title VII also provides for 
     the amendment of part VII of the Agricultural Adjustment Act 
     of 1938 to establish marketing assessment bases for sugarcane 
     and sugar beet processors and cane sugar refiners.


                     sec. 701. sugar price support

       Section 701 of the bill amends section 206 of the 
     Agriculture Act of 1949 as follows:


                         loan and price support

       Section 206, as amended, provides that the price of each of 
     the 1996 through 2002 crops of sugar beets and sugarcane must 
     be supported by the Secretary of Agriculture and fixes the 
     support level for the price of domestically grown sugarcane 
     for this period at 18 cents per pound for raw cane sugar, and 
     for domestically grown sugar beets at the basic loan rate 
     level for the 1994 crop of sugar beets. The price support is 
     implemented through nonrecourse loans provided by the 
     Commodity Credit Corporation. Section 206, as amended, 
     provides the Secretary with authority to adjust these fixed 
     price support levels for each of the 1997 through 2002 crops 
     of sugarcane and sugar beets when the Secretary deems it 
     appropriate, taking into account such factors as changes in 
     the cost of sugar products, the cost of domestic sugar 
     production, and other circumstances that may adversely affect 
     domestic sugar production.
     
[[Page S 12248]]



                           market assessments

       Section 206, as amended, also establishes market 
     assessments for raw cane sugar, beet sugar, and imported 
     sugar. Two tiers of assessment are established in subsection 
     206(i). The tier 1 assessment is applicable to the first 
     processor of sugarcane and sugar beets for raw cane sugar and 
     beet sugar which fall within the processor's base as 
     established by the Secretary under the Agricultural 
     Adjustment Act of 1938, as amended by this bill, and to 
     imported raw cane sugar. The assessment rate in tier 1 for 
     marketings of raw cane sugar processed from domestically 
     produced sugarcane or sugarcane molasses marketed during the 
     1997 through 2003 fiscal years is equal to 1.1% of the loan 
     level established by the Secretary to support the price of 
     domestically grown sugar cane (but not more than 0.198 cents 
     per pound of raw cane sugar); the tier 1 assessment for beet 
     sugar processed from domestically produced sugar beets or 
     sugar beet molasses marketed during the 1997 through 2003 
     fiscal years is equal to 1.1794% of the loan level 
     established by the Secretary to support the price of 
     domestically grown sugar beets (but not more than 0.2123 
     cents per pound of beet sugar). These tier 1 assessments 
     apply only to marketed beet sugar and raw cane sugar within 
     the processor's base. For imported raw cane sugar, the tier 1 
     assessment which must be paid by each holder of a certificate 
     of quota eligibility for such sugar imported into the United 
     States is the same amount that would be applicable to the 
     first processor of U.S. produced sugarcane during the fiscal 
     year. For refined sugar, whether from sugar beets or 
     sugarcane, imported into the United States, each holder of a 
     certificate of quota eligibility must pay a tier 1 assessment 
     in the amount applicable to the first processor of U.S. 
     produced sugar beets during the fiscal year. In all cases, 
     the assessment is paid to the Commodity Credit Corporation, 
     and the assessment is nonrefundable.
       The tier 2 non-refundable marketing assessment established 
     under subsection 206(i) is applicable to marketings of raw 
     cane sugar or beet sugar during the 1997 through 2003 fiscal 
     years which are in excess of the processor's or the cane 
     sugar refiner's assessment base as established by the 
     Secretary under the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, as 
     amended by this bill. The tier 2 assessment for fiscal 1997 
     is an amount equal to 100% of the loan level established for 
     marketings of raw cane sugar or beet sugar in fiscal 1997. 
     For each fiscal year thereafter through fiscal year 2001, the 
     assessment rate is reduced by three percentage points per 
     year, so that the assessment rate is 97% of the applicable 
     loan level for marketings for the 1998 fiscal year, 94% for 
     the 1999 fiscal year, 91% for the 2000 fiscal year, and 88% 
     for the fiscal years 2001 through 2003. The first processor 
     of sugarcane or sugar beets, or the refiner of cane sugar, as 
     the cane may be, must remit the assessment to the Commodity 
     Credit Corporation.


                        supply of raw cane sugar

       Subsection 206(j) of the 1949 Act, as amended, authorizes 
     the Secretary to assure the U.S. supply of raw cane sugar. It 
     provides that whenever for 7 consecutive market days the 
     price for raw cane sugar for the nearest future contract 
     month averages more than 128 percent of the loan rate 
     specified for raw cane sugar, the Secretary must, within 3 
     market days, use all available authorities to increase the 
     supply of raw cane sugar, in increments of not less than 
     50,000 tons, to a level sufficient to reduce the average 
     price for raw cane sugar to equal to or less than 128 percent 
     of the loan rate.
       There is an exception to the authority of the Secretary to 
     take this action. The Secretary must not take any action if, 
     for the same 7 consecutive market days in which the price for 
     raw cane sugar for the nearest future contract month averages 
     more than 128 percent of the loan rate for raw cane sugar, 
     the average bulk, FOB factory net price for refined beet 
     sugar reported by all sellers is more than 128 percent of 
     such average price for raw cane sugar for such nearest future 
     contract month.


    sec. 702. marketing assessment bases for processors and refiners

       Section 702 of the bill amends part VII of subtitle B of 
     title III of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (7 
     U.S.C. 1359aa et seq.) (the ``1938 Act''), effective October 
     1, 1996, to provide for marketing assessment bases for sugar 
     processors and refiners as follows:


              establishment of marketing assessment bases

       Section 359b of the 1938 Act, as amended, requires that the 
     Secretary impose, for each of the fiscal years 1997 through 
     2003, marketing assessment bases for processors of sugar 
     processed from domestically produced sugarcane and sugar 
     beets and for cane sugar refiners. The marketing assessment 
     bases are to be based on the Secretary's estimate of sugar 
     consumption in the United States for such fiscal year.


               calculation of marketing assessment bases

       Section 359c of the 1938 Act, as amended, provides for the 
     calculation of marketing assessment bases and requires the 
     Secretary to establish marketing assessment bases for sugar 
     in each of the fiscal years 1997 through 2003. The Secretary 
     must first establish the overall quantity of sugar to be 
     distributed for the fiscal year, referred to as the overall 
     base. This overall base is to be set on the basis of the 
     Secretary's estimate of sugar consumption for the fiscal 
     year, and must be adjusted to the maximum extent practicable 
     to prevent the acquisition of sugar by the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation.
       Section 359c requires that once the overall base quantity 
     is established for a fiscal year, it must be distributed 
     among sugar derived from sugar beets and sugar derived from 
     sugarcane in the proportion of 47% for sugar derived from 
     sugar beets; and 53% sugar derived from sugarcane, including 
     raw cane sugar imported from foreign countries for 
     consumption in the United States.
       Subsection (d) of Section 359c provides that this initial 
     distribution of the base between sugar derived from sugar 
     beets and sugar derived from sugarcane is subject to a 
     required further distribution to establish three bases. The 
     first of these bases is the base for sugar derived from sugar 
     beets, which for a fiscal year is a quantity equal to the 
     product of multiplying the overall base quantity for the 
     fiscal year by 47%. The second base is a base for sugar 
     derived from sugarcane, which for a fiscal year is the 
     quantity obtained by subtracting 1,257,000 short tons, raw 
     value, from the quantity equal to the product of multiplying 
     the overall base quantity for the fiscal year by 53%. The 
     third base is the base for refined cane sugar, which is the 
     quantity equal to the product of multiplying the overall base 
     quantity for the fiscal year by 53%.
       Section 359c further provides that the base for sugar 
     derived from sugarcane must be distributed among the five 
     States in the United States (considering Puerto Rico as a 
     ``State'' for this purpose) in which sugarcane is produced in 
     a fair and equitable manner on the basis of past marketings 
     of sugar processed from sugarcane in the 2 highest years of 
     production from each States from the 1990 through 1994 
     crops), processing capacity, and the ability of processors to 
     market the sugar covered under the base.
       Section 359c also provides for the adjustment of the 
     marketing assessment bases. Whenever the weighted average 
     bulk, FOB factory/refinery net price (including the price of 
     representative consumer and industrial products, adjusted to 
     a bulk basis) reported by all sellers of refined sugar for 
     any week is more than 111 per cent of the average bulk, FOB 
     factory price for refined beet sugar for the fiscal years 
     1990 through 1994, the Secretary may increase the marketing 
     assessment bases of cane sugar refiners and sugar beet 
     processors. Whenever the weighted average bulk FOB factory/
     refinery net price (including the price of representative 
     consumer and industrial products, adjusted to a bulk basis) 
     reported by all sellers of refined sugar for any week is less 
     than 104 percent of the average FOB factory price for refined 
     beet sugar for the fiscal years 1990 through 1994, the 
     Secretary must decrease the marketing assessment bases of 
     cane sugar refiners, sugar beet processors, and cane sugar 
     processors, but must maintain the minimum access level for 
     imports of sugar set forth in the Harmonized Tariff Schedules 
     of the United States.


               distribution of marketing assessment bases

       Section 359d of the 1938 Act, as amended, provides for the 
     distribution of marketing assessment bases to individual 
     processors and refiners. The Secretary must distribute each 
     of the three bases provided for under subsection (d) of 
     section 359c for each of the fiscal years 1997 through 2003 
     among the processors or cane sugar refiners covered by the 
     base in a fair, efficient and equitable manner. In the case 
     of distributing the cane sugar assessment base among 
     processors, the Secretary is required to take into 
     consideration processing capacity, past marketings of sugar, 
     and the ability of each processor to market sugar covered by 
     that proportion of the base distributed. Further, with 
     respect to distribution the beet sugar assessment base among 
     processors of sugar beets, the Secretary is required to 
     assign processor bases in accordance with each processor's 
     highest amount of
      sugar produced in any year from sugar beets produced from 
     the 1990 through the 1994 crops. In making these 
     distributions to processors and refiners from the 
     assessments bases, the Secretary is also required to make 
     reasonable provisions for new processors and refiners.


                        reassignment of deficits

       Section 359e of the 1938 Act, as amended, provides for the 
     reassignment of any deficits in the marketing of an 
     assessment base. If the Secretary determines that any 
     sugarcane processor who has received a share of a State cane 
     sugar assessment base will be unable to market the 
     processor's share of the State's cane sugar base for the 
     fiscal year, the Secretary must first reassign the estimated 
     quantity of the deficit to the bases for other processors 
     within that State; if after such reassignments the deficit 
     cannot be completely eliminated, the Secretary must then 
     reassign the remaining part of the estimated quantity of the 
     deficit proportionately to the bases for other cane sugar 
     States; and finally, if after these second reassignments, the 
     deficit still cannot be completely eliminated, the Secretary 
     is to reassign the remainder to imports. With respect to beet 
     sugar, if the Secretary determines that a sugar beet 
     processor who has received a share of the beet sugar 
     assessment base will be unable to market its share, the 
     Secretary must first reassign the estimated quantity of the 
     deficit to the bases for other sugar beet processors; if 
     after such reassignments the deficit cannot be completely 
     eliminated, the Secretary must reassign the remainder to 
     imports. If the Secretary determines that a 

[[Page S 12249]]
     cane sugar refiner who has received a share of the cane sugar 
     assessment base will be unable to market that share, the 
     Secretary must reassign the estimated quantity of the deficit 
     to the bases of other refiners, as the Secretary deems 
     appropriate.


                   provisions applicable to producers

       Section 359f of the 1938 Act directs the Secretary, for 
     each of the fiscal years 1997 through 2003, to obtain from 
     processors such assurances as the Secretary deems adequate 
     that the assessment base will be shared among producers 
     served by the processors in a fair and equitable manner that 
     adequately reflects producers' production histories, and to 
     resolve through arbitration by the Secretary on the request 
     of either party any dispute between a processor and a 
     producer, or group of producers, with respect to the sharing 
     of the processor's allocation.
       Section 359f also directs the Secretary, in any case in 
     which a State share of an assessment base is established 
     under subsection (e) of section 359c and there are in excess 
     of 250 producers in the State to which it applies, to make a 
     determination, for each such State share of an assessment 
     base, whether the production of sugar, in the absence of 
     proportionate shares, will be greater than the quantity 
     needed to enable processors to fill the State share of the 
     assessment base and provide a normal carryover inventory. If 
     the Secretary determines this to be the case for a fiscal 
     year, considering the
      amount of sugar processed from all crops by all processors 
     covered by such State base, then the Secretary must 
     establish a proportionate share for each sugarcane 
     producing farm that limits the acreage of sugarcane that 
     may be harvested on the farm for sugar or seed during the 
     fiscal year, with each such proportionate share subject to 
     adjustment for natural disaster or other condition beyond 
     the control of producers.


             Sec. 703. Prevention of Sugar Loan Forfeitures

       Section 703 of title VI amends section 902(c)(2)(A) of the 
     Food Security Act of 1985--which provides that the Secretary 
     is to report to the President any sugar imports from Cuba by 
     certain countries exporting sugar to the United States--by 
     extending its applicability to August 1, 2002.

                Title VIII--General Commodity Provisions

       Significant adjustments have been made in the General 
     Provisions to increase planting flexibility and comply with 
     deficit reduction targets. Increased flexibility is provided 
     in two ways: (1) by expanding so-called optimal flex acres 
     from 10% of permitted acres to 100% of permitted acres and 
     (2) by providing new authority to allow producers to plant up 
     to 25% of their historical oilseed acreage to a program crop. 
     In both cases, the crop ``flexed'' would be eligible for loan 
     but not deficiency payments.


            Sec. 801. Deficiency and Land Diversion Payments

       Section 801 amends section 114 of the 1949 Act to continue 
     the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture to make advance 
     deficiency payments.


               Sec. 802. Adjustment of Established Prices

       Section 802 extends the authority contained in section 
     402(b) of the 1949 Act through the 2002 crops.


                 Sec. 803. Adjustment of Support Prices

       Section 803 extends the authority contained in section 
     403(c) of the 1949 Act through the 2002 crops.


       Sec. 804. Program Option for the 1003 and Subsequent Crops

       Section 804 amends section 406 of the 1949 Act to provide 
     the Secretary with the authority to offer optional programs 
     for the 2003 and subsequent crop years that are similar to 
     those provided in the 1949 Act for the 2002 crops.


     Sec. 805. Application of Terms in the Agricultural Act of 1949

       Section 805 amends section 408(k)(3) of the 1949 Act to 
     make its terms applicable to the 1996-2002 crops.


                Sec. 806. Acreage Base and Yield System

       Title V of the 1949 Act is basically extended and made 
     applicable to the 1996 through 2002 crops of wheat, feed 
     grains, upland cotton and rice. Section 806 changes current 
     law governing planting flexibility as follows:
       Increases current planting flexibility from 25% to 100%. 
     Producers can effectively respond to market signals by 
     planting alternative crops on up to 100% of their crop 
     acreage base without penalty and without market-distorting 
     financial incentives; and
       Provides producers with ability to plant program crops on 
     up to 25% of their historical soybean acreage, without losing 
     program eligibility and without market-distorting financial 
     incentives. Any program crop planted under this provision 
     will retain loan eligibility.


                     Secs. 811. Payment Limitations

       Section 811 extends the application of payment limitations 
     as provided in title X of the Food Security Act of 1985 to 
     the 1996 through 2002 crops.


         Sec. 812-831. Miscellaneous and Conforming Amendments

       Sections 812 through 831 of the bill contain various 
     miscellaneous and conforming amendments either extending 
     certain provisions of law or making necessary modifications 
     to current law to conform with the provisions of the 
     agricultural Competitiveness act of 1995.
     \1\ Section 358 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 
     requires the Secretary to establish and apportion a national 
     marketing quota and a national acreage allotment for the 
     production of peanuts.
     \2\ Section 358a of the Act provides for the sale, lease, and 
     transfer of peanut acreage allotments.
     \3\ Section 371 of the Act provides for the adjustment of 
     marketing quotas and acreage allotments for cotton, rice, 
     peanuts, or tobacco based on the supply of the commodity 
     involved.
     \4\ Part I provides for the publication and review of 
     marketing quotas and acreage allotments for tobacco, corn, 
     wheat, cotton, peanuts, and rice.
     \5\ Section 358-1(a)(1) of current law prohibits the 
     secretary from establishing the national poundage quota for a 
     marketing year at less than 1,350,000 tons.
     \6\ Section 358-1(b)(4) of the Act provides that quota will 
     be considered produced if it is either voluntarily released 
     during 1 of the 3 previous years or leased during 1 of the 3 
     previous years (or both).
     \7\ Section 358-1(b)(6)(B) of the Act provides that not more 
     than 25 percent of such quota may be reallocated to farms for 
     which no quota was established for the preceding year.
     \8\ Section 358e of the Act provides for the handling and 
     disposal of peanuts and establishes penalties for the 
     marketing of peanuts in excess of the established poundage 
     quota.
     \9\ Section 358c of the Act authorizes the Secretary to 
     permit not more than 1 tenth of 1 percent of the basic quota 
     for a State to be utilized for experimental and research 
     purposes.
                                                                    ____

     Key Provisions of the Agricultural Competitiveness Act of 1955

       Maintains the current basic structure of our highly 
     successful farm programs (contains the freeze on target 
     prices and maintains from marketing loan program for wheat, 
     feedgrains, cotton, and rice).
       Requires farm policies to be modified in order to meet the 
     Balanced Budget Reconciliation Instruction--Increases non-
     paid base acres from 15% to 25%.
       Allows for 100% flexibility; increases the Optional Flex 
     Acres (OFA) from 10% to 100% of program crop acreage base. 
     This will allow producers to more effectively respond to 
     market signals by being able to plant eligible alternative 
     crops on up to 100% of their program base acres without being 
     penalized by having their base acreage reduced in the 
     following crop year.
       Provides farmers the option for up to 25% two-way 
     flexibility. This will enable farmers to produce program 
     crops on up to 25% of historical soybean acres. In essence, 
     this provision further allows farmers to respond to market 
     signals by enabling them to plant up to 25% of their 
     historical soybean acres to program crops which will be 
     eligible for loan participation.
       Allows the Secretary to increase soybean and minor oilseed 
     marketing loan rates up to 85% of their 5 year average market 
     price or $5.50 per bushel and $9.75 per hundred weight, 
     respectively, if the Secretary determines that these rates 
     will be budget neutral. The minimum market loan rate for 
     soybeans and minor oilseeds are increased to $5.00 per bushel 
     and $8.90 per hundred weight respectively.
       Eliminates any ARP requirements for oilseeds which are 
     double cropped with program crops.
       The Peanut program is reformed to move it toward no 
     government cost, further opening the program to new producers 
     and more closely tying production limits to market demand. 
     Removes the limitations on the Secretary to control the cost 
     of the program by giving the Secretary full discretion to 
     adjust the amount of peanuts eligible for domestic price 
     support so production will better equal market demand. 
     Undermarketings are eliminated (the current practice of 
     allowing unproduced quota to be produced the following year). 
     Program benefits to producers will be reduced, but government 
     costs will be dramatically reduced and the program made more 
     responsible to imports and market demand.
       The Sugar program is reformed to allow U.S. Sugar policy to 
     continue its 1985 mandate to operate at a ``no cost'' to the 
     U.S. Treasury. Marketing assessments imposed beginning in 
     1991 on sugar sales would continue at current levels and 
     extended to imports, providing over $30 million per year 
     toward federal deficit reduction. There are no payments to 
     sugar producers. The 18 cent per pound loan rate for raw 
     sugar remains at the 1985 level. In order to meet the new 
     minimum import obligations required by the GATT and remain no 
     cost, a system requiring private industry to equitably carry 
     surplus stocks is proposed which is more market oriented and 
     more reliable than current policy. The reform proposal also 
     includes new consumer price projections.
 Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I join my distinguished colleague 
from Mississippi, Senator Cochran, in cosponsoring the Agricultural 
Competitiveness Act of 1995. This legislation represents stability in 
the most important business sector of this Nation. Farmers and ranchers 
of this country continue to produce the most affordable and abundant 
food and fiber supply in the world and this bill helps to ensure they 
persist in this role for the next 7 years and beyond.
  Senator Cochran and I have cosponsored legislation many times in past 
farm bill debates. As agriculture is so important to the States of 
Arkansas and Mississippi, we have always strived to put forth policy 
ideas that provide agriculture the necessary fundamental tools to 
survive. The legislation we are 

[[Page S 12250]]
introducing today accomplishes this consistent goal.
  Mr. President, the farmers and ranchers in Arkansas have made one 
very important point to me as we enter this year's farm bill debate--
U.S. agriculture policy has served America very well. The consumers of 
this country spend less of their disposable income on food than any 
other country in the world. Farm programs, that represent only 0.6 
percent of the Federal budget, guarantee a reliable supply of food and 
fiber products at the best prices.
  However, with an ever increasing global marketplace, the success of 
farms in the delta of Arkansas is becoming more dependent on policies 
in Canada, the European Union, or even Japan. Because of these 
increasing uncertainties and the willingness of competitor countries to 
heavily subsidize, we must have policies in place to assist our farmers 
who are directly competing against foreign treasuries. This legislation 
addresses this important point and helps to protect the food and fiber 
security of our country.
  Mr. President, the legislation we are introducing today also provides 
significant but responsible change. Flexibility, being the buzz word in 
this year's farm bill debate, is expanded. Farmers can respond to a 
changing market by planting alternative crops on up to 100 percent of 
their crop acreage base without being penalized by losing base acres in 
the following crop year. Additionally, our flexibility is provided as a 
choice to the farmer without market-distorting financial incentives.
  This farmer-oriented legislation also addresses the continuing budget 
pressures faced by the government. Although I did not support the 
balanced budget amendment or the budget resolution this year because I 
believe they went too far too fast, I obviously recognize that there 
will have to be some reductions. However, I believe this should be done 
in a responsible fashion. when faced with painful budget cutting 
choices, farmers have generally preferred an increase in nonpaid acres 
rather than other more drastic approaches.
  Our legislation prudently increases nonpaid acres from 15 to 25 
percent over the next 7 years, significantly reducing Federal outlays. 
Further, the bill recognizes the budget reconciliation instructions the 
Agriculture Committee will have to consider. I still believe the cuts 
being forced on agriculture are far too drastic and don't recognize the 
fact that we have paid more than our fair share and will continue to 
support efforts to reduce this financial burden during the budget 
reconciliation process. However, in working to find responsible ways 
for farmers and ranchers to contribute their fair share, this bill does 
address a responsible way of meeting certain budget obligations.
  In summary, Mr. President, this legislation improves upon policies 
that have served this country well. With these improvements, 
agriculture will better be able to meet the new challenges of a world 
economy.
 Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, it has become increasingly 
apparent that the 1995 farm bill will be a comprehensive debate on the 
future of American agriculture not only in the face of tight Federal 
budget constraints, but also under new competitive realities brought on 
by the passage of the NAFTA and GATT trade agreements. In this debate, 
my colleagues and I are challenged to design a plan that will protect 
production agriculture and the fragile rural economies it supports 
while meeting necessary spending reductions that will eventually bring 
us to our imperative goal of a balanced federal budget.
  In order to meet the competitive challenges we face in regard to our 
nation's commodity programs, my distinguished colleague from 
Mississippi, Senator Cochran, has carefully crafted a bill titled the 
Agricultural Competitiveness Act of 1995. For his leadership in this 
regard, I would like to commend the Senator and join his effort by 
cosponsoring this legislation. This bill, of which I am a coauthor, 
will provide a steady direction for production agriculture over the 
next 7 years. It also offers a commitment to programmatic changes 
necessary to meet all spending reductions required by the Senate 
Agriculture Committee.
  Production leaders of each commodity program contained in this bill 
have actively participated in its formulation and have been extremely 
cooperative in working toward our goals. Particular credit should go to 
our leaders in the peanut industry who have accepted the challenge to 
reform and have delivered a significant product. It could be argued 
that the peanut industry has made more substantive changes in its 
program than any other commodity program we currently administer. Our 
reformed peanut title was taken directly from the positions established 
by the National Peanut Growers Group, the Nation's largest grower 
organization, who labored over several months to make the tough 
decisions required of them.
  A review of our title will indicate substantive change. We have moved 
the program toward no Government cost, opened the opportunities for 
greater participation and have become more market oriented. It should 
be mentioned that these peanut title reforms do not come without pain 
for our growers. This legislation will represent a nearly 30 percent 
decrease in peanut farmer income. In addition, USDA has estimated that 
we will save at least $500 million over the life of this bill from the 
difficult changes we have made. And, it is these very changes that 
represent our true commitment to budgetary responsibility.
  We have eliminated almost all government cost and responded to 
competitive demands with the following five program changes:
  First, elimination of the statutory minimum quota floor.
  The Secretary of Agriculture is granted the authority to set the 
amount of quota peanuts eligible for domestic price support equal to 
market demand. This provision it will eliminate the recent Government 
surpluses of peanuts that must be crushed for oil at tremendous losses 
to the American taxpayer.
  Second, elimination of undermarketings.
  This provision will help insure government cost reductions by ending 
carry-over of quota to future crop years. It has been estimated that if 
undermarketings had been eliminated in the 1994 crop year, we would 
have saved $60 million.
  Third, price support to decrease with farm production cost decreases.
  The price support for peanut growers would be allowed to decrease up 
to 5 percent with reductions in farm production costs. Currently, the 
cost of production model allows only for increases in prices support. 
This is a market-oriented measure designed to keep the support price 
competitive and reduce Government cost.
  Fourth, provide all peanut growers with quota for seed.
  Fairness is the issue here. Our quota growers have agreed to provide 
any peanut grower with quota equal to the approximate amount of seed 
they plant each year. This addresses the concerns about seed costs of 
some farmers who grow peanuts primarily for the export market.
  Fifth, allowance of cross-county line sale and transfer of quota.
  This provision would allow 40 percent of our total quota to be 
transferred or sold across county lines over the life of the bill. 
Allowing nearly half of our Nation's quota to go to the most efficient 
growing areas is good policy from a production standpoint. This change 
is also a strong argument against those critics saying the peanut 
program operates behind closed doors.
  These positive changes offered in this bill by our peanut producers, 
coupled with our cotton growers commitment to meeting necessary 
spending requirements, are strong signs of their commitment to the 
future of not only Georgia agriculture, but our nation's as a whole. 
Again, I commend my colleague from Mississippi for his leadership in 
this process and look forward to working with him in crafting a final 
product that will sustain the future of rural America.
  Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, no other legislation likely to come before 
Congress this year will have more direct impact on my State of North 
Carolina, and the people who live there, than the 1995 farm bill. For 
an agriculture State that ranks third as the most diversified 
agribusiness State in the country, the farm bill is critically 
important legislation.
  I commend the Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Cochran] for leading the 

[[Page S 12251]]
  way in maintaining the support of the agricultural commodities that 
give American consumers peace of mind by providing the safest, most 
affordable, and most abundant food supply in the world.
  Mr. President, when Congress begins the debate on this legislation, 
it is essential that we focus on fundamental reform. The time for farm 
program facelifts is rapidly approaching--and overdue in some 
instances. It is time for real change, change that will return farm 
programs to their fundamental and original mission: helping family 
farmers survive and prosper. Today, along with the other cosponsors of 
this commodity title of the 1995 farm bill, I can report that there is 
real reform for the peanut program.
  Permit me to highlight a few of the significant changes that have 
been made to the peanut program:
  First, it eliminates Government cost through reducing the amount of 
peanuts subject to government support.
  Second, allows the sale and transfer of quota across country lines.
  Third, provides all growers quota to cover seed requirements.
  Fourth, allows the support level to fluctuate with cost of 
production.
  These sacrifices will cost at least $110 million annually in income 
to our growers.
  Mr. President, much of a negative nature has been said about peanuts 
this year. The peanut portion of the commodity title addresses major 
changes that the growers have supported wholeheartedly. The peanut 
program is one of the most important programs not only to my State, but 
to all Southern States.
  Critics have asserted, mistakenly, that the peanut program costs 
consumers hundreds of millions of dollars each year in higher prices. 
This is simply not true. In fact, according to the USDA, 74 percent of 
the consumer cost is added to a jar of peanut butter after farmers have 
sold their peanuts.
  So contrary to the myth that farmers are reaping huge profits from 
the peanut program, it is, in fact, the manufacturers of peanut 
products who reap the sizable profits.
  The 1990 farm bill extended the peanut program through the 1995 crop. 
But this year, peanut growers had to reevaluate their program; we have 
included their reform in this legislation. This reform package is the 
first step in providing a safety net for our farmers while addressing 
the new demands of the North American Free Trade Agreement [NAFTA] and 
the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trades [GATT]. This legislation 
will carry our farmers into a more market-oriented 21st century.
  In the current budget-driven atmosphere in Washington, urban Members 
of Congress often mistakenly view phasing out farm programs as a simple 
solution to our budget problems. Its easy for politicians who have no 
peanut producers in their States to take cheap shots at the livelihoods 
of those who earn their livings in the peanut industry.
  The peanut program is an investment in the business of farming. It 
means 150,000 U.S. jobs, $200 million in U.S. exports, $1 billion in 
U.S. farm revenue, and $6 billion in U.S. economic activity each year.
  This commodity title includes peanut reform provisions that make 
solid changes to the current program. This reform package will be an 
alternative that will turn this program towards a market-oriented plan 
that will ensure U.S. competitiveness in global markets, will operate 
at no net cost to the taxpayer, and will provide a safety net for 
farmers.
  Farmers and their families have contributed so much to the growth of 
our country. Today, according to USDA, the United States is the third 
largest producer of peanuts in the world. Elimination of the peanut 
program would mean an immediate loss of 37,000 U.S. jobs, as well as 
$350 million in lost farm revenue, $50 million in lost exports, and $25 
million in lost tax revenues.
  Everyone in the peanut industry, from the growers to the shellers and 
manufacturers, realizes the program must be reformed as part of the 
1995 farm bill.
  The peanut farmers of my State of North Carolina and throughout the 
Nation have taken a responsible voluntary approach of cutting their 
budgets. They are willing to make major sacrifices and reforms in order 
to eliminate government cost and make the peanut program more market-
oriented. Again, I commend the able Senior Senator from Mississippi 
[Mr. Cochran] for his diligent efforts to address the issues of real 
reform.
                                 ______

      By Mr. HELMS (for himself, Mr. Dole, Mr. Lieberman, and Mr. 
        McCain):
  S. 1157. A bill to authorize the establishment of a multilateral 
Bosnia and Herzegovina Self-Defense Fund; to the Committee on Foreign 
Relations.


       the multilateral bosnia and herzegovina self-defense fund
  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I am pleased to cosponsor the Multilateral 
Bosnia and Herzegovina Self-Defense Fund. In the aftermath of the 
overwhelming votes to lift the arms embargo in the Senate and the 
House, this legislation is the logical next step in a policy designed 
to put the future of Bosnia back in Bosnian hands. This legislation 
will create an international fund for the defense of Bosnia, and will 
provide for a leadership role for the United States, not only in 
establishing the fund, but in chairing it.
  I would like to commend the distinguished chairman of the Foreign 
Relations Committee in taking the lead and forging legislation to 
address the critical issue of supporting the Bosnian Government 
militarily once the arms embargo is lifted--and it will be lifted. I 
would also add that the chairman has brought together a bipartisan 
group of distinguished Senators, including Senator Lieberman, in this 
important effort.
  During our debates on lifting the arms embargo on Bosnia 
administration officials have snidely criticized our legislation as 
lift and pray--alleging to the press and even to the Bosnians that 
there is no support in the Congress for providing military assistance 
to them. This bill makes it absolutely clear that we are serious--that 
we are ready to follow-through.
  The reality is that the administration's approach is don't lift and 
pray--pray that the American people will be fooled into thinking that 
there is a U.S. policy and pray that the Croatian government will get 
the international community off the hook.
  Well, the American people are not fooled. They know that the 
administration does not have a policy.
  As for the recent Croatian military action--Croatia's ability to 
retake its territory has demonstrated that with arms, the victims of 
aggression can successfully take matters into their own hands. In 4 
days, Croatian forces accomplished what the United Nations could not do 
in 4 years. And, they had no help--the NATO no-fly zone was not 
enforced as Serb jets bombed Croatian towns.
  The undeniable lesson of the past week is that the arms embargo and 
the U.N. presence has prolonged the war in the former Yugoslavia by 
keeping areas of Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina under occupation.
  Another allegation made by administration officials is that lifting 
the embargo would Americanize the war. We know from the large votes in 
support of Bosnia's right to self-defense in the U.N. General Assembly 
and from discussions with international leaders that this assertion is 
simply not true.
  This rhetoric is part of the scare tactics employed by the Pentagon 
and State Department in order to try to persuade members of Congress 
that somehow, if the arms embargo is lifted, we alone would be 
providing aid to the Bosnians.
  This fund will provide a mechanism for countries, other than just the 
United States, to provide the Bosnians with military assistance--and to 
do so before the arms embargo is lifted. I would add, however, that the 
actual delivery of weapons will not occur until the U.S. arms embargo 
is lifted which would occur after U.N. forces withdraw.
  I want to talk for a moment about cost. This bill provides for a $50 
million payment to the fund and authorization for $50 million in 
Department of Defense draw down authority for defense articles and 
services--for a total package of $100 million, far less than we are 
currently spending on a failed approach. This year, we are being billed 
around a half a billion dollars for our share of the U.N. peacekeeping 
operation. Our share for UNPROFOR next 

[[Page S 12252]]
year will probably be closer to $600 million. We are also providing 
indirect support to this operation--for example, through NATO--which 
amounts to about $250 million annually. And, we do not get any discount 
when UNPROFOR is unable to do its job.
  The bottom line is that keeping the U.N. in Bosnia is not cost-free. 
Indeed it is far more expensive than helping the Bosnians help 
themselves. Furthermore, we have to look at the costs of this failure 
to our credibility and our principles.
  As we introduce this legislation today, President Clinton is poised 
to veto S. 21, the Dole-Lieberman legislation to lift the arms embargo 
on Bosnia.
  Administration officials are reportedly in Europe devising new ways 
to divide Bosnia and Herzegovina and to bribe Serbian President 
Milosevic, while Ambassador Albright is briefing the Security Council 
on evidence that more than 2,000 people were buried in mass graves in 
the wake of the Bosnian Serb take over of Srebrenica.
  No doubt about it, the international community is partially 
responsible for these war crimes. It has refused to protect the 
Bosnians and denied the Bosnians the means to protect themselves.
  How can America, the leader of the free world, continue to be a part 
of this immoral embargo? Administration officials even publicly 
acknowledge that it is immoral. As for the embargo's practical effect, 
it has been a total failure at achieving its goal of limiting violence 
and ending the war.
  America should be leading the way toward a moral and rational policy 
that has some chance of resulting in a just and stable settlement. 
Instead, America is following an ineffective, failed approached based 
on appeasement.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1157

       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 ``Multilateral Bosnia and 
     Herzegovina Self-Defense Fund Act''.

     SEC. 2. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA SELF-DEFENSE FUND.

       (a) Authority for Establishment.--(1) Subject to the other 
     provisions of this section, the President is authorized to 
     enter into an international agreement with eligible countries 
     for the establishment of a fund to assist the self-defense of 
     Bosnia and Herzegovina, which may be known as the 
     ``Multilateral Bosnia and Herzegovina Self-Defense Fund''.
       (2) The Secretary of State is authorized--
       (A) to pay the United States contribution to the Fund out 
     of amounts made available pursuant to section 3; and
       (B) to transfer to the custody of the international board 
     having responsibility for the Fund military equipment that 
     has been drawn down in accordance with section 4.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of the Fund shall be to provide 
     an international mechanism for the procurement of military 
     equipment and training for transfer to the Government of 
     Bosnia and Herzegovina for the exercise of its right to self 
     defense under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, and 
     to facilitate the achievement of a just and equitable peace 
     settlement by enabling the government of Bosnia and 
     Herzegovina to protect its population and territory.
       (c) Requirements.--An agreement referred to in subsection 
     (a) shall meet the following requirements:
       (1) United states representation.--The United States will 
     chair any international board having responsibility for the 
     Fund.
       (2) Membership of the international board.--Membership of 
     any international board having responsibility for the Fund 
     will include, at a minimum, one representative of the 
     Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina and one representative 
     from the Government of Croatia.
       (3) Control of Military Equipment.--The agreement will 
     provide procedures for the control of military equipment 
     received by the international board having responsibility for 
     the Fund.
       (4) Commitment by the government of bosnia and 
     herzegovina.--Before any military equipment or training 
     purchased or otherwise acquired through the Fund, or held by 
     the international board responsible for the Fund, may be 
     transferred to the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina that 
     Government will provide written assurances that the equipment 
     or training will not be used to take reprisals against any 
     civilians in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
       (5) Implementation.--No military equipment or training 
     purchased or otherwise acquired through the Fund, or held by 
     the international board responsible for the Fund, will be 
     transferred to the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina 
     before the date of termination of the United States arms 
     embargo against the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina if 
     such a transfer would violate the embargo.
       (d) Definitions.--As used in this section:
       (1) Eligible countries.--The term ``eligible countries'' 
     includes any foreign country other than a country the 
     government of which the Secretary of State has determined, in 
     accordance with section 6(j)(1)(A) of the Export 
     Administration Act of 1979, repeatedly provides support for 
     acts of international terrorism.
       (2) Fund.--The term ``Fund'' means the fund established as 
     provided in section 2(a).
       (3) Government of bosnia and herzegovina.--The term 
     ``Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina'' includes any agency, 
     instrumentality, or forces of the Government of Bosnia and 
     Herzegovina.
       (4) United states arms embargo of the government of bosnia 
     and herzegovina.--The term ``United States arms embargo of 
     the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina means the 
     application to the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina of--
       (A) the policy adopted July 10, 1991, and published in the 
     Federal Register of July 19, 1991 (58 FR 33322) under the 
     heading ``Suspension of Munitions Export Licenses to 
     Yugoslavia''; and
       (B) any similar policy being applied by the United States 
     Government as of the date of completion of withdrawal of 
     UNPROFOR personnel from Bosnia and Herzegovina, pursuant to 
     which approval is denied for transfers of defense articles 
     and defense services to the former Yugoslavia.

     SEC. 3. UNITED STATES CONTRIBUTION TO THE FUND.

       Of the amounts made available for fiscal year 1996 to carry 
     out the Foreign Military Financing Program under section 23 
     of the Arms Export Control Act, $50,000,000 shall be 
     available only for payment to the Fund of the United States 
     contribution authorized by section 2(a)(2)(A).

     SEC. 4. DRAW DOWN AUTHORITY.

       (a) Authority.--The President is authorized to transfer, 
     subject to the regular notification procedures of the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the House and the Senate, to 
     the custody of the international board having responsibility 
     for the Fund, without reimbursement, defense articles from 
     the stocks of the Department of Defense and defense services 
     of the Department of Defense of an aggregate value not to 
     exceed $50,000,000 in fiscal year 1996.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the President such sums as may be 
     necessary to reimburse the applicable appropriation, fund, or 
     account for defense articles provided under this section.

     SEC. 5. REPORT.

       Sixty days after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
     President shall submit a report to the Committee on Foreign 
     Relations of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of 
     Representatives on what steps the President and the Secretary 
     of State have taken to carry out section 2(a).

     SEC. 6. STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.

       Nothing in this Act shall be interpreted as authorization 
     for deployment of United States forces in the territory of 
     Bosnia and Herzegovina for any purpose, including training, 
     support, or delivery of military equipment.

  Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I thank the majority leader for his 
statement and for his support, as I thank the other cosponsors.
  Now, the purpose of this legislation is to correct an injustice that 
is burdening the conscience of millions of Americans, as well as 
citizens of all civilized countries around the world.
  I refer, of course, to what so many Senators properly consider an 
imperative responsibility both personally and as a nation to move to 
untie the hands of the Bosnian people, thereby enabling them to acquire 
the means to defend themselves against Serbia's cruel genocide designed 
to achieve an illegal conquest of the sovereign nation of Bosnia.
  Mr. President, on behalf of the distinguished majority leader [Mr. 
Dole] Senators Lieberman, McCain, and myself, I shall momentarily send 
a bill to the desk to be read the first time.
  The purpose of this legislation is to correct an injustice that is 
burdening the conscience of millions of Americans as well as citizens 
of all civilized countries around the world.
  I refer of course to what so many Senators properly consider an 
imperative responsibility to move to untie the hands of the Bosnian 
people, thereby enabling them to acquire the means to defend themselves 
against Serbia's cruel genocide designed to achieve an illegal conquest 
of the sovereign nation of Bosnia.
  Mr. President, in a joint hearing conducted yesterday by the Senate's 
Foreign Relations and Intelligence Committees to investigate war crimes 
in the former Yugoslavia, a distinguished witness asserted that the 
difference between the conduct of a great nation and the conduct of a 
mighty nation is 

[[Page S 12253]]
that, while both are capable of shaping events far beyond their 
borders, a great nation is guided by deep sense of moral principle.
  The greatest expression of that moral principle, as practiced by our 
Nation in the past, has been the enduring commitment that never again 
will we stand silent while a people fall victim to crimes against 
humanity--as did the Jews in World War II.
  Could it be that that enduring commitment must today seem an empty 
one to the people of Bosnia?
  Instead of protecting the Bosnian people, the United Nations--the 
very body created years ago to make certain that such genocide would 
never happen again--has served instead to render the Bosnian people 
defenseless in the face of Serbia's annihilation of their country.
  And the United States, the leader of the Atlantic alliance, has done 
scarcely more than sit on the sidelines and watch as an entire nation 
of people is slowly exterminated.
  Mr. President, we can no longer sit on the sidelines. The shameful 
policy of neutrality in the face of genocide must be brought to an end. 
There must be a policy, once and for all, that distinguishes clearly 
between victim and aggressor, and which puts the diplomatic, military, 
and financial resources of the United States squarely behind the 
victim.
  No one doubts the magnitude of the abuse against the Bosnian people. 
Today's Washington Post discloses the Clinton administration has openly 
acknowledged that crimes against humanity are being committed this very 
moment in the center of Europe.
  Yet the administration continues to deny the Bosnian victims any hope 
of defending themselves. The President of the United States--fully 
aware of these crimes--intends to veto the legislation Congress has 
passed to restore Bosnia's right of self-defense. This veto is wrong, 
it is unfair, it is unjust, and it must be overridden.
  There are many in both the House and the Senate who have pledged to 
the people of Bosnia that we will do everything in our power to make 
sure Congress overrides that veto. And we will fight to pass 
legislation not only to lift this brutal embargo, but to help provide 
the Bosnian people with the means to defend themselves, their families 
and their sovereign nation.
  Mr. President, it is time the United States began treating the 
Bosnian people the same way we treated the contras in Nicaragua and the 
mujahadeen in Afghanistan--as freedom fighters engaged in a war for the 
liberation of their country. We must help arm them and train them and 
to help them defend themselves against Serbian genocide.
  The legislation we are introducing today will do just that. It will 
establish a multilateral fund to collect and hold donations by 
countries seeking to assist in the self-defense of Bosnia until the 
arms embargo is lifted.
  The bill authorizes an initial U.S. contribution of $50 million in 
foreign military financing, and the transfer of up to $50 million in 
U.S. defense stocks. Moreover, it proposes to create the means to 
coordinate the efforts of nations such as Turkey, Malaysia, Jordan, and 
Saudi Arabia, who are eager to assist the Bosnians in a similar 
fashion.
  Our bill will ensure that, upon the withdrawal of the failed United 
Nations mission, the Serb military will be unable to take advantage of 
any lag in the arming of the Bosnian people. The multilateral fund will 
allow the Bosnian Government to coordinate contributions--and to begin 
procurement by proxy--of the weapons they need for their national self-
defense. The Bosnians will be able to ensure the necessary support and 
transport are available for immediate delivery of weapons after the 
lifting of the embargo. And finally, Bosnian soldiers will be travel to 
third countries to acquire training for the use of donated weapons.
  Our legislation is consistent with the legislation to repeal the arms 
embargo in that it postpones the actual delivery of weaponry until the 
conclusion of the peacekeeping effort. But it will provide the Bosnian 
Government a running start as the arms embargo is lifted.
  The President claims that the recent success of the Croatian military 
has created a new balance of power in the region, thereby giving us an 
opportunity for a political settlement. The President ignores the 
lessons of the last half-century. There can be no lasting peace built 
on weakness; there can only be peace through strength. Let us have no 
illusions that Serbia's recent defeats have taken away their craving 
for territorial expansion--Serbia's appetite for war, destruction and 
conquest is far from satisfied.
  What the success of the recent Croatian offensive does show, however, 
is that the Serb aggression can be successfully confronted and 
defeated, and that Serbs can be driven from land they have unlawfully 
conquered. If a real and lasting peace is to come to Bosnia, we must 
help the Bosnians achieve it by forcing the Serbs to evacuate the land 
they have occupied in Bosnia. We must recognize that there can be no 
peace in that troubled region until the Bosnian people can defend 
themselves against aggression. We must help them restore their nation 
so that they can negotiate from a position to strength.
  The lifting of the unlawful and unjust arms embargo on the Bosnian 
people is long overdue. And it will be lifted. The time has come to end 
America's silence in the face of the unspeakable injustices in Bosnia. 
The time is overdue to lift the embargo and help arm the Bosnian 
Moslems. I hope the Senate will vote to allow the Bosnian people to 
defend themselves at long last.
                                 ______

      By Mr. KERRY (for himself and Mr. Kennedy):
  S. 1158. A bill to deauthorize certain portions of the navigation 
project for Cohasset Harbor, Massachusetts, and for other purposes; to 
the Committee on Environment and Public Works.


               THE COHASSET HARBOR NAVIGATION PROJECT ACT

  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce today with 
Senator Kennedy the Cohasset Harbor Navigation Project Act.
  This is a simple and straightforward bill that will enable an 
important navigation project in the harbor at Cohasset, MA to move 
ahead. Its purpose is to make a series of technical changes in the 
coordinates for the Army Corps of Engineers' Cohasset Harbor project 
that will enable the dredging project to proceed. The changes are 
necessary because of shoaling that has taken place since the harbor was 
last fully dredged in 1960. The shoaling led the Coast Guard in the 
Spring of 1994 to remove Cohasset Harbor from its previously recognized 
status as a ``safe harbor'' for storm refuge for certain vessels at 
sea. The Coast Guard now routinely sets and resets channel buoys which 
practically lay on their sides at low tide. Marine engineers and the 
Coast Guard agree that an offshore storm of any substantial magnitude 
will most probably cause the channel to be blocked completely by the 
transport of bottom sediment carried in storm surge waters.
  The situation is having a damaging effect on our commercial fishing 
fleet, and the safe boating environment of Cohasset's portion of 
Massachusetts Bay. Most of Cohasset's racing and recreational vessels 
of any significant size cannot move into or out of the Harbor within 2 
hours of low tide. The Town of Cohasset has worked closely with all 
parties to expedite the dredging of the inner and outer portions of the 
Harbor. The necessary permits are in place and the funding of $1.415 
million, of which the Federal share is 85 percent, is in place. All 
that is needed for the project to proceed are the technical corrections 
in the coordinates which this legislation will provide. No further 
funding is needed.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues on the relevant 
Committees to move this legislation forward. I ask unanimous consent 
that the full 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. 1158

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

     SECTION 1. DEAUTHORIZATION OF NAVIGATION PROJECT, COHASSET 
                   HARBOR, MASSACHUSETTS.
       The following portions of the project for navigation, 
     Cohasset Harbor, Massachusetts, authorized by section 2 of 
     the Act entitled ``An Act authorizing the construction, 
     repair, and preservation of certain public 

[[Page S 12254]]
     works on rivers and harbors, and for other purposes'', approved March 
     2, 1945 (59 Stat. 12), or carried out pursuant to section 107 
     of the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (33 U.S.C. 577), are 
     deauthorized: A 7-foot deep anchorage and a 6-foot deep 
     anchorage; beginning at site 1, starting at a point 
     N453510.15, E792664.63, thence running south 53 degrees 07 
     minutes 05.4 seconds west 307.00 feet to a point N453325.90, 
     E792419.07, thence running north 57 degrees 56 minutes 36.8 
     seconds west 201.00 feet to a point N453432.58, E792248.72, 
     thence running south 88 degrees 57 minutes 25.6 seconds west 
     50.00 feet to a point N453431.67, E792198.73, thence running 
     north 01 degree 02 minutes 52.3 seconds west 66.71 feet to a 
     point N453498.37, E792197.51, thence running north 69 degrees 
     12 minutes 52.3 seconds east 332.32 feet to a point 
     N453616,30, E792508.20, thence running south 55 degrees 50 
     minutes 24.1 seconds east 189.05 feet to point of origin; 
     then site 2, starting at a point, N452886.64, E791287.83, 
     thence running south 00 degrees 00 minutes 00.0 seconds west 
     56.04 feet to a point, N452830.60, E791287.83, thence running 
     north 90 degrees 00 minutes 00.0 seconds west 101.92 feet to 
     a point, N452830.60, E791185.91, thence running north 52 
     degrees 12 minutes 49.7 seconds east 89.42 feet to a point, 
     N452885.39, E791256.58, thence running north 87 degrees 42 
     minutes 33.8 seconds east 31.28 feet to point of origin; and 
     site 3, starting at a point, N452261.08, E792040.24, thence 
     running north 89 degrees 07 minutes 19.5 seconds east 118.78 
     feet to a point, N452262.90, E792159.01, thence running south 
     43 degrees 39 minutes 06.8 seconds west 40.27 feet to a 
     point, N452233.76, E792131.21, thence running north 74 
     degrees 33 minutes 29.1 seconds west 94.42 feet to a point, 
     N452258.90, E792040.20, thence running north 01 degree 03 
     minutes 04.3 seconds east 2.18 feet to point of origin.

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague from 
Massachusetts, Senator Kerry, in sponsoring this bill for an important 
navigation project for Cohasset Harbor. This bill is intended to make 
minor adjustments to the limits of Federal navigation and anchorage, in 
order to expedite the dredging planned by the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers.
  The dredging is urgently needed. The harbor was last fully dredged in 
1960, and shifting shoals have made the current channel unsafe for many 
vessels during several hours of each day at low tide. Cohasset depends 
on access to its harbor for commercial fishing and recreational 
vessels.
  The proposed adjustment to the current limits for Federal navigation 
and anchorage in Cohasset Harbor was prepared by the Army Corps, 
working in close conjunction with town. The Coast Guard has strongly 
requested that this dredging project proceed promptly in order to 
restore the port's status as a ``recommended harbor of refuge'' during 
bad weather. I urge my colleagues to approve this legislation, which is 
of great importance to the people of Cohasset, their safety and the 
local economy.
                                 ______

      By Mr. INOUYE (for himself, Mr. Simon, Mr. Campbell, and Mr. 
        Conrad):
  S. 1159. A bill to establish an American Indian Policy Information 
Center, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Indian Affairs.


       the american indian policy information center act of 1995

 Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I introduce a measure that reflects 
the culmination of a 4-year effort which has examined the feasibility 
of and has clearly documented the need for the establishment of the 
entity that this bill addresses.
  Mr. President, over the course of the last few months, as the Senate 
has given consideration to broad reform proposals, we have once again 
found ourselves confronted with the challenge of securing accurate 
information with regard to the manner in which such proposals would 
affect Indian country.
  For instance, in the context of welfare reform, we quickly learned 
that there was no central source from which we could secure the 
relevant information with regard to the Indian proportion of the 
population served by programs that are the subject of block grant 
proposals or with respect to unemployment rates in the respective 
reservation communities.
  Nor is there a central source of data with regard to program 
administration or service delivery systems in Indian country, so that 
we might ascertain how best to assure that Federal programs which are 
block granted to the States address the social and economic conditions 
in Indian country. In light of a 200-year history of a Federal Indian 
government-to-government relationship that for the most part does not 
involve the State governments, how should the Congress provide for the 
administration of programs in Indian country under a State block grant 
system?
  To effectively answer this question, we should have a range of policy 
and programmatic options to consider, but there is no existing body 
with the expertise and knowledge of Indian country that we can call 
upon to identify and analyze such options.
  Mr. President, in most of Indian country policy-related information 
is very scarce. If tribal governments are to effectively participate in 
the decisonmaking process associated with reform proposals and other 
Federal actions, they too must have access to information and analyses 
that will assist them in doing so. It is these imperatives that this 
bill seeks to address.
  The central purpose of the American Indian Policy Information Center 
that would be established under the bill would be one of making 
information and analyses available to agencies of the Federal 
Government, to the Congress, and to tribal and other governments that 
are not otherwise readily available to them. In addition to providing 
information collected from a variety of sources, the policy information 
center would be authorized to conduct or commission research to meet 
policy information needs and to conduct or sponsor forums to identify 
and explore policy issues.
  The bill would establish a successor to the demonstration project now 
authorized as the National Indian Policy Center, and the activities 
proposed are among those that have been carried out as elements of the 
demonstration. The bill is a revision of a bill approved by the Senate 
Committee on Indian Affairs during the 103d Congress, but it has been 
modified on the basis of the experience of the current demonstration. 
In revising this measure, I have also drawn upon a bill drafted during 
the 103d Congress by Senator Craig Thomas.
  Mr. President, I am hopeful that my colleagues will give this measure 
their careful consideration and will join me in seeking its approval by 
the full Senate.
                                 ______

      By Mr. ROCKEFELLER:
  S. 1160. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
that the depreciation rules which apply for regular tax purposes also 
shall apply for alternative minimum tax purposes; to the Committee on 
Finance.


      THE ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM TAX DEPRECIATION RELIEF ACT OF 1995

 Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, today I am introducing a 
relatively modest tax measure that could provide significant relief to 
capital intensive industries that show little to no profits and pay 
income taxes under the Alternative Minimum Tax [AMT]. This will 
eliminate a disincentive in tax policy towards key investment in 
industries that are vital to the country's economic competitiveness, 
job base, and industrial strength. This is one of the ways to help the 
employers, workers, and families in my state of West Virginia.
  As a tax measure designed to enhance the competitiveness of 
industries that range from steel, to paper and wood products, autos, 
chemicals, and mining, this bill will result in a cost in the form of 
less revenue collected. But I am introducing the AMT Depreciation 
Relief Act of 1995 to serve as a practical, affordable option to 
consider along with the versions of AMT reform that have already passed 
the House and have been introduced earlier this year in the Senate. And 
I believe this bill addresses a real problem that Congress must work 
together to overcome.
  Many manufacturers want to see a complete repeal of the AMT. Some 
especially want reform to address the problems which result from being 
effectively stuck in AMT status, such as the accumulation of credits 
and past investments in plants and equipment modernization, which I 
think merit serious attention.
  This bill focuses specifically on the problem of the way the AMT 
treats the depreciation of assets, which is a root cause of why many 
companies remain stuck in AMT status. If and when a resolution is 
worked out to deal with the problem in the way depreciation is 
calculated, we will go a long way to getting companies out of AMT 
status, with the result that then they would be able to use their 
accumulated credits.

[[Page S 12255]]

  As my colleagues know, the corporate AMT was created in the 1986 Tax 
Act in response to the problem raised when companies would report 
profits to stockholders, but then claim losses to the IRS. However, the 
subsequent action taken in this area as part of that historic effort to 
``simplify'' the code had the unintended consequence of penalizing low-
profit, capital-intensive companies, because the AMT treats 
depreciation as an adjustment (or increase in income). As Tom Usher, 
the chairman and CEO of USX explained to the House Ways and Means 
Committee in January 1995: ``under the AMT, most steel making assets 
are subject to a 15-year capital cost recovery period and a 150-percent 
declining balance method, compared to 7 years and 200 percent under the 
regular tax.'' What that means is that compared to other countries, 
after 5 years, a U.S. steelmaker under AMT recovers only 37 percent on 
its investment in new plant and equipment, versus the recovery for 
companies in other countries, that include 58 percent in Japan, 81 
percent in Germany, 90 percent in Korea, and 100 percent in Brazil.
  What it comes down to is that under the regular tax system, 
depreciation adjustments are designed to encourage investment. However, 
the AMT has had the unintended consequence of, if anything, 
discouraging investment in new plants and equipment. This is precisely 
the wrong signal to send to our Nation's capital intensive industries.
  At its heart, this is an issue for how well our companies can compete 
on the world stage. For years, I have focused on how trade laws are 
used to ensure that our domestic industries can compete with unfairly 
sold imports. However, the present AMT policies have created a 
situation which hinders that competitive position.
  The fix I am suggesting would eliminate depreciation as a adjustment 
under the alternative minimum tax. Quite simply, that means that 
depreciation for companies in an AMT status would be treated in 
precisely the same way as for companies in a regular tax status.
  This is a simple, two-page, bill. It proposes a modest change in the 
tax code that will have a very beneficial impact on the bottom line of 
some of America's most important industries and employers. I am looking 
forward to bipartisan support for this change, and hope it can be made 
quickly. I urge my colleagues to join me as cosponsors.
                                 ______

      By Mr. BAUCUS:
  S. 1161. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exempt 
small manufacturers, producers and importers from the firearms excise 
tax; to the Committee on Finance.


                         excise tax legislation

 Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation 
which will exempt custom gunsmiths who manufacture, produce or import 
fewer than 50 guns a year from the Federal excise tax on firearms.
  In 1982, this body passed legislation which was subsequently signed 
into law which was intended to relieve custom gunsmiths from the excise 
tax.
  Apparently we were not clear enough. Notwithstanding that 
legislation, the Internal Revenue Service and the Bureau of Alcohol, 
Tobacco and Firearms continue to attempt to collect the excise tax from 
custom gunsmiths.
  Mr. President, the custom gunsmith is a small operator. While 
ignorance of the law is no excuse, many of these small operators do not 
know that an excise tax is owed until they receive a visit from the IRS 
or the BATF. Because the number of custom gunsmiths is small and 
because they produce few guns, the revenue raised from the imposition 
of the excise tax is insubstantial. In fact, the BATF has indicated 
that the cost to the BATF of collecting the tax may well exceed the 
revenue raised from the tax.
  For all of these reasons, Congress attempted to relieve custom 
gunsmiths from the firearms excise tax in 1982.
  The bill I introduce today completes that job.
                                 ______

      By Mr. MOYNIHAN (for himself and Mr. D'Amato):
  S. 1162. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to treat 
academic health centers like other educational institutions for 
purposes of the exclusion for employer-provided housing; to the 
Committee on Finance.


                 employer-provided housing legislation

  Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I rise today on behalf of myself and 
Senator D'Amato to introduce a bill that would correct an anomaly, by 
extending to faculty at independent academic health centers an 
exclusion from income tax for employer-provided housing that is enjoyed 
by faculty at university-affiliated health centers. In 1986, Congress 
enacted a provision allowing employees of educational institutions to 
exclude from income the excess of the fair market value of the 
university-provided housing over the rent actually paid. This exclusion 
permits universities to attract faculty and staff with the necessary 
expertise to meet the university's needs. The availability of this 
exclusion is especially vital to those institutions located in high-
cost housing areas like New York City.
  Currently, faculty at academic health centers that are not affiliated 
with a university are not allowed to exclude the excess value of their 
employer-provided housing. This is the case despite the fact that 
independent academic health centers perform the same function as 
university-affiliated institutions, and that the situation of their 
employees is likewise identical to that of their counterparts. Many of 
the tenants of center-owned housing are employees pursuing advanced 
training at the academic health center, often at substantial financial 
hardship. Because of the difference in tax treatment, independent 
institutions are placed at a competitive disadvantage in terms of their 
ability to attract these highly qualified employees. Academic health 
centers are an important national resource, performing essential 
research and providing other significant contributions to our Nation's 
health care. By enacting this bill, Congress would ensure the continued 
ability of independent academic health centers to pursue their missions 
of patient care, education, and research.
  Our bill is narrowly drawn to focus only on this competitive 
disadvantage. Under the proposed amendment, the academic health center 
must, first, qualify as a tax-exempt hospital or medical research 
organization eligible to receive charitable contributions; second, it 
must receive Federal funding for graduate medical education; and third, 
it must engage in and teach basic and clinical medical science and 
research with the organization's own faculty. The bill would have 
negligible impact on revenue.
  We believe that this legislation would rectify the inequitable 
treatment currently accorded the faculty of independent academic health 
centers, ensuring fair tax treatment for these employees and the 
continued excellence of the institutions for which they work.
  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. 1162

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

     SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF HOUSING PROVIDED TO EMPLOYEES BY 
                   ACADEMIC HEALTH CENTERS.

       (a) In General.--Paragraph (4) of section 119(d) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to lodging furnished 
     by certain educational institutions to employees) is amended 
     to read as follows:
       ``(4) Educational institution.--For purposes of this 
     subsection--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `educational institution' 
     means--
       ``(i) an institution described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(ii), 
     or
       ``(ii) an academic health center.
       ``(B) Academic health center.--For purposes of subparagraph 
     (A), the term `academic health center' means an entity--
       ``(i) which is described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(iii),
       ``(ii) which receives (during the calendar year in which 
     the taxable year of the taxpayer begins) payments under 
     subsection (d)(5)(B) or (h) of section 1886 of the Social 
     Security Act (relating to graduate medical education), and
       ``(iii) which has as one of it principal purposes or 
     functions the providing and teaching of basic and clinical 
     medical science and research with the entity's own faculty.''
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     1994.
                                 ______

      By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Gregg, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Cohen, 
        and Ms. Snowe):

[[Page S 12256]]

  S. 1163. A bill to implement the recommendations of the Northern 
Stewardship Lands Council; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, 
and Forestry.


                  THE NORTHERN FOREST STEWARDSHIP ACT

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, today I am proud to introduce the Northern 
Forest Stewardship Act of 1995, a bill that represents the highest 
standards of the legislative process. The legislation we are 
introducing is founded on extensive research, open discussion, 
consensus decisions, and visionary problem solving. The goal of this 
bill is to capture perfectly the vision of Northern Forest Lands 
Council and northern communities.
  The Northern Forest Lands Council process was initiated to avoid the 
divisive conflicts that have torn communities apart in some regions of 
our country. Too often we have seen parties fuel conflicts for 
political gain, exacerbate conflicts with misinformation, or prolong 
conflicts in hopes of a one-sided windfall. Over the past 4 years, the 
Northern Forest communities made dedicated effort to steer clear of 
divisive conflict to chart a future for themselves. They have worked 
hard to develop a consensus vision. We owe it to them to deliver the 
requests they have made.
  This legislation delivers these requests. It goes no further than the 
Council's recommendations and nor does it fall short. This bill 
includes a package of technical and financial assistance programs that 
I believe this Congress can and should support. Sometimes studies are 
commissioned primarily to delay solution or pacify a problem. The 
Council's study was driven by a desire to achieve something. The 
northern forest delegation will not let this study sit on a shelf. 
Between the Family Forestland Preservation Act (S. 692) and the 
Northern Forest Stewardship Act, Congress can achieve for the people of 
the Northern Forest the requests they have made of us.
  The legislation embodies the conservation ethic of the 1990's--non-
regulatory incentives and assistance to realize community-based goals 
for sustainable economic and environmental prosperity. The rights and 
responsibilities of landowners are emphasized, the primacy of the state 
is reinforced, and the traditions of the region are protected. And yet, 
the bill also promotes new ways of achieving our goals and a common 
vision that did not exist several years ago. Moving ahead with the 
Council's work, we will pursue enhanced forest management, land 
protection that supports the recreational and wildlife needs of the 
region, integrated research and decision making, and increased 
productivity in the traditional industries and new compatible 
industries. Through this bill, I hope to boost sustainable development 
and protect the ecological integrity of biological resources across the 
landscape. The nation has taken notice of this highly successful effort 
as a model for meeting the conservation challenges of the country, and 
I am confident of its inevitable success.
  I welcome the constructive input of people who will compare this 
legislation with the recommendations, research, and public 
participation in the Northern Forest Lands Council.
  It is my goal to create a perfect representation of the future 
described in the report to Congress Finding Common Ground: Conserving 
the Northern Forest. Most of all, I want the Council's solutions to 
work, and work well. I hope all affected citizens will take advantage 
of the opportunity to shape the final product of their hard work.
  I want to congratulate the members of the Council for their success, 
and most importantly the people of the Northern Forest for their 
enthusiasm for this process. Thousands of people took time from their 
busy lives to drive down to a school auditorium, local restaurant, or 
hotel auditorium to share their views on the Northern Forest. Hundreds 
more put pen to paper or picked up the phone to register their 
thoughts. Without their effort, this would be an empty process. It is a 
vibrant process and the will of the majority produced a brilliant piece 
of work.
  I will include a short section by section summary of the bill for the 
Record that emphasizes the Council recommendation that inspired each 
provision. I also want to thank Senators Gregg, Jeffords, Cohen and 
Snowe for their contributions to this draft, and I look forward to 
working with entire delegation to refine this legislation if necessary, 
and move it through the Senate in the upcoming months.
  Mr. President, the Council's process has the highest integrity, the 
recommendations reflect the true consensus vision of the Northern 
Forest communities, and I believe we owe it to Northern New England to 
follow through on their expectations.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that additional material be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                       Section-by-Section Summary


                                Overview

       The Northern Forest Stewardship Act takes the specific 
     consensus proposals of the Northern Forest Lands Council that 
     require Congressional action and translates them into 
     legislation. The Council's proposals reflect four years of 
     research and public input refined and condensed by the 
     diverse membership of the Council. This bill, together with 
     the Family Forestland Preservation Act (S. 692), goes no 
     further than, nor falls short of, the Council's proposals for 
     the Northern Forest lands. Affected parties are encouraged 
     submit constructive comments to their Congressional 
     delegation to make this a perfect representation of the 
     Council's consensus vision. The authorities in this bill are 
     voluntary opportunities for technical and financial 
     assistance to states, landowners, businesses and scientists 
     to work in partnership with the federal government and each 
     other to achieve stewardship goals.


           section 1: title--northern forest stewardship act

                        section 2: declarations

       The first ten principles are lifted from the Council's 
     fundamental principles on page 15 of the report to Congress. 
     The eleventh one is added to make them relevant to this bill.


                   section 3: marketing cooperatives

       Section 3 implements recommendation #23 to facilitate the 
     formation of forestry cooperatives. Timber growers are 
     eligible to form cooperatives under the Capper-Volstead Act 
     of 1922, but few cooperative efforts in New England have been 
     successful. This provision directs the Secretary to provide 
     assistance and evaluate the opportunities to increase 
     profitability and improve forest management through 
     cooperatives.


                section 4: principles of sustainability

       Section 4 implements recommendations #10 and #11 to define 
     measurable benchmarks for sustainability and facilitate the 
     formation of best management practice to achieve 
     sustainability. The principles of sustainability for Sec 
     (4)(b) are lifted from page 42 of the Council's report.


            section 5: northern forest research cooperative

       Section 5 implements recommendations #33 to form a research 
     cooperative much like Senator Gorton's ``Blue Mountain 
     Institute'' in the 1990 Farm Bill with objectives defined on 
     page 86 of the Council's report.
              section 6: interstate coordination strategy

       Section 6 implements the recommendation on page 95 to 
     facilitate continued dialogue between the four states. 
     Section 6 names representatives to an interstate working 
     group with wide flexibility to include state roundtables.


                  section 7: labor safety and training

       Section 7 implements recommendation #27 to improve worker 
     safety and thereby reduce operating costs for forest products 
     companies.


                      section 8: land conservation

       Section 8 implements recommendations #16 and 17 to improve 
     funding opportunities for public land acquisition by both the 
     states and the federal government. This creates a new 
     authority to protect important recreation and conservation 
     land but does not guarantee increased funding. Section 8 also 
     establishes a public process for prioritizing public 
     acquisition.


                section 9: landowner liability exemption

       Section 9 expresses the Sense of the Senate that states 
     should enact laws to reduce the liability of landowners who 
     make their lands available for free public use as requested 
     in recommendation #26.


                    section 10: nongame conservation

       Section 10 expresses the sense of the Senate that a 
     mechanism is needed to protect non-game wildlife using a user 
     fee similar to the Wallop-Breaux and Pittman-Robertson 
     programs as requested in recommendation #14. A full 
     legislative proposal may be ready within the year and it 
     should be considered after it has been introduced.


     section 11: authorization for appropriations/rural development

       Section 11 provides such sums as necessary for 
     implementation and authorizes targeted rural development 
     funding for the Northern Forest states through the Rural 
     Development Through Forestry program.
                                 ______

      By Mr. ROCKEFELLER:
  S. 1164. A bill to amend the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation 
Act 

[[Page S 12257]]
of 1980 with respect to inventions made under cooperative research and 
development agreements, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.


            the technology transfer improvements act of 1995

   Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I am pleased today to 
introduce the 1995 version of the Technology Transfer Improvements Act, 
a bill I first introduced in 1993. This legislation will help 
facilitate and speed technology cooperation between companies and 
Federal laboratories, and thus will benefit our economy and citizens.
  It does so by giving both companies and Federal laboratories clear 
guidelines regarding intellectual property rights to technology 
developed under cooperative research projects--guidelines that will 
reduce negotiating time and reduce the uncertainty that can deter 
companies from working with the Government.
  Specifically, the bill amends the Stevenson-Wydler Technology 
Innovation Act, which since 1986 has allowed Federal laboratories to 
enter into cooperative research and development agreements [CRADAs] 
with industry and other collaborating parties. The laboratories can 
contribute people, facilities, equipment, and ideas, but not funding, 
and the companies contribute people and funding.
  Even under the current law, the CRADA provision has been a success. 
Hundreds of these agreements have been signed and carried out in recent 
years, making expertise and technology that the Federal Government has 
already paid for through its mission-related work available to the 
wider economy. But we also have seen a problem. Currently, the law 
provides little guidance on what intellectual property rights a 
collaborating partner should receive from a CRADA. The current law 
gives agencies very broad discretion on this matter, which provides 
flexibility but also means that both companies and laboratory 
executives must laboriously negotiate patent rights each time they 
discuss a new CRADA. Neither side has much guidance as to what 
constitutes an appropriate agreement regarding intellectual property 
developed under the CRADA. Options range from assigning full patent 
title to the company all the way to providing the firm with only a 
nonexclusive license for a narrow field of use.
  In conversations with company executives, we learned that this 
uncertainty--and the time and effort involved in negotiating 
intellectual property from scratch in each CRADA--was often a barrier 
to working with government laboratories. Companies are reluctant to 
enter into a CRADA, or, equally important, to commit additional 
resources to commercialize a CRADA invention, unless they have some 
assurance they will control important patient rights.
  In 1993, I began working with Congresswoman Connie Morella on 
possible ways to reduce the uncertainty and negotiating burden facing 
companies, while still ensuring that the government interest remains 
protected. To begin legislative discussion on this matter, I introduced 
S. 1537 on October 7, 1993, for myself and Senator DeConcini, then 
chairman of the Senate Patent Subcommittee. That bill would have 
directed Federal laboratories to assign to the collaborating party--the 
company--title to any intellectual property arising from a CRADA, in 
exchange for reasonable compensation to the laboratory and certain 
patent safeguards.
  S. 1537 also contained a second provision--an additional incentive 
for Federal scientists to report and develop inventions that might have 
commercial as well as government value. The General Accounting Office 
[GAO] had recommended that Federal inventors receive more of the 
royalties received by laboratories as government compensation under 
CRADAs. My bill incorporated that recommendation.
  Soon after Senator DeConcini and I introduced our bill, Congresswoman 
Morella introduced the companion House bill, H.R. 3590. In subsequent 
House and Senate hearings, the bill received strong support from 
industry, professional societies, trade associations, and the 
administration. At that point, we also began working closely with 
Commerce Department Under Secretary for Technology Mary Good and her 
staff, who helped us obtain detailed technical suggestions from 
executive branch agencies and other patent experts. We made major 
progress during the 103rd Congress, but in 1994 ran out of time to 
complete action on the legislation.
  Now we are back with a similar bill that incorporates suggestions 
made by the experts. Through her position as Chair of the House Science 
Committee's Subcommittee on Technology, Congresswoman Morella has 
worked closely with us and the administration to produce a revised 
version of the bill which I believe is strongly supported by all 
interested parties. The revised bill continues to focus on the twin 
issues of company rights under a CRADA and royalty sharing for Federal 
investors.
  The revised bill would give a collaborating party a statutory option 
to choose an exclusive license for a field of use for any such 
invention created under the agreement. Agencies may still assign full 
patent title to the company; the agencies we consulted felt they needed 
to retain that flexibility, and our new bill allows them to do so. But 
the important point is that a company will now know that it is assured 
of having no less than an exclusive license in a field of use of its 
choosing. This statutory guideline will give companies real assurance 
that they will get important intellectual property out any CRADA they 
fund. In turn, that assurance will give those companies both an extra 
incentive to enter into a CRADA and the knowledge that they can safely 
invest further in the commercialization of that invention, knowing they 
have an exclusive claim on it.
  In return, the Government may negotiate for reasonable compensation, 
such as royalties. And the Government retains minimal rights to use the 
invention under unusual but important circumstances, such as when the 
invention is needed to meet health and safety needs that are not 
reasonably satisfied by the collaborating party.
  In sum, the bill continues to carry out the original purpose we 
envisioned in 1993--providing guidelines that simplify the negotiation 
of CRADA's and, in the process, give companies greater assurance they 
will share in the benefits of the research they fund. We expect that 
this change will increase the number of CRADA's, reduce the time and 
effort required to negotiate them, and thus speed the transfer of 
laboratory technology and know-how to the broader economy.
  The revised version also contains a slightly revised version of the 
provision regarding royaltysharing for Federal inventors. Under the new 
bill, agencies each year must pay a Federal inventor the first $2,000 
in royalties received because of that person's inventions, plus at 
least 15 percent of any additional annual royalties. By rewarding 
Federal inventors, we will give them an incentive to report inventions 
and work in CRADA's. The bill involves no Federal spending; all rewards 
would be from royalties paid to the Government by companies and others.
  Mr. President, Mrs. Morella introduced the House version of the 
revised bill last Friday, August 4. It is H.R. 2196. Cosponsors include 
House Science Committee Chairman Bob Walker, House Science Committee 
Ranking Member George Brown, and Technology Subcommittee Ranking Member 
John Tanner. Today I am proud to introduce the same bill in the Senate.
  This bill is a concrete step towards making our government's huge 
investment in science and technology--an investment made primarily to 
carry out important government missions--more useful to commercial 
companies and our economy. If we do it right, the end result will be 
new technologies, new products, and new jobs for Americans. I look 
forward to continuing to work with my House and Senate colleagues and 
with the Administration to enact this valuable, focused piece of 
legislation.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a summary sheet prepared 
by Mrs. Morella's office and the text of the bill itself be printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:
                                S. 1164

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,
     
[[Page S 12258]]


     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Technology Transfer 
     Improvements Act of 1995''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds the following:
       (1) Bringing technology and industrial innovation to the 
     marketplace is central to the economic, environmental, and 
     social well-being of the people of the United States.
       (2) The Federal Government can help United States business 
     to speed the development of new products and processes by 
     entering into cooperative research and development agreements 
     which make available the assistance of Federal laboratories 
     to the private sector, but the commercialization of 
     technology and industrial innovation in the United States 
     depends upon actions by business.
       (3) The commercialization of technology and industrial 
     innovation in the United States will be enhanced if 
     companies, in return for reasonable compensation to the 
     Federal Government, can more easily obtain exclusive licenses 
     to inventions which develop as a result of cooperative 
     research with scientists employed by Federal laboratories.

     SEC. 3. USE OF FEDERAL TECHNOLOGY

       Subparagraph (B) of section 11(e)(7) of the Stevenson-
     Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 
     3710(e)(7)(B)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(B) A transfer shall be made by any Federal agency under 
     subparagraph (A), for any fiscal year, only if the amount so 
     transferred by that agency (as determined under such 
     subparagraph) would exceed $10,000.''.

     SEC. 4. TITLE TO INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ARISING FROM 
                   COOPERATIVE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 
                   AGREEMENTS.

       Subsection (b) of section 12 of the Stevenson-Wydler 
     Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3710a(b)) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(b) Enumerated Authority.--(1) Under an agreement entered 
     into pursuant to subsection (a)(1), the laboratory may grant, 
     or agree to grant in advance, to a collaborating party patent 
     licenses or assignments, or options thereto, in any invention 
     made in whole or in part by a laboratory employee under the 
     agreement, for reasonable compensation when appropriate. The 
     laboratory shall ensure that the collaborating party has the 
     option to choose an exclusive license for a field of use for 
     any such invention under the agreement or, if there is more 
     than one collaborating party, that the collaborating parties 
     are offered the option to hold licensing rights that 
     collectively encompass the rights that would be held under 
     such an exclusive license by one party. In consideration for 
     the Government's contribution under the agreement, grants 
     under this paragraph shall be subject to the following 
     explicit conditions:
       ``(A) A nonexclusive, nontransferable, irrevocable, paid--
     up license from the collaborating party to the laboratory to 
     practice the invention or have the invention practiced 
     throughout the world by or on behalf of the Government. In 
     the exercise of such license, the Government shall not 
     publicly disclose trade secrets or commercial or financial 
     information that is privileged or confidential within the 
     meaning of section 552(b)(4) of title 5, United States Code, 
     or which would be considered as such if it had been obtained 
     from a non-Federal party.
       ``(B) If a laboratory assigns title or grants an exclusive 
     license to such an invention, the Government shall retain the 
     right--
       ``(i) to require the collaborating party to grant to a 
     responsible applicant a nonexclusive, partially exclusive, or 
     exclusive license to use the invention in the applicant's 
     licensed field of use, on terms that are reasonable under the 
     circumstances; or
       ``(ii) if the collaborating party fails to grant such a 
     license, to grant the license itself.
       ``(C) The Government may exercise its right retained under 
     subparagraphs (B)(ii) and (iii) only if the Government finds 
     that--
       ``(i) the action is necessary to meet health or safety 
     needs that are not reasonably satisfied by the collaborating 
     party;
       ``(ii) the action is necessary to meet requirements for 
     public use specified by Federal regulations, and such 
     requirements are not reasonably satisfied by the 
     collaborating party; or
       ``(iii) the collaborating party has failed to comply with 
     an agreement containing provisions described in subsection 
     (c)(4)(B).
       ``(2) Under agreements entered into pursuant to subsection 
     (a)(1), the laboratory shall ensure that a collaborating 
     party may retain title to any invention made solely by its 
     employee in exchange for normally granting the Government a 
     nonexclusive, nontransferable, irrevocable, paid-up license 
     to practice the invention or have the invention practiced 
     throughout the world by or on behalf of the Government for 
     research or other Government purposes.
       ``(3) Under an agreement entered into pursuant to 
     subsection (a)(1), a laboratory may--
       ``(A) accept, retain, and use funds, personnel, services, 
     and property from a collaborating party and provide 
     personnel, services, and property to a collaborating party;
       ``(B) use funds received from a collaborating party in 
     accordance with subparagraph (A) to hire personnel to carry 
     out the agreement who will not be subject to full-time-
     equivalent restrictions of the agency; and
       ``(C) to the extent consistent with any applicable agency 
     requirements or standards of conduct, permit an employee or 
     former employee of the laboratory to participate in an effort 
     to commercialize an invention made by the employee or former 
     employee while in the employment or service of the 
     Government.
       ``(4) A collaborating party in an exclusive license in any 
     invention made under an agreement entered into pursuant to 
     subsection (a)(1) shall have the right of enforcement under 
     chapter 29 of title 35, United States Code.
       ``(5) A Government-owned, contractor-operated laboratory 
     that enters into a cooperative research and development 
     agreement pursuant to subsection (a)(1) may use or obligate 
     royalties or other income accruing to the laboratory under 
     such agreement with respect to any invention only--
       ``(A) for payments to inventors;
       ``(B) for purposes described in clauses (i), (iii), and 
     (iv) of section 14(a)(1)(B); and
       ``(C) for scientific research and development consistent 
     with the research and development missions and objectives of 
     the laboratory.''.

     SEC. 5. DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME FROM INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 
                   RECEIVED BY FEDERAL LABORATORIES.

       Section 14 of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation 
     Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3710c) is amended--
       (1) by amending subsection (a)(1) to read as follows:
       ``(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (4), any 
     royalties or other payments received by a Federal agency from 
     the licensing and assignment of inventions under agreements 
     entered into by Federal laboratories under section 12, and 
     from the licensing of inventions of Federal laboratories 
     under section 207 of title 35, United States Code, or under 
     any other provision of law, shall be retained by the agency 
     whose laboratory produced the invention and shall be disposed 
     of as follows:
       ``(A)(i) The head of the agency or laboratory, or such 
     individual's designee, shall pay each year the first $2,000, 
     and thereafter at least 15 percent, of the royalties or other 
     payments to the inventor or coinventors.
       ``(ii) An agency or laboratory may provide appropriate 
     incentives, from royalties or other payments, to employees of 
     a laboratory who contribute substantially to the technical 
     development of licensed or assigned inventions between the 
     time that the intellectual property rights to such inventions 
     are legally asserted and the time of the licensing or 
     assigning of the inventions.
       ``(iii) The agency or laboratory shall retain the royalties 
     and other payments received from an invention until the 
     agency or laboratory makes payments to employees of a 
     laboratory under clause (i) or (ii).
       ``(B) The balance of the royalties or other payments shall 
     be transferred by the agency to its laboratories, with the 
     majority share of the royalties or other payments from any 
     invention going to the laboratory where the invention 
     occurred. The royalties or other payments so transferred to 
     any laboratory may be used or obligated by that laboratory 
     during the fiscal year in which they are received or during 
     the succeeding fiscal year--
       ``(i) to reward scientific, engineering, and technical 
     employees of the laboratory, including developers of 
     sensitive or classified technology, regardless of whether the 
     technology has commercial applications;
       ``(ii) to further scientific exchange among the 
     laboratories of the agency;
       ``(iii) for education and training of employees consistent 
     with the research and development missions and objectives of 
     the agency or laboratory, and for other activities that 
     increase the potential for transfer of the technology of the 
     laboratories of the agency;
       ``(iv) for payment of expenses incidental to the 
     administration and licensing of intellectual property by the 
     agency or laboratory with respect to inventions made at that 
     laboratory, including the fees or other costs for the 
     services of other agencies, persons, or organizations for 
     intellectual property management and licensing services; or
       ``(v) for scientific research and development consistent 
     with the research and development missions and objectives of 
     the laboratory.
       ``(C) All royalties or other payments retained by the 
     agency or laboratory after payments have been made pursuant 
     to subparagraphs (A) and (B) that is unobligated and 
     unexpended at the end of the second fiscal year succeeding 
     the fiscal year in which the royalties and other payments 
     were received shall be paid into the Treasury.'';
       (2) in subsection (a)(2)--
       (A) by inserting ``or other payments'' after ``royalties''; 
     and
       (B) by striking ``for the purposes described in clauses (i) 
     through (iv) of paragraph (1)(B) during that fiscal year or 
     the succeeding fiscal year'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``under paragraph (1)(B)'';
       (3) in subsection (a)(3), by striking ``$100,000'' both 
     places it appears and inserting ``$150,000'';
       (4) in subsection (a)(4)--
       (A) by striking ``income'' each place it appears and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``payments'';
       (B) by striking ``the payment of royalties to inventor'' in 
     the first sentence thereof and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``payments to inventors'';
       (C) by striking ``clause (i) of paragraph (1)(B)'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``clause (iv) of paragraph 
     (1)(B)'';
       (D) by striking ``payment of the royalties,'' in the second 
     sentence thereof and inserting 

[[Page S 12259]]
     in lieu thereof ``offsetting the payments to inventors,''; and
       (E) by striking ``clauses (i) through (iv) of''; and
       (5) by amending paragraph (1) of subsection (b) to read as 
     follows:
       ``(1) by a contractor, grantee, or participant, or an 
     employee of a contractor, grantee, or participant, in an 
     agreement or other arrangement with the agency, or''.

     SEC. 6. EMPLOYEE ACTIVITIES.

       Section 15(a) of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation 
     Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3710d(a)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``the right of ownership to an invention 
     under this Act'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``ownership of 
     or the right of ownership to an invention made by a Federal 
     employee''; and
       (2) by inserting ``obtain or'' after ``the Government, 
     to''.

     SEC. 7. AMENDMENT TO BAYH-DOLE ACT.

       Section 210(e) of title 35, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking ``, as amended by the Federal Technology Transfer 
     Act of 1986,''.
                                                                    ____

   The Technology Transfer Improvements Act of 1995--Outline Summary


                          statutory authority

       The Act amends the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation 
     Act of 1980 and the Federal Technology Transfer Act of 1986 
     by crating incentives to promote technology commercialization 
     and for other purposes. The Act would impact upon technology 
     transfer policies in both Government-owned, Government-
     operate, laboratories (GOGOs) and Government-owned, 
     Contractor-operated laboratories (GOCOs).


                        specific bill objectives

       (1) Provides assurances to United States industry that they 
     will be granted sufficient rights to justify prompt 
     commercialization of resulting inventions arising from CRADAs 
     with Federal laboratories; (2) Provides important new 
     incentives to Federal laboratory personnel who create new 
     inventions, and (3) Provides several clarifying amendments to 
     strengthen the current law.


                   the two major sections of the bill

       Title to intellectual property arising from CRADAs (Section 
     4). Guarantees of collaborating partner from industry, in a 
     CRADA, the option to choose an exclusive license for a field 
     of use for any such invention created under the agreement. 
     This is an important change because it permits industry to 
     select which option of rights to the invention makes the most 
     sense under the CRADA, in order for industry to commercialize 
     promptly.
       Distribution of income from intellectual property received 
     by Federal labs--Royalties (Section 5). Responds to criticism 
     made by the GAO and witnesses at previous Committee hearings 
     that agencies are not sufficiently providing incentives and 
     rewarding laboratory personnel. The change is significant 
     because it comes at a time that both Federal laboratories and 
     industry need to work closer together for their mutual 
     benefit and our national competitiveness. Requires that 
     agencies must pay Federal inventors each year the first 
     $2,000, and thereafter at least 15% of the royalties, 
     received by the agency for the inventions made by the 
     employee. It also allows for rewarding other lab personnel 
     involved in the project, permits agencies to pay for related 
     administrative and legal costs, and provides a significant 
     new incentive by allowing the laboratory to use royalties for 
     related research in the laboratory.


                effect upon crada partner under the act

       Right to choose exclusive or non-exclusive license in a 
     field of use for resulting CRADA invention.
       Assurance that privileged and confidential information will 
     be protected when CRADA invention is used by the Government.


                  effect upon government under the act

       Right to use invention for legitimate governmental needs 
     with minimum statutory rights to the invention.
       March-in rights to require license to others for public 
     health, safety, or regulatory reasons.
       March-in rights to require license to others for failure to 
     manufacture resulting technologies in the United States.
       Clarifies contributions laboratories can make in a CRADA; 
     continues current prohibition of direct Federal funds to 
     CRADA.
       Clarifies that agencies may use royalty revenue to hire 
     temporary personnel to assist in the CRADA or in related 
     projects.
       Permits agencies to use royalty revenue for related 
     research in the laboratory, and related administrative & 
     legal costs.
       Would return all unused royalty revenue to the Treasury 
     after the completion of the second fiscal year.


          effect upon federal scientist/inventor under the act

       Inventors would receive the first $2,000 each year and 
     thereafter at least 15% of the royalties.
       Restates current law permitting the Federal employee to 
     work on the commercialization of their invention.
       Clarifies that the inventor has rights to his or her 
     invention when the Government chooses not to pursue 
     it.
                                 ______

      By Mr. HATCH:
  S. 1165. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a 
tax credit for adoption expenses and an exclusion for employer-provided 
adoption assistance; to the Committee on Finance.


                 the fairness for adopting families act

  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Fairness for 
Adopting Families Act. This act reimburses legitimate adoption expenses 
through a nonrefundable tax credit and permits companies to offer 
adoption benefits to their employees as a tax-free fringe benefit.
  We should be grateful, Mr. President, that many parents in America 
today form their families through adoption. Our laws should help 
alleviate the cost barriers associated with an adoption. Many Americans 
are unaware of the enormous costs associated with an adoption. It's not 
uncommon for the adopting family to pay thousands in legal expenses, 
prenatal care for the birth mother, and the cost of the adopted child's 
hospital delivery. And none of these expenses is tax deductible.
  If an employer helps to pay an employee's pregnancy expenses by 
funding an insurance policy or paying the fees for an employee to join 
an HMO, these expenses are treated as tax-free fringe benefits. But if 
an employer decides to help his or her employees form families through 
adoption, it will have to pay these expenses in after-tax dollars. Mr. 
President, this is just not fair.
  Our tax system should encourage families to adopt children. Adoption 
is an option that can relieve some of the suffering and loneliness that 
too many young children face. Adoption is vitally important to millions 
of couples and to children wanting to belong to a family of their own. 
In America today, Mr. President, an estimated 36,000 adoptable children 
remain in foster care or institutions, often bereft of the nurturing, 
guidance, and security that all children need, because of public and 
private barriers to adoption. Mr. President, a majority of these 
children have special physical, emotional, or mental needs; or they may 
have reached school age, have brothers and sisters with whom they must 
be adopted, or be of various ethnic backgrounds.A stable home and 
strong role models are especially important for these at-risk 
youngsters.
  The Fairness for Adopting Families Act provides adopting families 
with a desperately needed tax credit, needed by children who are 
waiting to be adopted and needed by families who are sacrificing to 
finance the ever-increasing costs of adopting a child. In today's 
changing society, we must continue to express our support for the 
family unit. Mr. President, with the increase in teenage pregnancy, 
broken homes, and children born out of wedlock, adoption can provide 
many of these children with a chance to succeed in life. We all agree 
that strong families are the key to a strong America. A true pro-family 
policy would assist families being formed through adoption.
  Mr. President, to many families wishing to adopt a child, the costs 
associated with such a procedure are simply prohibitive. Prospective 
parents are often required to pay
 not only court and attorney fees but also expenses for maternity home 
services, hospital and physician costs, and, at times, prenatal care 
for the birth mother. Data provided by the National Council for 
Adoption show that the actual costs connected with legal adoptions can 
easily exceed $15,000.

  Mr. President, one family in my home State of Utah illustrates the 
financial burden an adoption can place on a family. This family was in 
the process of adopting an infant. All of the paperwork had been filed 
with the appropriate agencies when they discovered that they were 
required to pay a lump sum of $13,000 within a short period of time. 
This was a significant amount of money for this middle-class family, 
Mr. President. Their insurance company would reimburse them for $3,000, 
but only after the adoption was finalized. Tragically, this heartbroken 
family simply could not afford to continue with the adoption and had to 
discontinue the proceeding. Situations like this should not have to 
happen. Family wealth should not be the determining factor in adopting 
a child.
  This bill recognizes the importance of the family unit by alleviating 
some of the cost barriers associated with 

[[Page S 12260]]
adoption. This legislation has two major features.
  First, it provides a nonrefundable tax credit of up to $5,000 for 
legitimate adoption expenses. One of the problems with most 
nonrefundable tax credits, Mr. President, is that they can only help 
families with sizeable tax liabilities. If a family spends $5,000 on an 
adoption but only owes $2,000 in Federal income taxes, $3,000 of credit 
would ordinarily be lost under a nonrefundable system.
  To help lower-income families who may not owe much in Federal income 
taxes, this bill would allow any unused adoption credit to be carried 
forward for up to 5 years. This will avoid some of the problems that 
have unfortunately arisen with the only refundable credit currently in 
the personal income tax, the earned income tax credit.
  Second, the bill would exclude from an employee's gross income up to 
$5,000 for adoption expenses paid by an employer; those who participate 
in the military's adoption expense reimbursement program would also 
receive this exclusion. This feature of my bill provides fair treatment 
for adopting families. Many of America's employers have recognized the 
importance of adoption, and this bill's provisions build upon that 
recognition. Corporations such as Dow Chemical, Wendy's Inc., IBM, 
Digital Equipment, and Honeywell currently offer adoption benefits. 
This legislation will encourage more employers to establish these pro-
family plans.
  These tax provisions are specifically aimed to help families who 
otherwise might not be able to afford to adopt; for that reason, they 
phase out for families with taxable incomes above $60,000. Using 
taxable income rather than adjusted gross income further focuses the 
credit's purpose. It ensures that large families with moderate incomes 
will remain as eligible as smaller families with lower incomes. A 
family earning $65,000 but raising four children would hardly qualify 
as well-off; they should be just as able to adopt a child as a smaller, 
less affluent family. Using taxable (post-deduction) income to 
calculate eligibility will level the playing field for larger families.
  I want to point out, Mr. President, that this legislation does not 
provide an exclusion or credit for expenses for adoptions administered 
through illegal practices, such as through a baby broker. Many adopting 
parents in my own State of Utah and in other States have sadly been 
defrauded by such schemes.
  This legislation will actually result in less Government spending, 
Mr. President. The National Council for Adoption has shown savings in 
two ways. First, the bill would move thousands of children, who might 
otherwise have lingered in foster care, into permanent, loving homes. 
Second, the tax credit encourages the shifting of medical costs to the 
adopting family and away from the more expensive AFDC and Medicaid 
programs.
  I strongly encourage my colleagues to support this legislation. We 
are representatives of a society that professes a commitment to the 
success of the family. The Tax Code should demonstrate that commitment 
by allowing for the fair tax treatment of adoption expenses.
  At a time when our Nation is experiencing a tragic increase in crime, 
teenage pregnancies, disease, and violence, we cannot afford to let 
even one child fall through the cracks. We must work together to bring 
children into permanent, secure, and loving families. We must work 
together to eliminate the barriers that discourage adoption.
  The most important resource America has is its families. We must do 
everything in our power to ensure their continued growth and success. A 
relatively small dollar investment in this bill will move us a long way 
toward strengthening the American family.
  Mr. President, 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. 1165

       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 ``Fairness for Adopting 
     Families Act''.

     SEC. 2. CREDIT FOR ADOPTION EXPENSES.

       (a) In General.--Subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 
     nonrefundable personal credits) is amended by inserting after 
     section 22 the following new section:

     ``SEC. 23. ADOPTION EXPENSES.

       ``(a) Allowance of Credit.--In the case of an individual, 
     there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by 
     this subtitle for the taxable year the amount of the 
     qualified adoption expenses paid or incurred by the taxpayer 
     during such taxable year.
       ``(b) Limitations.--
       ``(1) Dollar limitation.--The aggregate amount of qualified 
     adoption expenses which may be taken into account under 
     subsection (a) with respect to the adoption of a child shall 
     not exceed $5,000.
       ``(2) Income limitation.--The amount allowable as a credit 
     under subsection (a) for any taxable year shall be reduced 
     (but not below zero) by an amount which bears the same ratio 
     to the amount so allowable (determined without regard to this 
     paragraph but with regard to paragraph (1)) as--
       ``(A) the amount (if any) by which the taxpayer's taxable 
     income exceeds $60,000, bears to
       ``(B) $40,000.
       ``(3) Denial of double benefit.--
       ``(A) In general.--No credit shall be allowed under 
     subsection (a) for any expense for which a deduction or 
     credit is allowable under any other provision of this 
     chapter.
       ``(B) Grants.--No credit shall be allowed under subsection 
     (a) for any expense to the extent that funds for such expense 
     are received under any Federal, State, or local program.
       ``(C) Reimbursement.--No credit shall be allowed under 
     subsection (a) for any expense to the extent that such 
     expense is reimbursed and the reimbursement is excluded from 
     gross income under section 137.
       ``(c) Carryforwards of Unused Credit.--If the credit 
     allowable under subsection (a) for any taxable year exceeds 
     the limitation imposed by section 26(a) for such taxable year 
     reduced by the sum of the credits allowable under this 
     subpart (other than this section), such excess shall be 
     carried to the succeeding taxable year and added to the 
     credit allowable under subsection (a) for such taxable year. 
     No credit may be carried forward under this subsection to any 
     taxable year following the fifth taxable year after the 
     taxable year in which the credit arose.
       ``(d) Qualified Adoption Expenses.--For purposes of this 
     section, the term `qualified adoption expenses' means 
     reasonable and necessary adoption fees, court costs, attorney 
     fees, and other expenses which are directly related to the 
     legal and finalized adoption of a child by the taxpayer and 
     which are not incurred in violation of State or Federal law 
     or in carrying out any surrogate parenting arrangement. The 
     term `qualified adoption expenses' shall not include any 
     expenses in connection with the adoption by an individual of 
     a child who is the child of such individual's spouse.
       ``(e) Married Couples Must File Joint Returns.--Rules 
     similar to the rules of paragraphs (2), (3), and (4) of 
     section 21(e) shall apply for purposes of this section.''
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for 
     subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting after 
     the item relating to section 22 the following new item:

``Sec. 23. Adoption expenses.''

       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     1995.

     SEC. 3. EXCLUSION OF AMOUNTS RECEIVED UNDER EMPLOYER'S 
                   ADOPTION ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS.

       (a) In General.--Part III of subchapter B of chapter 1 of 
     such Code (relating to items specifically excluded from gross 
     income) is amended by redesignating section 137 as section 
     138 and by inserting after section 136 the following new 
     section:

     ``SEC. 137. ADOPTION ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS.

       ``(a) In General.--Gross income of an employee does not 
     include amounts paid or expenses incurred by the employer for 
     qualified adoption expenses in connection with the adoption 
     of a child by an employee if such amounts are furnished 
     pursuant to an adoption assistance program.
       ``(b) Limitations.--
       ``(1) Dollar limitation.--The aggregate amount excludable 
     from gross income under subsection (a) for all taxable years 
     with respect to the legal adoption of any single child by the 
     taxpayer shall not exceed $5,000.
       ``(2) Income limitation.--The amount excludable from gross 
     income under subsection (a) for any taxable year shall be 
     reduced (but not below zero) by an amount which bears the 
     same ratio to the amount so excludable (determined without 
     regard to this paragraph but with regard to paragraph (1)) 
     as--
       ``(A) the amount (if any) by which the taxpayer's taxable 
     income (determined without regard to this section) exceeds 
     $60,000, bears to
       ``(B) $40,000.
       ``(c) Adoption Assistance Program.--For purposes of this 
     section, an adoption assistance program is a plan of an 
     employer--
       ``(1) under which the employer provides employees with 
     adoption assistance, and
       ``(2) which meets requirements similar to the requirements 
     of paragraphs (2), (3), and (5) of section 127(b).


[[Page S 12261]]

     An adoption reimbursement program operated under section 1052 
     of title 10, United States Code (relating to armed forces) or 
     section 514 of title 14, United States Code (relating to 
     members of the Coast Guard) shall be treated as an adoption 
     assistance program for purposes of this section.
       ``(d) Qualified Adoption Expenses.--For purposes of this 
     section, the term `qualified adoption expenses' has the 
     meaning given such term by section 23(d).''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for such 
     part III is amended by striking the item relating to section 
     137 and inserting the following:

``Sec. 137. Adoption assistance programs.
``Sec. 138. Cross reference to other Acts.''.

       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     1995.
                                 ______

      By Mr. LUGAR (for himself, Mr. Pryor, Mrs. Kassebaum, Mr. Inouye, 
        Mr. Cochran, Mr. Kerrey, Mr. Dole, Mr. Heflin, Mr. Gorton, and 
        Mr. Breaux):
  S. 1166. A bill to amend the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,and 
Rodenticide Act, to improve the registration of pesticides, to provide 
minor use crop protection, to improve pesticide tolerances and 
safeguard infants and children, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.


                the food quality protection act of 1995

 Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I introduce bipartisan legislation 
that will help ensure that continued availability of a safe, 
affordable, and abundant food supply in our Nation.
  This bill reforms the scientifically outdated Delaney clause. The 
continuation of and strict enforcement of the Delaney clause enacted in 
1958 could have a significant negative impact on our Nation's farmers 
and ranchers.
  The Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act [FFDCA] establishes rules for 
setting tolerances for pesticide residues on food which differ for raw 
and processed commodities. Residues in raw commodities are subject to 
section 408 of the FFDCA which requires that residue tolerances be set 
for raw food commodities at levels necessary to protect public health 
considering the need for an adequate, wholesome, and economic food 
supply. Thus risk and benefits are balanced in determining an 
acceptable tolerance level. This approach allows EPA to determine what 
level of risks are acceptable and to set tolerance levels accordingly. 
Such an approach is scientifically defensible. Balancing risk and 
benefits is a fundamental component in any decisionmaking process, 
whether it concerns pesticides or any other product in the marketplace.
  When pesticide residues concentrate in processed foods above levels 
of sanctioned on raw commodities, they are treated as food additives 
under section 409. The Delaney clause in section 409 prohibits granting 
a residue tolerance for any food additive that has been found to cause 
cancer in humans or animals, no matter how low the estimated risk might 
be. Thus, for processed foods, no pesticide residue is permitted, if 
the pesticide is a possible carcinogen and is concentrated above the 
level permitted on or in the raw food.
  Advances in science and technology improving our ability to detect 
small quantities of substances, to parts per trillion in some cases, 
have shown that the Delaney clause enacted in 1958 is scientifically 
outdated. As has been stated by EPA Administrator Browner, the 
pesticides impacted by the Delaney clause do not pose an unacceptable 
risk to public health.
  This is not a partisan issue, as evidenced by the strong show of 
support from the cosponsors of this bill today. This group of Senators 
agrees: The Delaney clause needs modernization.
  The scientific evidence is clear. Almost a decade ago, the
   National Research Council's Board on Agriculture of the National 
Academy of Sciences recommended the use of a single negligible risk 
standard for approving acceptable levels of pesticide residues in both 
raw and processed foods. This recommendation appeared in the NRC's 1987 
report, ``Regulating Pesticides in Food: The Delaney Paradox.''

  This bill implements the recommendations of the National Academy of 
Sciences report by establishing a negligible risk standard for both raw 
and processed foods. Under current procedures, Federal regulators must 
deal with two distinct and conflicting standards for pesticide residues 
on raw and processed foods.
  Despite many years of acknowledging the need for Delaney reform, 
Congress has failed to pass legislation. After the Environmental 
Protection Agency [EPA] in 1988 articulated its de minimis policy for 
interpreting Delaney, the agency was sued. In 1992, the U.S. Court of 
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of strict enforcement of 
Delaney. A consent decree in another case, agreed to by EPA this year, 
establishes an expedited schedule of review of all pesticides impacted 
by Delaney. Reform can no longer be delayed.
  Continuation of the Delaney clause and its strict enforcement could 
impact the international competitiveness of U.S. agriculture. The 
judicious use of pesticides has enabled our Nation's farmers to improve 
yields and efficiency and become high quality and competitive producers 
for the global marketplace. Researchers at the National Center for Food 
and Agricultural Policy have estimated that strict enforcement of 
Delaney could result in an increase in production costs of $175 million 
in the first year and yield losses totaling $212 million per year.
  This bill also addresses concerns that have been raised following 
another report of the National Research Council of the National Academy 
of Sciences, ``Pesticides in the Diets of Infants and Children.'' This 
legislation directs EPA, the Department of Agriculture, and the 
Department of Health and Human Services to coordinate the development 
and implementation of procedures to ensure that pesticide tolerances 
adequately safeguard the health of infants and children based on this 
report released in 1993.
  Providing regulatory relief for minor use pesticides is also 
important in helping to ensure the availability of minor use pesticides 
for farmers and an abundant and varied food supply for our Nation. 
Minor use pesticides are generally used on relatively small acreage or 
for regional pest or disease problems. Because there is a significant 
cost to develop scientific data to register or reregister these 
products and there is a limited market potential once approved, many 
minor use pesticides are not being supported or are being voluntarily 
canceled for economic, not safety reasons. This bill offers several 
incentives for manufacturers to maintain and develop new safe and 
effective pesticides for minor uses without compromising food safety or 
adversely affecting the environment.
  This bill is similar to legislation that I cosponsored in the last 
Congress and to legislation now being considered within the House of 
Representatives. Legislation in the 103d Congress gained the support of 
21 of my Senate colleagues while legislation pending in the House this 
year has already garnered 192 cosponsors.
  I have a long history of involvement in these often complex and 
challenging food safety and pesticide issues. As chairman of the Senate 
Agriculture Committee, I am hopeful that this year we will be able to 
finally see much needed reform of these food safety and pesticide 
statutes. I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this bill and to recognize 
that the Delaney clause is far too rigid. We need to move toward the 
future in a scientifically sound way by removing the unduly restrictive 
Delaney clause.
  I ask unanimous consent that a summary and copy of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:
                                S. 1166

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Food 
     Quality Protection Act of 1995''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

    TITLE I--AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL INSECTICIDE, FUNGICIDE, AND 
                            RODENTICIDE ACT

Sec. 101. Reference.

                 Subtitle A--Registration of Pesticides

Sec. 111. Tolerance reevaluation as part of reregistration.
Sec. 112. Scientific advisory panel.
Sec. 113. Coordination of cancellation.

                 Subtitle B--Minor Use Crop Protection

Sec. 121. Definition of minor use.
Sec. 122. Exclusive use of minor use pesticides.

[[Page S 12262]]

Sec. 123. Time extensions for development of minor use data.
Sec. 124. Minor use waiver.
Sec. 125. Expedition of minor use registrations.
Sec. 126. Utilization of data for voluntarily canceled chemicals.
Sec. 127. Minor use programs.

                   Subtitle C--Conforming Amendments

Sec. 131. FIFRA table of contents.

   TITLE II--DATA COLLECTION AND IMPROVED PROCEDURES TO ENSURE THAT 
        TOLERANCES SAFEGUARD THE HEALTH OF INFANTS AND CHILDREN

Sec. 201. Implementation of NAS report.
Sec. 202. Collection of pesticide use information.
Sec. 203. Integrated pest management.

   TITLE III--AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL FOOD, DRUG, AND COSMETIC ACT

Sec. 301. Reference.
Sec. 302. Definitions.
Sec. 303. Prohibited acts.
Sec. 304. Adulterated food.
Sec. 305. Tolerances and exemptions for pesticide chemical residues.
Sec. 306. Authorization for increase monitoring.
    TITLE I--AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL INSECTICIDE, FUNGICIDE, AND 
                            RODENTICIDE ACT

     SEC. 101. REFERENCE.

       Except as otherwise expressly provided, whenever in this 
     title an amendment or repeal is expressed in terms of an 
     amendment to, or repeal of, a section or other provision, the 
     reference shall be considered to be made to a section or 
     other provision of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 
     Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.).
                 Subtitle A--Registration of Pesticides

     SEC. 111. TOLERANCE REEVALUATION AS PART OF REREGISTRATION.

       Section 4(g)(2) (7 U.S.C. 136a-1(g)(2)) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(E) As soon as the Administrator has sufficient 
     information with respect to the dietary risk of a particular 
     active ingredient, but in any event not later than the date 
     on which the Administrator makes a determination under 
     subparagraph (C) or (D) with respect to a pesticide 
     containing a particular active ingredient, the Administrator 
     shall--
       ``(i) reassess each associated tolerance and exemption from 
     the requirement for a tolerance issued under section 408 of 
     the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 346a), 
     taking into account available information and reasonable 
     assumptions concerning the dietary exposure levels of food 
     consumers (and major identifiable subgroups of food 
     consumers, including infants and children) to residue of the 
     pesticide in food and available information and reasonable 
     assumptions concerning the variability of the sensitivities 
     of major identifiable groups, including infants and children;
       ``(ii) determine whether the tolerance or exemption meets 
     the requirements of the Act;
       ``(iii) determine whether additional tolerances or 
     exemptions should be issued;
       ``(iv) publish in the Federal Register a notice setting 
     forth the determinations made under this subparagraph; and
       ``(v) commence promptly such proceedings under this Act and 
     section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 
     U.S.C. 346a) as are warranted by the determinations.''.

     SEC. 112. SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY PANEL.

       Section 25(d) (7 U.S.C. 136w(d)) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``(d) Scientific 
     Advisory Panel.--The Administrator shall'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(d) Scientific Advisory Panel.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator shall''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Science review board.--
       ``(A) There is established a science review board 
     consisting of 60 scientists who shall be available to the 
     scientific advisory panel to assist in reviews conducted by 
     the panel.
       ``(B) The scientific advisory panel shall select the 
     scientists from 60 nominations submitted by each of the 
     National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of 
     Health.
       ``(C) A member of the board shall be compensated in the 
     same manner as a member of the panel.''.

     SEC. 113. COORDINATION OF CANCELLATION.

        Section 2(bb) (7 U.S.C. 136(bb)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``means any unreasonable risk'' and 
     inserting ``means--
       ``(1) any unreasonable risk''; and
       (2) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; 
     and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) a human dietary risk from residue that results from a 
     use of a pesticide in or on any food inconsistent with the 
     standard the Administrator determines is adequate to protect 
     the public health under section 408 of the Federal Food, 
     Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 346a).''.
                 Subtitle B--Minor Use Crop Protection

     SEC. 121. DEFINITION OF MINOR USE.

       Section 2 (7 U.S.C. 136) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(hh) Minor Use.--The term `minor use' means the use of a 
     pesticide on an animal, on a commercial agricultural crop or 
     site, or for the protection of public health if--
       ``(1)(A) in the case of the use of the pesticide on a 
     commercial agricultural crop or site, the total quantity of 
     acreage devoted to the crop in the United States is less than 
     300,000 acres, as determined by the Secretary; or
       ``(B) the Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary 
     of Agriculture, determines that, based on information 
     provided by an applicant for registration or a registrant--
       ``(i) the use does not provide a sufficient economic 
     incentive to support the initial registration or continuing 
     registration of a pesticide for the use; and
       ``(ii)(I) there are not a sufficient number of efficacious 
     alternative registered pesticides available for the use; or
       ``(II) any 1 of the alternatives to the pesticide pose a 
     greater risk to the environment or human health than the 
     pesticide; or
       ``(III) the pesticide plays, or will play, a significant 
     part in managing pest resistance; or
       ``(IV) the pesticide plays, or will play, a significant 
     part in an integrated pest management program; and
       ``(2) the Administrator does not determine that, based on 
     data existing on the date of the determination, the use may 
     cause unreasonable adverse effects on the environment.''.

     SEC. 122. EXCLUSIVE USE OF MINOR USE PESTICIDES.

       Section 3(c)(1)(F) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(1)(F)) is amended--
       (1) in clause (i)--
       (A) by striking ``(i) With respect'' and inserting ``(i)(I) 
     With respect'';
       (B) by striking ``a period of ten years following the date 
     the Administrator first registers the pesticide'' and 
     inserting ``the exclusive data use period determined under 
     subclause (II)''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(II) Except as provided in subclauses (III) and (IV), the 
     exclusive data use period under subclause (I) shall be 10 
     years beginning on the date the Administrator first registers 
     the pesticide.
       ``(III) Subject to subclauses (IV), (V), and (VI), the 
     exclusive data use period under subclause (II) shall be 
     extended 1 year for each 3 minor uses registered after the 
     date of enactment of this subclause and before the date that 
     is 7 years after the date the Administrator first registers 
     the pesticide, if the Administrator in consultation with the 
     Secretary of Agriculture, determines that, based on 
     information provided by an applicant for registration or a 
     registrant--

       ``(aa) there are not a sufficient number of efficacious 
     alternative registered pesticides available for the use; or
       ``(bb) any 1 of the alternatives to the pesticide pose a 
     greater risk to the environment or human health than the 
     pesticide; or
       ``(cc) the pesticide plays, or will play, a significant 
     part in managing pest resistance; or
       ``(dd) the pesticide plays, or will play, a significant 
     part in an integrated pest management program.

       ``(IV) Notwithstanding subclause (III), the exclusive data 
     use period established under this clause may not exceed 13 
     years.
       ``(V) For purposes of subclause (III), the registration of 
     a pesticide for a minor use on a crop grouping established by 
     the Administrator shall be considered 1 minor use for each 
     representative crop for which data are provided in the crop 
     grouping.
       ``(VI) An extension under subclause (III) shall be reduced 
     or terminated if the applicant for registration or the 
     registrant voluntarily cancels the pesticide or deletes from 
     the registration a minor use that formed the basis for the 
     extension, or if the Administrator determines that the 
     applicant or registrant is not actually marketing the 
     pesticide for a minor use that formed the basis for the 
     extension.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(iv) The period of exclusive use provided under clause 
     (i)(III) shall not take effect until 1 year after enactment 
     of this clause, except where an applicant or registrant is 
     applying for the registration of a pesticide containing an 
     active ingredient not previously registered.
       ``(v) With respect to data submitted after the date of 
     enactment of this clause by an applicant or registrant to 
     support an amendment adding a new use to an existing 
     registration that does not retain any period of exclusive 
     use, if the data relate solely to a minor use of a pesticide, 
     the data shall not, without the written permission of the 
     original data submitter, be considered by the Administrator 
     to support an application for a minor use by another person 
     during the period of 10 years following the date of 
     submission of the data. The applicant or registrant at the 
     time at which the new minor use is requested shall notify the 
     Administrator that, to the best of the applicant's or 
     registrant's knowledge, the exclusive use period for the 
     pesticide has expired and that the data pertaining solely to 
     the minor use of a pesticide are eligible for exclusive use 
     protection under this paragraph. If the minor use 
     registration that is supported by data submitted pursuant to 
     this subsection is voluntarily canceled or if the data are 
     subsequently used to support a nonminor use, the data shall 
     not be subject to the exclusive use protection provided under 
     this paragraph but shall instead be considered by the 
     Administrator in accordance with clause (i), as 
     appropriate.''.

     SEC. 123. TIME EXTENSIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF MINOR USE DATA.

       (a) In General.--Section 3 (7 U.S.C. 136a) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

[[Page S 12263]]

       ``(g) Time Extension for Development of Minor Use Data.--
       ``(1) Supported use.--In the case of a minor use, the 
     Administrator shall, on the request of a registrant and 
     subject to paragraph (3), extend the time for the production 
     of residue chemistry data under subsection (c)(2)(B) and 
     subsections (d)(4), (e)(2), and (f)(2) of section 4 for data 
     required solely to support the minor use until the final date 
     under section 4 for submitting data on any other use 
     established not later than the date of enactment of this 
     subsection.
       ``(2) Nonsupported use.--
       ``(A) If a registrant does not commit to support a minor 
     use of a pesticide, the Administrator shall, on the request 
     of the registrant and subject to paragraph (3), extend the 
     time for taking any action under subsection (c)(2)(B) or 
     subsection (d)(6), (e)(3)(A), or (f)(3) of section 4 
     regarding the minor use until the final date under section 4 
     for submitting data on any other use established not later 
     than the date of enactment of this subsection.
       ``(B) On receipt of the request from the registrant, the 
     Administrator shall publish in the Federal Register a notice 
     of the receipt of the request and the effective date on which 
     the uses not being supported will be deleted from the 
     registration under section 6(f)(1).
       ``(3) Conditions.--Paragraphs (1) and (2) shall apply only 
     if--
       ``(A) the registrant commits to support and provide data 
     for--
       ``(i) any use of the pesticide on a food; or
       ``(ii) any other use, if all uses of the pesticide are for 
     uses other than food;
       ``(B)(i) the registrant provides a schedule for producing 
     the data referred to in subparagraph (A) with the request for 
     an extension;
       ``(ii) the schedule includes interim dates for measuring 
     progress; and
       ``(iii) the Administrator determines that the registrant is 
     able to produce the data referred to in subparagraph (A) 
     before a final date established by the Administrator;
       ``(C) the Administrator determines that the extension would 
     not significantly delay issuance of a determination of 
     eligibility for reregistration under section 4; and
       ``(D) the Administrator determines that, based on data 
     existing on the date of the determination, the extension 
     would not significantly increase the risk of unreasonable 
     adverse effects on the environment.
       ``(4) Monitoring.--If the Administrator grants an extension 
     under paragraph (1) or (2), the Administrator shall--
       ``(A) monitor the development of any data the registrant 
     committed to under paragraph (3)(A); and
       ``(B) ensure that the registrant is meeting the schedule 
     provided under paragraph (3)(B) for producing the data.
       ``(5) Noncompliance.--If the Administrator determines that 
     a registrant is not meeting a schedule provided by the 
     registrant under paragraph (3)(B), the Administrator may--
       ``(A) revoke any extension to which the schedule applies; 
     and
       ``(B) proceed in accordance with subsection (c)(2)(B)(iv).
       ``(6) Modification or revocation.--The Administrator may 
     modify or revoke an extension under this subsection if the 
     Administrator determines that the extension could cause 
     unreasonable adverse effects on the environment. If the 
     Administrator modifies or revokes an extension under this 
     paragraph, the Administrator shall provide written notice to 
     the registrant of the modification or revocation.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 3(c)(2)(B) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(2)(B)) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(vi) Subsection (g) shall apply to this subparagraph.''.
       (2) Subsections (d)(4), (e)(2), and (f)(2) of section 4 (7 
     U.S.C. 136a-1) are each amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(C) Section 3(g) shall apply to this paragraph.''.
       (3) Subsections (d)(6) and (f)(3) of section 4 (7 U.S.C. 
     136a-1) are each amended by striking ``The Administrator 
     shall'' and inserting ``Subject to section 3(g), the 
     Administrator shall''.
       (4) Section 4(e)(3)(A) (7 U.S.C. 136a-1(e)(3)(A)) is 
     amended by striking ``If the registrant'' and inserting 
     ``Subject to section 3(g), if the registrant''.

     SEC. 124. MINOR USE WAIVER.

       Section 3(c)(2) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(2)) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following:
       ``(E) In the case of the registration of a pesticide for a 
     minor use, the Administrator may waive otherwise applicable 
     data requirements if the Administrator determines that the 
     absence of the data will not prevent the Administrator from 
     determining--
       ``(i) the incremental risk presented by the minor use of 
     the pesticide; and
       ``(ii) whether the minor use of the pesticide would have 
     unreasonable adverse effects on the environment.''.

     SEC. 125. EXPEDITION OF MINOR USE REGISTRATIONS.

       Section 3(c)(3) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(3)) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following:
       ``(C)(i) As expeditiously as practicable after receipt, the 
     Administrator shall review and act on a complete application 
     that--
       ``(I) proposes the initial registration of a new pesticide 
     active ingredient, if the active ingredient is proposed to be 
     registered solely for a minor use, or proposes a registration 
     amendment to an existing registration solely for a minor use; 
     or
       ``(II) for a registration or a registration amendment, 
     proposes a significant minor use.
       ``(ii) As used in clause (i):
       ``(I) The term `as expeditiously as practicable' means the 
     Administrator shall, to the greatest extent practicable, 
     complete a review and evaluation of all data submitted with 
     the application not later than 1 year after submission of the 
     application.
       ``(II) The term `significant minor use' means--

       ``(aa) 3 or more proposed minor uses for each proposed use 
     that is not minor;
       ``(bb) a minor use that the Administrator determines could 
     replace a use that was canceled not earlier than 5 years 
     preceding the receipt of the application; or
       ``(cc) a minor use that the Administrator determines would 
     avoid the reissuance of an emergency exemption under section 
     18 for the minor use.

       ``(iii) Review and action on an application under clause 
     (i) shall not be subject to judicial review.
       ``(D) On receipt by the registrant of a denial of a request 
     to waive a data requirement under paragraph (2)(E), the 
     registrant shall have the full time period originally 
     established by the Administrator for submission of the data, 
     beginning on the date of receipt by the registrant of the 
     denial.''.

     SEC. 126. UTILIZATION OF DATA FOR VOLUNTARILY CANCELED 
                   CHEMICALS.

       Section 6(f) (7 U.S.C. 136d) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(C)(ii) by striking ``90-day'' and 
     inserting ``180-day'' each place it appears;
       (2) in paragraph (3)(A) by striking ``90-day'' and 
     inserting ``180-day''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Utilization of data for voluntarily canceled 
     chemicals.--The Administrator shall process, review, and 
     evaluate the application for a voluntarily canceled pesticide 
     as if the registrant had not canceled the registration, if--
       ``(A) another application is pending on the effective date 
     of the voluntary cancellation for the registration of a 
     pesticide that is--
       ``(i) for a minor use;
       ``(ii) identical or substantially similar to the canceled 
     pesticide; and
       ``(iii) for an identical or substantially similar use as 
     the canceled pesticide;
       ``(B) the Administrator determines that the minor use will 
     not cause unreasonable adverse effects on the environment; 
     and
       ``(C) the applicant under subparagraph (A) certifies that 
     the applicant will satisfy any outstanding data requirement 
     necessary to support the reregistration of the pesticide, in 
     accordance with any data submission schedule established by 
     the Administrator.''.

     SEC. 127. MINOR USE PROGRAMS.

       The Act is amended--
       (1) by redesignating sections 30 and 31 (7 U.S.C. 136x and 
     136y) as sections 33 and 34, respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after section 29 (7 U.S.C. 136w-4) the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 30. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY MINOR USE PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Establishment.--The Administrator shall establish a 
     minor use program in the Office of Pesticide Programs.
       ``(b) Responsibilities.--In carrying out the program 
     established under subsection (a), the Administrator shall--
       ``(1) coordinate the development of minor use programs and 
     policies; and
       ``(2) consult with growers regarding a minor use issue, 
     registration, or amendment that is submitted to the 
     Environmental Protection Agency.

     ``SEC. 31. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE MINOR USE PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Establishment.--The Secretary of Agriculture shall 
     establish a minor use program.
       ``(b) Responsibilities.--In carrying out the program 
     established under subsection (a), the Secretary shall 
     coordinate the responsibilities of the Department of 
     Agriculture related to the minor use of a pesticide, 
     including--
       ``(1) carrying out the Inter-Regional Research Project 
     Number 4 established under section 2(e) of Public Law 89-106 
     (7 U.S.C. 450i(e));
       ``(2) carrying out the national pesticide resistance 
     monitoring program established under section 1651(d) of the 
     Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 
     U.S.C. 5882(d));
       ``(3) supporting integrated pest management research;
       ``(4) consulting with growers to develop data for minor 
     uses; and
       ``(5) providing assistance for minor use registrations, 
     tolerances, and reregistrations with the Environmental 
     Protection Agency.

     ``SEC. 32. MINOR USE MATCHING FUND PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Establishment.--The Secretary of Agriculture, in 
     consultation with the Administrator, shall establish and 
     administer a minor use matching fund program.
       ``(b) Responsibilities.--In carrying out the program, the 
     Secretary shall--
       ``(1) ensure the continued availability of minor use 
     pesticides; and
       ``(2) develop data to support minor use pesticide 
     registrations and reregistrations.
       ``(c) Eligibility.--Any person that desires to develop data 
     to support a minor use registration shall be eligible to 
     participate in the program.

[[Page S 12264]]

       ``(d) Priority.--In carrying out the program, the Secretary 
     shall provide a priority for funding to a person that does 
     not directly receive funds from the sale of a product 
     registered for a minor use.
       ``(e) Matching Funds.--To be eligible for funds under the 
     program, a person shall match the amount of funds provided 
     under the program with an equal amount of non-Federal funds.
       ``(f) Ownership of Data.--Any data developed through the 
     program shall be jointly owned by the Department of 
     Agriculture and the person that receives funds under this 
     section.
       ``(g) Statement.--Any data developed under this subsection 
     shall be submitted in a statement that complies with section 
     3(c)(1)(F).
       ``(h) Compensation.--Any compensation received by the 
     Department of Agriculture for the use of data developed under 
     this section shall be placed in a revolving fund. The fund 
     shall be available, without fiscal year limitation, to carry 
     out the program.
       ``(i) Authorization for Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 
     $10,000,000 for each fiscal year.''.
                   Subtitle C--Conforming Amendments

     SEC. 131. FIFRA TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       The table of contents in section 1(b) (7 U.S.C. prec. 121) 
     is amended--
       (1) by adding at the end of the items relating to section 2 
     the following:

  ``(hh) Minor use.'';

       (2) by adding at the end of the items relating to section 3 
     the following:

``(g) Time extension for development of minor use data.
  ``(1) Supported use.
  ``(2) Nonsupported use.
  ``(3) Conditions.
  ``(4) Monitoring.
  ``(5) Noncompliance.
  ``(6) Modification or revocation.'';

       (3) by adding at the end of the items relating to section 
     6(f) the following:

  ``(4) Utilization of data for voluntarily canceled chemicals.'';

       (4) by striking the item relating to section 25(d) and 
     inserting the following:

``(d) Scientific advisory panel.
  ``(1) In general.
  ``(2) Science review board.'';

     and
       (5) by striking the items relating to sections 30 and 31 
     and inserting the following:

``Sec. 30. Environmental Protection Agency minor use program.
  ``(a) Establishment.
  ``(b) Responsibilities.
``Sec. 31. Department of Agriculture minor use program.
  ``(a) Establishment.
  ``(b) Responsibilities.
``Sec. 32. Minor use matching fund program.
  ``(a) Establishment.
  ``(b) Responsibilities.
  ``(c) Eligibility.
  ``(d) Priority.
  ``(e) Matching funds.
  ``(f) Ownership of data.
  ``(g) Statement.
  ``(h) Compensation.
  ``(i) Authorization for appropriations.
``Sec. 33. Severability.
``Sec. 34. Authorization for appropriations.''.
   TITLE II--DATA COLLECTION AND IMPROVED PROCEDURES TO ENSURE THAT 
        TOLERANCES SAFEGUARD THE HEALTH OF INFANTS AND CHILDREN

     SEC. 201. IMPLEMENTATION OF NAS REPORT.

       (a) In General.--The Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency, the Secretary of Agriculture, and the 
     Secretary of Health and Human Services shall coordinate the 
     development and implementation of procedures to ensure that 
     pesticide tolerances adequately safeguard the health of 
     infants and children, based on the conclusions and 
     recommendations contained in the report entitled ``Pesticides 
     in the Diets of Infants and Children'' of the National 
     Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences.
       (b) Procedures.--To the maximum extent practicable, the 
     procedures referred to in subsection (a) shall include--
       (1) collection of data on food consumption patterns of 
     infants and children;
       (2) improved surveillance of pesticide residues, including 
     guidelines for the use of comparable analytical and 
     standardized reporting methods, the increased sampling of 
     foods most likely consumed by infants and children, and the 
     development of more complete information on the effects of 
     food processing on levels of pesticide residues;
       (3) toxicity testing procedures that take into account the 
     vulnerability of infants and children;
       (4) methods of risk assessment that take into account 
     unique characteristics of infants and children; and
       (5) other appropriate measures considered necessary by the 
     Administrator to ensure that pesticide tolerances adequately 
     safeguard the health of infants and children.

     SEC. 202. COLLECTION OF PESTICIDE USE INFORMATION.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Agriculture shall collect 
     data of Statewide or regional significance on the use of 
     pesticides to control pests and diseases of major crops and 
     crops of dietary significance, including fruits and 
     vegetables.
       (b) Collection.--The data shall be collected by surveys of 
     farmers or from other sources offering statistically reliable 
     data.
       (c) Coordination.--The Secretary shall, as appropriate, 
     coordinate with the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency in the design of the surveys and make 
     available to the Administrator the aggregate results of the 
     surveys to assist the Administrator in developing exposure 
     calculations and benefits determinations with respect to 
     pesticide regulatory decisions.

     SEC. 203. INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT.

       (a) Definition.--In this section, the term ``integrated 
     pest management'' means a sustainable approach to managing 
     pests by combining biological, cultural, physical, and 
     chemical tools in a way that minimizes economic, health, and 
     environmental risks.
       (b) Implementation.--The Secretary of Agriculture, in 
     cooperation with the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency, shall implement research, demonstration, 
     and education programs to support adoption of integrated pest 
     management.
       (c) Federal Agencies.--Federal agencies shall use 
     integrated pest management techniques to carry out pest 
     management activities and shall promote integrated pest 
     management through procurement and regulatory policy and 
     through other activities.
       (d) Information.--The Secretary of Agriculture and the 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall 
     make information on integrated pest management widely 
     available to pesticide users, including Federal agencies that 
     use pesticides.
   TITLE III--AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL FOOD, DRUG, AND COSMETIC ACT

     SEC. 301. REFERENCE.

       Whenever in this title an amendment is expressed in terms 
     of an amendment to a section or other provision, or refers to 
     a section or other provision, the reference shall be 
     considered to be made to a section or other provision of the 
     Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321 et seq.).

     SEC. 302. DEFINITIONS.

       (a) Pesticide, Chemical; Pesticide Chemical Residue.--
     Section 201(q) (21 U.S.C. 321(q)) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(q)(1) The term `pesticide chemical' means--
       ``(A) any substance that is a pesticide within the meaning 
     of section 2(u) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 
     Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136 (u)),
       ``(B) any active ingredient of a pesticide within the 
     meaning of section 2(a) of the Federal Insecticide, 
     Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. (7 U.S.C. 136(a)), or
       ``(C) any inert ingredient of a pesticide within the 
     meaning of section 2(m) of the Federal Insecticide, 
     Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. (7 U.S.C. 136 (m)).
       ``(2) The term `pesticide chemical residue' means a residue 
     in or on raw agricultural commodity or processed food of--
       ``(A) a pesticide chemical, or
       ``(B) any other added substance that is present in the 
     commodity or food primarily as a result of the metabolism or 
     other degradation of a pesticide chemical.
       ``(3) Notwithstanding subparagraphs (1) and (2), the 
     Administrator may by regulation except a substance from the 
     definition of `pesticide chemical' or `pesticide chemical 
     residue' if--
       ``(A) the substance's occurrence as a residue on a raw 
     agricultural commodity or processed food is attributable 
     primarily to natural causes or to human activities not 
     involving the use of any substances for a pesticidal purpose 
     in the production, storage, processing, or transportation of 
     any raw agricultural commodity or processed food, and
       ``(B) the Administrator, after consultation with the 
     Secretary, determines that the substance more appropriately 
     should be regulated under one or more provisions of this Act 
     other than sections 402(a)(2)(B) and 408.''.
       (b) Food Additive.--Subparagraphs (1) and (2) of section 
     201(s) (21 U.S.C. 321(s)) are amended to read as follows:
       ``(1) a pesticide chemical residue in or on a raw 
     agricultural commodity or processed food; or
       ``(2) a pesticide chemical; or''.
       (c) Processed Food; Administrator.--Section 201 (21 U.S.C. 
     321) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsections:
       ``(gg) The term `processed food' means any food other than 
     a raw agricultural commodity and includes any raw 
     agricultural commodity that has been subject to processing, 
     such as canning, cooking, freezing, dehydration, or milling.
       ``(hh) The term `Administrator' means the Administrator of 
     the United States Environmental Protection Agency.''.

     SEC. 303. PROHIBITED ACTS.

       Section 301(j) (21 U.S.C. 331(j)) is amended by inserting 
     before the period at the end of the first sentence the 
     following: ``, or the violation of section 408(g) or any 
     regulation issued under that subsection''.

     SEC. 304. ADULTERATED FOOD.

       Section 402(a)(2) (21 U.S.C. 342(a)(2)) is amended to read 
     as follows: ``(2)(A) if it bears or contains any added 
     poisonous or added deleterious substance (other than a 
     substance that is a pesticide chemical residue in or on a raw 
     agricultural commodity or processed food, a food additive, a 
     color additive, or a new animal drug) that is unsafe within 
     the meaning of section 406; (B) if it bears or contains a 
     pesticide chemical residue that is unsafe within the meaning 
     of section 408(a); or (C) if it is or if it bears or contains 
     (i) any food additive that is unsafe within the meaning of 
     section 409 or (ii) a new animal drug (or conversion product 
     thereof) that is unsafe within the meaning of section 512; 
     or''.
     
[[Page S 12265]]


     SEC. 305. TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEMICAL 
                   RESIDUES.

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

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

       ``(a) Requirement for Tolerance or Exemption.--
       ``(1) Definition.--For the purposes of this section, the 
     term `food', when used as a noun without modification, means 
     a raw agricultural commodity or processed food.
       ``(2) General rule.--Except as provided in paragraph (3) or 
     (4), any pesticide chemical residue in or on a food shall be 
     deemed unsafe for the purpose of section 402(a)(2)(B) 
     unless--
       ``(A) a tolerance for such pesticide chemical residue in or 
     on such food is in effect under this section and the 
     concentration of the residue is within the limits of the 
     tolerance; or
       ``(B) an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is 
     in effect under this section for the pesticide chemical 
     residue.
       ``(3) Processed food.--Notwithstanding paragraph (2), the 
     following provisions shall apply with respect to processed 
     food:
       ``(A) Tolerance requirement.--If a tolerance is in effect 
     under this section for a pesticide chemical residue in or on 
     a raw agricultural commodity, a pesticide chemical residue 
     that is present in or on a processed food because the food is 
     made from that raw agricultural commodity shall not be 
     considered unsafe within the meaning of section 402(a)(2)(B) 
     despite the lack of a tolerance for the pesticide chemical 
     residue in or on the processed food if the concentration of 
     the pesticide chemical residue in the processed food when 
     ready for consumption or use is not greater than the 
     tolerance prescribed for the pesticide chemical residue in 
     the raw agricultural commodity.
       ``(B) Exemption from tolerance requirement.--If an 
     exemption from the requirement for a tolerance is in effect 
     under this section for a pesticide chemical residue in or on 
     a raw agricultural commodity, a pesticide chemical residue 
     that is present in or on a processed food because the food is 
     made from that raw agricultural commodity shall not be 
     considered unsafe within the meaning of section 402(a)(2)(B).
       ``(4) Residues of degradation products.--If a pesticide 
     chemical residue is present in or on a food because the 
     residue is a metabolite or other degradation product of a 
     precursor substance that itself is a pesticide chemical or 
     pesticide chemical residue, the residue shall not be 
     considered to be unsafe within the meaning of section 
     402(a)(2)(B) despite the lack of a tolerance or exemption 
     from the need for a tolerance for the residue in or on the 
     food if--
       ``(A) the Administrator has not determined that the 
     degradation product is likely to pose any potential health 
     risk from dietary exposure that is of a different type than, 
     or of a greater significance than, any risk posed by dietary 
     exposure to the precursor substance; and
       ``(B) either--
       ``(i) a tolerance is in effect under this section for 
     residues of the precursor substance in or on the food, and 
     the combined level of residues of the degradation product and 
     the precursor substance in or on the food is at or below the 
     stoichiometrically equivalent level that would be permitted 
     by the tolerance if the residue consisted only of the 
     precursor substance rather than the degradation product; or
       ``(ii) an exemption from the need for a tolerance is in 
     effect under this section for residues of the precursor 
     substance in or on the food; and
       ``(C) the tolerance or exemption for residues of the 
     precursor substance does not state that the tolerance or 
     exemption applies only to particular named substances or 
     states that the tolerance or exemption does not apply to 
     residues of the degradation product.
       ``(5) Effect of tolerance or exemption.--While a tolerance 
     or exemption from the requirement for a tolerance is in 
     effect under this section for a pesticide chemical residue 
     with respect to any food, the food shall not by reason of 
     bearing or containing any amount of such a residue be 
     considered to be adulterated within the meaning of section 
     402(a)(1).
       ``(b) Authority and Standard for Tolerances.--
       ``(1) Authority.--The Administrator may issue regulations 
     establishing, modifying, or revoking a tolerance for a 
     pesticide chemical residue in or on a food--
       ``(A) in response to a petition filed under subsection (d); 
     or
       ``(B) on the Administrator's initiative under subsection 
     (e).
       ``(2) Standard.--
       ``(A) In general.--A tolerance may not be established for a 
     pesticide chemical residue in or on a food at a level that is 
     higher than a level that the Administrator determines is 
     adequate to protect the public health.
       ``(B) Modification or revocation of a tolerance.--The 
     Administrator shall modify or revoke a tolerance if the 
     tolerance is at a level higher than the level that the 
     Administrator determines is adequate to protect the public 
     health.
       ``(C) Determination factors.--In making a determination 
     under this paragraph, the Administrator shall take into 
     account, among other relevant factors, the validity, 
     completeness, and reliability of the available data from 
     studies of the pesticide chemical residue, the nature of any 
     toxic effects shown to be caused by the pesticide chemical in 
     the studies, available information and reasonable assumptions 
     concerning the relationship of the results of the studies to 
     human risk, available information and reasonable assumptions 
     concerning the dietary exposure levels of food consumers (and 
     major identifiable subgroups of food consumers, including 
     infants and children) to the pesticide chemical residue, and 
     available information and reasonable assumptions concerning 
     the variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable 
     subgroups, including infants and children, and shall consider 
     other factors to the extent required by subparagraph (F).
       ``(D) Negligible dietary risk standard.--For purposes of 
     subparagraph (A), a tolerance level for a pesticide chemical 
     residue in or on a food shall be deemed to be adequate to 
     protect the public health if the dietary risk posed to food 
     consumers by the level of the pesticide chemical residue is 
     negligible. The Administrator shall by regulation set forth 
     the factors and methods, including tests that are appropriate 
     for the determination of dietary risk and most likely dietary 
     exposure, for the determination of negligible dietary risk.
       ``(E) Infants and children.--Procedures shall be developed 
     and implemented that ensure that pesticide tolerances 
     adequately safeguard the health of infants and children.
       ``(F) Calculation of dietary risk.--Where reliable data are 
     available, the Administrator shall calculate the dietary risk 
     posed to food consumers by a pesticide chemical on the basis 
     of the percent of food actually treated with the pesticide 
     chemical and the actual residue levels of the pesticide 
     chemical that occur in food. In particular, the Administrator 
     shall take into account aggregate pesticide use and residue 
     data collected by the Department of Agriculture.
       ``(G) Exceptions to the negligible dietary risk standard.--
     For purposes of subparagraph (A), a level of a pesticide 
     chemical residue in or on a food that poses a greater than 
     negligible dietary risk to consumers of the food shall be 
     considered to be adequate to protect the public health if the 
     Administrator determines that the risk is not unreasonable 
     because--
       ``(i) use of the pesticide that produces the residue 
     protects humans or the environment from adverse effects on 
     public health or welfare that would, directly or indirectly, 
     result in a greater risk to the public or the environment 
     than the dietary risk from the pesticide chemical residue;
       ``(ii) use of the pesticide avoids risks--

       ``(I) to workers, the public, or the environment that would 
     be expected to result from the use of another pesticide or 
     pest control method on the same food; and
       ``(II) that are greater than the risks that result from 
     dietary exposure to the pesticide chemical residue; or

       ``(iii) the availability of the pesticide would maintain 
     the availability to consumers of an adequate, wholesome, and 
     economical food supply taking into account national and 
     regional effects.

     In making the determination under this subparagraph, the 
     Administrator shall not consider the effects on any pesticide 
     registrant, manufacturer, or marketer of a pesticide.
       ``(3) Limitations.--
       ``(A) Issuance of tolerance.--A tolerance may be issued 
     under the authority of paragraph (2)(G) only if the 
     Administrator has assessed the extent to which efforts are 
     being made to develop either an alternative method of pest 
     control or an alternative pesticide chemical for use on such 
     commodity or food that would meet the requirements of 
     paragraph (2)(D).
       ``(B) Establishment of a tolerance.--A tolerance for a 
     pesticide chemical residue in or on a food shall not be 
     established by the Administrator unless the Administrator 
     determines, after consultation with the Secretary, that there 
     is a practical method for detecting and measuring the levels 
     of the pesticide chemical residue in or on the food.
       ``(C) Establishment of a tolerance level.--A tolerance for 
     a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food shall not be 
     established at a level lower than the limit of detection of 
     the method for detecting and measuring the pesticide chemical 
     residue as determined by the Administrator under subparagraph 
     (B).
       ``(4) International standards.--In establishing a tolerance 
     for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food, the 
     Administrator shall take into account any maximum residue 
     level for the chemical in or on the food that has been 
     established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The 
     Administrator shall determine whether the Codex maximum 
     residue level is adequate to protect the health of consumers 
     in the United States and whether the data supporting the 
     maximum residue level are valid, complete, and reliable. If 
     the Administrator determines not to adopt a Codex level, the 
     Administrator shall publish a notice in the Federal Register 
     setting forth the reasons for the determination.
       ``(c) Authority and Standard for Exemptions.--
       ``(1) Authority.--The Administrator may issue a regulation 
     establishing, modifying, or revoking an exemption from the 
     requirement for a tolerance for a pesticide chemical residue 
     in or on a food--
       ``(A) in response to a petition filed under subsection (d), 
     or
       ``(B) on the Administrator's initiative under subsection 
     (e).

[[Page S 12266]]

       ``(2) Standard.--
       ``(A) In general.--An exemption from the requirement for a 
     tolerance for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food 
     may be established only if the Administrator determines that 
     a tolerance is not needed to protect the public health, in 
     view of the levels of dietary exposure to the pesticide 
     chemical residue that could reasonably be expected to occur.
       ``(B) Revocation of exemption.--An exemption from the 
     requirement for a tolerance for a pesticide chemical residue 
     in or on a food shall be revoked if the Administrator, in 
     response to a petition for the revocation of the exemption, 
     or at the Administrator's own initiative, determines that the 
     exemption does not satisfy the criterion of subparagraph (A).
       ``(C) Determination factors.--In making a determination 
     under this paragraph, the Administrator shall take into 
     account, among other relevant factors, the factors set forth 
     in subsection (b)(2)(C).
       ``(3) Limitation.--An exemption from the requirement for a 
     tolerance for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food 
     shall not be established by the Administrator unless the 
     Administrator determines, after consultation with the 
     Secretary--
       ``(A) that there is a practical method for detecting and 
     measuring the levels of the pesticide chemical residue in or 
     on the food; or
       ``(B) that there is no need for such a method, and states 
     the reasons for the determination in the order issuing the 
     regulation establishing or modifying the regulation.
       ``(d) Petition for Tolerance of Exemption.--
       ``(1) Filing.--Any person may file with the Administrator a 
     petition proposing the issuance of a regulation--
       ``(A) establishing, modifying, or revoking a tolerance for 
     a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food; or
       ``(B) establishing or revoking an exemption from the 
     requirement of a tolerance for such a residue.
       ``(2) Petition contents.--
       ``(A) In general.--A petition under paragraph (1) to 
     establish a tolerance or exemption for a pesticide chemical 
     residue shall be supported by such data and information as 
     are specified in regulations issued by the Administrator, 
     including--
       ``(i)(I) an informative summary of the petition and of the 
     data, information, and arguments submitted or cited in 
     support of the petition; and
       ``(II) a statement that the petitioner agrees that the 
     summary or any information the summary contains may be 
     published as a part of the notice of filing of the petition 
     to be published under this subsection and as part of a 
     proposed or final regulation issued under this section;
       ``(ii) the name, chemical identity, and composition of the 
     pesticide chemical residue and of the pesticide chemical that 
     produces the residue;
       ``(iii) data showing the recommended amount, frequency, 
     method, and time of application of that pesticide chemical;
       ``(iv) full reports of tests and investigations made with 
     respect to the safety of the pesticide chemical, including 
     full information as to the methods and controls used in 
     conducting the tests and investigations;
       ``(v) full reports of tests and investigations made with 
     respect to the nature and amount of the pesticide chemical 
     residue that is likely to remain in or on the food, including 
     a description of the analytical methods used;
       ``(vi) a practical method for detecting and measuring the 
     levels of the pesticide chemical residue in or on the food, 
     or a statement why such a method is not needed;
       ``(vii) practical methods for removing any amount of the 
     residue that would exceed any proposed tolerance;
       ``(viii) a proposed tolerance for the pesticide chemical 
     residue, if a tolerance is proposed;
       ``(ix) all relevant data bearing on the physical or other 
     technical effect that the pesticide chemical is intended to 
     have and the quantity of the pesticide chemical that is 
     required to produce the effect;
       ``(x) if the petition relates to a tolerance for a 
     processed food, reports of investigations conducted using the 
     processing method or methods used to produce that food;
       ``(xi) such information as the Administrator may require to 
     make the determination under subsection (b)(2)(E); and
       ``(xii) such other data and information as the 
     Administrator requires by regulation to support the petition.

     If information or data required by this subparagraph is 
     available to the Administrator, the person submitting the 
     petition may cite the availability of the information or data 
     in lieu of submitting the information or data. The 
     Administrator may require a petition to be accompanied by 
     samples of the pesticide chemical with respect to which the 
     petition is filed.
       ``(B) Modification or revocation.--The Administrator may by 
     regulation establish the requirements for information and 
     data to support a petition to modify or revoke a tolerance or 
     to revoke an exemption from the requirement for a tolerance.
       ``(3) Notice.--A notice of the filing of a petition that 
     the Administrator determines has met the requirements of 
     paragraph (2) shall be published by the Administrator within 
     30 days after such determination. The notice shall announce 
     the availability of a description of the analytical methods 
     available to the Administrator for the detection and 
     measurement of the pesticide chemical residue with respect to 
     which the petition is filed or shall set forth the statement 
     of the petitioner of why such a method is not needed. The 
     notice shall include the summary required by paragraph 
     (2)(A)(i).
       ``(4) Actions by the administrator.--The Administrator 
     shall, after giving due consideration to a petition filed 
     under paragraph (1) and any other information available to 
     the Administrator--
       ``(A) issue a final regulation (which may vary from that 
     sought by the petition) establishing, modifying, or revoking 
     a tolerance for the pesticide chemical residue or an 
     exemption of the pesticide chemical residue from the 
     requirement of a tolerance;
       ``(B) issue a proposed regulation under subsection (e), and 
     thereafter either issue a final regulation under subsection 
     (e) or an order denying the petition; or
       ``(C) issue an order denying the petition.
       ``(5) Effective date.--A regulation issued under paragraph 
     (4) shall take effect upon publication.
       ``(6) Further proceedings.--
       ``(A) Objections.--Not later than 60 days after a 
     regulation or order is issued under paragraph (4), subsection 
     (e)(1), or subsection (f)(1), any person may file objections 
     thereto with the Administrator, specifying with particularity 
     the provisions of the regulation or order considered 
     objectionable and stating reasonable grounds therefore. If 
     the regulation or order was issued in response to a petition 
     filed under paragraph (1), a copy of each objection filed by 
     a person other than the petitioner shall be served by the 
     Administrator on the petitioner.
       ``(B) Public evidentiary hearing.--An objection may include 
     a request for a public evidentiary hearing upon the 
     objection. The Administrator shall, upon the initiative of 
     the Administrator or upon the request of an interested person 
     and after due notice, hold a public evidentiary hearing if 
     and to the extent the Administrator determines that the 
     public hearing is necessary to receive factual evidence 
     relevant to material issues of fact raised by the objections. 
     The presiding officer in the hearing may authorize a party to 
     obtain discovery from other persons and may upon a showing of 
     good cause made by a party issue a subpoena to compel 
     testimony or production of documents from any person. The 
     presiding officer shall be governed by the Federal Rules of 
     Civil Procedure in making any order for the protection of the 
     witness or the content of documents produced and shall order 
     the payment of reasonable fees and expenses as a condition to 
     requiring testimony of the witness. On contest, the subpoena 
     may be enforced by a Federal district court.
       ``(C) Issuance of an order.--After receiving the arguments 
     of the parties, the Administrator shall, as soon as 
     practicable, issue an order stating the action taken upon 
     each such objection and setting forth any revision to the 
     regulation or prior order that the Administrator has found to 
     be warranted. If a hearing was held under subparagraph (B), 
     the order and any revision to the regulation or prior order 
     shall, with respect to questions of fact at issue in the 
     hearing, be based only on substantial evidence of record at 
     the hearing, and shall set forth in detail the findings of 
     facts and the conclusions of law or policy upon which the 
     order or regulation is based.
       ``(D) Effective date of an order.--An order issued under 
     this paragraph ruling on an objection shall not take effect 
     before the 90th day after the publication of the order unless 
     the Administrator finds that emergency conditions exist 
     necessitating an earlier effective date, in which event the 
     Administrator shall specify in the order the findings of the 
     Administrator as to such conditions.
       ``(7) Judicial review.--
       ``(A) Filing.--In a case of actual controversy as to the 
     validity of any order issued under paragraph (6) or any 
     regulation that is the subject of such an order, any person 
     who will be adversely affected by the order or regulation may 
     obtain judicial review by filing in the United States Court 
     of Appeals for the circuit wherein that person resides or has 
     its principal place of business, or in the United States 
     Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, not 
     later than 60 days after publication of such order, a 
     petition praying that the order or regulation be set aside in 
     whole or in part.
       ``(B) Filing of record of proceedings.--A copy of the 
     petition shall be forthwith transmitted by the clerk of the 
     court to the Administrator, or any officer designated by the 
     Administrator for that purpose, and thereupon the 
     Administrator shall file in the court the record of the 
     proceedings on which the Administrator based the order or 
     regulation, as provided in section 2112 of title 28, United 
     States Code. Upon the filing of the petition, the court shall 
     have exclusive jurisdiction to affirm or set aside the order 
     or regulation complained of in whole or in part. The findings 
     of the Administrator with respect to questions of fact shall 
     be sustained only if supported by substantial evidence when 
     considered on the record as a whole.
       ``(C) Additional evidence.--If a party applies to the court 
     for leave to adduce additional evidence, and shows to the 
     satisfaction of the court that the additional evidence is 
     material and that there were reasonable grounds for the 
     failure to adduce the evidence in the proceeding before the 
     Administrator, the court may order that the additional 
     evidence (and evidence in rebuttal 

[[Page S 12267]]
     thereof) shall be taken before the Administrator in the manner and upon 
     the terms and conditions the court deems proper. The 
     Administrator may modify prior findings as to the facts by 
     reason of the additional evidence so taken and may modify the 
     order or regulation accordingly. The Administrator shall file 
     with the court any such modified finding, order, or 
     regulation.
       ``(D) Final judgment.--The judgment of the court affirming 
     or setting aside, in whole or in part, any order under 
     paragraph (6) and any regulation that is the subject of the 
     order shall be final, subject to review by the Supreme Court 
     of the United States as provided in section 1254 of title 28 
     of the United States Code. The commencement of proceedings 
     under this paragraph shall not, unless specifically ordered 
     by the court to the contrary, operate as a stay of a 
     regulation or order.
       ``(E) Limitations on judicial review.--Any issue as to 
     which review is or was obtainable under paragraph (6) and 
     this paragraph shall not be the subject of judicial review 
     under any other provision of law.
       ``(e) Action on Administrator's Own Initiative.--
       ``(1) General rule.--The Administrator may issue a 
     regulation--
       ``(A) establishing, modifying, or revoking a tolerance for 
     a pesticide chemical or a pesticide chemical residue;
       ``(B) establishing or revoking an exemption of a pesticide 
     chemical residue from the requirement of a tolerance; or
       ``(C) establishing general procedures and requirements to 
     implement this section.
     A regulation issued under this paragraph shall become 
     effective upon the publication of the regulation.
       ``(2) Notice.--Before issuing a final regulation under 
     paragraph (1), the Administrator shall issue a notice of 
     proposed rulemaking and provide a period of not less than 60 
     days for public comment on the proposed regulation, except 
     that a shorter period for comment may be provided if the 
     Administrator for good cause finds that it would be in the 
     public interest to do so and states the reasons for the 
     finding in the notice of proposed rulemaking. The 
     Administrator shall provide an opportunity for a public 
     hearing during the rulemaking under procedures provided in 
     subsection (d)(6)(B).
       ``(f) Special Data Requirements.--
       ``(1) Requiring submission of additional data.--If the 
     Administrator determines that additional data or information 
     is reasonably required to support the continuation of a 
     tolerance or exemption that is in effect under this section 
     for a pesticide chemical residue on a food, the Administrator 
     shall--
       ``(A) issue a notice requiring the persons holding the 
     pesticide registrations associated with the tolerance or 
     exemption to submit the data or information under section 
     3(c)(2)(B) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 
     Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(2)(B));
       ``(B) issue a rule requiring that testing be conducted on a 
     substance or mixture under section 4 of the Toxic Substances 
     Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2603); or
       ``(C) publish in the Federal Register, after first 
     providing notice and an opportunity for comment of not less 
     than 90 days' duration, an order--
       ``(i) requiring the submission to the Administrator by one 
     or more interested persons of a notice identifying the person 
     or persons who will submit the required data and information;
       ``(ii) describing the type of data and information required 
     to be submitted to the Administrator and stating why the data 
     and information could not be obtained under the authority of 
     section 3(c)(2)(B) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 
     Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(2)(B)) or section 4 of the 
     Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2603);
       ``(iii) describing the reports to the Administrator 
     required to be prepared during and after the collection of 
     the data and information;
       ``(iv) requiring the submission to the Administrator of the 
     data, information, and reports referred to in clauses (ii) 
     and (iii); and
       ``(v) establishing dates by which the submissions described 
     in clauses (i) and (iv) must be made.

     The Administrator may revise any such order to correct an 
     error.
       ``(2) Noncompliance.--If a submission required by a notice 
     issued in accordance with paragraph (1)(A) or a rule issued 
     under paragraph (1)(B) is not made by the time specified in 
     the notice or the rule, the Administrator may by order 
     published in the Federal Register modify or revoke the 
     tolerance or exemption in question.
       ``(3) Review.--An order issued under this subsection shall 
     be effective upon publication and shall be subject to review 
     in accordance with paragraphs (6) and (7) of subsection (d).
       ``(g) Confidentiality and Use of Data.--
       ``(1) General rule.--Data and information that are 
     submitted to the Administrator under this section in support 
     of a tolerance shall be entitled to confidential treatment 
     for reasons of business confidentiality and to exclusive use 
     and data compensation, to the same extent provided by 
     sections 3 and 10 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and 
     Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136a and 136h).
       ``(2) Exceptions.--Data that are entitled to confidential 
     treatment under paragraph (1) may nonetheless be disclosed to 
     the Congress, and may be disclosed, under such security 
     requirements as the Administrator may provide by regulation, 
     to--
       ``(A) employees of the United States who are authorized by 
     the Administrator to examine the data in the carrying out of 
     their official duties under this Act or other Federal 
     statutes intended to protect the public health; or
       ``(B) contractors with the United States authorized by the 
     Administrator to examine the data in the carrying out of 
     contracts under such statutes.
       ``(3) Summaries.--Notwithstanding any provision of this 
     subsection or other law, the Administrator may publish the 
     informative summary required by subsection (d)(2)(A)(i) and 
     may, in issuing a proposed or final regulation or order under 
     this section, publish an informative summary of the data 
     relating to the regulation or order.
       ``(h) Status of Previously Issued Regulations.--
       ``(1) Regulations under section 406.--Regulations affecting 
     pesticide chemical residues in or on raw agricultural 
     commodities promulgated, in accordance with section 701(e), 
     under the authority of section 406(a) upon the basis of 
     public hearings instituted before January 1, 1953, shall be 
     deemed to be regulations issued under this section and shall 
     be subject to modification or revocation under subsections 
     (d) and (e).
       ``(2) Regulations under section 409.--Regulations that 
     established tolerances for substances that are pesticide 
     chemical residues on or in processed food, or that otherwise 
     stated the conditions under which such pesticide chemicals 
     could be safely used, and that were issued under section 409 
     on or before the date of the enactment of this paragraph, 
     shall be deemed to be regulations issued under this section 
     and shall be subject to modification or revocation under 
     subsection (d) or (e).
       ``(3) Regulations under section 408.--Regulations that 
     established tolerances or exemptions under this section that 
     were issued on or before the date of the enactment of this 
     paragraph shall remain in effect unless modified or revoked 
     under subsection (d) or (e).
       ``(i) Transitional Provision.--If, on the day before the 
     date of the enactment of this subsection, a substance that is 
     a pesticide chemical was, with respect to a particular 
     pesticidal use of the substance and any resulting pesticide 
     chemical residue in or on a particular food--
       ``(1) regarded by the Administrator or the Secretary as 
     generally recognized as safe for use within the meaning of 
     the provisions of section 408(a) or 201(s) as then in effect; 
     or
       ``(2) regarded by the Secretary as a substance described by 
     section 201(s)(4),

     such a pesticide chemical residue shall be regarded as exempt 
     from the requirement for a tolerance, as of the date of 
     enactment of this subsection. The Administrator shall by 
     regulation indicate which substances are described by this 
     subsection. An exemption under this subsection may be revoked 
     or modified as if the exemption had been issued under 
     subsection (c).
       ``(j) Harmonization With Action Under Other Laws.--
       ``(1) Limitation.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this Act, a final rule under this section that revokes, 
     modifies, or suspends a tolerance or exemption for a 
     pesticide chemical residue in or on a food may be issued only 
     if the Administrator has first taken any necessary action 
     under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act 
     (7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.) with respect to the registration of 
     the pesticide or pesticides whose use results in the residue 
     to ensure that any authorized use of the pesticide in 
     producing, storing, processing, or transporting food that 
     occurs after the issuance of the final rule under this 
     section will not result in pesticide chemical residues on the 
     food that are unsafe within the meaning of subsection (a).
       ``(2) Revocation of tolerance or exemption following 
     cancellation of associated registrations.--
       ``(A) In general.--If the Administrator, acting under the 
     Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 
     136 et seq.), cancels the registration of each pesticide that 
     contains a particular pesticide chemical and that is labeled 
     for use on a particular food, or requires that the 
     registration of each such pesticide be modified to prohibit 
     the use of the pesticide in connection with the production, 
     storage, or transportation of the food, due in whole or in 
     part to dietary risks to humans posed by residues of the 
     pesticide chemical on that food, the Administrator shall 
     revoke any tolerance or exemption that allows the presence of 
     the pesticide chemical, or any pesticide chemical residue 
     that results from the use of the pesticide chemical, in or on 
     the food. The Administrator shall use the procedures set 
     forth in subsection (e) in taking action under this 
     paragraph.
       ``(B) Effective date.--A revocation under this paragraph 
     shall become effective not later than 180 days after--
       ``(i) the date by which each such cancellation of a 
     registration has become effective; or
       ``(ii) the date on which the use of the canceled pesticide 
     becomes unlawful under the terms of the cancellation,
     whichever is later.
       ``(3) Suspension of tolerance or exemption following 
     suspension of associated registrations.--

[[Page S 12268]]

       ``(A) Suspension.--If the Administrator, acting under the 
     Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 
     136 et seq.), suspends the use of each registered pesticide 
     that contains a particular pesticide chemical and that is 
     labeled for use on a particular food, due in whole or in part 
     to dietary risks to humans posed by residues of the pesticide 
     chemical on the food, the Administrator shall suspend any 
     tolerance or exemption that allows the presence of the 
     pesticide chemical, or any pesticide chemical residue that 
     results from the use of the pesticide chemical, in or on that 
     food. The Administrator shall use the procedures set forth in 
     subsection (e) in taking action under this paragraph. A 
     suspension under this paragraph shall become effective not 
     later than 60 days after the date by which each such 
     suspension of use has become effective.
       ``(B) Effect of suspension.--The suspension of a tolerance 
     or exemption under subparagraph (A) shall be effective as 
     long as the use of each associated registration of a 
     pesticide is suspended under the Federal Insecticide, 
     Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.). While 
     a suspension of a tolerance or exemption is effective the 
     tolerance or exemption shall not be considered to be in 
     effect. If the suspension of use of the pesticide under such 
     Act is terminated, leaving the registration of the pesticide 
     for the use in effect under such Act, the Administrator shall 
     rescind any associated suspension of a tolerance or 
     exemption.
       ``(4) Tolerances for unavoidable residues.--In connection 
     with action taken under paragraph (2) or (3), or with respect 
     to pesticides whose registrations were canceled prior to the 
     effective date of this paragraph, if the Administrator 
     determines that a residue of the canceled or suspended 
     pesticide chemical will unavoidably persist in the 
     environment and thereby be present in or on a food, the 
     Administrator may establish a tolerance for the pesticide 
     chemical residue at a level that permits such unavoidable 
     residue to remain in or on the food. In establishing such a 
     tolerance, the Administrator shall take into account the 
     factors set forth in subsection (b)(2)(C) and shall use the 
     procedures set forth in subsection (e). The Administrator 
     shall review a tolerance established under this paragraph 
     periodically and modify the tolerance as necessary so that 
     the tolerance allows only that level of the pesticide 
     chemical residue that is unavoidable.
       ``(5) Pesticide residues resulting from lawful application 
     of pesticide.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this 
     Act, if a tolerance or exemption for a pesticide chemical 
     residue in or on a food has been revoked, suspended, or 
     modified under this section, an article of the food shall not 
     be considered unsafe solely because of the presence of the 
     pesticide chemical residue in or on the food if it is shown 
     to the satisfaction of the Secretary that--
       ``(A) the residue is present as the result of an 
     application or use of a pesticide at a time and in a manner 
     that was lawful under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 
     Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.); and
       ``(B) the residue does not exceed a level that was 
     authorized at the time of the application or use to be 
     present on the food under a tolerance, exemption, food 
     additive regulation, or other sanction then in effect under 
     this Act,

     unless, in the case of any tolerance or exemption revoked, 
     suspended, or modified under this subsection or subsection 
     (d) or (e), the Administrator has issued a determination that 
     consumption of the legally treated food during the period of 
     the likely availability of the food in commerce will pose an 
     unreasonable dietary risk.
       ``(k) Fees.--The Administrator shall by regulation require 
     the payment of such fees as will in the aggregate, in the 
     judgment of the Administrator, be sufficient over a 
     reasonable term to provide, equip, and maintain an adequate 
     service for the performance of the functions of the 
     Administrator under this section. Under the regulations, the 
     performance of the services or other functions of the 
     Administrator under this section, including--
       ``(1) the acceptance for filing of a petition submitted 
     under subsection (d);
       ``(2) the promulgation of a regulation establishing, 
     modifying, or revoking a tolerance or establishing or 
     revoking an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance 
     under this section;
       ``(3) the acceptance for filing of objections under 
     subsection (d)(6); or
       ``(4) the certification and filing in court of a transcript 
     of the proceedings and the record under subsection (d)(7),

     may be conditioned upon the payment of the fees. The 
     regulations may further provide for waiver or refund of fees 
     in whole or in part when in the judgment of the Administrator 
     the waiver or refund is equitable and not contrary to the 
     purposes of this subsection.
       ``(l) National Uniformity of Tolerances.--
       ``(1) Qualifying pesticide chemical residue.--For purposes 
     of this subsection, the term `qualifying pesticide chemical 
     residue' means a pesticide chemical residue resulting from 
     the use, in production, processing, or storage of a food, of 
     a pesticide chemical that is an active ingredient and that--
       ``(A) was first approved for such use in a registration of 
     a pesticide issued under section 3(c)(5) of the Federal 
     Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 
     136a(c)(5)) on or after April 25, 1985, on the basis of data 
     determined by the Administrator to meet all applicable 
     requirements for data prescribed by regulations in effect 
     under such Act on April 25, 1985; or
       ``(B) was approved for such use in a reregistration 
     eligibility determination issued under section 4(g) of such 
     Act on or after the date of enactment of the Food Quality 
     Protection Act of 1995.
       ``(2) Qualifying federal determination.--For purposes of 
     this subsection, the term `qualifying Federal determination' 
     means--
       ``(A) a tolerance or exemption from the requirement for a 
     tolerance for a qualifying pesticide chemical residue that 
     was--
       ``(i) issued under this section after the date of enactment 
     of the Food Quality Protection Act of 1995; or
       ``(ii) issued (or, pursuant to subsection (h) or (i), 
     deemed to have been issued) under this section prior to the 
     date of enactment of the Food Quality Protection Act of 1995, 
     and determined by the Administrator to meet the standard 
     under subsection (b)(2) (in the case of a tolerance) or 
     (c)(2) (in the case of an exemption); and
       ``(B) any statement, issued by the Secretary, of the 
     residue level below which enforcement action will not be 
     taken under this Act with respect to any qualifying pesticide 
     chemical residue, if the Secretary finds that the pesticide 
     chemical residue level permitted by the statement during the 
     period to which the statement applies protects human health.
       ``(3) Limitation.--The Administrator may make the 
     determination described in paragraph (2)(A)(ii) only by 
     issuing a rule in accordance with the procedure set forth in 
     subsection (d) or (e) and only if the Administrator issues a 
     proposed rule and allows a period of not less than 30 days 
     for comment on the proposed rule. Any such rule shall be 
     reviewable in accordance with paragraphs (6) and (7) of 
     subsection (d).
       ``(4) State authority.--Except as provided in paragraph 
     (5), no State or political subdivision may establish or 
     enforce any regulatory limit on a qualifying pesticide 
     chemical residue in or on any food if a qualifying Federal 
     determination applies to the presence of the pesticide 
     chemical residue in or on the food, unless the State 
     regulatory limit is identical to the qualifying Federal 
     determination. A State or political subdivision shall be 
     deemed to establish or enforce a regulatory limit on a 
     pesticide chemical residue in or on food if the State or 
     political subdivision purports to prohibit or penalize the 
     production, processing, shipping, or other handling of a food 
     because the food contains a pesticide residue (in excess of a 
     prescribed limit), or if the State or political subdivision 
     purports to require that a food containing a pesticide 
     residue be the subject of a warning or other statement 
     relating to the presence of the pesticide residue in the 
     food.
       ``(5) Petition procedure.--
       ``(A) In general.--Any State may petition the Administrator 
     for authorization to establish in such State a regulatory 
     limit on a qualifying pesticide chemical residue in or on any 
     food that is not identical to the qualifying Federal 
     determination applicable to the qualifying pesticide chemical 
     residue.
       ``(B) Petition requirements.--Any petition made by a State 
     under subparagraph (A) shall--
       ``(i) satisfy any requirements prescribed, by rule, by the 
     Administrator; and
       ``(ii) be supported by scientific data about the pesticide 
     chemical residue that is the subject of the petition or about 
     chemically related pesticide chemical residues, data on the 
     consumption within the State of food bearing the pesticide 
     chemical residue, and data on exposure of humans within the 
     State to the pesticide chemical residue.
       ``(C) Order.--Subject to paragraph (6), the Administrator 
     may, by order, grant the authorization described in 
     subparagraph (A) if the Administrator determines that the 
     proposed State regulatory limit--
       ``(i) is justified by compelling local conditions;
       ``(ii) would not unduly burden interstate commerce; and
       ``(iii) would not cause any food to be in violation of 
     Federal law.
       ``(D) Consideration of petition as petition for tolerance 
     or exemptions.--In lieu of any action authorized under 
     subparagraph (C), the Administrator may treat a petition 
     under this paragraph as a petition under subsection (d) to 
     revoke or modify a tolerance or to revoke an exemption. If 
     the Administrator determines to treat a petition under this 
     paragraph as a petition under subsection (d), the 
     Administrator shall thereafter act on the petition pursuant 
     to subsection (d).
       ``(E) Review of order.--Any order of the Administrator 
     granting or denying the authorization described in 
     subparagraph (A) shall be subject to review in the manner 
     described in paragraphs (6) and (7) of subsection (d).
       ``(6) Residues from lawful application.--No State or 
     political subdivision may enforce any regulatory limit on the 
     level of a pesticide chemical residue that may appear in or 
     on any food if, at the time of the application of the 
     pesticide that resulted in the residue, the sale of the food 
     with the residue level was lawful under this Act and under 
     the law of the State, unless the State demonstrates that 
     consumption of the food containing the pesticide residue 
     level during the period of the likely availability of the 
     food in the State will pose an unreasonable dietary risk to 
     the health of persons within the State.''.
     
[[Page S 12269]]


     SEC. 306. AUTHORIZATION FOR INCREASED MONITORING.

       There are authorized to be appropriated an additional 
     $12,000,000 for increased monitoring by the Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services of pesticide residues in imported 
     and domestic food.
                                                                    ____

            Summary--The Food Quality Protection Act of 1995


   Data Collection and Improved Procedures to Ensure That Tolerances 
              Safeguard the Health of Infants and Children

       Implementation of the NAS report.--EPA, USDA, and HHS are 
     directed to coordinate the development and implementation of 
     procedures to ensure that pesticide tolerances adequately 
     safeguard the health of infants and children based on the 
     report ``Pesticides in the Diets of Infants and Children'' of 
     the National Research Council of the National Academy of 
     Sciences. Guidelines are provided to aid in the development 
     of these procedures.
       Collection of pesticide use information.--USDA is directed 
     to collect data on the use of pesticides on food. In 
     collecting the information, USDA is required to coordinate 
     with EPA to ensure that such information is useful in 
     pesticide regulatory decisions.
       Integrated pest management.--USDA, in cooperation with EPA, 
     is directed to implement research, demonstration, and 
     education programs to support the adoption of IPM.


 Amendments to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act

       Minor uses of pesticides.--Incentives are offered for 
     manufacturers to maintain and develop minor uses without 
     compromising food safety or adversely affecting the 
     environment. Provisions include:
       Establishes a minor use definition.
       The current 10 year exclusive use protection for 
     registrants of new chemicals could be extended one year for 
     each three minor uses which a manufacturer registers by year 
     7, up to a maximum of three additional years for nine or more 
     minor uses registered by EPA.
       The time necessary for the development of residue chemistry 
     data for a minor use could be extended.
       EPA may waive minor use data requirements in certain 
     circumstances.
       EPA is to review and act on minor use registration 
     applications within 1 year if the active ingredient is to be 
     registered solely for a minor use, or if there are three or 
     more
      minor uses proposed for every non-minor use, or if the minor 
     use would serve as a replacement for any use that has been 
     canceled within 5 years of the application or if the 
     approval of the minor use would avoid the reissuance of an 
     emergency exemption.
       If a minor use waiver of data requirements is submitted to 
     EPA and subsequently denied, the registrant would be given 
     the full time period for supplying the data to EPA.
       As a transition measure, the effective date of the 
     voluntary cancellation of minor uses by a registrant could 
     coincide with the due date of the final study required in the 
     reregistration process for those uses being supported by the 
     registrant.
       EPA can consider data from a pesticide which has been 
     voluntarily canceled in support of another minor use 
     registration that is identical or similar and for a similar 
     use.
       A minor use program within EPA's Office of Pesticide 
     Programs would be established.
       A minor use program within USDA would be established. This 
     would include a minor use matching fund for the development 
     of scientific data to support minor uses.
       Tolerance reevaluation as part of reregistration.--EPA is 
     required to conduct a reevaluation of tolerances and 
     exemptions from tolerances once a pesticide has completed 
     reregistration or as soon as sufficient information on 
     dietary risks of the pesticide have been collected.
       Coordination of cancellation.--The term unreasonable risk 
     would also include a human dietary risk from residues that 
     result from use of a pesticide on food inconsistent with the 
     standard adequate to protect human health under Section 408 
     of the FFDCA.
       Scientific advisory panel.--A Science Review Board is 
     established to assist the FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel in 
     its scientific review function.


          amendments to the federal food drug and cosmetic act

       A consistent framework for pesticide tolerance regulation 
     is created by:
       Establishing a single narrative negligible risk standard 
     for pesticide residues in both raw and processed food, 
     putting an end to the pesticide ``double standard.''
       Requiring EPA, where reliable data are available, to 
     calculate dietary risk on the basis of the percent of food 
     actually treated with the pesticide and the actual residue 
     levels of the pesticide that occurs on food.
       Retaining EPA's power to consider benefits in regulatory 
     actions involving tolerances for pesticide residues on raw 
     agricultural commodities and would extend that power to the 
     tolerances for pesticide residues on processed food.
       Promoting international harmonization of pesticide 
     tolerances by requiring EPA to take into consideration 
     whether a maximum residue level has been established for the 
     chemical by the Codex Alimentarious Commission [CODEX].
       Providing for national uniformity of tolerances for 
     pesticides when such pesticides have been registered under 
     current data requirements. States are permitted to petition 
     EPA to establish a different regulatory limit based on 
     compelling local conditions.
       Authorization for Increased Monitoring.--Authorizes an 
     increase of $12 million in appropriations for monitoring 
     pesticide residues on domestic and imported food.
                                 ______

      By Mr. PRESSLER:
  S. 1167. A bill to amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to exclude 
the South Dakota segment from the segment of the Missouri River 
designated as a recreational river, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
                                 ______

      By Mr. PRESSLER:
  S. 1168. A bill to amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to exclude 
any private lands from the segment of the Missouri River designated as 
a recreational river, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Energy and Natural Resources.


                niobrara recreational river legislation

  Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, earlier this year I spoke on the Senate 
floor regarding the visit to Washington, DC, of an outstanding South 
Dakota family--the Talsmas. Georgia and Larry Talsma, from Springfield, 
SD, made their first trip ever to Washington, DC, by car.
  The Talsmas came to Washington to tell their story of how the Federal 
Government is intruding on their land and threatening to take over 
their private property. In its drive to protect a small portion of the 
Missouri River as a recreational river, the National Park Service 
appears intent on trampling private property rights.
  During their visit, I arranged for the Director of the National Park 
Service to come to my office and listen to the Talsmas. At that meeting 
I told the Director that I intended to introduce legislation to undo 
the designation in South Dakota. This is an effort the Talsmas and 
other South Dakotans strongly support.
  As a result of the Talsmas' visit, the Director agreed to push back 
the deadline for a preferred alternative to no earlier than August 1, 
1995, assured the Talsmas there would be at least a 60-day comment 
period on any preferred alternative, and if more time is needed, 
Director Kennedy said he would be willing to provide such time.
  All in all, quite a success story for a family's first trip to 
Washington, DC, to convince the Federal Government that they were going 
to far.
  Well, it was just a few weeks since the Talsmas returned to South 
Dakota, that I received a letter from Georgia. It appeared that the new 
plans of the
 Director fell on deaf ears out in the regional office. At the next 
public meeting the Talsmas were told there had been no communication 
from the Director of the Park Service to the regional office. In 
addition, the Park Service representative told the Talsmas that the 
Director of the National Park Service was not well informed. I find 
this lack of communication between the regional and D.C. offices very 
disturbing. It certainly does little for the Talsma's hope that 
government can work to solve problems.

  As I told the Director at the meeting, I was prepared to introduce 
legislation designed to protect property owners in South Dakota. The 
legislation I am introducing today will do just that.
  The first bill would ``undesignate'' the 39-mile stretch of the 
Missouri River as a recreational river. The second bill would exempt 
private property from any boundary of a recreational river. The second 
bill is necessary should the bill undesignating the river not pass.
  All too often we hear of reports of the federal bureaucracy out of 
control. Frankly, Congress helped create this problem by designating 
the recreational river. However, I am sure that Congress never intended 
to trample private property rights.
  The right thing to do is to undesignate the river, or, at the very 
least, exempt private property from the designation.
  The Talsmas and other South Dakota land owners want to see that their 
property and their rights fully protected. They want to see government 
work to respond to the needs of property owners when government is 
overreaching. That is why the Talsmas traveled to Washington. They are 
right.
  The bills I am introducing today will achieve that goal.
                                 ______

                                 
[[Page S 12270]]

      By Mr. KEMPTHORNE:
  S. 1169. A bill to amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater 
Study and Facilities Act to authorize construction of facilities for 
the reclamation and reuse of wastewater at McCall, Idaho, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.


the mccall area wastewater reclamation and reuse project authorization 
                              act of 1995

 Mr. KEMPTHORNE. Mr. President, I am introducing a bill today 
that will enable the Federal Government to carry through on its 
commitments and its responsibilities to improve water quality 
associated with Federal facilities. Specifically, the bill authorizes 
the Bureau of Reclamation to participate financially in a Federal, 
State, local, and private sector project to correct severe water 
quality problems in Cascade Reservoir, which is owned and operated by 
the Bureau of Reclamation.
  The water quality problems in Cascade Reservoir are so severe that at 
various times we have had both major fish kills and the death of some 
cattle. The primary culprit appears to be large amounts of phosphorus 
in the water, which result in algae blooms that are both aesthetically 
displeasing and occasionally toxic. Last year, when the National Marine 
Fisheries Service commanded Cascade Reservoir water to help flush 
migrating endangered salmon toward the ocean, the water quality 
problems got even worse and disrupted what has been an ongoing effort 
to improve water quality.
  Cascade Reservoir is now formally listed as water quality limited 
under section 303 of the Clean Water Act. Surrounding communities are 
under court orders to fix the problems, and the clock is running out.
  The community is identifying every means it can to reduce phosphorus 
loadings going
 into the north fork of the Payette River and Cascade Reservoir. 
Studies show that somewhere between 6 and 11 percent of the phosphorus 
comes from the city of McCall's wastewater treatment plant, which 
discharges effluent into the north fork of the Payette River.

  Using its authority under the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater 
Study and Facilities Act, the Bureau of Reclamation has identified the 
McCall, ID, situation has an opportunity for the Bureau to facilitate 
the reclamation and reuse of wastewater. Under a proposal that has been 
developed by the State of Idaho, the city of McCall, and the Payette 
Lakes Water and Sewer District with the Bureau of Reclamation, a 
project would be constructed to use the wastewater presently discharged 
into the north fork to irrigate agricultural land.
  Direct irrigation would take place during the summer months, with the 
effluent being stored during the winter months for application during 
the growing season. The arrangement will allow wastewater to be 
reclaimed and reused in a way that both improves water quality and meet 
farmers needs for both water and crop nutrients.
  The total cost of the project is roughly $11.3 million, of which the 
Bureau of Reclamation will provide roughly $5.6 million. While most of 
that commitment is intended for phase II of the project in fiscal year 
1997, expenditures of a portion of that amount in fiscal year 1996 
would go a long way toward strengthening the State, local, Federal, and 
private sector partnership that has been established here. The bill 
limits the Federal cost share on the project to 50 percent of the total 
capital costs, and prohibits the use of the funds for operations and 
maintenance.
  Mr. President, Cascade Reservoir is a Federal facility under the 
jurisdiction of the Bureau of Reclamation. It is therefore appropriate 
that it participate in solving the water quality problems of the 
reservoir.
  I commend the regional director, John Keys, and his personnel, who 
have recognized the Federal responsibility in this area. And, I 
appreciate all of those individuals who have worked so hard to develop 
this part of the solution to the reservoir's water quality problems. 
They have committed financially to this effort, and I hope Congress 
will act expeditiously to enact this bill to authorize the McCall 
Wastewater Reclamation and Reuse project so the Federal Government can 
follow through with its financial commitment.
                                 ______

      By Mr. PRESSLER (for himself and Mr. Baucus):
  S. 1170. A bill to limit the applicability of the generation-skipping 
transfer tax; to the Committee on Finance.


      the generation-skipping transfer tax correction act of 1995

  Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I am proud to introduce a bill today 
that would correct an unintended consequence of changes in the 
generation-skipping transfer [GST] tax that were made as part of the 
1986 Tax Reform Act. As the law currently stands, individuals are 
discouraged from establishing charitable trusts in certain 
circumstances due to the tax treatment of such trusts. My bill would 
correct this discrepancy, thereby opening the option of contributing to 
charity through this instrument to those who otherwise would not do so.
  The corrections in my bill relate to the predeceased parent exclusion 
of the GST tax. As my colleagues know, the GST tax prevents individuals 
from avoiding estate and gift taxes by circumventing the first 
generation heir and passing the assets along to a second generation 
heir, thereby skipping a generation. The exclusion provides that the 
GST tax is not applied to direct gifts or bequests made by a 
grandparent to a grandchild where the grandchild's parent--the 
transferor's child--is deceased at the time of the transfer. In this 
situation, clearly there is no intent to circumvent the tax by skipping 
a generation, as that generation no longer exists.
  My bill would correct two problems in the current law. First, as the 
law is currently written, childless individuals are treated differently 
than those who have lineal descendants. An individual who outlives his 
or her own generation--siblings and cousins--and the subsequent 
generation--nieces and nephews--cannot transfer property to his or her 
grandnieces and grandnephews without being hit by the punitive GST tax.
  This seems to be an inequitable, and unintended, situation which 
needs to be resolved so that these individuals can transfer property to 
their closest living relatives. My bill would amend the exclusion to 
make it applicable to collateral heirs in this situation.
  Second, current law limits the predeceased parent exclusion to direct 
gifts and bequests only; it does not apply to any type of transfer from 
a trust. Unfortunately, the effect of this limitation is to strongly 
discourage individuals, whose direct gifts or bequests would otherwise 
be covered by the exclusion, from establishing a charitable trust for 
some period of years before distributing the property to qualifying 
family members.
  Trusts of this nature are very important to charities in South Dakota 
and across the country. Because of this discriminatory treatment of 
trusts, many South Dakotan charitable groups stand to lose potential 
funding sources. As volunteer and charitable service groups are vital 
for our communities, I find it unproductive to have excessive rules in 
the tax code such as this that chill charitable giving, and do not 
serve the ends that the GST was established to achieve.
  In this era of tight budgetary constraints on the federal budget, we 
need to do all that we can to encourage private charitable giving that 
helps those who are less fortunate within our communities. This bill 
lifts an unnecessary restriction on giving and I urge my colleagues to 
join me in support of this bill to change these rules so that 
charitable giving may continue to flourish.
                                 ______

      By Mr. McCONNELL (for himself and Mr. Ford):
  S. 1171. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify 
the application of the passive loss limitations to equine activities; 
to the Committee on Finance.


                        passive loss legislation

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, on behalf of myself and Senator Ford, I 
rise today to introduce a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code to 
modify application of passive loss limitations to horse activities.
  The horse industry is extremely important for my State, and for the 
thousands of Kentuckians who actively participate in horse-related 
activities--whether it is owning, breeding, or racing horses, or simply 
enjoying an afternoon trail ride or horse show. However, 

[[Page S 12271]]
the horse industry has been adversely impacted by the changes made in 
the Tax Reform Act of 1986 with job losses occurring at racetracks and 
horse farms. Hundreds of breeding farms have gone out of business.
  The horse industry is a $15.2 billion industry that employs and 
supports hundreds of thousands of workers. In Kentucky alone, a study 
done by the University of Kentucky found that $5 billion annually can 
be attributed to the direct and indirect effects of the horse industry. 
The study also emphasized that the majority of people involved in 
breeding horses operate small, family run farms, a detail that garners 
little attention. The equine industry is an extremely labor-intensive 
industry employing hundreds of thousands of people to do everything 
from exercising horses to track, employees to trainers. In Kentucky, 
over 80,000 jobs are related to the horse industry.
  What supports the horse industry, including the job base, the 
breeding farms and the revenue stream in the form of taxes to all 
levels of Government, is the investment in the horses themselves. The 
horse industry relies on outside investment to operate, just as other 
businesses do. Without owners willing to buy, breed, and race horses, 
the hundreds of thousands who are employed fulltime by the industry 
cannot work. Without such investment, jobs and revenue are lost.
  Since the Tax Reform Act of 1986, the horse industry has experienced 
a near devastating decline. Most horse owners and breeders believe that 
the limits on passive losses was a major reason for the decline, and 
chilled the interest of investors in horses. Since the mid-1980's, the 
number of horses bred and registered has decreased--leading to losses 
in jobs and revenues for states.
  The 1986 act indicates that in order to satisfy the material 
participation requirement, a person's involvement must be regular, 
continuous, and substantial. The passive loss rules are difficult for 
many to satisfy because this is such a unique industry. It is difficult 
for many owners to ride, train, breed, or show their horses because of 
the expertise and physical ability that is required. This would alter 
these requirements to make them fair, workable, and enforceable.
                                 ______

      By Mr. ROTH (for himself, Mr. Hatch, and Mr. Baucus):
  S. 1172. A bill to amend the Revenue Act of 1987 to provide a 
permanent extension of the transition rule for certain publicly traded 
partnerships; to the Committee on Finance.


                publicly traded partnerships legislation

  Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce, along with my 
Finance Committee colleagues, Mr. Baucus and Mr. Hatch, a bill to 
correct what I believe was a mistake made in the Omnibus Budget 
Reconciliation Act of 1987 relating to publicly traded partnerships, or 
PTP's, as they are commonly known. PTP's are limited partnerships 
traded as units on public stock exchanges or over the counter. They are 
regulated by the SEC comparably to other public companies. Many 
investors, large and small, find PTP units to be safe, liquid 
investments.
  The 1987 act included a change to the Tax Code which arbitrarily 
limited the future life of certain PTP's to no more than 10 years. The 
purpose of our amendment is to eliminate that change and permit this 
small group of PTP's that were in existence back in 1987 to continue 
operating as partnerships as long as they wish. We believe that a 
mistake was made in 1987. If the mistake is not corrected in the very 
near future, these companies will be forced to undertake an expensive 
and disruptive conversion to corporate form, or some other operating 
form. No public purpose will be served by such forced conversions.
  PTP's first came into being in the early 1980's as a new means to 
raise capital for industries that had traditionally done business in 
partnership form. At the time, a number of corporations decided that 
the PTP structure better suited their operations. A few years later, 
Congress became concerned that the opportunity to become a PTP might 
erode the corporate tax base and decided, in 1987, to limit the extent 
to which new PTP's could be created. The law restricted future PTP 
operating status to companies in the energy, real estate, and natural 
resources sectors.
  For reasons that were not clear at the time, and still are not clear 
from the committee reports explaining the 1987 act, all companies then 
operating as PTP's outside the protected sectors were to be 
``sunsetted,'' or terminated, within 10 years. Unless the law is 
changed, this provision, sometimes referred to as the ``PTP grandfather 
provision,'' will punish 27 American companies who played by the rules. 
Unless changed, this provision of law will compel them to convert by 
January 1, 1998.
  Our amendment would stop this punitive process in its tracks. Our 
amendment recognizes the positive contribution that these companies 
make to their communities, to their employees, and to the unit holders. 
Our amendment is consistent with many precedents which have changed tax 
law prospectively, and left alone those who relied on prior law for 
major business decisions.
  Our amendment also strikes a blow for fairness. After all, companies 
that converted to PTP form went through a complex, expensive,
 and time-consuming process. In so doing, they relied on the 
expectation that they would be able to operate as partnerships as long 
as they wanted. If they ever wished to convert to corporate form, or to 
become a nontraded partnership, they could do so when it was in their 
best interests. Some firms have converted voluntarily during the 
intervening years for business reasons unrelated to the sunset. 
However, to force such a conversion arbitrarily is totally unfair, and 
will require the investment of significant resources and managerial 
time far better devoted to strengthening these companies.

  There were only about 120 PTP's in existence in 1987; nearly three-
fourths of which were in lines of business untouched by the new 
restrictions. Today, their are still 27 ``grandfathered'' PTP's in 
operation. They are in such businesses as nursing homes, restaurants, 
hotels and motels, investment management and financial advisory 
services, cable television, home, and office services such as carpet 
cleaning, lawn maintenance and pest control, and even Macadamaia nuts.
  They operate in all 50 states and employ more than 225,000 people 
nationwide--from fewer than 200 people in Alaska, South Dakota, and 
Vermont, to more than 10,000 people in California, Illinois, Ohio, 
Pennsylvania, and Texas. There are more than 300,000 unit holders 
nationwide from as few as 500 in North Dakota to as many as 30,000 in 
California.
  These are the people with the greatest stake in this amendment--the 
employees and unit holders of the affected PTP's. Unless our amendment 
is enacted into law, the value of units will decline. The investors 
will suffer--most of whom are average, middle-class Americans who 
purchased their PTP's, oftentimes through an individual retirement 
account, because of the attractive yield, safety, and liquidity. As PTP 
units decline in value, a company's ability to expand will be 
negatively affected and the employees will suffer. Employees who are 
also unit holders--tens of thousands of individuals nationwide--face a 
``double whammy.''
  I hope my colleagues will agree that this punitive provision of the 
tax code is unfair, counterproductive, and contrary to the objectives 
of capital formation and jobs growth. Our amendment would fix the 
problem, so I urge its inclusion in this year's tax bill.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my distinguished 
colleague from Delaware, Senator Roth, in introducing legislation that 
would prevent publicly traded partnerships [PTP's] from becoming 
subject to the double taxation of corporate tax status. This bill 
extends permanently the tax law that recognizes these entities as 
ordinary partnerships for tax purposes. As a result, they will escape 
the unfair consequences that would occur if this bill is not passed.
  The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act [OBRA] of 1987 changed the tax 
law so that all PTP's would be treated, for tax purposes, as 
corporations. However, those partnerships established prior to this 
legislation were grandfathered. For the past 8 years, these 
grandfathered PTP's have been taxed as 

[[Page S 12272]]
partnerships, but the grandfather protection provided by OBRA '87 will 
expire at the end of 1997. In order to continue this needed protection 
from double taxation, it is necessary to extend this provision 
permanently.
  At the time OBRA '87 was enacted, the Congress commissioned the 
Treasury Department to study the effect that this change in the 
taxation of PTP's would have on Federal revenue. However, the 1991 
Treasury study on large partnerships did not address this issue 
directly. This suggests to me the possibility of invalid reasoning 
behind OBRA '87 provision that taxes newly formed PTP's as 
corporations. This apparent lack of justification in taxing newly 
formed publicly traded partnerships as corporations clearly makes 
switching the grandfathered PTP's to this tax status unfair.
  Mr. President, the world recognizes America as a land of business 
opportunity. In order to preserve these partnerships from penalties and 
taxes that were unforeseen at the time of their establishment--and to 
prevent negative repercussions for workers, investors, customers, and 
suppliers--I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this 
legislation.
                                 ______

      By Mr. MOYNIHAN (for himself, Mr. D'Amato, Mr. Bradley, and Mr. 
        Lautenberg):
  S. 1175. A bill to suspend temporarily the duty for personal effect 
of participants in certain world athletic events; to the Committee on 
Finance.


                      foreign athletes legislation

  Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to 
facilitate the entry of foreign athletes into the United States to 
participate in the 1998 Goodwill Games. The New York metropolitan area 
has assumed the honor of hosting the 1998 games, with events to be held 
in both New York and New Jersey. I am pleased to be joined by Senator 
D'Amato, Bradley, and Lautenberg in this effort. The House Ways and 
Means Subcommittee on Trade approved an identical measure last week.
  The United States has routinely granted duty-free entry for such 
events in the past. Last year, Congress granted temporary customs duty 
waivers to the 1994 World Cup, the 1996 Summer Olympics, and three 
other international sporting events. Before that, to the World 
University Games held in 1993 in Buffalo, NY. Without this bill, teams, 
athletes and officials would suffer an extensive Customs paperwork 
process and pay duties for their equipment and personal effects. They 
would receive refunds of these duties only upon their departure from 
the United States. Furthermore, handling the sheer volume of 
participants who will enter the United States would pose a serious 
burden on U.S. Customs officials, who have many other important 
responsibilities. Foreign nations, without exception, assure hassle-
free entry for U.S. athletes participating in similar events, and we 
should continue to reciprocate the courtesy.
  New York is much looking forward to hosting the 1998 Goodwill Games, 
which, since they follow the 1998 Winter Olympic Games in Nagano, 
Japan, should be the final major gathering of nations in the 20th 
century. This is fitting because the games were founded with the vision 
of promoting international cooperation through world-class competition. 
Moscow hosted the inaugural games in 1986--the cold war still 
persisting and only 2 years after the Soviets boycotted the 1984 Summer 
Olympics in Los Angeles--and the world witnessed 91 national 8 
European, and 6 world records broken. The 1990 games in Seattle were 
the largest cultural and business-to-business exchange in United 
States-Soviet history, and the 1994 games in St. Petersburg, Russia 
were the first international event in Democratic Russia. Organizers 
anticipate the 1998 games in New York to attract 3,000 athletes from 
over 70 countries, and I expect them to be a worthy addition to this 
impressive history.
                                 ______

      By Mr. KYL (for himself and Mr. McCain):
  S. 1176. A bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior to make 
certain modifications with respect to a water contact with the city of 
Kingman, Arizona, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy 
and Natural Resources.


                       water contract legislation

 Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I join today with my colleague from 
Arizona, Senator Kyl, in introducing legislation to help resolve a 
problem that affects the water supplies of more than 120,000 of our 
constituents in Mohave County, AZ.
  Representative Bob Stump (R-AZ), whose Third Congressional District 
includes Mohave County, recently introduced a similar bill cosponsored 
by all Arizona House Members.
  The purpose of the bill is to require the Secretary of the Interior 
to take three actions with respect to a contract that provides for the 
Secretary to deliver 18,500 acre-feet of Colorado River water to the 
city of Kingman, AZ.
  First, the measure directs the Secretary to amend the contract by 
extending its term from December 31, 1995, to December 31, 2001.
  Second, the bill directs the Secretary, within 60 days of receiving a 
request from Kingman, to approve the assignment of the amended contract 
to the Mohave County Water Authority, a corporation organized pursuant 
to State law.
  Third, the bill directs the Secretary to further amend the contract 
so as to make water available for permanent service, consistent with a 
plan developed by the city in consultation with the U.S. Bureau of 
Reclamation.
  Mr. President, enactment of this legislation is necessary to 
implement a regional plan for meeting existing and future water needs 
of the city of Kingman and other fast-growing communities in Mohave 
County. The most significant element of this plan is the assignment of 
Kingman's contract for Colorado River water to the Mohave County Water 
Authority.
  In 1968, Kingman entered into a contract with the Secretary of the 
Interior providing for the annual delivery of 18,500 acre-feet of 
Colorado River water for use by the city's municipal and industrial 
customers. Under this contract, the United States reserved the right to 
terminate the contract if Kingman did not ``order, divert, transport 
and apply to water for use by the city'' by November 13, 1993.
  In the early 1970's, the city began studying various alternatives to 
facilitate direct use of its entitlement to Colorado River water.These 
studies consistently indicated that the capital expenditures required 
for water transportation and treatment make direct use of the water 
prohibitively expensive.
  In May 1993, the city adopted a water adequacy study that set forth a 
long-term water resource management plan. The plan is based largely on 
a hydrological analysis of the Hualapai Basin, which is Kingman's 
primary groundwater source. This analysis concluded that there is more 
than enough groundwater in the basin to meet the city's needs for the 
next century. Accordingly, the study recommended that the city's 
Colorado River entitlement be exchanged for funds to develop its 
groundwater resources, and to pursue effluent reuse and conservation 
projects.
  Subsequently, Kingman solicited statements of interest from entities 
that would be interested in an exchange of the city's contractual 
entitlement to Colorado River water. In a response that reflects the 
great need in the region for water, seven entities expressed an 
interest in obtaining more than 45,000 acre-feet of water annually.
  In September 1993, the Bureau of Reclamation extended Kingman's 
contract to provide additional time for the city and other Mohave 
County communities to develop a regional approach to putting Kingman's 
entitlement to beneficial use. Public meetings and discussions by the 
Colorado River Ad Hoc Water Users Group/Mojave Ad Hoc Committee, 
Kingman, Bullhead City, Lake Havasu City, Golden Shores Water 
Conservation District, the Mojave Valley Irrigation and Drainage 
District, the Mohave Water Conservation District, and others, led to a 
consensus that a county water authority should be created. This new 
authority would also
 satisfy Reclamation's expressed interest in having a single entity to 
work with in coordinating efforts to meet the needs of water 
contractors in Mohave County.

  In January 1994, Mohave County's representatives in the State 
legislature introduced legislation to establish a 

[[Page S 12273]]
Mohave County Water Authority. Governor Fife Symington signed the bill 
into law on April 8, 1994, and the Arizona Department of Water 
Resources recommended that the Bureau of Reclamation initiate the 
process to effect the transfer of Kingman's water to the authority. To 
provide the time needed to complete this process, the Bureau again 
extended the contract to December 31, 1995.
  In March 1995, just days before Kingman, the authority and 
Reclamation were to sign the documents necessary to assign the city's 
water to the authority, the Interior Department abruptly directed 
Reclamation to ``temporarily suspend'' the proceedings. It was later 
learned that the reason for this suspension was a last-minute decision 
by the Department to look at possibly using the Kingman water to settle 
Indian water rights claims in Arizona.
  The Arizona delegation has always recognized that water from many 
sources will be needed to complete settlements of the remaining tribal 
claims in our State. However, at no time has the delegation or the 
State of Arizona regard the Kingman water allocation as a necessary 
part of any overall Indian water settlement plan. To the contrary, as 
noted in the preceding paragraphs, the delegation has worked to assist 
Kingman and other Mohave County communities in the their efforts to 
develop the kind of regional solution that the new county water 
authority represents.
  Mr. President, over the past 12 years, Arizona congressional 
delegations have worked with previous administrations and the current 
administration in seeking to settle Indian water rights claims by 
negotiation, not litigation. A high level of cooperation and 
communication has characterized these efforts, which thus far have 
resulted in Congress enacting six water settlements involving Arizona 
tribes. Settling the remaining water rights claims of Arizona tribes 
will require similar efforts, and involve completion of the allocation 
of Arizona's finite water sources.
  Regrettably, the Department's action in aborting the lengthy process 
by which the Kingman water was to be allocated was contrary to all 
previous representations and commitments by the Department regarding 
the Kingman water. It effectively disregarded the extensive efforts by 
Mohave County, the Arizona Department of Water Resources, the Arizona 
legislature, and the local communities and citizens who, with the 
active cooperation and support by the Bureau of Reclamation, developed 
the Mohave County Water Authority.
  Mr. President, I strongly believe that the agreements that were to 
have been concluded in March that would have assigned the Kingman water 
contract to the Mohave County Water Authority should be signed and 
implemented. The legislation that Senator Kyl and I introduce today 
will simply ensure that the assignment will occur as planned.
  I am hopeful that the Congress can consider and approve this 
legislation in an expeditious manner. I am also hopeful that the 
Department will support this legislation in an effort to reestablish 
the kind of cooperation and communication that is so essential to 
concluding and implementing the complex agreements that comprise any 
water rights settlement.
                                 ______

      By Mr. HATCH:
  S. 1177. A bill to amend the Social Security Act and the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 to provide improved access to quality long-term 
care services, to obtain cost savings through provider incentives and 
removal of regulatory and legislative barriers, to encourage greater 
private sector participation and personal responsibility in financing 
such services, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.


                     the quality care for life act

  Mr. HATCH.
   Mr. President, I rise today to introduce S. 1177, the Quality Care 
for Life Act, which offers ideas on how we can deal with an important 
and necessary aspect of our health care delivery system--long term 
care.

  One of the most frequent concerns I hear from citizens of Utah is the 
fear of having to impoverish themselves and their loved ones in order 
to obtain much needed long term care services.
  Clearly, long term care is an issue of vital concern to our 
constituents and to Members of this body as well.
  But, the issue of long term care always presents this body with a 
dilemma.
  On the one hand, Senators wish very much that we can offer some kind 
of help to many, many American families that face the human and 
financial struggle of needing long term care.
  On the other hand, a public program to provide and/or pay for long 
term care, if not designed properly, could prove enormously expensive 
and become just another promise that we cannot keep.
  At a time when this country faces budget deficits so massive that 
they affect the future viability of our country, I do not think that we 
can afford any enormously expensive new program. That is not my intent 
in putting this bill forward today.
  Indeed, I hope that this measure will offer a useful starting point 
in the Senate for discussions on long term care and related issues, 
including the appropriate Federal role. Obviously, any final measure we 
adopt must be crafted very carefully in close consultation with the 
Congressional Budget Office, so that it does not add unduly to the 
deficit.
  In the interim, I think it is important that the Senate indicate its 
commitment to resolving the long term care dilemma which faces so many 
Americans.
  The extent of the proposals we consider, and their costs, are 
factors, but they should not become obstacles. Because we cannot do it 
all for everyone, we must not settle for doing nothing for anyone.
  It is only by taking action now to lay the foundations for a public/
private partnership that our society will be prepared 10, 20, and 30 
years hence to meet the long term care needs of a growing elderly 
population.
  I am putting forth this legislative proposal, the Quality Care for 
Life Act, in order to provoke a national dialogue on our Nation's long 
term care needs and how they can best be addressed.
  In drafting S. 1177, I attempted to widen and strengthen the long 
term care safety net with appropriate reliance on private sector 
resources.
  Last year, this body considered health care reform legislation that 
would have created a new Federal long term care program offering 
Federal and State payment for long term care services to the 
functionally disabled.
  Many of us agreed with the intent of that program, but had serious 
concerns about whether it embodied the best approach for addressing our 
Nation's long term care needs.
  First, such a program would have been far too expensive. It is clear 
that we are going to have to invest greater resources in long term 
care. However, in making that investment, we must make sure that we 
invest wisely, and that we offer solutions that address the need in a 
constructive manner.
  Second, such a program would not have embodied true reform; it would 
only have created yet more government programs modeled after previous 
and ineffective government programs.
  The legislation I am introducing today meets the same goals as the 
more ambitious and expensive legislation that we considered last year, 
yet it accomplishes them through a more targeted and cost-effective 
approach.
  For the edification of my colleagues, I would like to describe the 
problems that my legislation seeks to remedy, and outline how the bill 
addresses those areas.


            The Need for Change in Long Term Care Financing

  Our society, individually and collectively, has not made adequate 
provisions for financing the costs of long term care. Individuals and 
families are not saving for, or insuring themselves against, the costs 
of long term care. The Federal/State Medicaid Program is stretched to 
the breaking point. Families and governments are going broke.
  Without action to address these problems, our growing elderly 
population will come to rely much more heavily on Medicaid to pay for 
long term care. In 1993, Medicaid accounted for approximately 52 
percent of all long term care payment--and about 69 percent of all 
nursing facility residents--in the United States. If current trends 
continue unchecked, Medicaid will be burdened with an ever increasing 
share of the nation's long term care costs as the baby boomers reach 
retirement. 

[[Page S 12274]]

  But these current trends cannot continue. Federal and State budgets--
already strained badly by current Medicaid long term care obligations--
cannot bear such costs. Nor would the elderly be well served by an 
overwhelmed Medicaid Program.
  February 1993 Gallup Organization survey results indicated that 76 
percent of Americans agree that ``government should pay the cost of 
nursing home care only for those who cannot afford it.'' In order to 
meet the Nation's growing long term care needs without both emptying 
the public purse and sacrificing quality of care, our society cannot 
afford to rely solely on government.
  Instead, we must encourage and enforce an expectation of personal 
responsibility on the part of those with the means to plan for and pay 
for potential long term care costs. Government can--and must--help in 
the effort by working to see that individuals have the information and 
resources needed to accept responsibility for meeting their own long 
term care needs.


         Long Term Care Costs are Impoverishing Senior Citizens

  Most elderly Americans are unaware of the magnitude of long term care 
costs and of the limits of government assistance. Most Americans do not 
foresee needing long term care. Most probably do not realize how costly 
months or years of long term care can be.
  Many Americans wrongly assume that government programs of their 
general health insurance will cover the cost of any long term care 
services they might need. For all these reasons, individuals and 
families face long term care costs for which they have not planned and 
which they cannot afford.
  The costs of long term care can quickly wipe out the assets even of 
those who have worked and saved for a lifetime. The cost of 1 year of 
nursing home care is more than triple the average annual income for an 
elderly American.
  But the nation's current long term care policy does not promote 
personal planning, saving, or the purchase of insurance against the 
financial risk of long term care costs. Nor does our Nation provide 
comprehensive social insurance against the financial catastrophe of 
long term care costs. Only after a long term care recipient has been 
impoverished does government assistance become available through 
Medicaid--a welfare program.


      Medicaid is Impoverishing the Federal and State Governments

  According to the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA), total 
Medicaid payments (state and federal) have nearly doubled over recent 
years--from $54.5 billion in FY 1989 to $101.7 billion in fiscal year 
1993. The countless court battles over Medicaid reimbursement, and the 
protracted battle over ``provider specific taxes'' well illustrate the 
strain that Medicaid is putting on State and Federal resources. This 
strain jeopardizes the availability and quality of both acute and long 
term care for those who must depend on Medicaid.
  Clearly, if current long term care needs have stretched Federal and 
State budgets to their limits, the future needs of a burgeoning 
population of elderly will overwhelm our current arrangements for long 
term care financing. Therefore, the nation must look to sources other 
than government for additional resources to meet the future long term 
care needs.
  I believe that long term care reform should have the following goals: 
providing appropriate access to the full continuum of long term care 
services; ensuring that all Americans have the means to meet the cost 
of long term care; moving individuals and families away from dependence 
on government welfare; programs for long term care financing; and 
addressing the Nation's long term care needs in a fiscally responsible 
way.


              The Role of Private Long Term Care Insurance

  Results from the March 1993 Gallup Organization survey indicate that 
79 percent of Americans agree that ``to keep government costs as low as 
possible, private insurance should play a more active role in paying 
for nursing home bills for most Americans.''
  Private insurance, so useful in protecting individuals and families 
form such costly misfortunes as accidents and illness, has great 
potential for marshaling private sector resources to meet long term 
care costs.
  Insurance offers a very good means to preserve an individuals's 
choice from among various long term care arrangements and competing 
providers. Its expanded use would make an appropriate private/public 
long term care cost burden that the graying of America will otherwise 
put on the American taxpayer.
  To date, private insurance accounts for less that two percent of all 
payments for long term care services. I am confident, however, that 
with appropriate changes in federal policies private long term care 
insurance can and will take on a larger role of private insurance, a 
number of things must change. Chiefly, long term care insurance 
policies must have value to consumers.
  Many States are interested in encouraging residents to purchase 
private long term care insurance because they see an opportunity to 
slow the growth of their Medicaid spending by shifting a significant 
share of long term care costs to private insurance. We are now 
beginning to see evidence of how much long term care insurance can save 
the Medicaid Program. Publishing in Health Affairs in the fall of 1994, 
Marc Cohen, Nanda Kumar, and Stanley Wallack estimated that having a 
long term care insurance policy reduces the probability of spending 
down to Medicaid eligibility levels by some 39 percent. The authors 
estimate that, in the aggregate, Medicaid expenditures would be reduced 
by $7,945 to $15,519 for every nursing home entrant who had a long term 
care insurance policy. According to the analysis of Cohen, Kumar, and 
Wallack, this translates into cutting what Medicaid pays per nursing 
home entrant in half for long term care purchasers.
  The Quality Care for Life Act would make the laws tighter on asset 
transfers so that people cannot avoid their personal responsibilities 
by protecting unreasonable amounts of their personal funds from 
legitimate nursing home expenses, thus shifting the burden to 
taxpayers.


  Federal Long Term Care Insurance Standards and Consumer Protections

  Appropriate Federal standards and consumer protections for long term 
care insurance would inspire consumer confidence, foster growth of the 
private long term care insurance market, and ensure that elderly 
consumers are spared the problems that once plagued the Medigap 
insurance business. Accordingly, S. 1177 would establish Federal 
standards to ensure appropriate policy design and sales practices.


   Clarification of the Federal Tax Status of Private Long Term Care 
                               Insurance

  The Quality Care for Life Act would make the following clarifications 
to the tax treatment of long term care insurance: treatment of long 
term care insurance premiums paid by individuals in the same manner as 
accident and health insurance premiums; treatment of benefits received 
under long term care insurance contracts for long term care services in 
the same manner as benefits received under accident and health 
insurance; treatment of employer plans providing long term care 
services in the same manner as accident or health plans; treatment of 
life insurance benefits paid to a terminally ill individual in the same 
manner as death benefits; inclusion of long term care options as 
preferred employee benefits in employer programs, including cafeteria 
plans; and clarification of the allowance of tax deduction for 
additions to an insurer's long term care insurance reserves.
  The private long term care insurance market is growing and improving. 
Products have evolved and improved. Insurance companies, have gained 
experience and expertise in designing and pricing policies. Sales have 
been rising by 30-35 percent a year over recent years. There have been 
some two million long term care policies purchased. I believe that the 
private long term care insurance market is on the way to realizing its 
potential. With the right kind of Federal standards, consumers will 
come to understand the value of long term care insurance. Private 
insurance can then become a full partner in a private/public long term 
care partnership.


          Expansion of Home and Community Based Long Term Care

  Today, about 6 million older Americans living at home need assistance 
as 

[[Page S 12275]]
a result of their disabilities. As we in Congress debate a health care 
system that addresses our current inequities in access and costs, we 
must lay the foundation for addressing our long term care demands of 
today and tomorrow.
  The Quality Care for Life Act would establish a home and community 
based service program for disabled persons who either need assistance 
with three activities of daily living or who suffer from Alzheimer's 
disease or a related cognitive disorder.
  S. 1177 also revises the reimbursement system to create a payment 
level for subacute care in nursing home, thus increasing access for 
those patients who need that level of care but are unable to get that 
care in community nursing facilities because the costs for providing 
the service are much higher than the current skilled nursing home daily 
rate. Currently, these services are provided by hospitals at a much 
higher cost. Finally, the bill provides for a prospective payment 
system for nursing facilities.
  By the year 2030, there will be more elderly than young people, and 
the population age 85 and over is expected to more than triple in size 
between 1980 and 2030. My home State of Utah has the fastest growing 
population over 80 in the country.
  We simply do not have the necessary federal resources to provide all 
Americans every benefit they need. An aging population will 
significantly increase demand for long term care services. Planning 
today will save us from bankruptcy and lack of services tomorrow.
  I believe the greatest barrier to enacting long term care legislation 
has been its substantial cost. Although any proposal will entail new 
costs, I have constructed the Quality Care for Life Act to place 
maximum reliance upon the private sector wherever possible, in order to 
leverage our resources since we will be providing new services. It is 
true that my bill will entail new spending in the short-run, but these 
funds are an investment which will achieve greater savings over the 
long-run.
  Some of the costs will be incurred because we are establishing a 
floor for home health services, so that the most frail and sick of our 
elderly population are guaranteed home care now. Currently, many fall 
through the cracks of our care system. They lack adequate home care and 
are denied access to adequate nursing home services.
  We all know that the amount and duration of home care services varies 
from State to State and also varies with State areas between urban and 
rural areas. But this is not fair to our frail elderly, and we have a 
responsibility to see that all Americans, regardless of where they 
live, can receive the home care services they need and deserve.
  If we help our elderly now, and provide the kinds of home care 
services they need, they may never need to be in a nursing home and may 
never be a long-term drain on scarce Federal financial resources. We 
can do the right thing, and do it now. If we do not act soon, we will 
be mortgaging our children's future to pay for our own long term care 
needs.
  I intend to work with the other members of this body so that we can 
provide our Nation's elderly the care they so badly need and deserve. I 
think that the Quality Care for Life proposal will go a long way in 
meeting that goal, and I hope my colleagues will give it serious 
consideration. I certainly welcome their suggestions.
                                 ______

      By Mr. CHAFEE (for himself, Mr. Mack, Mr. Thurmond, Mr. Pell, Mr. 
        Bumpers, and Mr. Lieberman):
  S. 1178. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
provide for coverage of colorectal screening under part B of the 
Medicare program; to the Committee on Finance.


            THE CANCER SCREENING AND PREVENTION ACT OF 1995

 Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, today, I am introducing the Cancer 
Screening and Prevention Act of 1995. This bill targets colorectal 
cancer, one of this Nation's leading causes of death by cancer, by 
providing coverage under Medicare for prevention and early detection of 
colorectal cancer services. Medicare already provides for the treatment 
of colorectal cancer, but the treatment of this disease in its later 
stages is much more expensive than finding it early and treating it 
early.
  Last year, a Senate amendment--offered by my colleague from Utah, Mr. 
Hatch--was adopted during the health reform debate with strong 
bipartisan support. It directed that colorectal cancer screening 
benefits consistent with the guide to clinical preventive services, 
recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, be included in 
any health care reform comprehensive benefits package. An amendment 
virtually identical to the bill I am introducing today, was passed with 
strong bipartisan support last year by the relevant House committees. A 
companion bill was introduced again this year in the House and has well 
over 40 cosponsors. I am hopeful our bill will receive similar strong 
support. I believe it is important for the Congress to act on this bill 
in order to stop the deaths this disease causes without prevention 
screening.
  In 1995 alone, 55,300 people are expected to die from colorectal 
cancer, and 138,200 new cases will be found. Colorectal cancer is the 
second leading cause of cancer death in this Nation--far more men and 
women die each year of colorectal cancer than with breast cancer or 
prostate cancer. In fact, colorectal cancer strikes men and women 
equally but is easily treated when found early.
  If colorectal cancer is not found early, the 5-year survival rate is 
60 percent or lower. Early detection, however, can boost patients' 5-
year survival rate to 91 percent. That differential is astonishing when 
measured in terms of lives and dollars saved. In recent years, colon 
cancers have become almost completely preventable by using techniques 
which became readily available only during the past decade. The vast 
majority of those afflicted with colorectal cancer are over the age of 
50. Unfortunately, Medicare does not specifically cover colorectal 
cancer screening and prevention services and it should.
  In recent years, scientific developments have made clear that 
colorectal cancer can be eradicated. Just as Medicare now covers other 
preventive services such as mammography screening and flu shots, its 
time to add colorectal screening and prevention services.
  Several years ago, we moved aggressively to ensure that women took 
appropriate steps to prevent cervical cancer. It is time now to move 
aggressively to provide the preventive services necessary to eradicate 
this lethal cancer in the population most at risk.
  A study recently published in the Journal of the National Cancer 
Institute evaluated the effect of various factors on the costs of colon 
and other cancers. Not surprisingly, the study found that the costs 
associated with initial care of colon cancer was higher than when the 
cancer was first detected in its later stages. Based on these findings, 
the study concluded that interventions that prevent colon cancer will 
afford the greatest immediate cost savings.
  Under this act, all Medicare recipients will be eligible for limited 
cancer screening or preventive services. For certain high risk 
individuals a more comprehensive examination is available.
  The legislation enables early detection of colon cancer by providing 
for an annual fecal occult blood test. This low-cost, noninvasive 
blood-screening test allows for early detection of colorectal cancer. 
Research shows that this test, as well as a followup exam of a positive 
result, reduces cancer risks from 33 to 43 percent. The average cost of 
this test is only $5.
  Second, this legislation includes limited coverage of a flexible 
sigmoidoscopy exam which enables a doctor to inspect the lower part of 
the colon where 50 to 60 percent of polyps and cancers occur. This 
preventive service would be available no more than once every 4 years 
and is an essential component of the basic screening regimen 
recommended by the American Cancer Society for all asymptomatic, 
average risk Americans over the age of 50.
  Third, this act would allow individuals at high risk for getting 
colon cancer to receive a screening colonoscopy exam no more than once 
every 2 years. A screening colonoscopy allows a doctor to inspect the 
entire colon. This procedure also enables doctors contemporaneously to 
perform biopsies and to remove potentially precancerous polyps.

[[Page S 12276]]

  The Cancer Screening and Prevention Act of 1995 specifically 
delineates those individuals at high risk for colon cancer, and allows 
the Secretary of Health and Human Services the authority to revise the 
category of high risk individuals. An individual faces a high risk of 
colon cancer if he or she has a history of cancer, suspicious polyps, 
or chronic digestive diseases such as inflammatory bowel disease, 
Crohn's disease, or ulcerative colitis, or if the individual has any 
gene markers for colorectal cancer present, or has a family history of 
colon cancer.
  The preventive screening services in this act are all standard 
medical procedures which are recommended by the American Cancer 
Society, the National Cancer Institute, the American College of 
Gastroenterology, the American Gastroenterological Association, and the 
American College of Physicians.
  Patient and professional groups alike support this legislation. The 
American College of Gastroenterology worked closely in providing
 scientific and technical information. This bill also enjoys the strong 
support of the American Gastroenterological Association, and the 
American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. It is strongly 
supported by consumer groups including the Crohn's and Colitis 
Foundation, the United Ostomy Association, and the other 10 patient 
care groups which comprise the Digestive Disease National Coalition.

  It is my understanding that a group of radiologists are concerned 
that their diagnostic procedures is not named as a covered service in 
this legislation. It is my hope that should this bill move through the 
Finance Committee and the Senate, we will work with these groups to 
resolve this issue.
  Several of my colleagues have indicated their strong support by 
sending a letter urging other Members to support this legislation. I 
ask unanimous consent that the letter of Senators Mack and Lieberman be 
included in the Record.
  I urge my colleagues to cosponsor the Cancer Screening and Prevention 
Act.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that additional material be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:
      Colorectal Cancer Screening Should be Covered Under Medicare

       Colorectal cancer screening should be added to the clinical 
     preventive services now covered under Medicare.
       Leading scientific organizations recommend colorectal 
     cancer screening services for normal risk individuals 
     beginning at age 50. Three types of tests should be covered: 
     Annual fecal occult blood test (FOBT) for normal risk 
     patients age 50 and over; flexible sigmoidoscopy for normal 
     risk patients 50 and over, once every 3-5 years; and 
     colonoscopy exams for high risk patients.
       Currently, Medicare coverage of preventive services is 
     limited to screening for cervical and breast cancer, 
     pneumococcal vaccines and hepatitis B vaccines. Yet, 
     colorectal cancer is the No. 2 cancer killer and is one of 
     the most preventable types of cancer and curable when 
     detected early.
       Colorectal cancer screening services should be covered 
     because:
       Colorectal cancer is the second deadliest cancer right 
     after lung cancer.
       About 138,000 new cases of colorectal cancer will be 
     diagnosed and about 55,300 people will die from the disease 
     in 1995. The disease is most common in people over 50 and 
     strikes men and women in almost equal numbers. In fact, the 
     average age of colorectal cancer patients at time of 
     diagnosis is 71.
       It is one of the most preventable types of cancer and 
     curable when detected early.
       Most colorectal cancers develop from benign polyps. Finding 
     and removing these polyps reduces the risk of colon cancer by 
     90 percent.
       Detection and prevention strategies are well documented and 
     highly effective.
       Screening has long been recommended by many organizations, 
     including American Cancer Society, National Cancer Institute, 
     American College of Physicians, and the Blue Cross and Blue 
     Shield Association in their guidelines.
       The nation's leading expert panel--the U.S. Preventive 
     Services Task Force--is releasing their report in September 
     of 1995 and it is expected to recommend screening (FOBT and 
     sigmoidoscopy). An April 1995 study done by the Office of 
     Technology Assessment shows colorectal screening to be cost-
     effective.
       Colorectral screening services are provided to most Federal 
     employees.
       Every major Federal employee health care plan recognizes 
     the effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening services and 
     provides coverage for these services.
                                                                    ____

                                                  U.S. Senate,

                                  Washington, DC, August 10, 1995.
       Dear Colleague: Even though we face many competing 
     priorities this year, we think it is critically important 
     that we make progress in addressing the No. 2 cancer killer 
     in the United States--colorectal cancer. This year, 149,000 
     new cases of colorectal cancer will be detected and about 
     55,300 people will die from the disease, making it second 
     only to lung cancer in causing cancer deaths. It 
     predominantly strikes individuals over the age of 50, most of 
     whom are senior citizens. The average age at the time of 
     diagnosis is 71.
       Today our colleague, Senator John Chafee, is introducing 
     the Cancer Screening and Prevention Act of 1995. This bill 
     provides Medicare coverage of preventive services which will 
     enable the detection and early treatment of colon cancer. Its 
     preventive measures track the screening recommendations of 
     the American Cancer Society (ACS), the National Cancer 
     Institute (NCI), the National Institutes on Health (NIH), the 
     American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), the American 
     Gastroenterological Association (AGA), and the American 
     Medical Association (AMA).
       We know that early detection of colorectal cancer saves 
     lives. Colon cancer is nearly completely preventable using 
     techniques that have been available for over a decade. Recent 
     research bears this out.
       Research published by Dr. Sidney Winawer and colleagues in 
     the New England Journal of Medicine (December 1993) found 
     that removal of precancerous polyps reduced the incidence of 
     colon cancer by 90 percent and mortality by over 95 percent. 
     This work proved conclusively that timely removal of polyps 
     will eliminate most colon cancers.
       The way to reduce colorectal cancer is very simple--promote 
     screening. The ACS, the NCI, the ACG, and the AGA recommend 
     that individuals at age 50 be screened annually for 
     colorectal cancer by fecal occult blood tests and by flexible 
     sigmoidoscopic examination every three to five years. High 
     risk individuals should have a more thorough test--
     colonoscopic surveillance--available every two years. 
     Colorectal cancer screening reduces cancer risk and is at 
     least as cost-effective as other preventive health care 
     services.
       The NCI conducted a cost analysis of screening the U.S. 
     population from ages 50 to 80 that demonstrated a beneficial 
     cost-effectiveness ration relative to other preventive 
     services. Scientific evidence is well established to 
     demonstrate that screening of our elderly population for 
     colorectal cancer will save lives and is cost-effective.
       Given the prevalence of this disease in older Americans and 
     the overwhelming evidence that screening is effective, these 
     preventive benefits should be covered under Medicare. A 
     recent analysis and estimate of the cost of this legislation, 
     prepared by Peter McMenamin, Ph.D., a former Health Care 
     Financing Administration official, projects the full cost of 
     this legislation to be $429 million over four years, which 
     means an average of $107 million annually.
       Please join us as original cosponsors of the Cancer 
     Screening and Prevention Act of 1995. To become a cosponsor 
     or for further information, please call Doug Guerdat of 
     Senator Chafee's staff at 224-2921.
           Sincerely,
     Connie Mack.
     Joseph I. Lieberman.
 Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague, 
Senator John Chafee in introducing the Medicare Cancer Screening and 
Prevention Act of 1995. The legislation provides for Medicare coverage 
of preventive care specifically aimed at the early detection, 
prevention, and treatment of colorectal cancer.
  This bill, when enacted, will close a significant gap that currently 
exists in the preventive services covered by Medicare. Under current 
law, Medicare does not reimburse for preventive colorectal screening 
services. A beneficiary must have a presenting condition, such as 
bleeding, or must already have colorectal cancer before services are 
provided through Medicare. These are very costly diseases, which 
Medicare will pay to treat. However, I believe it is in the best 
interests of patients and the Medicare system to provide for coverage 
of tests which will identify colorectal cancer at its earliest stages. 
Medicare currently provides coverage for other preventive services such 
as mammography screening for breast cancer and flu shots. This 
legislation will send the message to all beneficiaries that colorectal 
cancer is curable if detected early.
  This legislation will ensure that Medicare beneficiaries will be 
eligible to receive the basic colorectal cancer screening tests which 
are recommended by the American Cancer Society for all Americans over 
the age of 50. As my colleagues will recall, these basic tests were 
used successfully to detect and successfully treat former President 
Ronald Reagan's cancerous colon polyps in 1985.
  Colorectal cancer is one of the most widely contracted forms of 
cancer, with higher incidence rates than either breast cancer or 
prostate cancer. In 

[[Page S 12277]]
1995 alone, according to the American Cancer Society, more than 138,000 
new cases of colorectal cancer will be diagnosed. Tragically, more than 
55,000 Americans will die from the disease this year. My home State of 
Florida has been disproportionately affected by colorectal cancer with 
the third highest estimated number of new cases and deaths associated 
with this form of cancer.
  Scientific data clearly show preventive services can successfully 
combat many cases of colorectal cancer. If colorectal cancer goes 
undetected, the 5-year survival rate is approximately 60 percent or 
less. If, however, colorectal cancer is detected at its earliest 
stages, then the 5-year survival rate increases dramatically to 87 
percent for rectal cancer and 93 percent for colon cancer. The 
legislation we are introducing today will not only address the early 
detection of colorectal cancer, but it will also aid in the prevention 
of colorectal cancer in many Americans over the age of 50.
  At a time when the Board of Trustees of Social Security and Medicare 
warns that the Hospital Insurance, or Medicare part A, trust fund will 
become insolvent by the year 2002, Congress should enact laws to 
prevent hospitalization and reduce long-term health care costs. This 
legislation will greatly enhance this effort by focusing on preventive 
services which have been shown to be cost-effective. For example, a 
National Cancer Institute study found the costs of screening for 
colorectal cancer are favorable as compared to other preventive 
services. The study also found the costs of medical treatment of 
advanced colorectal cancer far outweigh the costs of prevention and 
early treatment. In addition, the onset of this tragic form of cancer 
leads to lost productivity, lost income, and lost tax revenues.
  The scientific evidence supporting the benefits of early detection 
and screening is clear. The technology to prevent colorectal cancer has 
been available for more than a decade. Now is the time to increase the 
accessibility of these services to the population of Americans who are 
at highest risk of contracting colorectal cancer--our senior citizens. 
The American Cancer Society, along with physician organizations such as 
the American College of Gastroenterology, and consumer groups such as 
the Crohn's and Colitis Foundation of America are unified in their 
strong support and advocacy for this important legislation. Enactment 
of this bill is prudent, cost-effective, and humane.
  My wife, our daughter, my mother, and I are each alive today because 
of the early detection of cancer. I've been told that our Nation can 
see a 50-percent increase in cancer survival rates if only Americans 
would follow the screening recommendations of the American Cancer 
Society. The need is great. The cost-effectiveness of these tests is 
conclusive. I am proud to join in introducing the Medicare Cancer 
Screening and Prevention Act of 1995. I ask all of my colleagues to 
join us in this effort.
                                 ______

      By Mr. ROCKEFELLER:
  S. 1179. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
reductions in required contributions to the United Mine Workers of 
America Combined Benefit Fund, and for other purposes; to the Committee 
on Finance.


             the small noncoal producing company relief act

  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, today, I am introducing a bill to 
provide relief to small, non-coal producing companies that are 
experiencing difficulty in meeting their financial obligations under 
the 1992 Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act. I want to see this 
bill enacted into law so a group of small companies will get the help 
needed to preserve and pay for the health care coverage of their former 
workers. These companies want to make sure miners' health care benefits 
are protected, just as I do. But they need some help to do it.
  I will talk more about why I think it is so important that the Senate 
act on this legislation, but first, I think it's equally important for 
everyone to understand what brought me to this place. The context for 
the introduction of a bill is important, and in this case, the context 
is the history of the coal fields. So, first some background before I 
discuss my proposal for small company relief:
  Almost 50 years ago, the President of the United States, Harry S. 
Truman, ended a national coal strike that had forced him to seize the 
mines. That action established a unique relationship between the 
Federal government, miners and operators in the coal industry. In that 
1946 strike, health care was a central issue. And coal miners' health 
care benefits remain central to labor relations in the coal industry 
today.
  Through the years since that 1946 strike, coal miners and their 
families have traded or foregone other benefits to preserve the decent 
health care benefits upon which they depend because illness and injury 
are so endemic to coal mining. In fact, the health program that exists 
for current and retired miners today derives from the one established 
when President Truman seized the mines.
  In the 1950's, a grand compact was reached between labor and 
management in the coal industry. In return for health and pension 
security, labor agreed to mechanization of the mines, which led to the 
elimination of 300,000 jobs in Appalachia alone. This leads to today's 
situation, because it is largely the retirees of that vast industrial 
restructuring whose health care was in jeopardy before passage of the 
1992 Coal
 Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act, now simply known as the Coal Act. 
Those coal miners created the might of modern industrial America. They 
fueled our Nation's economic progress. In 1992, when Congress passed 
the Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act, we told those miners that 
their tremendous contributions and sacrifices mattered and the promises 
made to them will be kept. We must not forsake that promise now or 
ever.

  The urgent need for legislation to protect miners' health care 
benefits became increasingly clear during the fall of 1989, when 
another coal strike broke out, where health care benefits were, once 
again, a central issue. In that year, I introduced my first bill to 
prevent collapse of the trust funds that provide health care for 
retired coal miners. The dwindling base of contributors resulting from 
bankruptcies and the failure of some companies to keep paying into the 
funds, along with exploding health care inflation, put the health trust 
funds in jeopardy. Then-Secretary of Labor Elizabeth Dole appointed a 
mediator to assist in settlement of the strike. When the settlement was 
reached, she announced appointment of a commission to recommend a long-
term solution to the crisis of the health trust funds. That Commission 
became known as the Coal Commission.
  Secretary Dole explained that during negotiation of the settlement of 
that strike, which involved a single company, ``it became clear to all 
parties involved that the issue of health care benefits for retirees 
affects the entire industry.''
  ``A comprehensive, industry wide solution is desperately needed,'' 
Secretary Dole then said.
  Secretary Dole's Coal Commission submitted its final report in 
November, 1990. The Commission observed that health benefits are an 
emotional subject in the coal industry, not only because coal miners 
have been promised and guaranteed health care benefits for life, but 
also because coal miners in their labor contracts have traded lower 
pensions over the years for better health care benefits. The Commission 
said it firmly believes that the retired miners are entitled to the 
health care benefits that were promised and guaranteed them and that 
such commitments must be honored. To quote from that 1990 report--

       Retired coal miners have legitimate expectations of health 
     care benefits for life; that was the promise they received 
     during their working lives and that is how they planned their 
     retirement years. That commitment should be honored.

  The Coal Commission also considered the fairest way to ensure that 
the health fund did not collapse. They recommended that companies that 
employed miners, current signatories and former signatories alike, 
share the costs of providing benefits to miners whose employers went 
out of business. And, in the words of the Dole Commission, the best way 
to finance the health benefits promised miners was the ``imposition of 
a statutory obligation to contribute on current and past signatories, 
mechanisms to prevent future dumping of retiree health obligations''.

[[Page S 12278]]

  Collective bargaining cannot work when companies are not around to 
bargain because they are bankrupt or have walked away from their 
responsibilities, sometimes through legal loopholes created by dozens 
of conflicting court decisions. Moreover, the orphan retirees whose 
last employers were gone faced the prospect that when the collective-
bargaining agreement expired in 1993, no one would have been 
responsible for their health care. The miners' health program's 
shrinking funding base and spiraling costs made continuation of the old 
program unworkable. The task Congress and the administration had in 
1992 when we passed the Coal Act was to do the best we could to assign 
responsibility for funding the health program, recognizing that there 
was not then, nor is there now, a perfect solution.
  And so, in 1992, Congress met its national responsibility to protect 
miners' health benefits. I was proud to author that legislation, the 
Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act, or the Coal Act. It was 
attached to the Energy Policy Act of 1992. I worked on that legislation 
with an outstanding group of Members whose invaluable contributions 
were essential to securing passage of the Act--my esteemed colleagues 
Senators Byrd and Ford, Senators Specter, Wallop, and others from the 
Finance and Energy Committees. The Coal Act would not have become law 
without their work and without strong bipartisan cooperation. We did 
our work and miners' benefits were saved. That makes me enormously 
proud.
  Those miners today, on average, are 73 years old. Most worked in the 
mines for 20, 30, 40 years, or more. Every day many rode a rail car a 
mile underground, stooped in a crawlspace 4 feet high with ice cold 
water up to their knees, and made their mines productive and their 
employers rich. For them, the legacy of that work is black lung 
disease, asthma, cancer, back pain, and chronic respiratory disease. 
Their health benefits remain a matter of life and death. The Coal Act 
protected their benefits into the future. But in the 104th Congress, 
some want to take away the health care security of miners. I don't 
intend to let that happen.
  But there are big mining companies still looking for a way
   to walk from the promise made to these miners nearly 50 years ago. 
These companies have spent millions to oppose the implementation of the 
Coal Act. So far, they have not succeeded in robbing miners of the 
health security the Coal Act provides.

  But this year, they are at it again, seeking what amounts to nothing 
more than a tax break for a select group of special interest companies.
  If they succeed, the health benefits of 30,000 West Virginia miners, 
widows, and orphans will be in jeopardy. Thousands of people like them 
in other States will face the same peril. If those people lose their 
health care coverage, we will have a disastrous health care crisis in 
West Virginia, with miners and widows being forced to sell their homes 
to pay for the medication and treatment they now receive. Retirees in 
every State will be in the same desperate straits, and the other coal 
States where most miners have retired would all face the same health 
care tragedy.
  We must remember that the promise of coal miners' health is not just 
another entitlement program. These benefits have been earned by a 
lifetime in the mines--a lifetime of deferred wages as the price paid 
for health care coverage. Some big companies who are, or were, in the 
coal business, and who can afford to pay for these benefits, continue 
to say they do not want to meet their responsibilities. And I am sad to 
have to report that there are bills in both the Senate and the House 
which seek to amend the Coal Act and let these companies walk away from 
their commitment to miners.
  Some Members of Congress are supporting a bill to let big coal 
companies abandon retired miners. Some would like to see such a bill 
included in this year's budget reconciliation bill, hiding the fate of 
more than 92,000 retired miners and their dependents as a tiny 
provision in a massive bill. If Congress is not careful, a cut in coal 
miners' health benefits may be snuck through in the bill needed to make 
sure the Federal Government can operate.
  What's especially troubling is how many of these companies are using 
exaggerated claims of a huge surplus in the health fund to bolster 
their contention that there is sufficient money with which to give them 
a tax break. The problem is the big surplus which they project is not 
supported by the independent actuarial analysis commissioned (by the 
fund's trustees) to review the financial health of the fund. The Ernst 
and Young analysis, conducted by Guy King, a former chief actuary at 
HCFA, advises Congress to be very cautious about any changes to the Act 
which expend the fund's reserves. Guy King's report said that the most 
likely scenario is there
 will be a $39 million deficit in the health funds in the year 2003. 
The General Accounting Office told Congress on May 25, 1995, that ``it 
now appears that annual deficits--instead of surpluses--are likely to 
occur, which would erode the current surplus over time.'' That means 
that there's not a lot of extra money, available to help pay for this 
proposed tax break.

  This tells me we have to be very, very thoughtful about doing 
anything which would destabilize the health fund--which a big tax break 
would most certainly do.
  While we are seeing all the efforts of the millions- and billion-
dollar mining conglomerates who are looking to the courts and to legal 
fine print for a way out of keeping their promise to retired coal 
miners and their widows--these companies are certainly not focused on 
how smaller businesses are affected by the Act.
  These large companies are hoping Congress will give them a big tax 
break, but small businesses in financial need would not be helped under 
their plans to amend the Coal Act.
  I think that's wrong. The Coal Act ensures retired miners and their 
dependents will receive the health benefits they were promised. That's 
what it was intended to do. And it's working.
  But over the last year or two, as I have monitored the implementation 
of the Act, I have been hearing from and meeting with small companies 
who are very troubled. They tell me it is difficult for a number of 
them to do what is required under the provisions of the Coal Act. They 
tell me that they need some relief. As you know, the Coal Act requires 
small and large businesses to contribute to the miners' health funds on 
behalf of their former employees. But that requirement may be more 
doable for large companies than it is for small ones.
  While holding small businesses legitimately responsible for the 
health benefits of their former workers is fair, the burden of making 
those payments may be difficult for some. That's why I am introducing a 
bill which would amend the Coal Act to help small, non-coal producing 
businesses make their premium payments under the Act.
  I think this legislation is a way we can provide some relief to small 
companies, who are no longer in the coal business, and yet still 
maintain the stable financing structure of the Act.
  It doesn't make sense to me to bankrupt a viable small company 
because it cannot meet its full premium obligations
 under the Act, especially if the company has an ability to make 
payments consistently over time. I want to make it easier for these 
small businesses, which create jobs in West Virginia, Pennsylvania, 
Ohio, and across the Nation, to stay in business and make reasonable 
premium payments under the Act.

  An important point to underscore: the financial condition of the fund 
is not such that forgiving the health care liability assigned any one 
group of companies under the Act is possible. Miners' benefits would be 
at risk. What I think we can do is limit, or cap, the liability of 
small, non-coal producing companies in a way which provides meaningful 
assistance. That is what my bill attempts to do. Again, it's not 
perfect, but it offers relief that could make a real difference to 
small companies.
  The group of small, non-coal producing companies which I have been 
working with committed themselves to a long process in which we sat 
down and together figured out a way that small companies could get help 
while miners' benefits are protected. We struggled with the numbers, 
and we struggled with the constraints--practical, political, some 
philosophical.

[[Page S 12279]]

  Keeping in mind our shared goal of protecting miners benefits and 
doing something concrete to help small companies--something which could 
actually be signed into law--together, we negotiated the piece of 
legislation I am introducing today.
  This is not necessarily the only way to provide a group of small 
companies with targeted relief from their obligations under the Coal 
Act. Others may suggest different approaches. But I firmly believe that 
this approach is one which can pass, and be signed into law, if we keep 
this relief package directed at the small companies most in need of 
financial assistance. I am working on one or two other minor 
adjustments to the Act, one of particular interest to West Virginia, 
which I also hope to have ready for the Senate's consideration in the 
near future.
  Another word of caution: If companies with an ability to pay, but 
with a desire to avoid their responsibilities, want to use a small 
company relief package as momentum for their efforts, it could be that 
we go another year or many years without small company relief. I, for 
one, do not want a bunch of big companies with the ability and 
obligation to keep promises to miners to get in the way of small 
company relief along the lines of what I have proposed here. I hope my 
colleagues don't either. One thing I do know, if efforts to pile on 
some mega-tax break or relief for companies that do not need or deserve 
it are successfully attached to this
 proposal in the legislative process, I will not be able to recommend 
to the President that he sign such a bill. I cannot support anything 
that puts miners' health benefits at risk. I hope we can avoid that 
scenario.

  The small company relief bill which I am introducing is enactable. It 
will go a long way to helping meet the needs of the small companies 
which I have been working with--and they are a cross-section of small 
companies from all over the country. This is the product of many, many, 
months of negotiations. I have consulted with Rich Trumka, the 
President of the United Mine Workers of America [UMW] about this 
package. He agrees that there may be a need to address the needs of 
small companies that truly can't afford to pay. The members of the 
Bituminous Coal Operators Association [BCOA] also understand my strong 
desire to see this type of relief enacted this year, and they know what 
is in this bill and why. With those two disparate interests in 
agreement that it is appropriate for me to pursue small company relief, 
I am confident that we can actually make this small company relief a 
reality this year.
  All parties--the small companies, the BCOA, and the UMW--agree that 
we cannot know today, with any precision, the exact dollar impact of 
these provisions on the long-term financial health of the fund. As the 
financial impact comes into better focus, under no circumstances will 
we move ahead with this amendment if it would cause the fund surplus to 
fall below a level that protects the benefits.
  A sacred promise was made to coal miners, their widows and 
dependents, and Congress took historic, bipartisan action in 1992 to 
keep that promise. These guaranteed health benefits cannot be sold off 
or traded away. But small companies can get some meaningful relief to 
help them meet their obligations under the 1992 Coal Act without 
jeopardizing miners' health benefits through the bill I am submitting 
today. I urge my colleagues to carefully consider this legislation, and 
to work with me in enacting and achieving its objective.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the complete text of the 
Small Non-Coal Producing Company Relief Act of 1995 be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:
                                S. 1179

       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 ``Small Non-Coal Producing 
     Company Relief Act''.

     SEC. 2. REDUCTION IN CONTRIBUTIONS OF CERTAIN PERSONS TO COAL 
                   MINERS COMBINED BENEFIT FUND.

       (a) In General.--Part II of subchapter B of chapter 99 of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to financing of 
     Combined Benefit Fund) is amended by inserting after section 
     9704 the following new section:

     ``SEC. 9704A. REDUCTIONS IN ANNUAL PREMIUMS OF CERTAIN 
                   ASSIGNED OPERATORS.

       ``(a) General Rule.--The annual premium of an assigned 
     operator under section 9704(a) shall--
       ``(1) in the case of an eligible small assigned operator, 
     be reduced as provided in subsection (b), and
       ``(2) in any case in which there is a surplus in the 
     Combined Fund to which subsection (c) applies, be reduced as 
     provided in subsection (c).
       ``(b) Reductions for Eligible Small Assigned Operators.--
       ``(1) In general.--If this subsection applies to an 
     eligible small assigned operator for any plan year of the 
     Combined Fund, the annual premium under section 9704(a) for 
     such operator for such plan year shall not exceed 5 percent 
     of the operator's average annual taxable income for purposes 
     of chapter 1 for the 5-taxable year period ending with the 
     operator's most recent taxable year ending before the 
     beginning of the plan year.
       ``(2) Years to which subsection applies.--
       ``(A) In general.--This subsection shall apply to any plan 
     year of the Combined Fund--
       ``(i) which begins before October 1, 1998,
       ``(ii) which begins after September 30, 1998, and before 
     October 1, 2003, but only if the Combined Fund has a surplus 
     as of the close of the plan year ending September 30, 1998, 
     equal to or greater than $150,000,000, or
       ``(iii) which begins after September 30, 2003, but only if 
     the Combined Fund has a surplus as of the close of the plan 
     year ending September 30, 2003, equal to or greater than 
     $100,000,000.
       ``(B) Coordination with surplus reductions.--This 
     subsection shall not apply to any eligible small assigned 
     operator for any plan year for which no annual premium is 
     imposed on such operator by reason of subsection (c).
       ``(3) Eligible small assigned operators.--For purposes of 
     this section--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `eligible small assigned 
     operator' means any assigned operator--
       ``(i) the average annual gross income of which for purposes 
     of chapter 1 for the 5-taxable year period ending with the 
     operator's most recent taxable year ending before October 1, 
     1993, did not exceed $25,000,000, and
       ``(ii) which is not engaged in the production of coal for 
     the plan year for which the determination is being made.

     For purposes of this subparagraph, production by a related 
     person shall be treated as production by the assigned 
     operator.
       ``(B) Production of coal.--For purposes of subparagraph 
     (A), an assigned operator or related person shall be treated 
     as engaged in the production of coal if it has employed 
     employees in--
       ``(i) the extraction of coal, or
       ``(ii) the preparation, processing, or changing of coal for 
     sale.
       ``(4) Aggregation rules.--In determining gross income or 
     taxable income for purposes of this section, an assigned 
     operator and any related persons shall be treated as 1 
     person.
       ``(c) Reductions Based Upon Fund Surplus.--
       ``(1) Assigned operators.--If, as of the close of any plan 
     year ending after September 30, 1997, the Combined Fund has a 
     surplus equal to or greater than 50 percent of the net 
     expenses of the Combined Fund for the plan year, no annual 
     premium shall be imposed under section 9704(a) on any 
     eligible small assigned operator for the succeeding plan 
     year.
       ``(2) Other operators.--If, as of the close of any plan 
     year ending after September 30, 1997, the Combined Fund has a 
     surplus equal to or greater than 100 percent of the net 
     expenses of the Combined Fund for the plan year, the annual 
     premium under section 9704(a) for the succeeding plan year of 
     any assigned operator other than an eligible small assigned 
     operator shall be reduced by an amount which bears the same 
     ratio to the surplus in excess of 100 percent of the net 
     expenses of the Combined Fund for the plan year as--
       ``(A) such assigned operator's applicable percentage 
     (expressed as a whole number), bears to
       ``(B) the sum of the applicable percentages (expressed as 
     whole numbers) of all assigned operators other than eligible 
     small assigned operators.
       ``(d) Overall Limitation.--
       ``(1) In general.--In no event shall the total reductions 
     in annual premiums payable to the Combined Fund under this 
     section for any plan year exceed $5,000,000.
       ``(2) Calculation of reductions.--For purposes of paragraph 
     (1), the total reductions in annual premiums for any plan 
     year shall not include any reductions under this section in 
     premiums payable by an eligible small assigned operator who, 
     prior to the date of the enactment of this section, has not 
     paid at least 50 percent of the premiums assessed such 
     assigned operator for the period October 1, 1994, through 
     June 30, 1995.
       ``(3) Ordering rule.--Any decrease in premium reductions 
     under this section for any plan year by reason of paragraph 
     (1) shall be applied first against the reductions under 
     subsection (b) and then against reductions under subsection 
     (c). Any such decreases shall be made ratably among 
     operators.
       ``(e) Computation of Surplus.--For purposes of this 
     section, any determination of a surplus in the Combined 
     Fund--

[[Page S 12280]]

       ``(1) shall be calculated on an accrual basis,
       ``(2) shall be made and certified by an independent auditor 
     retained by the trustees, and
       ``(3) once so certified, shall be reviewable by a court of 
     law only to determine if such determination is reasonable.

     A determination shall be considered reasonable for purposes 
     of paragraph (3) if it is made in accordance with generally 
     accepted accounting principles and is based on assumptions 
     which, in the aggregate, are reasonable.''
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for part 
     II of subchapter B of chapter 99 of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 is amended by inserting after the item relating to 
     section 9704 the following new item:

``Sec. 9704A. Reductions in annual premiums of certain assigned 
              operators.''

       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to plan years beginning after January 31, 1993.

     SEC. 3. WAIVER OF PENALTIES.

       (a) In General.--In the case of an eligible small assigned 
     operator (as defined in section 9704A(b)(3) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986, as added by section 1), no penalty 
     shall be imposed under section 9707 of such Code on any 
     failure of such operator to pay any installment of a premium 
     due under section 9704 of such Code before January 1, 1996, 
     if the operator pays such installment before such date. For 
     purposes of this subsection, the amount of the installment 
     shall be determined after application of the amendments made 
     by section 1.
       (b) Compliance.--An operator shall not be treated as 
     failing to meet the requirements of subsection (a) with 
     respect to any installment if--
       (1) the failure to pay the installment before January 1, 
     1996, was due to reasonable cause and not to willful neglect, 
     and
       (2) the failure is corrected within 90 days of the later 
     of--
       (A) notice of the failure, or
       (B) a final administrative or judicial determination of the 
     amount of the installment which is not reviewable or 
     appealable.
                                 ______

      By Mrs. KASSEBAUM:
  S. 1180. A bill to amend title XIX of the Public Health Service Act 
to provide for health performance partnerships, and for other purposes; 
to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.


 THE SAMHSA REAUTHORIZATION FLEXIBILITY ENHANCEMENT AND CONSOLIDATION 
                              ACT OF 1995

  Mrs. KASSEBAUM. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the SAMHSA 
Reauthorization, Flexibility Enhancement, and Consolidation Act of 
1995. An important aim of this legislation is to increase state 
flexibility in the use of mental health and substance abuse block grant 
funds while improving program accountability.
  The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration 
[SAMHSA] programs address the nation's major substance abuse and mental 
illness health problems. The SAMHSA programs have greatly improved the 
quality and availability of substance abuse prevention and treatment 
and mental health services for our citizens.
  The fields of substance abuse treatment and prevention and mental 
health have changed considerably since the last reauthorization in 
1992--so must our approach in addressing these major public health 
issues.
  One important feature of the reauthorization legislation I am 
proposing is its focus on establishing new partnership block grant 
arrangements with the states. The performance partnerships will utilize 
state selected ``benchmarks'' to help us learn what works. They will 
also facilitate the ability of state and local communities to improve 
the health of their people. These partnership block grants are a unique 
blend of categorical and block grants.
  I believe performance partnerships will increase state flexibility 
and streamline Federal management while they also will retain 
accountability. The performance partnerships would also lead to the 
development and enhancement of national and state data collection 
systems and provide for justification of future funding.
  Another major issue addressed in my proposal is that of the mentally 
ill homeless. My proposal to enhance outpatient treatment for the 
gravely disabled mentally ill who are committed would ensure that these 
individuals receive needed treatment in the least restrictive setting.
  Concerns have been raised about my approach which I would like to 
address. First, some believe my proposal would not allow a sufficient 
transition time to develop meaningful partnerships between the Federal 
Government and the state around the implementation of performance 
partnerships.
  Second, some believe my proposal should not retain any of the set-
asides because this does not allow for flexibility for the states.
  Third, others perceive the current data systems to be inadequate and 
irrelevant to measure performance on national and state-local levels.
  To address these concerns, the legislation would:
  First, establish a minimum 2-year transition period before 
performance partnerships are implemented;
  Second, provide states the option to opt-out of the current set-aside 
requirements; and
  Third, require states to report only on performance for which they 
have current and relevant data systems.
  Mr. President, I realize there are issues which others may continue 
to raise regarding the performance partnership block grants and the 
commitment of the mentally ill homeless. The introduction of this 
proposal today should serve as the starting point for further 
discussions of these issues.
  As discussion of these issues develops, I would welcome any 
suggestions my colleagues or others may have for improving this 
legislation. I ask unanimous consent that a summary of this bill and 
the text of the legislation be made a part of the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:
                                S. 1180

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE, REFERENCES, AND TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``SAMHSA 
     Reauthorization, Flexibility Enhancement, and Consolidation 
     Act of 1995''.
       (b) References in Act.--Except as otherwise expressly 
     provided, whenever in this Act an amendment or repeal is 
     expressed in terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a 
     section or other provision, the reference shall be considered 
     to be made to a section or other provision of the Public 
     Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 201 et seq.).
       (c) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title, references, and table of contents.

                         TITLE I--MENTAL HEALTH

Sec. 101. Replacement of State plan program with performance 
              partnerships.
Sec. 102. Review by planning council of State's report.
Sec. 103. State opportunity to correct or mitigate failure to maintain 
              effort.
Sec. 104. Funding for organizations that are for-profit.
Sec. 105. Authorization of appropriation.
Sec. 106. Data collection, technical assistance, and evaluations.
Sec. 107. Projects for assistance in transition from homelessness.
Sec. 108. Priority mental health needs of regional and national 
              significance.
Sec. 109. Repeals.
Sec. 110. Comprehensive community services for children with a serious 
              emotional disturbance.
Sec. 111. Reauthorization of the Access Program.

                       TITLE II--SUBSTANCE ABUSE

Sec. 201. Replacement of State plan program with performance 
              partnerships.
Sec. 202. Allocations regarding primary prevention and womens programs.
Sec. 203. Tuberculosis and HIV.
Sec. 204. Group homes for recovering substance abusers.
Sec. 205. State substance abuse prevention and treatment planning 
              council.
Sec. 206. Additional agreements.
Sec. 207. State opportunity to correct or mitigate failure to maintain 
              effort.
Sec. 208. Funding for organizations that are for-profit.
Sec. 209. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 210. Data collection, technical assistance, and evaluations.
Sec. 211. Priority substance abuse prevention and treatment needs of 
              regional and national significance.
Sec. 212. Repeals.

                     TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 301. Reporting by States on performance.
Sec. 302. On site performance reviews.
Sec. 303. Additional year for obligation by State.
Sec. 304. Definitions.
Sec. 305. Repeal of obsolete provisions concerning allocations.
Sec. 306. Repeal of obsolete addict referral provisions.
Sec. 307. Regulations.
Sec. 308. Advisory councils.
Sec. 309. Report on development of partnerships and use of grants.

[[Page S 12281]]


 TITLE IV--REAUTHORIZATION OF PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY FOR MENTALLY ILL 
                        INDIVIDUALS ACT OF 1986

Sec. 401. Short title.
Sec. 402. Reauthorization.
Sec. 403. Allotment formula.

             TITLE V--REAUTHORIZATION OF CERTAIN INSTITUTES

Sec. 501. Reauthorization of certain Institutes.

          TITLE VI--TRANSITION PROVISIONS AND EFFECTIVE DATES

Sec. 601. Transition provisions and effective dates.
                         TITLE I--MENTAL HEALTH

     SEC. 101. REPLACEMENT OF STATE PLAN PROGRAM WITH PERFORMANCE 
                   PARTNERSHIPS.

       (a) Elimination of State Plan Program Requirements.--
     Subpart I of Part B of title XIX (42 U.S.C. 300x-1 et seq.) 
     is amended by repealing sections 1911, 1912, and 1913.
       (b) Performance Partnership Framework.--Subpart I of Part B 
     of title XIX (as amended by subsection (a) is further amended 
     by inserting after the subpart heading the following new 
     sections:

     ``SEC. 1911. PERFORMANCE PARTNERSHIP GOALS AND OBJECTIVES.

       ``(a) Goals.--
       ``(1) In general.--It is the goal of this subpart for the 
     States and the Federal Government, working together in a 
     partnership, to improve the quality of life of adults with a 
     serious mental illness and children with a serious emotional 
     disturbance, and to improve the overall mental health of 
     United States citizens, by--
       ``(A) promoting access to comprehensive community mental 
     health services for adults with a serious mental illness and 
     children with a serious emotional disturbance; and
       ``(B) increasing the development of systems of integrated 
     comprehensive community based services for adults with a 
     serious mental illness and children with a serious emotional 
     disturbance.
       ``(2) Systems of integrated comprehensive community based 
     services.--As used in paragraph (1)(B), the term `systems of 
     integrated comprehensive community based services' means 
     integrated systems of care that would enable children and 
     adults to receive care appropriate for their multiple needs. 
     With respect to children, such integrated systems of care 
     shall ensure the provision, in a collaborative manner, of 
     mental health, substance abuse, education and special 
     education, juvenile justice, health, and child welfare 
     services. With respect to adults, such integrated systems of 
     care shall ensure the provision, in a collaborative manner, 
     of mental health, vocational rehabilitation, housing, 
     criminal justice, health, and substance abuse services.
       ``(b) Performance Partnership Objectives.--
       ``(1) Establishment.--Not later than October 1 of the 
     fiscal year prior to the fiscal year in which this section 
     becomes effective as provided for in section 601(c) of the 
     SAMHSA Reauthorization, Flexibility Enhancement, and 
     Consolidation Act of 1995, the Secretary, in consultation 
     with the States, local governments, Indian tribes, health 
     care providers, consumers, and families, shall establish, and 
     as necessary, periodically revise--
       ``(A) a list of performance partnership objectives to carry 
     out the goals of this subpart, and
       ``(B) a core set of not more than five of such objectives 
     that address mental health problems of national significance.
       ``(2) Requirements.--Each performance partnership objective 
     established under paragraph (1) shall include--
       ``(A) a performance indicator;
       ``(B) the specific population being addressed;
       ``(C) a performance target; and
       ``(D) a date by which the target level is to be achieved.
       ``(3) Principles.--In establishing the performance 
     partnership objectives under paragraph (1), the Secretary 
     shall be guided by the following principles:
       ``(A) The objectives should be closely related to the goals 
     of this subpart, and be viewed as important by and 
     understandable to State policymakers and the general public.
       ``(B) Objectives should be results-oriented, including a 
     suitable mix of outcome, process and capacity measures.
       ``(C) In the case of an objective that has suitable outcome 
     measures, measurable progress in achieving the objective 
     should be expected over the period of the grant.
       ``(D) In the case of an objective that has suitable process 
     or capacity measures, such objective should be demonstrably 
     linked to the achievement of, or demonstrate the potential to 
     achieve, a mental health outcome.
       ``(E) Data to track the objective should, to the extent 
     practicable, be comparable for all grant recipients, meet 
     reasonable statistical standards for quality, and be 
     available in a timely fashion, at appropriate periodicity, 
     and at reasonable cost.
       ``(c) Definitions.--
       ``(1) Establishment by secretary of definitions; 
     dissemination.--For purposes of this subpart, the definitions 
     established on May 20, 1993, for the terms `adults with a 
     serious mental illness' and `children with a serious 
     emotional disturbance' shall apply unless such definitions 
     are revised by the Secretary. The Secretary shall disseminate 
     the definitions to the States.
       ``(2) Standardized methods.--The Secretary shall establish 
     standardized methods for applying the definitions in 
     paragraph (1). A funding agreement for a grant under this 
     subpart for the State is that the State will utilize such 
     methods in making such estimates.
       ``(3) Date certain for compliance by secretary.--Not later 
     than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this section, 
     the Secretary shall establish the standardized methods 
     described in paragraph (2).

     ``SEC. 1912. STATE PERFORMANCE PARTNERSHIP PROPOSAL.

       ``(a) In General.--To be eligible to receive a grant under 
     this subpart, a State shall, in accordance with this section, 
     prepare and submit to the Secretary a performance partnership 
     proposal.
       ``(b) Elements Related to Performance Objectives.--A State 
     proposal submitted under subsection (a) shall contain--
       ``(1) a list of one or more objectives (derived from the 
     performance partnership objectives established under section 
     1911(b)), including at least one objective in the children's 
     area, toward which the State will work and a performance 
     target for each objective which the State will seek to 
     achieve by the end of the partnership period;
       ``(2) a rationale for the State's selection of objectives, 
     including any performance targets, and timeframes;
       ``(3) a statement of the State's strategies for achieving 
     the objectives over the course of the grant period and 
     evidence that the actions taken under a partnership agreement 
     will have an impact on the objective;
       ``(4) a statement of the amount to be expended to carry out 
     each strategy; and
       ``(5) an assurance that the State will report annually on 
     all core performance objectives established under section 
     1911(b)(1)(B) (regardless of whether it is working toward 
     those objectives) and the specific objectives toward which 
     the State will work under the performance partnership.

     A State may select an objective that is not an established 
     performance partnership objective under section 1911 if the 
     State demonstrates to the Secretary that the objective 
     relates to a significant mental health problem in the State 
     that would not otherwise be appropriately addressed. The 
     Secretary may require that objectives and requirements be 
     developed by the State in a manner consistent with the 
     requirements of paragraphs (2) and (3) of section 1911(b).
       ``(c) Transition Provision.--A State may select objectives 
     under this section which have solely process or capacity 
     measures until such time as data sets are determined by the 
     Secretary to be readily available, sufficient, and relevant 
     under section 601(a) of the SAMHSA Reauthorization, 
     Flexibility Enhancement, and Consolidation Act of 1995, to 
     make outcome measurements for objectives developed by the 
     Secretary.

     ``SEC. 1913. FEDERAL-STATE PERFORMANCE PARTNERSHIP.

       ``(a) Negotiations Concerning State Proposal.--
       ``(1) Reasonable efforts to agree.--A State submitting a 
     proposal under section 1912 and the Secretary shall make all 
     reasonable efforts to agree on a performance partnership 
     pursuant to which the State shall expend amounts received 
     under a grant provided under this subpart.
       ``(2) Duties of secretary.--In negotiations conducted under 
     paragraph (1) concerning the proposal of a State, the 
     Secretary shall consider the extent to which the proposed 
     objectives, performance targets, timeframes, and strategies 
     of the State are likely to address appropriately the most 
     significant mental health problems (as measured by applicable 
     indicators) within the State.
       ``(b) Partnership Period.--The Secretary, in consultation 
     with a State receiving a grant under this subpart, shall set 
     the duration of the partnership with the State. Initial and 
     subsequent partnership periods shall not be less than 3 nor 
     more than 5 years, except that the Secretary may agree to a 
     partnership period of less than 3 years where a State 
     demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary that such 
     shorter period is appropriate in light of the particular 
     circumstances of that State.
       ``(c) Assessment and Adjustment.--
       ``(1) Assessments.--The Secretary shall annually assess--
       ``(A) the progress achieved nationally toward each of the 
     core objectives established under section 1911(b)(1)(B); and
       ``(B) in consultation with each State, the progress of the 
     State toward each objective agreed upon in the performance 
     partnership under subsection (a);
     and make such assessment publicly available.
       ``(2) State assessments.--In carrying out paragraph (1)(B), 
     the Secretary shall take into consideration such qualitative 
     assessments of performance as may be provided by each State 
     pursuant to section 1942(a)(3).
       ``(3) Adjustments.--With respect to a performance 
     partnership under subsection (a), the Secretary and the State 
     may at any time in the course of the partnership period 
     renegotiate, and revise by mutual agreement, the elements of 
     the partnership to account for new information or changed 
     circumstances (including information or changes identified 
     during assessments under paragraph (1)).
       ``(d) Grants to States; Use of Funds.--
       ``(1) Grants.--The Secretary shall award a grant to each 
     State that--
       ``(A) has reached a performance partnership agreement with 
     the Secretary under subsection (a); and

[[Page S 12282]]

       ``(B) is carrying out activities in accordance with the 
     terms of such partnership;
     in an amount that is equal to the allotment of the State 
     under section 1918. Grants shall be awarded for each fiscal 
     year for which the partnership is in effect.
       ``(2) Use of funds.--Funds paid to a State under a grant 
     described in paragraph (1) may be used by the State only for 
     the purpose of carrying out this subpart (including related 
     data collection, evaluation, planning, administration, and 
     educational activities).''.
       (c) Additional General Provisions Concerning 
     Partnerships.--Section 1917 (42 U.S.C. 300x-6) is amended--
       (1) by striking the section heading;
       (2) by striking ``application'' each place that such term 
     appears and inserting ``proposal'';
       (3) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in the subsection heading, by striking ``(a) In 
     General.--'' and all that follows through paragraph (1) and 
     inserting ``(d) Additional Elements.--A State proposal is in 
     accordance with this subsection if--'';
       (B) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``proposed performance 
     partnership and'' before ``agreements'';
       (C) in paragraph (5), by striking ``the application 
     contains the plan required in section 1912(a),'';
       (D) in paragraph (7), by striking ``including the plan 
     under section 1912(a))'';
       (E) by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (4), and 
     paragraphs (6) and (7) as paragraphs (1) through (5), 
     respectively; and
       (F) by transferring such subsection to section 1912 (as 
     added by subsection (b)) and inserting such subsection at the 
     end of such section; and
       (4) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by transferring such subsection to section 1913 (as 
     added by subsection (b));
       (B) by inserting such subsection at the end of such section 
     1913; and
       (C) by redesignating such subsection as subsection (e).
       (d) Definitions.--Section 1919 (42 U.S.C. 300x-8) is 
     amended by adding at the end thereof the following new 
     paragraphs:
       ``(3) The term `performance indicator' means a quantifiable 
     characteristic used as a measurement.
       ``(4) The term `performance target' means a numerical value 
     sought to be achieved within a specified period of time.''.
       (e) Conforming Amendments.--Title XIX is amended--
       (1) in the heading to subpart I of part B (42 U.S.C. 300x-
     1), by striking ``Block'' and inserting ``Performance 
     Partnership'';
       (2) in section 1914(b)(1) (42 U.S.C. 300x-3(b)(1)), by 
     striking ``plans'' each place that such appears and inserting 
     ``performance partnerships'';
       (3) in section 1915(a) (42 U.S.C. 300x-4(a))--
       (A) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Plan'' in the 
     subsection heading and inserting ``Performance Partnership''; 
     and
       (B) by striking ``plan'' each place that such appears and 
     inserting ``performance partnership'';
       (4) in subpart III of part B (300x-51 et seq.), by striking 
     ``section 1911'' each place that such appears, and inserting 
     ``subpart I''.
       (5) in section 1941 (42 U.S.C. 300x-51)--
       (A) in the section heading, by striking ``PLANS'' and 
     inserting ``PERFORMANCE PARTNERSHIPS''; and
       (B) by striking ``plan'' each place that such appears and 
     inserting ``performance partnership'';
       (6) in section 1944(b)(3) (42 U.S.C. 300x-54(b)(3)), by 
     striking ``1912(d) or''; and
       (7) in section 1945(d)(2)(A) (42 U.S.C. 300x-55(d)(2)(A)), 
     by striking ``the condition established in section 1912(d) 
     and''.
       (f) Conforming Amendment to Title V.--Section 520(b) (42 
     U.S.C. 2900bb-31(b)) is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraph (5); and
       (2) by redesignating paragraphs (6) through (14) as 
     paragraphs (5) through (13), respectively.

     SEC. 102. REVIEW BY PLANNING COUNCIL OF STATE'S REPORT.

       Section 1915(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 300x-4(a)(1)) is amended by 
     inserting ``(and the report of the State under section 
     1942(a) concerning the preceding fiscal year)'' after ``to 
     the grant''.

     SEC. 103. STATE OPPORTUNITY TO CORRECT OR MITIGATE FAILURE TO 
                   MAINTAIN EFFORT.

       Section 1915(b)(3)(A) (42 U.S.C. 300x-4(b)(3)(A)) is 
     amended by striking the second sentence and inserting the 
     following new sentences: ``If the Secretary determines that a 
     State has failed to maintain such compliance, the Secretary 
     may permit the State, not later than 1 year after 
     notification, to correct or mitigate the noncompliance. If 
     the State does not carry out a correction or mitigation as 
     specified by the Secretary (or if the Secretary decided it 
     was not appropriate to provide that opportunity), the 
     Secretary shall reduce the amount of the grant under this 
     subpart for the State for the current fiscal year by an 
     amount equal to the amount constituting such failure.''.

     SEC. 104. FUNDING FOR ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE FOR-PROFIT.

       Section 1916(a)(5) (42 U.S.C. 300x-5(a)(5)) is amended by 
     inserting before the period the following: ``, unless the 
     State determines that it is appropriate and beneficial for a 
     for-profit private entity to receive assistance to facilitate 
     the integration of the State Medicaid program or mental 
     health managed care programs under title XIX of the Social 
     Security Act)''.

     SEC. 105. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATION.

       Section 1920(a) (42 U.S.C. 300x-9(a)) is amended by 
     striking ``$450,000,000'' and all that follows through the 
     end thereof and inserting ``$280,000,000 for fiscal year 
     1996, and such sums as may be necessary for each of the 
     fiscal years 1997 through 1999.''.

     SEC. 106. DATA COLLECTION, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, AND 
                   EVALUATIONS.

       (a) Reserved Funds.--Section 1920(b) (42 U.S.C. 300x-9(b)) 
     is amended to read as follows:
       ``(b) Reserved Funds.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall reserve 5 percent of 
     the amounts appropriated for a fiscal year under subsection 
     (a)--
       ``(A) to carry out sections 505 (providing for data 
     collection) and 1948(a) (providing for technical assistance 
     to States) with respect to mental health; and
       ``(B) to conduct evaluations concerning programs supported 
     under this subpart.

     The Secretary may carry out activities funded pursuant to 
     this subsection directly, or through grants, contracts, or 
     cooperative agreements.
       ``(2) Data collection infrastructure.--In carrying out this 
     subsection, the Secretary shall make available grants and 
     contracts to States for the development and strengthening of 
     State core capacity (including infrastructure) for data 
     collection and evaluation.''.
       (b) Data Collection Authority.--Section 505(a) (42 U.S.C. 
     290aa-4(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and'' at the end 
     thereof;
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end 
     thereof and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) other factors as needed to carry out part B of title 
     XIX.

     The Secretary may conduct activities under this subsection 
     directly, or through grants, contracts, or cooperative 
     agreements.''.
       (c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1948(a) (42 U.S.C. 300x-
     58(a)) is amended by striking ``through contract, or through 
     grants'' and inserting ``or through grants, contracts, or 
     cooperative agreements''.

     SEC. 107. PROJECTS FOR ASSISTANCE IN TRANSITION FROM 
                   HOMELESSNESS.

       (a) Purpose of Grants.--Section 522(b) of the Public Health 
     Service Act (42 U.S.C. 290cc-22(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (10)--
       (A) in subparagraph (F), by striking ``and'' at the end 
     thereof; and
       (B) by adding at the end thereof the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(H) providing ongoing assistance for rental payments and 
     the costs of living in such settings when such housing is 
     considered to be integral for the treatment of mentally ill 
     homeless individuals committed to treatment in outpatient 
     settings; and'';
       (2) by redesignating paragraph (11) as paragraph (12); and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (10), the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(11) education of the judiciary regarding the 
     manifestations of mental illness which are indications for 
     committing the mentally ill homeless to inpatient or 
     outpatient treatment in accordance with existing State 
     commitment statutes for the mentally ill; and''.
       (b) Incentive Grants.--Part C of title V of the Public 
     Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 290cc-21 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) by inserting after the part heading the following:

``SUBPART I--FORMULA GRANTS FOR MEDICAL AND SUPPORTIVE SERVICES FOR THE 
                      MENTALLY ILL HOMELESS''; and

       (2) by inserting after section 529 (42 U.S.C. 290cc-29) the 
     following:

  SUBPART II--INCENTIVE GRANTS FOR STATE TO IMPROVE THEIR OUTPATIENT 
            COMMITMENT TREATMENT SYSTEMS AND COMMITMENT LAWS

     ``SEC. 529A. INCENTIVE GRANTS FOR STATE TO IMPROVE THEIR 
                   OUTPATIENT COMMITMENT TREATMENT SYSTEMS AND 
                   COMMITMENT LAWS.

       ``(a) In General.--Beginning in fiscal year 1998, the 
     Secretary may make a grant to or enter into a contract with a 
     State or territory under this section for the purpose of 
     providing the services described in subsection (b) to 
     individuals who--
       ``(1) are suffering from serious mental illness; and
       ``(2) have been committed to outpatient treatment in 
     accordance with State or territory commitment laws for the 
     mentally ill because such individuals have been found to be 
     gravely disabled as a result of their mental illness.
       ``(b) Specification of Services.--The services described in 
     this subsection are--
       ``(1) mental health services in outpatient settings;
       ``(2) outreach services; and
       ``(3) case management to assure that individuals remain in 
     treatment and to assist individuals with supportive and 
     supervisory residential settings.
       ``(c) Application.--To be eligible to receive a grant or 
     contract under this section, a State or territory shall 
     prepare and submit to the Secretary an application at such 
     time, in such manner, and containing such information as the 
     Secretary may require, including--
       ``(1) an agreement that the State or territory will ensure 
     that payments under the grant will be expended by the State 
     or territory or through grants made by the State or territory 
     to political subdivisions of the State or territory and to 
     nonprofit private entities; 

[[Page S 12283]]

       ``(2) a description of the performance objectives that the 
     project to be funded under the grant will be measured 
     against, and that a recipient of the grant under this section 
     shall meet; and
       ``(3) an assurance that the State or territory will meet 
     information requirements as specified by the Secretary.
       ``(d) Special Rule.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary may not award a grant or 
     contract to a State or territory under this subpart unless 
     the State or territory involved has in effect on the date of 
     the award a law--
       ``(A) which provides for the commitment of the gravely 
     disabled; and
       ``(B) that provides for intensive case management to 
     monitor compliance and reconnect the gravely disabled to 
     treatment services, a court hearing prior to a gravely 
     disabled individual being re-committed to an inpatient or 
     outpatient setting, or the involvement of outpatient mental 
     health care providers in the initial treatment planning as 
     well as the monitoring and case management aspects of follow-
     up care for the gravely disabled individual.
       ``(2) Definition.--For the purpose of this section, the 
     term `gravely disabled' means an individual who, as a result 
     of mental illness, fails to meet his or her essential needs 
     including the need for food, clothing, shelter or medical 
     care, to the degree that such individual poses a real, 
     present and substantial threat of serious physical harm to 
     self, except that the failure of an individual to meet 
     essential needs shall not, in and of itself, be sufficient 
     grounds to establish that such person is mentally ill.
       ``(e) Administrative Expenses.--The Secretary may not award 
     a grant or contract to a State or territory under this 
     section unless the State or territory involved agrees that 
     not more than 4 percent of the amounts received under the 
     award will be expended for administrative expenses regarding 
     the amounts.
       ``(f) Maintenance Requirements.--
       ``(1) Maintenance of effort.--The Secretary may not award a 
     grant or contract to a State or territory under this section 
     unless the State involved agrees that the State or territory 
     will maintain State or territory expenditures for services 
     described in subsection (b) at a level that is not less than 
     the average level of such expenditures maintained by the 
     State or territory for the 2-year period preceding the fiscal 
     year for which the State or territory is applying to receive 
     such an award.
       ``(2) Matching funds.--The Secretary may require that a 
     State or territory that applies for a grant or contract under 
     this section provide non-Federal matching funds, as 
     appropriate, to ensure the State or territory commitment to 
     the programs funded under this section. Such non-Federal 
     matching funds may be provided directly or through donations 
     from public or private entities and may be in cash or in-
     kind, fairly evaluated, including plant, equipment, or 
     services.
       ``(g) Generally Applicable Provisions.--
       ``(1) Competitive basis.--The Secretary shall ensure that 
     grants and contract are awarded under this section on a 
     competitive basis, as appropriate, to States or territories 
     that demonstrate a potential to retain, or a history of 
     retaining, the gravely disabled mentally ill who have been 
     committed to outpatient treatment in outpatient treatment in 
     accordance with court ordered treatment plans.
       ``(2) Terms.--The period under which payments are made 
     under a grant or contract under this section may not exceed 5 
     years. Such payments shall be subject to annual approval by 
     the Secretary and subject to the availability of 
     appropriations for the fiscal year involved. Nothing in this 
     paragraph shall be construed as limiting the number of awards 
     that may be made to a State or territory under this section.
       ``(3) Peer review.--An application received by the 
     Secretary under this section shall be submitted to a peer 
     review group for an evaluation of the merits of the proposals 
     made in the application. The Secretary may not approve such 
     an application unless a peer review group has recommended the 
     application for approval.

           ``SUBPART III--GENERALLY APPLICABLE PROVISIONS''.

       (c) Funding.--Section 535(a) of the Public Health Service 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 290cc-35(a)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``this part'' and inserting ``section 
     521''; and
       (2) by striking ``$75,000,000'' and all that follows 
     through the period and inserting ``$29,000,000 for each of 
     the fiscal years 1996 and 1997, and $50,000,000 for each of 
     the fiscal years 1998 and 1999. With respect to amounts 
     appropriated under this subsection for fiscal year 1998, the 
     Secretary shall allocate such amounts between subparts I and 
     II based on the ratio of the amounts allocated under section 
     521 and under sections 520A(e) and 506(e) for the program 
     known as the `Access to Community Care and Effective Services 
     and Supports' (ACCESS) program for fiscal year 1997.''.
       (d) Repeal.--Effective on October 1, 1997--
       (1) section 506 (42 U.S.C. 290aa-5) is repealed; and
       (2) the Secretary shall not allocate funds under section 
     520A (as amended by section 108) (42 U.S.C. 290bb-32) or 
     under any other authority for the program known as the 
     ``Access to Community Care and Effective Services and 
     Supports'' (ACCESS) program.

     SEC. 108. PRIORITY MENTAL HEALTH NEEDS OF REGIONAL AND 
                   NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE.

       Section 520A (42 U.S.C. 290bb-32) is amended to read as 
     follows:

     ``SEC. 520A. PRIORITY MENTAL HEALTH NEEDS OF REGIONAL AND 
                   NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE.

       ``(a) Grants.--The Secretary shall address priority mental 
     health needs of regional and national significance through--
       ``(1) the provision of--
       ``(A) training; or
       ``(B) demonstration projects for prevention, treatment, and 
     rehabilitation; and
       ``(2) the conduct or support of evaluations of such 
     demonstration projects.

     In carrying out this section, the Secretary may make grants 
     to, or enter into cooperative agreements with, States, 
     political subdivisions of States, Indian Tribes and tribal 
     organizations, and public or private nonprofit entities.
       ``(b) Priority Mental Health Needs.--Priority mental health 
     needs of regional and national significance shall include 
     child mental health services, and may include managed care, 
     systems and partnerships, client-oriented and consumer-run 
     self-help services, training, and other priority populations 
     and conditions as determined appropriate by the Secretary.
       ``(c) Requirements.--
       ``(1) In general.--Recipients of grants, cooperative 
     agreements, and contracts under this section shall comply 
     with information and application requirements determined 
     appropriate by the Secretary.
       ``(2) Payments.--With respect to a grant, cooperative 
     agreement, or contract awarded under this section, the period 
     during which payments under such award are made to the 
     recipient may not exceed 5 years. The provision of such 
     payments shall be subject to annual approval by the Secretary 
     and the availability of appropriations for the fiscal year 
     involved. This paragraph may not be construed as limiting the 
     number of awards under the program involved that may be made 
     to an entity.
       ``(3) Matching funds.--The Secretary may require that an 
     entity that applies for a grant, contract, or cooperative 
     agreement under this section provide non-Federal matching 
     funds, as determined appropriate by the Secretary, to ensure 
     the institutional commitment of the entity to the projects 
     funded under the grant, contract, or cooperative agreement. 
     Such non-Federal matching funds may be provided directly or 
     through donations from public or private entities and may be 
     in cash or in kind, fairly evaluated, including plant, 
     equipment, or services.
       ``(4) Maintenance of effort.--With respect to activities 
     for which a grant, cooperative agreement, or contract is 
     awarded under this section, the Secretary may require that 
     the recipient agree to maintain expenditures of non-Federal 
     amounts for such activities at a level that is not less than 
     the level of such expenditures maintained by the entity for 
     such fiscal year preceding the fiscal year for which the 
     entity receives such a grant, contract, or cooperative 
     agreement.
       ``(5) Application and funding agreements.--
       ``(A) Application.--An application for a grant, contract, 
     or cooperative agreement under this section shall ensure that 
     amounts received under such grant, contract, or agreement 
     will not be expended--
       ``(i) to provide inpatient services;
       ``(ii) to make cash payments to intended recipients of 
     services;
       ``(iii) to purchase or improve land, purchase, construct, 
     or permanently improve (other than minor remodeling) any 
     building or other facility, or purchase major medical 
     equipment; or
       ``(iv) to satisfy any requirement for the expenditure of 
     non-Federal funds as a condition for the receipt of Federal 
     funds.
       ``(B) Funding agreement.--A funding agreement for a grant, 
     contract, or cooperative agreement under this section is that 
     the entity involved will not expend more than 10 percent of 
     the grant, contract, or agreement for administrative expenses 
     with respect to the grant, contract, or agreement.
       ``(d) Reduction in Payments.--The Secretary, at the request 
     of a State or a political subdivision of a State, or a public 
     or private nonprofit entity, may reduce the amount of 
     payments under this section by--
       ``(1) the fair market value of any supplies or equipment 
     furnished the State, political subdivision of the State, or a 
     public of private nonprofit entity; and
       ``(2) the amount of the pay, allowances, and travel 
     expenses of any officer, fellow, or employee of the 
     Government when detailed to the State, a political 
     subdivision of the State, or a public or private non-profit 
     entity, and the amount of any other costs incurred in 
     connection with the detail of such officer, fellow, or 
     employee;

     when the furnishing of such officer, fellow, or employee is 
     for the convenience of and at the request of the State, 
     political subdivision of the State, or public or private non-
     profit entity and for the purpose of conducting activities 
     described in this section. The amount by which any payment is 
     so reduced shall be available for payment by the Secretary of 
     the costs incurred in furnishing the supplies or equipment or 
     in detailing the personnel, on which the reduction of the 
     payment is based, and the amount shall be deemed to have been 
     paid to the State, political subdivision of the State, or 
     public or private non-profit entity.

[[Page S 12284]]

       ``(e) Evaluation.--The Secretary shall evaluate each 
     project carried out under section (a)(1)(B) and shall 
     disseminate the findings with respect to each such evaluation 
     to appropriate public and private entities.
       ``(f) Information and Education.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish 
     information and education programs to disseminate the 
     findings of the demonstration and training programs under 
     this section to the general public and to health 
     professionals.
       ``(2) Dissemination.--The Secretary shall take such action 
     as may be necessary to insure that all methods of 
     dissemination and exchange of information are maintained 
     between the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 
     Administration and the public, and such Administration and 
     other scientific organizations, both nationally and 
     internationally.
       ``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section, 
     $50,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 1996 and 1997, 
     $30,000,000 for fiscal year 1998, and such sums as may be 
     necessary for fiscal year 1999.''.

     SEC. 109. REPEALS.

       (a) In General.--The following provisions of the Public 
     Health Service Act are repealed:
       (1) Subsections (a), (c), and (d) of section 303 (42 U.S.C. 
     242a(a), (c), and (d)) relating to clinical training and AIDS 
     training.
       (2) Section 520B (42 U.S.C. 290bb-33) relating to AIDS 
     demonstrations.
       (3) Section 612 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless 
     Assistance Act.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 303 (42 U.S.C. 242a) as 
     amended by subsection (a)(1), is further amended by striking 
     the remaining subsection designation.

     SEC. 110. COMPREHENSIVE COMMUNITY SERVICES FOR CHILDREN WITH 
                   A SERIOUS EMOTIONAL DISTURBANCE.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 565(f)(1) (42 
     U.S.C. 290ff-4(f)(1)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' after ``1993''; and
       (2) by inserting before the period the following: ``, 
     $60,000,000 for fiscal year 1996, and such sums as may be 
     necessary for each of the 3 succeeding fiscal years''.
       (b) Flexibility for Indian Tribes and Territories.--Section 
     562(c) (42 U.S.C. 290ff-1(c)) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new flush sentence:

     ``The Secretary may waive one or more of the requirements of 
     the preceding sentence (for a public entity that is an Indian 
     Tribe or tribal organization, or American Samoa, Guam, the 
     Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, the 
     Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Republic of 
     Palau, or the United States Virgin Islands) if the Secretary 
     determines, after peer review, that the system of care is 
     family-centered and uses the least restrictive environment 
     that is clinically appropriate.''.
                       TITLE II--SUBSTANCE ABUSE

     SEC. 201. REPLACEMENT OF STATE PLAN PROGRAM WITH PERFORMANCE 
                   PARTNERSHIPS.

       (a) Repeals.--Section 1921 (42 U.S.C. 300x-21) is repealed.
       (b) Performance Partnership Framework.--Subpart II of part 
     B of title XIX (42 U.S.C. 300x-21 et seq.) (as amended by 
     subsection (a)) is further amended by inserting after the 
     subpart heading the following new sections:

     ``SEC. 1921. PERFORMANCE PARTNERSHIP GOALS AND OBJECTIVES.

       ``(a) Goals.--It is the goal of this subpart for the States 
     and the Federal Government, working together in a 
     partnership--
       ``(1) to reduce the incidence and prevalence of substance 
     abuse and dependence;
       ``(2) to improve access to appropriate prevention and 
     treatment programs for targeted populations;
       ``(3) to enhance the effectiveness of substance abuse 
     prevention and treatment programs; and
       ``(4) to reduce the personal and community risks for 
     substance abuse.
       ``(b) Performance Partnership Objectives.--
       ``(1) Establishment.--Not later than October 1 of the 
     fiscal year prior to the fiscal year in which this section 
     becomes effective as provided for in section 601(c) of the 
     SAMHSA Reauthorization, Flexibility Enhancement, and 
     Consolidation Act of 1995, the Secretary, in consultation 
     with the States, local governments, Indian tribes, providers, 
     and consumers, and in accordance with paragraph (4), shall 
     establish, and as necessary, periodically revise--
       ``(A) a list of performance partnership objectives to carry 
     out the goals of this subpart; and
       ``(B) a core set of not more than five of such objectives 
     that address substance abuse problems of national 
     significance.
       ``(2) Requirements.--Each performance partnership objective 
     established under paragraph (1) shall include--
       ``(A) a performance indicator;
       ``(B) the specific population being addressed;
       ``(C) a performance target; and
       ``(D) a date by which the target level is to be achieved.
       ``(3) Principles.--In establishing the performance 
     partnership objectives under paragraph (1), the Secretary 
     shall be guided by the following principles:
       ``(A) The objectives should be closely related to the goals 
     of this subpart, and be viewed as important by and 
     understandable to State policymakers and the general public.
       ``(B) Objectives should be results-oriented, including a 
     suitable mix of outcome, process and capacity measures.
       ``(C) In the case of an objective that has suitable outcome 
     measures, measurable progress in achieving the objective 
     should be expected over the period of the grant.
       ``(D) In the case of an objective that has suitable process 
     or capacity measures, such objective should be demonstrably 
     linked to the achievement of, or demonstrate a potential to 
     achieve, a substance abuse treatment outcome.
       ``(E) Data to track the objective should, to the extent 
     practicable, be comparable for all grant recipients, meet 
     reasonable statistical standards for quality, and be 
     available in a timely fashion, at appropriate periodicity, 
     and at reasonable cost.

     ``SEC. 1921A. STATE PERFORMANCE PARTNERSHIP PROPOSAL.

       ``(a) In General.--To be eligible to receive a grant under 
     this subpart, a State shall, in accordance with this section, 
     prepare and submit to the Secretary a performance partnership 
     proposal in accordance with the provisions of this subpart .
       ``(b) Elements Related to Performance Objectives.--A State 
     proposal submitted under subsection (a) shall contain--
       ``(1) a list of one or more objectives (derived from the 
     performance partnership objectives specified under section 
     1921(b)) toward which the State will work and a performance 
     target for each objective which the State will seek to 
     achieve by the end of the partnership period;
       ``(2) a rationale for the State's selection of objectives, 
     including any performance targets, and timeframes;
       ``(3) a statement of the State's strategies for achieving 
     the objectives over the course of the grant period and 
     evidence that the actions taken under a partnership agreement 
     will have an impact on the objective;
       ``(4) a statement of the amount to be expended to carry out 
     each strategy; and
       ``(5) an assurance that the State will report annually on 
     all core performance objectives established under section 
     1921(b)(1)(B) (regardless of whether it is working toward 
     those objectives) and the specific objectives toward which 
     the State will work under the performance partnership.

     A State may select an objective that is not an established 
     performance partnership objective under section 1921 if the 
     State demonstrates to the Secretary that the objective 
     relates to a significant health problem related to substance 
     abuse in the State that would not otherwise be addressed 
     appropriately. The Secretary may require that objectives 
     developed by the State under this subsection be consistent 
     with the requirements of paragraphs (2) and (3) of section 
     1921(b).
       ``(c) Transition Provision.--A State may select objectives 
     under this section which solely have process or capacity 
     measures until such time as data sets are determined by the 
     Secretary to be readily available, sufficient, and relevant 
     under section 601(a) of the SAMHSA Reauthorization, 
     Flexibility Enhancement, and Consolidation Act of 1995, to 
     make outcome measurements for objectives developed by the 
     Secretary.

     ``SEC. 1921B. FEDERAL-STATE PERFORMANCE PARTNERSHIP.

       ``(a) Negotiations Concerning State Proposal.--
       ``(1) Reasonable efforts to agree.--A State submitting a 
     proposal under section 1921A and the Secretary shall make all 
     reasonable efforts to agree on a performance partnership 
     pursuant to which the State shall expend amounts received 
     under a grant provided under this subpart.
       ``(2) Duties of secretary.--In negotiations conducted under 
     paragraph (1) concerning the proposal of a State, the 
     Secretary shall consider the extent to which the proposed 
     objectives, performance targets, timeframes, and strategies 
     of the State are likely to address appropriately the most 
     significant health problems associated with substance abuse 
     (as measured by applicable indicators) within the State, 
     including the health problems associated with substance abuse 
     of vulnerable populations (such as pregnant women, women with 
     dependent children, and crack-cocaine and injecting drug 
     users).
       ``(b) Partnership Period.--The Secretary, in consultation 
     with a State receiving a grant under this subpart, shall set 
     the duration of the partnership with the State. Initial and 
     subsequent partnership periods shall not be less than 3 nor 
     more than 5 years, except that the Secretary may agree to a 
     partnership period of less than 3 years where a State 
     demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary that such 
     shorter period is appropriate in light of the particular 
     circumstances of that State.
       ``(c) Assessment and Adjustment.--
       ``(1) Assessments.--The Secretary shall annually assess--
       ``(A) the progress achieved nationally toward each of the 
     core objectives established under section 1921(b)(1)(B); and
       ``(B) in consultation with each State, the progress of the 
     State toward each objective agreed upon in the performance 
     partnership under subsection (a);
     and make such assessment publicly available
       ``(2) State assessments.--In carrying out paragraph (1)(B), 
     the Secretary shall take into consideration such qualitative 
     assessments of performance as may be provided by each State 
     pursuant to section 1942(a)(3).
       ``(3) Adjustments.--With respect to a performance 
     partnership under subsection (a), 

[[Page S 12285]]
     the Secretary and the State may at any time in the course of the 
     partnership period renegotiate, and revise by mutual 
     agreement, the elements of the partnership to account for new 
     information or changed circumstances (including information 
     or changes identified during assessments under paragraph 
     (1)).
       ``(d) Grants to States; Use of Funds.--
       ``(1) Grants.--The Secretary shall award a grant to each 
     State that--
       ``(A) has reached a performance partnership agreement with 
     the Secretary under subsection (a); and
       ``(B) is carrying out activities in accordance with the 
     terms of such partnership;

     in an amount that is equal to the allotment of the State 
     under section 1933. Grants shall be awarded for each fiscal 
     year for which the partnership is in effect.
       ``(2) Use of funds.--Funds paid to a State under a grant 
     described in paragraph (1) may be used by the State only for 
     the purpose of carrying out this subpart (including related 
     data collection, evaluation, planning, administration, and 
     educational activities).''.
       (c) Additional General Provisions Concerning 
     Partnerships.--Section 1932 (42 U.S.C. 300x-32) is amended--
       (1) by striking the section heading;
       (2) by striking ``application'' each place that such term 
     appears and inserting ``proposal'';
       (3) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in the subsection heading, by striking ``(a) In 
     General.--'' and all that follows through paragraph (1) and 
     inserting ``(c) Additional Elements.--A State proposal is in 
     accordance with this subsection if--'';
       (B) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``proposed performance 
     partnership and'' before ``agreements'';
       (C) by striking paragraphs (5) and (6)
       (D) in paragraph (7), by striking ``including the plan 
     under section paragraph (6)'';
       (E) by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (4), and 
     paragraph (7) as paragraphs (1) through (4), respectively; 
     and
       (F) by transferring such subsection to section 1921A (as 
     added by subsection (b)) and inserting such subsection at the 
     end of such section; and
       (4) in subsection (c)--
       (A) by transferring such subsection to section 1921B (as 
     added by subsection (b));
       (B) by inserting such subsection at the end of such section 
     1921B; and
       (C) by redesignating such subsection as subsection (h); and
       (5) by striking subsections (b) and (d).
       (d) Definitions.--Section 1934 (42 U.S.C. 300x-34) is 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (3) through (7) as 
     paragraphs (5) through (9), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (2), the following new 
     paragraphs:
       ``(3) The term `performance indicator' means a quantifiable 
     characteristic used as a measurement.
       ``(4) The term `performance target' means a numerical value 
     sought to be achieved within a specified period of time.''.
       (e) Conforming Amendments.--Title XIX is amended--
       (1) in the heading of subpart II of part B (42 U.S.C. 300x-
     21 et seq) by striking ``Block'' and inserting ``Performance 
     Partnership'';
       (2) in subpart II of part B (42 U.S.C. 300x-21 et seq.), by 
     striking``section 1921'' each place that such appears and 
     inserting ``this subpart'';
       (3) in section 1933(a)(1)(A)) 42 U.S.C. 300x-33(a)(1)(A)), 
     by inserting ``(as in effect on January l, 1995)'' after 
     ``section 1918(a)''; and
       (4) in subpart III of part B (42 U.S.C. 300x-51 et seq.), 
     by striking``section 1921'' each place that such appears and 
     inserting ``subpart II''.

     SEC. 202. ALLOCATIONS REGARDING PRIMARY PREVENTION AND WOMENS 
                   PROGRAMS.

       Section 1922 (42 U.S.C. 300x-22) is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (a);
       (2) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as subsections 
     (a) and (b), respectively; and
       (3) in subsection (b) (as so redesignated)--
       (A) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(1) In general.--A a funding agreement for a grant under 
     section 1921 for a fiscal year is that in the case of a grant 
     for fiscal year 1996, or a subsequent fiscal year, the State 
     will expend not less than an amount equal to the amount 
     expended by the State for fiscal year 1995 to increase the 
     availability of treatment services designed for pregnant 
     women and women with dependent children (either by 
     establishing new programs or expanding the capacity of 
     existing programs).''; and
       (B) by adding at the end thereof the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(4) Insufficient amounts.--If the Secretary determines 
     that, as a result of a reduction in the amount of Federal 
     funds provided to State under this subpart, a State will be 
     unable to meet the requirement of paragraph (1), the 
     Secretary shall permit the State to prorate amounts provided 
     under such paragraph based on the amount provided to the 
     State under this subpart in fiscal year 1995.''.

     SEC. 203. TUBERCULOSIS AND HIV.

       (a) Tuberculosis.--Section 1924(a) (42 U.S.C. 300x-24(a)) 
     is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), to read as follows:
       ``(1) In General.--A funding agreement for a grant under 
     section 1921 is that the State involved will--
       ``(A)(i) directly or through arrangements with other public 
     or nonprofit private entities, ensure that activities are 
     routinely carried out under subparagraphs (A) and (B) of 
     paragraph (2); and
       ``(ii) ensure that arrangements are made with other public 
     or nonprofit private entities to make available tuberculosis 
     services, including services under subparagraphs (C) and (D) 
     of paragraph (2), to each individual receiving treatment for 
     substance abuse under this subpart; and
       ``(B) require that any entity receiving amounts from the 
     grant for operating a program of treatment for substance 
     abuse, in the case of an individual in need of such treatment 
     who is denied admission to the program on the basis of the 
     lack of the capacity of the program to admit the individual, 
     will refer the individual to another provider of tuberculosis 
     services.

     Nothing in subparagraph (A)(ii) shall be construed to require 
     that the State expend funds under this Act to make available 
     such services.'';
       (2) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D); 
     and
       (B) in subparagraph (B), to read as follows:
       ``(B) tuberculosis testing, based on the risk assessment 
     conducted by the State, to determine whether the individual 
     has contracted such disease, such testing to be based on 
     usual standards as determined to be appropriate by the State 
     health director in cooperation with State and local health 
     agencies for tuberculosis and with other relevant private 
     nonprofit entities;
       ``(C) testing to determine the form of treatment for the 
     disease that is appropriate for the individual; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end thereof the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(3) Counseling.--For purposes of paragraph (2), the term 
     `counseling' with respect to an individual means--
       ``(A) the provision of information to individuals or 
     communities about risk factors for tuberculosis; and
       ``(B) conducting tuberculosis risk assessments to determine 
     if tuberculosis testing is required.''.
       (b) HIV.--Section 1924(b) (42 U.S.C. 300x-24(b)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(A), insert ``routinely'' after 
     ``projects to'';
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``10'' and inserting 
     ``15''; and
       (3) in paragraph (7)(B)(ii), by inserting before the 
     semicolon the following: ``, such testing to be based on 
     usual standards as determined to be appropriate by the State 
     health director in cooperation with State and local health 
     agencies for HIV and with other relevant private nonprofit 
     entities; and'';
       (c) Expenditure.--Section 1924(c) (42 U.S.C. 300x-24(c)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Agreements'' 
     and inserting ``Partnerships''; and
       (2) in paragraph (1), by striking ``agreements'' and 
     inserting ``partnerships''.
       (d) Payor of Last Resort.--Section 1924 (42 U.S.C. 300x-24) 
     is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(f) Payor of Last Resort.--Amounts made available under 
     this section may only be used as a payment of last resort for 
     tuberculosis and may not be used for the medical evaluation 
     and treatment of such disease.''.

     SEC. 204. GROUP HOMES FOR RECOVERING SUBSTANCE ABUSERS.

       (a) In general.--Section 1925 (42 U.S.C. 300x-25) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``For fiscal year 1993'' 
     and all that follows through the colon and inserting ``Except 
     as provided in subsection (d), for each of the fiscal years 
     1996 through 1999, the Secretary may make a grant under 
     section 1921 only if the State involved has established and 
     is providing for the ongoing operation of a revolving fund as 
     follows:''; and
       (2) by adding at the end thereof the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(d) Nonapplication of Section.--
       ``(1) In general.--The requirements of this section shall 
     not apply to a State that is not, as of the date of enactment 
     of this subsection, utilizing a revolving fund under this 
     section. Such a State shall not be required to maintain such 
     a fund after such date of enactment.
       ``(2) Use of funds.--A State described in paragraph (1), 
     may use amounts set aside under this section, or amounts 
     remaining in the revolving fund, to provide other services 
     under this part.''.
       (b) Repeal.--Section 1925 (42 U.S.C. 300x-25) shall be 
     repealed effective on September 30, 1998.

     SEC. 205. STATE SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT 
                   PLANNING COUNCIL.

       Subpart II of part B of title XIX is amended by inserting 
     after section 1927 (42 U.S.C. 300x-27) the following new 
     section:

     ``SEC. 1927A. STATE SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT 
                   PLANNING COUNCIL.

       ``(a) In General.--A funding agreement for a grant under 
     this subpart is that the State involved will establish and 
     maintain a State substance abuse prevention and treatment 
     planning council in accordance with the conditions described 
     in this section.
       ``(b) Duties.--A condition under subsection (a) for a 
     council is that the duties of the council are--
       ``(1) to review performance partnerships and related 
     reports provided to the council 

[[Page S 12286]]
     by the State involved and to submit to the State any recommendations of 
     the council for modifications;
       ``(2) to serve as an advocate for individuals suffering 
     from substance abuse; and
       ``(3) to monitor, review, and evaluate, not less than once 
     each year, the allocation and adequacy of substance abuse 
     prevention and treatment services within the State.
       ``(c) Membership.--
       ``(1) In general.--A condition under subsection (a) for a 
     council is that the council be composed of residents of the 
     State, including representatives of--
       ``(A) the principal State agencies with respect to--
       ``(i) substance abuse prevention and treatment, education, 
     vocational rehabilitation, criminal justice, housing, and 
     social services; and
       ``(ii) the development of the plan submitted pursuant to 
     title XIX of the Social Security Act;
       ``(B) public and private entities concerned with the need, 
     planning, operation, funding, and use of substance abuse 
     prevention and treatment services and related support 
     services;
       ``(C) individuals who are receiving (or have received) 
     substance abuse prevention or treatment services; and
       ``(D) the families of such individuals.
       ``(2) Limitation on state employees and providers.--A 
     condition under subsection (a) for a council is that not less 
     that 50 percent of the members of the council are individuals 
     who are not State employees or providers of substance abuse 
     prevention or treatment services.
       ``(d) Review of State Performance Partnership by Planning 
     Council.--The Secretary may make a grant under this subpart 
     only if--
       ``(1) the performance partnership submitted under this 
     subpart with respect to the grant (and the State's report 
     under section 1942(a) concerning the preceding fiscal year) 
     has been reviewed by the council; and
       ``(2) the State submits to the Secretary any 
     recommendations received by the State from the council for 
     modifications to the performance partnership (without regard 
     to whether the State has made the recommended modifications).
       ``(e) Waivers.--In the case of a State that has other 
     existing processes for complying with the duties required 
     under subsection (b), the Secretary, upon the request of the 
     State, may waive the requirements of such subsection. Such 
     waiver shall be deemed to be granted if the Secretary fails 
     to act within 90 days of the date of the submission of such a 
     request.''.

     SEC. 206. ADDITIONAL AGREEMENTS.

       Section 1928 (42 U.S.C. 300x-28) is amended--
       (1) by striking subsections (a) and (d); and
       (2) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as subsections 
     (a) and (b), respectively.

     SEC. 207. STATE OPPORTUNITY TO CORRECT OR MITIGATE FAILURE TO 
                   MAINTAIN EFFORT.

       Section 1930(c)(1) (42 U.S.C. 300x-30(c)(1)) is amended by 
     striking the second sentence and inserting the following new 
     sentences: ``If the Secretary determines that a State has 
     failed to maintain such compliance, the Secretary may permit 
     the State, not later than 1 year after notification, to 
     correct or mitigate the noncompliance. If the State does not 
     carry out a correction or mitigation as specified by the 
     Secretary (or if the Secretary decided it was not appropriate 
     to provide that opportunity), the Secretary shall reduce the 
     amount of the grant under this subpart for the State for the 
     current fiscal year by an amount equal to the amount 
     constituting such failure.''.

     SEC. 208. FUNDING FOR ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE FOR-PROFIT.

       Section 1931(a) (42 U.S.C. 300x-31(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(E), by inserting before the semicolon 
     the following: ``, unless the State determines that it is 
     appropriate and beneficial for a for-profit private entity to 
     receive assistance to facilitate the integration of the State 
     Medicaid program or substance abuse managed care programs 
     under title XIX of the Social Security Act)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end thereof the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(4) For-profit restrictions.--For purposes of providing 
     assistance to a for-profit entity under paragraph (1)(E), the 
     State shall ensure that--
       ``(A) such an entity is certified or licensed by the State;
       ``(B) all profits earned by such entity as a result of 
     assistance provided under this subpart are redistributed by 
     the entity to the community served by the entity for the 
     provision of treatment or prevention services; and
       ``(C) in the case of an entity that is a private for-profit 
     entity, such entity is the only available provider of 
     substance abuse treatment in the area served.''.

     SEC. 209. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       Section 1935(a) (42 U.S.C. 300x-35(a)) is amended by 
     striking ``$1,500,000,000'' and all that follows through the 
     end thereof and inserting ``$1,300,000,000 for fiscal year 
     1996, and such sums as may be necessary for each of the 
     fiscal years 1997 through 1999.''.

     SEC. 210. DATA COLLECTION, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, AND 
                   EVALUATIONS.

       Section 1935(b) (42 U.S.C. 300x-35(b)) is amended to read 
     as follows:
       ``(b) Reserved Funds.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall reserve 5 percent of 
     the amounts appropriated for a fiscal year under subsection 
     (a)--
       ``(A) to carry out sections 505 (providing for data 
     collection) and 1948(a) (providing for technical assistance 
     to States) with respect to substance abuse;
       ``(B) to carry out section 515(d) (providing for a 
     performance substance abuse data base); and
       ``(C) to conduct evaluations concerning programs supported 
     under this subpart.

     The Secretary may carry out activities funded pursuant to 
     this paragraph directly, or through grants, contracts, or 
     cooperative agreements.
       ``(2) Data collection infrastructure.--In carrying out this 
     subsection, the Secretary shall make available grants and 
     contracts to States for the development and strengthening of 
     State core capacity (including infrastructure) for data 
     collection and evaluation.
       ``(3) Prevention.--Of the amounts reserved under paragraph 
     (1) for a fiscal year, the Secretary shall ensure that 20 
     percent of such amounts shall be used for activities related 
     to prevention.''.

     SEC. 211. PRIORITY SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT 
                   NEEDS OF REGIONAL AND NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE.

       Section 510 (42 U.S.C. 290bb-3) is amended to read as 
     follows:

     ``SEC. 510. PRIORITY SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT 
                   NEEDS OF REGIONAL AND NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE.

       ``(a) Grants.--The Secretary shall address the substance 
     abuse health needs of regional and national significance 
     through--
       ``(1) the provision of
       ``(A) training; or
       ``(B) demonstration projects for prevention and treatment; 
     and
       ``(2) the conduct or support of evaluations of such 
     demonstration projects.
     In carrying out this section, the Secretary may make grants 
     to, or enter into cooperative agreements with, States, 
     political subdivisions of States, Indian Tribes and tribal 
     organizations, and public or private nonprofit entities.
       ``(b) Substance Abuse Health Needs.--Substance abuse health 
     needs of regional and national significance shall include 
     prevention activities and may include managed care, systems 
     and partnerships, client-oriented services, and other 
     priority populations (including pregnant substance abusers, 
     women with dependent children, and crack cocaine and 
     injecting drug users) and conditions as determined 
     appropriate by the Secretary.
       ``(c) Requirements.--
       ``(1) In general.--Recipients of grants, cooperative 
     agreements, and contracts under this section shall comply 
     with information and application requirements determined 
     appropriate by the Secretary.
       ``(2) Payments.--With respect to a grant, cooperative 
     agreement, or contract awarded under this section, the period 
     during which payments under such award are made to the 
     recipient may not exceed 5 years. The provision of such 
     payments shall be subject to annual approval by the Secretary 
     and the availability of appropriations for the fiscal year 
     involved. This paragraph may not be construed as limiting the 
     number of awards under the program involved that may be made 
     to an entity.
       ``(3) Matching funds.--The Secretary may require that an 
     entity that applies for a grant, contract, or cooperative 
     agreement under this section provide non-Federal matching 
     funds, as determined appropriate by the Secretary, to ensure 
     the institutional commitment of the entity to the projects 
     funded under the grant, contract, or cooperative agreement. 
     Such non-Federal matching funds may be provided directly or 
     through donations from public or private entities and may be 
     in cash or in kind, fairly evaluated, including plant, 
     equipment, or services.
       ``(4) Maintenance of effort.--With respect to activities 
     for which a grant, cooperative agreement, or contract is 
     awarded under this section, the Secretary may require the 
     recipient to agree to maintain expenditures of non-Federal 
     amounts for such activities at a level that is not less than 
     the level of such expenditures maintained by the entity for 
     such fiscal year preceding the fiscal year for which the 
     entity receives such a grant, contract, or cooperative 
     agreement.
       ``(5) Application and funding agreements.--
       ``(A) Application.--An application for a grant, contract, 
     or cooperative agreement under this section shall ensure that 
     amounts received under such grant, contract, or agreement 
     will not be expended--
       ``(i) to provide inpatient services;
       ``(ii) to make cash payments to intended recipients of 
     services;
       ``(iii) to purchase or improve land, purchase, construct, 
     or permanently improve (other than minor remodeling) any 
     building or other facility, or purchase major medical 
     equipment; or
       ``(iv) to satisfy any requirement for the expenditure of 
     non-Federal funds as a condition for the receipt of Federal 
     funds.
       ``(B) Funding agreement.--A funding agreement for a grant, 
     contract, or cooperative agreement under this section is that 
     the entity involved will not expend more than 10 percent of 
     the grant, contract, or agreement for administrative expenses 
     with respect to the grant, contract, or agreement.

[[Page S 12287]]

       ``(d) Reduction in Payments.--The Secretary, at the request 
     of a State or a political subdivision of a State, or a public 
     or private nonprofit entity, may reduce the amount of 
     payments under this section by--
       ``(1) the fair market value of any supplies or equipment 
     furnished the State, political subdivision of the State, or a 
     public of private nonprofit entity; and
       ``(2) the amount of the pay, allowances, and travel 
     expenses of any officer, fellow, or employee of the 
     Government when detailed to the State, a political 
     subdivision of the State, or a public or private non-profit 
     entity, and the amount of any other costs incurred in 
     connection with the detail of such officer, fellow, or 
     employee;

     when the furnishing of such officer, fellow, or employee is 
     for the convenience of and at the request of the State, 
     political subdivision of the State, or public or private non-
     profit entity and for the purpose of conducting activities 
     described in this section. The amount by which any payment is 
     so reduced shall be available for payment by the Secretary of 
     the costs incurred in furnishing the supplies or equipment or 
     in detailing the personnel, on which the reduction of the 
     payment is based, and the amount shall be deemed to have been 
     paid to the State, political subdivision of the State, or 
     public or private non-profit entity.
       ``(e) Evaluation.--The Secretary shall evaluate each 
     project carried out under section (a)(1)(B) and shall 
     disseminate the findings with respect to each such evaluation 
     to appropriate public and private entities.
       ``(f) Information and Education.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish 
     information and education programs to disseminate the 
     findings of the research, demonstration, and training 
     programs under this section to the general public and to 
     health professionals.
       ``(2) Dissemination.--The Secretary shall take such action 
     as may be necessary to insure that all methods of 
     dissemination and exchange of information are maintained 
     between the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 
     Administration and the public, and the Administration and 
     other scientific organizations, both nationally and 
     internationally.
       ``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section, 
     $352,000,000 for fiscal year 1996, and such sums as may be 
     necessary for each of the fiscal years 1997 through 1999.''.

     SEC. 212. REPEALS.

       The following provisions of the Public Health Service Act 
     are repealed:
       (1) Section 508 (42 U.S.C. 290bb-1) relating to residential 
     treatment programs for pregnant women.
       (2) Section 509 (42 U.S.C. 290bb-2) relating to outpatient 
     treatment programs for pregnant and postpartum women.
       (3) Section 511 (42 U.S.C. 290bb-4) relating to substance 
     abuse treatment in State and local criminal justice systems.
       (4) Section 512 (42 U.S.C. 290bb-5) relating to training in 
     the provision of treatment services.
       (5) Paragraph (5) of section 515(b) (42 U.S.C. 290bb-
     21(b)(5)) relating to the activities of the Office of 
     Substance Abuse Prevention. Paragraphs (6) through (10) of 
     such section shall be redesignated as paragraphs (5) through 
     (9), respectively.
       (6) Section 516 (42 U.S.C. 290bb-22) relating to community 
     prevention programs.
       (7) Section 517 (42 U.S.C. 290bb-23) relating to high risk 
     youth demonstrations.
       (8) Section 518 (42 U.S.C. 290bb-24) relating to employee 
     assistance programs.
       (9) Section 571 (42 U.S.C. 290gg) relating to the National 
     Capital Area Demonstration Program.
       (10) Section 1943(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 300x-53(a)(1)) relating 
     to peer review.
       (11) Section 1971 (42 U.S.C. 300y) relating to categorical 
     grants to States.
                     TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

     SEC. 301. REPORTING BY STATES ON PERFORMANCE.

       Section 1942(a) (42 U.S.C. 300x-52(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and'' at the end 
     thereof;
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end thereof the following:
       ``(3) the performance of the State in relation to the 
     objectives specified or agreed upon under sections 1912(b)(5) 
     or section 1921A(b)(5), as applicable.''.

     SEC. 302. ON SITE PERFORMANCE REVIEWS.

       Section 1945(g)(1) (42 U.S.C. 300x-55(g)(1)) is amended by 
     striking ``in fiscal year 1994'' and all that follows through 
     the end thereof and inserting ``, not more frequently than 
     once every 3 nor less frequently than once every 5 years, 
     conduct an on-site performance review of a State's activities 
     supported under this part.''.

     SEC. 303. ADDITIONAL YEAR FOR OBLIGATION BY STATE.

       Section 1952(a) (42 U.S.C. 300x-62(a)) is amended by 
     striking ``until the end'' and all that follows through the 
     end thereof and inserting ``and expenditure until the end of 
     the fiscal year following the fiscal year for which the 
     amounts were paid.''.

     SEC. 304. DEFINITIONS.

       Section 1954(b) (42 U.S.C. 300x-64(B)) is amended by adding 
     the following new paragraphs at the end thereof:
       ``(5) The term `performance indicator' means a quantifiable 
     characteristic used as a measurement.
       ``(6) The term `performance target' means a numerical value 
     sought to be achieved within a specified period of time.''.

     SEC. 305. REPEAL OF OBSOLETE PROVISIONS CONCERNING 
                   ALLOCATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1933 (42 U.S.C. 300x-33) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (b);
       (2) in subsection (c)(2)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by adding ``and'' at the end 
     thereof;
       (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``; and'' at the end 
     of subparagraph (B) and inserting a period; and
       (C) by striking subparagraph (C); and
       (3) by redesignating subsections (c) and (d) as subsection 
     (b) and (c), respectively.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1923(h) (as so 
     redesignated by section 201(c)(4)(A)) is amended by striking 
     ``section 1933(c)(2)(B)'' and inserting ``section 
     1933(b)(2)(B)''.

     SEC. 306. REPEAL OF OBSOLETE ADDICT REFERRAL PROVISIONS.

       (a) Repeal of Obsolete Public Health Service Act 
     Authorities.-- Part E of title III (42 U.S.C. 257 et seq.) is 
     repealed.
       (b) Repeal of Obsolete NARA Authorities.--Titles III and IV 
     of the Narcotic Addict Rehabilitation Act of 1966 are 
     repealed.
       (c) Repeal of Obsolete Title 28 Authorities.--
       (1) In general.--Chapter 175 of title 28, United States 
     Code, is repealed.
       (2) Table of contents.--The table of contents to part VI of 
     title 28, United States Code, is amended by striking the 
     items relating to chapter 175.

     SEC. 307. REGULATIONS.

       Section 1949 (42 U.S.C. 300x-59) is amended to read as 
     follows:

     ``SEC. 1949. REGULATIONS.

       ``The Secretary shall promulgate regulations as the 
     Secretary determines are necessary to carry out this part.''.

     SEC. 308. ADVISORY COUNCILS.

       Section 502(b)(3)(A) (42 U.S.C. 290aa-1(b)(3)(A)) is 
     amended by inserting ``and leading representatives from State 
     and local governments'' after ``sciences)''.

     SEC. 309. REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT OF PARTNERSHIPS AND USE OF 
                   GRANTS.

       Not later than January 1, 1999, the Secretary of Health and 
     Human Services shall prepare and submit to the appropriate 
     committees of Congress a report that contains--
       (1) information concerning the adequacy of outcome data 
     sets to measure State performance with respect to amounts 
     received by the State under subparts I and II of part B of 
     title XIX of the Public Health Service Act (as amended by 
     this Act);
       (2) information concerning the range and types of 
     performance partnership objectives and measures utilized by 
     the State under such subparts; and
       (3) a plan, if determined by the Secretary to be feasible 
     after considering information received under such subparts, 
     for the implementation of incentive-based performance 
     partnership grants that shall include a disclosure of public 
     comments.
 TITLE IV--REAUTHORIZATION OF PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY FOR MENTALLY ILL 
                        INDIVIDUALS ACT OF 1986

     SEC. 401. SHORT TITLE.

       The first section of the Protection and Advocacy for 
     Mentally Ill Individuals Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-319) is 
     amended to read as follows:

     ``SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       ``This Act may be cited as the `Protection and Advocacy for 
     Individuals With Mental Illnesses Act'.''.

     SEC. 402. REAUTHORIZATION.

       Section 117 of the Protection and Advocacy for Individuals 
     With Mental Illnesses Act (as amended by section 401) (42 
     U.S.C. 10827) is amended by striking ``1995'' and inserting 
     ``1999''.

     SEC. 403. ALLOTMENT FORMULA.

       (a) Minimum Amount.--Section 112(a)(2) of the Protection 
     and Advocacy for Mentally Ill Individuals Act (as amended by 
     section 401) (42 U.S.C. 10822(a)(2)) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(2)(A) The minimum amount of the allotment of an eligible 
     system shall be the product (rounded to the nearest $100) of 
     the appropriate base amount specified in subparagraph (B) and 
     the factor specified in subparagraph (C).
       ``(B) For purposes of subparagraph (A), the appropriate 
     base amount--
       ``(i) for American Samoa, Guam, the Marshall Islands, the 
     Federated States of Micronesia, the Commonwealth of the 
     Northern Mariana Islands, the Republic of Palau, and the 
     Virgin Islands, is $139,300; and
       ``(ii) for any other State, is $260,000.
       ``(C) For purposes of subparagraph (A), the factor 
     specified in this subparagraph is the ratio of the amount 
     appropriated under section 117 for the fiscal year for which 
     the allotment is being made to the amount appropriation under 
     such section for fiscal year 1995.''.
       (b) Technical Amendments.--Section 112(a) of such Act (42 
     U.S.C. 10822(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking ``Trust Territory of 
     the Pacific Islands'' and inserting ``Marshall Islands, the 
     Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of Palau''; and
       (2) by striking paragraph (3).
     
[[Page S 12288]]

             TITLE V--REAUTHORIZATION OF CERTAIN INSTITUTES

     SEC. 501. REAUTHORIZATION OF CERTAIN INSTITUTES.

       (a) National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.--
     Section 464H(d)(1) (42 U.S.C. 285m(d)(1)) is amended by 
     striking ``for fiscal year 1994'' and inserting ``for each of 
     the fiscal years 1994 through 1996''.
       (b) National Institute on Drug Abuse.--
       (1) In general.--Section 464L(d)(1) (42 U.S.C. 285o(d)(1)) 
     is amended by striking ``for fiscal year 1994'' and inserting 
     ``for each of the fiscal years 1995 and 1996''.
       (2) Medication development program.--Section 464P(e) (42 
     U.S.C. 285o-4(e)) is amended by striking ``and $95,000,000 
     for fiscal year 1994'' and inserting ``$95,000,000 for fiscal 
     year 1994, and such as may be necessary for each of the 
     fiscal years 1995 and 1996''.
       (c) National Institute of Mental Health.--Section 
     464R(f)(1) (42 U.S.C. 285p(f)(1)) is amended by striking 
     ``for fiscal year 1994'' and inserting ``for each of the 
     fiscal years 1994 through 1996''.
          TITLE VI--TRANSITION PROVISIONS AND EFFECTIVE DATES

     SEC. 601. TRANSITION PROVISIONS AND EFFECTIVE DATES.

       (a) Objective and Data Development Process.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services 
     (hereafter referred to in this section as the ``Secretary'') 
     shall develop and implement a process to--
       (A) establish a model set of mental health and substance 
     abuse prevention and treatment objectives that, to the extent 
     practicable, meet the requirements of sections 1911 and 1921 
     of the Public Health Service Act (as amended by sections 
     101(b) and 201(b) of this Act);
       (B) determine the availability, relevancy, and sufficiency 
     of data necessary to measure capacity, process, or outcomes 
     with respect to such model set of objectives; and
       (C) establish a plan to improve the availability, 
     relevancy, and sufficiency of data if the data sets that are 
     available at the time such process is being developed are 
     determined to be inadequate.
       (2) Consultation.--In carrying out paragraph (1), the 
     Secretary shall consult with representatives from State and 
     local governments, Indian Tribes, mental health and substance 
     abuse service providers, consumers and families, researchers, 
     and other individuals who have technical relevancy with 
     respect to the development of the process under such 
     paragraph.
       (3) Implementation.--In implementing the process under 
     paragraph (1), the Secretary may award a contract to an 
     independent entity for--
       (A) the conduct of a technical analysis of the 
     availability, relevancy, and sufficiency of data sets 
     existing on the date on which such contract is awarded; and
       (B) the development of a data strategy if such existing 
     data sets are determined to be insufficient to measure the 
     model set of mental health and substance abuse prevention and 
     treatment objectives developed under paragraph (1)(A).
       (b) General Effective Date.--Except as provided in 
     subsection (c), this Act shall take effect on the date of 
     enactment of this Act or October 1, 1995, whichever occurs 
     later.
       (c) Exceptions.--
       (1) Performance partnerships.--The amendments made by 
     sections 101 and 201 shall take effect on the date on which 
     the Secretary of Health and Human Services determines that 
     the model set of objectives and the data sets described in 
     subsection (a) have been developed and are sufficient and 
     available to measure process/capacity or outcomes, but in no 
     event earlier than October 1, 1997.
       (2) Preparation and Negotiation.--The Secretary of Health 
     and Human Services may consult with the States, and others, 
     in preparing for the implementation of the performance 
     partnership grants under the amendments made by this Act. In 
     no event shall such Secretary require a State to begin the 
     negotiation process for the implementation of a performance 
     partnership grant for a fiscal year prior to fiscal year 
     1998.
       (3) Specific effective dates.--Sections 103 and 207 
     (relating to maintenance of effort), sections 104 and 208 
     (relating to for-profit eligibility), section 203 (relating 
     to tuberculosis and HIV), section 204 (relating to group home 
     revolving loan funds), and section 303 (relating to the 
     additional year for obligation), shall become effective as if 
     enacted on October 1, 1994.
       (4) Mandatory Exemptions.--
       (A) In general.--Effective on the date on which the 
     Secretary of Health and Human Services determines that the 
     objectives and data described in subsection (a) have been 
     developed and are relevant, sufficient, and available to 
     measure performance in each State, a State shall be exempt 
     from the requirements described in subparagraph (C). If the 
     Secretary determines, using data with respect to the intended 
     purpose of any such requirement, that the State has a 
     significant need to improve the outcomes related to the 
     intended purposes of any such requirements, the Secretary may 
     require the State to utilize an objective that addresses the 
     intended purpose of any such requirement.
       (B) Consultation process.--Until the Secretary makes the 
     determination described in subparagraph (A), a State shall--
       (i) comply with the requirements described in subparagraph 
     (C); or
       (ii) select objectives to be measured that would address 
     the intended purpose of each of such requirements.
       (C) Requirements.--The requirements described in this 
     subparagraph are the requirements contained in the following:
       (i) Section 1922(b) (42 U.S.C. 300x-21) (as amended by this 
     Act), relating to minimum allocation of funds for services to 
     pregnant women and women with dependent children.
       (ii) Section 1923 (42 U.S.C. 300x-23), relating to whether 
     injecting drug users have timely access to treatment upon 
     request.
       (iii) Section 1924 (42 U.S.C. 300x-24), relating to 
     requirements related to tuberculosis and HIV.
       (iv) Section 1926 (42 U.S.C. 300x-26), relating to 
     curtailing the sale of tobacco products to persons under the 
     age of 18.
       (v) Section 1927 (42 U.S.C. 300x-27), relating to 
     preference in the admission of pregnant women for treatment.
       (vi) Section 1929 (42 U.S.C. 300x-29), relating to the 
     needs assessments.
       (d) Existing Projects.--A project that receives support for 
     fiscal year 1996, 1997, 1998, or 1999 under section 506 or 
     520A of the Public Health Service Act (as amended by section 
     108 or 109(2), respectively), and that previously received 
     support under title V of the Public Health Service Act for 
     fiscal year 1995, shall be subject to the requirements to 
     which that project was subject to for fiscal year 1995 unless 
     the Secretary of Health and Human Services determines 
     otherwise.
       (e) Waivers.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this 
     Act, or an amendment made by this Act, the Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services may grant a State a waiver to 
     permit such State to operate a performance partnership 
     program prior to fiscal year 1998. Such programs shall be 
     operated under the requirements described in the amendments 
     made by sections 101 and 201 and shall be funded using 
     amounts appropriated for the fiscal year involved under part 
     B of title XIX of the Public Health Service Act.
                                                                    ____

The SAMHSA Reauthorization, Flexibility Enhancement, and Consolidation 
                          Act of 1995--Summary


                             mental health

       1. Reauthorize the mental health block grant as a 
     Performance Partnership Block Grant (PPG). Under this 
     provision, each State and the Federal Government would work 
     in a partnership to develop goals and performance objectives 
     to improve the mental health of adults with serious mental 
     illness and children with serious emotional disturbances. 
     Each State would submit a performance partnership proposal 
     based on the State selected goals and objectives which the 
     State would be held accountable. Funding for this PPG would 
     be authorized at $280,000,000.
       2. Establish a Transition Provision for implementing the 
     PPGs. Under this provision, States would begin the PPGs no 
     sooner than October 1, 1997. This minimum two-year transition 
     period would allow for the development of partnerships 
     between the Federal government and the states to: (1) develop 
     the menu of objectives; (2) carry out a technical analysis of 
     the availability, relevancy, and sufficiency of existing data 
     sets; and (3) develop a plan to address insufficient data 
     systems. This process would include individuals from states, 
     local governments, consumers, and others who have technical 
     expertise in this area.
       3. Eliminate set-asides. This section would repeal the 10 
     percent set-aside to provide services for children with 
     serious emotional disturbances.
       4. Repeal the current (4) separate demonstration 
     authorities and establish a transition funding period for the 
     current mental health demonstration programs. This section 
     repeals separate categorical authorities for programs 
     relating to: (1) clinical training and AIDS training, (2) 
     community support programs; (3) homeless demonstrations; and 
     (4) AIDS demonstrations. Each current demonstration grant 
     would continue under the same terms and conditions until the 
     expiration of the grant period.
       5. Establish a general authority for priority mental health 
     needs of regional and national significance. Through this 
     single demonstration authority, the SAMHSA could provide 
     technical assistance, conduct applied research, or conduct 
     demonstration projects to address compelling mental health 
     prevention and treatment needs of regional and national 
     importance. All support for a specific problem would be time-
     limited to five years. Once successful solutions are 
     developed, the SAMHSA would work with States to incorporate 
     these solutions through the use of the State's performance 
     partnership grant.
       Funding for this authority would be authorized at 
     $50,000,000 for each fiscal year 1996-1997 and $30,000,000 
     for fiscal year 1998. This accounts for the repeal of the 
     ACCESS Program in fiscal year 1998. This funding level 
     represents a ten-percent reduction from the combined totals 
     of the three demonstration programs consolidated. In the 
     event of reductions in the appropriations for the 
     demonstration and training programs, the Secretary would 
     decide which existing programs to reduce or eliminate.
       6. Establish a separate authority for the Children's Mental 
     Health Services Program. Through this single demonstration 
     authority, appropriate community services for children 
     suffering from severe mental disorders would continue as 
     provided for under current law. Funding for this authority 
     would be authorized at $60,000,000--equal to fiscal year 1995 
     appropriations.
     
[[Page S 12289]]

       7. Permit States to provide funding to for-profit 
     organizations in order to facilitate integration of services. 
     This provision would provide flexibility for States to 
     utilize the service of mental health managed care programs to 
     operate Medicaid managed mental health programs. This would 
     facilitate integration of mental health services within each 
     State to achieve standardization of care and cost reductions.
       8. Permit the Secretary to reserve up to 5 percent for data 
     collection, technical assistance, and evaluations. This 
     provision would permit the Secretary to reserve up to 5 
     percent of the amount appropriated in any fiscal year for 
     necessary data collection, technical assistance, and program 
     evaluation. Also, the Secretary could use these funds to 
     assist States with developing and strengthening their 
     capacity for data collection.


               summary of mentally ill homeless provision

       Generally, the purpose of this proposal would be to improve 
     the mental health treatment--and thus the living conditions--
     of the mentally ill homeless who are gravely disabled as a 
     result of their illness. It would also continue to fund 
     treatment and support systems for the mentally ill homeless 
     who are not gravely disabled.
       1. Reauthorize the current PATH provisions as a new Part I 
     of the PATH program. This will retain a focus on the 
     expansion of services for the mentally ill homeless. The 
     major problem currently facing the mentally ill homeless, 
     regardless of whether they receive outpatient commitment or 
     not, is the lack of adequate treatment capacity. Continuation 
     of the PATH program would assure that services for the 
     mentally ill homeless are either maintained or expanded. 
     Funding for this block grant would be authorized at $29 
     million--equal to FY 1995 appropriations.
       2. Create a second part to the PATH program for incentive 
     grants to states to improve and operate outpatient commitment 
     treatment programs for the gravely disabled mentally ill 
     homeless. The purpose of this grant would be to improve the 
     treatment capacity, which is often inadequate, for 
     individuals with severe mental illness. In addition,
      these grants could encourage state mental health agencies to 
     work with judges to help assure the consistent enforcement 
     and appropriate use of state commitment statutes for the 
     gravely disabled mentally ill.
       Funding for this provision would be provided from funds 
     currently used to support the ACCESS program. Because the 
     current ACCESS grantees are funded for two more years, these 
     incentive grants would become available beginning in fiscal 
     year 1998.
       As a condition of receiving a categorical grant under this 
     program, a state would be required to have a statute 
     providing for the commitment of the gravely disabled mentally 
     ill homeless. The state would also be required to provide for 
     intensive case management monitoring and follow-up care, and 
     a hearing prior to recommitment of a gravely disabled 
     individual.
       In addition, the grants would be made to states which 
     successfully bring, or which have the greatest chance to 
     bring, the gravely disabled mentally ill homeless into 
     treatment and which show that such individuals remain in 
     treatment. These funds would be used to provide treatment, 
     outreach, and case management services to individuals who 
     have been committed to an outpatient setting because they 
     have been determined to be gravely disabled as a result of 
     their mental illness.
       3. Allow the new Part I PATH funds to fund supportive 
     housing for homeless mentally ill individuals who are 
     committed to or were previously committed to outpatient 
     treatment. This would help improve treatment outcomes for 
     these individuals. Supportive housing is critical to the 
     treatment of the gravely disabled mentally ill.
       4. Permit the new Part I PATH funds to be used to educate 
     the judiciary regarding mental illness and the 
     appropriateness of outpatient commitment for the gravely 
     disabled mentally ill homeless. Many experts believe that 
     successful implementation of grave disability commitment laws 
     for the mentally ill homeless will require education of the 
     judges. This education is needed because judges are not often 
     prepared to rule on the mental status of the homeless.


                substance abuse prevention and treatment

       1. Reauthorize the substance abuse prevention and treatment 
     services block grant as a Performance Partnership Block Grant 
     (PPG). Under this provision, each State and the Federal 
     Government would work in a partnership to develop goals and 
     performance objectives. The State Needs Assessments could be 
     utilized to assist States in selection of their objectives. 
     Each State would submit a performance partnership proposal. 
     Through a negotiated process the State and the Federal 
     government would agree to objectives which would: 1) reduce 
     the incidence and prevalence of substance abuse and 
     dependence; 2) improve access to appropriate prevention and 
     treatment programs for targeted populations; 3) enhance the 
     effectiveness of substance abuse prevention and treatment 
     programs; and 4) reduce the personal and community risks for 
     substance abuse. Funding for this authority would be 
     authorized at $1,300,000,000.
       2. Establish a Transition Provision for implementing the 
     PPGs. Under this provision, States would begin the PPGs no 
     sooner than October 1, 1997. This minimum two-year transition 
     period would allow for the development of partnerships 
     between the Federal government and the states to: 1) develop 
     the menu of objectives; 2) carry out a technical analysis of 
     the availability, relevancy, and sufficiency of existing data 
     sets; and 3) develop a plan to address insufficient data 
     systems. This process would include individuals from states, 
     local governments, consumers, and others who have technical 
     expertise in this area.
       3. Repeal set-asides for alcohol and drugs under the block 
     grant. To allow States the flexibility to plan and implement 
     services specific to their drug and alcohol treatment and 
     prevention needs, set-asides for alcohol and drugs are 
     repealed.
       4. Establish a ``mandatory exemption'' provision as a 
     transition to eliminating the set-asides in the PPGs. Under 
     this provision, States would be required either to follow 
     current law for set-asides or to select an objective which 
     meets the intent of the set-aside. This process would remain 
     in place until the menu of objectives and the data sets have 
     been developed and are relevant, sufficient, and readily 
     available to measure outcomes in each state. Then, using 
     outcome data, the Secretary may require a state to select an 
     objective which meets the intent of the set-aside if the 
     Secretary determines that the State has a significant problem 
     in an area previously addressed by the set-aside.
       5. Maintain requirements that States spend certain amounts 
     for primary prevention and for programs providing treatment 
     services to pregnant women and women with dependent children 
     under the block grant. The reauthorization bill will continue 
     to provide a 20 percent set-aside for primary prevention 
     activities and the development of effective substance abuse 
     prevention strategies, programs, and systems to reduce drug 
     and alcohol use and abuse.
       6. Increase the minimum threshold from 10 per 100,000 cases 
     of AIDS to 15 per 100,000 for a State to be required to carry 
     out HIV Early Intervention services and repeal the provision 
     of treatment requirement for tuberculosis under the block 
     grant. The higher AIDS case rate threshold requirement for 
     the provision of HIV Early Intervention services would 
     allocate resources to States with the greatest need in 
     addressing co-morbid conditions of substance abusers. Also, 
     the higher threshold rate will moderately reflect 
     proportionately the change in the increase number of AIDS 
     cases since the CDC AIDS surveillance case definition was 
     changed (in 1993). Requirement for HIV Early Intervention 
     Services would remain as in current law. Requirements for TB 
     have been streamlined to include only counseling and testing/
     screening.
       7. Repeal the current (7) demonstration authorities and 
     establish a transition funding period for the current 
     substance abuse and prevention demonstration programs. This 
     section would repeal separate categorical authorities for 
     programs relating to: 1) residential treatment programs for 
     pregnant women, 2) demonstration projects of national 
     significance, 3) substance abuse treatment in State and local 
     criminal justice systems, 4) training in the provision of 
     treatment services, 5) community prevention programs, 6) 
     clinical training of substance abuse prevention 
     professionals; and 7) high risk youth and national capital 
     area demonstrations. Also, this provision provides for a 
     transition funding period of these programs. Each current 
     demonstration grant would continue under the same terms and 
     conditions until the expiration of the grant period.
       8. Establish a general authority for priority substance 
     abuse prevention and treatment needs of regional and national 
     significance. Through this single demonstration authority, 
     the SAMHSA could provide technical assistance, conduct 
     applied research, or conduct demonstration projects to 
     address compelling substance abuse prevention and treatment 
     needs of regional and national importance. Substance abuse 
     health needs would include prevention activities as a 
     priority. All support for a specific problem would be time-
     limited to five years. Once successful solutions are 
     developed, the SAMHSA would work with States to incorporate 
     these solutions through the use of the State's performance 
     partnership grant.
       Funding for this authority would be authorized at 
     $352,000,000. This funding level represents a ten-percent 
     reduction from the combined total of the 14 demonstration 
     programs consolidated in this authority. In the event of 
     reductions in the appropriations for the demonstration and 
     training programs, the Secretary would decide which existing 
     programs to reduce or eliminate.
       9. Maintain the state based loan funds used to establish 
     group homes for recovering substance abusers only for States 
     that have utilized such funds. To allow for greater 
     flexibility to the States, this provision would apply only to 
     States that have current obligations under the revolving loan 
     fund. States which are not currently providing from their 
     loan funds would be exempt from maintaining such loan funds. 
     States would use funds established under this provision to 
     provide other substance abuse treatment services. The 
     requirement for such funds to be maintained in any State 
     would be repealed on September 30, 1998.
       10. Permit States to provide funding to for-profit 
     organizations in order to facilitate integration of services. 
     This provision would provide flexibility for States to 
     utilize the 

[[Page S 12290]]
     services of substance abuse treatment managed care programs to operate 
     Medicaid managed substance abuse treatment programs. The 
     provision would facilitate integration of substance abuse 
     treatment services within each State to achieve 
     standardization of care and cost reductions. However, for-
     profit organizations would have to agree to fulfill certain 
     requirements in order to qualify for funds under this Act.
       11. Permit the Secretary to reserve up to 5 percent of 
     funding for data collection, technical assistance and 
     evaluations. This provision would permit the Secretary to 
     reserve up to 5 percent of the amount appropriated in any 
     fiscal year for necessary data collection, technical 
     assistance and program evaluation. Also, the Secretary could 
     use these funds to assist states with developing and 
     strengthening their capacity for data collection.


  GENERAL PROVISIONS, PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY, AND INSTITUTES OF THE 
                     NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH

       1. Require States to report on performance. This provision 
     would require each State to submit an annual report and to 
     include data concerning its performance in relation to the 
     core set of partnership objectives, including the State's 
     objectives and performance targets.
       2. Require State Review. This provision would replace 
     current peer review requirements but establishes reviews by 
     States in accordance with their existing accreditation and 
     certification standards.
       3. Require on site performance reviews. This provision 
     would replace current requirements for annual investigations 
     by the Secretary in at least 10 States with a new requirement 
     for on site performance reviews in each State every two to 
     three years.
       4. Provide an additional year for obligation by State. This 
     provision would allow States an additional year in which to 
     obligate grant funds.
       5. Repeal of Addict Referral Provisions. This section would 
     repeal authority for Federal judges to refer drug addicts in 
     the criminal justice system to the Surgeon General of the 
     Public Health Service for treatment in lieu of prosecution 
     for a criminal offense.
       6. Reauthorize Protection and Advocacy for Mentally Ill 
     Individuals. This reauthorization would reauthorize this 
     program for three years and amends the name of the act to 
     ``Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental 
     Illnesses Act of 1986.''
       7. Reauthorize the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and 
     Alcoholism (NIAA), National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) 
     and the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). This 
     provision reauthorizes each of the Institutes and programs 
     for only one year in order to correspond with the 
     reauthorization of the entire NIH next year.
     

                          ____________________