[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 118 (Tuesday, September 3, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9691-S9729]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND 
             INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1997

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will now 
proceed to the consideration of H.R. 3666, the VA-HUD appropriations 
bill, which the clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 3666) making appropriations for the Department 
     of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and 
     for sundry independent agencies, boards, commissions, 
     corporations, and offices for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 1997, and for other purposes.

  The Senate proceeded to consider the bill, which had been reported 
from the Committee on Appropriations, with amendments; as follows:

  (The parts of the bill intended to be stricken are shown in boldface 
brackets and the parts of the bill intended to be inserted are shown in 
italic.)

                               H.R. 3666

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the 
     Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the Departments of 
     Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and for 
     sundry independent agencies, boards, commissions, 
     corporations, and offices for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 1997, and for other purposes, namely:

                                TITLE I

                     DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

                    Veterans Benefits Administration

                       compensation and pensions

                     (including transfers of funds)

       For the payment of compensation benefits to or on behalf of 
     veterans as authorized by law (38 U.S.C. 107, chapters 11, 
     13, 51, 53, 55, and 61); pension benefits to or on behalf of 
     veterans as authorized by law (38 U.S.C. chapters 15, 51, 53, 
     55, and 61; 92 Stat. 2508); and burial benefits, emergency 
     and other officers' retirement pay, adjusted-service credits 
     and certificates, payment of premiums due on commercial life 
     insurance policies guaranteed under the provisions of Article 
     IV of the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act of 1940, as 
     amended, and for other benefits as authorized by law (38 
     U.S.C. 107, 1312, 1977, and 2106, chapters 23, 51, 53, 55, 
     and 61; 50 U.S.C. App. 540-548; 43 Stat. 122, 123; 45 Stat. 
     735; 76 Stat. 1198); [$18,497,854,000] $18,671,259,000, to 
     remain available until expended: Provided, That not to exceed 
     $26,417,000 of the amount appropriated shall be reimbursed to 
     ``General operating expenses'' and ``Medical care'' for 
     necessary expenses in implementing those provisions 
     authorized in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, 
     and in the Veterans' Benefits Act of 1992 (38 U.S.C. chapters 
     51, 53, and 55), the funding source for which is specifically 
     provided as the ``Compensation and pensions'' appropriation: 
     Provided further, That such sums as may be earned on an 
     actual qualifying patient basis, shall be reimbursed to 
     ``Medical facilities revolving fund'' to augment the funding 
     of individual medical facilities for nursing home care 
     provided to pensioners as authorized by the Veterans' 
     Benefits Act of 1992 (38 U.S.C. chapter 55).

                         readjustment benefits

       For the payment of readjustment and rehabilitation benefits 
     to or on behalf of veterans as authorized by 38 U.S.C. 
     chapters 21, 30, 31, 34, 35, 36, 39, 51, 53, 55, and 61, 
     [$1,227,000,000] $1,377,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That funds shall be available to pay any 
     court order, court award or any compromise settlement arising 
     from litigation involving the vocational training program 
     authorized by section 18 of Public Law 98-77, as amended.

                   veterans insurance and indemnities

       For military and naval insurance, national service life 
     insurance, servicemen's indemnities, service-disabled 
     veterans insurance, and veterans mortgage life insurance as 
     authorized by 38 U.S.C. chapter 19; 70 Stat. 887; 72 Stat. 
     487, $38,970,000, to remain available until expended.

                 guaranty and indemnity program account

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the cost of direct and guaranteed loans, such sums as 
     may be necessary to carry out the program, as authorized by 
     38 U.S.C. chapter 37, as amended: Provided, That such costs, 
     including the cost of modifying such loans, shall be as 
     defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
     1974, as amended.
       In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the 
     direct and guaranteed loan programs, $105,226,000, which may 
     be transferred to and merged with the appropriation for 
     ``General operating expenses''.

                     loan guaranty program account


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the cost of direct and guaranteed loans, such sums as 
     may be necessary to carry out the program, as authorized by 
     38 U.S.C. chapter 37, as amended: Provided, That such costs, 
     including the cost of modifying such loans, shall be as 
     defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
     1974, as amended.
       In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the 
     direct and guaranteed loan programs, $33,810,000, which may 
     be transferred to and merged with the appropriation for 
     ``General operating expenses''.

                      direct loan program account

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the cost of direct loans, such sums as may be necessary 
     to carry out the program, as authorized by 38 U.S.C. chapter 
     37, as amended: Provided, That such costs, including the cost 
     of modifying such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 
     of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended: Provided 
     further, That during 1997, within the resources available, 
     not to exceed $300,000 in gross obligations for direct loans 
     are authorized for specially adapted housing loans.
       In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the 
     direct loan program, $80,000, which may be transferred to and 
     merged with the appropriation for ``General operating 
     expenses''.

                  education loan fund program account


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the cost of direct loans, $1,000, as authorized by 38 
     U.S.C. 3698, as amended: Provided, That such costs, including 
     the cost of modifying such loans, shall be as defined in 
     section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as 
     amended: Provided further, That these funds are available to 
     subsidize gross obligations for the principal amount of 
     direct loans not to exceed $3,000.
       In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry 
     out the direct loan program, $195,000, which may be 
     transferred to and merged with the appropriation for 
     ``General operating expenses''.

            vocational rehabilitation loans program account


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the cost of direct loans, $49,000, as authorized by 38 
     U.S.C. chapter 31, as amended: Provided, That such costs, 
     including the cost of modifying such loans, shall be as 
     defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
     1974, as amended: Provided further, That these funds are 
     available to subsidize gross obligations for the principal 
     amount of direct loans not to exceed [$1,964,000] $2,822,000.
       In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry 
     out the direct loan program, $377,000, which may be 
     transferred to and merged with the appropriation for 
     ``General operating expenses''.

          native american veteran housing loan program account


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For administrative expenses to carry out the direct loan 
     program authorized by 38 U.S.C. chapter 37, subchapter V, as 
     amended, $205,000, which may be transferred to and merged 
     with the appropriation for ``General operating expenses''.

                     Veterans Health Administration

                              medical care

       For necessary expenses for the maintenance and operation of 
     hospitals, nursing homes, and domiciliary facilities; for 
     furnishing, as authorized by law, inpatient and outpatient 
     care and treatment to beneficiaries of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs, including care and treatment in facilities 
     not under the jurisdiction of the Department; and furnishing 
     recreational facilities, supplies, and equipment; funeral, 
     burial, and other expenses incidental thereto for 
     beneficiaries receiving care in the Department; 
     administrative expenses in support of planning, design, 
     project management, real property acquisition and 
     disposition, construction and renovation of any facility 
     under the jurisdiction or for the use of the Department; 
     oversight, engineering and architectural activities not 
     charged to project cost; repairing, altering, improving or 
     providing facilities in the several hospitals and homes under 
     the jurisdiction of the Department, not otherwise provided 
     for, either by contract or by the hire of temporary employees 
     and purchase of materials; uniforms or allowances therefor, 
     as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902; aid to State homes as 
     authorized by 38 U.S.C. 1741; and not to exceed $8,000,000

[[Page S9692]]

     to fund cost comparison studies as referred to in 38 U.S.C. 
     8110(a)(5); $17,008,447,000, plus reimbursements: Provided, 
     That of the funds made available under this heading, 
     [$570,000,000] $596,000,000 is for the equipment and land and 
     structures object classifications only, which amount shall 
     not become available for obligation until August 1, 1997, and 
     shall remain available until September 30, 1998.

                    medical and prosthetic research

       For necessary expenses in carrying out programs of medical 
     and prosthetic research and development as authorized by 38 
     U.S.C. chapter 73, to remain available until September 30, 
     1998, [$257,000,000] $262,000,000, plus reimbursements.

      medical administration and miscellaneous operating expenses

       For necessary expenses in the administration of medical, 
     hospital, nursing home, domiciliary, construction, supply, 
     and research activities, as authorized by law; administrative 
     expenses in support of planning, design, project management, 
     architectural, engineering, real property acquisition and 
     disposition, construction and renovation of any facility 
     under the jurisdiction or for the use of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs, including site acquisition; engineering and 
     architectural activities not charged to project cost; and 
     research and development in building construction technology; 
     [$59,207,000] $62,207,000, plus reimbursements.

                   transitional housing loan program

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the cost of direct loans, $7,000, as authorized by 
     Public Law 102-54, section 8, which shall be transferred from 
     the ``General post fund'': Provided, That such costs, 
     including the cost of modifying such loans, shall be as 
     defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
     1974, as amended: Provided further, That these funds are 
     available to subsidize gross obligations for the principal 
     amount of direct loans not to exceed $70,000.
       In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the 
     direct loan program, $54,000, which shall be transferred from 
     the ``General post fund'', as authorized by Public Law 102-
     54, section 8.

                      Departmental Administration

                       general operating expenses

       For necessary operating expenses of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs, not otherwise provided for, including 
     uniforms or allowances therefor; not to exceed $25,000 for 
     official reception and representation expenses; hire of 
     passenger motor vehicles; and reimbursement of the General 
     Services Administration for security guard services, and the 
     Department of Defense for the cost of overseas employee mail; 
     [$823,584,000] $813,730,000: Provided [further], That during 
     fiscal year 1997, notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     the number of individuals employed by the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs (1) in other than ``career appointee'' 
     positions in the Senior Executive Service shall not exceed 6, 
     and (2) in schedule C positions shall not exceed 11: Provided 
     further, That funds under this heading shall be available to 
     administer the Service Members Occupational Conversion and 
     Training Act.

                        national cemetery system

       For necessary expenses for the maintenance and operation of 
     the National Cemetery System, not otherwise provided for, 
     including uniforms or allowances therefor; cemeterial 
     expenses as authorized by law; purchase of two passenger 
     motor vehicles for use in cemeterial operations; and hire of 
     passenger motor vehicles, $76,864,000.

                      office of inspector general

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the Inspector General Act of 1978, as 
     amended, $30,900,000.

                      construction, major projects

       For constructing, altering, extending and improving any of 
     the facilities under the jurisdiction or for the use of the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs, or for any of the purposes 
     set forth in sections 316, 2404, 2406, 8102, 8103, 8106, 
     8108, 8109, 8110, and 8122 of title 38, United States Code, 
     including planning, architectural and engineering services, 
     maintenance or guarantee period services costs associated 
     with equipment guarantees provided under the project, 
     services of claims analysts, offsite utility and storm 
     drainage system construction costs, and site acquisition, 
     where the estimated cost of a project is $3,000,000 or more 
     or where funds for a project were made available in a 
     previous major project appropriation, [$245,358,000] 
     $178,250,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That except for advance planning of projects funded through 
     the advance planning fund and the design of projects funded 
     through the design fund, none of these funds shall be used 
     for any project which has not been considered and approved by 
     the Congress in the budgetary process: Provided further, That 
     funds provided in this appropriation for fiscal year 1997, 
     for each approved project shall be obligated (1) by the 
     awarding of a construction documents contract by September 
     30, 1997, and (2) by the awarding of a construction contract 
     by September 30, 1998: Provided further, That the Secretary 
     shall promptly report in writing to the Comptroller General 
     and to the Committees on Appropriations any approved major 
     construction project in which obligations are not incurred 
     within the time limitations established above; and the 
     Comptroller General shall review the report in accordance 
     with the procedures established by section 1015 of the 
     Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (title X of Public Law 93-
     344): Provided further, That no funds from any other account 
     except the ``Parking revolving fund'', may be obligated for 
     constructing, altering, extending, or improving a project 
     which was approved in the budget process and funded in this 
     account until one year after substantial completion and 
     beneficial occupancy by the Department of Veterans Affairs of 
     the project or any part thereof with respect to that part 
     only.

                      construction, minor projects

       For constructing, altering, extending, and improving any of 
     the facilities under the jurisdiction or for the use of the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs, including planning, 
     architectural and engineering services, maintenance or 
     guarantee period services costs associated with equipment 
     guarantees provided under the project, services of claims 
     analysts, offsite utility and storm drainage system 
     construction costs, and site acquisition, or for any of the 
     purposes set forth in sections 316, 2404, 2406, 8102, 8103, 
     8106, 8108, 8109, 8110, and 8122 of title 38, United States 
     Code, where the estimated cost of a project is less than 
     $3,000,000; [$160,000,000] $190,000,000, to remain available 
     until expended, along with unobligated balances of previous 
     ``Construction, minor projects'' appropriations which are 
     hereby made available for any project where the estimated 
     cost is less than $3,000,000: Provided, That funds in this 
     account shall be available for (1) repairs to any of the 
     nonmedical facilities under the jurisdiction or for the use 
     of the Department which are necessary because of loss or 
     damage caused by any natural disaster or catastrophe, and (2) 
     temporary measures necessary to prevent or to minimize 
     further loss by such causes.

                         parking revolving fund

       For the parking revolving fund as authorized by 38 U.S.C. 
     8109, [$12,300,000, together with] income from fees 
     collected, to remain available until expended, which shall be 
     available for all authorized expenses except operations and 
     maintenance costs, which will be funded from ``Medical 
     care''.

       grants for construction of state extended care facilities

       For grants to assist States to acquire or construct State 
     nursing home and domiciliary facilities and to remodel, 
     modify or alter existing hospital, nursing home and 
     domiciliary facilities in State homes, for furnishing care to 
     veterans as authorized by 38 U.S.C. 8131-8137, $47,397,000, 
     to remain available until expended.

        grants for the construction of state veterans cemeteries

       For grants to aid States in establishing, expanding, or 
     improving State veteran cemeteries as authorized by 38 U.S.C. 
     2408, $1,000,000, to remain available until expended.


                             franchise fund

                     (including transfer of funds)

       There is hereby established in the Treasury a franchise 
     fund pilot, as authorized by section 403 of Public Law 103-
     356, to be available as provided in such section for expenses 
     and equipment necessary for the maintenance and operation of 
     such administrative services as the Secretary determines may 
     be performed more advantageously as central services: 
     Provided, That any inventories, equipment and other assets 
     pertaining to the services to be provided by the franchise 
     fund, either on hand or on order, less the related 
     liabilities or unpaid obligations, and any appropriations 
     made hereafter for the purpose of providing capital, shall be 
     used to capitalize the franchise fund: Provided further, That 
     the franchise fund may be paid in advance from funds 
     available to the Department and other Federal agencies for 
     which such centralized services are performed, at rates which 
     will return in full all expenses of operation, including 
     accrued leave, depreciation of fund plant and equipment, 
     amortization of automated data processing (ADP) software and 
     systems (either acquired or donated), and an amount necessary 
     to maintain a reasonable operating reserve, as determined by 
     the Secretary: Provided further, That the franchise fund 
     shall provide services on a competitive basis: Provided 
     further, That an amount not to exceed four percent of the 
     total annual income to such fund may be retained in the fund 
     for fiscal year 1997 and each fiscal year thereafter, to 
     remain available until expended, to be used for the 
     acquisition of capital equipment and for the improvement and 
     implementation of Departmental financial management, ADP, and 
     other support systems: Provided further, That no later than 
     thirty days after the end of each fiscal year amounts in 
     excess of this reserve limitation shall be transferred to the 
     Treasury: Provided further, That such franchise fund pilot 
     shall terminate pursuant to section 403(f) of Public Law 103-
     356.

                       administrative provisions


                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 101. Any appropriation for 1997 for ``Compensation and 
     pensions'', ``Readjustment benefits'', and ``Veterans 
     insurance and indemnities'' may be transferred to any other 
     of the mentioned appropriations.
       Sec. 102. Appropriations available to the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs for 1997 for salaries and expenses shall be 
     available for services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109.
       Sec. 103. No appropriations in this Act for the Department 
     of Veterans Affairs (except the appropriations for 
     ``Construction, major projects'', ``Construction, minor 
     projects'', and the ``Parking revolving fund'') shall be

[[Page S9693]]

     available for the purchase of any site for or toward the 
     construction of any new hospital or home.
       Sec. 104. No appropriations in this Act for the Department 
     of Veterans Affairs shall be available for hospitalization or 
     examination of any persons (except beneficiaries entitled 
     under the laws bestowing such benefits to veterans, and 
     persons receiving such treatment under 5 U.S.C. 7901-7904 or 
     42 U.S.C. 5141-5204), unless reimbursement of cost is made to 
     the ``Medical care'' account at such rates as may be fixed by 
     the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
       Sec. 105. Appropriations available to the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs for fiscal year 1997 for ``Compensation and 
     pensions'', ``Readjustment benefits'', and ``Veterans 
     insurance and indemnities'' shall be available for payment of 
     prior year accrued obligations required to be recorded by law 
     against the corresponding prior year accounts within the last 
     quarter of fiscal year 1996.
       Sec. 106. Appropriations accounts available to the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs for fiscal year 1997 shall be 
     available to pay prior year obligations of corresponding 
     prior year appropriations accounts resulting from title X of 
     the Competitive Equality Banking Act, Public Law 100-86, 
     except that if such obligations are from trust fund accounts 
     they shall be payable from ``Compensation and pensions''.
       Sec. 107. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     during fiscal year 1997, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs 
     shall, from the National Service Life Insurance Fund (38 
     U.S.C. 1920), the Veterans' Special Life Insurance Fund (38 
     U.S.C. 1923), and the United States Government Life Insurance 
     Fund (38 U.S.C. 1955), reimburse the ``General operating 
     expenses'' account for the cost of administration of the 
     insurance programs financed through those accounts: Provided, 
     That reimbursement shall be made only from the surplus 
     earnings accumulated in an insurance program in fiscal year 
     1997, that are available for dividends in that program after 
     claims have been paid and actuarially determined reserves 
     have been set aside: Provided further, That if the cost of 
     administration of an insurance program exceeds the amount of 
     surplus earnings accumulated in that program, reimbursement 
     shall be made only to the extent of such surplus earnings: 
     Provided further, That the Secretary shall determine the cost 
     of administration for fiscal year 1997, which is properly 
     allocable to the provision of each insurance program and to 
     the provision of any total disability income insurance 
     included in such insurance program.

                                TITLE II

              DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

                            Housing Programs

               [annual contributions for assisted housing


                        [(including rescission)

       [For assistance under the United States Housing Act of 
     1937, as amended (the ``Act'' herein) (42 U.S.C. 1437), not 
     otherwise provided for, $5,272,000,000 (reduced by 
     $140,000,000), to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That of the total amount provided under this head, 
     $4,472,000,000 shall be for assistance under the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437) for use in 
     connection with expiring or terminating section 8 subsidy 
     contracts of which $875,000,000 shall be available on 
     September 15, 1997: Provided further, That the Secretary may 
     determine not to apply section 8(o)(6)(B) of the Act to 
     housing vouchers during fiscal year 1997: Provided further, 
     That of the total amount provided under this head, 
     $800,000,000 (reduced by $140,000,000) shall be for 
     amendments to section 8 contracts other than contracts for 
     projects developed under section 202 of the Housing Act of 
     1959, as amended: Provided further, That 50 per centum of the 
     amounts of budget authority, or in lieu thereof 50 per centum 
     of the cash amounts associated with such budget authority, 
     that are recaptured from projects described in section 
     1012(a) of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance 
     Amendments Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-628, 102 Stat. 3224, 
     3268) shall be rescinded, or in the case of cash, shall be 
     remitted to the Treasury, and such amounts of budget 
     authority or cash recaptured and not rescinded or remitted to 
     the Treasury shall be used by State housing finance agencies 
     or local governments or local housing agencies with projects 
     approved by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     for which settlement occurred after January 1, 1992, in 
     accordance with such section.


         [housing for special populations: elderly and disabled

       [For capital advances, including amendments to capital 
     advance contracts, and for project rental assistance and 
     amendments thereto, for Supportive Housing for the Elderly 
     under section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959, as amended, 
     $595,000,000 (increased by $100,000,000), to remain available 
     until expended.
       [For capital advances, including amendments to capital 
     advance contracts, and for project rental assistance and 
     amendments thereto, for Supportive Housing for Persons with 
     Disabilities under section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez 
     National Affordable Housing Act, $174,000,000 (increased by 
     $40,000,000), to remain available until expended, of which 25 
     percent shall be used for tenant-based rental assistance 
     under section 8(o) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 
     (42 U.S.C. 1437(o)), in addition to any other amounts 
     available for section 8(o).
       [The Secretary may waive any provision of section 202 of 
     the Housing Act of 1959 and section 811 of the Cranston-
     Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (including the 
     provisions governing the terms and conditions of project 
     rental assistance) that the Secretary determines is not 
     necessary to achieve the objectives of these programs, or 
     that otherwise impedes the ability to develop, operate or 
     administer projects assisted under these programs, and may 
     make provision for alternative conditions or terms where 
     appropriate.

                         [flexible subsidy fund

                     [(including transfer of funds)

       [From the fund established by section 236(g) of the 
     National Housing Act, as amended, all uncommitted balances of 
     excess rental charges as of September 30, 1996, and any 
     collection during fiscal year 1997, shall be transferred, as 
     authorized under such section, to the fund authorized under 
     section 201(j) of the Housing and Community Development 
     Amendments of 1978, as amended.

                       [rental housing assistance

                             [(rescission)

       [The limitation otherwise applicable to the maximum 
     payments that may be required in any fiscal year by all 
     contracts entered into under section 236 of the National 
     Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-1) is reduced in fiscal year 
     1997 by not more than $2,000,000 in uncommitted balances of 
     authorizations provided for this purpose in appropriations 
     Acts.

                       [Public and Indian Housing


                       [housing certificate fund

       [For tenant-based assistance under section 8 of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f), as amended, 
     $166,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That of the total amount provided under this head, 
     $50,000,000 shall be for nonelderly disabled families 
     relocating pursuant to designation of a public housing 
     development under section 7 of such Act: Provided further, 
     That the remainder of the amount provided under this head 
     shall be used only for housing assistance for relocating 
     residents of properties (i) that are eligible for assistance 
     under the Low Income Housing Preservation and Resident 
     Homeownership Act of 1990 (LIHPRHA) or the Emergency Low-
     Income Housing Preservation Act of 1987 (ELIHPA) in 
     accordance with the terms and conditions of the tenth and 
     eleventh provisos of the second undesignated paragraph under 
     the head ``Annual Contributions for Assisted Housing'' in 
     Public Law 104-134; (ii) that are owned by the Secretary and 
     being disposed of; (iii) for which section 8 assistance is 
     allocated under subsection (f) of section 204 of this Act 
     (relating to portfolio reengineering); or (iv) subject to 
     special workout assistance team intervention compliance 
     actions: Provided further, That notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, a public housing agency administering 
     certificate or voucher assistance provided under subsection 
     (b) or (o) of section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 
     1937, as amended, shall delay for 3 months, the use of any 
     amounts of such assistance (or the certificate or voucher 
     representing assistance amounts) made available by the 
     termination during fiscal year 1997 of such assistance on 
     behalf of any family for any reason, but not later than 
     October 1, 1997, with the exception of any certificates 
     assigned or committed to project-based assistance as 
     permitted otherwise by the Act, accomplished prior to the 
     effective date of this Act: Provided further, That section 
     8(c)(2)(A) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as 
     amended (42 U.S.C. 1437f(c)(2)(A)) is further amended--
       [(1) in the third sentence by inserting ``and fiscal year 
     1997'' after ``1995''; and
       [(2) in the last sentence by inserting ``and fiscal year 
     1997'' after ``1995''.

                     [public housing operating fund

       [For payments to public housing agencies and Indian housing 
     authorities for operating subsidies for low-income housing 
     projects as authorized by section 9 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1437g), 
     $2,850,000,000.

                      [public housing capital fund

                    [(including transfers of funds)

       [For the Public Housing Capital Fund program under the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended (42 U.S.C. 
     1437), $2,700,000,000, to remain available until expended, of 
     which $2,415,000,000 shall be for modernization of existing 
     public housing projects; $200,000,000 for Indian Housing 
     Development; $50,000,000 for grants to public housing 
     agencies (including Indian housing authorities), nonprofit 
     corporations, and other appropriate entities for a supportive 
     services program to assist residents of public and assisted 
     housing, former residents of such housing receiving tenant-
     based assistance under section 8 of such Act, and other low-
     income families and individuals, principally for the benefit 
     of public housing residents, to become self-sufficient; 
     $20,000,000 for technical assistance for the inspection of 
     public housing units, contract expertise, and training and 
     technical assistance directly or indirectly, under grants, 
     contracts, or cooperative agreements, to assist in the 
     oversight and management of public and Indian housing 
     (whether or not the housing is being modernized with 
     assistance under this proviso) or tenant-based assistance, 
     including, but not limited to, an annual resident survey, 
     data collection and analysis, training

[[Page S9694]]

     and technical assistance by or to officials and employees of 
     the department and of public housing agencies and to 
     residents in connection with the public and Indian housing 
     program or for carrying out activities under section 6(j) of 
     the Act; $10,000,000 for the Tenant Opportunity Program; and 
     $5,000,000 for the Jobs-Plus Demonstration for Public Housing 
     families: Provided, That all obligated and unobligated 
     balances as of the end of fiscal year 1996 heretofore 
     provided for the development or acquisition costs of public 
     housing (including public housing for Indian families), for 
     modernization of existing public housing projects (including 
     such projects for Indian families), for public and Indian 
     housing amendments, for modernization and development 
     technical assistance, for lease adjustments for the section 
     23 program, and for the Family Investment Centers program 
     shall be transferred to amounts made available under this 
     heading.


    [revitalization of severely distressed public housing (hope vii)

       [For grants to public housing agencies for assisting in the 
     demolition of obsolete public housing projects or portions 
     thereof, the revitalization (where appropriate) of sites 
     (including remaining public housing units) on which such 
     projects are located, replacement housing which will avoid or 
     lessen concentrations of very low-income families, and 
     tenant-based assistance in accordance with section 8 of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937; and for providing 
     replacement housing and assisting tenants to be displaced by 
     the demolition, $550,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended, of which the Secretary may use up to $2,500,000 for 
     technical assistance, to be provided directly or indirectly 
     by grants, contracts or cooperative agreements, including 
     training and cost of necessary travel for participants in 
     such training, by or to officials and employees of the 
     Department and of public housing agencies and to residents: 
     Provided, That, notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     the funds made available to the Housing Authority of New 
     Orleans under HOPE VI for purposes of Desire Homes, shall not 
     be obligated or expended for on-site construction until an 
     independent third party has determined whether the site is 
     appropriate.

            [drug elimination grants for low-income housing


                     [(including transfer of funds)

       [For grants to public and Indian housing agencies for use 
     in eliminating crime in public housing projects authorized by 
     42 U.S.C. 11901-11908, for grants for federally assisted low-
     income housing authorized by 42 U.S.C. 11909, and for drug 
     information clearinghouse services authorized by 42 U.S.C. 
     11921-11925, $290,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended, $10,000,000 of which shall be for grants, technical 
     assistance, contracts and other assistance training, program 
     assessment, and execution for or on behalf of public housing 
     agencies and resident organizations (including the cost of 
     necessary travel for participants in such training), 
     $5,000,000 of which shall be used in connection with efforts 
     to combat violent crime in public and assisted housing under 
     the Operation Safe Home program administered by the Inspector 
     General of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, 
     and $5,000,000 of which shall be transferred to the Office of 
     Inspector General for Operation Safe Home: Provided, That the 
     term ``drug-related crime'', as defined in 42 U.S.C. 
     11905(2), shall also include other types of crime as 
     determined by the Secretary.]


            development of additional new subsidized housing

       For assistance for the purchase, construction, acquisition, 
     or development of additional public and subsidized housing 
     units for low income families under the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937, as amended (``the Act'' herein) (42 U.S.C. 
     1437), not otherwise provided for, $969,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That of the total amount 
     provided under this head, $595,000,000 shall be for capital 
     advances, including amendments to capital advance contracts, 
     for housing for the elderly, as authorized by section 202 of 
     the Housing Act of 1959, as amended, and for project rental 
     assistance, and amendments to contracts for project rental 
     assistance, for supportive housing for the elderly under 
     section 202(c)(2) of the Housing Act of 1959; and 
     $174,000,000 shall be for capital advances, including 
     amendments to capital advance contracts, for supportive 
     housing for persons with disabilities, as authorized by 
     section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
     Housing Act; and for project rental assistance, and 
     amendments to contracts for project rental assistance, for 
     supportive housing for persons with disabilities as 
     authorized by section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National 
     Affordable Housing Act: Provided further, That the Secretary 
     may designate up to 25 percent of the amounts earmarked under 
     this paragraph for section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez 
     National Affordable Housing Act for tenant-based assistance, 
     as authorized under that section, which assistance is five 
     years in duration: Provided further, That the Secretary may 
     waive any provision of section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959 
     and section 811 of the National Affordable Housing Act 
     (including the provisions governing the terms and conditions 
     of project rental assistance and tenant-based assistance) 
     that the Secretary determines is not necessary to achieve the 
     objectives of these programs, or that otherwise impedes the 
     ability to develop, operate or administer projects assisted 
     under these programs, and may make provision for alternative 
     conditions or terms where appropriate: Provided further, That 
     of the total amount provided under this head, $200,000,000 
     shall be for the development or acquisition cost of public 
     housing for Indian families, including amounts for housing 
     under the mutual help homeownership opportunity program under 
     section 202 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 1437bb).


                  prevention of resident displacement

       For activities and assistance to prevent the involuntary 
     displacement of low-income families, the elderly and the 
     disabled because of the loss of affordable housing stock, 
     expiration of subsidy contracts or expiration of use 
     restrictions, or other changes in housing assistance 
     arrangements, $4,775,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That of the total amount provided under 
     this head, $3,800,000,000 shall be for assistance under the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437) for use in 
     connection with expiring or terminating section 8 subsidy 
     contracts: Provided further, That the Secretary may determine 
     not to apply section 8(o)(6)(B) of the Act to housing 
     vouchers during fiscal year 1997: Provided further, That of 
     the total amount provided under this head, $800,000,000 shall 
     be for amendments to section 8 contracts other than contracts 
     for projects developed under section 202 of the Housing Act 
     of 1959, as amended: Provided further, That of the total 
     amount provided under this head, $175,000,000 shall be for 
     assistance under the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437) for nonelderly disabled families relocating 
     pursuant to designation of a public housing development under 
     section 7 of such Act, for a demonstration linking housing 
     assistance to State welfare reform initiatives to help 
     families make the transition from welfare to work and for 
     housing assistance for relocating residents of properties (i) 
     that are owned by the Secretary and being disposed of; (ii) 
     that are discontinuing section 8 project-based assistance; or 
     (iii) subject to special workout assistance team intervention 
     compliance actions.


                 PRESERVING EXISTING HOUSING INVESTMENT

       For operating, maintaining, revitalizing, rehabilitating, 
     preserving, and protecting existing housing developments for 
     low income families, the elderly and the disabled, 
     $6,590,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That of the total amount made available under this head, 
     $2,900,000,000 shall be available for payments to public 
     housing agencies and Indian housing authorities for operating 
     subsidies for low-income housing projects as authorized by 
     section 9 of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as 
     amended (42 U.S.C. 1437g): Provided further, That of the 
     total amount made available under this head, $2,500,000,000 
     shall be available for modernization of existing public 
     housing projects as authorized under section 14 of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1437l): 
     Provided further, That of the total amount made available 
     under this head, $550,000,000 shall be for grants to public 
     housing agencies for assisting in the demolition of obsolete 
     public housing projects or portions thereof, the 
     revitalization (where appropriate) of sites (including 
     remaining public housing units) on which such projects are 
     located, replacement housing which will avoid or lessen 
     concentrations of very low-income families, and tenant-based 
     assistance in accordance with section 8 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937; and for providing replacement housing 
     and assisting tenants to be displaced by the demolition, of 
     which the Secretary may use up to $2,500,000 for technical 
     assistance, to be provided directly or indirectly by grants, 
     contracts or cooperative agreements, including training and 
     cost of necessary travel for participants in such training, 
     by or to officials and employees of the Department and of 
     public housing agencies and to residents: Provided further, 
     That of the total amount provided under this head, 
     $350,000,000 plus amounts recaptured from interest reduction 
     payment contracts for section 236 projects whose owners 
     prepay their mortgages during fiscal year 1997 (which amounts 
     shall be transferred and merged with this account), shall be 
     for use in conjunction with properties that are eligible for 
     assistance under the Low Income Housing Preservation and 
     Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 (LIHPRHA) or the emergency 
     Low-Income Housing Preservation Act of 1987 (ELIHPA): 
     Provided further, That the Secretary may continue to impose a 
     moratorium on the acceptance of initial notices of intent by 
     potential recipients of such funding: Provided further, That 
     funding shall be limited to: (1) tenant-based assistance 
     under the terms of the tenth and eleventh provisos of the 
     second undesignated paragraph under the ``Annual 
     Contributions for Assisted Housing'' head of the Departments 
     of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and 
     Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996; (2) plans of 
     action for sales of projects to nonprofit organizations, 
     tenant-sponsored organizations and other priority purchasers; 
     (3) projects that are subject to a repayment or settlement 
     agreement that was executed between the owner and the 
     Secretary prior to September 1, 1995; (4) projects for which 
     submissions were delayed as a result of their location in 
     areas that were designated as a Federal disaster area in a 
     Presidential Disaster Declaration; and (5) projects whose 
     processing was, in fact, or in practical effect, suspended, 
     deferred, or interrupted for a period of nine months or more 
     because of differing interpretations, by the Secretary and an 
     owner concerning the timing of the ability of an uninsured 
     section 236 property to prepay or by the Secretary and a 
     State or local rent regulatory agency, concerning the effect 
     of a presumptively applicable State or local rent control law 
     or regulation on the determination of preservation value 
     under section 213 of LIHPRHA, as amended, if the owner of 
     such project filed a notice of

[[Page S9695]]

     intent to extend the low-income affordability restrictions of 
     the housing, or transfer to a qualified purchaser who would 
     extend such restrictions, on or before November 1, 1993: 
     Provided further, That priority shall be given to funding 
     tenant-based assistance under the terms of the tenth and 
     eleventh provisos of the second undesignated paragraph under 
     the ``Annual Contributions for Assisted Housing'' head of the 
     Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban 
     Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 
     1996, and plans of action for sales of projects to nonprofit 
     organizations, tenant-sponsored organizations, and other 
     priority purchasers: Provided further, That the Secretary may 
     give priority to funding approved plans of action for the 
     following projects: (1) projects that are subject to a 
     repayment or settlement agreement that was executed between 
     the owner and the Secretary prior to September 1, 1995; (2) 
     projects for which submissions were delayed as a result of 
     their location in areas that were designated as a Federal 
     disaster area in a Presidential Disaster Declaration; and (3) 
     projects whose processing was, in fact, or in practical 
     effect, suspended, deferred, or interrupted for a period of 
     nine months or more because of differing interpretations, by 
     the Secretary and an owner concerning the timing of the 
     ability of an uninsured section 236 property to prepay or by 
     the Secretary and a State or local rent regulatory agency, 
     concerning the effect of a presumptively applicable State or 
     local rent control law or regulation on the determination of 
     preservation value under section 213 of LIHPRHA, as amended, 
     if the owner of such project filed a notice of intent to 
     extend the low-income affordability restrictions of the 
     housing, or transfer to a qualified purchaser who would 
     extend such restrictions, on or before November 1, 1993: 
     Provided further, That section 241(f) of the National Housing 
     Act is repealed and insurance under such section shall not be 
     offered as an incentive under LIHPRHA and ELIHPA: Provided 
     further, That a capital loan may be provided as an incentive 
     under LIHPRHA or ELIHPA on such terms and conditions as the 
     Secretary may prescribe: Provided further, That the following 
     provisos under the second undesignated heading under the 
     ``Annual Contributions for Assisted Housing'' head of the 
     Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban 
     Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 
     1996 shall continue in effect: the fourth proviso, the sixth 
     proviso, the seventh proviso, the ninth proviso, the tenth 
     proviso, the eleventh proviso, and the twelfth proviso: 
     Provided further, That notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, effective October 1, 1997, the Secretary shall suspend 
     further funding of plans of action: Provided further, That of 
     the total amount provided under this head $290,000,000 shall 
     be for grants to public and Indian housing agencies for use 
     in eliminating crime in public housing projects authorized by 
     42 U.S.C. 11901-11908, for grants for federally assisted low-
     income housing authorized by 42 U.S.C. 11909, and for drug 
     information clearinghouse services authorized by 42 U.S.C. 
     11921-11925, of which $10,000,000 shall be for grants, 
     technical assistance, contracts and other assistance 
     training, program assessment, and execution for or on behalf 
     of public housing agencies and resident organizations 
     (including the cost of necessary travel for participants in 
     such training), up to $5,000,000 of which may be used in 
     connection with efforts to combat violent crime in public and 
     assisted housing under the Operation Safe Home program 
     administered by the Inspector General of the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development, and up to $5,000,000 of which 
     may be provided to the Office of Inspector General for 
     Operation Safe Home: Provided further, That the term ``drug-
     related crime'', as defined in 42 U.S.C. 11905(2), shall also 
     include other types of crime as determined by the Secretary: 
     Provided further, That notwithstanding section 5130(c) of the 
     Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 11909(c)), the 
     Secretary may determine not to use any such funds to provide 
     public housing youth sports grants.

           indian housing loan guarantee fund program account

       For the cost of guaranteed loans, as authorized by section 
     184 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (106 
     Stat. 3739), $3,000,000: Provided, That such costs, including 
     the costs of modifying such loans, shall be as defined in 
     section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as 
     amended: Provided further, That these funds are available to 
     subsidize total loan principal, any part of which is to be 
     guaranteed, not to exceed $36,900,000.

                   Community Planning and Development

                community development block grants fund

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For grants to States and units of general local government 
     and for related expenses, not otherwise provided for, to 
     carry out a community development grants program as 
     authorized by title I of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1974, as amended (the ``Act'' herein) (42 
     U.S.C. 5301), $4,600,000,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 1999, [of which $300,000,000 shall become 
     available for obligation on September 30, 1997, and] of which 
     [$61,400,000] $68,500,000 shall be for grants to Indian 
     tribes notwithstanding section 106(a)(1) of the Act: 
     Provided, That $2,100,000 shall be available as a grant to 
     the Housing Assistance Council, [$1,000,000] $1,500,000 shall 
     be available as a grant to the National American Indian 
     Housing Council, and $49,000,000 shall be available for 
     grants pursuant to section 107 of such Act, including up to 
     $14,000,000 for the development and operation of a management 
     information system: Provided further, That not to exceed 20 
     percent of any grant made with funds appropriated herein 
     (other than a grant made available under the preceding 
     proviso to the Housing Assistance Council or the National 
     American Indian Housing Council, or a grant using funds under 
     section 107(b)(3) of the Housing and Community Development 
     Act of 1974, as amended) shall be expended for ``Planning and 
     Management Development'' and ``Administration'' as defined in 
     regulations promulgated by the Department: Provided further, 
     That for fiscal year 1997 and thereafter, section 105(a)(25) 
     of such Act, shall continue to be effective and the 
     termination and conforming provisions of section 907(b)(2) of 
     the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act shall 
     not be effective: Provided further, That section 916(f) of 
     the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act is 
     repealed.
       Of the amount provided under this heading, the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development may use up to $50,000,000 for 
     grants to public housing agencies (including Indian housing 
     authorities), nonprofit corporations, and other appropriate 
     entities for a supportive services program to assist 
     residents of public and assisted housing, former residents of 
     such housing receiving tenant-based assistance under section 
     8 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1437f), and other low-income 
     families and individuals to become self-sufficient: Provided, 
     That the program shall provide supportive services, 
     principally for the benefit of public housing residents, to 
     the elderly and the disabled, and to families with children 
     where the head of household would benefit from the receipt of 
     supportive services and is working, seeking work, or is 
     preparing for work by participating in job training or 
     educational programs: Provided further, That the supportive 
     services shall include congregate services for the elderly 
     and disabled, service coordinators, and coordinated 
     educational, training, and other supportive services, 
     including academic skills training, job search assistance, 
     assistance related to retaining employment, vocational and 
     entrepreneurship development and support programs, 
     transportation, and child care: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary shall require applications to demonstrate firm 
     commitments of funding or services from other sources: 
     Provided further, That the Secretary shall select public and 
     Indian housing agencies to receive assistance under this head 
     on a competitive basis, taking into account the quality of 
     the proposed program (including any innovative approaches), 
     the extent of the proposed coordination of supportive 
     services, the extent of commitments of funding or services 
     from other sources, the extent to which the proposed program 
     includes reasonably achievable, quantifiable goals for 
     measuring performance under the program over a three-year 
     period, the extent of success an agency has had in carrying 
     out other comparable initiatives, and other appropriate 
     criteria established by the Secretary.
       Of the amount made available under this heading, 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, [$20,000,000] 
     $40,000,000 shall be available for youthbuild program 
     activities authorized by subtitle D of title IV of the 
     Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, as 
     amended, and such activities shall be an eligible activity 
     with respect to any funds made available under this heading.
       Of the amount made available under this heading, 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, $60,000,000 shall 
     be available for the lead-based paint hazard reduction 
     program as authorized under sections 1011 and 1053 of the 
     Residential Lead-Based Hazard Reduction Act of 1992.
       For the cost of guaranteed loans, $31,750,000, as 
     authorized by section 108 of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1974: Provided, That such costs, including 
     the cost of modifying such loans, shall be as defined in 
     section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as 
     amended: Provided further, That these funds are available to 
     subsidize total loan principal, any part of which is to be 
     guaranteed, not to exceed $1,500,000,000, notwithstanding any 
     aggregate limitation on outstanding obligations guaranteed in 
     section 108(k) of the Housing and Community Development Act 
     of 1974. In addition, for administrative expenses to carry 
     out the guaranteed loan program, $675,000 which shall be 
     transferred to and merged with the appropriation for 
     departmental salaries and expenses.


                  home investment partnerships program

       For the HOME investment partnerships program, as authorized 
     under title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
     Housing Act (Public Law 101-625), as amended, $1,400,000,000, 
     to remain available until expended: Provided, That 
     $21,000,000 shall be available for grants to Indian Tribes: 
     Provided further, That up to 0.5 percent, but not less than 
     $7,000,000, shall be available for the development and 
     operation of a management information system: Provided 
     further, That $15,000,000 shall be available for Housing 
     Counseling under section 106 of the Housing and Urban 
     Development Act of 1968.

                       homeless assistance funds

       For the emergency shelter grants program (as authorized 
     under subtitle B of title IV of the Stewart B. McKinney 
     Homeless Assistance Act (Public Law 100-77), as amended); the 
     supportive housing program (as authorized under subtitle C of 
     title IV of such Act); the section 8 moderate rehabilitation 
     single room occupancy program (as authorized under the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937, as amended) to assist homeless 
     individuals pursuant to section 441 of the Stewart B. 
     McKinney Homeless Assistance Act; and the shelter plus care 
     program (as authorized under subtitle F of title IV of such 
     Act), $823,000,000, to remain available until expended.

[[Page S9696]]

              housing opportunities for persons with aids


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For carrying out the Housing Opportunities for Persons with 
     AIDS program, as authorized by the AIDS Housing Opportunity 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 12901), $171,000,000, to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That any amounts previously 
     appropriated for such program, and any related assets and 
     liabilities, in the ``Annual contributions for assisted 
     housing'' account, shall be transferred to and merged with 
     amounts in this account.

                     Federal Housing Administration

             fha--mutual mortgage insurance program account

                     (including transfers of funds)

       During fiscal year 1997, commitments to guarantee loans to 
     carry out the purposes of section 203(b) of the National 
     Housing Act, as amended, shall not exceed a loan principal of 
     $110,000,000,000: Provided, That during fiscal year 1997, the 
     Secretary shall sell assigned mortgage notes having an unpaid 
     principal balance of up to $2,000,000,000, which notes were 
     originally insured under section 203(b) of the National 
     Housing Act: Provided further, That the Secretary may use the 
     amount of any negative subsidy resulting from the sale of 
     such assigned mortgage notes during fiscal year 1997 for the 
     purposes included under this heading.
       During fiscal year 1997, obligations to make direct loans 
     to carry out the purposes of section 204(g) of the National 
     Housing Act, as amended, shall not exceed $200,000,000: 
     Provided, That the foregoing amount shall be for loans to 
     nonprofit and governmental entities in connection with sales 
     of single family real properties owned by the Secretary and 
     formerly insured under section 203 of such Act.
       For administrative expenses necessary to carry out the 
     guaranteed and direct loan program, [$341,595,000] 
     $350,595,000, to be derived from the FHA-mutual mortgage 
     insurance guaranteed loans receipt account, of which not to 
     exceed [$334,483,000] $343,483,000 shall be transferred to 
     the appropriation for departmental salaries and expenses; and 
     of which not to exceed $7,112,000 shall be transferred to the 
     appropriation for the Office of Inspector General.

             fha--general and special risk program account

                     (including transfers of funds)

       For the cost of guaranteed loans, as authorized by sections 
     238 and 519 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-3 
     and 1735c), including the cost of loan guarantee 
     modifications (as that term is defined in section 502 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended) $85,000,0000, 
     to remain available until expended: Provided, That these 
     funds are available to subsidize total loan principal, any 
     part of which is to be guaranteed, of up to $17,400,000,000: 
     Provided further, That during fiscal year 1997, the Secretary 
     shall sell assigned notes having an unpaid principal balance 
     of up to $2,500,000,000, which notes are held by the 
     Secretary under the General Insurance and Special Risk 
     Insurance funds: Provided further, That any amounts made 
     available in any prior appropriations Act for the cost (as 
     such term is defined in section 502 of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974) of guaranteed loans that are obligations 
     of the funds established under section 238 or 519 of the 
     National Housing Act that have not been obligated or that are 
     deobligated shall be available to the Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development in connection with the making of such 
     guarantees and shall remain available until expended, 
     notwithstanding the expiration of any period of availability 
     otherwise applicable to such amounts.
       Gross obligations for the principal amount of direct loans, 
     as authorized by sections 204(g), 207(l), 238(a), and 519(a) 
     of the National Housing Act, shall not exceed $120,000,000; 
     of which not to exceed $100,000,000 shall be for bridge 
     financing in connection with the sale of multifamily real 
     properties owned by the Secretary and formerly insured under 
     such Act; and of which not to exceed $20,000,000 shall be for 
     loans to nonprofit and governmental entities in connection 
     with the sale of single-family real properties owned by the 
     Secretary and formerly insured under such Act.
       In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry 
     out the guaranteed and direct loan programs, [$202,470,000, 
     of which $198,299,000] $207,470,000, of which $203,299,000 
     shall be transferred to the appropriation for departmental 
     salaries and expenses; and of which $4,171,000 shall be 
     transferred to the appropriation for the Office of Inspector 
     General.

                Government National Mortgage Association

guarantees of mortgage-backed securities loan guarantee program account

                     (including transfer of funds)

       During fiscal year 1997, new commitments to issue 
     guarantees to carry out the purposes of section 306 of the 
     National Housing Act, as amended (12 U.S.C. 1721(g)), shall 
     not exceed $110,000,000,000.
       For administrative expenses necessary to carry out the 
     guaranteed mortgage-backed securities program, [$9,101,000] 
     $9,383,000, to be derived from the GNMA-guarantees of 
     mortgage-backed securities guaranteed loan receipt account, 
     of which not to exceed [$9,101,000] $9,383,000 shall be 
     transferred to the appropriation for departmental salaries 
     and expenses.

                    Policy Development and Research

                        research and technology

       For contracts, grants, and necessary expenses of programs 
     of research and studies relating to housing and urban 
     problems, not otherwise provided for, as authorized by title 
     V of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970, as 
     amended (12 U.S.C. 1701z-1 et seq.), including carrying out 
     the functions of the Secretary under section 1(a)(1)(i) of 
     Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1968, $34,000,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 1998.

                   Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity

                        fair housing activities

       For contracts, grants, and other assistance, not otherwise 
     provided for, as authorized by title VIII of the Civil Rights 
     Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 
     1988, and for contracts with qualified fair housing 
     enforcement organizations, as authorized by section 561 of 
     the Housing and Community Development Act of 1987, as 
     amended, $30,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     1998, of which $15,000,000 shall be to carry out activities 
     pursuant to section 561.

                     Management and Administration

                         salaries and expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary administrative and non-administrative 
     expenses of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, 
     not otherwise provided for, including not to exceed $7,000 
     for official reception and representation expenses, 
     [$962,558,000 (reduced by $1,411,000) (reduced by 
     $42,000,000)] $976,840,000, of which [$532,782,000] 
     $546,782,000 shall be provided from the various funds of the 
     Federal Housing Administration, [$9,101,000] $9,383,000 shall 
     be provided from funds of the Government National Mortgage 
     Association, and $675,000 shall be provided from the 
     Community Development Grants Program account.


                      Office of Inspector General

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, as amended, $52,850,000, of which $11,283,000 shall 
     be provided from the various funds of the Federal Housing 
     Administration and $5,000,000 shall be [provided] transferred 
     from the amount earmarked for Operation Safe Home in the Drug 
     elimination grants for low income housing account.

             Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight

                         salaries and expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For carrying out the Federal Housing Enterprise Financial 
     Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, [$14,895,000] $15,751,000, 
     to remain available until expended, from the Federal Housing 
     Enterprise Oversight Fund: Provided, That such amounts shall 
     be collected by the Director as authorized by section 1316(a) 
     and (b) of such Act, and deposited in the Fund under section 
     1316(f) of such Act.

                       administrative provisions

       [Sec. 201. Minimum Rents.--Notwithstanding section 3(a) and 
     8(o)(2) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended, 
     for fiscal year 1997--
       [(1) public housing agencies shall require each family who 
     is assisted under the certificate or moderate rehabilitation 
     program under section 8 of such Act to pay a minimum monthly 
     rent of up to $25;
       [(2) public housing agencies shall reduce the monthly 
     assistance payment on behalf of each family who is assisted 
     under the voucher program under section 8 of such Act so that 
     the family pays a minimum monthly rent of up to $25;
       [(3) with respect to housing assisted under other programs 
     for rental assistance under section 8 of such Act, the 
     Secretary shall require each family who is assisted under 
     such program to pay a minimum monthly rent of up to $25; and
       [(4) public housing agencies shall require each family who 
     is assisted under the public housing program (including 
     public housing for Indian families) to pay a minimum monthly 
     rent of up to $25.]
       Sec. 201. Extenders.--(a) Public Housing Funding 
     Flexibility.--Section 201(a)(2) of the Departments of 
     Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and 
     Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996 is amended by 
     striking ``1996'' and inserting ``1997''.
       (b) One-for-One Replacement of Public and Indian Housing.--
     Section 1002(d) of Public Law 104-19 is amended by striking 
     ``before September 30, 1996'' and inserting ``on or before 
     September 30, 1997''.
       (c) Public and Assisted Housing Rents, Income Adjustments, 
     and Preferences.--(1) Section 402(a) of the Balanced Budget 
     Downpayment Act, I is amended by inserting after ``1995'' the 
     following: ``, and effective for fiscal year 1997''.
       (2) Section 402(f) of such Act is amended by striking 
     ``fiscal year 1996'' and inserting ``fiscal years 1996 and 
     1997''.
       (3) The second sentence of section 230 of the Departments 
     of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and 
     Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996 is amended by 
     inserting before the period the following: ``during the 
     entire time the family receives assistance under the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937''.

[[Page S9697]]

       (d) Applicability to IHAS.--In accordance with section 
     201(b)(2) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, the 
     amendments made by subsections (a), (b), and (c) shall apply 
     to public housing developed or operated pursuant to a 
     contract between the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development and an Indian housing authority.
       (e) Streamlining Section 8 Tenant-Based Assistance.--
     Section 203(d) of the Departments of Veterans Affairs and 
     Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 1996 is amended by striking ``fiscal year 
     1996'' and inserting ``fiscal years 1996 and 1997''.
       (f) Section 8 Fair Market Rentals and Delay in 
     Reissuance.--(1) The first sentence of section 403(a) of the 
     Balanced Budget Downpayment Act, I, is amended by striking 
     ``1996'' and inserting ``1997''.
       (2) Section 403(c) of such Act is amended--
       (A) by striking ``fiscal year 1996'' and inserting ``fiscal 
     years 1996 and 1997''; and
       (B) by inserting before the semicolon the following: ``for 
     assistance made available during fiscal year 1996 and October 
     1, 1997 for assistance made available during fiscal year 
     1997''.
       (g) Section 8 Rent Adjustments.--Section 8(c)(2)(A) of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 is amended--
       (1) in the third sentence by inserting ``, fiscal year 1996 
     prior to April 26, 1996, and fiscal year 1997'' after 
     ``1995'';
       (2) in the fourth sentence, by striking ``For'' and 
     inserting ``Except for assistance under the certificate 
     program, for'';
       (3) after the fourth sentence, by inserting the following 
     new sentence: ``In the case of assistance under the 
     certificate program, 0.01 shall be subtracted from the amount 
     of the annual adjustment factor (except that the factor shall 
     not be reduced to less than 1.0), and the adjusted rent shall 
     not exceed the rent for a comparable unassisted unit of 
     similar quality, type, and age in the market area.''; and
       (4) in the last sentence, by--
       (A) striking ``sentence'' and inserting ``two sentences''; 
     and
       (B) inserting ``, fiscal year 1996 prior to April 26, 1996, 
     and fiscal year 1997'' after ``1995''.
       Sec. 202. Administrative Fees.--Notwithstanding section 
     8(q) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended--
       (a) The Secretary shall establish fees for the cost of 
     administering the certificate, voucher and moderate 
     rehabilitation programs.
       (1)(A) For fiscal year 1997, the fee for each month for 
     which a dwelling unit is covered by an assistance contract 
     shall be 7.5 percent of the base amount, adjusted as provided 
     herein, in the case of an agency that, on an annual basis, is 
     administering a program of no more than 600 units, and 7 
     percent of the base amount, adjusted as provided herein, for 
     each additional unit above 600.
       (B) The base amount shall be the higher of--
       (i) the fair market rental for fiscal year 1993 for a 2-
     bedroom existing rental dwelling unit in the market area of 
     the agency; and
       (ii) such fair market rental for fiscal year 1994, but not 
     more than 103.5 percent of the amount determined under clause 
     (i).
       (C) The base amount shall be adjusted to reflect changes in 
     the wage data or other objectively measurable data that 
     reflect the costs of administering the program during fiscal 
     year 1996; except that the Secretary may require that the 
     base amount be not less than a minimum amount and not more 
     than a maximum amount.
       (2) For subsequent fiscal years, the Secretary shall 
     publish a notice in the Federal Register, for each geographic 
     area, establishing the amount of the fee that would apply for 
     the agencies administering the program, based on changes in 
     wage data or other objectively measurable data that reflect 
     the cost of administering the program, as determined by the 
     Secretary.
       (3) The Secretary may increase the fee if necessary to 
     reflect higher costs of administering small programs and 
     programs operating over large geographic areas.
       (4) The Secretary may decrease the fee for PHA-owned units.
       (b) Beginning in fiscal year 1997 and thereafter, the 
     Secretary shall also establish reasonable fees (as determined 
     by the Secretary) for--
       (1) the costs of preliminary expenses, in the amount of 
     $500, for a public housing agency, but only in the first year 
     it administers a tenant-based assistance program under the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 and only if, immediately 
     before the effective date of this Act, it was not 
     administering a tenant-based assistance program under the 
     1937 Act (as in effect immediately before the effective date 
     of this Act), in connection with its initial increment of 
     assistance received;
       (2) the costs incurred in assisting families who experience 
     difficulty (as determined by the Secretary) in obtaining 
     appropriate housing under the program; and
       (3) extraordinary costs approved by the Secretary.
       Sec. 203. Single Family Assignment Program.--Section 407(c) 
     of the Balanced Budget Downpayment Act, I (12 U.S.C. 1710 
     note), is amended by striking ``October 1, 1996'' and 
     inserting ``October 1, 1997''.
       Sec. 204. Flexible Authority.--During fiscal year 1997 and 
     fiscal years thereafter, the Secretary may manage and dispose 
     of multifamily properties owned by the Secretary and 
     multifamily mortgages held by the Secretary on such terms and 
     conditions as the Secretary may determine, notwithstanding 
     any other provision of law.
       Sec. 205. Use of Available Funding for Homeownership.--Up 
     to $20,000,000 of amounts of unobligated balances that are or 
     become available from the Nehemiah Housing Opportunity Grant 
     program, repealed under section 289(b) of the Cranston-
     Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, Public Law 101-625, 
     shall be available for use for activities relating to 
     promotion and implementation of homeownership in targeted 
     geographic areas, as determined by the Secretary.
       Sec. 206. Debt Forgiveness.--The Secretary of Housing and 
     Urban Development shall cancel the indebtedness of the Greene 
     County Rural Health Center relating to a loan received under 
     the Public Facility Loan program to establish the health 
     center (Loan #Mis-22-PFL0096). The Greene County Rural Health 
     Center is hereby relieved of all liability to the Federal 
     Government for such loan and any fees and charges payable in 
     connection with such loan.
       Sec. 207. Flexible Subsidy Fund.--From the fund established 
     by section 236(g) of the National Housing Act, as amended, 
     all uncommitted balances of excess rental charges as of 
     September 30, 1996, and any collection during fiscal year 
     1997, shall be transferred, as authorized under such section, 
     to the fund authorized under section 201(j) of the Housing 
     and Community Development Amendments of 1978, as amended.
       Sec. 208. Rental Housing Assistance.--The limitation 
     otherwise applicable to the maximum payments that may be 
     required in any fiscal year by all contracts entered into 
     under section 236 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 
     1715z-1) is reduced in fiscal year 1997 by not more than 
     $2,000,000 in uncommitted balances of authorizations provided 
     for this purpose in appropriations Acts.
       Sec. 209. D.C. Modernization Funding.--Notwithstanding the 
     provisions of section 14(k)(5)(D) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937, the withheld modernization funds that 
     became credited in fiscal years 1993, 1994 and 1995, due to 
     the troubled status of the former Department of Public and 
     Assisted Housing of the District of Columbia, shall be made 
     available without diminution to its successor, the District 
     of Columbia Housing Authority, at such time between the 
     effective date of this Act and the end of fiscal year 1998 as 
     the District of Columbia Housing Authority is no longer 
     deemed ``mod-troubled'' under section 6(j)(2)(A)(i) of such 
     Act; after fiscal year 1998, the District of Columbia Housing 
     Authority shall become subject to the provisions of section 
     14(k)(5)(D) of such Act should it remain mod-troubled.
       Sec. 210. Financing Adjustment Factors.--Fifty per centum 
     of the amounts of budget authority, or in lieu thereof 50 per 
     centum of the cash amounts associated with such budget 
     authority, that are recaptured from projects described in 
     section 1012(a) of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless 
     Assistance Amendments Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-628, 102 
     Stat. 3224, 3268) shall be rescinded, or in the case of cash, 
     shall be remitted to the Treasury, and such amounts of budget 
     authority or cash recaptured and not rescinded or remitted to 
     the Treasury shall be used by State housing finance agencies 
     or local governments or local housing agencies with projects 
     approved by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     for which settlement occurred after January 1, 1992, in 
     accordance with such section.
       Sec. 211. Section 8 Contract Renewals.--(a) Authority.--
     Notwithstanding section 405(a) of Public Law 104-99, for 
     fiscal year 1997, the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development may use amounts available for the renewal of 
     assistance under section 8 of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937, upon termination or expiration of a contract for 
     assistance under section 8 (other than a contract for tenant-
     based assistance) to provide assistance under section 8, at 
     rent levels not to exceed the lesser of (1) the rents in 
     effect upon termination or expiration, or (2) comparable 
     market rents, for the eligible families assisted under the 
     contracts at expiration or termination but, in no case may 
     rents be increased to comparable market rents. The contract 
     term of such renewal of assistance shall not exceed one year. 
     In the case of any project assisted under section 8, not 
     insured under the National Housing Act, and for which the 
     original primary financing was provided by a public agency 
     and remains outstanding, contract rents shall be renewed at 
     the rents in effect upon termination or expiration of the 
     contract. Such assistance shall be in accordance with terms 
     and conditions prescribed by the Secretary. The Secretary may 
     approve assisted rents in excess of market rents (but not 
     more than the rents in effect upon termination or expiration) 
     for a particular housing project, but only if and to the 
     extent that the Secretary finds that market rents are not 
     sufficient to cover debt service and reasonable operating 
     expenses for that project, taking into account reasonable 
     operating costs for similar properties.
       (b) Repeal.--The sentence immediately preceding section 
     8(w) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 
     1437f(w)) is hereby repealed.
       Sec. 212. FHA Multifamily Demonstration.--Section 210(f) of 
     the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban 
     Development and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996 
     (Public Law 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321, April 26, 1996) is 
     amended (1) by striking out ``$30,000,000'' and inserting 
     ``$40,000,000'' in lieu thereof, and (2) by inserting the 
     following new proviso before the period: ``: Provided 
     further, That not less than $10,000,000 of the amount 
     appropriated by this subsection shall be available for 
     reducing monthly debt service costs by offering owners 
     secondary mortgages on deferred payment terms''.
        Sec. 213. Hawaiian Home Lands.--Section 282 of the 
     Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 
     12832) is amended by

[[Page S9698]]

     adding at the end the following new sentence: ``The Secretary 
     may waive this section in connection with the use of funds 
     made available under this title on lands set aside under the 
     Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920 (42 Stat. 108).''.

                               TITLE III

                          INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

                  American Battle Monuments Commission

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, of the 
     American Battle Monuments Commission, including the 
     acquisition of land or interest in land in foreign countries; 
     purchases and repair of uniforms for caretakers of national 
     cemeteries and monuments outside of the United States and its 
     territories and possessions; rent of office and garage space 
     in foreign countries; purchase (one for replacement only) and 
     hire of passenger motor vehicles; and insurance of official 
     motor vehicles in foreign countries, when required by law of 
     such countries; $22,265,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That where station allowance has been 
     authorized by the Department of the Army for officers of the 
     Army serving the Army at certain foreign stations, the same 
     allowance shall be authorized for officers of the Armed 
     Forces assigned to the Commission while serving at the same 
     foreign stations, and this appropriation is hereby made 
     available for the payment of such allowance: Provided 
     further, That when traveling on business of the Commission, 
     officers of the Armed Forces serving as members or as 
     Secretary of the Commission may be reimbursed for expenses as 
     provided for civilian members of the Commission: Provided 
     further, That the Commission shall reimburse other Government 
     agencies, including the Armed Forces, for salary, pay, and 
     allowances of personnel assigned to it.

                       Department of the Treasury

              Community Development Financial Institutions

   community development financial institutions fund program account

       For grants, loans, and technical assistance to qualifying 
     community development lenders, and administrative expenses of 
     the Fund, $45,000,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 1998, of which $8,000,000 may be used for the cost of 
     direct loans, and up to $800,000 may be used for 
     administrative expenses to carry out the direct loan program: 
     Provided, That the cost of direct loans, including the cost 
     of modifying such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 
     of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided further, 
     That not more than $19,400,000 of the funds made available 
     under this heading may be used for programs and activities 
     authorized in section 114 of the Community Development 
     Banking and Financial Institutions Act of 1994.

                   Consumer Product Safety Commission

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Consumer Product Safety 
     Commission, including hire of passenger motor vehicles, 
     services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for 
     individuals not to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the 
     rate for GS-18, purchase of nominal awards to recognize non-
     Federal officials' contributions to Commission activities, 
     and not to exceed $500 for official reception and 
     representation expenses, $42,500,000.

             Corporation for National and Community Service

       national and community service programs operating expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses for the Corporation for National and 
     Community Service (referred to in the matter under this 
     heading as the ``Corporation'') in carrying out programs, 
     activities, and initiatives under the National and Community 
     Service Act of 1990 (referred to in the matter under this 
     heading as the ``Act'') (42 U.S.C. 12501 et seq.), 
     [$365,000,000] $400,500,000, of which $265,000,000 shall be 
     available for obligation from September 1, 1997, through 
     September 30, 1998: Provided, That not more than $25,000,000 
     shall be available for administrative expenses authorized 
     under section 501(a)(4) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 12671(a)(4)): 
     Provided further, That not more than $2,500 shall be for 
     official reception and representation expenses: Provided 
     further, That not more than [$40,000,000] $59,000,000, to 
     remain available without fiscal year limitation, shall be 
     transferred to the National Service Trust account for 
     educational awards authorized under subtitle D of title I of 
     the Act (42 U.S.C. 12601 et seq.): Provided further, That not 
     more than [$201,000,000] $215,000,000 of the amount provided 
     under this heading shall be available for grants under the 
     National Service Trust program authorized under subtitle C of 
     title I of the Act (42 U.S.C. 12571 et seq.) (relating to 
     activities including the Americorps program), of which not 
     more than $40,000,000 may be used to administer, reimburse or 
     support any national service program authorized under section 
     121(d)(2) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 12581(d)(2)): Provided 
     further, That not more than [$5,000,000] $5,500,000 of the 
     funds made available under this heading shall be made 
     available for the Points of Light Foundation for activities 
     authorized under title III of the Act (42 U.S.C. 12661 et 
     seq.): Provided further, That no funds shall be available for 
     national service programs run by Federal agencies authorized 
     under section 121(b) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 12571(b)): 
     Provided further, That to the maximum extent feasible, funds 
     appropriated in the preceding proviso shall be provided in a 
     manner that is consistent with the recommendations of peer 
     review panels in order to ensure that priority is given to 
     programs that demonstrate quality, innovation, replicability, 
     and sustainability: Provided further, That not more than 
     [$17,500,000] $18,000,000 of the funds made available under 
     this heading shall be available for the Civilian Community 
     Corps authorized under subtitle E of title I of the Act (42 
     U.S.C. 12611 et seq.): Provided further, That not more than 
     [$41,500,000] $43,000,000 shall be available for school-based 
     and community-based service-learning programs authorized 
     under subtitle B of title I of the Act (42 U.S.C. 12521 et 
     seq.): Provided further, That not more than $30,000,000 shall 
     be available for quality and innovation activities authorized 
     under subtitle H of title I of the Act (42 U.S.C. 12853 et 
     seq.): Provided further, That not more than $5,000,000 shall 
     be available for audits and other evaluations authorized 
     under section 179 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 12639): Provided 
     further, That no funds from any other appropriation, or from 
     funds otherwise made available to the Corporation, shall be 
     used to pay for personnel compensation and benefits, travel, 
     or any other administrative expense for the Board of 
     Directors, the Office of the Chief Executive Officer, the 
     Office of the Managing Director, the Office of the Chief 
     Financial Officer, the Office of National and Community 
     Service Programs, the Civilian Community Corps, or any field 
     office or staff of the Corporation working on the National 
     and Community Service or Civilian Community Corps programs: 
     Provided further, That to the maximum extent practicable, the 
     Corporation shall increase significantly the level of 
     matching funds and in-kind contributions provided by the 
     private sector, shall expand significantly the number of 
     educational awards provided under subtitle D of title I, and 
     shall reduce the total Federal costs per participant in all 
     programs.

                      office of inspector general

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, as amended, $2,000,000.

                       Court of Veterans Appeals

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses for the operation of the United 
     States Court of Veterans Appeals as authorized by 38 U.S.C. 
     sections 7251-7292, $9,229,000 [(increased by $1,411,000)], 
     of which [$634,000] $700,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 1998, shall be available for the purpose of 
     providing financial assistance as described, and in 
     accordance with the process and reporting procedures set 
     forth, under this heading in Public Law 102-227.

         Department of Defense--Civil Cemeterial Expenses, Army

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses, as authorized by law, for 
     maintenance, operation, and improvement of Arlington National 
     Cemetery and Soldiers' and Airmen's Home National Cemetery, 
     including the purchase of one passenger motor vehicle for 
     replacement only, and not to exceed $1,000 for official 
     reception and representation expenses, $11,600,000, to remain 
     available until expended.

                    Environmental Protection Agency

                         science and technology

       For science and technology, including research and 
     development activities, which shall include research and 
     development activities under the Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), 
     as amended; necessary expenses for personnel and related 
     costs and travel expenses, including uniforms, or allowances 
     therefore, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902; services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for individuals not 
     to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the rate for GS-18; 
     procurement of laboratory equipment and supplies; other 
     operating expenses in support of research and development; 
     construction, alteration, repair, rehabilitation and 
     renovation of facilities, not to exceed $75,000 per project, 
     [$540,000,000 (reduced by $1,500,000)] $545,000,000, which 
     shall remain available until September 30, 1998.

                 environmental programs and management

       For environmental programs and management, including 
     necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, for personnel 
     and related costs and travel expenses, including uniforms, or 
     allowances therefore, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902; 
     services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for 
     individuals not to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the 
     rate for GS-18; hire of passenger motor vehicles; hire, 
     maintenance, and operation of aircraft; purchase of reprints; 
     library memberships in societies or associations which issue 
     publications to members only or at a price to members lower 
     than to subscribers who are not members; construction, 
     alteration, repair, rehabilitation, and renovation of 
     facilities, not to exceed $75,000 per project; and not to 
     exceed $6,000 for official reception and representation 
     expenses, [$1,703,000,000 (increased by $1,500,000)] 
     $1,713,000,000, which shall remain available until September 
     30, 1998.

                      office of inspector general

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, as amended, and for construction, alteration, 
     repair, rehabilitation, and renovation of facilities, not to 
     exceed $75,000 per project, $28,500,000.

                        buildings and facilities

       For construction, repair, improvement, extension, 
     alteration, and purchase of fixed

[[Page S9699]]

     equipment or facilities of, or for use by, the Environmental 
     Protection Agency, [$107,220,000] $27,220,000, to remain 
     available until expended[:Provided, That EPA is authorized to 
     establish and construct a consolidated research facility at 
     Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, at a maximum total 
     construction cost of $232,000,000, and to obligate such 
     monies as are made available by this Act for this purpose: 
     Provided further, That EPA is authorized to construct such 
     facility through multi-year contracts incrementally funded 
     through appropriations hereafter made available for this 
     project: Provided further, That, notwithstanding the previous 
     provisos, for monies obligated pursuant to this authority, 
     EPA may not obligate monies in excess of those provided in 
     advance in annual appropriations, and such contracts shall 
     clearly provide for this limitation].

                     hazardous substance superfund

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses to carry out the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (CERCLA), as amended, including sections 111 (c)(3), 
     (c)(5), (c)(6), and (e)(4) (42 U.S.C. 9611), and for 
     construction, alteration, repair, rehabilitation, and 
     renovation of facilities, not to exceed $75,000 per project; 
     not to exceed [$2,201,200,000] $1,394,245,000 (of which 
     $100,000,000 shall not become available until September 1, 
     1997), to remain available until expended, consisting of 
     [$1,951,200,000] $1,144,245,000 as authorized by section 
     517(a) of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 
     1986 (SARA), as amended by Public Law 101-508, and 
     $250,000,000 as a payment from general revenues to the 
     Hazardous Substance Superfund as authorized by section 517(b) 
     of SARA, as amended by Public Law 101-508: Provided, That 
     funds appropriated under this heading may be allocated to 
     other Federal agencies in accordance with section 111(a) of 
     CERCLA: Provided further, That $11,000,000 of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading shall be transferred to the 
     ``Office of Inspector General'' appropriation to remain 
     available until September 30, 1997: Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding section 111(m) of CERCLA or any other 
     provision of law, not to exceed [$59,000,000] $64,000,000 of 
     the funds appropriated under this heading shall be available 
     to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry to 
     carry out activities described in sections 104(i), 111(c)(4), 
     and 111(c)(14) of CERCLA and section 118(f) of the Superfund 
     Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986: Provided further, 
     That $35,000,000 of the funds appropriated under this heading 
     shall be transferred to the ``Science and technology'' 
     appropriation to remain available until September 30, 1998: 
     Provided further, That none of the funds appropriated under 
     this heading shall be available for the Agency for Toxic 
     Substances and Disease Registry to issue in excess of 40 
     toxicological profiles pursuant to section 104(i) of CERCLA 
     during fiscal year 1997[: Provided further, That $861,000,000 
     of the funds appropriated under this heading shall become 
     available for obligation only upon the enactment of future 
     appropriations legislation that specifically makes these 
     funds available for obligation: Provided further, That 
     $1,200,000 of the funds appropriatated under this heading 
     shall be used by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease 
     Registry to conduct a health effects study of the Toms River 
     Cancer Cluster in the Toms River area in the State of New 
     Jersey].

              leaking underground storage tank trust fund

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses to carry out leaking underground 
     storage tank cleanup activities authorized by section 205 of 
     the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, and 
     for construction, alteration, repair, rehabilitation, and 
     renovation of facilities, not to exceed $75,000 per project, 
     [$46,500,000 (increased by $20,000,000)] $60,000,000, to 
     remain available until expended: Provided, That no more than 
     $7,000,000 shall be available for administrative expenses: 
     Provided further, That $577,000 shall be transferred to the 
     ``Office of Inspector General'' appropriation to remain 
     available until September 30, 1997.

                           oil spill response

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For expenses necessary to carry out the Environmental 
     Protection Agency's responsibilities under the Oil Pollution 
     Act of 1990, $15,000,000, to be derived from the Oil Spill 
     Liability trust fund, and to remain available until expended: 
     Provided, That not more than $8,000,000 of these funds shall 
     be available for administrative expenses.

                   state and tribal assistance grants

       For environmental programs and infrastructure assistance, 
     including capitalization grants for State revolving funds and 
     performance partnership grants, [$2,768,207,000] 
     $2,815,207,000, to remain available until expended, of which 
     [$1,800,000,000] $1,976,000,000 shall be for making 
     capitalization grants for State revolving funds to support 
     water infrastructure financing; $100,000,000 for 
     architectural, engineering, planning, design, construction 
     and related activities in connection with the construction of 
     high priority water and wastewater facilities in the area of 
     the United States-Mexico Border, after consultation with the 
     appropriate border commission; $50,000,000 for grants to the 
     State of Texas, which shall be matched by an equal amount of 
     State funds from State resources, for the purpose of 
     improving wastewater treatment for colonias; $15,000,000 for 
     grants to the State of Alaska subject to an appropriate cost 
     share as determined by the Administrator, to address water 
     supply and wastewater infrastructure needs of rural and 
     Alaska Native Villages; [$129,000,000 for making grants for 
     the construction of wastewater treatment facilities and the 
     development of groundwater in accordance with the terms and 
     conditions specified for such grants in the Report 
     accompanying this Act;] and $674,207,000 for grants to States 
     and federally recognized tribes for multi-media or single 
     media pollution prevention, control and abatement and related 
     activities pursuant to the provisions set forth under this 
     heading in Public Law 104-134: Provided, That, from funds 
     appropriated under this heading, the Administrator may make 
     grants to federally recognized Indian governments for the 
     development of multi-media environmental programs: Provided 
     further, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     beginning in fiscal year 1997 the Administrator may make 
     grants to States, from funds available for obligation in the 
     State under title II of the Federal Water Pollution Control 
     Act, as amended, for administering the completion and 
     closeout of the State's construction grants program, based on 
     a budget annually negotiated with the State: Provided 
     further, That of the [$1,800,000,000] $1,976,000,000 for 
     capitalization grants for State revolving funds to support 
     water infrastructure financing, [$450,000,000] $550,000,000 
     shall be for drinking water State revolving funds, but if no 
     drinking water State revolving fund legislation is enacted by 
     June 1, 1997, these funds shall immediately be available for 
     making capitalization grants under title VI of the Federal 
     Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.

                          working capital fund


                     (including transfer of funds)

       There is hereby established in the Treasury a franchise 
     fund pilot to be known as the ``Working capital fund'', as 
     authorized by section 403 of Public Law 103-356, to be 
     available as provided in such section for expenses and 
     equipment necessary for the maintenance and operation of such 
     administrative services as the Administrator determines may 
     be performed more advantageously as central services: 
     Provided, That any inventories, equipment, and other assets 
     pertaining to the services to be provided by such fund, 
     either on hand or on order, less the related liabilities or 
     unpaid obligations, and any appropriations made hereafter for 
     the purpose of providing capital, shall be used to capitalize 
     such fund: Provided further, That such fund shall be paid in 
     advance from funds available to the Agency and other Federal 
     agencies for which such centralized services are performed, 
     at rates which will return in full all expenses of operation, 
     including accrued leave, depreciation of fund plant and 
     equipment, amortization of automated data processing (ADP) 
     software and systems (either acquired or donated), and an 
     amount necessary to maintain a reasonable operating reserve, 
     as determined by the Administrator: Provided further, That 
     such fund shall provide services on a competitive basis: 
     Provided further, That an amount not to exceed four percent 
     of the total annual income to such fund may be retained in 
     the fund for fiscal year 1997 and each fiscal year 
     thereafter, to remain available until expended, to be used 
     for the acquisition of capital equipment and for the 
     improvement and implementation of Agency financial 
     management, ADP, and other support systems: Provided further, 
     That no later than thirty days after the end of each fiscal 
     year amounts in excess of this reserve limitation shall be 
     transferred to the Treasury: Provided further, That such 
     franchise fund pilot shall terminate pursuant to section 
     403(f) of Public Law 103-356.

                       [administrative provision

       [Sec. 301. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     funds made available in this Act to the Environmental 
     Protection Agency for any account, program or project may be 
     transferred to Science and Technology for necessary research 
     activities, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in 
     the Report accompanying this Act.]

                   Executive Office of the President

                office of science and technology policy

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Science and 
     Technology Policy, in carrying out the purposes of the 
     National Science and Technology Policy, Organization, and 
     Priorities Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 6601 and 6671), hire of 
     passenger motor vehicles, and services as authorized by 5 
     U.S.C. 3109, not to exceed $2,500 for official reception and 
     representation expenses, and rental of conference rooms in 
     the District of Columbia, $4,932,000.

  council on environmental quality and office of environmental quality

       For necessary expenses to continue functions assigned to 
     the Council on Environmental Quality and Office of 
     Environmental Quality pursuant to the National Environmental 
     Policy Act of 1969, the Environmental Quality Improvement Act 
     of 1970, and Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1977, [$2,250,000] 
     $2,436,000.

                  Federal Emergency Management Agency

                            disaster relief

       For necessary expenses in carrying out the Robert T. 
     Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), [$1,120,000,000] $1,320,000,000, and, 
     notwithstanding 42 U.S.C. 5203, to become available

[[Page S9700]]

     for obligation on September 30, 1997, and remain available 
     until expended.

            disaster assistance direct loan program account

       For the cost of direct loans, $1,385,000, as authorized by 
     section 319 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and 
     Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.): Provided, 
     That such costs, including the cost of modifying such loans, 
     shall be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974, as amended: Provided further, That these 
     funds are available to subsidize gross obligations for the 
     principal amount of direct loans not to exceed $25,000,000.
       In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the 
     direct loan program, $548,000.

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, 
     including hire and purchase of motor vehicles (31 U.S.C. 
     1343); uniforms, or allowances therefor, as authorized by 5 
     U.S.C. 5901-5902; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, 
     but at rates for individuals not to exceed the per diem rate 
     equivalent to the rate for GS-18; expenses of attendance of 
     cooperating officials and individuals at meetings concerned 
     with the work of emergency preparedness; transportation in 
     connection with the continuity of Government programs to the 
     same extent and in the same manner as permitted the Secretary 
     of a Military Department under 10 U.S.C. 2632; and not to 
     exceed $2,500 for official reception and representation 
     expenses, [$168,000,000] $166,733,000.

                      office of inspector general

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, as amended, [$4,533,000] $4,673,000.

              emergency management planning and assistance

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, to 
     carry out activities under the National Flood Insurance Act 
     of 1968, as amended, and the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 
     1973, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.), the Robert T. 
     Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 
     1977, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.), the Federal Fire 
     Prevention and Control Act of 1974, as amended (15 U.S.C. 
     2201 et seq.), the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended 
     (50 U.S.C. App. 2061 et seq.), sections 107 and 303 of the 
     National Security Act of 1947, as amended (50 U.S.C. 404-
     405), and Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, [$209,101,000] 
     $199,101,000.

                   emergency food and shelter program

       To carry out an emergency food and shelter program pursuant 
     to title III of Public Law 100-77, as amended, $100,000,000: 
     Provided, That total administrative costs shall not exceed 
     three and one-half percent of the total appropriation.

                     national flood insurance fund

       For activities under the National Flood Insurance Act of 
     1968, the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, and the 
     National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994, not to exceed 
     $20,981,000 for salaries and expenses associated with flood 
     mitigation and flood insurance operations, and not to exceed 
     $78,464,000 for flood mitigation, including up to $20,000,000 
     for expenses under section 1366 of the National Flood 
     Insurance Act, which amount shall be available until 
     September 30, 1998. In fiscal year 1997, no funds in excess 
     of (1) $47,000,000 for operating expenses, (2) $335,680,000 
     for agents' commissions and taxes, and (3) $35,000,000 for 
     interest on Treasury borrowings shall be available from the 
     National Flood Insurance Fund without prior notice to the 
     Committees on Appropriations. For fiscal year 1997, flood 
     insurance rates shall not exceed the level authorized by the 
     National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994.


                          working capital fund

       For the establishment of a working capital fund for the 
     Federal Emergency Management Agency, to be available without 
     fiscal year limitation, for expenses and equipment necessary 
     for maintenance and operations of such administrative 
     services as the Director determines may be performed more 
     advantageously as central services: Provided, That any 
     inventories, equipment, and other assets pertaining to the 
     services to be provided by such fund, either on hand or on 
     order, less the related liabilities or unpaid obligations, 
     and any appropriations made hereafter for the purpose of 
     providing capital, shall be used to capitalize such fund: 
     Provided further, That such fund shall be reimbursed or 
     credited with advance payments from applicable appropriations 
     and funds of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, other 
     Federal agencies, and other sources authorized by law for 
     which such centralized services are performed, including 
     supplies, materials, and services, at rates that will return 
     in full all expenses of operation, including accrued leave, 
     depreciation of fund plant and equipment, amortization of 
     automated data processing (ADP) software and systems (either 
     acquired or donated), and an amount necessary to maintain a 
     reasonable operating reserve as determined by the Director: 
     Provided further, That income of such fund may be retained, 
     to remain available until expended, for purposes of the fund: 
     Provided further, That fees for services shall be established 
     by the Director at a level to cover the total estimated costs 
     of providing such services, such fees to be deposited in the 
     fund shall remain available until expended for purposes of 
     the fund: Provided further, That such fund shall terminate in 
     a manner consistent with section 403(f) of Public Law 103-
     356.


                        administrative provision

       The Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
     shall promulgate through rulemaking a methodology for 
     assessment and collection of fees to be assessed and 
     collected beginning in fiscal year 1997 applicable to persons 
     subject to the Federal Emergency Management Agency's 
     radiological emergency preparedness regulations. The 
     aggregate charges assessed pursuant to this section during 
     fiscal year 1997 shall approximate, but not be less than, 100 
     per centum of the amounts anticipated by the Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency to be obligated for its 
     radiological emergency preparedness program for such fiscal 
     year. The methodology for assessment and collection of fees 
     shall be fair and equitable, and shall reflect the full 
     amount of costs of providing radiological emergency planning, 
     preparedness, response and associated services. Such fees 
     shall be assessed in a manner that reflects the use of agency 
     resources for classes of regulated persons and the 
     administrative costs of collecting such fees. Fees received 
     pursuant to this section shall be deposited in the general 
     fund of the Treasury as offsetting receipts. Assessment and 
     collection of such fees are only authorized during fiscal 
     year 1997.

                    General Services Administration

                    consumer information center fund

       For necessary expenses of the Consumer Information Center, 
     including services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $2,260,000, 
     to be deposited into the Consumer Information Center Fund: 
     Provided, That the appropriations, revenues and collections 
     deposited into the fund shall be available for necessary 
     expenses of Consumer Information Center activities in the 
     aggregate amount of $7,500,000. [Administrative expenses of 
     the Consumer Information Center in fiscal year 1997 shall not 
     exceed $2,602,000.] Appropriations, revenues, and collections 
     accruing to this fund during fiscal year 1997 in excess of 
     $7,500,000 shall remain in the fund and shall not be 
     available for expenditure except as authorized in 
     appropriations Acts[: Provided further, That notwithstanding 
     any other provision of law, the Consumer Information Center 
     may accept and deposit to this account, during fiscal year 
     1997, gifts for the purpose of defraying its costs of 
     printing, publishing, and distributing consumer information 
     and educational material; may expend up to $1,100,000 of 
     those gifts for those purposes, in addition to amounts 
     otherwise appropriated; and the balance shall remain 
     available for expenditure for such purpose to the extent 
     authorized in subsequent appropriations Acts]: Provided 
     further, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Consumer Information Center may accept and deposit to this 
     account, during fiscal year 1997 and hereafter, gifts for the 
     purpose of defraying its costs of printing, publishing, and 
     distributing consumer information and educational materials 
     and undertaking other consumer information activities; may 
     expend those gifts for those purposes, in addition to amounts 
     appropriated or otherwise made available; and the balance 
     shall remain available for expenditure for such purpose.

             National Aeronautics and Space Administration

                           human space flight

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, in the 
     conduct and support of human space flight research and 
     development activities, including research, development, 
     operations, and services; maintenance; construction of 
     facilities including repair, rehabilitation, and modification 
     of real and personal property, and acquisition or 
     condemnation of real property, as authorized by law; space 
     flight, spacecraft control and communications activities 
     including operations, production, and services; and purchase, 
     lease, charter, maintenance and operation of mission and 
     administrative aircraft, $5,362,900,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 1998.

                  science, aeronautics and technology

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, in the 
     conduct and support of science, aeronautics and technology 
     research and development activities, including research, 
     development, operations, and services; maintenance; 
     construction of facilities including repair, rehabilitation, 
     and modification of real and personal property, and 
     acquisition or condemnation of real property, as authorized 
     by law; space flight, spacecraft control and communications 
     activities including operations, production, and services; 
     and purchase, lease, charter, maintenance and operation of 
     mission and administrative aircraft, [$5,662,100,000] 
     $5,762,100,000, to remain available until September 30, 1998. 
     Chapter VII of Public Law 104-6 is amended under the heading, 
     ``National Aeronautics and Space Administration'' by 
     replacing ``September 30, 1997'' with ``September 30, 1998'' 
     and ``1996'' with ``1997''.

                            mission support

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, in 
     carrying out mission support for human space flight programs 
     and science, aeronautical, and technology programs, including 
     research operations and support; space communications 
     activities including operations, production and services; 
     maintenance; construction of facilities including repair, 
     rehabilitation, and modification of facilities, minor 
     construction of new facilities

[[Page S9701]]

     and additions to existing facilities, facility planning and 
     design, environmental compliance and restoration, and 
     acquisition or condemnation of real property, as authorized 
     by law; program management; personnel and related costs, 
     including uniforms or allowances therefor, as authorized by 5 
     U.S.C. 5901-5902; travel expenses; purchase, lease charter, 
     maintenance, and operation of mission and administrative 
     aircraft; not to exceed $35,000 for official reception and 
     representation expenses; and purchase (not to exceed 33 for 
     replacement only) and hire of passenger motor vehicles; 
     $2,562,200,000, to remain available until September 30, 1998.

                      office of inspector general

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the Inspector General Act of 1978, as 
     amended, $17,000,000.


                       Administrative Provisions

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Notwithstanding the limitation on the availability of funds 
     appropriated for ``Human space flight'', ``Science, 
     aeronautics and technology'', or ``Mission support'' by this 
     appropriations Act, when (1) any activity has been initiated 
     by the incurrence of obligations for construction of 
     facilities as authorized by law, or (2) amounts are provided 
     for full-funding for the Tracking and Data Relay Satellite 
     (TDRS) replenishment program, such amount available for such 
     activity shall remain available until expended. This 
     provision does not apply to the amounts appropriated in 
     ``Mission support'' pursuant to the authorization for repair, 
     rehabilitation and modification of facilities, minor 
     construction of new facilities and additions to existing 
     facilities, and facility planning and design.
       Notwithstanding the limitation on the availability of funds 
     appropriated for ``Human space flight'', ``Science, 
     aeronautics and technology'', or ``Mission support'' by this 
     appropriations Act, the amounts appropriated for construction 
     of facilities shall remain available until September 30, 
     1999.
       Notwithstanding the limitation on the availability of funds 
     appropriated for ``Mission support'' and ``Office of 
     Inspector General'', amounts made available by this Act for 
     personnel and related costs and travel expenses of the 
     National Aeronautics and Space Administration shall remain 
     available until September 30, 1997 and may be used to enter 
     into contracts for training, investigations, cost associated 
     with personnel relocation, and for other services, to be 
     provided during the next fiscal year.
       In order to avoid or minimize the need for involuntary 
     separations due to a reduction in force, installation 
     closure, reorganization, transfer of function, or similar 
     action affecting the National Aeronautics and Space 
     Administration, the Administrator shall establish a program 
     under which separation pay, subject to the availability of 
     appropriated funds, may be offered to encourage employees to 
     separate from service voluntarily, whether by retirement or 
     resignation: Provided, That payments to individual employees 
     shall not exceed $25,000.

                  National Credit Union Administration

                       central liquidity facility

       During fiscal year 1997, gross obligations of the Central 
     Liquidity Facility for the principal amount of new direct 
     loans to member credit unions, as authorized by the National 
     Credit Union Central Liquidity Facility Act (12 U.S.C. 1795), 
     shall not exceed $600,000,000: Provided, That administrative 
     expenses of the Central Liquidity Facility in fiscal year 
     1997 shall not exceed $560,000: Provided further, That 
     $1,000,000, together with amounts of principal and interest 
     on loans repaid, to be available until expended, is available 
     for loans to community development credit unions.

                      National Science Foundation

                    research and related activities

       For necessary expenses in carrying out the National Science 
     Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1861-1875), and 
     the Act to establish a National Medal of Science (42 U.S.C. 
     1880-1881); services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; 
     maintenance and operation of aircraft and purchase of flight 
     services for research support; acquisition of aircraft; 
     [$2,422,000,000 (increased by $9,110,000)] $2,432,000,000, of 
     which not to exceed $226,000,000 shall remain available until 
     expended for Polar research and operations support, and for 
     reimbursement to other Federal agencies for operational and 
     science support and logistical and other related activities 
     for the United States Antarctic program; the balance to 
     remain available until September 30, 1998: Provided, That 
     receipts for scientific support services and materials 
     furnished by the National Research Centers and other National 
     Science Foundation supported research facilities may be 
     credited to this appropriation: Provided further, That to the 
     extent that the amount appropriated is less than the total 
     amount authorized to be appropriated for included program 
     activities, all amounts, including floors and ceilings, 
     specified in the authorizing Act for those program activities 
     or their subactivities shall be reduced proportionally.

                        major research equipment

       For necessary expenses of major construction projects 
     pursuant to the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as 
     amended, $80,000,000, to remain available until expended.

                     education and human resources

       For necessary expenses in carrying out science and 
     engineering education and human resources programs and 
     activities pursuant to the National Science Foundation Act of 
     1950, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1861-1875), including services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 and rental of conference rooms in 
     the District of Columbia, [$612,000,000] $624,000,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 1998: Provided, That to 
     the extent that the amount of this appropriation is less than 
     the total amount authorized to be appropriated for included 
     program activities, all amounts, including floors and 
     ceilings, specified in the authorizing Act for those program 
     activities or their subactivities shall be reduced 
     proportionally.

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary salaries and expenses of the National Science 
     Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1861-1875); 
     services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; hire of passenger motor 
     vehicles; not to exceed $9,000 for official reception and 
     representation expenses; uniforms or allowances therefor, as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902; rental of conference rooms 
     in the District of Columbia; reimbursement of the General 
     Services Administration for security guard services and 
     headquarters relocation; $134,310,000 [(reduced by 
     $9,110,000)]: Provided, That contracts may be entered into 
     under salaries and expenses in fiscal year 1997 for 
     maintenance and operation of facilities, and for other 
     services, to be provided during the next fiscal year.

                      office of inspector general

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     as authorized by the Inspector General Act of 1978, as 
     amended, $4,690,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     1998.

                 Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation

          payment to the neighborhood reinvestment corporation

       For payment to the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation 
     for use in neighborhood reinvestment activities, as 
     authorized by the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 8101-8107), [$50,000,000] $49,900,000.

                        Selective Service System

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Selective Service System, 
     including expenses of attendance at meetings and of training 
     for uniformed personnel assigned to the Selective Service 
     System, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 4101-4118 for civilian 
     employees; and not to exceed $1,000 for official reception 
     and representation expenses; $22,930,000: Provided, That 
     during the current fiscal year, the President may exempt this 
     appropriation from the provisions of 31 U.S.C. 1341, whenever 
     he deems such action to be necessary in the interest of 
     national defense: Provided further, That none of the funds 
     appropriated by this Act may be expended for or in connection 
     with the induction of any person into the Armed Forces of the 
     United States.

                      TITLE IV--GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Sec. 401. Where appropriations in titles I, II, and III of 
     this Act are expendable for travel expenses and no specific 
     limitation has been placed thereon, the expenditures for such 
     travel expenses may not exceed the amounts set forth 
     therefore in the budget estimates submitted for the 
     appropriations: Provided, That this provision does not apply 
     to accounts that do not contain an object classification for 
     travel: Provided further, That this section shall not apply 
     to travel performed by uncompensated officials of local 
     boards and appeal boards of the Selective Service System; to 
     travel performed directly in connection with care and 
     treatment of medical beneficiaries of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs; to travel performed in connection with 
     major disasters or emergencies declared or determined by the 
     President under the provisions of the Robert T. Stafford 
     Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act; to travel 
     performed by the Offices of Inspector General in connection 
     with audits and investigations; or to payments to interagency 
     motor pools where separately set forth in the budget 
     schedules: Provided further, That if appropriations in titles 
     I, II, and III exceed the amounts set forth in budget 
     estimates initially submitted for such appropriations, the 
     expenditures for travel may correspondingly exceed the 
     amounts therefore set forth in the estimates in the same 
     proportion.
       Sec. 402. Appropriations and funds available for the 
     administrative expenses of the Department of Housing and 
     Urban Development and the Selective Service System shall be 
     available in the current fiscal year for purchase of 
     uniforms, or allowances therefor, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 
     5901-5902; hire of passenger motor vehicles; and services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109.
       Sec. 403. Funds of the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development subject to the Government Corporation Control Act 
     or section 402 of the Housing Act of 1950 shall be available, 
     without regard to the limitations on administrative expenses, 
     for legal services on a contract or fee basis, and for 
     utilizing and making payment for services and facilities of 
     Federal National Mortgage Association, Government National 
     Mortgage Association, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, 
     Federal Financing Bank, Federal Reserve banks or any member 
     thereof, Federal Home Loan banks, and any insured bank within 
     the meaning of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Act, 
     as amended (12 U.S.C. 1811-1831).

[[Page S9702]]

       Sec. 404. No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current 
     fiscal year unless expressly so provided herein.
       Sec. 405. No funds appropriated by this Act may be 
     expended--
       (1) pursuant to a certification of an officer or employee 
     of the United States unless--
       (A) such certification is accompanied by, or is part of, a 
     voucher or abstract which describes the payee or payees and 
     the items or services for which such expenditure is being 
     made, or
       (B) the expenditure of funds pursuant to such 
     certification, and without such a voucher or abstract, is 
     specifically authorized by law; and
       (2) unless such expenditure is subject to audit by the 
     General Accounting Office or is specifically exempt by law 
     from such audit.
       Sec. 406. None of the funds provided in this Act to any 
     department or agency may be expended for the transportation 
     of any officer or employee of such department or agency 
     between his domicile and his place of employment, with the 
     exception of any officer or employee authorized such 
     transportation under 31 U.S.C. 1344 or 5 U.S.C. 7905.
       Sec. 407. None of the funds provided in this Act may be 
     used for payment, through grants or contracts, to recipients 
     that do not share in the cost of conducting research 
     resulting from proposals not specifically solicited by the 
     Government: Provided, That the extent of cost sharing by the 
     recipient shall reflect the mutuality of interest of the 
     grantee or contractor and the Government in the research.
       Sec. 408. None of the funds in this Act may be used, 
     directly or through grants, to pay or to provide 
     reimbursement for payment of the salary of a consultant 
     (whether retained by the Federal Government or a grantee) at 
     more than the daily equivalent of the rate paid for Level IV 
     of the Executive Schedule, unless specifically authorized by 
     law.
       Sec. 409. None of the funds provided in this Act shall be 
     used to pay the expenses of, or otherwise compensate, non-
     Federal parties intervening in regulatory or adjudicatory 
     proceedings. Nothing herein affects the authority of the 
     Consumer Product Safety Commission pursuant to section 7 of 
     the Consumer Product Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 2056 et seq.).
       Sec. 410. Except as otherwise provided under existing law 
     or under an existing Executive order issued pursuant to an 
     existing law, the obligation or expenditure of any 
     appropriation under this Act for contracts for any consulting 
     service shall be limited to contracts which are (1) a matter 
     of public record and available for public inspection, and (2) 
     thereafter included in a publicly available list of all 
     contracts entered into within twenty-four months prior to the 
     date on which the list is made available to the public and of 
     all contracts on which performance has not been completed by 
     such date. The list required by the preceding sentence shall 
     be updated quarterly and shall include a narrative 
     description of the work to be performed under each such 
     contract.
       Sec. 411. Except as otherwise provided by law, no part of 
     any appropriation contained in this Act shall be obligated or 
     expended by any executive agency, as referred to in the 
     Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 401 et 
     seq.), for a contract for services unless such executive 
     agency (1) has awarded and entered into such contract in full 
     compliance with such Act and the regulations promulgated 
     thereunder, and (2) requires any report prepared pursuant to 
     such contract, including plans, evaluations, studies, 
     analyses and manuals, and any report prepared by the agency 
     which is substantially derived from or substantially includes 
     any report prepared pursuant to such contract, to contain 
     information concerning (A) the contract pursuant to which the 
     report was prepared, and (B) the contractor who prepared the 
     report pursuant to such contract.
       Sec. 412. Except as otherwise provided in section 406, none 
     of the funds provided in this Act to any department or agency 
     shall be obligated or expended to provide a personal cook, 
     chauffeur, or other personal servants to any officer or 
     employee of such department or agency.
       Sec. 413. None of the funds provided in this Act to any 
     department or agency shall be obligated or expended to 
     procure passenger automobiles as defined in 15 U.S.C. 2001 
     with an EPA estimated miles per gallon average of less than 
     22 miles per gallon.
       Sec. 414. None of the funds appropriated in title I of this 
     Act shall be used to enter into any new lease of real 
     property if the estimated annual rental is more than $300,000 
     unless the Secretary submits, in writing, a report to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the Congress and a period of 
     30 days has expired following the date on which the report is 
     received by the Committees on Appropriations.
       Sec. 415. (a) Purchase of American-Made Equipment and 
     Products.--It is the sense of the Congress that, to the 
     greatest extent practicable, all equipment and products 
     purchased with funds made available in this Act should be 
     American-made.
       (b) Notice Requirement.--In providing financial assistance 
     to, or entering into any contract with, any entity using 
     funds made available in this Act, the head of each Federal 
     agency, to the greatest extent practicable, shall provide to 
     such entity a notice describing the statement made in 
     subsection (a) by the Congress.
       Sec. 416. None of the funds appropriated in this Act may be 
     used to implement any cap on reimbursements to grantees for 
     indirect costs, except as published in Office of Management 
     and Budget Circular A-21.
       Sec. 417. Such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 
     1997 pay raises for programs funded by this Act shall be 
     absorbed within the levels appropriated in this Act.
       Sec. 418. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used for any program, project, or activity, when it is 
     made known to the Federal entity or official to which the 
     funds are made available that the program, project, or 
     activity is not in compliance with any Federal law relating 
     to risk assessment, the protection of private property 
     rights, or unfunded mandates.
       Sec. 419. Such funds as may be necessary to carry out the 
     orderly termination of the Office of Consumer Affairs shall 
     be made available from funds appropriated to the Department 
     of Health and Human Services for fiscal year 1997.
       Sec. 420. Corporations and agencies of the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development which are subject to the 
     Government Corporation Control Act, as amended, are hereby 
     authorized to make such expenditures, within the limits of 
     funds and borrowing authority available to each such 
     corporation or agency and in accord with law, and to make 
     such contracts and commitments without regard to fiscal year 
     limitations as provided by section 104 of the Act as may be 
     necessary in carrying out the programs set forth in the 
     budget for 1997 for such corporation or agency except as 
     hereinafter provided: Provided, That collections of these 
     corporations and agencies may be used for new loan or 
     mortgage purchase commitments only to the extent expressly 
     provided for in this Act (unless such loans are in support of 
     other forms of assistance provided for in this or prior 
     appropriations Acts), except that this proviso shall not 
     apply to the mortgage insurance or guaranty operations of 
     these corporations, or where loans or mortgage purchases are 
     necessary to protect the financial interest of the United 
     States Government.
       [Sec. 421. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this Act may be used to pay the salaries of 
     personnel who approve a contract for the purchase, lease, or 
     acquisition in any manner of supercomputing equipment or 
     services after a preliminary determination, as defined in 19 
     U.S.C. 1673b, or final determination, as defined in 19 U.S.C. 
     1673d, by the Department of Commerce that an organization 
     providing such supercomputing equipment or services has 
     offered such product at other than fair value.
       [Sec. 422. None of the funds made available in this Act for 
     the National Aeronautics and Space Administration may be used 
     for the National Center for Science Literacy, Education and 
     Technology at the American Museum of Natural History.
       [Sec. 423. (a) Denial of Funds for Preventing ROTC Access 
     to Campus.--None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be provided by contract or by grant (including a grant of 
     funds to be available for student aid) to an institution of 
     higher education when it is made known to the Federal 
     official having authority to obligate or expend such funds 
     that the institution (or any subelement thereof) has a policy 
     or practice (regardless of when implemented) that prohibits, 
     or in effect prevents--
       [(1) the maintaining, establishing, or operation of a unit 
     of the Senior Reserve Officer Training Corps (in accordance 
     with section 654 of title 10, United States Code, and other 
     applicable Federal laws) at the institution (or subelement); 
     or
       [(2) a student at the institution (or subelement) from 
     enrolling in a unit of the Senior Reserve Officer Training 
     Corps at another institution of higher education.
       [(b) Exception.--The limitation established in subsection 
     (a) shall not apply to an institution of higher education 
     when it is made known to the Federal official having 
     authority to obligate or expend such funds that--
       [(1) the institution (or subelement) has ceased the policy 
     or practice described in such subsection; or
       [(2) the institution has a longstanding policy of pacifism 
     based on historical religious affiliation.
       [Sec. 424. (a) Denial of Funds for Preventing Federal 
     Military Recruiting on Campus.--None of the funds made 
     available in this Act may be provided by contract or grant 
     (including a grant of funds to be available for student aid) 
     to any institution of higher education when it is made known 
     to the Federal official having authority to obligate or 
     expend such funds that the institution (or any subelement 
     thereof) has a policy or practice (regardless of when 
     implemented) that prohibits, or in effect prevents--
       [(1) entry to campuses, or access to students (who are 17 
     years of age or older) on campuses, for purposes of Federal 
     military recruiting; or
       [(2) access to the following information pertaining to 
     students (who are 17 years of age or older) for purposes of 
     Federal military recruiting: student names, addresses, 
     telephone listings, dates and places of birth, levels of 
     education, degrees received, prior military experience, and 
     the most recent previous educational institutions enrolled in 
     by the students.
       [(b) Exception.--The limitation established in subsection 
     (a) shall not apply to an institution of higher education 
     when it is made known to the Federal official having 
     authority to obligate or expend such funds that--

[[Page S9703]]

       [(1) the institution (or subelement) has ceased the policy 
     or practice described in such subsection; or
       [(2) the institution has a longstanding policy of pacifism 
     based on historical religious affiliation.
       [Sec. 425. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be obligated or expended to enter into or renew a contract 
     with an entity when it is made known to the Federal official 
     having authority to obligate or expend such funds that--
       [(1) such entity is otherwise a contractor with the United 
     States and is subject to the requirement in section 4212(d) 
     of title 38, United States Code, regarding submission of an 
     annual report to the Secretary of Labor concerning employment 
     of certain veterans; and
       [(2) such entity has not submitted a report as required by 
     that section for the most recent year for which such 
     requirement was applicable to such entity.
       [Sec. 426. The amount provided in title I for ``Veterans 
     Health Administration--Medical Care'' is hereby increased by, 
     the amount provided in title I for ``Departmental 
     Administration--General operating expenses'' is hereby 
     increased by, and the total of the amounts of budget 
     authority provided in this Act for payments not required by 
     law for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1997 (other than 
     any amount of budget authority provided in title I and any 
     such amount provided in title III for the American Battle 
     Monuments Commission, the Court of Veterans Appeals, or 
     Cemeterial Expenses, Army), is hereby reduced by, 
     $40,000,000, $17,000,000, and 0.40 percent, respectively.
       [Sec. 427. The amounts otherwise provided by this Act are 
     revised by increasing the amount made available for 
     ``Veterans Health Administration--Medical Care'', increasing 
     the amount made available for ``Veterans Health 
     Administration--Medical and Prosthetic Research'', reducing 
     the amount made available for ``Corporation for National and 
     Community Service--National and Community Service Programs 
     Operating Expenses'', and reducing the amount made available 
     for ``Corporation for National and Community Service--Office 
     of Inspector General'', by $20,000,000, $20,000,000, 
     $365,000,000, and $2,000,000, respectively.
       [Sec. 428. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used by the Environmental Protection Agency to issue, 
     reissue, or renew any approval or authorization for any 
     facility to store or dispose of polychlorinated biphenyls 
     when it is made known to the Federal official having 
     authority to obligate or expend such funds that there is in 
     effect at the time of the issuance, reissuance, or renewal a 
     rule authorizing any person to import into the customs 
     territory of the United States for treatment or disposal any 
     polychlorinated biphenyls, or polychlorinated biphenyl items, 
     at concentrations of more than 50 parts per million.
       [Sec. 429. None of the funds made available to the 
     Environmental Protection Agency under the heading ``Hazardous 
     Substance Superfund'' may be used to implement any 
     retroactive liability discount reimbursement described in the 
     amendment made by section 201 of H.R. 2500, as introduced on 
     October 18, 1995.
       [Sec. 430. FHA Mortgage Insurance Premiums.--Section 
     203(c)(2)(A) of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 
     1709(c)(2)(A)) is amended by inserting after the first 
     sentence the following new sentence: ``In the case of 
     mortgage for which the mortgagor is a first-time homebuyer 
     who completes a program of counseling with respect to the 
     responsibilities and financial management involved in 
     homeownership that is approved by the Secretary, the premium 
     payment under this subparagraph shall not exceed 2.0 percent 
     of the amount of the original insured principal obligation of 
     the mortgage.''.
       [Sec. 431. (a) Authority to Use Amounts Borrowed From 
     Family Members for Downpayments on FHA-insured Loans.--
     Section 203(b)(9) of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 
     1709(b)(9)) is amended by inserting before the period at the 
     end the following: ``: Provided further, That for purposes of 
     this paragraph, the Secretary shall consider as cash or its 
     equivalent any amounts borrowed from a family member (as such 
     term is defined in section 201), subject only to the 
     requirements that, in any case in which the repayment of such 
     borrowed amounts is secured by a lien against the property, 
     such lien shall be subordinate to the mortgage and the sum of 
     the principal obligation of the mortgage and the obligation 
     secured by such lien may not exceed 100 percent of the 
     appraised value of the property plus any initial service 
     charges, appraisal, inspection, and other fees in connection 
     with the mortgage''.
       [(b) Definition of Family Member.--Section 201 of the 
     National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1707) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new subsections:
       [``(e) The term `family member' means, with respect to a 
     mortgagor under such section, a child, parent, or grandparent 
     of the mortgagor (or the mortgagor's spouse). In determining 
     whether any of the relationships referred to in the preceding 
     sentence exist, a legally adopted son or daughter of an 
     individual (and a child who is a member of an individual's 
     household, if placed with such individual by an authorized 
     placement agency for legal adoption by such individual), and 
     a foster child of an individual, shall be treated as a child 
     of such individual by blood.
       [``(f) The term `child' means, with respect to a mortgagor 
     under such section, a son, stepson, daughter, or stepdaughter 
     of such mortgagor.''.
       [Sec. 432. Sections 401 and 402 of the bill, H.R. 1708, 
     104th Congress, as introduced in the House of Representatives 
     on May 24, 1995, are hereby enacted into law.
       [Sec. 433. None of the funds made available in this Act for 
     the National Aeronautics and Space Administration may be used 
     to carry out, or pay the salaries of personnel who carry out, 
     the Bion 11 and Bion 12 projects.]

                                TITLE V

                              SUPPLEMENTAL

              DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

                Government National Mortgage Association


Guarantees of Mortgage Backed Securities Loan Guarantee Program Account

       During fiscal year 1996 and in addition to commitments 
     previously provided, additional commitments to issue 
     guarantees to carry out section 306 of the National Housing 
     Act, as amended (12 U.S.C. 1721(g)), shall not exceed 
     $20,000,000,000.
       This Act may be cited as the ``Departments of Veterans 
     Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent 
     Agencies Appropriations Act, 1997''.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Coats). The Senator from Missouri is 
recognized.
  Mr. BOND. I thank the Chair and thank my colleague, the ranking 
member, the distinguished Senator from Maryland.
  Before proceeding with the opening statements and the usual motions 
to begin consideration of the appropriations bill--and we are going to 
be doing a lot of that today--I would like to go over, for our Members 
and the staff, our intentions, how we would like to be able to expedite 
floor consideration of this measure.
  The bill was reported by the Committee on Appropriations 6 weeks ago, 
on July 11. We tried very hard to minimize the number of new issues 
raised in the recommendations. Where compromises have been achieved, we 
have restated bill language and mirrored funding levels, reflecting the 
agreements for the current fiscal year. We think we have made a good-
faith effort to avoid reopening controversial issues.
  Again, I express my sincere thanks to the ranking member. This has 
been a bipartisan effort to try to move this bill forward. But in an 
$85 billion appropriations bill, there are disputes and policy 
differences. We did make a concerted effort to minimize the issues, 
specifically with the intent of facilitating consideration of this 
bill. It is critical that we move this bill quickly if we are to avoid 
the disruption, the waste, and inefficiencies which would result if we 
failed to enact the bill before the start of the fiscal year and have 
to resort to cumbersome continuing resolutions or other measures.
  I add, as I did in the discussion when this bill was brought up en 
bloc for consideration prior to the August recess, that there is a 
supplemental appropriation, increasing the loan limitation of the 
Government National Mortgage Corporation, or Ginnie Mae, as most people 
know it, which has to be enacted soon to prevent the disruption of 
orderly placement and financing of FHA- and Veterans' Administration-
guaranteed mortgages later this month. If we do not get this bill 
passed and sent to the President, they are going to run out of 
opportunities to refinance these mortgages later this month. I think 
that is something we ought to be concerned about.
  The bill also provides an extension of the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency flood insurance authorization, which is necessary to 
continue FEMA's writing of these critical insurance policies beyond the 
end of this month. Coming from a State where floods happen and flood 
insurance is vital, I ask all my colleague to focus on the fact that 
there are these gravely needed portions of the bill that are in some 
ways even more important than the appropriations parts for some 
individuals.
  It is my view that our efforts to avoid unnecessary disputes have 
been successful, laying the groundwork for a relatively quick 
disposition of the bill. I will be making the standard motions for en 
bloc consideration of the committee amendments after my ranking member 
has the opportunity to be heard.
  In the course of that motion, I will propose a compromise on the FHA 
home mortgage issue, which provides for a narrow demonstration of a 
revised downpayment formula, limited to the States of Alaska and 
Hawaii, which I believe is acceptable to all sides. We

[[Page S9704]]

had much interest from Members on the entire matter of the FHA issues. 
I want everyone to be on notice we are going to be dealing with those. 
We hope the compromise is acceptable.
  Beyond that matter, we have a number of other noncontroversial 
amendments, several of which make necessary technical and clarifying 
changes in the bill. We have heard of other issues which we are 
attempting to work out. All Members, please be on notice that at this 
point we can dispose of all but a handful of amendments within the 
hour. At that time it is the floor managers' intent to seek time 
agreements on remaining amendments which do require some debate and 
rollcall votes. We are limited in the amount of time that we have to 
deal with this bill. I ask Members or their staffs to contact us so we 
can provide this in an orderly fashion, for debate today and votes 
tomorrow, to move on with this bill.
  The issues in dispute include an amendment to delete the space 
station funding, by the Senator from Arkansas, Mr. Bumpers; an 
amendment by the Senators from New Hampshire and Wisconsin, Mr. Smith 
and Mr. Feingold, proposing to terminate U.S. participation in the Bion 
space life sciences mission; and one by the minority leader, the 
Senator from South Dakota, relating to a new VA entitlement program and 
discretionary benefits for the offspring of veterans in Vietnam 
suffering from spina bifida. I hope we can arrive at time agreements so 
we can air all sides of these issues and move on to a prompt 
resolution.
  I ask any Member who has an issue to come down to the floor and to 
work with us to address these concerns. If you work with our floor 
staff and leadership, we will be seeking to limit time for debate on a 
short list of remaining amendments by the conclusion of debate today. 
Again, I urge any Member who has concern over an issue under the 
subcommittee's jurisdiction, come to the floor so we can work to find 
an acceptable compromise or at least establish time agreements to 
facilitate debate and disposition.
  From past experience, I know there are likely to be a flurry of 
colloquies that we are asked to accept at the last moment. We have had 
some of those submitted to us. Both the ranking member and I need to 
look at the colloquies. In the past, sometimes colloquies have gone in 
which have caused problems for other Senators. We will be happy to 
accept as many of the colloquies as we can, if we can get them cleared 
and make sure that everyone is comfortable with them. But to do that we 
really need to have them by 5 o'clock today if we are to be able to 
give them the full consideration so that we do not have any unnecessary 
delay tomorrow or have to put off consideration of those issues to a 
later time.

  Mr. President, having said that, it is my pleasure to present to the 
Senate the VA, HUD, and independent agencies appropriations bill for 
fiscal year 1997 as reported by the Committee on Appropriations. I am 
especially pleased that I am doing so prior to the start of the fiscal 
year rather than 6 months after it has begun. That is a pleasant change 
for us. None of us want to repeat the long delays and frustrations we 
experienced during the past year, being unable to enact this critical 
funding measure. Unfortunately, less than a month of legislative 
activity remains in this session.
  So if we are to avoid a lapse of funding, or the necessity of a 
continuing resolution, and if we are to deal with the problems that I 
mentioned in my earlier statements, we have to act quickly. The bill 
before us attempts to provide a fair and balanced approach to many 
competing programs and activities under the VA-HUD subcommittee's 
jurisdiction, within the constraints imposed by a very tight budget 
allocation. We have attempted to avoid reopening past disagreements and 
controversy which blocked the bill last year. It is our hope that by 
pursuing this course, we can expedite consideration and enactment of 
the measure.
  Our efforts to facilitate this measure has meant that the bill, in a 
number of respects, reflects funding levels and policies which are 
compromises between very different viewpoints. Nobody is going to be 
happy with all of the decisions we have reached in this bill. Certainly 
I have had to make many compromises myself in the hopes of making it 
acceptable.
  One example is inclusion of funds at the 1996 enacted level for the 
Corporation for National and Community Service. I and many others on my 
side continue to have some strong reservations about the program. No 
doubt that failure to fund the program would result in a Presidential 
veto. I think that there are reforms that have been enacted and will be 
enacted that can improve the operation of the program.
  Despite the misgivings, the bill proposes to maintain the current 
level of funding for the program, less than what is requested, more 
than what I believe is warranted, but certainly more than would be 
included in a continuing resolution or other subsequent action if we 
have to deal with vetoes of this measure.
  With respect to other agencies funded in the bill, the committee has 
attempted to balance a wide variety of competing interests within a 
very constrained budget allocation. The committee recommendation 
provides $39 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, including 
full funding for VA medical care and an increase for VA research.
  VA medical programs were afforded the highest priority in order to 
assure quality care for all veterans. The veterans currently being 
served by the VA will receive that quality care. There will be a smooth 
transition to a new organizational structure with the emphasis we 
expect on a managed care approach.
  For the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the committee 
recommendation continues the policies and programmatic reforms enacted 
last year. We are hopeful and strongly support enactment of a 
comprehensive public and assisted housing reform bill from the 
authorizing committees. Make no mistake about it, we believe that we 
have to have authorizing legislation. We would like to see it done. But 
this appropriations bill contains temporary extensions of provisions 
needed to halt the ever increasing cost of housing subsidy commitments.

  And as I point out, and as the Secretary has agreed, under the 
reduced funding levels, many of these programmatic changes have to be 
made right now in the appropriations measure to enable particularly 
local housing authorities, public housing agencies to deal with the 
reduced levels of funding. We cannot cut back on the funds without 
giving relief to the local agencies who must administer the program. 
That is why in the HUD provisions there are temporary authorizing 
provisions to facilitate their use of the lower amounts of resources 
available until such time as we get a good authorizing bill that 
establishes a new framework.
  Similarly, the appropriations bill complements the multifamily 
housing restructuring proposals now under consideration by the 
authorizing committee. We cannot continue excessive subsidies currently 
being paid to sustain the inventory of nearly a million apartments for 
low-income families. Unless we in Congress act to reduce the excessive 
debt of this housing inventory along with implementing other management 
improvements, there could be massive defaults and widespread resident 
displacement. So make no mistake about it, the housing provisions in 
this appropriations bill are vitally important.
  The complexity and difficulty of developing a consensus on these 
issues obviously is substantial. Project owners, including limited and 
general partners, project managers, the residents themselves with the 
greatest stake in it, the State housing finance agencies, local 
community development organizations, bondholders, and municipal 
governments are among those with significant interests in how we 
address this issue.
  These interests are, while we seek the same general goals, often 
divergent and sometimes competing. We must be mindful of the fact that 
we have billions of taxpayer dollars previously invested in this 
multifamily housing inventory, and billions more which are at risk over 
the next several years depending on which policies and financing 
mechanisms we select to deal with these issues.
  The reported bill reflects our attempts at finding a reasonable 
balance between these sometimes conflicting

[[Page S9705]]

concerns. We cannot afford to continue to pay excessive, way above 
market-rate subsidies for these multifamily housing projects through 
our supplements of rent through section 8, even those which provide 
very good housing for low-income families. And some portions of this 
inventory, I might add, are little more than slums that it was intended 
to replace. Those have to be dealt with as well.
  The committee recommendation is not a comprehensive solution. We are 
striving for a workable compromise. It simply is an attempt to deal 
with the issues in that fraction of the multifamily inventory that has 
section 8 contracts expiring during fiscal year 1997. We are acting 
solely because of affirmative efforts and the forward motion necessary 
to prevent defaults and potential resident displacement during the 
fiscal year. This ought to be of great importance to all Members of 
this body.
  Many people will shy away from housing because it is complicated. But 
let me tell you, if we fail to do our job, there could be citizens in 
our States who are left without housing, which I think is a result that 
we must avoid.
  Since this bill was reported, we have heard from a number of affected 
parties, including the Department of Housing and Urban Development, who 
have made suggestions as to how our proposal could be improved or made 
more effective. We are examining these ideas and incorporating the good 
ones as they come along.
  We may be able to recommend a perfecting amendment to our multifamily 
housing provisions. We intend to do so before the bill is finally 
passed. In any event, since the House bill contained no recommendations 
on this issue, we will have extensive discussions on these concerns 
prior to and during conference. I hope that we can come out of 
conference, if not out of this body, which will be my first choice, 
with a workable temporary solution.
  Mr. President, I wish to acknowledge and express my sincere thanks 
for the critically important role that the Senator from Oregon, the 
chairman of our full Appropriations Committee, has played in addressing 
the potential adverse effects of the House budgetary allocations. 
Specifically, Senator Hatfield has recognized how that allocation would 
curtail our ability to maintain housing occupied by low-income families 
in developments which could prepay their subsidized mortgages and 
convert to market-rate housing.
  Based on the chairman's recommendation, the committee revised the 
subcommittee's allocation which enabled us to include $19.7 billion for 
HUD. Perhaps what is more important, the increase in our outlay 
allocation allowed the increased funding for activities which prevent 
the displacement of currently assisted families through contract 
renewals and housing prevention payments.
  I am especially pleased that the bill restores funding for the 
Community Development Block Grants program, the CDBG, at the current 
full fiscal year 1996 level of $4.6 billion and does not have to 
withhold $300 million from the obligation as was proposed in the House-
passed bill, operating under a lower allocation.
  For the Environmental Protection Agency, the recommendation totals 
$6.6 billion, an increase of $70 million over last year, with increases 
in key areas, particularly grants to States. Most programs are funded 
at last year's level, and programs such as Superfund and safe drinking 
water revolving funds are increased as requested by the President. 
Despite the very compelling arguments made by some Members, this 
recommendation does not include so-called riders in EPA in view of our 
desire to keep this bill as free of controversy as possible in the 
limited time available.
  For FEMA, the bill provides the President's full request and, in 
addition, restores $1 billion in previously rescinded disaster relief 
funds which FEMA anticipates will be needed to meet ongoing disaster 
relief requirements.
  The recommendations for NASA totals $13.7 billion, an increase of 
$100 million over the House, and restores funds for the critical 
Mission to Planet Earth program to study global climate change.
  Finally, $3.27 billion is recommended for the National Science 
Foundation, an increase of $55 million over the 1996 level and $22 
million over the House amount, with very high priority given to 
instrumentation and informal science education.
  I note it was only 4 months ago we finally gained enactment of the 
bill for the current fiscal year. As a consequence, much of what is 
recommended simply builds on agreements achieved in that measure. Mr. 
President, in aggregate, this bill appears to provide $2.1 billion more 
than the fiscal year 1996 appropriations level. But this reflects two 
major adjustments which are unrelated to program levels. The first is 
an increase of $1.1 billion to replenish the FEMA disaster relief 
account, which was drained by that amount to accommodate other 
appropriations measures in the cycle for the current year. The other 
change is $948 million in one-time legislative savings which were 
enacted for HUD housing programs. When these adjustments are made, the 
net aggregate increase in program funding is reduced to $84 million, or 
just one-tenth of 1 percent of the fiscal year 1996 appropriation.
  Mr. President, this very modest increase, all but a freeze, reflects 
the net of increases and decreases in several of our agencies. The 
biggest increase, $481 million, was provided for the discretionary 
programs of the Department of Veterans Affairs. The only other agencies 
to receive significant increases were the Environmental Protection 
Agency, with a $70 million increase, and the National Science 
Foundation, which received $55 million more than last year. These 
increases were offset by cuts of $411 million in HUD and $200 million 
in NASA.
  Finally, again, I express my sincere appreciation to my ranking 
member and valuable colleague, the Senator from Maryland. I appreciate 
her assistance and cooperation in putting this bill together. I now 
take pleasure in yielding the floor to her for such statement as she 
wishes to make.


                         Privilege of the Floor

  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that during the 
consideration of H.R. 3666, Miss Catherine Corson, a detailee from the 
National Science Foundation serving with the VA-HUD subcommittee, be 
provided floor privileges.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I know we are debating the VA-HUD bill, 
and I want to make my comments on it. I think, like all Americans 
today, our thoughts and our prayers are with our U.S. military, who, 
once again, are called upon to stand sentry to protect those who cannot 
protect themselves. For all who might be watching this on C-SPAN and 
seeing how we want to help the veterans, we are going to keep our 
promises to America's veterans, but we should really hold these men and 
women in our hearts today.
  Today, I want to join my distinguished colleague, the Senator from 
Missouri, to offer for floor debate the fiscal year 1997 appropriations 
bill. This is an $84.7 billion bill. It funds seven Cabinet or Cabinet-
level agencies, as well as 18 independent agencies. We fund all of the 
veterans programs--both the veterans pensions, as well as veterans 
medical care, veterans medical research, housing, the Environmental 
Protection Agency, the National Science Foundation, National Community 
Service, the Federal Emergency Management Agency. While we are looking 
at those large and significant agencies, we also fund programs like 
Selective Service, Arlington Cemetery, the Consumer Product Safety 
Agency.
  Somebody might say, ``Well, how did all that happen?'' It sounds like 
a lot of money, and it is, but years ago, this was the subcommittee 
that before you got to be a Cabinet agency, you were an independent 
agency. Hopefully, these agencies still have independence and backbone, 
but we now have seven of these. Of course, the largest and most 
significant, in terms of our obligations to the American people, is the 
Veterans Administration.
  Dealing with these competing interests has been an enormous and 
difficult job. I want to thank Senator Bond and his appropriations 
staff, as well as my own for all the hard work they have done to get 
this bill to the floor. I want to acknowledge the role of Senator 
Hatfield and Senator Byrd in ensuring we have an allocation to meet 
day-

[[Page S9706]]

to-day needs of American people, as well as in science and technology, 
looking at the long-range interests of the American people.
  I am particularly grateful for Chairman Bond's efforts to work on a 
collegial basis with this. I want to thank him for the collegiality and 
civility with which we have been able to work on these issues. This 
bill continues the process of implementing many of the recommendations 
of the National Academy of Public Administration that I raised on 
issues related to HUD and EPA.
  It is my commitment and I know the chairman's commitment that we want 
to make sure that a dollar's worth of taxes is used for a dollar's 
worth of services. When we are working, whether it is to fund Housing 
and Urban Development or the Environmental Protection Agency, we want 
to fund results and not bureaucracy. That is why when I chaired the 
subcommittee, we turned to the National Association of Public 
Administration to give us kind of an x ray of what they thought we 
should be doing so we could get rid of the bureaucracy and focus on the 
results.
  I thank Senator Bond for continuing that. When we look at HUD, we can 
see we have been able to do that. It has been my concern that in 
Housing and Urban Development, too often we create programs without 
thinking about their results. Do we empower the poor, which I know the 
Presiding Officer is deeply concerned about? We share a belief and 
commitment in the role that nonprofit agencies play in the empowerment 
of the poor.
  We want to make sure that our section 8 program is an opportunity, 
but not a hollow one, and that along the way we do not create such 
large subsidies that we are creating a new generation of slum landlords 
or creating a new and expanded liability for taxpayers.
  I have been deeply distressed in my own State of Maryland, 
particularly in Baltimore and some of the surrounding areas, of the 
failure to stand sentry with section 8 housing itself to make sure that 
it is an opportunity for the poor. Too often section 8 housing is 
riddled with housing abuse, poor housing conditions from plumbing and 
other fire and safety violations. We want to make sure HUD is on track 
on how they spend their money, that we do get results and we are not 
creating more liability for the taxpayer and minimizing opportunity for 
the poor. Then we also looked at the funding for the Environmental 
Protection Agency. Both the chairman and I have worked to get them 
focused on the fact that they need to spend their money on that which 
is the greatest public health risk. The whole idea is not only to 
protect natural resources and make sure we have clean air and clean 
water, but in the process let us look at those areas that ensure public 
health and safety, and not move around on certain boutique programs 
that might grab a headline. Chairman Bond and I are more interested in 
saving lives than in grabbing headlines. That is why we urged EPA to 
focus on this kind of risk-based approach. We believe EPA is doing it. 
I believe Secretary Browner is actually trying to move it in this 
direction.

  There is one other area in this bill where we were able to restore 
cuts that the House made. We restored a $1 billion cut in Federal 
emergency disaster relief. As you know, many disasters have hit the 
United States, from blizzards to hurricanes, to terrible tornadoes that 
have affected our States. We wanted to be sure that if a Governor calls 
President Clinton 911 to help with emergency relief, we will have the 
money to be able to do that. We now have Edouard and we have Fran 
whizzing around out there. We want to be sure that the Governors of our 
Southeastern States know we are behind them.
  This bill also restores a cut in NASA's Mission to Planet Earth. All 
of us have been mesmerized about this new finding about life on Mars, 
that maybe there is life on Mars, or maybe there was life on Mars. It 
is a fascinating topic. But there is one planet that we believe there 
is intelligent life on and it is called the Planet Earth. Dr. Sally 
Ride said we should study it because by stepping back in space and 
studying Mission to Planet Earth, studying our own planet as if it were 
a distant one, we will come up with an incredible amount of information 
that will be able to help our farmers, help our fishermen, and help 
communities prepare for natural disasters.
  Mission to Planet Earth is a scientific mission, a civilian mission 
that looks at our environmental condition, which can then prepare 
communities for natural disasters, and not only here, Mr. President, 
but around the world. We can help Africa predict and know about a 
famine. We can help Japan and our friends in the Pacific rim know how 
to estimate typhoons and be able to save lives and property and 
evacuate people. What a great way for us to advance our scientific 
knowledge but, again, be able to help in our commercial activity and be 
able to save lives.
  Another cut restored was in the national service AmeriCorps Program. 
I know that is significantly controversial. I thank Senator Bond for 
working with me in restoring AmeriCorps at a modest funding level. This 
is a program that is very special to President Clinton and, I believe, 
to many people. What it essentially says is that by getting out there 
and volunteering, being part of AmeriCorps, you can earn a voucher to 
reduce your student debt.
  You see, for every opportunity, we think there is an obligation. This 
is not about giveaways. We want our kids to be able to reduce their 
student debt, but at the same time rekindle those habits of the heart, 
so when the voucher is over and they are back in their communities, 
they are part of the volunteer effort, working in nonprofits, or hands-
on, or being members of boards and commissions.
  I am very proud of the fact that Senator Bond has worked very hard to 
ensure veterans medical care and veterans medical research. It is 
promises made and promises kept to America's veterans. I think we were 
able to do that. There are over 187 veterans hospitals. There are also 
many new outpatient clinics in many areas where I believe we have not 
done all we would like to do, but I believe we have kept our promises.

  Some of the yellow flashing lights for me are in EPA. I know that 
while funding for EPA is $70 million more than last year, it is $400 
million below the President's request. There is concern about deep cuts 
in core programs or other priority programs like Boston Harbor, the 
Montreal protocol, climate exchange, and the environmental technology 
initiative. Some in Congress do not always make the case between public 
health and the environment. We know it is so, and that is why we need 
to ensure adequate funding for EPA.
  Another area which is controversial is NASA. Because we face so many 
compelling human needs, many people say, ``Why are we funding NASA?'' 
Well, by funding NASA, we develop new ideas, new knowledge and new 
technology that helps advance the cause of mankind through scientific 
discovery. That is the nature of what we are as Americans. We are 
discoverers. And through it, we are able to also come up with 
tremendous opportunities for technology transfer, which helps our 
American people. I could list those programs, but I don't think we need 
to do it. I do know that we will be looking at all of these special 
programs, some in Maryland and some in other States. Goddard Space 
Agency is in my own home State. I know the recent discovery of possible 
life on Mars is an example of how exciting and important the space 
program continues to be.
  Some people feel that money is wasted. But we cannot look that way. 
It is too narrow. You know, they laughed at the Louisiana Purchase, 
they laughed at Columbus, and they laughed at Pasteur.
  The Presiding Officer knows that scientific discovery and the 
technology around it is always ridiculed, such as the automobile, and 
all those things, and one day they transformed our society. Whoever 
thought a couple of guys working in a garage with spare parts could 
spawn a whole new computer industry that has now revolutionized the 
entire planet?
  We want to make sure that by funding the National Science Foundation, 
we continue to make sure that the United States of America is on the 
cutting edge. There are many issues that we have to face in the future, 
whether it is in housing, space, and so on. But

[[Page S9707]]

I believe that we can solve those problems if we work with good will, 
common sense, and focus on the results we want to achieve in science 
and technology for the long-range needs of our country and looking at 
the day-to-day needs of the American people. How can we give help to 
those who practice self-help? I believe if those are our guiding 
principles, we will be able to move this bill, and I think we have 
followed those principles in this.
  Again, I thank Senator Bond for his very hard work and willingness to 
listen to my concerns and those of the members of my own party, and to 
work with my staff and me. I am going to echo the words of Senator 
Bond. Less than a month remains in this session. We don't want this 
bill to be in a continuing resolution. Let us make the U.S. Senate work 
and get the appropriations bill done. I look forward to voting for 
final passage of this bill tomorrow.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished ranking member for 
a very forceful presentation. I tell her that I share that desire for a 
final vote tomorrow very strongly. I endorse and second all of the 
strong things she said about the science function. She knows and 
understands these programs extremely well. That is why she is an 
invaluable member of this subcommittee. I certainly would hate to lose 
her from this subcommittee to Small Business, as has been suggested in 
other quarters.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. I am right here.
  Mr. BOND. I am delighted to have the good Senator from Maryland 
working with me on this. I enjoy working with the Senator from Arkansas 
on small business.
  Mr. President, turning to some of the procedural matters, I ask 
unanimous consent that the amendments of the committee to H.R. 3666 be 
considered and adopted, en bloc, with the proviso that no points of 
order are to be waived thereon by such adoption, and that the bill, as 
amended, be considered original text for the purpose of further 
amendment, with the further proviso that this consent request exclude 
the following amendments: On page 72, line 10, relating to an earmark 
for drinking water funds; page 85, lines 6 through 15, relating to NASA 
buyouts; page 102, line 23, through page 104, line 20, relating to FHA; 
page 104, lines 21 through 24, relating to NASA's Bion mission.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The committee amendments were agreed to, en bloc, with the above 
noted exceptions.


 Amendment No. 5157 to Excepted Committee Amendment on Page 72, line 10

(Purpose: To increase the amount provided for EPA drinking water state 
  revolving funds by $725,000, offset by a commensurate reduction to 
                   clean water state revolving funds)

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for 
its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 5157.

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the 
amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       On page 72, line 10, in lieu of the sum proposed by the 
     committee amendment, insert ``$1,275,000,000''.

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, this is an amendment to the first excepted 
committee amendment. It increases the amount provided for drinking 
water State revolving funds by $725 million in recognition of the fact 
that, on August 1, 1996, funds previously appropriated for drinking 
water State revolving funds were reallocated to clean water State 
revolving funds pursuant to a requirement in the fiscal year 1996 
omnibus appropriations bill.
  Congress mandated this transfer if a drinking water authorization 
bill had not been enacted into law as of that date. That measure was 
enacted less than 1 week after the August 1 deadline, and we believe it 
is appropriate that these funds be restored. The funds which have been 
released for clean water revolving funds can be considered as an 
advance on the fiscal year 1997 appropriation.
  This amendment simply adjusts the new appropriations to reflect this 
prior funding and will have no effect on our intended program levels. 
We gave our assurances to members of the authorizing committee that 
this would be one of the first orders of business as we dealt with this 
bill. The members of the committee worked so hard for the passage of 
the safe drinking water measure. We are very anxious to have these 
funds available, and the funds under this amendment will be available 
crediting the transfer of the funds on August 1 to the clean water 
revolving fund account for 1997 and giving the 1996 appropriations 
along with the 1997 appropriations to drinking water.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I concur with the amendment offered by 
Senator Bond. It does make the compelling need that we have talked 
about and does so in a timely way.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment 
of the Senator from Missouri.
  The amendment (No. 5157) was agreed to.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the 
amendment was agreed to.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the committee 
amendment, as amended.
  The excepted committee amendment on page 72, line 10, as amended, was 
agreed to.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the 
amendment, was amended, was agreed to.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


Amendment No. 5158 to Excepted Committee Amendment on Page 85, Lines 6-
                                   15

   (Purpose: To modify language providing NASA authority to provide 
special incentive payments to encourage voluntary retirements to extent 
  necessary to avoid a reduction in force (RIF), subject to a $25,000 
  limitation, with a further limitation to assure no net increase in 
                         Federal expenditures)

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 5158 to the excepted committee amendment on page 85, 
     line 15.

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the 
amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       On page 85, line 15, before the period insert the 
     following: ``: Provided further, That in addition to any 
     other payments which it is required to make under subchapter 
     III of chapter 83 or chapter 84 of title 5, United States 
     Code, NASA shall remit to the Office of Personnel Management 
     for deposit in the Treasury of the United States to the 
     credit of the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund an 
     amount equal to 15 percent of the final basic pay of each 
     employee who is covered under subchapter III of chapter 83 or 
     chapter 84 of title 5 to whom a voluntary separation 
     incentive has been paid under this paragraph''.

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, this is a perfecting amendment to the next 
excepted committee amendment.
  The modification proposed is necessary to clarify the intent of the 
committee that the buyout authority granted for NASA be conducted 
entirely with the appropriated funds. The modification requires NASA to 
reimburse the civil service retirement disability fund for the full 
cost of anticipated retirement benefits and lost contributions 
associated with employees who accept these incentives and retire 
voluntarily to separate from Federal service. By requiring such 
payments, we prevent an increase in expenditures occurring during 
fiscal year 1997 as a result of the buyout since NASA will have to use 
other expenditures in order to meet these costs.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I concur with Senator Bond's amendment. 
Again, what we are finding is that NASA must encourage people to 
retire. Their original request was excessive. I think this is a prudent 
way to proceed, and this side accepts the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the perfecting 
amendment offered by the Senator from Missouri.

[[Page S9708]]

  The amendment (No. 5158) was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the underlying 
committee amendment, as amended.
  The excepted committee amendment on page 85, lines 6-15, as amended, 
was agreed to.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the 
amendment was agreed to.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


 Excepted Committee Amendment on Page 102, Line 23, Through Page 104, 
                                Line 17

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, next I move that the committee amendment 
beginning on page 102, line 23, through page 104, line 17, the 
amendment which would have eliminated two House-passed sections, first, 
mirroring the current administrative policy to reduce the FHA payment 
25 basis points by first-time home buyers and, second, permitting loans 
by family members to meet FHA downpayment requirements, be tabled.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion.
  The motion was agreed to.


 Amendment No. 5159 to Excepted Committee Amendment on Page 104, Lines 
                             18 Through 20

  (Purpose: To permit a demonstration of application of a streamlined 
formula to calculate down payment requirements for the Federal Housing 
 Administration [FHA] home mortgage guarantee program in the States of 
 Alaska and Hawaii and to provide for the delegation of single family 
          insuring authority to direct endorsement mortgagees)

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk to the 
language proposed to be stricken by the pending committee amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 5159 to excepted committee amendment on page 104, 
     lines 18 through 20.

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the 
amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       In lieu of the matter stricken on page 104, lines 18 
     through 20, insert the following:

     SEC. 423. CALCULATION OF DOWN PAYMENT.

       Section 203(b) of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 
     1709(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(10) Alaska and Hawaii.--
       ``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this subsection, with respect to a mortgage originated in the 
     State of Alaska or the State of Hawaii, involve a principal 
     obligation not in excess of the sum of--
       ``(i) the amount of the mortgage insurance premium paid at 
     the time the mortgage is insured; and
       ``(ii) (I) in the case of a mortgage for a property with an 
     appraised value equal to or less than $50,000, 98.75 percent 
     of the appraised value of the property;
       ``(II) in the case of a mortgage for a property with an 
     appraised value in excess of $50,000 but not in excess of 
     $125,000, 97.65 percent of the appraised value of the 
     property; or
       ``(III) in the case of a mortgage for a property with an 
     appraised value in excess of $125,000, 97.15 percent of the 
     appraised value of the property.''.

     SEC. 424. DELEGATION OF SINGLE FAMILY MORTGAGE INSURING 
                   AUTHORITY TO DIRECT ENDORSEMENT MORTGAGEES.

       Title II of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1707 et 
     seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:


  ``Delegation of Insuring Authority To Direct Endorsement Mortgagees

       ``Sec 256. (A) Authority.--The Secretary may delegate, to 
     one or more mortgages approved by the Secretary under the 
     direct endorsement program, the authority of the Secretary 
     under this Act to insure mortgages involving property upon 
     which there is located a dwelling designed principally for 
     occupancy by 1 to 4 families.
       ``(b) Considerations.--In determining whether to delegate 
     authority to a mortgagee under this section, the Secretary 
     shall consider the experience and performance of the 
     mortgagee compared to the default rate of all insured 
     mortgages in comparable markets, and such other factors as 
     the Secretary determines appropriate to minimize risk of loss 
     to the insurance funds under this Act.
       ``(c) Enforcement of Insurance Requirements.--
       ``(1) In general.--If the Secretary determines that a 
     mortgage insured by a mortgagee pursuant to delegation of 
     authority under this section was not originated in accordance 
     with the requirements established by the Secretary, and the 
     Secretary pays an insurance claim with respect to the 
     mortgage within a reasonable period specified by the 
     Secretary, the Secretary may require the mortgagee approved 
     under this section to indemnify the Secretary for the loss.
       ``(2) Fraud or misrepresentation.--If fraud or 
     misrepresentation was involved in connection with the 
     origination, the Secretary may require the mortgagee approved 
     under this section to indemnify the Secretary for the loss 
     regardless of when an insurance claim is paid.
       ``(d) Termination of Mortgagee's Authority.--If a mortgagee 
     to which the Secretary has made a delegation under this 
     section violates the requirements and procedures established 
     by the Secretary or the Secretary determines that other good 
     cause exists, the Secretary may cancel a delegation of 
     authority under this section to the mortgagee by giving 
     notice to the mortgagee. Such a cancellation shall be 
     effective upon receipt of the notice by the mortgagee or at a 
     later date specified by the Secretary. A decision by the 
     Secretary to cancel a delegation shall be final and 
     conclusive and shall not be subject to judicial review.
       ``(e) Requirements and Procedures.--Before approving a 
     delegation under this section, the Secretary shall issue 
     regulations establishing appropriate requirements and 
     procedures, including requirements and procedures governing 
     the indemnification of the Secretary by the mortgagee.''.

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, this amendment restores another House-passed 
provision to the FHA single-family mortgage program with an amendment 
which limits a proposed change in the formula for determining 
downpayment requirements to a demonstration in the States of Alaska and 
Hawaii.
  This perfecting amendment also inserts the text of the language 
incorporated by reference in the original House-passed provision 
relating to the delegation of ensuring authority to direct endorsement 
mortgagees.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I concur with the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment 
of the Senator from Missouri.
  The amendment (No. 5159) was agreed to.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the 
amendment was agreed to.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. By virtue of the Senate having agreed to the 
previous amendment, the excepted committee amendment on page 104, lines 
18 through 20 falls.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, we have dealt with three of the four 
provisions of the committee amendments.
  The fourth one relates to the NASA Bion mission.
  Colleagues who wish to deal with that are not available.
  So I now ask unanimous consent that the amendment on page 104, lines 
21 through 24, relating to NASA's Bion mission be set aside 
temporarily.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


               Amendments Nos. 5160 through 5166 En Bloc

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I now have several amendments which have 
been cleared on both sides, I believe. I send them to the desk and ask 
for their immediate consideration en bloc.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond] proposes amendments 
     numbered 5160 through 5166 en bloc.

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the 
amendments be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendments are as follows:


                           amendment no. 5160

    (Purpose: To provide an interim extension of the National Flood 
      Insurance Act of 1968 to enable the Federal Flood Insurance 
Administration to continue writing flood insurance policies and conduct 
   floodplain mapping during fiscal year 1997, pending enactment of 
                        authorizing legislation)

       On page 77, line 22, after the sentence ending ``September 
     30, 1998.'' insert:
       The first sentence of section 1376(c) of the National Flood 
     Insurance Act of 1968, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4026), is 
     amended by striking all after ``this subchapter'' and 
     inserting: ``such sums as may be necessary through September 
     30, 1997 for studies under this title.''
       On page 78, line 5, after the sentence ending ``Insurance 
     Reform Act of 1994.'' insert:
       Section 1319 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 
     as amended (42 U.S.C. 4026), is amended by striking out 
     September 30, 1996.'', and inserting ``September 30, 1997.''

[[Page S9709]]

     
                                                                    ____
                           amendment no. 5161

  (Purpose: To make a technical correction to a grant provided in the 
 fiscal year 1995 VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act 
                      for the City of Bangor, ME)

       On page 72, line 15, before the period, insert: : Provided 
     further, That the funds made available in Public Law 103-327 
     for a grant to the City of Bangor, Maine, in accordance with 
     House Report 103-715, shall be available for a grant to that 
     city for meeting combined sewer overflow requirements.
                                                                    ____



                           amendment no. 5162

(Purpose: To express the sense of the Senate with regard to compliance 
 by the Environmental Protection Agency with international obligations)

       At the end of title IV, add the following:

     SEC. 4  . SENSE OF THE SENATE WITH REGARD TO COMPLIANCE WITH 
                   INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) in response to a dispute settlement finding against the 
     United States by the World Trade Organization, the United 
     States informed the World Trade Organization on June 19, 
     1996, that the United States intends to meet its 
     international obligations to the World Trade Organization 
     with respect to the Environmental Protection Agency's 
     requirements on imported reformulated and conventional 
     gasoline;
       (2) the Environmental Protection Agency has initiated an 
     open process to examine any and all options for compliance 
     with international obligations of the United States in which 
     a key criterion will be fully protecting public health and 
     the environment; and
       (3) many United States environmental and industrial 
     organizations are concerned about the ``Regulation of Fuels 
     and Fuel Additives: Individual Foreign Refinery Baseline 
     Requirements for Reformulated Gasoline'' proposed on May 3, 
     1994 (59 Fed. Reg. 84).
       (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate 
     that, in evaluating any option for compliance with 
     international obligations, the Administrator of the 
     Environmental Protection Agency should--
       (1) take fully into account the protection of public health 
     and the environment and the international obligations of the 
     United States as a member of the World Trade Organization;
       (2) ensure that the compliance review process not result in 
     the degradation of the gasoline quality required by the Clean 
     Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.) with respect to conventional 
     and reformulated gasoline;
       (3) not recognize individual foreign refiner baselines 
     unless the Administrator determines that the issues of 
     auditing, inspection of foreign facilities, and enforcement 
     have been adequately addressed; and
       (4) provide a full and open administrative process in the 
     formulation of any final rule.

  Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I rise to comment on the pending sense-of-
the-Senate offered by my colleague, Senator Burns. This measure strikes 
what I believe to be the proper balance. It recognizes both our 
obligation to comply with the World Trade Organization's [WTO] recent 
dispute-settlement finding against the United States' regulation of 
imports of reformulated and conventional gasoline, and our obligation 
to take fully into account the protection of the public health and the 
environment in evaluating all options for compliance.
  As the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, I want to underscore 
the importance of the United States honoring its obligations and 
commitments under the WTO, particularly with respect to the dispute-
settlement process. Mr. President, creation of an effective binding WTO 
dispute-settlement mechanism was an important achievement of the 
Uruguay Round trade agreement.
  I believe that any attempt to frustrate U.S. efforts to implement the 
WTO's decision on reformulated and conventional gasoline, or any future 
WTO decision, would be harmful to U.S. interests and the multilateral 
trading system for the following reasons.
  First, WTO rules permit retaliation to be taken against a WTO member 
country that refuses to implement a WTO decision. Therefore, U.S. 
failure to comply with a WTO decision could prompt our trading partners 
with an interest in the decision to seek authority from the WTO to 
retaliate against the United States. Such retaliation could come in the 
form of increased tariffs on U.S. exports.
  Second, I believe that U.S. failure to implement a WTO decision would 
undermine the WTO dispute-settlement process and our ability to end 
unfair foreign trade practices. Other countries may use U.S. non-
compliance as an excuse for refusing to implement WTO decisions that 
are unfavorable to them, including the many WTO disputes the United 
States is currently pursuing against other countries' trade 
restrictions.
  Third, I worry that if WTO decisions are ignored by the United States 
or other countries, the ability to enforce WTO obligations generally is 
sharply reduced, as is the value of the obligations themselves. A 
weakening of WTO obligations would be a major setback for the 
multilateral trading system and could complicate any future efforts to 
further expand the system and reduce existing trade barriers.
  For these reasons, Mr. President, I am heartened that this Sense of 
the Senate recognizes the important U.S. interests in complying with 
the WTO's recent decision on reformulated and conventional gas and in 
maintaining the integrity of the WTO dispute-settlement process.
  Finally, I would like to make two further points on the WTO decision 
at issue here. I hope that these points will clear up any 
misconceptions surrounding United States compliance with the WTO's 
finding that current Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] regulations 
discriminate against foreign refiners in Brazil and Venezuela and do 
not comply with WTO rules.
  First, the WTO decision does not dictate what actions the United 
States or the EPA must take to come into compliance with the decision, 
because under WTO rules the United States retains the discretion to 
decide the best way to comply with the WTO's finding.
  Second, as my good friend Senator Chafee, chairman of the Committee 
on Environment and Public Works, will point out, the WTO decision does 
not undermine the United States' ability to enforce its environmental 
laws. In its decision, the WTO was very careful to note that it did not 
object to the goals of the Clean Air Act or the United States' right to 
take measures to protect the environment. Nor does the decision require 
the United States to lower its environmental standards. Instead, the 
decision simply found that the United States had not adequately 
explored ways to achieve its environmental objectives without 
discriminating against imports.
  I appreciate having the opportunity to share my views on this 
important matter.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, if my colleagues would permit, I would 
like to add a few comments of my own on the subject of the Burns sense-
of-the-Senate included in the managers' amendment.
  As my colleagues may know, earlier this spring a World Trade 
Organization [WTO] panel found that a 1993 regulation adopted by the 
Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] discriminated against imports. 
The regulation in question established baselines against which refiners 
must measure compliance with requirements under the Clean Air Act for 
conventional and reformulated gasoline. In coming to its conclusions, 
the WTO panel noted that the United States had not fully explored ways 
to overcome the administrative difficulties relating to imported 
gasoline, and that although the United States had considered the costs 
to domestic refiners of complying with the regulation, the same 
consideration was not given to the costs that would be incurred by 
foreign refiners. On June 19, the United States informed the WTO that 
we would endeavor to meet our international obligations by complying 
with the panel decision.
  This case has received a good deal of attention, and provoked a good 
deal of comment. Unfortunately, many of the assertions that have been 
made about this case misinterpret both its meaning and its effect. As 
chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, I regret 
such misinterpretations, and want to take a moment to set the record 
straight.
  First, let me stress that the April WTO decision has nothing to do 
with the Clean Air Act itself; nor does it undermine the act in any 
way. Rather, the WTO decision deals with the approach set by a 
regulation issued pursuant to the Act. The Clean Air Act did not force 
EPA to discriminate against foreign refiners. EPA had a range of 
options from which to choose and, unfortunately, they chose one that 
ran afoul of our international obligations.
  I want to emphasize that the panel decision did not invalidate or 
otherwise undermine the act's requirements or the concept of using 
baselines. What the decision did do is say that the law must be 
implemented in a fair and nondiscriminatory manner. That concept

[[Page S9710]]

is one of the most basic--and most important--elements of our global 
trading system. And I would point out that it need not conflict with 
strong environmental protection.
  The WTO ruling does not affect the ability of the United States to 
enforce the Clean Air Act. The WTO itself explicitly recognizes the 
right of member nations to take steps to protect human health and 
exhaustible natural resources. Neither the Clean Air Act nor its 
objectives were ever at issue in this case.
  Finally, the panel decision does not mandate whether, or how, the 
United States should come into compliance with the WTO ruling. Such 
matters are left to the member nation to decide for itself. In this 
case, the United States informed the WTO that we will take steps to 
comply--a decision I believe was the right one. Indeed, I would urge 
EPA in the strongest terms possible to act without delay, so that we 
may come into compliance as quickly as possible.
  So there should be no confusion about this case or its outcome. The 
WTO examined a regulation promulgated under the Clean Air Act and found 
that its separate requirements for foreign refiners were 
discriminatory. That is all there is to it. Fix the discrimination, and 
the problems cease. Meanwhile, the Clean Air Act and our other 
environmental laws remain in effect, as always.
  Now, with regard to the sense of the Senate, which attempts to 
describe the current situation and hold the EPA to certain commitments 
regarding the upcoming review process, since it does not constitute an 
amendment to the Clean Air Act and is not binding, I do not intend to 
raise an objection.
  However, let me say this: there is no question that complying with 
the WTO decision is in the best interests of the United States, not 
only for the reasons outlined just now by my colleague, the 
distinguished chairman of the Finance Committee, but for our own 
interests in environmental protection. Frankly, there are some in the 
domestic refining industry who have benefited from the current unequal 
state of affairs, and who would prefer to see the United States avoid 
coming into compliance in this case. They may attempt to influence the 
review process to ensure that at the end of the day, they retain their 
current advantage. An outcome along those lines would be an act of 
cynicism that would do us serious damage in our efforts to maintain a 
fair international trading system. Such an outcome will not do.
  We have an obligation to make a good faith effort to come into 
compliance with the WTO decision as soon as possible. Adopting an 
approach that purports to solve the problem, but that merely prolongs 
the current inequity, is not acceptable. An acceptable solution is one 
in which no unfair distinction is drawn between domestic and foreign 
gasoline; in which domestic and foreign refiners alike meet the levels 
currently allowed by the Clean Air Act; and in which the United States 
may ensure enforcement for both domestic and foreign industry using 
approaches that have proven effective in the past. That truly would be 
a level playing field.
  For my colleagues' information, I ask unanimous consent to have 
printed in the Record a copy of a letter on this issue that was sent to 
me by the Environmental Defense Fund, the National Wildlife Federation, 
the Sierra Club, and the World Wildlife Fund. I appreciate the managers 
of the bill allowing me the opportunity to make comments about this 
matter, and yield the floor.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

         Environmental Defense Fund, National Wildlife Federation, 
           Sierra Club, World Wildlife Fund,
                                                    July 25, 1996.
     Hon. John Chafee, Chairman,
     Hon. Max Baucus, Ranking Member,
     Environment and Public Works Committee, U.S. Senate, Dirksen 
         Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senators Chafee and Baucus: We write to register our 
     environmental opposition to a potential rider, identical to 
     that attached to the 1995 and 1996 VA/HUD/Independent 
     Agencies Appropriations bill, that would prohibit the 
     Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from signing, 
     promulgating, implementing, or enforcing certain regulations 
     concerning reformulated gasoline (RFG). We are concerned that 
     this rider would limit the authority of EPA to promulgate 
     sound regulations to protect the U.S. environment and the 
     health of U.S. citizens.
       First, EPA has a mandate under the Clean Air Act to protect 
     the U.S. environment from hazards in reformulated gasoline, 
     whether such gasoline is domestically produced or imported. 
     EPA should be free to fulfill that congressional mandate in 
     the way that it sees fit, consistent with the required public 
     comment process. We believe such a procedure places decision-
     making on trade and environment issues where it belongs: with 
     the American people and the government agencies that serve 
     them. This process should not be cut off prematurely by 
     Congressional action on an Appropriations bill.
       Second, all of our organizations strongly oppose weakening 
     environmental laws in response to trade pressures, and harbor 
     deep concerns about the WTO. However, the WTO Appellate 
     Report in the RFG case concedes that the United States can 
     adopt ``non-arbitrary'' discriminatory rules if we and our 
     RFG trading partners are unable to agree on a mutually 
     satisfactory approach for maintaining our high level of 
     protection of the U.S. environment. Thus the EPA is not 
     constrained to weaken U.S. environmental standards (in fact, 
     it has a mandate not to), and there is no environmental 
     benefit to be gained by the proposed rider.
       One further note: it has come to our attention that certain 
     industry entities may have stated, directly or by 
     implication, that some of the undersigned organizations are 
     supporting the Burns rider on environmental grounds. Any such 
     statements reflect a misunderstanding and are inaccurate. 
     Some of our organizations did object to an earlier effort by 
     EPA to change the RFG rule. These organizations did so 
     because EPA did not provide adequate public notice and 
     opportunity for public comment. Moreover, a compromise rule 
     considered at the time could have weakened environmental 
     protections. EPA's latest Federal Register Notice does 
     provide the opportunity for comment that we were originally 
     seeking, and provides the public with the opportunity to 
     ensure that high levels of U.S. environmental protections are 
     maintained. Because EPA has met our concerns about public 
     notice and comment, there is no reason to support the Burns 
     rider, or to hamper EPA from pursuing its new course.
       We therefore urge you to oppose the rider currently being 
     considered by Senator Burns for attachment to the EPA 
     Appropriations bill in the floor debate in the Senate.
       Thank you for your consideration.
           Sincerely yours,
     Annie Petsonk,
       International Counsel, Environmental defense Fund.
     Rodrigo Prudencio,
       Trade & Environment Program Coordinator, The National 
     Wildlife Federation.
     Daniel Seligman,
       Senior Trade Fellow, Sierra Club.
     David Schorr,
       Senior Program Officer, Trade and Environment World 
     Wildlife Fund.


                           amendment no. 5163

 (Purpose: To allow the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
Agency to use certain funds to implement comprehensive conservation and 
          management plans under the national estuary program)

       At the end of title IV, add the following:

     SEC. 4   . IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION AND 
                   MANAGEMENT PLANS.

       Notwithstanding section 320(g) of the Federal Water 
     Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1330(g)), funds made 
     available pursuant to authorization under such section for 
     fiscal year 1997 and prior fiscal years may be used for 
     implementing comprehensive conservation and management plans.
                                                                    ____



                           amendment no. 5164

       On page 30, line 14, strike ``$6,590,000,000'', and insert 
     ``$6,740,000,000''.
       On page 31, strike the proviso beginning on line 16, and 
     insert the following: ``Provided further, That of the total 
     amount provided under this head, $500,000,000 shall be 
     available for use in conjunction with properties that are 
     eligible for assistance under the Low Income Housing 
     Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 (LIHPRHA) 
     or the Emergency Low-Income Housing Preservation Act of 1987 
     (ELIHPA): Provided further, that amounts recaptured from 
     interest reduction payment contracts for section 236 projects 
     whose owners prepay their mortgages during fiscal year 1997 
     shall be rescinded.''
                                                                    ____



                           amendment no. 5165

       On page 30, line 9, delete the period and insert the 
     following: ``; Provided, That of the total amount made 
     available under this head, $50,000,000 shall be made 
     available to nonelderly disabled families affected by the 
     designation of a public housing development under section 7 
     of such Act or the establishment of preferences in accordance 
     with section 651 of the Housing and Community Development Act 
     of 1992 [42 U.S.C. 13611].''

[[Page S9711]]

     
                                                                    ____
                           amendment no. 5166

 (Purpose: To allow states which are unprepared to receive the entire 
 amount of their share of the $725 million in recently released clean 
water state revolving funds in fiscal year 1996, but receive the funds 
   in fiscal year 1997, to participate in any reallotment of FY 1996 
                                 funds)

       On page 72, line 15, before the period, insert: ``: 
     Provided further, That, notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law, a State that did not receive, in fiscal year 1996, 
     grants under Title VI of the Federal Water Pollution Control 
     Act, as amended, that obligated all the funds allotted to it 
     from the $725,000,000 that became available for that purpose 
     on August 1, 1996, may receive reallotted funds from the 
     fiscal year 1996 appropriation, provided the State receives 
     such grants in fiscal year 1997''.

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, let me give Members a brief rundown of the 
provisions in these en bloc amendments so everybody will know what we 
are dealing with.
  The first amendment, which is supported by FEMA and is cosponsored by 
Senator Byrd, provides an interim extension of FEMA's flood insurance 
legislation to enable FEMA to continue writing flood insurance policies 
after September 30, 1996, until the committee of jurisdiction 
reauthorizes the flood insurance program. Without this extension, FEMA 
would be forced to stop writing policies on October 1, a problem which 
I have already dealt with here and which I have stated is of great 
importance to many States and particularly those like mine which have 
had significant flood events in them.
  The second amendment is offered on behalf of Senators Snowe and 
Cohen. It represents a technical correction to the fiscal 1995 VA-HUD 
bill pertaining to a project in Bangor, ME. The amendment relates only 
to the fiscal year 1995 appropriations for the project and allows the 
funds to be utilized in a manner required by that community.
  The third, on behalf of Senators Burns and Mikulski, is an amendment 
which expresses the sense of the Senate regarding imports of 
reformulated and conventional gasoline.
  That has been cleared on both sides, and it has been cleared by the 
Environment and Public Works Committee.
  Next, in the en bloc amendment, on behalf of Senators Mack, Graham, 
and Lieberman, an amendment which has been cleared on both sides and 
has wide support would allow EPA's national estuary program funds to be 
used for implementing cleanup plans in fiscal year 1997 and prior 
years.
  Next, on behalf of Senators Craig, Sarbanes, Moseley-Braun, Kerry, 
and Murray is an amendment to clarify the $500 million appropriation 
for low-income housing preservation.
  Next, on behalf of Senators Kerry and Domenici, the final amendment 
sets forth an earmark of $50 million for vouchers for displaced and 
disabled individuals or families currently in buildings being converted 
to all-elderly.
  The last amendment which has been requested by the EPA Administrator 
is technical in nature. It is one which addresses $725 million in funds 
recently released for the clean water State revolving funds from funds 
previously appropriated for drinking water State revolving funds. These 
funds are considered an advance on the fiscal year 1997 appropriation 
for clean water State revolving funds. The amendment simply ensures 
that States' clean water funds are not penalized by the 1996 release of 
funds so late in the fiscal year. It enables States which are not 
prepared to receive the entire amount of the share of $725 million in 
clean water State revolving funds in fiscal year 1996 but do receive 
the balance in fiscal year 1997 to participate in any possible 
reallotment of fiscal year 1996 funds.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further discussion of the amendments? 
If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendments offered en bloc 
by the Senator from Missouri.
  The amendments (Nos. 5160 through 5166) were agreed to.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I know in a few minutes one of our 
distinguished colleagues, Senator Glenn of Ohio, wants to speak about 
the importance of NASA and its adequate funding. We are so honored to 
have a Senator astronaut with us who, of course, can speak in a unique 
way, but I wish to make one comment on the amendments that we just 
passed because when we run through them they sound so technical, they 
sound so dry, and they sound so easy.
  I should like to bring to the attention of my colleagues that each 
one of these took a lot of hard work and a lot of staff time and will 
be enormously important to people.
  The FEMA flood insurance authorization means that we can actually 
write flood insurance. What we are facing with Edouard and Fran, and so 
on--flood insurance.
  We have worked to protect the American refiner industry. We had 
something a lot stronger, but we were told that we would trigger a WTO 
action, so therefore we sat down and worked very hard to make sure we 
comply with international trade but we made sure we had our dukes up to 
protect America's jobs in the gulf coast, to make sure that Americans 
are working, being able to have jobs in the refiner industry, and 
ultimately with Iran and Iraq staring each other down now it would be 
very important to ensure our independence in the refinery process.
  When we look at the amendment of a $50 million earmark for vouchers 
for displaced disabled, what does that mean? It means now that disabled 
people are now living in housing for the elderly. That is what was 
included in the Americans With Disabilities Act. These are younger 
people. There is a clash of culture between the younger disabled and 
the elderly. We want to have the elderly be able to have their own 
housing. We want to make sure that we do not abandon our commitment, 
and that is what this amendment is about. I could go through example 
after example. We want to show when we are spending this money we are 
protecting jobs, we are looking out for the disabled, and we are also 
protecting property owners with flood insurance. It takes a lot of hard 
work, focusing on the detail, and making sure that Government is 
working in a way that serves people.
  So having said that, I did not mean to give a long speech but that is 
why we agree to these amendments and again we find that a sensible 
Senate can protect our jobs and protect our folks.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. GLENN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. DeWine). The Senator from Ohio.
  Mr. GLENN. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. President, I want to make a statement on NASA today before we get 
in the throes of some of the amendments and get into the more time-
constrained portion of our debate on the floor.
  I wish I could have the very personal attention of every person in 
this country who is 60 years of age or older. Do you know how many 
there are? According to the statistics from the Bureau of the Census, 
as of July 1 of this year, it is estimated we had 43,872,000 people 
above the age of 60. That number is expanding, as was pointed out in a 
U.S. News & World Report full-page article earlier this year in June 
called, ``Waves of Gray.''
  The Census Bureau also tells us that over the next 50 years or so 
when those people who are in their twenties now are in their real 
senior years, the numbers of people over 60 years of age will have 
grown to almost 100 million people.
  Now, why do I bring that up in the context of NASA? Because I think 
if I had the attention of every single one of those people we could 
make very decided moves into getting every single one of those people 
to support everything about the space program, and for this reason. One 
thing that has happened in the look into the life and biosciences in 
the NASA program has been that we find some notable parallels between 
what happens to astronauts in space and what happens to the elderly 
right here on Earth. And if we can find what triggers some of these 
similarities, perhaps we will have a whole new handle on approaching 
difficulties that people have right here on Earth.
  There is an excellent article that was put out by Joan Vernikos, who 
is the Director of Life Sciences at NASA, and I wanted to read most of 
this article here because I think it is very good and it lays out 
exactly what NASA has found. Then I will have some addi-

[[Page S9712]]

tional remarks at the end. The article is titled ``Parallel Processes? 
The Study of Human Adaptation to Space Helps Us Understand Aging.''

       In 1963, the U.S. population included 17 million people who 
     were 65 years old or older--today there are twice as many.

  That is just since 1963.

       Meanwhile, the number of Americans 85 years or older is 
     projected to grow from 3.3 million today to 18.9 million by 
     2050.

  Many people just getting out of college and starting their working 
years will fit into that group.

       Gerontologists--scientists who study the aging process--say 
     that more research into diseases that afflict older people 
     could help to reduce the number of individuals who require 
     expensive full-time medical care in their later years.
       Studies of age-related health problems have shown that the 
     process of physiological adaptation to the low gravity of 
     space induces symptoms also seen in aging (some effect of 
     aging appear to be due to inactivity rather than the aging 
     process itself). Hence, gerontologists and space life 
     scientists are collaborating to determine how people adapt to 
     aging and to the virtual absence of gravity in space and to 
     develop countermeasures where possible. Space biomedical 
     research could improve understanding of the basic mechanisms 
     of aging, and aging research could contribute to a better 
     understanding of physiological deconditioning in space.


               Astronauts: Simulating the Aging Process?

       Life on Earth evolved in the presence of gravity. For this 
     reason, gravity plays a role in all life processes, and 
     exposure to the microgravity environment of space affects 
     living things significantly. Certain physiological changes 
     that occur in space also occur with aging: for instance, 
     cardiovascular deconditioning, balance disorders, weakening 
     bones and muscles, disturbed sleep, and depressed immune 
     response. An important difference, however, is that these 
     changes are reversible in astronauts.
       Research has shown that insufficient excercise--due to 
     aging, paralysis, weakness, or prolonged bed rest, for 
     example--can cause a downward spiral in an individual's 
     health over time, increasing susceptibility to bone fractures 
     and slowing recovery from injuries and other ailments. What 
     researchers learn about the physiological effects that 
     accompany space flight may yield ways of limiting he 
     deconditioning symptoms of the inactivity that comes with 
     aging.
       Are these changes inevitable? Do they result from the same 
     processes? Can people take steps to lessen, prevent, or 
     reverse them? With the understanding that similar results may 
     be due to different mechanisms and processes, biomedical 
     researchers are attempting to gain insights into the aging 
     process by studying physiological adaptation to space and 
     visa versa.
       A primary goal of NASA's life sciences program is to 
     understand the mechanisms underlying these physiological 
     changes and to find ways of preventing them in astronauts. 
     The National Institute on Aging's high-priority research 
     interests reflect a similar focus, encompassing nervous 
     system function, frailty, osteoporosis, dizzy spells, sudden 
     drops in blood pressure often causing falls and fractured 
     bones, problems with coordination of movements, and the 
     effects of physical exercise on bone and muscle in the older 
     population.


                           Balance Disorders

       Space crew members experience neurosensory disturbances 
     such as dizziness and inability to maintain their balance 
     upon returning from space flights. Humans sense gravity on 
     Earth directly through receptors in the inner ear and 
     indirectly by touch and stretch. In space these sensing 
     mechanisms don't review their usual cues. Studies of the 
     neurosensory system conducted in space offer a unique 
     opportunity to understand how gravity, and the absence of it, 
     affects the central nervous system and neurosensory-dependent 
     functions such as hand-eye coordination, posture, balance, 
     and gait.
       Much space flight sciences research focuses on better 
     understanding the mechanisms involved in the brain's 
     interpretation of the body's orientation in three-dimensional 
     space. With sufficient information in hand, researchers can 
     develop procedures to protect space crew members from such 
     disturbances, especially when crews return to Earth after 
     long space voyages. The results of this research apply to 
     patients with gait and postural disorders of neurological 
     origin, including elderly people for whom falls may have 
     especially serious consequences.


                           Sleep Disturbances

       The change in sleep pattern that typically comes with aging 
     is early waking and fragmented sleep. In space, sleep is also 
     fragmented or otherwise disturbed. Optimal alertness during 
     the day and sound sleep at night, valuable qualities on Earth 
     and in space, require proper synchronizing of the human 
     circadian pacemaker (the ``body clock''). Thus, researchers 
     seek to better understand how aging and space flight affect 
     the mechanisms governing circadian rhythms.
       While researchers surmise that aging changes the properties 
     of the human circadian pacemaker, they are not precisely sure 
     how changes occur. Research has shown that bright light can 
     reset the human circadian pacemaker; this treatment, 
     originally developed for aging people, more recently has 
     proven useful to astronauts preparing for space flight.


                           bone deterioration

       Loss of bone mass is a problem common to aging and space 
     travel. Although the results may be the same, the causes may 
     be different. Space life scientists and researchers studying 
     aging are interested in how exercise affects bones; whether 
     hormones or drugs can prevent bone loss or promote bone 
     formation; and what mechanism translates mechanical loading 
     (physical street or force) on bones into biochemical signals 
     that stimulate bone formation and resorption.
       Normally, the breakdown of old bone mass (resorption) and 
     the formation of new bone mass occur constantly, in a 
     balanced cycle called remodeling. Mechanical forces (that is, 
     gravity-driven stresses) appear to coordinate these 
     fundamental bone shaping processes. Determining how the body 
     translates these forces into the signals that control bone 
     structure may reveal whether and how exercise or drugs can 
     prevent osteoporosis in the elderly and in astronauts.


       cardiovascular deconditioning and orthostatic intolerance

       Exposure to microgravity degrades the general condition of 
     the cardiovascular system and specifically degrades 
     orthostatic tolerance (the ability of the cardiovascular 
     system to supply the brain with enough blood to maintain 
     consciousness while an individual stands upright).

       It is what adjusts our body if we are lying down and stand 
     up or are sitting down and stand up suddenly. We know a lot 
     of people have a problem with this, have a dizziness. If they 
     fall over, with maybe osteoporosis, have a broken hip, 
     whatever.

       Since orthostatic tolerance may decline with aging, 
     whatever space researchers learn about this particular 
     adaptation should help to solve the problem on Earth as well 
     as in space, even though the mechanisms of adaptation may be 
     different.


                      drug and nutrient absorption

       Nausea and sometimes vomiting were the earliest and mostly 
     consistent symptoms experienced in the first few days of 
     spaceflight. A broad array of drugs used to treat motion 
     sickness on Earth were only slightly helpful in space. Many 
     theories were developed to explain this lack of 
     effectiveness, until an astronaut doctor gave a fellow 
     suffering astronaut one of these drugs by injection.
       The effect was miraculous. It became clear that the same 
     drug taken orally in space was not nearly as effective 
     because perhaps it was not absorbed nearly as well. Recent 
     experiments in spaceflight suggest the absorption of calcium 
     may also be reduced in space. Perhaps the same is true for 
     other nutrients? Ground studies, using the inactivity of bed 
     rest to mimic the effects of spaceflight in young volunteers, 
     have also indicated reduced absorption through the stomach 
     and gut, similar to what is suspected to be found in the 
     elderly. Research in the absorption and distribution of drugs 
     and nutrients in astronauts may help increase awareness that 
     as people get older daily nutritional requirements as well as 
     the effect of drugs prescribed may change.


                            immune response

       Both aging and space flight depress the human immune 
     response (though the change in space is temporary while the 
     change due to aging is not). Reduced proliferation of 
     infection-fighting cells in the immune system may underlie 
     changes in both conditions. It is not clear, however, whether 
     aging or other factors that typically accompany aging (such 
     as declining activity) cause this immune-system depression.
       Models of age-related changes in immune function are 
     difficult to find, so microgravity may be a very useful model 
     system to use to increase our understanding of changes due to 
     aging.


                             for the future

       Although humans have been traveling into space for three 
     decades--

  A little over three decades now.

     researchers have had few opportunities thus far to carry out 
     systematic biomedical research in space. The dedicated space 
     biomedical research missions of Skylab in the early 1970's 
     and two Spacelab Life Sciences missions aboard the Space 
     Shuttle stand out as exceptions. Future Spacelab missions 
     such as Neurolab, a joint mission with the National Institute 
     of Health to be launched in 1998--and expanding collaboration 
     with Russia on Shuttle-Mir missions will give researchers 
     greater opportunities to solve the mysteries of space 
     deconditioning and aging.

  Mr. President, NASA has a book published by some of its most notable 
physicians. The book is called ``Space Physiology and Medicine.'' And 
it is a great book. It describes the changes that have come up in space 
flight with the different astronauts. And they have come up with a list 
of 55--55 different areas where there are changes on the human body 
that occur in space. It is a long list. It is in that book.
  I did a little research on my own. We came up with some very similar 
findings, as a matter of fact. I had the Merck Manual of Geriatrics. 
Everyone is familiar with the Merck Manual that almost every doctor has 
on his or her desk as a reference work. It is the definitive reference 
work. It has been

[[Page S9713]]

published, I think, for over 100 years now, the Merck Manual.
  Just a few years ago, back in the 1980's, Merck started putting out 
the Merck Manual of Geriatrics. It is one where it gives all the same 
things that apply to the regular Merck Manual for normal-aged people. 
But this one book has a different emphasis to it. In the index they 
have, for instance, ``disequilibrium of aging,'' one I just happen to 
turn to here. The book gives a great number of things where changes in 
the human body occur with aging. And they note them here and the 
effects of them.
  What we did is go through the NASA book on space physiology and 
medicine and compare it with the Merck Manual where there is a special 
relationship to aging and the human body. We came up with some 
similarities that are excellent. I mentioned some of them a moment ago.
  But there are 10 very basic areas we think should be looked into and 
can be looked into that can give us not only better control for the 
deterioration that occurs in the human body in space, but perhaps even 
more importantly for those almost 44 million people I mentioned who are 
over 60 years of age, these things, if we do more research on them, can 
apply to a better senior citizen life expectancy here on Earth. And 
that to me is exciting. That is something to really look into and find 
out. I am of an age where I could probably benefit from some of that, 
and so are some 44 million other Americans. And that list is growing 
all the time. As I said, over the next 50 years or so that number is 
expected to double up to almost 100 million people.
  Listen to these for just a moment. These are physiological changes 
that are referred not only in the Merck Manual, but also in the 
experience of astronauts in space as recorded in the space physiology 
book.
  First, bone density. What happens? Net loss of bone density in both 
the normal age process where it is irreversible as far as we know now, 
and during space flight where when they come back to Earth it is 
reversible. What causes this? What is the mechanism that triggers 
changes in bone density? What can lead us to breakthroughs in the 
treatment of osteoporosis? Are there some similarities here where we 
can make some experiments on the elderly and on astronauts in space? If 
we had an older person go up in space, would that breakdown in the bone 
be in addition to what has already occurred just because that person 
had become elderly? We do not know the answer to that yet. But I think 
we should be finding out.
  Second area, orthostatic tolerance, the difference in blood pressure 
measured when standing or sitting. How the lower extremities and the 
abdominal area react to the changing role of gravity as you stand up. 
Orthostatic tolerance decreases during and after flight in space before 
returning to normal. It takes several days before astronauts, when they 
come back from space, feel normal again. But it is a symptom that, once 
it occurs in the elderly, they may have to live with it the rest of 
their lives. So research into neurosensory mechanisms that control this 
adaptation could lead to cures for motion sickness and help prevent 
falls, a very major factor with the elderly.
  Another area, balance and vestibular problems. Dizziness and the 
inability to maintain balance is common in the elderly and astronauts 
returning from space flight. Research could lead to advances in 
treatment of patients with walking disorders or posture disorders of a 
neurological origin.

  Sleep disturbances. Fragmented sleep and early wakening are common 
problems in space flight and aging. That is, disruption of the human 
circadian rhythm I mentioned a few moments ago. Learning how to control 
the circadian rhythm will improve quality of life for the elderly as 
well as others with sleep disorders or schedule changes.
  Muscle strength. Decreases during and after space flight before 
returning to normal, and decreases with aging, just across the board in 
general. What causes this? Understanding the mechanism for muscle 
weakening and developing treatments can benefit patients with prolonged 
bed rest, as an example.
  Immunology. I find this absolutely fascinating, and the portent of 
this or the possibility of what research in this area may bring--I do 
not think we can predict what it might be. The normal aging process in 
space flight depresses the human immune response. Now, what triggers 
this? Why is that triggered in someone in the weightlessness of space 
flight for a few days? What causes it in the elderly here on Earth 
where they become less immune to certain diseases? Since these immune 
system changes are similar, I think it is just an ideal opportunity 
that exists to better understand how the elderly fight infection, 
cancer, AIDS in younger people, across the board. We are talking about 
one of the most basic things in the human body, that the immune system 
changes its response. The immune system changes its response in the 
elderly but is triggered off in younger, healthy people that go into 
space. Now, say we send someone into space. In an elderly person would 
that change in immunology be in addition to what they have already 
experienced just by growing older here on Earth, or would they be 
immune from further changes induced by microgravity? We do not know the 
answer yet. Maybe we will someday.
  To me, that is one of the most exciting areas of all because it opens 
up the thought of so many other areas and the potential is enormous. 
What if all of our elderly people here on Earth could do something that 
would let them continue their immune response that they had in their 
younger years? What if they can find a way to stimulate the immunology 
of young people who may be at risk for AIDS or cancer or whatever? This 
to me is a very, very exciting area to look into.
  Drug and nutrient absorption. Reduced absorption of medicine and 
nutrients in the stomach and gut evidenced during space flight and also 
suspected with many elderly where medicines do not have the same effect 
they are expected to have. Space flight research may increase awareness 
of changing nutrient and pharmaceutical needs of the elderly.
  Cardiac electrical activity increases PR interval and QT interval in 
space flight and aging. What effect this may have or the impact it may 
have is not clear, but it certainly is an area for further research.
  Serum glucose postflight increases and it increases with aging. The 
implication of this, once again, is not clear.
  Reflexes, particularly Achilles tendon reflex. Reflex duration is 
decreased after flight for astronauts coming back. We do not know why. 
For a while, until they readapt to their Earth environment, their 
reflexes change. Now, that also occurs with the elderly. It may be 
diminished or even absent as a reflex in the elderly. All of these 
things are areas where we have seen changes in the elderly as well as 
with those who are on space flight.

  Mr. President, I think these areas are exciting areas to look into. 
In a life science project that NASA has and is planning they are 
looking into these areas. I know that the Administrator, Dan Goldin at 
NASA, is interested in this area. I have talked to him about some of 
the similarities in these areas and he is very interested in seeing 
that these things are looked into. Exactly how that will be done is 
under some discussion right now. These are areas that obviously have 
enormous potential benefits for people right here on Earth.
  Mr. President, let me go into some of the other areas of NASA that I 
want to talk about for a little while this afternoon. Curiosity is at 
the heart of all research. Who are we going to see as being responsible 
for establishing a curious attitude, the curious mind of those, say, in 
the class of 2015 or 2025? The Government's responsibility, as I see 
it, is to fund long-term basic research that is not being done or 
cannot be done by anyone in private corporations here on Earth and be 
conducted on the space station. Certainly no company is going to invest 
significantly in that particular area.
  The CRS report discussing case studies of federally sponsored 
research is interesting. Mr. President, the Congressional Research 
Service has recently published a report which examines some case 
studies of federally-sponsored research and development activities. 
While these are not directly related with the space station, I want to 
cite some of these as examples where curiosity or some inquiry into the 
unknown--that has been an American trade ever since our founding

[[Page S9714]]

days--has led on to things that were undreamed of when they started 
out.
  Some of the examples discussed in the report indicate that we do not 
always know what the outcome or benefit will be from research, but 
these examples clearly demonstrate federally-sponsored research in 
these areas can change the way we live. I want to make clear, as CRS 
stresses, it is often difficult to extrapolate findings from particular 
cases to support for other types of research. The point I wish to make 
is that basic research can have unforeseen and unintended benefits.
  Here are some of the examples cited by CRS: Titanium, in common use 
today, until the 1940's the titanium industry did not exist because 
nobody knew how to convert titanium ore into metal of a high-quality 
product. Intense Government involvement surmounted this technological 
barrier and allowed the industry to grow. Like so many research 
programs, early applications of titanium were for military use. 
However, commercial use of titanium now is three times that of the 
military.
  The Internet: As most people now know, the predecessor to the 
Internet was created in the late 1960's to establish a secure and 
reliable communications network between the DOD and universal 
researchers. Out of this early narrow application has evolved today an 
entirely new media form which will possibly impact our lives as much as 
the development of the telephone or television.
  The National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics and the $25 cowling: 
NACA, NASA's predecessor, was involved with the federally-sponsored 
research effort to improve America's international standing in aviation 
and aeronautics back in that time. One of the first major successes in 
the 1920's was development of a cowling around aircraft engines, the 
housing which surrounds it. In 1928, NACA announced test results that 
showed if a $25 cowling was installed on existing aircraft, then the 
possible annual savings in fuel and associated costs could amount to 
more than $5 million. In addition, one of the first aircraft equipped 
with an NACA-designed cowling set a new cross-country record, allowing 
the maximum speed of the aircraft to be increased by more than 10 
percent.
  Food processing control is another example. In the early days of the 
space program, NASA wrestled with the question of how and what to feed 
astronauts. They were aided in this effort by researchers from 
Pillsbury, working on a Government contract. A major issue that had to 
be overcome was to develop assurances against bacteria contamination.
  Pillsbury responded to this problem by developing the hazard analysis 
and critical control point, HACCP, concept, which was designed to 
prevent food safety problems rather than catch them after they had 
occurred. Pillsbury used the HACCP process to manufacture food that 
went to the moon with the Apollo spacecraft. Subsequently, this system 
was incorporated in the Food and Drug Administration regulation on 
canned foods and has since become industry practice and provides for 
safety for food that our producers here can now ship all over the 
world.
  Compact disc technology. Compact discs have made a substantial impact 
throughout our economy--in education, music, and computer systems. Not 
many people know this technology was originally developed from R&D 
sponsored by the Air Force, who were looking for better data storage 
systems for the strategic bomber force. Air Force research in this area 
successfully demonstrated the concept in the early seventies, but it 
was not until the mid 1980's that CD's became the commercial success 
that they are today.
  Of course, with any research, there is no guarantee of the greatness 
of discovery. Arthur Compton, a Nobel Prize physicist, noted:

       Every great discovery I ever made, I gambled that the truth 
     was there and then I acted on it in faith until I could prove 
     its existence.

  From Eli Whitney to Thomas Edison, great Americans have pursued 
research leading to vast improvements in the quality of the American 
way of life. I am convinced that research conducted on the 
international space station will impact our lives in a manner 
comparable to the other research programs I have mentioned.
  Today I want to discuss for a little while the type of research that 
will be conducted on the international space station and discuss the 
research currently being done on the space shuttle. As I talk about 
this research, I want to emphasize what the benefits of the research 
have been, or could be, for those of us right here on Earth. Then I 
would like to discuss a particularly promising area of research, and 
that was the one I mentioned before that involves the very similarities 
of aging and space flight.
  Space station research areas. The following is a list of some of the 
fields to be explored aboard the space station: Biotechnology, which is 
very promising. While some significant advances have been made in 
microgravity research aboard the space shuttle, many projects need a 
sustained microgravity environment in order to obtain any useful 
result. For example--and this is a very promising--protein crystal 
growth projects, conducted in microgravity, have resulted in new cancer 
drugs, among other pharmaceutical breakthroughs. However, the longest 
shuttle mission has only been 17 days. Often, this is not long enough 
to grow adequate crystals for drug research and production. A sustained 
microgravity environment provided by the space station could lead to 
new weapons in the fight against such things as cancer, AIDS, and other 
terminal illnesses. I find that very exciting.
  In talking to some of the people at NASA who are dealing with these 
areas, they say that some day a Nobel Prize will be given for some of 
the breakthroughs that are imminent. I think that is entirely possible.
  Private industry is working with NASA's Center for Macromolecular 
Crystallography to produce high-quality protein crystals for new drug 
development. Drug companies such as Scherring Plough, Eli-Lilly, 
Upjohn, Bristol-Myers, Squibb, Smith Kline Beecham, Biocryst, Dupont 
Merck, Eastman Kodak, and Vertex are using protein crystals to research 
cancer, diabetes, emphysema, and immune system disorders, including the 
HIV virus. That is exciting to me because you cannot develop crystals 
of this purity or size here on Earth because of the ``G'' environment. 
In space, they grow differently, larger, and you can separate them out, 
and they grow more pure than on Earth. It opens up new fields of 
application for pharmaceutical breakthroughs. You can only do that in a 
lengthy period of time on the space station. To me, the potential in 
that area alone is worth everything that we are thinking about spending 
on the space station.

  Another area is mammalian tissue culture. Consider that field. The 
purpose of tissue culturing is to replicate what goes on inside the 
body, but in a controlled environment. Unfortunately, several factors 
conspire to limit the size and the shape of tissue cultures in a normal 
Earth-bound lab.
  For example, tissue cultures are extremely sensitive to shear forces 
caused by fluid flow. Microgravity provides a reduced stress 
environment, which allows much larger tissue masses to develop. Tissues 
grown in a microgravity environment not only grow large, but they 
resemble what actually happens in the body. They would no longer settle 
at the bottom of a Petri dish in a lab. You would develop that tissue 
culture much as it would occur here on Earth in a human body where it 
is in a 3D environment. Clearly, the more accurate and living model we 
have, the more accurate the results of any experiment that is done with 
the model. This branch of research is particularly promising for cancer 
research. That is actively underway, and it has been on the space 
shuttle and will be to a greater degree on the space station.
  Materials science. The space station will play an integral role in 
this research area. The zero-gravity environment available in the space 
station will allow scientists to study how gravity influences the 
crystal growth process I mentioned, and the primary offshoot of 
crystalline growth can also be polymer production. Polymers are long 
chains of organic molecules used in everything from nylon and polyester 
to the plastics found in cars and medical implants. With breakthroughs 
in this area, the impact could be enormous.
  Life sciences. Variable gravitational fields are an excellent 
research tool in addressing fundamental biological

[[Page S9715]]

questions. Cell response to external forces results in changes in gene 
expression and protein synthesis. By studying cells in microgravity, 
researchers hope to better understand how such basic cell functions are 
carried out. This is the first step in learning how to improve care for 
genetic disorders and other cell imbalance problems.
  Space physiology. Microgravity research also helps improve our 
understanding of bodily systems. From the basic functions of the heart 
and lungs to the complex neurosystems controlling balance, perception 
and cognition, information gathered from space station research will 
improve health care on Earth. For example, astronauts lose bone and 
muscle mass in microgravity. In learning to treat these flight 
problems, scientists have uncovered new insights into osteoporosis and 
aging. With continued microgravity experiments, it is possible 
that researchers could minimize some of the debilitating effects of 
aging.

  Technology and engineering. Not only will the space station help 
improve human life on Earth, but it will also contribute to a more 
energy-efficient future. The microgravity environment of the space 
station will allow scientists to study combustion processes. Improved 
combustion efficiency leads to improved energy conservation. Just a 2-
percent increase in burner efficiency for heaters would save the United 
States $8 billion per year. Advances in combustion research have 
already occurred on the shuttle. They have been working on that on 
several flights already.
  Fluid physics experiments will be also conducted aboard the space 
station. By studying fluid behavior, scientists hope to improve their 
understanding of important activities from energy production to 
materials engineering.
  Recent shuttle research. Mr. President, one of the challenges in 
describing the benefits of NASA research is explaining how it affects 
our everyday lives. Too often when scientific issues come to this 
floor, my colleagues become afflicted with that unfortunate condition 
we are all familiar with known as MEGO--My eyes glaze over. Today, I 
hope to relate recent scientific findings from the space shuttle 
program in an easily understandable fashion so that we can understand 
what our significant investments in this program are yielding. I would 
like to spend a few minutes describing some of the research conducted 
on three recent shuttle flights. This discussion is relevant because 
the research and experiments I will discuss are examples of the type of 
research that will be conducted on the space station.
  One of the missions up a short time ago was the life and microgravity 
sciences mission, STS-78. Earlier this month the astronauts on flight 
STS-78, also called the Life and Microgravity Sciences, or LMS, 
mission, returned to Earth after a record-setting 17-day mission.
  During this mission a number of important experiments were conducted 
that could lead to new breakthroughs in our understanding of disease, 
how it occurs, the aging process, as well as basic research in 
materials formation.
  Musculoskeletal tests: Research conducted in this area could help 
scientists develop measures to reduce in-flight muscle atrophy and also 
fight certain muscle diseases and osteoporosis on Earth.
  Metabolic experiments: These experiments involved the crew collecting 
fluid and calcium tracer samples throughout the flight to help 
investigators measure bone loss and changes in metabolism.
  Circadian rhythm and sleep study: This study examined the crew's 
brain waves, eye movement and muscle movement during sleep. Results of 
this study may also benefit people on Earth by helping people whose 
sleep schedule suffers from shift changes or jet lag.
  Neuroscience experiments: These experiments examine the crew's 
adaptation to microgravity in regard to balance and spatial 
orientation. What is learned in this area could lead to developments to 
combat motion sickness in cars, boats or aircraft--as well as in space.
  Advanced gradient heating facility: Six individual experiments were 
run that examined solidification of alloys and crystals. The benefits 
of this research could lead to improvements in the way semiconductors 
are manufactured. And that would be an enormous step forward.
  The bubble, drop, and particle unit: A dozen experiments were 
conducted to examine how gas bubbles and liquid drops interact during 
heating. Research gathered from experiments completed could lead to 
advances in material processing on Earth, including the development of 
new types of glass and ceramics.


                            usmps-3--sts-75

  In March of this year, seven astronauts aboard the shuttle Columbia, 
on flight STS-75, returned to Earth. This flight included two 
astronauts from the European Space Agency--thus demonstrating that 
international cooperation is working well with the shuttle program. One 
of the successes of that flight was the research conducted using the 
U.S. microgravity payload (USMP-3). Using four major experiments on 
support trusses in Columbia's  payload bay, the astronauts and 
researchers on the ground, studied the formation of solids and liquids 
in microgravity. Much of the work conducted on USMP-3 will help 
calibrate and improve the research done on the space station--thus 
enabling station researchers to more quickly begin more productive 
research.
  Basic research was also conducted with USMP-3. On an experiment 
dubbed ``Zeno'' researchers were able to identify the precise critical 
point of the element xenon. The critical point or temperature is that 
precise point when an element is in a liquid and gas phase at the same 
time. This research goal was achieved by lowering the xenon sample's 
temperature and pressure in increments of a millionth of a degree. 
Because gravity on Earth causes mixing of samples that destabilizes 
them as they near the critical point, this is research that simply 
cannot be conducted on Earth.
  This is basic research. It is not immediately clear what scientists 
might learn from this experiment. What is clear is that researchers now 
have a more fundamental understanding of what happens when materials 
change from one phase to another. This insight could lead to 
breakthroughs in superconductivity or magnetism. I ask unanimous 
consent that an article discussing this experiment that appeared in 
Science News be included in the Record at this point.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

              [From Science News, Vol. 149, Apr. 20, 1996]

                      Creeping to a Critical Point

                          (By Ivars Peterson)

       When the space shuttle Columbia touched down at NASA's 
     Kennedy Space Center in Orlando, Fla. on March 9, it returned 
     a remarkable instrument to Earth. Designed to monitor laser 
     light scattered by a dense, compressed gas teetering on the 
     brink of turning into a liquid, this precision apparatus had 
     operated continuously in space for more than 14 days.
       During this time, researchers had relayed dozens of 
     instructions to the equipment, controlling the temperature of 
     an ultrapure, high-pressure sample of xenon to millionths of 
     a degree. By taking advantage of a setting in which the 
     effects of gravity do not obscure details of a material's 
     activity, they could bring the xenon sample excruciatingly 
     close to its critical temperature--the point at which its 
     liquid and gas phases coexist and blend into one.
       Robert W. Gammon of the Institute for Physical Science and 
     Technology at the University of Maryland in College Park and 
     head of the research team dubbed this project the Zeno 
     experiment in honor of the philosopher of ancient Greece who 
     pondered the paradox of traveling a finite distance in steps 
     that became vanishingly small.
       The recent shuttle experiment represented the culmination 
     of years of work by a large group of scientists, students, 
     engineers, and technicians at the University of Maryland, 
     NASA's Lewis Research Center in Cleveland, Ball Aerospace in 
     Boulder, Colo., and several other organizations.
       ``No other microgravity instrument has logged as many hours 
     as the Zeno experiment,'' says R. Allen Wilkinson of the 
     space experiments division at Lewis. ``It's gone through two 
     launches and two landings, and it's gone through hundreds of 
     hours of operation in orbit and more than 10,000 hours of 
     testing on the ground.
       ``That's an impressive reliability record,'' he insists.
       The data provided by this instrument brought researchers 
     closer to a fundamental understanding of what happens when 
     materials change from one phase to another, whether from gas 
     to liquid, from ordinary conductor of electricity to 
     superconductor, or from nonmagnet to magnet.

[[Page S9716]]

       In particular, Gammon, project scientist Jeffrey N. 
     Shaumeyer of Maryland, and their team observed with 
     unprecedented clarity xenon's behavior as the gas hovered 
     within microkelvins of its critical temperature of 289.72 
     kelvins, or about 16.7 deg.C.
       The physical state of a material depends on its temperature 
     and pressure. For instance, at sea level pressure on Earth, 
     water exists as a liquid at temperatures between 0 deg.C and 
     100 deg.C. When the temperature goes above 100 deg.C, it 
     changes phase to become a vapor. During this phase 
     transition, the material's density decreases considerably.
       By increasing the pressure, it's possible to raise water's 
     boiling point while increasing the vapor's density. At 
     sufficiently high temperature and pressure, the difference in 
     density between the liquid and vapor phases diminishes to 
     zero. At temperatures within millikelvins of this critical 
     point, the fluid fluctuates rapidly between liquid and vapor, 
     creating density waves.
       These density fluctuations scatter light, making the fluid 
     appear milky instead of clear and colorless. This phenomenon 
     is known as critical opalescence.
       On Earth, it's difficult to observe the details of these 
     fluctuations because the fluid's own weight compresses part 
     of the sample, distorting the waves. In orbit, where the 
     apparent force of gravity is only one-millionth as strong as 
     it is on the ground, such distortions disappear.
       For their experiment, Gammon and his team used a sample of 
     pressurized xenon only 100 micrometers thick. By shining 
     laser light into the sample, they could monitor how the 
     density fluctuations scattered light, making the sample look 
     like a twinkling star.
       As the sample temperature approaches the critical point, 
     ``those twinkles get slower and slower and more and more 
     intense,'' Gammon says.
       By watching these trends, the researchers could readily 
     monitor how closely the xenon had crept to its critical state 
     as they slowly and systematically manipulated the 
     temperature. They had to be extremely careful not to step 
     through the critical point itself.
       ``If we had made a temperature error and gone through too 
     large a step too quickly, we would have messed the sample 
     up,'' Gammon says.
       On its first shuttle flight, in March 1994, the instrument 
     allowed the researchers to make measurements to within 100 
     microkelvins of the critical temperature.
       ``The outstanding performance of the Zeno instrument during 
     the mission gave a fine demonstration of the possibility of 
     making high-precision materials measurements in low gravity, 
     as well as the power of a flexible, ground-commanded 
     experiment,'' the research team concluded in its report on 
     the first run.
       Two years later, having learned how to control temperature 
     changes considerably more carefully, the researchers put the 
     Zeno experiment back on board space shuttle Columbia for a 
     second try (SN:3/16/96, p. 165).
       ``For 14 days, we worked our way up to more and more 
     intense fluctuations, and on the last day, we scanned across 
     and actually saw the transition more sharply than I have ever 
     seen it,'' Gammon says.
       Beyond the transition, as the sample cooled further, it 
     began breaking apart into separate phases, with drops of 
     liquid forming within the vapor and pockets of vapor forming 
     within the liquid to create a kind of fog.
       ``The transition was really there, right where we projected 
     it would be,'' Gammon observes. ``We could locate the 
     transition to about 10 microkelvins.
       ``You can't see it this way on the ground,'' he says. ``It 
     was a delightful conclusion to the 2-week experiment.''
       There are no more flights planned for the Zeno experiment. 
     To get even closer to the transition point and to get more 
     detailed data, the researchers need more than 14 days in 
     space: It takes longer than that for tiny temperature 
     differences across the sample to even out. ``We're still 
     struggling with equilibration issues in the microgravity 
     environment,'' Wilkinson notes.
       ``There's more to be learned,'' he adds. ``But the 
     experiments would be very difficult and require a lot more 
     time.''

  Mr. GLENN. Another interesting experiment conducted on USMP-3 is 
called the isothermal dendritic growth experiment. Dendrites are tiny 
crystalline structures formed from molten materials as these materials 
solidify. The size, shape, and orientation of the dendrites determine 
the strength and durability of steel, aluminum, and superalloys used in 
automobiles and airplanes. This experiment was designed to test 
assumptions concerning the effect of gravity driven fluid flows on 
dendritic formation. What is learned from this experiment could have an 
impact on such major industrial processes as alloy and steel 
manufacturing.


                             usml-2--sts-73

  Last November the shuttle flight STS-73 returned to Earth thus 
concluding the space-based portion of the second U.S. microgravity 
laboratory flight [USML-2]. On board the shuttle were a number of 
sophisticated scientific instruments to explore biological, chemical, 
and materials sciences in microgravity. The experiments carried aboard 
USML-2 include the following:
  Advanced protein crystallization facility: This facility can grow 
crystals three different ways. By growing larger, more highly ordered 
crystals, scientists may be able to better understand biological 
processes, leading to advances in medicine and agriculture.
  Astroculture facility: This facility is designed to support growth of 
plants and to study how starch accumulation in plants is affected by 
the microgravity environment.
  Commercial generic bioprocessing apparatus: This research tool allows 
a variety of experiments to be performed in the area of biomedical 
testing and drug development, ecological systems development, and 
biomaterials products and processes.
  Crystal growth furnace: This furnace is also used for crystal growth 
experiments. It can process multiple large samples at temperatures 
above 1,000 degrees Celsius.
  Drop physics module: This experiments has been developed so that 
scientists can study several fluid physics phenomena: a simple surface, 
such as the sphere formed by a liquid drop in the absence of gravity; 
how a drop reacts to different forces: and how surfaces and compound 
drops--a drop in one liquid surrounding a drop of a different liquid--
interact.
  These are important things and what they can learn here from 
manufacturing processes and for laboratory experiments right here on 
Earth.
  Geophysical fluid flow cell: The purpose of this experiment is to 
study how fluids move in microgravity as a means of understanding fluid 
flow in oceans, the atmosphere--even stars.
  Glovebox: The glove box is used for a variety of experiments, and 
enables hazardous or toxic materials to be incorporated in experiments, 
while they are isolated from the general environment in the lab.
  Space acceleration measurement systems: This equipment enables 
scientists to accurately measure the microgravity environment on the 
shuttle to better calibrate experiments and design experiments for the 
station.
  Surface tension driven convention experiment: This experiment will 
allow scientists to investigate the basic fluid mechanics and heat 
transfer of thermocapillary flows generated by temperature variations 
along free surfaces of liquids in low gravity.
  Zeolite crystal growth experiment: Zeolite crystals are used in the 
chemical process industry as filters, catalysts, and adsorbents. The 
purpose of this experiment is to understand zeolite crystallization and 
growth so as to achieve high yields of large nearly perfect crystals in 
space, something that cannot be done here on Earth.
  What can be learned from all of this? Why am I going through all of 
these technical terms here? What good is it? Let me talk about that a 
moment.
  Knowledge gained from USML-2 research could lead to:
  Custom tailored drugs, made possible by determining structures of 
proteins involved in diseases, and then designing drugs to disrupt 
specific protein;
  Faster, more efficient and less costly semiconductors for high speed 
digital circuits, solid state lasers, and infrared detectors;
  A new form of drug delivery: injecting a disease fighting cell into 
the body, protected by a polymer outer shell developed in space;
  Improved crude oil recovery, environmental cleanup and synthetic drug 
production, based on better knowledge of how chemicals alter the 
surface properties of liquids;
  Sophisticated materials production by controlling unwanted fluid 
flows in molten materials and welding;
  More accurate weather forecasts, as improved computer models of 
atmospheric fluid behavior and in predicting ocean flows and weather 
patterns;
  Implants, such as synthetic skin and blood vessels for burn victims, 
based on commercial research into biological materials;
  Less expensive gasoline, by improving zeolite crystals used to crack 
crude oil into refined petroleum;
  Stronger, more easily shaped ceramics from insights into how the 
microscopic structures of solids form; and
  More efficient fuel use and pollution control, derived from a better 
understanding of the combustion process.
  Mr. President, any one of those items I just mentioned as possible 
benefits

[[Page S9717]]

out of this research going into space--just one breakthrough in any one 
or two of those areas--would make the whole space station program worth 
every penny that we are going to spend on it.
  USML-2 technologies are already being used on Earth. For example, 
devices for early detection of cataracts, based on laser light 
scattering instruments developed for USML-2 investigations.
  These are already being used right now.
  Efficient lighting systems for large commercial nurseries, designed 
for the space plant growth chamber.
  These are already in the news.
  Let me talk for a little while about another issue, the bioreactor.
  Growing tissue samples--so-called tissue culture--is one of the 
fundamental goals of biomedical research.
  Scientists use laboratory containers called bioreactors to grow or 
culture samples of body tissues. Scientists could use cancer tumors and 
other tissues that are successfully grown outside the body to test and 
study treatments, like chemotherapy, for instance, without risking harm 
to patients, if we were able to do this. These tissues from bioreactors 
will also offer important medical insights into how tissues grow and 
develop in the body.
  NASA engineers have already created breakthrough technologies for 
cell culture research on the ground and major breakthroughs can be 
expected once time on the space station becomes available.
  For example, NASA developed bioreactors have already produced the 
first 80-day lung culture, the first normal human intestine culture, 
and major breakthroughs in the quality of ovarian cancer tumor 
cultures. Though superior tissues may be grown in some Earth bound 
bioreactors, when compared with traditional sell culturing techniques, 
there are still limits to the size and quality of the tissue. Many 
scientists believe that far superior tissues can be grown in the 
extended microgravity afforded on the space station and preliminary 
tests on the space station support this idea.
  Mr. President, when we do these experiments in a laboratory here on 
Earth, we are still affected by gravity so that experiments that are 
done in a Petri dish or whatever the experimental laboratory piece of 
equipment may be, you still have difficulty in that tissue does not 
grow in its normal way that it would if it was in a 3-D environment in 
the body. And with the bioreactor in space that kind of growth is 
possible and has already occurred on the first experiments so we then 
can have a culture, a tissue culture that is more like what occurs in 
the real human body.
  In the long term, tissues cultured outside the body may be used 
directly even for replacing damaged tissues, treating diseases, or 
eventually perhaps sometime even replacing organs.
  Let me give a few highlights of recent research.
  Dr. Jeanne Becker of the University of South Florida has applied NASA 
technology to create a breakthrough in culturing ovarian cancer tumors 
for cancer research.
  Dr. Josh Zimmerberg of the NIH National Institute for Child Health 
and Human Development is using NASA-developed bioreactors and NASA-
funded resident technical staff to pursue AIDS research goals under a 
1994 to 1998 NASA-NIH joint venture. And I would add that the NASA and 
NIH have 18, I believe there are, memoranda of agreement--they are 
cooperative agreements in any event back and forth--to work in this 
area of how the studies of NIH and NASA can be correlated together to 
get the maximum effect.
  Dr. Lisa Freed of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology is using 
a NASA bioreactor to grow cartilage cells on biodegradable scaffolds. 
Her work shows a clear prospect for using the space station to produce 
models and transplantable cartilage tissues that could revolutionize 
treatment for joint diseases and injuries.
  STS-70 in July 1995. In July 1995, a NASA bioreactor flew to orbit 
aboard the space shuttle Discovery, and the primary purpose of this 
experiment was to test the performance of the bioreactor which worked 
successfully.
  Poorly differentiated human colon carcinoma cells were grown in a 
bioreactor aboard the space shuttle Discovery and their growth was 
compared with that of similar cells in a bioreactor in normal gravity 
as well as in conventional two dimensional tissue cultures. The space 
grown clusters of cells were approximately two times larger than the 
ground-based samples but the significance of this must be determined 
yet by much study on the ground and many more data points from space 
experiments.

  Ground-based analyses by Dr. J. Milburn Jessup of the Harvard Medical 
School will address the histology of the preserved tissue specimens and 
the production of specific proteins such as CEA.
  The NASA-NIH agreement on biomedical research, let me talk about that 
for a moment. NASA and the National Institutes of Health recently have 
signed an agreement that will combine the unique talents and experience 
of both agencies in biomedical research and exploit NASA's bioreactor 
technology to produce fully three-dimensional tissue cultures for 
laboratory research. This agreement will increase the capabilities of 
biomedical researchers throughout NIH by transferring NASA technology 
to NIH and establishing a center within the National Institute of Child 
Health and Human Development. The new center will teach this new 
technology to hundreds of neighboring NIH intermural laboratories that 
currently employ other tissue culture techniques as part of their 
ongoing research. The initial goal of the agreement is to engineer a 
human lymph node model for AIDS research and then to extend the use of 
this technology to a broad spectrum of tissues available at the NIH. 
This collaborative effort will enable researchers to culture tissues 
previously deemed too complex for current tissue culturing technology.
  To accelerate the development of this critical tissue culturing 
technology, research grants were recently awarded under a NASA research 
announcement. Included in the selections are support for two research 
centers located at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 
Cambridge and the Wistar Institute in Philadelphia that will transfer 
the NASA bioreactor technology for culturing three-dimensional tissues 
to university researchers. These centers expand the pace of technology 
transfer in the biotechnology areas begun when NASA and NIH established 
a joint cooperative program within the NIH's Institute of Child Health 
and Human Development to exploit the NASA-developed bioreactor 
technology.
  Protein crystal growth. Data from space to revolutionize 
pharmaceuticals in the 21st century.
  Rapid advances in biotechnology combined with enhanced data from 
protein structures promise to revolutionize the pharmaceutical industry 
in this country--indeed, around the world. Researchers seek to define 
the structures of proteins and ultimately to design drugs that interact 
with them. Penicillin is a well-known example of a drug that works by 
blocking a protein's function. In order to define protein structures 
with precision, researchers analyze protein crystals. Unfortunately, 
many Earth-grown crystals have flaws that limit their usefulness as 
data sources or are too small to provide adequate data.
  Orbital experiments provide researchers with superior protein 
crystals for analysis and they also help scientists understand the 
fundamental concepts about the crystallization process. This 
information can be used to improve crystallization techniques here on 
Earth. Researchers will soon be able to use enhanced data on protein 
structure derived from space station research to design a whole new 
generation of drugs to target a long list of specific diseases.

  Once again, if we didn't have anything come out of the space station 
except advances in this particular area, it would be worth far more 
than anything we are spending on it.
  Rationally designed drugs promise to revolutionize health care, and 
orbital research will feed this revolution with the crucial protein 
structure data it needs. NASA researchers have already used space 
shuttle missions to produce protein crystals for a variety of clinical 
conditions including cancer, diabetes, emphysema, and immune system 
disorders.
  Let me start that sentence again. They have already used space 
shuttle

[[Page S9718]]

missions to produce protein crystals for a variety of purposes. These 
space-grown crystals were far superior to any crystals grown on Earth 
for revealing the structure of proteins and supporting the development 
of drugs.
  Recombinant DNA human insulin. The Hauptman Institute of Buffalo, in 
collaboration with Eli Lilly, has obtained an improved description of 
human insulin-drug complex based on space-grown crystals. They are 
currently working on the design of a nontoxic drug that will bind 
insulin, thereby improving the treatment of diabetic patients.

  Porcine elastase. Elastase is a protein which is involved in 
emphysema. The refined structure of this protein was obtained using 
space-grown crystals. Vertex Pharmaceuticals is designing drugs based 
on this data to improve treatment for emphysema.
  HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. NASA is supporting the microgravity 
crystallization of HIV reverse transcriptase. That is a critical enzyme 
for viral replication. It is believed this research will better define 
the enzyme structure, so that effective pharmaceuticals can be 
developed to inhibit the HIV virus.
  What could be more important than looking into that?
  The structural biology space program at NASA's Center in Excellence 
in Biotechnology was the first to publish a structure of a major human 
antibody that recognizes the AIDS virus. That was a breakthrough.
  Human serum albumin, HSA. That is a primary binding protein in the 
blood and is responsible for distributing drugs throughout the body. 
Eli Lilly and Co. is using this structural information from space-grown 
crystals to design drugs that exhibit improved interactions with HSA. 
The potential impact of this HSA structure on drug design and delivery 
is also enormous.
  Mr. President, that takes us through quite a listing here of some 
technical things I thought it was important to get into the Record. Let 
me talk for a moment about the international aspects.
  Thirteen nations, including the United States, Canada, Italy, 
Belgium, The Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, France, Spain, Germany, 
United Kingdom, Japan, and Russia will join together in the largest 
scientific cooperative program in history. This is the first time this 
number of nations has been able to draw together and run this type of 
project together. Drawing on Russian expertise in long-duration space 
flight and existing Russian technology and equipment, the international 
space station will help redirect the focus of Russian technology 
programs to nonmilitary pursuits.
  Perhaps more important, the space station will serve as a symbol of 
the opportunities available through peaceful international initiatives. 
There will be several laboratories aboard the space station. One United 
States lab, one other United States facility, a European space agency 
Columbus Orbital Facility, a Japanese experiment module, and Russian 
research modules. Partner nations will contribute $9 billion to the 
U.S. cooperative effort.
  International contribution means international cooperation, bringing 
together the best scientific minds worldwide to answer fundamental 
scientific questions.
  Since NASA began, the agency has been very effective. They have 
reached out to the community at large with programs to educate the 
average U.S. citizen on the contributions of NASA to society. 
Astronauts make thousands of appearances every year all over the world, 
speaking with people of all ages about their experiences and their 
research. Traveling aerospace education units, sponsored by NASA, 
visited over 500,000 students last year, and tens of thousands of 
students participated in urban community enrichment programs to get 
students interested in science and mathematics.

  These inspirational efforts are an investment in our future. It is a 
future including a fully operational space station. Students here on 
Earth will be able to place experiments on the space station and run 
those experiments, indeed, from their classrooms. NASA virtual reality 
technology will make it possible for students to experience life on the 
space station without ever leaving their classrooms.
  Mr. President, these are enormous steps forward. They will only 
become reality if we have the space station. I know there are those, 
and we will probably have a vote on it tomorrow sometime, who wish to 
knock out support for the space station. I think that would be 
extremely myopic in our vision of the future. I think the space station 
has the promise of developing wholesale changes and contributing to the 
changes in medicine, materials research and all those things I have 
gone through, not in complete detail today because any one of these 
items could be talked about as long as I have stood here this 
afternoon. But I have tried to hit the high points of some of the 
things I think are important as to why the space station should 
continue into the future.
  There are some other areas that are less quantifiable, that are a 
little less describable. That is how we look at ourselves. Are we 
willing to put money into this research for the future? If there is one 
thing, it seems to me, we have learned throughout the past in this 
country it is that we, more than any other nation on Earth, we have 
been the ones who have had the curiosity. We were the ones who did the 
research, whether macroresearch or geographical research or 
microresearch, going into the laboratory and trying to get down to 
discover things at atom size. We have been the Nation that led the 
whole world in this kind of technology and this research. However every 
single time it has not resulted in a home run.
  But if there is one thing we have learned in the past in this country 
it is that money spent on basic research, the basic fundamental 
breakthrough type research, is that has usually paid off in the future 
beyond any possible thing we can imagine at the outset. I think this 
space station, with its capability to do research in microgravity over 
an extended period of time, has the greatest potential of anything we 
have come into for a long time.
  Not only that research, but also just having the space station, and 
having space flights, having this kind of research go on, is exciting 
to our young people. I run into kids, young people of grade school, 
high school, college age, all the time in my travels around the country 
and back home in Ohio, who are excited about these things. They want to 
know about it, what it is like. What experiments can they run? They are 
very interested in it. A lot of them are studying math and science now 
because of their interest in these programs. I do not want to take that 
encouragement away. I want to see that encouragement expanded and 
continued.
  I wish we had money enough to send up several space stations. Maybe 
that would hasten things somewhat. I am realist enough to know that is 
not about to happen. But these programs have truly been an inspiration 
to our young people. It has given them goals, has given them a vision 
of what we in this country can do. If we can do it in science research 
why can we not improve our Government? Why can we not improve our 
relationships with each other? Why can we not do lots of things?
  The answer is, we can. This stands as a symbol to our young people of 
encouragement to be curious, to do the research. Not just in this, but 
in a lot of different areas. It is inspirational to our young people 
and I think to those of us who are older also. Because we do see 
ourselves leading the world with this technology and leading research. 
We do not want to lay that kind of lead down. We cannot afford to see 
some other nation take up that kind of a lead.
  Being a leader in technology and research is what results in us 
having control of our own future. To take any other view of it, to say 
we will cut this out because we have some other needs, I think would be 
very shortsighted. Do we have other needs? Of course. Can we provide 
for some of those other needs? Yes, I think we can. At the same time, 
we do not want to give up what I think is one of our greatest projects 
for the future, and that is the space station.
  Mr. President, we are always faced with the people who say what good 
is it, as though you are supposed to know the results of research in 
advance. Of course, we have the example of Faraday talking to Disraeli, 
the British Prime Minister. It has been often quoted. This was in the 
early dawn of the electrical age, when they had some

[[Page S9719]]

sparks jumping from one bottle to another.
  Disraeli is supposed to have asked Faraday, ``But what good is it?''
  Faraday's reply was, ``What good is a baby?'' What is the potential? 
We do not know. Yet, out of that curiosity, that research, came the 
whole electronic, electrically powered world that we know today, with 
all the benefits and the standard of living and improvements in health 
that is brought to us and the whole world.

  Another example of this is one I used here on the floor last year. 
Daniel Webster rose in the Senate Chambers, even as we rise and debate 
this subject every year. Daniel Webster rose back in his day in the 
early 1800's when they were debating whether to buy some land for the 
Government, to acquire some land west of the Mississippi River. Daniel 
Webster was against that. He put into very eloquent words what he 
thought about what good it could possibly be out there.
  This is what he said referring to that area beyond the Mississippi.

       What do we want with this vast worthless area, this region 
     of savages and wild beasts, of deserts of shifting sands and 
     whirlwinds of dust and cactus and prairie dogs? To what use 
     could we ever hope to put these great deserts or those 
     endless mountain ranges, impenetrable and covered to their 
     very base with eternal snow? What can we ever hope to do with 
     the western coast, a coast of 3,000 miles, rock-bound, 
     cheerless, uninviting, and not a harbor on it? What use have 
     we for this country? Mr. President, I will never vote one 
     cent from the public treasury to place the Pacific coast one 
     inch nearer to Boston than it is now.

  Daniel Webster's quote reminds us that when we are looking to 
territorial exploration, or whether it be microexploration in the 
laboratory, or combining the two in research in new places to travel 
and microexperimentation on something like the space station, we really 
cannot predict what may come from that kind of curiosity. Curiosity has 
built this country, how to do things better, how to do things in a 
better way, whether it is to establish a better democracy and a better 
representation of the people, how to do industrial research, how to do 
transportation research, all of these different areas--medical 
research--that we lead the world in.
  I hope that we can have a resounding vote, when the vote comes up, if 
there are efforts made to cut back on the space station.
  Mr. President, I have gone on longer than I have before when this 
subject has come up because I thought it was important this year, in 
support for the space station, to just at least name some of these 
areas that I know do have big titles. They are difficult to understand, 
but they are the scientific research that is the building blocks for 
everything else that happens in our society. I think it is important 
that we establish very solid support for this program. I yield the 
floor. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Coverdell). The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I thank our good friend, the very 
distinguished colleague from Ohio, for his very perceptive and 
persuasive comments about space programs generally and specifically 
about the space station. No one in this body speaks with more personal 
authority than Senator Glenn on these very important issues. What he 
has said is of great importance to all of us. I share his hope that not 
only all our colleagues, but people throughout this country, will 
listen to his comments and his heartfelt statements about the 
importance of space and of scientific inquiry.


                        urban search and rescue

  Mr. KERREY. Mr. President, I wanted to bring to the chairman's 
attention a fine urban search and rescue team in Lincoln, NE. It was 
the first team to be recognized by FEMA and has been ongoing since 
1991.
  Mr. BOND. I thank the Senator for bringing that to my attention.
  Mr. KERREY. I am concerned that the Lincoln team has been 
underfunded. At the same time, this bill calls for five new teams. Is 
it the Senator's intention to start five new teams prior to adequately 
funding existing teams?
  Mr. BOND. I fully support strong urban search and rescue teams, 
especially in the Midwest. I believe FEMA should move quickly to assure 
an appropriate geographical mix of teams that are funded adequately. 
Furthermore, FEMA should consider decommissioning some teams that do 
not meet the urban search and rescue programs' high standards.
  Mr. KERREY. Would the Chairman encourage FEMA to strengthen existing 
Midwest teams, as they start new teams?
  Mr. BOND. Yes.


                      endocrine disrupter research

  Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I would like to take this opportunity to 
thank my colleagues for supporting my successful effort last session to 
add an amendment to the Safe Drinking Water Act legislation. The 
amendment would establish a new screening program to identify 
pesticides and other substances in drinking water that would have an 
effect on humans similar to effects produced by naturally occurring 
estrogen or other endocrine effects. A provision very similar to my 
amendment was also included in the bipartisan food safety legislation, 
H.R. 1627, that overwhelmingly passed the Senate last week.
  These amendments address a growing concern over the effect of 
pesticides and other substances on human endocrine systems and their 
ability to increase the likelihood of disease, such as breast cancer. 
The screening program established in these amendments will play an 
important role in developing our understanding of the nature of so 
called endocrine disrupters and their potential effect on exposed 
individuals. Given the passage and likely enactment of these 
provisions, I now want to make sure that there will be sufficient funds 
to implement these testing programs and that the testing programs will 
be based on the best science available. For this reason, I would like 
to ask my colleague from Missouri, Senator Bond, chairman of the 
Appropriations Subcommittee responsible for this legislation, whether 
there are sufficient funds in this bill to cover the anticipated cost 
of developing these screening programs and ensuring that they are based 
on the best science available.
  Mr. BOND. I thank the Senator from New York for his concern for the 
health of the American public. The legislation under consideration does 
include funding for basic research on endocrine disrupters. If 
necessary, the Environmental Protection Agency should consider 
proposing a reprogramming of funds to develop the screening programs 
required under the food safety and safe drinking water legislation. I 
do, however share the Senator's concern that EPA base its testing 
programs and future regulations on the best science available, 
particularly as it embarks on relatively new areas of scientific 
investigation.
  Mr. D'AMATO. I thank my colleague from Missouri. Given our shared 
concerns over the importance of the science in this new field of 
scientific inquiry, would it not be appropriate for the Environmental 
Protection Agency to enter into agreement with the National Academy of 
Sciences to conduct a comprehensive study of both the potential effects 
and the actual and potential exposures of humans to synthetic and 
naturally occurring hormonally active agents in the environment? The 
study could address a number of important issues central to the 
development of an effective screening program, such as how to select 
and prioritize chemicals and samples for testing, which test or tests 
to include in a screening program, and the most appropriate way to use 
the resulting information in developing risk estimates.

  Mr. BOND. The Senator from New York is correct. Such a study could 
provide the Agency and the Congress with a comprehensive analysis of 
the relative risks from both synthetic and naturally occurring 
endocrine disrupters and mixtures of both, as well as the most cost-
effective way of developing a screening program that identifies 
substances of potential concern.
  Mr. INHOFE. If my colleagues will yield for a moment, I would like to 
endorse the recommendation made by the

[[Page S9720]]

Senator from New York. Requiring EPA to arrange for the National 
Academy of Sciences to conduct a full analysis of the science on 
endocrine disrupters will enhance our understanding of this new 
potential environmental threat. While I understand that the Academy's 
Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology is already undertaking a 
study at the request of the Department of the Interior and the 
Environmental Protection Agency that focuses primarily on wildlife, 
toxicological mechanisms, and some human effects, this analysis could 
and should be broadened substantially to include a more comprehensive 
analysis of human exposures, sources of exposure, and the best ways to 
measure them, in order to help guide the EPA in developing these 
screening programs. In addition to comparing the relative risks between 
natural and synthetic endocrine disrupters and providing information on 
the proper way to prioritize chemicals and samples for testing, the 
Academy could also be useful in providing advice on how to use the 
resulting information in making public policy decisions and how to best 
communicate the results of any screening and testing program to the 
public.
  Mr. FRIST. If my colleagues will yield for an additional comment, I 
would like to associate myself with the recommendations made by the 
Senator from New York and the Senator from Oklahoma. Since joining the 
Senate I have been surprised, as a physician and a lawmaker, with how 
few of our rules and laws seem to incorporate the best of our current 
scientific understanding, but instead have only political goals in 
mind. Good politics and good science must be combined in the 
promulgation of new rules, standards, and laws. With the 
recommendations outlined by my colleagues from Missouri, New York, and 
Oklahoma, I believe we have the opportunity to have good science and 
possible future regulation necessarily linked, and I commend them for 
their commitment.
  Mr. BOND. I thank my colleagues from New York, Oklahoma, and 
Tennessee for their recommendations, and I agree fully. Given the 
expected value of this more comprehensive study, I would expect that 
the Administrator would consult with the National Academy of Sciences 
prior to the release of the comprehensive study before proposing a 
testing program for public comment that addresses potential endocrine 
disrupters. Once the study has been released, the Administrator would 
be expected to consider the findings and recommendations of the 
National Academy of Sciences included in the study in developing any 
future testing program or regulatory initiatives. I thank my colleagues 
for their recommendations.


             huntsville global hydrology and climate center

  Mr. SHELBY. Would the chairman yield for a question?
  Mr. BOND. I would be happy to yield to the Senator from Alabama for a 
question.
  Mr. SHELBY. I want to first commend the chairman and the ranking 
member for their skill in crafting this bill. I am particulary pleased 
that the committee reported bill has included an additional $100 
million for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration over that 
proposed by the House. As the chairman knows, NASA is an important part 
of the Huntsville-Madison County, AL, economy, and I am grateful for 
the chairman's willingness to add these extra funds for NASA's 1997 
budget.
  I would like to make the chairman aware of an important project in 
north Alabama. Since 1994, NASA, the University of Alabama in 
Huntsville and the Universities Space Research Association have jointly 
run a Global Hydrology and Climate Center [GHCC] in Huntsville.
  Since its creation, the center has developed a unique expertise in 
studying the importance of the Earth's hydrologic cycle and its 
importance to climate change. The GHCC has created a state-of-the-art 
capability and understanding the importance of water vapor and its 
effect on greenhouse gases. In addition to this basic research, the 
center has developed important applications that demonstrate the links 
between better understanding of hydrology and more cost-effective use 
and regulation of natural resources in the southeastern United States.
  The Global Hydrology and Climate Center is currently located in 
leased space whose cost is shared between NASA and UAH. However, the 
center now has an opportunity to relocate to permanent, dedicated space 
as part of an existing UAH-owned facility by permitting the buildout of 
46,500 square feet for the center's exclusive use. Unfortunately, 
because of NASA's accounting rules, driven by GSA guidelines, NASA 
cannot pay for its share of the cost of this buildout since the 
facility in question is nonfederal space. However, with an 
appropriation of $2 million, which could cover only those costs of this 
relocation that are attributable to NASA's share of the total cost of 
the relocation project, NASA and UAH could proceed to continue the GHCC 
in this new and more cost-effective space.
  The cost savings of such a relocation are significant as NASA can 
reduce the long-term costs of its support for the center. Some 
estimates suggest that NASA could save more than $500,000 per year in 
rental costs that they now pay for their share of the leased space.
  I wonder if the chairman would consider identifying $2 million within 
NASA's science, aeronautics and technology account to pay for this 
relocation in the upcoming conference on the 1997 VA-HUD appropriations 
bill?
  Mr. BOND. I would be happy to consider the Senator from Alabama's 
request in conference.
  Mr. SHELBY. I thank the chairman for his willingness to consider my 
request.


                  james h. quillen school of medicine

  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I would like to bring to the attention of 
my colleagues a very important project for the Department of Veterans 
Affairs and the James H. Quillen School of Medicine at Mountain Home, 
TN, which has been under construction for several years. The project 
involves the relocation of the medical school and the renovation of 
several VA buildings, with the intended result being an improved 
environment for both the medical school and the VA, and most 
importantly the highest quality medical care to Tennessee's veterans. 
Funding to complete this project in fiscal year 1997 is an extremely 
high priority to me.
  Mr. THOMPSON. If I may echo the sentiments of my colleague from 
Tennessee, Mr. Frist, that the joint project at Mountain Home 
represents a model relationship and combined effort between a 
Department of Veterans Affairs hospital and a medical school. The 
relationship provides both access to quality medical care for our 
veterans who are living at Mountain Home, and it provides a tremendous 
level of access to patients for the students and their teachers. Both 
the medical school and Mountain Home believe this relationship is 
critical to their success, and would like to further the level of 
cooperation.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, to that end of further enhancing the 
cooperative efforts between the two institutions, the State of 
Tennessee and the Congress have, since 1993, funded the planning and 
construction of a new, joint facility at Mountain Home. The State of 
Tennessee has provided $12 million thus far, with another $8 million 
this year. Congress has funded a total of $16.3 million, with the House 
of Representatives including the final Federal obligation of $15.5 
million in their spending bill this year.
  Mr. BOND. I thank both Senators from Tennessee for raising this 
important project. I would note that both Senators from Tennessee wrote 
me earlier this year expressing their strong support for funding in the 
fiscal year 1997 appropriation for the VA. Unfortunately, we were 
unable in the committee to provide the funds needed to complete this 
project since a decision was made to limit VA construction funds to 
outpatient projects, cemetery projects, and research facilities. 
However, I note that both Senators have been strong advocates for this 
project, and that funding for this project will be an issue in 
conference with the House on the VA-HUD appropriations bill.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. Thompson and I fully understand the constraints under 
which his subcommittee currently operates with regards to limiting 
Veterans Administration construction funds largely to outpatient 
facilities. However, would the Senator from Missouri be willing to 
consider receding to the House position in conference?

[[Page S9721]]

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I would say to my colleagues from Tennessee 
that I, too, recognize the importance of this project for the James H. 
Quillen School of Medicine, for our veterans at Mountain Home, and for 
the State of Tennessee. I assure them that I will give very close 
consideration to their request when the Senate and House meet in 
conference on this bill.
  Mr. FRIST. I sincerely thank my colleague from Missouri.
  Mr. THOMPSON. I, too, offer my thanks for his diligent efforts on our 
behalf.


                       new york botanical garden

  Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I rise to enter into a colloquy about 
the New York Botanical Garden with the distinguished Senator from 
Missouri and the distinguished Senator from Maryland. The New York 
Botanical Garden has the largest collection of plant specimens in the 
hemisphere, some 5 million including those collected by Lewis and 
Clarke. These are available to virtually any institution or researcher 
at no charge. The Department of Agriculture is the most frequent 
borrower.
  Mr. D'AMATO. I would like to join my colleague from New York in 
support of the New York Botanical Garden. The Garden is much more than 
a collection of plant specimens. Its research scientists are 
continually out in the field collecting new specimens, particularly in 
Central and South America. In addition, one of the Garden's major 
initiatives is in economic botany, trying to find and promote rain 
forest plants that can be harvested and sold, such as those with 
medicinal value, rather than deforesting a region for farming.
  Mr. MOYNIHAN. The New York Botanical Garden is in need of a new 
laboratory in which it will train graduate students and visiting 
scientists from this country and abroad. Their work is most important 
to the Garden's many efforts, but especially to the economic botany 
program.
  Senator D'Amato and I ask that when this bill goes to conference, the 
chairman and ranking member look for an opportunity to provide a 
$50,000 planning grant so that the New York Botanical Garden can begin 
the process of building a new laboratory.
  Mr. BOND. I will certainly keep in mind the request from my 
colleagues from New York.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. I too will keep this request in mind during the 
conference.
  Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a letter to 
Senator Bond be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                           Washington University in St. Louis,

                                     St. Louis, MO, July 29, 1996.
     Hon. Kit Bond,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Bond: I am asking you to support a $50,000 
     planning to determine the feasibility of a new laboratory at 
     the New York Botanical Garden. The Garden serves as a 
     training facility for graduate students as well as visiting 
     scientists from the U.S. and foreign countries in wide areas 
     of plant biology and agriculture. The laboratory, if built, 
     will house a mycology lab with research conducted in 
     pathology of crops, etc., the study of systematic and 
     developmental plant anatomy which will compliment research 
     being done at the Missouri Botanical Garden (St. Louis), and 
     other programs involved in research for medicinal properties 
     of plants. The latter will be particularly valuable in 
     relation to Washington University's program of drug discovery 
     associated with our International Cooperative Biodiversity 
     Group project which you helped so positively through the 
     final stages of funding. The research and laboratory at the 
     New York Botanical Garden are an integral part of modern 
     science and the institution is world-famous for conducting 
     first-rate scientific research.
       I understand that such a study could be funded through the 
     Environmental Protection Agency, the budget for which is 
     under your Committee's jurisdiction. I appreciate you 
     attention to and support for this request.
           Sincerely yours,
                                                  Walter H. Lewis,
                                                        Professor.


        agency for toxic substances and disease registry (atsdr)

  Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, I rise today to speak to the merits of a 
program that has done great work in the field of medicine. The Agency 
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, or ATSDR, funded through the 
Environmental Protection Agency, has addressed the concerns of a lot of 
Americans, and has garnered the support of the Louisiana Department of 
Health and Hospitals, particularly the Louisiana Office of Public 
Health. The program has also received accolades from a network of 
universities that host programs aimed at expanding and enhancing 
numbers and qualities of specialists entering the health professions 
field. In Louisiana, the program has been essential to Xavier 
University, whose college of pharmacy is in the fourth year of a 5-year 
cooperative agreement with ATSDR and the Minority Health Professions 
Foundation. ATSDR helps the college provide training for pharmacists 
who are challenged with meeting the expanding needs of our society. 
Xavier is 1 of 11 universities nationwide that have ongoing programs of 
this nature.
  Mr. SHELBY. I, too, would like to express my support for this 
program. In my State of Alabama, Tuskeegee University's School of 
Veterinary Medicine also participates in the Association of Minority 
Health Professions Schools, by contributing materially toward helping 
to control the cost of human health care by preventing zoonotic 
diseases. This, in turn, helps prevent an overload on human primary 
health care systems. The value of this program is self-evident.
  Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, I would like to ask my colleagues to 
join me in supporting this very worthwhile program, to stress the 
importance of funding ATSDR at the budget request level of $69 million, 
and to direct the Environmental Protection Agency to fund at $4 million 
the ATSDR minority health professions for the purposes of conducting 
essential research on hazardous substance induced diseases.
  Mr. BOND. I can assure my colleague that this subcommittee has 
supported ATSDR in the past, and in particular has supported the 
minority health professions initiative. It continues to be a worthwhile 
program, and I am cognizant of the need associated with ongoing 
research and treatment efforts. I am sure that I and my colleague, the 
distinguished Senator from Maryland, ranking member on this 
subcommittee, will keep this in mind as we proceed to conference on the 
VA, HUD and independent agencies appropriations bill, H.R. 3666.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. I would agree with the chairman, and support this 
excellent program.
  Mr. JOHNSTON. I thank my colleagues.


                               clean air

  Ms. MIKULSKI. I would be grateful if the Senator would provide an 
interpretation of the assurance contained in the letter dated July 23, 
1996, addressed to you and me from the U.S. Trade Representative and 
the Administrator of EPA. I will submit the text of the letter for the 
Record.
  The letter states that compliance with the WTO decision ``will not 
result in the degradation of gasoline quality required by the Clean Air 
Act with respect to imported conventional and reformulated gasoline.'' 
I understand that the EPA proposed in 1994 a foreign refiner baseline 
rule that could have allowed foreign oil companies to export gasoline 
to the United States with higher levels of sulfur and olefins than 
allowed under existing rules. However, the letter we recently received 
provides assurances that the WTO compliance process will not allow 
foreign refiners to supply gasoline with higher levels of precursors of 
ozone pollution than are currently allowed.
  Mr. BOND. The letter indicates there will be no degradation in the 
gasoline quality required by the Clean Air Act with respect to imports. 
My understanding is that foreign refiners will not be allowed to 
increase the content of precursors of ozone pollution in its gasoline 
supplied to the United States above the levels currently allowed.
  Mr. BURNS. I would be grateful if the gentlemen would yield for one 
additional point. I received a letter from the U.S. Trade 
Representative and the Administrator of EPA regarding the foreign 
refiner baseline issue dated July 25, 1996. I will submit the text of 
the letter for the Record.
  The letter provides additional comments regarding enforcement and 
states, ``EPA will not recognize individual foreign refiner baselines 
unless we have adequately addressed the issues of auditing, inspection 
of foreign facilities, and enforcement.'' It is my understanding the 
letter gives the administration's commitment to seek

[[Page S9722]]

equivalent levels of enforcement for foreign refiners before allowing 
the access that these refiners desire to reformulated and conventional 
gasoline markets.
  Mr. BOND. I believe the Senator from Montana is correct. The letter 
indicates the U.S. Government will seek to bring all appropriate and 
available U.S. enforcement efforts to bear upon foreign refiners to 
assure that the data foreign refiners provide is useful and reliable.
  Mr. BURNS. I thank the Senators from Missouri and Maryland and 
appreciate their hard work. I will continue to monitor this issue in 
the future and look forward to our continued cooperation on this issue.
  I believe this is a good compromise to expedite the bill yet send a 
strong message about clean air and a level playing field for our 
domestic refiners.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the letter be printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

         U.S. Trade Representative, U.S. Environmental Protection 
           Agency,
                                    Washington, DC, July 26, 1996.
     Hon. Conrad Burns,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Burns: Thank you for bringing to our attention 
     your concerns regarding the WTO decision with respect to 
     EPA's regulation on reformulated and conventional gasoline. 
     We appreciate your understanding of the Administration's need 
     for regulatory flexibility and your agreement not to support 
     Congressional action circumscribing that flexibility, 
     including introduction of a rider to H.R. 3666, the FY 1997 
     VA, HUD and Independent Agencies appropriations bill, 
     regarding EPA's treatment of foreign gasoline under its 
     regulations implementing the Clean Air Act.
       On June 19, after consulting with Congress, we advised the 
     World Trade Organization (WTO) that the United States intends 
     to meet our WTO obligations with respect to the results of 
     the dispute settlement proceeding brought by Venezuela and 
     Brazil concerning the EPA's regulations on reformulated and 
     conventional gasoline. We announced that we had initiated an 
     open process which will examine any and all options for 
     compliance. In evaluating options, the overriding criterion 
     will be fully protecting public health and the environment, 
     consistent with this Administration's commitment to strong 
     and effective implementation of the Clean Air Act, in a 
     manner consistent with U.S. obligations under the WTO. We can 
     assure you that this process will not result in the 
     degradation of the gasoline quality required by the Clean Air 
     Act with respect to imported conventional and reformulated 
     gasoline.
       The U.S. government understands that the foreign refiner 
     baseline issue and the WTO Appellate Body report on EPA's 
     gasoline regulation is of great continuing concern to U.S. 
     environmental and industrial organizations. We are committed 
     to working closely with all interested parties, including 
     specifically U.S. industry, the states and the environmental 
     NGO community, during our review process. We recognize the 
     concerns raised by members of the industry regarding the 1994 
     EPA proposal to use foreign refiner baselines. EPA will not 
     recognize individual foreign refiner baselines unless we have 
     adequately addressed the issues of auditing, inspection of 
     foreign facilities, and enforcement. We are also very mindful 
     of the concerns expressed by members of Congress and others 
     that any response to the WTO decision should take into 
     account impacts on the environment and should recognize the 
     significant infrastructure investments undertaken by industry 
     to meet the requirements for reformulated gasoline. We can 
     assure you that we will incorporate these concerns of members 
     of Congress in the review process. We are committed to a full 
     and open administrative process in the formulation of any 
     final rule.
       We look forward to continuing to work with you throughout 
     this process. Please do not hesitate to contact either one of 
     us if we may provide you with further information.
           Sincerely,
     Charlene Barshefsky,
       Acting U.S. Trade Representative.
     Carol M. Browner,
       Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency.

  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the letter 
dated July 23, 1996, be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                        U.S. Trade Representative,


                            Executive Office of the President.

                              Environmental Protection Agency,

                                    Washington, DC, July 23, 1996.
     Hon. Christopher S. Bond, Chairman,
     Hon. Barbara Mikulski, Ranking Member,
     Subcommittee on VA, HUD and Independent Agencies.
       Dear Senators: We are writing to strongly urge you to 
     oppose a potential rider to H.R. 3666, the FY 1997 VA, HUD 
     and Independent Agencies appropriations bill, regarding EPA's 
     treatment of foreign gasoline under its regulations 
     implementing the Clean Air Act.
       On June 19, after consulting with Congress, we advised the 
     World Trade Organization (WTO) that the United States intends 
     to meet our WTO obligations with respect to the results of 
     the dispute settlement proceeding brought by Venezuela and 
     Brazil concerning the EPA's regulations on reformulated and 
     conventional gasoline. We announced that we had initiated an 
     open process which will examine any and all options for 
     compliance. In evaluating options, the overriding criterion 
     will be fully protecting public health and the environment, 
     consistent with this Administration's commitment to strong 
     and effective implementation of the Clean Air Act, in a 
     manner consistent with U.S. obligations under the WTO. We can 
     assure you that this process will not result in the 
     degradation of the gasoline quality required by the Clean Air 
     Act with respect to imported conventional and reformulated 
     gasoline.
       We are very concerned that any action taken by Congress 
     casting doubt upon U.S. intentions could seriously interfere 
     with our ability to reach the best possible resolution of 
     this matter and could prompt Venezuela and Brazil to quickly 
     seek authority from the WTO to retaliate by raising tariffs 
     on U.S. exports. Even if such authority were not granted, 
     there is a serious risk that we could face a harmful 
     shortening of the period available for us to evaluate our 
     options.
       We are also concerned about the precedent such action could 
     set. It would be most unfortunate if this type of legislative 
     action were to be used by other countries as an excuse to 
     avoid implementing the results of the many WTO disputes that 
     we expect to win. The United States is pursuing numerous 
     disputes against other countries' measures, including, for 
     example, one against the European Union for unjustifiably 
     limiting U.S. beef exports.
       The U.S. government understands that the foreign refiner 
     baseline issue and the WTO Appellate Body report on EPA's 
     gasoline regulation is of great continuing concern to U.S. 
     environmental and industrial organizations. We are committed 
     to working closely with all interested parties, including 
     specifically U.S. industry, the states and the environmental 
     NGO community, during our review process. We recognize the 
     concerns raised by members of the industry regarding the 1994 
     EPA proposal to use foreign refiner baselines. We are also 
     very mindful of the concerns expressed by members of Congress 
     and others that any response to the WTO decision should take 
     into account impacts on the environment and should recognize 
     the significant infrastructure investments undertaken by 
     industry to meet the requirements for reformulated gasoline. 
     We can assure you that we will incorporate these concerns of 
     members of Congress in the review process. We are committed 
     to a full and open administrative process in the formulation 
     of any final rule.
       We strongly urge you to oppose the rider. Please do not 
     hesitate to contact either one of us if we may provide you 
     with further information.
           Sincerely,
     Charlene Barshefsky,
       Acting U.S. Trade Representative.
     Carol M. Browner,
       Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency.


              center for molecular medicine and immunology

  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I would like to engage in a colloquy 
with the distinguished managers of the bill.
  Mr. President, the Center for Molecular Medicine and Immunology 
[CMMI], located in Newark, NJ, has been a leader in developing life 
saving treatment for cancers that plague our Nation's veteran 
population. In particular, CMMI is conducting research into 
radioimmunodetection and radio- immunotherapy, a new technology that 
uses radioisotopes and monochlonal antibodies to target tumors often 
too small for detection with traditional equipment and delivers cancer 
fighting therapy to targeted muscle tissue and organs with virtually no 
side effects. This has the potential to be very helpful to treating our 
Nation's veterans, many of whom suffer from cancer.
  Mr. President, the House report on the fiscal year 1997 VA-HUD 
appropriations bill included language that encourages the Veterans' 
Administration to enter into a partnership with nonprofit research 
centers to expand these research efforts. The Senate report does not 
include such language. Does the Senator support the intent of the House 
language?
  Mr. BOND. Yes. I am supportive of the House language.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. I concur with the distinguished manager of the bill.

[[Page S9723]]

              funding for the epa long island sound office

  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I rise to engage the chairman of the 
VA-HUD Appropriations Subcommittee, the Senator from Missouri, in a 
colloquy to discuss funding for the EPA's Long Island Sound Office. 
Senators D'Amato, Dodd, and Moynihan have asked to join in this 
colloquy as well.
  Mr. President, as the Chairman knows, the Long Island Sound Office 
[LISO] is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the 
sound's comprehensive conservation management plan [CCMP]. This office 
is faced with the daunting task of orchestrating a multibillion dollar, 
decade-long initiative that requires the cooperation of nearly 150 
different Federal, State, municipal, and private institutions and 
agents.
  Despite the odds, and the limited resources it has had to work with, 
the LISO is succeeding. Over the last 2 years, it has made tremendous 
progress in getting the cleanup started and beginning work toward the 
key goals outlined in the CCMP--limiting nitrogen loads, restoring 
damaged habitats, cracking down on nonpoint source pollution and the 
release of pathogens, and educating area residents about the importance 
of these conservation efforts and ways they can help.
  We are deeply concerned, however, that this progress may be in 
jeopardy. In contrast to past years, the subcommittee has chosen not to 
provide any funding for the grant program the LISO is authorized to 
administer. In addition, it is our understanding that the National 
Estuary Program [NEP], which supplied $300,000 to the LISO in the 
current fiscal year to fund the office's operating budget, is planning 
to phase out its support of the LISO in fiscal year 1977. In fact, 
because of the increasing budgetary strain on the NEP, it is possible 
the LISO may be zeroed out completely.
  Mr. DODD. I join my colleagues in urging the Senate to maintain our 
commitment to supporting the LISO. The loss of funding that Senator 
Lieberman has described would severely handicap the LISO's ability to 
continue implementing the management plan, and could force the office 
to shut down operations, which would effectively stop the cleanup dead 
in its tracks.
  Our conclusion is based on past experience. The New England River 
Basin Commission drafted a cleanup plan in 1975, and it disintegrated 
soon after its adoption because the program ended with the plan and did 
not focus on implementation. In other words, there was no central 
organizing and coordinating force keeping the many players at the 
table. The LISO is the glue that is holding this project together, and 
after spending millions of dollars and enormous time and energy getting 
to this point, we cannot afford to lose it. The environmental and 
economic health of our region depends on a sound Sound.
  Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, we understand that the subcommittee is 
working under considerable budget pressures. But given the importance 
of this project to our respective States, we would ask that you make a 
concerted effort in conference to provide funding to keep this office 
moving forward. We are seeking an appropriation of $975,000 to cover 
the LISO's operating expenses and to expand its efforts to provide 
grants to State and local partnerships involved in the cleanup. But at 
a minimum, we would request that the conferees maintain support for the 
office at the current level of $650,000. We thank the chairman and the 
subcommittee's ranking member, Senator Mikulski, for consideration of 
this matter.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. I understand the Long Island Sound Office is as my 
colleague, Senator Dodd, states ``the glue that is holding'' the 
restoration of the Long Island Sound together. Recognizing the office's 
importance, I will do everything I can to support the Senators' request 
in conference.
  Mr. D'AMATO. I would like to join my colleagues in expressing my 
support for the continued funding of the Long Island Sound Office. What 
many Senators may not know is that Long Island Sound is an economic as 
well as an environmental asset. The sound generates billions of dollars 
from tourism, boating, sportfishing, and a newly-revived shellfish 
industry. If the sound's recovery is threatened, the economies of both 
States will suffer and we will lose jobs that these industries sustain. 
Funding to continue to carry out the important work of the sound's 
management plan will help keep that recovery moving.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. In closing, I think it is important to point out that 
unlike other NEP participants, the LISO was chartered for the express 
purpose of carrying the sound's management plan beyond the development 
stage and to actually oversee and contribute to the implementation of 
this plan. It was for this reason that the office is authorized at $3 
million annually to provide grants to State agencies, municipalities, 
and local partnerships. While we understand that the NEP may no longer 
be the appropriate source of funding for the LISO, we feel strongly 
that in no way should justify stripping this project of all its Federal 
support.
  I also want to point out that the State of Connecticut reaffirmed its 
commitment to cleaning up the sound just last week when it approved a 
$52 million bond issue to upgrade wastewater treatment facilities in 
the cities of Norwalk and Waterbury. That investment is just the latest 
show of support from Connecticut and New York, and we strongly urge the 
Congress not to let those dollars go to waste.
  Mr. BOND. I understand the priority the Senators from New York and 
Connecticut place on the restoration of Long Island Sound, and I 
recognize the unique challenges you face in implementing the long-term 
management plan. It seems clear that this effort cannot succeed without 
the guiding hand of the EPA Long Island Sound Office. Knowing of your 
deep concern, I will do everything I can to support your request in 
conference and at a minimum maintain funding at its current level. My 
hope is to secure report language directing the EPA to provide funding 
to the LISO at a satisfactory level.


                         community development

  Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I would like to address a question to the 
managers of the bill, the chairman and ranking member of the VA/HUD 
Subcommittee, Senators Bond and Mikulski. Let me begin by commending 
them for their hard work in crafting this bill under tough budgetary 
circumstances. We all agree that this bill will provide funds for 
diverse programs of vital importance to communities all across America. 
As such, I hope this Senate floor debate will yield a cost-effective 
and responsible bill that we can all support.
  In particular, I would like to ask for the managers' input on HUD 
programs to foster community development. More specifically, funds in 
this bill are designed to promote economic growth and development that 
benefits entire communities, and it is my understanding that Congress 
has taken steps to target some of those funds to urban areas where 
Americans of the low and middle range live, work and raise their 
families.
  As you may know, Marquette University has headed up the Avenues West 
Neighborhood Crime Intervention Demonstration Program in Milwaukee, WI. 
This innovative program has brought together a diverse group of public 
and private entities to focus resources on the causes of crime and its 
effects on individuals, families, and neighborhoods. The underlying 
goal of this effort has been to generate comprehensive community-based 
solutions to complex urban problems. Program participants include the 
city of Milwaukee, Marquette University, the Milwaukee Police 
Department, as well as other community organizations. Do the managers 
agree that the avenues west initiative is the type of comprehensive, 
community-based program that Congress would want to support through 
community development grants?
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Yes. In fact, Congress has appropriated funds for this 
worthwhile program in the past through special purpose grants.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, over the past 2 years the committee has 
worked very hard to eliminate the number of narrowly focused 
categorical programs in HUD. Instead we have placed a priority on 
focusing our declining budgetary resources on block grants such as the 
CDBG program, and other activities designed to increase local 
flexibility and decisionmaking. I would note that the

[[Page S9724]]

reported appropriations bill has the effect of increasing the amount 
available to cities and States under the CDBG program by $300 million. 
This will maintain the full $4.6 billion level for CDGB. I would add 
that there is no doubt in my mind that this neighborhood crime 
intervention program of Marquette qualifies for such CDBG funding.
  In addition, let me note that earlier this month HUD issued a notice 
of funding availability for the $50 million appropriated in the current 
fiscal year for the Economic Development Initiatives Program. This is a 
nationwide competitive program which is designed to combat urban 
decline and to foster economic revitalization in our cities. The 
Marquette University sponsors should definitely consider participation 
in this competition since their program appears very much on point to 
the EDI effort, and I suspect, such an application should fare well in 
this HUD competition.


                   benefits of a disposal endosheath

  Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I would like to state my support for an 
issue that I believe is important to the health of all veterans in 
detecting colorectal cancer. Specifically, I am referring to the 
flexible endoscopic procedures performed by physicians. Currently, 
there are two types of flexible endoscopes available to physicians to 
perform these procedures: One is a conventional endoscope that is 
manually cleaned and disinfected. The other is a redesigned endoscope 
which incorporates the use of a sterile protective covering called the 
EndoSheath. Using the EndoSheath protects the patient and health care 
provider from the risks associated with cross-contamination.
  I am very concerned by the contamination risks associated with the 
use of impure patient-ready endoscopes on veterans. As such, it is 
important to ensure that the Veterans Health Administration is aware of 
and encouraged to explore the overall effectiveness of the single-
patient, sterile, condom-like protective coverings that may help 
protect veterans from the risk of cross-contamination.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I share the concern expressed by Senator 
D'Amato, and agree with him about the benefits of utilizing a disposal 
sheath when physicians conduct procedures using a flexible 
sigmoidoscope on patients to detect colorectal cancer. Disposal sheaths 
are widely used in private practice. Therefore, I also encourage the 
Veterans Health Administration to explore their use as a means of 
protecting veterans from the risk of cross-contamination.


                        nasa's academic programs

  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, the House of Representatives approved 
$110.8 million in fiscal year 1997 for the National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration's [NASA] academic programs. This amount reflects a 
$3.9 million increase from fiscal year 1996, and a $10 million increase 
above the administration's budget request. I understand that the Senate 
proposal did not include a funding increase for NASA's academic 
programs.
  I support increased funding for this valuable program. This will 
allow NASA to fund ongoing programs as well as fund new innovative 
programs. One such program involves a science education program 
developed by Hawaii's Bishop Museum. NASA Administrator Daniel Goldin 
has indicated his personal support for this program which involves the 
creation of two dynamic multimedia planetarium programs and associated 
educational materials around the theme of exploration. The ``Journey by 
Starlight'' program is an interactive simulation of navigating a 
Hawaiian canoe from Tahiti to Hawaii. The ``Eyes of the Universe'' 
program will focus on modern technology and human exploration of the 
universe from earth and space-based observatories, particularly those 
in Hawaii.
  Using various distribution techniques, it is estimated that at least 
800,000 students and 500,000 families and nontraditional students 
across the Nation will experience these programs. Complementing the 
planetarium programs will be educational curricula for grades 3 through 
12, an interactive and evolving World Wide Web site, video resources, 
and an interactive CD-ROM.
  Mr. President, it is my hope that during the House-Senate conference 
you will support increased funding for NASA's academic programs and 
give consideration to the joint initiative between NASA and Hawaii's 
Bishop Museum.
  Mr. BOND. I will be pleased to give your request every consideration 
during conference deliberations with the House.


    future use of land adjacent to the los angeles national cemetery

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I would like to say a few words today 
relative to an effort being undertaken by veterans and local community 
organizations to protect and preserve land adjacent to the Los Angeles 
National Cemetery.
  This land, 44 acres, was deeded as a gift to the Federal Government 
provided that its use would be for veterans. It is hoped that the land 
can be preserved so that as the need for veterans cemeteries grows, 
this land, which is adjacent to the Los Angeles National Cemetery, will 
be a valuable resource to the Department of Veterans Affairs.
  It is my understanding that there have been requests of the DVA to 
lease this land for commercial development, including its use as the 
site for an NFL stadium. This has raised concerns by veterans and local 
communities as to the appropriate use of this land so close to a 
national cemetery where families and veterans go to honor their loved 
ones.
  Local organizations are willing and able, through private resources, 
to develop this land as a park honoring our Nation's veterans. This 
proposal, in keeping with the intent of the gift of land, complements 
the existing cemetery and protects the land for future veterans' use.
  I have received letters from the American Legion, the California 
Department of Veterans Affairs, and officials of numerous veterans 
organizations in the State expressing their support for this effort.
  I would ask that the committee include language in its conference 
report directing the Department of Veterans Affairs to work with these 
organizations to develop the land into a veterans memorial park and to 
prohibit the Department from entering into any long-term, binding 
leases which would tie the use of that land into one inconsistent with 
the intent of its donor.
  I applaud the local veterans, the California veterans groups, the 
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs both in Los Angeles and Washington, 
DC, and the local citizens groups for working together to arrive at an 
approach to protect this land for veterans now and in the future
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I would like to ask the Senator from 
California a few additional questions on this matter. Senator, you 
mention the land is under deed restrictions against development 
inconsistent with veterans needs. If this is the case, why are these 
organizations worried about suggestions for commercial development?
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. The 44 acres in question are part of the original 
deed; however, they are contiguous to lands under less restrictive 
deeds thus creating a danger to this parcel.
  Mr. BOND. The committee understands that the Department of Veterans 
Affairs is not prepared to create new cemetery space in this region and 
that there is not an immediate need for additional cemetery space. Are 
there not higher priorities for the Department of Veterans Affairs for 
cemetery space in other regions of the United States?
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. It is not my intent to request that this land be 
converted into a cemetery at this time. The Senator is correct, there 
are other regions in the country that are in great need of additional 
cemetery space. My goal is to ensure that this land is preserved so 
that when the need for additional cemetery space arises, 20-50 years 
from now, the Federal Government will have land without major 
construction or contamination issues which can be easily converted into 
a cemetery.
  Veterans Affairs Secretary Jesse Brown has suggested both to local 
leaders and the House that a veterans memorial park would be a good 
interim step to protect the land. This action would not be an 
additional burden on the taxpayer because local leaders strongly feel 
they can raise the needed funds privately to create this park. I hope 
that the committee will support this effort with the inclusion of 
language in the conference report.

[[Page S9725]]

  Mr. BOND. I appreciate the issues you have raised and will be pleased 
to work with Mr. Lewis of the House Appropriations Committee to address 
this issue in conference.


                        southern oxidants study

  Mr. FAIRCLOTH. Mr. President, as you know, the Southern Oxidants 
Study has brought together 35 industrial and government organizations 
and 20 universities in 21 States to study a critical economic, 
environmental, and health issue--the formation of ground level ozone. 
Ground level ozone is a problem that has plagued many areas of the 
United States, having a negative impact on economic growth, human 
health, and forest and crop productivity. In the Southeast, ground 
level ozone may have its root causes in environmental factors unique to 
my region. Because of this, the basic scientific research conducted by 
the Southern Oxidants Study scientists is so critical to providing 
policymakers with unbiased data for use in developing solutions to the 
problem. Not only is this information beneficial to my region, but the 
methodologies and knowledge gained in this study will add to ozone 
research nationally and internationally. The Southern Oxidants Study 
approach has been endorsed by the National Research Council and others 
and is considered a model of regional cooperation. It is imperative 
that appropriate funding be continued for this vital study.
  Mr. BOND. I am aware of the important scientifically based 
contributions made by the university-based Southern Oxidants Study to 
understanding the causes of ground level ozone pollution in the 
Southeast as well as other areas of the country. I agree that the 
Environmental Protection Agency should continue to provide the 
appropriate funding to ensure that the critical objectives of the study 
can be fulfilled.


                    PCB-landfill Permit Application

  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, as some of my colleagues know, PCB's are an 
extremely sensitive matter in the Great Lakes region. These substances 
bioaccumulate, biomagnify and cause permanent damage to the environment 
and public health. And, they are ubiquitous. They are in the water, the 
sediment, and still stored around the country. Long ago, we made a 
decision to discontinue their manufacture and import because of their 
negative effects on human health.
  Recently, in March of this year, the EPA decided that a 15-year-old 
ban on the importation of PCB's should be lifted. This seems like a 
curious decision, since I am not aware that the negative health 
implications of PCB disposal, incineration or other treatment, which 
motivated the original ban have significantly changed in that time. I 
plan to review this decision very carefully and hope my colleagues will 
join me in that process.
  It is true that some novel and cleaner permanent destruction options 
are now nearly ready for commercial use. But, PCBs are toxic wastes 
that have an extremely long half-life and their basic characteristics 
have not changed. I am concerned about their importation especially if 
they are simply going to be landfilled or their incineration generates 
dioxins and other air toxics.
  As my colleagues may know, Representatives Bentsen and Rivers 
successfully attached a rider to the House version of this bill that 
would prohibit any PCB disposal or treatment so long as EPA's rule 
allowing importation of PCB waste is in force. Though that provision 
has some merit, I would prefer a narrower approach to correct what 
seems to be a clearly flawed process that EPA has followed to date on a 
landfill permit for PCB disposal.
  Generally, EPA does a very good job of informing the public and 
considering its view prior to making regulatory decisions. But, in this 
case, things have not gone very well. And, due process seems to have 
been thrown out the window.
  In approximately July of 1995, an application was filed with the EPA 
to dispose of 1.4 million cubic feet of PCB-contaminated waste, much of 
which would be higher than the Federal action level of 50 ppm, at a 
facility in Michigan.
  According to EPA, legal notice of this application was given at about 
the same time in various local newspapers.
  At a public meeting in April of this year, during the public comment 
period on a landfill permit application, EPA and the Michigan 
Department of Environmental Quality representatives responded to 
questions from a very concerned local audience. My staff attended this 
meeting.
  This meeting occurred weeks prior to the conclusion of the public 
comment period. The deadline for public comments was May 18, 1996.
  At that meeting, an EPA official apparently spoke words to the effect 
that the people can say all they want but that the permit is ``a done 
deal.'' EPA has video tape of the event and we will try to check that 
tape. But, my staff was in attendance and heard the remark. It was 
later retracted, but the damage was done.
  Mr. President, I am appalled at the implication in that official's 
statement, regardless of the situation or the retraction. There can be 
no confidence now that the permit process that EPA has followed has 
been fair and objective, that the public's comments will even be 
factored into the permit decision. In fact, in a letter that I ask be 
inserted into the Record following my remarks, Congresswoman Rivers and 
I suggested that EPA discontinue consideration of the permit 
application simply because of this event. (See exhibit 1.)
  Further complicating this situation are the merits of the permit 
application. The regulations developed by EPA to implement the Toxic 
Substances Control Act [TSCA] are fairly specific. They lay out all of 
the technical requirements that each chemical waste landfill must meet 
before it can be approved for PCB disposal. Based on the excellent 
information provided to me by Van Buren Township, the landfill 
application in question apparently fails to meet 5 of the 7 major 
technical requirements.
  Mr. President, it becomes more disturbing. My staff has been given 
the impression from EPA staff that a waiver of the technical 
requirements is necessary to approve this permit, since it clearly 
violates the criteria for proximity and connection to water, and that 
such waiver will be granted. Combining that with a statement to the 
effect that the permit is ``a done deal,'' I am truly disappointed. The 
people who live in the vicinity of this gargantuan waste disposal 
facility are not getting fair treatment from the regulators who are 
supposed to be looking out for the public health and welfare.
  Mr. President, this permitting process should not go forward, if it 
has been as tainted as I have been led to believe. It should be 
discontinued. If the public cannot be assured of a fair hearing on such 
weighty matters, we are in real trouble.
  Mr. BOND. The Senator from Michigan has stated his case clearly and 
forcefully. EPA certainly seems to have seriously erred, if its 
representative indicated an outcome before the permit process has 
concluded.
  Having said that, however, there is a related provision, as the 
Senator has mentioned, in the House bill on PCB's. As a result, this 
matter will have to be discussed in conference. EPA has been made aware 
of the mistakes that have weakened his trust in the Agency's ability to 
be fair and objective in this permitting process. I cannot speak for 
the Administrator, but I believe that it may be possible for the Agency 
to review this situation and start afresh.
  There may be something that we can do in Conference report language 
that would help the concerned citizens feel that they are being treated 
reasonably and the real environmental risks are being considered.
  Mr. LEVIN. Would the chairman be willing to seek to include language 
in the conference report that directs EPA to review the process that 
has been followed in this particular case for breaches of the public 
trust and breakdowns in the normal process that should be followed when 
considering a permit of this magnitude? And, if the representatives of 
the EPA have, by their own words during public consideration of a 
landfill permit application stated the intended outcome prior to a 
final permitting decision, direct that further consideration of the 
permit be discontinued?
  Mr. BOND. I will certainly work to inform and convince the conferees 
that such language is important and may be appropriate.
  Mr. LEVIN. Would he further request that the conference report 
include language directing EPA to report back to

[[Page S9726]]

Congress within 90 days on the location and number of chemical waste 
landfills that have received waivers pursuant to 40 CFR 761.75(c)(4) 
and a justification for each waiver?
  Finally, and I appreciate the chairman's patience, would he also 
consider directing EPA to engage an independent body to review whether 
or not the facility in question meets the technical requirements 
spelled out in 40 CFR 761.75(b), prior to any final decision on the 
permit?
  Mr. BOND. I will do my best to accommodate his requests.
  Mr. LEVIN. I thank the Chairman.


                           Amendment No. 5167

     (Purpose: To make a series of amendments relating to housing)

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I now send an amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no objection, the pending 
committee amendment will be set aside. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond] for himself, Mr. 
     D'Amato and Mr. Bennett, proposes an amendment numbered 5167.

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The text of the amendment is printed in today's Record under 
``Amendments Submitted.'')
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, what I have offered today is an amendment to 
provide a section 8 mark-to-market transition demonstration program for 
the restructuring of mortgages on FHA-insured multifamily housing 
projects with expiring oversubsidized section 8 project-based 
contracts.
  At the end of my remarks, unless others wish to make comments on it, 
I will ask this amendment be set aside. My purpose in sending it today 
is to allow it to be printed in the Record so that all my colleagues 
have an opportunity to review the amendment.
  This amendment reflects our best efforts at solving a critical and 
costly issue which is necessary to preserve affordable low-income 
housing. Because it is a very complex amendment, it has gone through 
significant work, readjustments, revisions, and recriminations. I felt 
it would be wise to give all Members and their staffs an opportunity to 
give this amendment thorough consideration. If there are improvements 
on it or if there are ways we can change it now or when we go into 
conference, I hope Members will come forward and offer their views and 
their advice on it. It is absolutely essential we deal with this 
problem right away so we will not trap ourselves in an escalating 
series of commitments that are beyond our financial resources to 
satisfy.
  I know many Members are at this point perhaps only marginally aware 
of the exorbitant costs needed to maintain some one million units of 
FHA-insured section 8 project-based housing that are affordable to low-
income families. This marginal awareness is understandable because the 
section 8 new construction and modern rehabilitation programs were 
financed in previous years through oversubsidized 15- and 20-year 
section 8 project-based contracts which are only now coming due for 
contract renewal. This housing is a valuable resource for low-income 
families, but the cost of renewing section 8 for this housing often 
will be an unreasonable expense.
  We have an opportunity now and an obligation to readjust the cost of 
this housing to the cost of market rents. The Banking Committee 
recently held a hearing on the mark-to-market issue which emphasized 
the escalating costs of this section 8 project-based assistance. In 
response, the Banking Committee is currently preparing to mark up a 
bill to establish a comprehensive program to reduce the costs of 
expiring project-based section 8 contracts, limit the financial 
exposure of the FHA multifamily mortgage insurance fund for costly 
mortgage defaults, and preserve, to the maximum extent possible, the 
section 8 project-based housing stock for very low- and low-income 
families.
  In conjunction with the efforts of the Banking Committee, I am 
proposing today an interim section 8 mark-to-market demonstration as a 
stepping stone to the Banking Committee bill to provide HUD and certain 
public agencies with the authority and tools to test various approaches 
to restructure mortgages and reduce the cost of section 8 project-based 
assistance to these multifamily housing projects. I expect and hope 
that Congress will enact a comprehensive reform bill this year.
  I give my special thanks to Chairman D'Amato and Senator Mack as well 
as to Senator Sarbanes and Senator Kerrey for their interests, their 
dedication and commitment to finding a bipartisan approach that 
preserves this low-income housing stock at a reasonable cost to the 
Government.
  Let me emphasize the depth of the section 8 mark-to-market problem. 
There are some 8,500 projects with almost one million units that are 
both FHA-insured and whose debt service is almost totally dependent on 
rental assistant payments made under section 8 project-based contracts. 
Most of these projects serve very low-income families, with 
approximately 37 percent of the stock serving elderly families. Most of 
these projects are also oversubsidized and are at risk of mortgage 
default if we do nothing and attempt to renew the project-based 
contract at fair market rents.
  Some 75 percent of this housing stock has rents that exceed the fair 
market rent in the local area. This means without the renewal of the 
section 8 project-based contracts, many project owners likely will 
default on their FHA-insured mortgage liabilities, resulting in FHA 
mortgage insurance claims and foreclosures. HUD would then own and be 
responsible for managing these low-income multifamily housing projects.
  In addition, the cost of renewing the section 8 project-based 
contracts on these projects reemphasizes the difficult budget and 
appropriations choices Congress must make in seeking to control 
spending and achieve a balanced budget over the next 6 years. In 
particular, according to HUD estimates, the cost of all section 8 
contract renewals, both tenant-based and project-based, would require 
appropriations of about $4.3 billion in fiscal year 1997, $10 billion 
in fiscal year 1998, and over $16 billion in fiscal year 2000.
  In addition, the cost of renewing only the section 8 project-based 
contracts will grow from $1.2 billion in fiscal year 1997 to almost $4 
billion in fiscal year 2000, and to some $8 billion in 10 years. These 
exploding costs are unacceptable and unsustainable.
  The section 8 mark-to-market demonstration included in this amendment 
would authorize HUD to renew for up to 1 year all expiring section 8 
project-based contracts with rents at or below 120 percent of the fair 
market rents for an area. This safe harbor will cover many of the 
240,000 units which are supported by the expiring section 8 contracts 
and will provide HUD with the administrative ability to focus on those 
FHA-insured multifamily housing projects with significantly 
oversubsidized rents.
  The projects with units which do not qualify for the contract renewal 
safe harbor will be eligible to participate in the section 8 mark-to-
market demonstration. In addition, similar to the Banking Committee's 
mark-to-market draft bill, the demonstration would encourage HUD to 
enter into contracts with State housing finance agencies, local housing 
agencies, and other public agencies to administer the demonstration 
program and to work at the local level to restructure the FHA-insured 
mortgages and to reduce the cost of section 8 project-based assistance.
  Finally, the demonstration would provide HUD and the public agencies 
with a number of tools to restructure the FHA-insured mortgages and 
reduce the cost of section 8 project-based housing assistance. These 
tools include the authority to restructure mortgages so that a first 
mortgage will reflect the market value of a project, while HUD holds a 
soft second on the remainder of the front debt. This is a critical tool 
because it preserves both the low-income housing while reducing the 
cost of section 8 project-based assistance and the risk of foreclosure. 
The demonstration allows HUD to implement budget-based rents to squeeze 
out any inflated projects, while covering the debt service and 
operating costs of these federally assisted projects.
  In addition, this demonstration would exclude those projects which 
are not properly managed or do not meet appropriate housing quality 
standards. The demonstration, however, is flexible enough to address 
the unique characteristics of projects such as elderly

[[Page S9727]]

projects in rural areas and the unique characteristics of localities 
such as those with very low vacancy rates.
  I again emphasize that this demonstration is still a place holder as 
an interim approach to preserving federally assisted low-income housing 
through restructuring FHA-insured mortgages and reducing the associated 
cost of section 8 project-based assistance. We look forward to working 
with the administration, the Banking Committee, and the housing 
industry to find a responsible permanent method of preserving this 
valuable section 8 housing resource.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Ms. MIKULSKI addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland is recognized.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I support Senator Bond's amendment. It 
starts to address the serious problem with section 8. A large number of 
housing projects, or housing programs, are subsidized by rents that far 
exceed the rent in a given area. In 1997 alone, over 2,100 of these 
section 8 contracts with nearly 132,000 units will expire. The 
Government cannot afford to continue paying these excessive rents 
indefinitely. This is almost like a Ponzi scheme, which is to come on 
in and get an FHA mortgage to build it. But in order to sustain the 
mortgage at inflated rents so you don't default, you need section 8 
contracts. Well, we are heading for a financial disaster in three ways. 
No. 1, this could become an incredible taxpayer liability if all this 
begins to cascade in default. No. 2, we cannot continue to pay rents 
above market value, nor should we. No. 3, what we find is that we have 
an incredible number of these section 8 contracts coming due over the 
next 3 to 5 years. We must get a handle on the problem.
  Senator Bond's approach is a very, very reasonable approach. It is a 
demonstration project. It gives a variety of tools to the local area to 
resolve this, because so much housing in a national program is locally 
set. The market value in Utah of section 8 is remarkably different than 
in the San Francisco area or the Seattle area. So we think it is a very 
good approach. I think the Bond amendment begins a process that enables 
us to begin to, in a reasonable, rational, well-paced way, begin to 
move on this. We cannot ignore the fact that over 850,000 units with 
subsidy problems are in the pipeline. Now is the time to act. I look 
forward to additional debate on this amendment, but I look forward to 
supporting this amendment. Most of all, I support beginning the process 
of getting a real grip on this issue.
  Mr. President, I will have more to say later, but I think that 
summarizes my thinking.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished friend from 
Maryland, who has stated very clearly and eloquently what I was trying 
to say, which is that we have a financial disaster facing us, and we 
cannot resolve it easily. We have to do something that preserves this 
low-income housing. As I indicated earlier, my purpose in presenting 
the amendment at this time was to allow it to be printed in the Record, 
to draw the attention of my colleagues to it, so that they may give us 
the benefit of their wisdom or any views that they have on it before we 
seek to adopt it tomorrow, with the full knowledge that we may well 
have to address it again in conference. It is vitally important for 
low-income housing in every State in the Nation. I hope that my 
colleagues will look at it.
  With that, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment 
be set aside for further discussion. I see colleagues on the floor who 
may wish to speak, so I yield the floor.
  Mr. DORGAN. Reserving the right to object, Mr. President, I don't 
want to interrupt my friend, who was, I think, on the floor before I 
came. I want to ask a few questions about the section 8 program and 
this amendment. You have no doubt forgotten more about this than I even 
know. I have had some meetings about section 8 recently, and I would 
like to spend some time inquiring about the direction this amendment 
will take us. So I can do that following the presentation by Senator 
Shelby. I am happy to do that.
  I ask unanimous consent to be able to do that.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the unanimous-consent 
request?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Chair recognizes the Senator from Alabama.
  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I rise in support of the bill before the 
Senate this afternoon.
  Mr. President, the United States of America is the undisputed leader 
in space technology development and space exploration. We can thank the 
American people for this.
  It is they who had the foresight to commit to space exploration and 
to demand that we reach beyond what is already within our grasp.
  Mr. President, the bill before us today continues that fine tradition 
and will help the United States maintain its leading role in space.
  It fulfills our commitment to space exploration in a number of ways, 
but primarily by funding the international space station.
  We have heard on this floor countless times and we will continue to 
hear that we cannot afford such an investment in our future.
  I cannot explain why someone would choose not to complete this noble 
journey. I can explain, however, why Americans throughout this Nation 
insist that we must. It is because Americans have always dreamed 
larger, reached farther, and excelled beyond all expectation. It is an 
American destiny to take this next step in space exploration. We must 
not quit now.
  By providing more than $5.3 billion to fund the Human Space Flight 
Program, which includes the international space station, this bill will 
preserve American leadership in space exploration. I am pleased the 
committee chose to continue this great endeavor.
  Mr. President, I also want to take this opportunity to highlight two 
other very important NASA provisions in this bill. The first is the 
WINDSAT Program within Mission to Planet Earth. The Mission to Planet 
Earth Program will provide valuable long-term climate forecasting 
information essential to a number of U.S. industries, including 
environmental, agricultural, forestry management, and disaster 
prediction and mitigation programs. The most difficult task facing this 
program is predicting seasonal and annual climate changes. This is the 
purpose of the WINDSAT Program. The global wind data provided by the 
WINDSAT is critical to Mission to Planet Earth's ability to predict 
these changes.
  Without this information, we are getting only part of the picture. 
WINDSAT will provide the data needed to complete that picture. I am 
very pleased the committee has supported this program.
  Mr. President, 50 years ago, it would have taken an entire warehouse 
to hold a computer with the capabilities of today's small hand-held 
calculators. Again and again we have seen how technology development 
reduces size and increases power. This is happening in the satellite 
industry as well.
  By the year 2000, advanced microsatellite technologies will yield 
small high-power, low-cost satellites, yet launch costs will be 
prohibitively expensive, unless we do something about it.
  Therefore, I am pleased that the committee has directed an 
augmentation for the low-cost small-launch technology demonstration 
project.
  This project promises to establish American leadership in the low-
cost small-launch market. Without this additional funding, the 
objectives of the program simply cannot be met. The funding level in 
this bill will ensure that as microsatellites become available, we will 
have a cost-effective way to put them into orbit.
  Mr. President, in short, the bill we have before us today fulfills an 
American vision of our future in space by continuing our commitment to 
space exploration and high-technology research and development. It will 
ensure that we continue on our national journey into space and will 
mean more opportunities and a brighter future for our country.
  I urge my colleagues to share this vision and support this bill.
  Mr. DORGAN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I listened to some of the presentation by 
Senators Bond and Mikulski. I indicated that they obviously know much 
more about section 8 housing than I. I

[[Page S9728]]

am certainly not an expert in this area. But I have begun to look at 
section 8 housing because housing authorities and some others have 
called it to my attention and have asked how this can be justified. The 
more I have reviewed what has happened in section 8 housing, the more I 
have become convinced that if you were to try to find among the dumbest 
ideas on how you might provide housing for low-income folks, among the 
dumbest ideas, you would select the approach selected some 20 years ago 
called section 8 housing.
  It resulted in, as I understand it, a series of very significant tax 
benefits paid upfront--generous, significant tax benefits paid 
upfront--for the construction of housing with preferential mortgages 
and mortgage amounts being given in excess, in most cases, of what 
would be provided in normal private sector construction. In addition to 
that, once the property was built with these tax benefits and with the 
preferential mortgages, section 8 provided a contract for rents that 
provided automatic escalators every year for whatever the period of the 
contract--in most cases, 20 years, I understand.
  The result is, for example, that in a rural county of North Dakota, 
Towner County, the fair market rent for a one-bedroom apartment is 
$270. But someone owning a section 8 property is not given the $270, 
but instead paid a rent of $536. This is a microcosm of what is 
happening around the country.
  As you can see from this chart, in Williams County, ND, the fair 
market rent would be $263. If you happen to have a series of low-income 
units in section 8 in Williams County, you wouldn't be getting a check 
for $263; you would be getting $508.
  I made a list of these properties just in North Dakota, a tiny little 
fraction of the properties nationally, and discovered that a 
substantial amount of money is being paid above market rent. This will 
not be news to the chair and the ranking member. That is what they are 
attempting to address. That is what they have been talking about. But 
when you look at this, let me say at the outset that this is not a case 
of landlords doing anything wrong. The landlords signed up for a 
program that was made available by the Government, and the Government 
said we want to make sure some housing units are available for low-
income people. So here are the incentives. Grab the incentives. Build 
some units and join in. What has happened, however, over the years is, 
with these automatic escalators, the rents that are now being charged 
the taxpayer to house low-income people are outrageous. They are way 
out of whack.
  I also understand an evaluation has been done recently by Ernst & 
Young about deferred maintenance costs and short and long-term 
maintenance requirements on these section 8 properties across the 
country. There are, I believe, more than 1 million rental units 
receiving section 8 subsidies--132,000 of which will come up this year 
for an extension of the contract. The Ernst & Young study showed that 
there is somewhere around $9.2 to $10.2 billion in deferred maintenance 
costs.
  If that is the case, I ask the question: First, what do we do about 
this as the contracts expire? Do we simply renew the contracts? If I 
were a section 8 landlord--again, I emphasize these landlords have done 
nothing wrong. They have simply taken advantage of a fundamentally dumb 
program constructed improperly without good forethought in a way that 
was guaranteed to ravage the taxpayer. But, nonetheless, if I were one 
of those landlords, I suppose I would say, ``Gee, I would like to sign 
up for another 20 or 10 years. Let me sign up at the same rate. Let me 
get $508 for a unit where the fair market rent would be $260. I would 
like some of that.'' I am sure the landlords would say that. I know 
that across the country section 8 landlords are saying, ``We want 
extensions at the same rate.''
  The Senator from Missouri, as I understand his amendment--and I do 
not understand all of the details of it; that is why I am going to ask 
some questions--he says, well, these contracts, if extended, are going 
to have to be reduced and the rents are going to have to come down 
some. But if you bring them down to market rent or fair market rent 
immediately, these folks who own them will simply walk away. They have 
their tax benefits. They have 10, 15, or 20 years of well above market 
rents. They will simply walk away, and all of these properties will be 
defaulted, or many of them will be defaulted. The Federal Government or 
someone will end up owning all of this property.
  I would like to understand and talk through for a minute where we go 
with this. I am almost inclined to think that we ought to just decide 
this construct is so inappropriate, at least given the taxpayers' 
interests, that maybe we should find a way to get to simply a voucher 
system. We could give those who are eligible a voucher that they can 
take and go find an apartment or a housing unit somewhere. But I do not 
quite understand how we get there from where we are now. And I fully 
agree with the Senator from Missouri and the Senator from Maryland. It 
is totally unacceptable and must be changed. It must be altered.

  How do we get from where we are now to where we want to be? It seems 
to me that where we would want to be would be in a circumstance where 
the taxpayers are helping in providing the incentives for some low-
income housing, because I think we need to do that. But the question 
is, how do you get to that point? Can you make a silk purse out of a 
sow's ear? Can you take a program that now exists and conduct an 
experimental program of some type? Can you create something out of this 
that the taxpayers will look at and say, ``Yes, that makes sense''? If 
so, how do we do that? I ask the Senator from Missouri.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I appreciate my colleague asking simple 
questions. This obviously is a major financial problem. It is a 
question of preservation of housing stock, particularly for the elderly 
in rural areas. We also have been sensitive to the cost of this 
housing. Over the past several years, we have capped the automatic 
escalator, or annual adjustment factor, on section 8 contract rents to 
limit the upward cost of this housing.
  In addition, depending on how we treat this housing and the section 8 
subsidies, the Federal Government faces significant financial exposure 
as a result of FHA mortgage guarantees on these projects. If we were to 
walk away from this housing, the FHA insurance fund could be faced with 
the full cost of these mortgages. This is many billions of dollars of 
risk and exposure. In addition, mortgage defaults will mean that FHA 
and HUD would have the projects in the HUD inventory, and be 
responsible for managing and selling them. In some cases, many of the 
better projects could command high rents and be taken out of the 
publicly assisted housing program.
  We have attempted to look at the alternatives. Under the 
demonstration, HUD could hold a soft second mortgage by paying down the 
insured project debt to market. This would limit the exposure of FHA 
which otherwise could be subject to the exposure of the full amount of 
the guarantee on project debt. The FHA, the Government, the taxpayers, 
will have a soft second mortgage on that property which will 
essentially kick in after the first mortgage is paid off. In this way, 
section 8 would be paid at the market rent and good owners of projects 
could stay in the program and not be forced into default and 
foreclosure.
  It was our hope in working with all of the parties involved--as I 
said, originally many of them with adverse and competing interests--
that we could maintain this housing for those who need assisted housing 
most by allowing HUD to enter into a demonstration project. We tried to 
involve State housing authorities in this project to do the workouts. 
We have provisions that would permit HUD to set a budget-based rent 
that would take into account the costs of maintaining the project debt 
service and operating expenses.
  Finally, the purpose of the demonstration is to preserve low-income 
housing at affordable prices. This is critical for the people who 
depend upon this housing, in North Dakota, as in Missouri. Preservation 
is especially critical for the elderly who depend on these projects in 
rural areas.
  It is our view that attempting to shut down on the projects and 
voucher out the people who are displaced would lead to a tremendous 
loss to the FHA insurance fund and a loss of housing. In

[[Page S9729]]

many areas, there may not be housing to supplant this housing that has 
been constructed.
  I do not intend and will not try to justify the decisions which were 
made to get us into this crack. We are in a very difficult financial 
situation. We have a commitment to provide housing. It is my view that 
this is the best way we can get out of it. If the Senator and his staff 
would like to work with us and have a better way to do it, I am anxious 
to have improvements. But from our standpoint, having worked with all 
of the competing interests in this, this seems to be the best way to 
minimize the exposure to taxpayers and maintain vitally important 
housing for those who need assistance.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I am not suggesting there may be a better 
idea. It appears to me that this is a maze from which there is not an 
easy escape. I guess I do not yet understand what a soft second 
mortgage is, and I also want to try to understand how this $10 billion 
in deferred maintenance on these projects, projects for which there 
have been substantial tax advantages paid up front and substantial rent 
advantages given over a contract period, how that relates to what one 
might or might not do with these properties.
  So I guess the first question I would ask is, what is a soft second 
mortgage? Is there an anticipation that that will be paid? And why 
might not a landlord simply walk away from a soft second mortgage? 
After satisfying the obligation of the next contract period over which 
the original mortgage is written down and rents are sufficient to 
provide a profit ostensibly to those property holders, why would they 
not walk away from a soft second mortgage? I am asking the question 
only because I do not know anything about this proposal.
  Mr. BOND addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the Senator from 
Missouri.
  Mr. BOND. In answer to that question, there are significant tax 
liabilities for an owner who walks away from a project. There were tax 
benefits which accrued to the people who produced the project in the 
first place. Walking away means they lose not only the property, but 
they also are subject to significant tax recapture.
  There is a proposal from HUD that the write-down include funds 
sufficient to pay any tax liabilities. I do not agree with that. I do 
not think that in the housing business we should change the tax 
implications. But there are very serious tax implications if they walk 
away. The second mortgage is one which does not require payments in the 
initial years while the first mortgage is being paid off.
  To address the deferred maintenance, the owners will have access, for 
the first time, to residual sums which had been set aside in the past 
for maintenance, and by converting a portion of the debt on the project 
to the soft second and freeing the owners from the responsibility of 
paying that portion, paying current debt service on that portion, that 
will free up money for the deferred maintenance. Will it handle all of 
it? We cannot say. But there will be a substantial sum made available. 
We are calling it a demonstration project because we do not know for 
sure how this will work, but it is our best idea of how to deal with 
these related problems.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. If I could comment----
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the Senator from 
Maryland.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. To the Senator from North Dakota, the Senator first of 
all is right; we use a vocabulary nobody understands, like ``mark-to-
market,'' ``soft seconds,'' and all of that. It is part of budget speak 
and one of the reasons the American people cannot follow much of the 
debate. The language of Washington is not the language of everyday 
people nor the language of everyday mortgage speaking, and so on. So I 
want to acknowledge that.

  Let me first explain to the Senator what ``mark-to-market'' means. It 
is really called multifamily portfolio reengineering. It is a program 
designed simply to refinance the FHA-insured project base, meaning that 
it is the actual building. Section 8 assisted multifamily, meaning more 
than one family lives in it. It is private sector housing. It is not 
public housing. The Senator is right. It was a program created during 
the Nixon era and worked, but every good intention got layered on and 
now we are in a situation where there is a tremendous possible 
liability to the U.S. Government if these mortgages go into default. If 
so, it is like a mini S&L crisis. What we are all trying to avoid, 
including working with the Clinton administration and Secretary 
Cisneros, is that.
  There is no answer. So what we are doing is providing the flexibility 
for refinancing and restructuring. If you are a lousy landlord, you are 
going to be pushed out. They will not renew it. We are all in kind of 
this quagmire. This demonstration project is providing flexibility to 
the local government.
  But let me come back to what the Senator says, how he needs to 
understand this. I want to understand it, too. The best explanation, 
quite frankly--and I mention it for the Senator's staff--the Baltimore 
Sun in a column called, ``The Perspective,'' August 18, had an 
exceptional article done by John Barth, who was the chief economist at 
the Office of Thrift Supervision during President Bush, and Robert 
Litan, who is the director of economic studies at Brookings. He goes 
through what this time bomb is, and it is a time bomb, including a 
variety of the options that we have at our disposal. There are none 
that are easy. There are none that are simple. There are none that are 
cheap. So what we are in the process of doing with the Bond amendment 
is beginning the process of getting our hand around it.
  Now, I could go through item after item after item on tax 
consequences, and so on. But I do not know that it would serve the 
Senator, and also perhaps we could get this even Xeroxed because we 
will be debating this tomorrow. But one thing the Clinton 
administration agrees upon, and I believe the Republican Caucus as well 
as our side, is this is a time bomb, and where ultimately we might go 
to vouchers or some other thing, right now we have this, and we will be 
faced with this I would say for the next 3 to 5 years.
  I know this because of a problem in Maryland where the guy took the 
section 8 money, did nothing on maintaining it. HUD, Maryland HUD, 
preferred sitting in an air-conditioned office rather than going out 
standing sentry on these projects, and now this guy is walking away 
from it. I have an IG report on it. I cannot go into it in more detail.
  So you have the bums like what I had in Riverdale, in Maryland, and 
then you have others that got into it--well-intentioned, aging 
projects, section 8, tax credits--but now they cannot continue to pay 
that rent and so they say, ``Whoops, we are now caught. How can we work 
it out?'' And the Bond amendment is how to deal at the local level with 
landlords, owners who are ready to deal in good faith so we do not 
place the tenants in jeopardy and we do not place the taxpayers in 
jeopardy. It is the beginning of a process, and the only tool we have 
is to restructure these mortgages and to begin to kind of phase them 
out. Will the Senator characterize that as accurate?
  Mr. BOND addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I am advised by the distinguished majority 
whip that he needs to offer amendments, I believe, that are required on 
the unanimous consent.
  If there is no objection, I will yield the floor to allow him to meet 
the 5 o'clock deadline which was previously entered into. I yield the 
floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Campbell). The Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. 
Nickles] is recognized.

                          ____________________