[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.
____________________