[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 147 (Tuesday, October 28, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11290-S11299]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. TORRICELLI (for himself, Mr. Graham, Mr. Mack, Mr. 
        Sarbanes, and Mr. Lautenberg):
  S. 1321. A bill to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to 
permit grants for the national estuary program to be used for the 
development and implementation of a comprehensive conservation and 
management plan, to reauthorize appropriations to carry out the 
program, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works.


             the national estuary conservation act of 1997

  Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, today, Senators Graham, Mack, 
Sarbanes, Lautenberg, and I are introducing the National Estuary 
Conservation Act. I rise to draw this country's attention to our 
nationally significant estuaries that are threatened by pollution, 
development, or overuse. With 45 percent of the Nation's population 
residing in estuarine areas, there is a compelling need for us to 
promote comprehensive planning and management efforts to restore and 
protect them.
  Estuaries are significant habitat for fish, birds, and other wildlife 
because they provide safe spawning grounds and nurseries. Seventy-five 
percent of the U.S. commercial fish catch depends on estuaries during 
some stage of their life. Commercial and recreational fisheries 
contribute $111 billion to the Nation's economy and support 1.5 million 
jobs. Estuaries are also important to our Nation's tourist economy for 
boating and outdoor recreation. Coastal tourism in just four States--
New Jersey, Florida, Texas, and California--totals $75 billion.
  Due to their popularity, the overall capacity of our Nation's 
estuaries to function as healthy productive ecosystems is declining. 
This is a result of the cumulative effects of increasing development 
and fast-growing year-round populations which increase dramatically in 
the summer. Land development, and associated activities that come with 
people's desire to live and play near these beautiful resources, cause 
runoff and stormwater discharges that contribute to siltation, 
increased nutrients, and other contamination. Bacterial contamination 
closes many popular beaches and shellfish harvesting areas in 
estuaries. Also, several estuaries are afflicted by problems that still 
require significant research. Examples include the outbreaks of the 
toxic microbe, Pfiesteria piscicida, in rivers draining to estuaries in 
Maryland and Virginia.
  Congress recognized the importance of preserving and enhancing 
coastal environments with the establishment of the National Estuary 
Program in the Clean Water Act Amendments of 1987. The program's 
purpose is to facilitate State and local governments preparation of 
comprehensive conservation and management plans for threatened 
estuaries of national significance. In support of this effort, section 
320 of the Clean Water Act authorized the EPA to make grants to States 
to develop environmental management plans. To date, 28 estuaries across 
the country have been designated into the program. However, the law 
fails to provide assistance once plans are complete and ready for 
implementation. Already, 17 of the 28 plans are finished.
  As the majority of plans are now in the implementation stage, it is 
incumbent upon us to maintain the partnership the Federal Government 
initiated 10 years ago to insure that our nationally significant 
estuaries are protected. The legislation we are introducing will take 
the next step by giving EPA authority to make grants for plan 
implementation and authorize annual appropriations in the amount of $50 
million. To insure the program is a true partnership and leverage 
scarce resources, there is a direct match requirement for grant 
recipients so funds will be available to upgrade sewage treatment 
plants, fix combined sewer overflows, control urban stormwater 
discharges, and reduce polluted runoff into estuarine areas.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1321

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

     SECTION 1. NATIONAL ESTUARY PROGRAM.

       (a) Grants.--Section 320(g) of the Federal Water Pollution 
     Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1330(g)) is amended by striking 
     paragraphs (2) and (3) and inserting the following:
       ``(2) Purposes.--Grants under this subsection shall be made 
     to pay for assisting activities necessary for the development 
     and implementation of a comprehensive conservation and 
     management plan under this section.
       ``(3) Federal share.--The Federal share of a grant to any 
     person (including a State, interstate, or regional agency or 
     entity) under this subsection for a fiscal year--
       ``(A) shall not exceed--
       ``(i) 75 percent of the annual aggregate costs of the 
     development of a comprehensive conservation and management 
     plan; and
       ``(ii) 50 percent of the annual aggregate costs of the 
     implementation of the plan; and
       ``(B) shall be made on condition that the non-Federal share 
     of the costs are provided from non-Federal sources.''.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 320(i) of the 
     Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1330(i)) is 
     amended by striking ``$12,000,000 per fiscal year for each of 
     fiscal years 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, and 1991'' and insert 
     ``$50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1999 through 2004''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     take effect on October 1, 1998.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KENNEDY (for himself and Mr. Kerry):
  S. 1322. A bill to establish doctoral fellowships designed to 
increase the pool of scientists and engineers trained specifically to 
address the global energy and environmental challenges of the 21st 
century; to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.


               THE SENATOR PAUL E. TSONGAS FELLOWSHIP ACT

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, it is a privilege to introduce the Paul 
E. Tsongas Fellowship Act. This bill commemorates an outstanding leader 
and former colleague in the Senate who was an impressive and dedicated 
advocate of technology and environmental protection. Congressman Joe 
Kennedy is the sponsor of a companion bill in the House of 
Representatives.
  As a Senator, Paul Tsongas worked skillfully to guarantee that 
technology and environmental concerns are at the forefront of our 
country's priorities. He was an extraordinary leader who understood the 
importance of addressing the serious energy and environmental 
challenges we face at home and around the world. Today, we honor his 
commitment to these important priorities by proposing a national 
fellowship program to support graduate students in science and 
engineering.
  As a nation, we need to do more to encourage the best students to 
pursue graduate studies in these basic fields, which are so essential 
to a strong future for the Nation. As much as 50 percent of economic 
growth is attributed to technological innovation. The Paul E. Tsongas 
Fellowship will support the modern pioneers who will keep the Nation at 
the cutting edge of the technology revolution.
  The fellowship is modeled on the successful Office of Naval Research 
Graduate Fellowship Program, which over the past 15 years has provided 
fellowships to 592 graduate students in 11 disciplines, and has made 
significant contributions to research. The Tsongas fellowships in 
science and engineering can

[[Page S11291]]

make a comparable contribution in these fields. They will enhance our 
efforts to improve educational opportunity for students, and strengthen 
our country's economy by investing wisely in the future.
  The Tsongas fellowships will be a living memorial to one of the 
outstanding Senators of our time, and I hope that Congress will act 
quickly on this important legislation.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1322

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Paul E. Tsongas Fellowship 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE.

       It is the purpose of this Act to encourage individuals of 
     exceptional achievement and promise, especially members of 
     traditionally underrepresented groups, to pursue careers in 
     fields that confront the global energy and environmental 
     challenges of the 21st century.

     SEC. 3. DOCTORAL FELLOWSHIPS AUTHORIZED.

       (a) Program Authorized.--The Secretary of Energy is 
     authorized to award doctoral fellowships, to be known as Paul 
     E. Tsongas Doctoral Fellowships, in accordance with the 
     provisions of this Act for study and research in fields of 
     science or engineering that relate to energy or the 
     environment such as physics, mathematics, chemistry, biology, 
     computer science, materials science, environmental science, 
     behavioral science, and social sciences at institutions 
     proposed by applicants for such fellowships.
       (b) Period of Award.--A fellowship under this section shall 
     be awarded for a period of three succeeding academic years, 
     beginning with the commencement of a program of doctoral 
     study.
       (c) Fellowship Portability.--Each Fellow shall be entitled 
     to use the fellowship in a graduate program at any accredited 
     institution of higher education in which the recipient may 
     decide to enroll.
       (d) Number of Fellowships.--As many fellowships as may be 
     fully funded according to this Act shall be awarded each 
     year.
       (e) Designation of Fellows.--Each individual awarded a 
     fellowship under this Act shall be known as a ``Paul E. 
     Tsongas Fellow'' (hereinafter in this Act referred to as a 
     ``Fellow'').

     SEC. 4. ELIGIBILITY AND SELECTION OF FELLOWS.

       (a) Eligibility--Only United States citizens are eligible 
     to receive awards under this Act.
       (b)  Fellowship Board.--
       (1) Appointment.--The Secretary, in consultation with the 
     Director of the National Science Foundation, shall appoint a 
     Paul E. Tsongas Fellowship Board (hereinafter in this part 
     referred to as the ``Board'') consisting of 5 representatives 
     of the academic science and engineering communities who are 
     especially qualified to serve on the Board. The Secretary 
     shall assure that individuals appointed to the Board are 
     broadly knowledgeable about and have experience in graduate 
     education in relevant fields.
       (2) Duties.--The Board shall--
       (A) establish general policies for the program established 
     by this part and oversee its operation;
       (B) establish general criteria for awarding fellowships;
       (C) award fellowships; and
       (D) prepare and submit to the Congress at least once in 
     every 3-year period a report on any modifications in the 
     program that the Board determines are appropriate.
       (4) Term.--The term of office of each member of the Board 
     shall be 3 years, except that any member appointed to fill a 
     vacancy shall serve for the remainder of the term for which 
     the predecessor of the member was appointed. No member may 
     serve for a period in excess of 6 years.
       (5) Initial meeting; vacancy.--The Secretary shall call the 
     first meeting of the Board, at which the first order of 
     business shall be the election of a Chairperson and a Vice 
     Chairperson, who shall serve until 1 year after the date of 
     their appointment. Thereafter each officer shall be elected 
     for a term of 2 years. In case a vacancy occurs in either 
     office, the Board shall elect an individual from among the 
     members of the Board to fill such vacancy.
       (6) Quorum; additional meetings.--(A) A majority of the 
     members of the Board shall constitute a quorum.
       (B) The Board shall meet at least once a year or more 
     frequently, as may be necessary, to carry out its 
     responsibilities.
       (7) Compensation.--Members of the Board, while serving on 
     the business of the Board, shall be entitled to receive 
     compensation at rates fixed by the Secretary, but not 
     exceeding the rate of basic pay payable for level IV of the 
     Executive Schedule, including traveltime, and while so 
     serving away from their homes or regular places of business, 
     they may be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in 
     lieu of subsistence, as authorized by section 5703 of title 
     5, United States Code, for persons in Government service 
     employed intermittently.
       (c) Underrepresented Groups.--In designing selection 
     criteria and awarding fellowships, the Board shall--
       (1) consider the need to prepare a larger number of women 
     and individuals from minority groups, especially from among 
     such groups that have been traditionally underrepresented in 
     the professional and academic fields referred to in section 
     2, but nothing contained in this or any other provision of 
     this Act shall be interpreted to require the Secretary to 
     grant any preference or disparate treatment to the members of 
     any underrepresented group; and
       (2) take into account the need to expand access by women 
     and minority groups to careers heretofore lacking adequate 
     representation of women and minority groups.

     SEC. 5. PAYMENTS, STIPENDS, TUITION, AND EDUCATION AWARDS.

       (a) Amount of Award.--
       (1) Stipends.--The Secretary shall pay to each individual 
     awarded a fellowship under this Act a stipend in the amount 
     of $15,000, $16,500, and $18,000 during the first, second, 
     and third years of study, respectively.
       (2) Tuition.--The Secretary shall pay to the appropriate 
     institution an amount adequate to cover the tuition, fees, 
     and health insurance of each individual awarded a fellowship 
     under this Act.
       (3) Administrative and Travel Allowance.--The Secretary 
     shall pay to each host institution an annual $5,000 allowance 
     for the purpose of covering--
       (A) administrative expenses;
       (B) travel expenses associated with Fellow participation in 
     academic seminars or conferences approved by the host 
     institution; and
       (C) round-trip travel expenses associated with Fellow 
     participation in the internship required by section 6 of this 
     Act.

     SEC. 6. REQUIREMENT.

       Each Fellow shall participate in a 3-month internship 
     related to the dissertation topic of the Fellow at a national 
     laboratory or equivalent industrial laboratory as approved by 
     the host institution.

     SEC. 7. FELLOWSHIP CONDITIONS.

       (a) Academic Progress Required.--No student shall receive 
     support pursuant to an award under this Act--
       (1) except during periods in which such student is 
     maintaining satisfactory progress in, and devoting 
     essentially full time to, study or research in the field in 
     which such fellowship was awarded, or
       (2) if the student is engaging in gainful employment other 
     than part-time employment involved in teaching, research, or 
     similar activities determined by the institution to be in 
     support of the student's progress toward a degree.
       (b) Reports From Recipients.--The Secretary is authorized 
     to require reports containing such information in such form 
     and filed at such times as the Secretary determines necessary 
     from any person awarded a fellowship under the provisions of 
     this Act. The reports shall be accompanied by a certificate 
     from an appropriate official at the institution of higher 
     education, or other research center, stating that such 
     individual is fulfilling the requirements of this section.
       (c) Failure To Earn Degree.--A recipient of a fellowship 
     under this Act found by the Secretary to have failed in or 
     abandoned the course of study for which assistance was 
     provided under this Act may be required, at the discretion of 
     the Secretary, to repay a pro rata amount of such fellowship 
     assistance received, plus interest and, where applicable, 
     reasonable collection fees, on a schedule and at a rate of 
     interest to be prescribed by the Secretary by regulations 
     issued pursuant to this Act.

     SEC. 8. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated for this Act 
     $5,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 and such sums as may be 
     necessary for the succeeding fiscal years.

     SEC. 9. APPLICATION OF GENERAL EDUCATIONAL PROVISIONS ACT.

       Section 421 of the General Educational Provisions Act, 
     pertaining to the availability of funds, shall apply to this 
     Act.

     SEC. 10. DEFINITIONS.

       For purposes of this Act--
       (1) The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of Energy.
       (2) The term ``host institution'' means an institution 
     where a Paul E. Tsongas Fellow is enrolled for the purpose of 
     pursuing doctoral studies for which support is provided under 
     this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HARKIN:
  S. 1323. A bill to regulate concentrated animal feeding operations 
for the protection of the environment and public health, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.


                   THE ANIMAL AGRICULTURE REFORM ACT

  Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, today I am introducing the Animal 
Agriculture Reform Act, a bill that for the first time sets tough 
environmental standards governing how large livestock and poultry 
operations handle their animal waste. Animal waste pollution is a 
national problem that demands a national solution.

  Nationwide, 200 times more animal manure is produced than human 
waste--five tons for every person in the

[[Page S11292]]

United States--making large livestock operations the waste equivalent 
of a town or city. For example, 1,600 dairies in the Central Valley of 
California produce more waste than a city of 21 million people. And 
right here outside of Washington, DC, the annual production of 600 
million chickens on the Delmarva Peninsula leaves as much nitrogen as a 
city of almost 500,000 people.
  The shrinking number of farms producing an ever greater share of 
animals means that too much manure is produced in some areas of the 
country to be put on land without causing water pollution. Nitrogen and 
phosphorous in animal manure are valuable crop nutrients--but in 
excessive levels in water they are serious pollutants.
  High levels of nitrogen and phosphorous cause the excessive algae 
growth of algae, whose bacterial decomposition uses up oxygen in the 
water and kills fish. Animal waste also carries parasites, bacteria and 
viruses--and can pollute drinking water with nitrates, potentially 
fatal to infants.
  While towns must have sewage treatment plants, excess waste from 
large-scale animal feeding operations is simply stored indefinitely or 
over-applied on land. That means water pollution from over-application, 
and the ongoing risk of pollution and even massive spills from stored 
waste.
  In 1995 in North Carolina 35 million gallons of animal waste were 
spilled, killing 10 million fish. And last year more than 40 animal 
waste spills were recorded in Iowa, Minnesota and Missouri, up from 20 
in 1992.
  In 1997, the toxic microbe Pfiesteria, whose increased presence is 
linked to excessive nutrients in the water, killed approximately 30,000 
fish in the Chesapeake Bay and approximately 450,000 fish in North 
Carolina. Major attacks by harmful microbes in U.S. coastal and 
estuarial waters between 1972 and 1995 have doubled--and excessive 
nutrients are the suspected catalyst.
  In the Gulf of Mexico, farm runoff including animal waste is linked 
to the formation of a so-called ``dead zone'' of hypoxia (low oxygen)--
up to 7,000 square miles of water that cannot support most aquatic 
life.
  The Environmental Protection Agency's regulations in this area have 
not been revised since they were written in the 1970s, and they do not 
go nearly far enough to address current animal waste problems.
  Animal waste management practices must include limiting the 
application of both phosphorous and nitrogen to amounts that can be 
used by crops. In addition, environmentally sound standards are needed 
for the handling, storage, treatment and disposal of excess animal 
waste.
  Under my bill, large animal feeding operations must submit an 
individual animal waste management plan to USDA designed to minimize 
the risk of surface and ground water pollution. My bill would require 
that USDA work with farmers in developing plans to address potential 
problems before they happen. USDA will do this by establishing 
guidelines and providing technical assistance and information to 
develop farm-specific plans to be approved on an individual basis.
  I am using the term animal waste, but it is important that we 
recognize that manure is a valuable resource for farmers who need 
nutrients for their crops. Promoting wise use of manure for crop 
nutrients is the guiding principle of my bill. For a plan to be 
approved, an operator must agree to apply animal waste to land only in 
amounts meeting crop nutrient requirements. Furthermore, liquid waste 
that cannot be safely used for nutrients or another environmentally 
sound use must be treated in accordance with waste water treatment 
standards.
  My bill also applies sound technical standards to the construction of 
all new earthen manure lagoons to prevent leaks and spillage of animal 
waste. Existing earthen manure lagoons are given a reasonable phase-in 
period to meet appropriate standards.
  In addition, my bill puts the burden of complying with these 
requirements on the animal owners. The bill would prevent animal owners 
from using contracts or similar arrangements to avoid responsibility 
for animal waste management.
  The bill covers operations with an approximate one-time animal 
capacity above 1,330 hogs; 57,000 chickens; 270 dairy cattle; or 530 
slaughter cattle. Each animal owner with at least that many animals 
must submit a waste management plan to USDA for approval, whether or 
not the animals are kept in one place. Animal feeding operations under 
those sizes will qualify under USDA's Environmental Quality Incentives 
Program for additional technical and cost-share assistance to implement 
animal waste management plans.
  I want to be clear that my bill does not interfere with the role of 
EPA and the States in monitoring pollution, or is it a substitute for 
EPA strengthening its current regulations. I see it as an essential 
part of a cooperative approach to the problem by both EPA and USDA--and 
I look forward to EPA's proposals in this area. I also look forward to 
reviewing the recommendations of the National Environmental Dialogue on 
Pork Production, which is working on these issues in great detail.
  We must take strong action now to halt the pollution of our water 
from animal waste and other farm runoff. Other issues that are outside 
the scope of this bill also need to be addressed, including management 
of municipal and industrial wastewater and more careful application of 
commercial fertilizers. My proposal is one part of a national solution 
to our water quality concerns.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LOTT:
  S. 1324. A bill to deauthorize a portion of the project for 
navigation, Biloxi Harbor, MS; to the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works.


                      deauthorization legislation

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the 
bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1324

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

                 section 1. biloxi harbor, mississippi.

       The portion of the project for navigation, Biloxi Harbor, 
     Mississippi, authorized by the River and Harbor Act of 1960 
     (74 Stat. 481), for the Bernard Bayou Channel beginning near 
     the Air Force Oil Terminal at approximately navigation mile 
     2.6 and extending downstream to the North-South \1/2\ of 
     Section 30, Township 7 South, Range 10 West, Harrison County, 
     Mississippi, just west of Kremer Boat Yards, is not 
     authorized after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. FRIST (for himself, Mr. Rockfeller, Mr. Burns, and Mr. 
        Hollings):
  S. 1325. A bill to authorize appropriations for the Technology 
Administration of the Department of Commerce for fiscal years 1998 and 
1999, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation.


 THE TECHNOLOGY ADMINISTRATION AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEARS 1998 
                                AND 1999

  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I rise today to offer a bill to authorize 
appropriations for the Technology Administration [TA] of the Department 
of Commerce for fiscal year 1998 and 1999. This bill funds activities 
in the National Institutes of Standards and Technology [NIST].
  I am keenly aware of my responsibilities to the American people for 
ensuring that the people's money is spent wisely. I have a 
responsibility to exercise prudent fiscal management over programs that 
cost taxpayers millions of dollars each year. Each program must be 
examined, and wasteful, ineffective programs must be changed or 
eliminated. I also have a responsibility to make appropriate long term 
investments that will help Americans create the technology and wealth 
of tomorrow. I view both of these duties as part of the principle of 
``wise stewardship'. The TA legislation represents a challenging 
application of wise stewardship. This bill covers some of the most 
productive and necessary areas of governments, as well as a few of the 
most controversial.
  There is no question that the work done by NIST's Standards 
Laboratory is essential to U.S. commerce. These laboratories house of 
the best scientific minds in the world. A perfect example is the award 
of the 1997 Nobel Prize for Science to Dr. William Phillips in the area 
of low temperature physics. His accomplishment, as well as the 
achievements of the world class scientific cadre at NIST are reminders 
of

[[Page S11293]]

the necessity for investment in the Standards Laboratory, the people 
most of all, but the buildings and infrastructure as well. This 
legislation provides for continued investment into this research and 
those services
  The reauthorization bill contains a provision to add accountability 
and controls to the new Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive 
Technology [EPSCoT] program. Modeled after National Science 
Foundation's successful and effective EPSoR program, the goal of EPSCoT 
is to increase the technological competitiveness of these States that 
have historically received less Federal research and development funds 
than the majority of the States. While I believe that the aims of this 
program are good, we cannot afford to put this or any other Federal 
grant program on automatic pilot. Our legislation contains a 
graduations criteria, that moves a State out of the program when that 
State has become competitive. The bill contains a provision that 
mandates periodic evaluation of this program. Using this data we can 
tell if and when the program ceases to be effective. If that happens we 
have the information needed to see if the program can be fixed, or 
should be terminated.
  This legislation contains provisions for two programs that have been 
particularly contentious: the Advanced Technology Program [ATP], and 
the manufacturing Extension Program [MEP]. Both are technology 
enhancement programs designed with the intent of increasing the ability 
of U.S. firms to compete in the global marketplace.
  Under existing law each MEP center is funded for a maximum of 6 
years. This legislation removes the hard and fast sunset provision and 
replaces it with a 2-year renewal cycle. Each center must win renewal, 
and with it eligibility for Federal funds by receiving a satisfactory 
grade from this new biennial review. If the center is not fulfilling 
its expectation for assistance of manufacturing technology, then it 
will fail its review and will not be able to receive Federal funding.
  The Advanced Technology Program has been improved under this 
legislation. Large companies will no longer be able to participate as 
single applicants. They must partner with one or more small businesses 
in order to be eligible to apply for an ATP grant. This provision 
maximizes the benefit of this program by encouraging the transfer of 
technology and expertise from large businesses to the most dynamic 
section of our economy--small business. The legislation also takes 
steps to ensure that ATP does not displace private venture capital. 
finally, the bill takes an important step to continued evaluation and 
possible evolution of the program. It instructs the Department of 
Commerce to commission the National Academy of Sciences to study the 
effectiveness of the Advanced Technology Program. In addition the study 
will investigate alternative methods for the Federal Government to help 
keep U.S. businesses competitive.
  Finally, the TA NIST reauthorization bill creates a new educational 
resource for the country. There has never been a time in our country's 
history when science and technology has been more important. It is 
playing an increasingly critical role in our economy, and most of all 
to our economic future. It is all too clear that our children are not 
well enough prepared to take their places as part of the world's 
scientific leaders. As the recent NAEP and TIMSS science results show, 
there is a gap between our children's science abilities and those from 
other countries. In this bill, we have created the Teacher Science and 
Technology Enhancement Institute Program to help bridge that gap. The 
program is structured to afford primary and secondary educators the 
chance to become reacquainted with science. Armed with fresh 
experiences, the teachers will be better equipped to excite our 
children about technology and scientific inquiry. This is an investment 
that we cannot afford to pass up.
  I believe that this legislation embodies the concept of wise 
stewardship. The bill reflects input that we have received from my 
colleagues in the Senate, the House and the administration. More 
importantly, we have heard from constituents from my own State of 
Tennessee, as well as businesses, professional groups and academia from 
around the country. I am sure that the result will not please everyone. 
I believe, however, that it represents a necessary step in the constant 
evolution of these Federal programs. I take my congressional oversight 
obligations extremely seriously. Creating responsible, fair, timely 
authorizing legislation is a key part of that obligation. I believe 
that this legislation meets these requirements. I hope you will join me 
in honoring our obligation to the American people by supporting this 
legislation.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleagues 
Senator Frist, Senator Hollings, Senator Burns in introducing 
legislation to reauthorize the programs of the Technology 
Administration for fiscal years 1998 and 1999. This bill reauthorizes 
the Office of Science and Technology Policy as well as the NIST labs 
and facilities about the President's budget request. It also funds the 
Advanced Technology Program at $198 million and the Manufacturing 
Extension Program at $111 million.
  It is noteworthy that after several hearings on ATP, and after 
assessing Secretary of Commerce Daley's detailed review of the program, 
we are now putting forward a bill that continues to authorize this 
important form of investment in America's economic competitiveness. As 
I, along with many others in this Chamber, have stated before, this 
program supports American industry's own efforts to develop new, 
cutting-edge technologies which create the new industries and jobs of 
the 21st century.
  Let me remind my colleagues that ATP does not, and I repeat, does not 
fund the development of commercial products. Instead, this program 
provides matching funds to both individual companies and joint ventures 
for pre-product research on high-risk technologies which have the 
potential to place U.S. industry as the leader in new industrial areas. 
This high-risk, high-reward strategy has already led to the creation of 
new U.S. industries based on information transfer, biotechnology, and 
new materials synthesis.
  In spite of the merits of this program ATP has been criticized by 
some Members for the past 4 years of the program's 6 years of 
existence. This year Secretary Daley undertook a 60-day review to 
assess the ATP's performance and evaluate these criticisms. The 
Department of Commerce solicited comments from more than 3,500 
interested parties and took into account comments provided by both 
critics and supporters of the program. fact, Senators Lieberman, 
Domenici, Frist and I joined together and provided one of the 80-plus 
comments the Department received. I would like to take a moment and 
commend Secretary Daley for the job he did in undertaking this review. 
As we all know, there is not a department or program that can't be 
improved. And as a long time and avid supporter of ATP I believe, that 
after 6 years of operation, experience would suggest that there should 
be some areas that can be improved. This review has done just that. The 
recommendations that Secretary Daley has put forth further strengthens 
a strong and productive program. I agree with his suggestion to place 
more emphasis on small and medium-size single applicants, joint-
ventures, and consortia. This bill adopts that recommendation by 
amending the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act to 
define a large business as one with gross annual revenues in excess of 
$2.5 billion and prohibits such businesses from participating in ATP 
programs as single applicants.
  In addition, I was pleased to see the added emphasis by the Secretary 
on the need for an EPSCoT program, based on the EPSCoR model, which 
would enhance technology development in the 18 States that have 
traditionally been under-represented in Federal R&D funding. EPSCoT 
would provide the opportunity for States which have been able to build 
infrastructure capable of supporting high-tech research to use this 
infrastructure to its maximum advantage. Studies have shown that 
strengthening the competitive performance of research laboratories, 
usually universities, in an underdeveloped area, which is the purpose 
of EPSCoR, is often not sufficient to establish new, high-tech 
companies. EPSCoT seeks to assist in technology

[[Page S11294]]

transfer to the local economy by encouraging links between 
universities, local businesses, and local and State governments. Unlike 
ATP, which focuses on the national economic interest in research and 
development, EPSCoT focuses on allowing under-represented States the 
opportunity to participate in the technological revolution that is 
sweeping the global economy. In order to help the success of the 
program, Governors, business leaders and researchers were consulted 
about the importance of technology transfer for economic development. 
This bill provides statutory language to implement the Secretary's 
proposal of creating the EPSCoT program.
  Secretary Daley's review could not have been done at a better time. 
After 6 years of existence, a thorough and complete review of the 
process has shown that is it competently managed, produces positive 
results and has been working to achieve it's stated objectives. The 
proposals set forth in this review strengthen a very strong program 
that is one of the cornerstones to the Nation's long-term economic 
prosperity. The bill we are introducing today provides the necessary 
changes to existing law to implement many of the recommendations. I 
encourage my colleagues to support this bill.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DASCHLE:
  S. 1326. A bill to amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to 
provide for Medicaid coverage of all certified nurse practitioners and 
clinical nurse specialists services; to the Committee on Finance.


                   THE MEDICAID NURSING INCENTIVE ACT

  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing the Medicaid 
Nursing Incentive Act, a bill to provide direct Medicaid reimbursement 
for nurse practitioners and clinical nurse specialists.
  This legislation eliminates a groundless and counterproductive 
anomaly in Medicaid payment policy. Under current law, State Medicaid 
programs can exclude certified nurse practitioners and clinical nurse 
specialists from Medicaid reimbursement, even though these 
practitioners are fully trained to provide many of the same services as 
those provided by primary care physicians. This loophole is both 
discriminatory and shortsighted; it severs a critical access link for 
Medicaid beneficiaries.
  The ultimate goal of this proposal is to enhance the availability of 
cost-effective primary care to our Nation's most needy citizens.
  Studies have documented the fact that millions of Americans each year 
go without the health care services they need, because physicians 
simply are not available to care for them. This problem plagues rural 
and urban areas alike, in parts of the country as diverse as south 
central Los Angeles and Lemmon, SD.
  Medicaid beneficiaries are particularly vulnerable, since in recent 
years an increasing number of health professionals have chosen not to 
care for them or have been unwilling to locate in the inner-city and 
rural communities where many of the beneficiaries live. Fortunately, 
there is an exception to this trend: nurse practitioners and clinical 
nurse specialists frequently accept patients whom others will not treat 
and serve in areas where others refuse to work.
  Studies have shown that nurse practitioners and clinical nurse 
specialists provide care that both patients and cost cutters can 
praise. Their advanced clinical training enables them to assume 
responsibility for up to 80 percent of the primary care services 
usually performed by physicians, many times at a lower cost and with a 
high level of patient satisfaction.
  Congress has already recognized the expanding contributions of nurse 
practitioners and clinical nurse specialists. For more than a decade, 
CHAMPUS has provided direct payment to nurse practitioners. In 1990, 
Congress mandated direct payment for nurse practitioner services under 
the Federal employee health benefits plan. The Medicare Program, which 
already covers nurse practitioners and clinical nurse specialist 
services in rural areas, was modified under this year's Balance Budget 
Act to provide coverage for these services in all geographic areas. The 
bill I am introducing today establishes the same payment policy under 
Medicaid.
  Mr. President, the ramifications of this issue extend beyond the 
Medicaid Program and its beneficiaries: there is a broader lesson here 
that applies to our search to make cost-effective, high-quality health 
care services available and accessible to all Americans.
  One of the cornerstones of this kind of care is the expansion of 
primary and preventative care, delivered to individuals in convenient, 
familiar places where they live, work, and go to school. More than 2 
million of our Nation's nurses currently provide care in these sites--
in home health agencies, nursing homes, ambulatory care clinics, and 
schools.
  In places like South Dakota, nurses are often the only health care 
professionals available in the small towns and rural counties across 
the State.
  These nurses and other nonphysician health professionals play an 
important role in the delivery of care. And, this role will increase as 
we move from a system that focuses on the costly treatment of illness 
to one that emphasizes primary and preventive care and health 
promotion.
  But, first, we must reevaluate outdated attitudes and break down 
barriers that prevent nurses from using the full range of their 
training and skills in caring for patients. In 1994, the Pew Health 
Professions Commission concluded that nurse practitioners are not being 
fully utilized to deliver primary care services. The commission 
recommended eliminating fiscal discrimination by paying nurse 
practitioners directly for the services they provide. This step will 
help nurse practitioners and clinical nurse specialists expand access 
to the primary care that so many communities currently lack.
  Mr. President, I hope my colleagues will support the measure I am 
introducing today, recognizing the critical role that nurse 
practitioners and other nonphysician health professionals play in our 
health care delivery system, and the increasingly significant 
contribution they can make in the future. I ask unanimous consent that 
the full text of the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1326

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

     SECTION 1. MEDICAID COVERAGE OF ALL CERTIFIED NURSE 
                   PRACTITIONER AND CLINICAL NURSE SPECIALIST 
                   SERVICES.

       (a) In General.--Section 1905(a)(21) of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d(a)(21)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(21) services furnished by a certified nurse practitioner 
     (as defined by the Secretary) or clinical nurse specialist 
     (as defined in subsection (v)) which the certified nurse 
     practitioner or clinical nurse specialist is legally 
     authorized to perform under State law (or the State 
     regulatory mechanism provided by State law), whether or not 
     the certified nurse practitioner or clinical nurse specialist 
     is under the supervision of, or associated with, a physician 
     or other health care provider;''.
       (b) Clinical Nurse Specialist Defined.--Section 1905 of 
     such Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(v) The term `clinical nurse specialist' means an 
     individual who--
       ``(1) is a registered nurse and is licensed to practice 
     nursing in the State in which the clinical nurse specialist 
     services are performed; and
       ``(2) holds a master's degree in a defined area of clinical 
     nursing from an accredited educational institution.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall become effective with respect to payments for calendar 
     quarters beginning on or after January 1, 1998.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ROTH (for himself, Mr. Hagel, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Kerry, and 
        Mr. Akaka):
  S. 1327. A bill to grant normal trade relations status to the 
People's Republic of China on a permanent basis upon the accession of 
the People's Republic of China to the World Trade Organization; to the 
Committee on Finance.


                 the china trade relations act of 1997

  Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I rise today for myself and Senators Hagel, 
Thomas, John Kerry, and Akaka to introduce legislation that will grant 
normal trade relations to the People's Republic of China on a permanent 
basis when China accedes to the World Trade Organization.
  Today, President Jiang arrives in Washington for the first bilateral 
summit in 8 years. Exchange at the highest levels is critical to the 
maintenance of

[[Page S11295]]

any of our important bilateral relationships. It is even more crucial 
in our relationship with the world's largest country, fastest growing 
economy, and most important rising power.
  Mr. President, this body has spent a great deal of energy debating 
United States policy toward China, cresting each year with the struggle 
over renewal of normal trade relations. I have always supported such 
renewal, and viewed the annual debate as a singularly unproductive 
means of moving the United States toward a coherent China policy. I say 
that because, besides regular high-level exchange, normal trade 
relations with China are essential to any coherent China policy, one 
that keeps our economy strong and engages Beijing in constructive 
reform.
  Currently, the United States is negotiating with China over the 
package of measures Beijing must implement to comply with the strict 
market-based rules of the World Trade Organization. Until the United 
States is satisfied with commitments from China on such issues as lower 
tariff levels and enhanced market access, and assured that Beijing can 
and will carry out those commitments, China will not gain entry to the 
WTO.
  The concessions China must make to gain United States approval are 
significant and will dramatically affect large segments of China's 
economy. The single most important economic benefit Beijing will derive 
from membership in the World Trade Organization is permanent normal 
trade relations--also known as most-favored-nation trading status--with 
every other WTO member. As a practical matter, however, every member 
economy of the World Trade Organization, except the United States, has 
already conferred on China permanent normal trade relations. Moreover, 
the United States has provided normal trade relations to China 1 year 
at a time for more than 15 years. However, until China is specifically 
removed from the limitations of title IV of the Trade Act of 1974, 
Beijing cannot receive permanent normal trade relations from the United 
States, whatever China's status in the WTO.
  The resulting ambiguity over China's trade status with the United 
States hinders Beijing's willingness to make the significant 
concessions necessary to complete a commercially viable WTO accession 
package. A clear signal from the United States that China will, in 
fact, gain permanent normal trade relations upon its accession to the 
World Trade Organization will provide Beijing an incentive to make 
those concessions.
  Mr. President, it is crucial that we understand that China's 
membership in the WTO under commercially viable terms is wholly in the 
interest of the United States. That is because China will be forced to 
open its markets significantly to American trade and investment. And 
more fully open markets represent the best approach to reducing our 
current trade deficit with China. China's membership in the World Trade 
Organization will also make Beijing fully subject to the market-
oriented disciplines of the WTO. Finally, our bilateral trade disputes 
with China will be subject to multilateral resolution mechanisms, in 
addition to the means we already have available under United States 
trade law.
  China is the world's 10th largest trading country. It is the largest 
economy not in the World Trade Organization. Regardless of its WTO 
status, China will have a major influence on the future development of 
the world trading system. I believe the time has come for Congress to 
recognize the importance of integrating China into the global economy.
  Our bilateral economic relationship is the most important means we 
have of integrating China fully into the world economy and the 
international political order. The United States is one of the top five 
sources of foreign investment in China. That investment is not limited 
to the special economic zones, but now takes place throughout China and 
across every major industry. Our businesses are linked in investment 
and in trading relationships that provide a vehicle for common effort 
and common understanding at the most practical and personal levels.
  China also represents a growing economic and political influence in a 
region of critical importance to the United States. The Asia-Pacific 
region now represents over 40 percent of world trade and 53 percent of 
world gross national product. Trans-Pacific trade is more than twice as 
large as trans-Atlantic trade. The Asia-Pacific region economies, 
including the United States and China, are becoming increasingly 
interdependent. The region now represents the largest market for United 
States exports--over $130 billion by some estimates. The predicate to 
our ability to encourage China to play a constructive role in the 
region is our willingness to redefine our bilateral economic 
relationship through the WTO accession process and the normalization of 
our trade relations under United States law.
  A China more fully immersed in global capitalism is more likely to 
behave in ways compatible with American interests and international 
norms. We have seen this reality throughout Asia as countries have made 
major reforms in opening their economies and joined us at the table of 
democratic freedom. Moreover, without permanent normal trade relations, 
not only will we have less influence over the role China chooses to 
play on the global stage, we will also be left on the sidelines of 
China's economic growth.
  We cannot passively accept abuses of human rights, religious 
persecution, or the many other problems we have with China that must be 
addressed and corrected. But neither must we neglect the many issues 
and problems where our interests converge, including the stability in 
the Asia Pacific that undergirds the region's economic growth, peaceful 
resolution of the urgent troubles on the Korean Peninsula, and 
addressing the transnational concerns posed by environmental 
degradation, narcotics trafficking, and crime.
  A relationship premised on cooperation in areas of shared interest 
also provides us a better opportunity to discourage Beijing from 
transferring missiles and other arms to Iran, Iraq, Burma, and other 
rogue regimes, persuade China to reduce tensions in the Taiwan Straits, 
and encourage Beijing to maintain freedoms in Hong Kong and foster 
greater human rights in China.
  Mr. President, Congress and the American people must understand what 
is at stake in the bilateral relationship and how best to move China in 
a direction that is in our best interest and the best interest of the 
American and Chinese people. The summit taking place this week and this 
legislation, I believe, can provide the United States and China the 
impetus to move toward a far more mutually productive relationship.
  Mr. HAGEL. Mr. President, today I am pleased to join with the 
distinguished chairman of the Finance Committee, Senator Roth, as an 
original cosponsor to his legislation to strengthen the President's 
hand in opening up China's market to American exports. I commend 
Chairman Roth for his leadership on trade issues. This bill would 
extend permanent most-favored-nation trading status to China upon that 
country's accession to membership of the World Trade Organization under 
commercially viable terms.
  Mr. President, I believe that the annual debate over so-called most-
favored-nation trading status for China has become counterproductive. 
It is time for the United States and China to transcend this flawed 
process. It is time for trade relations between our two countries to be 
based on the normal commercial standards that one would expect between 
two of the world's great trading powers.
  This legislation would greatly strengthen the President's hand in 
achieving trade negotiations with China. It would do this by giving the 
President the authority to grant China permanent MFN status upon that 
country's accession to the WTO under normal commercial arrangements. As 
long as the Congress merely promises to consider granting permanent MFN 
status after China has agreed to accept WTO obligations, the 
President's leverage in trade negotiations with China will be weakened.
  I would like to emphasize that I do not support China's entry into 
the World Trade Organization under any special arrangement that would 
allow China to avoid full compliance with WTO standards. However, 
China's accession to the WTO under normal commercial arrangements would 
be good

[[Page S11296]]

for the United States and good for the world trading system. It would 
require China to adhere to international trading standards. And should 
China fail to live up to its WTO obligations, we would then have access 
to the WTO's multilateral dispute resolution mechanisms. As long as 
China remains outside of the WTO, our only recourse for resolving our 
trade disputes with China is through the threat of often less effective 
bilateral actions, such as threats of section 301 trade sanctions.
  But once China becomes a member of the WTO under a viable commercial 
protocol, the rules of the WTO require other WTO nations to grant 
permanent MFN to China. If we do not, we lose much of the benefit of 
getting China to accept WTO rules. This is because the United States 
would be denied access to the WTO's dispute resolution process for 
forcing China to live up to its agreements. That is why this bill is so 
important.
  There are a great number of common misunderstanding over the annual 
debate on so-called most-favored-nation trading status for China. First 
of all, the archaic term ``most favored nation'' is itself misleading. 
MFN status is not, as many believe, some special trade benefit. It is 
not even the most favored trading status that we maintain with other 
countries. The United States grants much more favorable trade status to 
many other countries, including Canada, Israel, Mexico, the countries 
of the Caribbean, and a host of other nations--more than 130 in all--
that benefit from special trade programs. All MFN status means is that 
we are willing to maintain some semblance of regular trade relations 
with that country. This is demonstrated by the fact that only six 
countries in the world do not have MFN status.
  What is more, under current trade laws, there is no middle ground 
between full MFN trading status with average tariffs of 4 percent, and 
the disastrous 1930's-era Smoot-Hawley tariffs that average over 50 
percent. Let there be no doubt about the consequences of repealing MFN 
trading status for China: it would mean a virtual end to United States-
China trade relations.
  United States trade with China is important. Throughout the ages, 
commerce has been a driving force of modernity and the spread of 
western ideas. Withdrawing from China will not bring the kind of change 
we are all seeking in that still autocratic system. Isolating China 
economically would have a disastrous and counterproductive result.
  Nevertheless, there are serious trade issues between the United 
States and China that need to be resolved. This bill will make their 
resolution more likely. Nebraska is a major exporting state, with total 
exports last year of $2.45 billion of which $1.5 billion was food or 
agricultural products. Nebraska's meat exports to the world, primarily 
beef, grew 89 percent in the first half of this decade. United States 
beef exports to China, however, are severely constrained by China's 80 
percent tariffs. These levels must come down in the context of the WTO 
negotiations. China also maintains a wide range of trade restrictions 
that are illegal under WTO rules. These illegal trade barriers include 
unscientific health laws that entirely prohibit certain types of U.S. 
wheat exports.
  Mr. President, aggressive United States efforts to negotiate China's 
entry into the WTO under normal commercial arrangements is clearly in 
our national interest. The United States continues to run a large, 
persistent trade deficit with China. Last year, our deficit reached $39 
billion, and it is expected to be higher this year. But the way to 
reduce that deficit is not by closing off our borders and cutting off 
export markets, but to work aggressively to open those markets, 
particularly the China market.
  Export jobs pay 13-16 percent more than average American jobs. 
Exports are the future of our Nation, and we need to have China's 
market opened to American goods, services, and agricultural 
commodities.
                                 ______
                                 
  By Mr. INOUYE:
  S. 1328. A bill to amend the Communications Satellite Act of 1962 to 
promote competition and privatization in satellite communications, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.


 THE COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITE COMPETITION AND PRIVATIZATION ACT OF 1997

  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I introduce the Communications 
Satellite Competition and Privatization Act of 1997. This bill amends 
the Communications Satellite Act of 1962 in order to promote full 
competition in the global satellite communication services market by 
fully privatizing satellite communications. It is my intention that the 
introduction of this bill in the Senate will spur debate on this 
important issue. It is my goal to work with all of my colleagues and 
all other interested parties to address the issues presented in this 
bill.
  In 1962, the United States and other countries around the world 
recognized the increasingly important role the new and emerging 
satellite technology could play in facilitating worldwide 
communications. In enacting the Communications Satellite Act of 1962, 
Congress sought to improve the global communications network by 
implementing a global, commercial communications satellite system, 
expeditiously. INTELSAT, Inmarsat, and Comsat emerged as the network 
that would connect Americans to countries throughout the world.
  INTELSATE, Inmarsat, and Comsat have undoubtedly fulfilled their 
missions and have provided us with valuable services. Through their 
communications network, they have connected us whether we are on land 
or on water, by voice, video, and data transmissions, and across 
continents. They have also played a pivotal role in pioneering the 
delivery of satellite communications.
  However, in the 35 years since the act has been adopted, the 
marketplace has changed and the time is now ripe for us to revisit the 
act and put in place a policy that will take the industry and the 
American consumers into the future. Today, many U.S. and foreign 
satellite systems participate in the global satellite marketplace. 
There are also an increasing number of satellite systems seeking 
authority to participate in the marketplace. As additional satellite 
systems enter the marketplace, competition must continue to flourish 
and consumers must obtain needed services at reasonable prices. The 
treaty-based status and intergovernmental structure of INTELSAT, 
Inmarsat, and Comsat must not hinder the ability of these carriers to 
effectively compete in the future and must not distort competition in 
the marketplace.
  Today, many individuals in the government and in industry, nationally 
and worldwide are working on the privatization of INTELSAT and 
Inmarsat. There is a recognition that the status quo will not benefit 
the marketplace nor will it benefit INTELSAT and Inmarsat, or Comsat. 
My introduction of this bill is intended to establish a framework in 
which the Senate can begin a larger discussion of the issues and 
ultimately craft legislation that promotes the delivery of state-of-
the-art satellite communications and brings innovations and cost 
reductions to the public. I encourage my colleagues to join with me in 
supporting a policy that will continue to allow our satellite industry 
to grow and flourish and for consumers to receive the benefits of such 
advancements.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1328

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Communications Satellite 
     Competition and Privatization Act of 1997''.

      TITLE I--USE OF FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION LICENSING 
          REQUIREMENTS TO SECURE COMPETITION AND PRIVATIZATION

     SEC. 101. PURPOSE.

       It is the purpose of this Act to promote a fully 
     competitive global market for satellite communication 
     services for the benefit of consumers and providers of 
     satellite services and equipment by fully privatizing the 
     intergovernmental satellite organizations, INTELSAT and 
     INMARSAT.

     SEC. 102. REVISION OF COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITE ACT OF 1962.

       (a) Addition of New Title.--The Communications Satellite 
     Act of 1962 (47 U.S.C. 101) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new title:

[[Page S11297]]

        ``TITLE VI--COMMUNICATIONS COMPETITION AND PRIVATIZATION

      ``SUBTITLE A--ACTIONS TO ENSURE PROCOMPETITIVE PRIVATIZATION

     SEC. 601. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION LICENSING.

       ``(a) Licensing for Separated Entitles.--
       ``(1) Competition test.--The Commission may not issue a 
     license or construction permit to any separated entity, or 
     renew or permit the assignment or use of any such license or 
     permit, or authorize the use by any entity subject to United 
     States jurisdiction of any space segment owned or operated by 
     any separated entity, unless the Commission determines that 
     such issuance, renewal, assignment, or use will not harm 
     competition in the telecommunications market of the United 
     States. If the Commission does not make such a determination, 
     it shall deny or revoke authority to use space segment owned 
     or operated by the separated entity to provide services to, 
     from, or within the United States.
       ``(2) Criteria for competition test.--In making the 
     determination required by paragraph (1), the Commission shall 
     use the licensing criteria in sections 621 and 623, and shall 
     not make such a determination unless the Commission 
     determines that the privatization of any separated entity is 
     consistent with such criteria.
       ``(b) Licensing for INTELSAT, INMARSAT, and successor 
     entities.--
       ``(1) Competition test.--The Commission shall substantially 
     limit, deny, or revoke the authority for any entity subject 
     to United States jurisdiction to use space segment owned or 
     operated by INTELSAT or INMARSAT or any successor entities to 
     provide non-core services to, from, or within the United 
     States, unless the Commission determines--
       ``(A) after January 1, 2002, in the case of INTELSAT and 
     its successor entities, that INTELSAT and any successor 
     entities have been privatized in a manner that will not harm 
     competition in the telecommunications markets of the United 
     States; or
       ``(B) after January 1, 2001, in the case of INMARSAT and 
     its successor entities, that INMARSAT and any successor 
     entities have been privatized in a manner that will not harm 
     competition in the telecommunications markets of the United 
     States.
       ``(2) Criteria for competition test.--In making the 
     determination required by paragraph (1), the Commission use 
     the licensing criteria in sections 621, 622, and 624, and 
     shall not make such a determination unless the Commission 
     determines that such privatization is consistent with such 
     criteria.
       ``(c) Prevention of Expansion.--Pending privatization in 
     accordance with the licensing criteria in subtitle B, the 
     Commission shall not--
       ``(1) issue an authorization, license, or permit to, or 
     renew the license or permit of, any provider of services 
     using INTELSAT or INMARSAT space segment, or authorize the 
     use of such space segment, for additional services (including 
     additional applications of existing services) or additional 
     areas of business; or
       ``(2) otherwise assist the expansion of INTELSAT or 
     INMARSAT services, including through authorizing COMSAT's 
     investment in new INTELSAT or INMARSAT satellites or 
     registering for orbital slots intended for INTELSAT or 
     INMARSAT provision of additional services (including 
     additional applications of existing services) or additional 
     areas of business.

     ``SEC. 602. INTELSAT OR INMARSAT ORBITAL SLOTS.

       ``Unless, in a proceeding under section 601(b), the 
     Commission determines that INTELSAT or INMARSAT have been 
     privatized in a manner that will not harm competition, then--
       ``(1) the President shall oppose, and the Commission shall 
     not assist, any registration for new orbital slots for 
     INTELSAT or INMARSAT orbital slots--
       ``(A) with respect to INTELSAT, after January 1, 2002, and
       ``(B) with respect to INMARSAT, after January 1, 2001, and
       ``(2) the President and Commission shall, consistent with 
     the deadlines in paragraph (1), take all other necessary 
     measures to preclude procurement, registration, development, 
     or use of new satellites which would provide non-core 
     services.

  ``SUBTITLE B--FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION LICENSING CRITERIA: 
                         PRIVATIZATION CRITERIA

     ``SEC. 621. GENERAL CRITERIA TO ENSURE A PRO-COMPETITIVE 
                   PRIVATIZATION OF INTELSAT AND INMARSAT.

       ``The President and the Commission shall secure a pro-
     competitive privatization of INTELSAT and INMARSAT that meets 
     the criteria set forth in this section and sections 622 
     through 624. In securing such privatizations, the following 
     criteria shall be applied as licensing criteria for purposes 
     of subtitle A:
       ``(1) dates for privatization.--Privatization shall be 
     obtained in accordance with the criteria of this title of--
       ``(A) INTELSAT as soon as practicable, but no later than 
     January 1, 2002, and
       ``(B) INMARSAT as soon as practicable, but no later than 
     January 1, 2001.
       ``(2) Independence.--The successor entities and separated 
     entities of INTELSAT and INMARSAT resulting from the 
     privatization obtained pursuant to paragraph (1) shall--
       ``(A) be entities that are national corporations; and
       ``(B) have ownership and management that is independent 
     of--
       ``(i) any signatories or former signatories that control 
     access to national telecommunications markets; and
       ``(ii) any intergovernmental organization remaining after 
     the privatization.
       ``(3) Termination of privileges and immunities.--The 
     preferential treatment of INTELSAT and INMARSAT shall not be 
     extended to any successor entity or separated entity of 
     INTELSAT or INMARSAT. Such preferential treatment includes--
       ``(A) privileged or immune treatment by national 
     governments;
       ``(B) privileges or immunities or other competitive 
     advantages of the type accorded INTELSAT and INMARSAT and 
     their signatories though the terms and operation of the 
     INTELSAT Agreement and the associated Headquarters Agreement 
     and the INMARSAT Convention; and
       ``(C) preferential access to orbital slots.
       ``(4) Prevention of expansion during transition.--During 
     the transition period prior to full privatization, INTELSAT 
     and INMARSAT shall be precluded from expanding into 
     additional services (including additional applications of 
     existing services) or additional areas of business.
       ``(5) Conversion to stock corporations.--Any successor 
     entity or separated entity created out of INTELSAT or 
     INMARSAT shall be a national corporation established through 
     the execution of an initial public offering as follows:
       ``(A) Any successor entities and separated entities shall 
     be incorporated as private corporations subject to the laws 
     of the nation in which incorporated.
       ``(B) An initial public offering of securities of any 
     successor entity or separated entity shall be conducted no 
     later than--
       ``(i) January 1, 2001, for the successor entities of 
     INTELSAT; and
       ``(ii) January 1, 2000, for the successor entities of 
     INMARSAT.
       ``(C) The shares of any successor entities and separated 
     entities shall be listed for trading on one or more major 
     stock exchanges with transparent and effective securities 
     regulation.
       ``(D) A majority of the board of directors of any successor 
     entity or separated entity shall not be subject to selection 
     or appointment by, or otherwise serve as representatives of--
       ``(i) any signatory or former signatory that controls 
     access to national telecommunications markets; or
       ``(ii) any intergovernmental organization remaining after 
     the privatization.
       ``(E) Any transactions or other relationships between or 
     among any successor entity, separated entity, INTELSAT, or 
     INMARSAT shall be conducted on an arm's length basis.
       ``(6) Regulatory treatment.--Any successor entity or 
     separated entity shall apply through the appropriate national 
     licensing authorities for international frequency assignments 
     and associated orbital registrations for all satellites.
       ``(7) Competition policies in domiciliary country.--Any 
     successor entity or separated entity shall be incorporated 
     and headquartered in a nation or nations that--
       ``(A) have effective laws and regulations that secure 
     competition in telecommunications services;
       ``(B) are signatories of the World Trade Organization Basic 
     Telecommunications Services Agreement; and
       ``(C) have a schedule of commitments in such Agreement that 
     includes non-discriminatory market access to their satellite 
     markets.
       ``(8) Return of unused orbital slots.--INTELSAT, INMARSAT, 
     and any successor entities and separated entities shall not 
     be permitted to warehouse orbital slots that do not have 
     satellites that are providing commercial services, and any 
     orbital slots of INTELSAT or INMARSAT which are not in use or 
     brought into use providing commercial services as of May 12, 
     1997, or thereafter, shall be returned to the 
     International Telecommunication Union for reallocation.
       ``(9) Appraisal of assets.--Before any transfer of assets 
     by INTELSAT or INMARSAT to any successor entity or separated 
     entity, such assets shall be independently audited for 
     purposes of appraisal, at both book and fair market value.

     ``SEC. 622. SPECIFIC CRITERIA FOR INTELSAT.

       ``In securing the privatizations required by section 621, 
     the following additional criteria with respect to INTELSAT 
     privatization shall be applied as licensing criteria for 
     purposes of subtitle A:
       ``(1) Number of competitors.--The number of competitors in 
     the market served by INTELSAT, including the number of 
     competitors created out of INTELSAT, shall be sufficient to 
     create a fully competitive market.
       ``(2) Prevention of expansion during transition.--Pending 
     privatization in accordance with the criteria in this title, 
     INTELSAT shall not expand by receiving additional orbital 
     slots, placing new satellites in existing slots, or procuring 
     new or additional satellites, except for specified 
     replacement satellites for which construction contracts have 
     been executed as of May 12, 1997, and the United States shall 
     oppose such expansion--
       ``(A) in INTELSAT, including at the Assembly of Parties,
       ``(B) in the International Telecommunication Union,

[[Page S11298]]

       ``(C) through United States instructions to COMSAT,
       ``(D) in the Commission, through declining to facilitate 
     the registration of additional orbital slots or the provision 
     of additional services (including additional applications of 
     existing services) or additional areas of business; and
       ``(E) in other appropriate fora.
       ``(3) Technical coordination among signatories.--Technical 
     coordination shall not be used to impair competition or 
     competitors, and coordination under Article XIV(d) of the 
     INTELSAT Agreement shall be eliminated.

     ``SEC. 623. SPECIFIC CRITERIA FOR INTELSAT SEPARATED 
                   ENTITIES.

       ``In securing the privatizations required by section 621, 
     the following additional criteria with respect to any 
     INTELSAT separated entity shall be applied as licensing 
     criteria for purposes of subtitle A:
       ``(1) Date for public offering.--Within one year after any 
     decision to create any separated entity, a public offering of 
     the securities of such entity shall be conducted.
       ``(2) Privileges and immunities.--The privileges and 
     immunities of INTELSAT and its signatories shall be waived 
     with respect to any transactions with any separated entity, 
     and any limitations on private cause of action that would 
     otherwise generally be permitted against any separated entity 
     shall be eliminated.
       ``(3) Interlockig directorates or employees.--None of the 
     officers, directors, or employees of any separated entity 
     shall be individuals who are officers, directors, or 
     employees of INTELSAT.
       ``(4) Spectrum assignments.--After the initial transfer 
     which may accompany the creation of a separated entity, the 
     portions of the electromagnetic spectrum assigned on the date 
     of enactment of this Act to INTELSAT shall not be transferred 
     between INTELSAT and any separated entity.
       ``(5) Reaffiliation prohibited.--Any merger or ownership or 
     management ties or exclusive arrangements between a 
     privatized INTELSAT or any successor entity and any separated 
     entity shall be prohibited until 15 years after the 
     completion of INTELSAT privatization under this title.

     ``SEC. 624. SPECIFIC CRITERIA FOR INMARSAT.

       ``In securing the privatizations required by section 621, 
     the following additional criteria with respect to INMARSAT 
     privatization shall be applied as licensing criteria for 
     purposes of subtitle A:
       ``(1) Multiple signatories and direct access.--Multiple 
     signatories and direct access to INMARSAT shall be permitted.
       ``(2) Prevention of expansion during transition.--Pending 
     privatization in accordance with the criteria in this title, 
     INMARSAT should not expanded by receiving additional orbital 
     slots, placing new satellites in existing slots, or procuring 
     new or additional satellites, except for specified 
     replacement satellites for which construction contracts have 
     been executed as of May 12, 1997, and the United States shall 
     oppose such expansion--
       ``(A) in INMARSAT, including at the Council and Assembly of 
     Parties,
       ``(B) in the International Telecommunication Union,
       ``(C) through United States instructions to COMSAT,
       ``(D) in the Commission, through declining to facilitate 
     the registration of additional orbital slots or providing new 
     services or uses for existing slots, and
       ``(E) in other appropriate fora.
       ``(3) Number of competitors.--The number of competitors in 
     the markets served by INMARSAT, including the number of 
     competitors created out of INMARSAT, shall be sufficient to 
     create a fully competitive market.
       ``(4) Reaffiliation prohibited.--Any merger or ownership or 
     management ties or exclusive arrangements between INMARSAT or 
     any successor entity or separated entity and ICO shall be 
     prohibited until 15 years after the completion of INMARSAT 
     privatization under this title.
       ``(5) Interlocking directorates or employees.--None of the 
     officers, directors, or employees of INMARSAT or any 
     successor entity or separated entity shall be individuals who 
     are officers, directors, or employees of ICO.
       ``(6) Spectrum assignments.--The portions of the 
     electromagnetic spectrum assigned on the date of enactment of 
     this Act to INMARSAT--
       ``(A) shall, after January 1, 2006, or the date on which 
     the life of the current generation of INMARSAT satellites 
     ends, whichever is later, be made available for assignment to 
     all systems (including the privatized INMARSAT) on a non-
     discriminatory basis; and
       ``(B) shall not be transferred between INMARSAT and ICO.

         ``SUBTITLE C--DEREGULATION AND OTHER STATUTORY CHANGES

     ``SEC. 641. DIRECT ACCESS; TREATMENT OF COMSAT AS NONDOMINANT 
                   CARRIER.

       ``The Commission shall take such actions as may be 
     necessary--
       ``(1) to permit providers or users of telecommunications 
     services to obtain direct access to INTELSAT 
     telecommunications services as soon as practicable, but no 
     later than January 1, 2001;
       ``(2) to permit providers or users of telecommunications 
     services to obtain direct access to INMARSAT 
     telecommunications services as soon as practicable, but no 
     later than January 1, 2000; and
       ``(3) to treat COMSAT as a nondominant carrier for the 
     purposes of the Commission's regulations on the effective 
     date of the actions taken pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2), 
     respectively.

     ``SEC. 642. SIGNATORY ROLE.

       ``(a) Multiple Signatories Permitted.--
       ``(1) INTELSAT.--As soon as practicable, but no later than 
     January 1, 2001, multiple signatories shall be permitted to 
     represent the United States in INTELSAT.
       ``(2) INMARSAT.--As soon as practicable, but not later than 
     January 1, 2000, multiple signatories shall be permitted to 
     represent the United States in INMARSAT.
       ``(b) Elimination of COMSAT Privileges and Immunities.--
     Notwithstanding any other law or executive agreement, COMSAT 
     shall not be entitled to any privileges or immunities under 
     the laws of the United States or any State on the basis of 
     its status as a signatory of INTELSAT or INMARSAT.
       ``(c) Parity of Treatment.--Notwithstanding any other law 
     or executive agreement, the Commission shall have the 
     authority to impose similar regulatory fees on the United 
     States signatory which it imposes on other entities providing 
     similar services.

     ``SEC. 643. ELIMINATION OF PROCUREMENT PREFERENCES.

       ``Nothing in this Act or the Communications Act of 1934 
     shall be construed to authorize or require any preference, in 
     Federal Government procurement of telecommunications 
     services, for the satellite space segment provided by 
     INTELSAT, INMARSAT, or any successor entity or separated 
     entity.

     ``SEC. 644. USE OF ITU TECHNICAL COORDINATION.

       ``The Commission and United States satellite companies 
     shall utilize the International Telecommunication Union 
     procedures for technical coordination with INTELSAT and its 
     successor entities and separated entities, rather than 
     INTELSAT procedures.

     ``SEC. 645. TERMINATION OF COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITE ACT OF 
                   1962 PROVISIONS.

       ``Effective on the dates specified, the following 
     provisions of this Act shall cease to be effective:
       ``(1) Date of enactment of this title: Sections 101 and 
     102; paragraphs (1), (5) and (6) of section 201(a); section 
     301; section 303; section 304; section 502; and paragraphs 
     (2) and (4) of section 504(a).
       ``(2) On the effective date of the Commission's order that 
     establishes direct access to INTELSAT space segment: 
     Paragraphs (1), (3) through (5), and (8) through (10) of 
     section 201(c).
       ``(3) On the effective date of the Commission's order that 
     establishes direct access to INMARSAT space segment: 
     Subsections (a) through (d) of section 503.
       ``(4) On the effective date of the Commission order 
     determining under section 601(b)(2) that INMARSAT 
     privatization is consistent with criteria in sections 621 and 
     624: Section 504(b).
       ``(5) On the effective date of a Commission order 
     determining under section 601(b)(2) that INTELSAT 
     privatization is consistent with criteria in sections 621 and 
     622: Paragraphs (2) and (4) of section 201(a); section 
     201(c)(2); subsection (a) of section 403; and section 404.

     ``SEC. 646. REPORTS TO THE CONGRESS.

       ``(a) Annual Reports.--The President and the Commission 
     shall report to the Congress within 90 calendar days of the 
     enactment of this Act, and not less than annually thereafter, 
     on the progress made to achieve the objectives and carry out 
     the purposes and provisions of this Act. Such reports shall 
     be made available immediately to the public.
       ``(b) Contents of Reports.--The reports submitted pursuant 
     to subsection (a) shall include the following:
       ``(1) Progress with respect to each objective since the 
     most recent preceding report.
       ``(2) Views of the Parties with respect to privatization.
       ``(3) Views of industry and consumers on privatization.

     ``SEC. 647. CONSULTATION WITH CONGRESS.

       ``The President's designees and the Commission shall 
     consult with the Committee on Commerce of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation of the Senate prior to each meeting of the 
     INTELSAT or INMARSAT Assembly of Parties, the INTELSAT Board 
     of Governors, the INMARSAT Council, or appropriate working 
     group meetings.

     ``SEC. 648. SATELLITE AUCTIONS.

       ``Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Commission shall not have the authority to assign by 
     competitive bidding orbital slots or spectrum used for the 
     provision of international or global satellite communications 
     services. The President shall oppose in the International 
     Telecommunication Union and in other bilateral and 
     multilateral fora any assignment by competitive bidding of 
     orbital slots or spectrum used for the provision of such 
     services.

           ``SUBTITLE D--NEGOTIATIONS TO PURSUE PRIVATIZATION

     ``SEC. 661. METHODS TO PURSUE PRIVATIZATIONS.

       ``The President shall secure the pro-competitive 
     privatizations required by this title in a manner that meets 
     the criteria in subtitle B.

                       ``SUBTITLE E--DEFINITIONS

     ``SEC. 681. DEFINITIONS.

       ``(a) In General.--As used in this title:

[[Page S11299]]

       ``(1) INTELSAT.--The term `INTELSAT' means the 
     International Telecommunications Satellite Organization 
     established pursuant to the Agreement Relating to the 
     International Telecommunications Satellite Organization 
     (INTELSAT).
       ``(2) INMARSAT.--The term `INMARSAT' means the 
     International Mobile Satellite Organization established 
     pursuant to the Convention on the International Maritime 
     Organization.
       ``(3) Signatories.--The term `signatories'--
       ``(A) in the case of INTELSAT, or INTELSAT successors or 
     separated entities, means a Party, or the telecommunications 
     entity designated by a Party, that has signed the Operating 
     Agreement and for which such Agreement has entered into force 
     or to which such Agreement has been provisionally applied;
       ``(B) in the case of INMARSAT, or INMARSAT successors or 
     separated entities, means either a Party to, or an entity 
     that has been designated by a Party to sign, the Operating 
     Agreement.
       ``(4) Party.--The term `Party'--
       ``(A) in the case of INTELSAT, means a nation for which the 
     INTELSAT agreement has entered into force or been 
     provisionally applied; and
       ``(B) in the case of INMARSAT, means a nation for which the 
     INMARSAT convention has entered into force.
       ``(5) Commission.--The term `Commission' means the Federal 
     Communications Commission.
       ``(6) International Telecommunication Union.--The term 
     `International Telecommunication Union' means the 
     intergovernmental organization that is a specialized agency 
     of the United Nations in which member countries cooperate for 
     the development of telecommunications, including adoption of 
     international regulations governing terrestrial and space 
     uses of the frequency spectrum as well as use of the 
     geostationary satellite orbit.
       ``(7) Direct Access.--The term `direct access' means 
     arrangements for purchase of space segment capacity from, or 
     investment in (or both), INTELSAT or INMARSAT by means other 
     than through a signatory.
       ``(8) Successor entity.--The term `successor entity'--
       ``(A) means any privatized entity created from the 
     privatization of INTELSAT or INMARSAT or from the assets of 
     INTELSAT or INMARSAT, but
       ``(B) does not include any entity that is a separated 
     entity.
       ``(9) Separated entity.--The term `separated entity' means 
     a privatived entity to whom a portion of the assets owned by 
     INTELSAT or INMARSAT are transferred prior to full 
     privatization of INTELSAT or INMARSAT, including in 
     particular the entity whose structure was under discussion by 
     INTELSAT as of May 12, 1997, but excluding ICO.
       (10) Orbital slot.--The term `orbital slot' means the 
     location for placement of a satellite on the geostationary 
     orbital are as defined in the International Telecommunication 
     Union Radio Regulations.
       ``(11) Space segment.--The term `space segment' means the 
     satellites, and the tracking, telemetry, command, control, 
     monitoring and related facilities and equipment used to 
     support the operation of satellites owned or leased by 
     INTELSAT, INMARSAT, or a separated entity or successor 
     entity.
       ``(12) Non-core.--The term `non-core services' means, with 
     respect to INTELSAT provision, services other than public-
     switched network voice telephony and occasional-use 
     television, and with respect to INMARSAT provision, services 
     other than global maritime distress and safety services or 
     other existing maritime or aeronautical services for which 
     there are not alternative providers.
       ``(13) Additional services.--The term `additional services' 
     means Internet services, high-speed data, non-maritime or 
     non-aeronautical mobile services, Direct to Home (DTH) or 
     Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) video services, or Ka-band 
     services.
       ``(14) INTELSAT.--The term `INTELSAT' means the 
     International Telecommunications Satellite Organization.
       ``(15) INTELSAT agreement.--The term `INTELSAT Agreement' 
     means the Agreement Relating to the International 
     Telecommunications Satellite Organization (INTELSAT), 
     including all its annexes (TIAS 7532, 23 UST 3813).
       ``(16) Headquarters agreement.--The term `Headquarters 
     Agreement' means the International Telecommunication 
     Satellite Organization Headquarters Agreement (November 24, 
     1976) (TIAS8542, 28 UST 2248).
       ``(17) Operating agreement.--The term `Operating Agreement' 
     means--
       ``(A) in the case of INTELSAT, the agreement, including its 
     annex but excluding all titles of articles, opened for 
     signature at Washington on August 20, 1971, by Governments or 
     telecommunications entities designated by Governments in 
     accordance with the provisions of the Agreement, and
       ``(B) in the case of INMARSAT, the Operating Agreement on 
     the International Maritime Satellite Organization, including 
     its annexes.
       ``(18) INMARSAT Convention.--The term `INMARSAT Convention' 
     means the Convention on the International Maritime Satellite 
     Organization (INMARSAT) (TIAS 9605, 31 UST 1).
       ``(19) National corporation.--The term `national 
     corporation' means a corporation the ownership of which is 
     held through publicly traded securities, and that is 
     incorporated under, and subject to, the laws of a national, 
     state, or territorial government.
       ``(20) COMSAT.--The term `COMSAT' means the corporation 
     established pursuant to title III of the Communications 
     Satellite Act of 1962 (47 U.S.C. 731 et seq.)
       ``(21) ICO.--The term `ICO' means the company known, as of 
     the date of enactment of this Act, as ICO Global 
     Communications, Inc.
       ``(b) Common terminology.--Except as otherwise provided in 
     subsection (a), terms used in this Act that are defined in 
     section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934 have the meanings 
     provided in such section.'.

                          ____________________