[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 129 (Thursday, September 24, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10921-S10926]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Jeffords, Mrs. Hutchinson, Mr. 
        Feingold, Ms. Moseley-Braun, Mr. Moynihan, Mr. Gregg, Mr. 
        Sarbanes, Mr. Cleland, and Mr. Dodd):
  S. 2514. A bill to amend the Communications Act of 1934 to clarify 
State and local authority to regulate the placement, construction, and 
modification of broadcast transmission and telecommunications 
facilities, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation.


                     TELECOMMUNICATIONS LEGISLATION

 Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am pleased to continue my strong 
objections to proposed Federal Communications Commission rules that 
could rob states and communities of the authority to decide where 
unsightly telecommunications towers should be built.
  I am one of five Senators who voted against the Telecommunications 
Act of 1996. One of my fears was that the will and voice of states and 
local communities would be muzzled if that bill became law. 
Unfortunately, with the passage and implementation of the 
Telecommunications Act, my fears have been confirmed.
  Mayors and citizens in Vermont towns and in towns across this nation 
are outraged that they have little control over the construction of 
these towers. This is especially troubling when communications 
technology is advancing so rapidly that large towers may become 
obsolete.
  For example, some wireless phone providers offer the older analog 
wireless service. That is now being replaced by digital phone service 
in many parts of the nation. Analog providers could provide towerless 
service to towns by using an array of small antennas, instead of a 
large tower. Phone companies prefer to build one large tower with its 
switching equipment because that is cheaper than the switching 
equipment needed to control an array of small antennas. However, if a 
town does not want its landscape ruined with a tower, I think the 
company should be required to offer service through these smaller 
antennas.
  Second, for companies offering the ``newer'' digital wireless phone 
service, other technologies are eliminating the need for large towers. 
The Iridium Corporation will offer phone service throughout the United 
States in the near future that is based on more than 60 low-earth-orbit 
satellites. Over time, this will provide a satellite communications 
link from any place in the world, even where no tower-based system is 
available.
  In areas of the United States outside the range of cellular coverage 
the Iridium phone will connect you directly to the Iridium satellite 
network. Emergency communications--911 and disaster assistance--will be 
greatly aided with this development.
  Hospitals, ambulances and other emergency service providers will be 
linked together by satellite directly from a hand held phone.
  The Wall Street Journal reports that this service will cost more than 
regular cell phone service. However, they also report that other 
competitors and more efficiencies of scale are likely to bring down 
costs over time.
  In addition, I have previously discussed how the towerless PCS-Over-
Cable technology provides digital cellular phone service by using small 
antennas rather than large towers. These small antennas can be quickly 
attached to existing telephone poles, lamp posts or buildings and can 
provide quality wireless phone service without the use of towers. This 
technology is cheaper than most tower technology in part because the 
PCS-Over-Cable wireless provider does not have to purchase land to 
erect large towers.
  Since there are viable and reasonable alternatives to providing 
wireless phone service through the use of towers, I think that towns 
should have some say in this matter. And I think that mayors, town 
officials and local citizens will agree with me.
  Why should a large tower be forced on a town when wireless phone 
service can be provided without using a tower? Indeed, many argue that 
towerless phone service is much better in a disaster situation. During 
New England's ice storm, I am told that some towers collapsed. 
Tornadoes, earthquakes or hurricanes can destroy large telephone 
towers. But satellite phone service would not be affected by these 
disasters. Also, the PCS-Over-Cable technology is much less likely to 
be out of service for large areas during a disaster as compared to 
wireless phone service provided by large towers.
  In addition, other advances in communications technology may also 
make towers obsolete even faster than anticipated.
  This is one reason why I am so concerned about the federal government 
taking away the power of local communities to control where these 
towers are located. When big, unsightly towers are proposed to be 
located in the wrong place, towns should be able to just say no. And if 
the rules proposed by the FCC are implemented, towns will be further 
marginalized and even lose their input as to where the towers are 
placed.
  As I have said before, I do not want Vermont turned into a 
pincushion, with 200 foot towers indiscriminately sprouting up on every 
mountain and in every valley. I have heard from many Vermonters, as 
well as town leaders and citizens from across the country, who are 
justifiably afraid that they are losing control over the siting, 
design, and construction of telecommunications towers and related 
facilities. They feel that state and local concerns are being 
sacrificed to the interests of a small part of the telecommunications 
industry that uses large towers.
  Today I continue in my commitment to the preservation of state and 
local authority. I am joined by Senators Jeffords, Hutchinson, 
Moynihan, Feingold, Gregg, Moseley-Braun, Sarbanes, Dodd, and Cleland 
in introducing legislation which would repeal the authority of the FCC 
to preempt state and local regulations affecting the placement of new 
telecommunications towers. This legislation expands and improves upon 
S. 1350, which I introduced one year ago.
  Vermont communities and the state of Vermont must have a role in 
deciding where towers are going to go. They

[[Page S10922]]

must be able to take into account the protection of Vermont's scenic 
beauty. This is true for other states as well.
  In fact, by requiring the companies to work with Vermont towns, 
acceptable alternative locations of towers, acceptable co-location of 
antennas on existing towers, or the use of alternative towerless 
technology, could be suggested. This would be much better than allowing 
any company to just come in willy-nilly and plop down towers next to 
our backyards.
  In my view passage of this bill will actually promote better 
emergency phone service, better phone service in disasters and the more 
advanced digital wireless phone service.
  The bill I am introducing today will mandate that states and towns 
cannot be ignored in the spread of telecommunications towers. This bill 
will recognize that states and towns do have choices in this cellular 
age.
  This bill also incorporates the concerns of the aviation industry. 
The Federal Aviation Administration presently does not have authority 
to regulate the siting of towers. Airport officials work with local 
governments in the siting of towers. Silencing local governments will 
have a direct effect on airline safety, according to the 
representatives of the airline industry that we have heard from.
  In a comment letter responding to the FCC's proposed rule, the 
National Association of State Aviation Officials attacked preemption on 
the grounds that it ``is contrary to the most fundamental principles of 
aviation safety * * * the proposed rule could result in the creation of 
hazards to aircraft and passengers at airports across the United 
States, as well as jeopardize safety on the ground.'' I cannot think of 
anyone who would want towers constructed irrespective of the negative 
and potentially dangerous impacts they may have on airplane flight and 
landing patterns.
  Make no mistake. I am for progress, but not for ill-considered, so-
called progress at the expense of Vermont families, towns and 
homeowners. Vermont can protect its rural and natural beauty while 
still providing for the amazing opportunities offered by these 
technological advances.
  To deprive states of the ability to protect their land from unsightly 
towers is wrong, and the FCC rules should not stand. My legislation 
would reaffirm that states have a role to play in where 
telecommunications towers are placed and providing alternates to 
wireless providers.
  I ask unanimous consent that this new legislation be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2514

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

     SECTION 1. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The placement of commercial telecommunications, radio, 
     or television towers near homes can greatly reduce the value 
     of such homes, destroy the views from such homes, and reduce 
     substantially the desire to live in such homes.
       (2) States and localities should be able to exercise 
     control over the siting and modification of such towers 
     through the use of zoning, planned growth, and other controls 
     relating to the protection of the environment and public 
     safety.
       (3) There are alternatives to the construction of towers to 
     meet telecommunications and broadcast needs, including the 
     co-location of antennae on existing towers or structures, 
     towerless PCS-Over-Cable telephone service, satellite 
     television systems, low-Earth orbit satellite communication 
     networks, and other alternative technologies.
       (4) There are alternative methods of designing towers to 
     meet telecommunications and broadcast needs, including the 
     use of small towers that do not require blinking aircraft 
     safety lights, break skylines, or protrude above tree 
     canopies and that are camouflaged or disguised to blend with 
     their surroundings, or both.
       (5) On August 19, 1997, the Federal Communications 
     Commission issued a proposed rule, MM Docket No. 97-182, 
     which would preempt the application of State and local zoning 
     and land use ordinances regarding the placement of broadcast 
     transmission facilities. It is in the interest of the Nation 
     that the Commission not adopt this rule.
       (6) It is in the interest of the Nation that the memoranda 
     opinions and orders and proposed rules of the Commission with 
     respect to application of certain ordinances to the placement 
     of such towers (WT Docket No. 97-192, ET Docket No. 93-62, 
     RM-8577, and FCC 97-303, 62 F.R. 47960) be modified in order 
     to permit State and local governments to exercise their 
     zoning and land use authorities, and their power to protect 
     public health and safety, to regulate the placement of 
     telecommunications or broadcast towers and to place the 
     burden of proof in civil actions, and in actions before the 
     Commission relating to the placement of such towers, on the 
     person or entity that seeks to place, construct, or modify 
     such towers.
       (7) PCS-Over-Cable or satellite telecommunications systems, 
     including low-Earth orbit satellites, offer a significant 
     opportunity to provide so-called ``911'' emergency telephone 
     service throughout much of the United States.
       (8) According to the Comptroller General, the Commission 
     does not consider itself a health agency and turns to health 
     and radiation experts outside the Commission for guidance on 
     the issue of health effects of radio frequency exposure.
       (9) The Federal Aviation Administration does not have the 
     authority to regulate the siting of personal wireless 
     telephone or broadcast transmission towers near airports or 
     high-volume air traffic areas such as corridors of airspace 
     or commonly used flyways. The Commission's proposed rules to 
     preempt State and local zoning and land-use restrictions for 
     the siting of such towers will have a serious negative impact 
     on aviation safety, airport capacity and investment, and the 
     efficient use of navigable airspace.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are as follows:
       (1) To repeal certain limitations on State and local 
     authority regarding the placement, construction, and 
     modification of personal wireless service towers and related 
     facilities as such limitations arise under section 332(c)(7) 
     of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)).
       (2) To permit State and local governments--
       (A) in cases where the placement, construction, or 
     modification of personal wireless service telephone and 
     broadcast towers and other facilities is inconsistent with 
     State and local requirements or decisions, to require the use 
     of alternative telecommunication or broadcast technologies 
     when such alternative technologies are available; and
       (B) to regulate the placement of such towers so that their 
     location or modification will not interfere with the safe and 
     efficient use of public airspace or otherwise compromise or 
     endanger public safety.

     SEC. 2. STATE AND LOCAL AUTHORITY OVER PLACEMENT, 
                   CONSTRUCTION, AND MODIFICATION OF BROADCAST 
                   TRANSMISSION AND OTHER TELECOMMUNICATIONS 
                   FACILITIES.

       (a) Repeal of Limitations on Regulation of Personal 
     Wireless Facilities.--Section 332(c)(7)(B) of the 
     Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in clause (i), by striking ``thereof--'' and all that 
     follows through the end and inserting ``thereof shall not 
     unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally 
     equivalent services.'';
       (2) by striking clause (iv);
       (3) by redesignating clause (v) as clause (iv); and
       (4) in clause (iv), as so redesignated--
       (A) in the first sentence, by striking ``30 days after such 
     action or failure to act'' and inserting ``30 days after 
     exhaustion of any administrative remedies with respect to 
     such action or failure to act''; and
       (B) by striking the third sentence and inserting the 
     following: ``In any such action in which a person seeking to 
     place, construct, or modify a tower facility is a party, such 
     person shall bear the burden of proof.''.
       (b) Prohibition on Adoption of Rule Regarding Preemption of 
     State and Local Authority Over Broadcast Transmission 
     Facilities.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Federal Communications Commission may not adopt as a final 
     rule the proposed rule set forth in ``Preemption of State and 
     Local Zoning and Land Use Restrictions on Siting, Placement 
     and Construction of Broadcast Station Transmission 
     Facilities'', MM Docket No. 97-182, released August 19, 1997.
       (c) Authority Over Placement, Construction, and 
     Modification of Other Transmission Towers.--Part I of title 
     III of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) 
     is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 337. STATE AND LOCAL AUTHORITY OVER PLACEMENT, 
                   CONSTRUCTION, AND MODIFICATION OF 
                   TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND BROADCAST TOWERS.

       ``(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this Act, no provision of this Act may be interpreted to 
     authorize any person to place, construct, or modify a 
     broadcast tower or telecommunications tower in a manner that 
     is inconsistent with State or local law, or contrary to an 
     official decision of the appropriate State or local 
     government entity having authority to approve, license, 
     modify, or deny an application to place, construct, or modify 
     a tower, if alternate technology is capable of delivering the 
     broadcast or telecommunications signals without the use of a 
     tower.
       ``(b) Authority Regarding Production of Safety Studies.--No 
     provision of this Act may be interpreted to prohibit a State 
     or local government from--
       ``(1) requiring a person seeking authority to locate 
     telecommunications facilities or broadcast transmission 
     facilities within the jurisdiction of such government to 
     produce--

[[Page S10923]]

       ``(A) environmental studies, engineering reports, or other 
     documentation of the compliance of such facilities with radio 
     frequency exposure limits established by the Commission; and
       ``(B) documentation of the compliance of such facilities 
     with applicable Federal, State, and local aviation safety 
     standards or aviation obstruction standards regarding objects 
     effecting navigable airspace; or
       ``(2) refusing to grant authority to such person to locate 
     such facilities within the jurisdiction of such government if 
     such person fails to produce any studies, reports, or 
     documentation required under paragraph (1).''.
 Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I am pleased to join forces 
with Senators Leahy and Jeffords to introduce legislation which 
confirms that zoning decisions should be the providence of local 
governments, not overseen by the Federal Communications Commission 
through the use of preemption authority.
  It has been my position for some time that the FCC does not have a 
role to play in local zoning, right of way management and franchising 
decisions. I fought hard during consideration of the Communications Act 
of 1996 to ensure that local governments have the right to exercise 
these fundamental authorities. The issues associated with the use and 
value of property, public and private, are most appropriately 
considered at the levels of government closest to the citizenry. Local 
governments can balance the needs of commerce and the use of property. 
If their judgment is subject to question, it should be reviewed by the 
court system. It should not be checked by a federal regulator, who is 
far less able to calculate the totality of a community's interest.
  This legislation is needed because local governments have contended 
with a proposed FCC rule to preempt local authority over the placement 
of broadcast towers. The rule, I understand, has been withdrawn as a 
result of an agreement between the FCC, local and state government 
interests and telecommunications industry interests under the auspices 
of the FCC's ``Local and State Government Advisory Committee.'' This 
agreement provides for facilities siting guidelines and informal 
dispute resolution. I applaud this agreement. I believe it represents 
the reality that local governments, in the main, do want to work 
cooperatively with telecommunications providers who want to serve the 
residents of a community.
  However, I believe that this legislation is still necessary. The FCC 
simply should not have the authority to preempt local zoning decisions.
  I look forward to working on the progress of this bill with my co-
sponsors and appreciate the opportunity to act in support of the 
exercise of local authority.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. REID:
  S. 2515. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to 
increase the amount of Social Security benefits exempt from tax for 
single taxpayers; to the Committee on Finance.


                SENIOR CITIZEN TAX REDUCTION ACT OF 1998

 Mr. REID. Mr. President, today I introduce legislation which 
will help alleviate a tax burden for senior citizens with modest 
incomes.
  Until 1984, Federal taxes were not imposed on social security 
benefits. People pay taxes their whole working life for social security 
benefits and I do not believe that these payments should be taxed when 
they retire.
  This legislation will help those single persons, widows and widowers 
with moderate incomes to keep more of their own money in their own 
pockets. When you responsibly plan for your retirement, you should be 
able to count on your government to meet its obligations under the 
contract you've made with social security.
  Under current law, there is first, a calculation to determine whether 
any of your social security benefits are taxable. The base amount is 
$25,000 for singles and $32,000 for married persons. This base amount 
is figured by taking one-half of your social security benefits and 
adding in your other income. If you are single and the result is under 
$25,000, you don't pay taxes on your social security benefit. If the 
amount is over this base amount, then a further calculation is done to 
figure what portion of your social security benefit is taxable.
  This further calculation determines how much of a person's benefit is 
taxed and the answer depends on the total amount of a person's social 
security benefit and their other income. Right now, if the total of 
one-half of your benefits and all your other income is more than 
$34,000 for a single person and $44,000 for married persons, up to 85% 
of your benefits could be taxable. My legislation increases the single 
amount to $44,000.
  Let me give you an example of the effect my law would have. A widow 
has $37,000 total income consisting of $10,000 in social security 
benefits and $27,000 in other income. So for this widow, she adds half 
of her social security benefit which is $5,000 and her other income of 
$27,000 for a total of $32,000. Under the current law, since she has 
over $25,000 total income, she does the next calculation. The result is 
that she has to include $3,500 of her social security benefits in her 
adjusted gross income. Under my legislation, none of her social 
security benefits would be taxable.
  While I realize that this may be considered a small step in removing 
an unfair tax burden, it is also an important first step to those 
seniors who have made America the greatest country in the world. I 
encourage the committee to give favorable consideration to our 
legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Mr. Durbin):
  S. 2516. A bill to make improvements in the operation and 
administration of the Federal courts, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on the Judiciary.


               the federal courts improvement act of 1998

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today, along with my colleague from 
Illinois, Senator Durbin, I am introducing the Federal Courts 
Improvement Act of 1998. As chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on 
Administrative Oversight and the Courts, it is my responsibility to 
review federal court processes and procedures. Every two years or so, 
the Congress receives an official request from the Judicial Conference, 
the governing body of the federal courts, that include changes in the 
law the Judicial Conference believes is necessary to improve the 
functioning of the courts.
  After reviewing the latest official request from the Judicial 
Conference, Senator Durbin, who is the ranking member of the 
subcommittee, and I worked together in putting together a modification 
of this request to introduce as legislation. We are introducing this 
legislation today.
  The bill contains four different titles including numerous changes in 
subjects such as judicial financial administration, judicial process 
improvements, judicial personnel administration, other personnel 
matters and federal public defenders. While many of these items may not 
be essential for the court system to operate, they will certainly help 
the system function better, and hopefully, more effectively.
  Mr. President, it is my hope that we can consider this bill and pass 
it during these last few weeks of this Congress. I will work with 
Senator Durbin to try and make that happen. I urge my colleagues to 
support us in this effort.
  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. 2516

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Federal 
     Courts Improvement Act of 1998.''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title and table of contents.

               TITLE I--JUDICIAL FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION

Sec. 101. Extension of Judiciary Information Technology Fund.
Sec. 102. Bankruptcy fees.
Sec. 103. Disposition of miscellaneous fees.

                TITLE II--JUDICIAL PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS

Sec. 201. Extension of statutory authority for magistrate judge 
              positions to be established in the district courts of 
              Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands.
Sec. 202. Magistrate judge contempt authority.
Sec. 203. Consent to magistrate judge authority in petty offense cases 
              and magistrate judge authority in misdemeanor cases 
              involving juvenile defendants.

[[Page S10924]]

Sec. 204. Savings and loan data reporting requirements.
Sec. 205. Membership in circuit judicial councils.
Sec. 206. Sunset of civil justice expense and delay reduction plans.
Sec. 207. Repeal of Court of Federal Claims filing fee.
Sec. 208. Technical bankruptcy correction.
Sec. 209. Technical amendment relating to the treatment of certain 
              bankruptcy fees collected.

TITLE III--JUDICIAL PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION, BENEFITS, AND PROTECTIONS

Sec. 301. Judicial administrative officials retirement matters.
Sec. 302. Travel expenses of judges.
Sec. 303. Transfer of county to Middle District of Pennsylvania.
Sec. 304. Payments to military survivors benefits plan.
Sec. 305. Creation of certifying officers in the judicial branch.
Sec. 306. Authority to prescribe fees for technology resources in the 
              courts.

                   TITLE IV--FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDERS

Sec. 401. Tort Claims Act amendment relating to liability of Federal 
              public defenders.

               TITLE I--JUDICIAL FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION

     SEC. 101. EXTENSION OF JUDICIARY INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FUND.

       Section 612 of title 28, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking ``equipment'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``resources'';
       (2) by striking subsection (f) and redesignating subsequent 
     subsections accordingly;
       (3) in subsection (g), as so redesignated, by striking 
     paragraph (3); and
       (4) in subsection (i), as so redesignated--
       (A) by striking ``Judiciary'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``judiciary'';
       (B) by striking ``subparagraph (c)(1)(B)'' and inserting 
     ``subsection (c)(1)(B)''; and
       (C) by striking ``under (c)(1)(B)'' and inserting ``under 
     subsection (c)(1)(B)''.

     SEC. 102. BANKRUPTCY FEES.

       Subsection (a) of section 1930 of title 28, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(7) In districts that are not part of a United States 
     trustee region as defined in section 581 of this title, the 
     Judicial Conference of the United States may require the 
     debtor in a case under chapter 11 of title 11 to pay fees 
     equal to those imposed by paragraph (6) of this subsection. 
     Such fees shall be deposited as offsetting receipts to the 
     fund established under section 1931 of this title and shall 
     remain available until expended.''.

     SEC. 103. DISPOSITION OF MISCELLANEOUS FEES.

       For fiscal year 1999 and thereafter, any portion of 
     miscellaneous fees collected as prescribed by the Judicial 
     Conference of the United States pursuant to sections 1913, 
     1914(b), 1926(a), 1930(b), and 1932 of title 28, United 
     States Code, exceeding the amount of such fees in effect on 
     September 30, 1998, shall be deposited into the special fund 
     of the Treasury established under section 1931 of title 28, 
     United States Code.

                TITLE II--JUDICIAL PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS

     SEC. 201. EXTENSION OF STATUTORY AUTHORITY FOR MAGISTRATE 
                   JUDGE POSITIONS TO BE ESTABLISHED IN THE 
                   DISTRICT COURTS OF GUAM AND THE NORTHERN 
                   MARIANA ISLANDS.

       Section 631 of title 28, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking the first two sentences of subsection (a) 
     and inserting the following: ``The judges of each United 
     States district court and the district courts of the Virgin 
     Islands, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands shall appoint 
     United States magistrate judges in such numbers and to serve 
     at such locations within the judicial districts as the 
     Judicial Conference may determine under this chapter. In the 
     case of a magistrate judge appointed by the district court of 
     the Virgin Islands, Guam, or the Northern Mariana Islands, 
     this chapter shall apply as though the court appointing such 
     a magistrate judge were a United States district court.''; 
     and
       (2) by inserting in the first sentence of paragraph (1) of 
     subsection (b) after ``Commonwealth of Puerto Rico,'' the 
     following: ``the Territory of Guam, the Commonwealth of the 
     Northern Mariana Islands,''.

     SEC. 202. MAGISTRATE JUDGE CONTEMPT AUTHORITY.

       Section 636(e) of title 28, United States Code, is amended 
     to read as follows:
       ``(e) Contempt Authority.--
       ``(1) In general.--A United States magistrate judge serving 
     under this chapter shall have within the territorial 
     jurisdiction prescribed by his or her appointment the power 
     to exercise contempt authority as set forth in this 
     subsection.
       ``(2) Summary criminal contempt authority.--A magistrate 
     judge shall have the power to punish summarily by fine or 
     imprisonment such contempt of his or her authority 
     constituting misbehavior of any person in the magistrate 
     judge's presence so as to obstruct the administration of 
     justice. The order of contempt shall be issued pursuant to 
     the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
       ``(3) Additional criminal contempt authority in civil 
     consent and misdemeanor cases.--In any case in which a United 
     States magistrate judge presides with the consent of the 
     parties under subsection (c) of this section, and in any 
     misdemeanor case proceeding before a magistrate judge under 
     section 3401 of title 18, the magistrate judge shall have the 
     power to punish by fine or imprisonment criminal contempt 
     constituting disobedience or resistance to the magistrate 
     judge's lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or 
     command. Disposition of such contempt shall be conducted upon 
     notice and hearing pursuant to the Federal Rules of Criminal 
     Procedure.
       ``(4) Civil contempt authority in civil consent and 
     misdemeanor cases.--In any case in which a United States 
     magistrate judge presides with the consent of the parties 
     under subsection (c) of this section, and in any misdemeanor 
     case proceeding before a magistrate judge under section 3401 
     of title 18, the magistrate judge may exercise the civil 
     contempt authority of the district court. This paragraph 
     shall not be construed to limit the authority of a magistrate 
     judge to order sanctions pursuant to any other statute, the 
     Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or the Federal Rules of 
     Criminal Procedure.
       ``(5) Criminal contempt penalties.--The sentence imposed by 
     a magistrate judge for any criminal contempt provided for in 
     paragraphs (2) and (3) shall not exceed the penalties for a 
     Class C misdemeanor as set forth in sections 3581(b)(8) and 
     3571(b)(6) of title 18.
       ``(6) Certification of other contempts to the district 
     court.--Upon the commission of any such act--
       ``(A) in any case in which a United States magistrate judge 
     presides with the consent of the parties under subsection (c) 
     of this section, or in any misdemeanor case proceeding before 
     a magistrate judge under section 3401 of title 18, that may, 
     in the opinion of the magistrate judge, constitute a serious 
     criminal contempt punishable by penalties exceeding those set 
     forth in paragraph (5) of this subsection; or
       ``(B) in any other case or proceeding under subsection (a) 
     or (b) of this section, or any other statute, where--
       ``(i) the act committed in the magistrate judge's presence 
     may, in the opinion of the magistrate judge, constitute a 
     serious criminal contempt punishable by penalties exceeding 
     those set forth in paragraph (5) of this subsection;
       ``(ii) the act that constitutes a criminal contempt occurs 
     outside the presence of the magistrate judge; or
       ``(iii) the act constitutes a civil contempt,

     the magistrate judge shall forthwith certify the facts to a 
     district judge and may serve or cause to be served upon any 
     person whose behavior is brought into question under this 
     paragraph an order requiring such person to appear before a 
     district judge upon a day certain to show cause why he or she 
     should not be adjudged in contempt by reason of the facts so 
     certified. The district judge shall thereupon hear the 
     evidence as to the act or conduct complained of and, if it is 
     such as to warrant punishment, punish such person in the same 
     manner and to the same extent as for a contempt committed 
     before a district judge.
       ``(7) Appeals of magistrate judge contempt orders.--The 
     appeal of an order of contempt pursuant to this subsection 
     shall be made to the court of appeals in cases proceeding 
     under subsection (c) of this section. In any other proceeding 
     in which a United States magistrate judge presides under 
     subsection (a) or (b) of this section, section 3401 of title 
     18, or any other statute, the appeal of a magistrate judge's 
     summary contempt order shall be made to the district 
     court.''.

     SEC. 203. CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE AUTHORITY IN PETTY 
                   OFFENSE CASES AND MAGISTRATE JUDGE AUTHORITY IN 
                   MISDEMEANOR CASES INVOLVING JUVENILE 
                   DEFENDANTS.

       (a) Amendments to Title 18.--
       (1) Petty offense cases.--Section 3401(b) of title 18, 
     United States Code, is amended by striking ``that is a class 
     B misdemeanor charging a motor vehicle offense, a class C 
     misdemeanor, or an infraction,'' after ``petty offense''.
       (2) Cases involving juveniles.--Section 3401(g) of title 
     18, United States Code, is amended--
       (A) by striking the first sentence and inserting the 
     following: ``The magistrate judge may, in a petty offense 
     case involving a juvenile, exercise all powers granted to the 
     district court under chapter 403 of this title.'';
       (B) in the second sentence by striking ``any other class B 
     or C misdemeanor case'' and inserting ``the case of any 
     misdemeanor, other than a petty offense,''; and
       (C) by striking the last sentence.
       (b) Amendments to Title 28.--Section 636(a) of title 28, 
     United States Code, is amended by striking paragraphs (4) and 
     (5) and inserting in the following:
       ``(4) the power to enter a sentence for a petty offense; 
     and
       ``(5) the power to enter a sentence for a class A 
     misdemeanor in a case in which the parties have consented.''.

     SEC. 204. SAVINGS AND LOAN DATA REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

       Section 604 of title 28, United States Code, is amended in 
     subsection (a) by striking the second paragraph designated 
     (24).

     SEC. 205. MEMBERSHIP IN CIRCUIT JUDICIAL COUNCILS.

       Section 332(a) of title 28, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:

[[Page S10925]]

       ``(3) Except for the chief judge of the circuit, either 
     judges in regular active service or judges retired from 
     regular active service under section 371(b) of this title may 
     serve as members of the council. Service as a member of a 
     judicial council by a judge retired from regular active 
     service under section 371(b) may not be considered for 
     meeting the requirements of section 371(f) (1)(A), (B), or 
     (C).''; and
       (2) in paragraph (5) by striking ``retirement,'' and 
     inserting ``retirement under section 371(a) or section 372(a) 
     of this title,''.

     SEC. 206. SUNSET OF CIVIL JUSTICE EXPENSE AND DELAY REDUCTION 
                   PLANS.

       Section 103(b)(2)(A) of the Civil Justice Reform Act of 
     1990 (Public Law 101-650; 104 Stat. 5096; 28 U.S.C. 471 
     note), as amended by Public Law 105-53 (111 Stat. 1173), is 
     amended by inserting ``471,'' after ``sections''.

     SEC. 207. REPEAL OF COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS FILING FEE.

       Section 2520 of title 28, United States Code, and the item 
     relating to such section in the table of contents for chapter 
     165 of such title, are repealed.

     SEC. 208. TECHNICAL BANKRUPTCY CORRECTION.

       Section 1228 of title 11, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking ``1222(b)(10)'' each place it appears and inserting 
     ``1222(b)(9)''.

     SEC. 209. TECHNICAL AMENDMENT RELATING TO THE TREATMENT OF 
                   CERTAIN BANKRUPTCY FEES COLLECTED.

       (a) Amendment.--The first sentence of section 406(b) of the 
     Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, 
     and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1990 (Public Law 
     101-162; 103 Stat. 1016; 28 U.S.C. 1931 note) is amended by 
     striking ``service enumerated after item 18'' and inserting 
     ``service not of a kind described in any of the items 
     enumerated as items 1 through 7 and as items 9 through 18, as 
     in effect on November 21, 1989,''.
       (b) Application of Amendment.--The amendment made by 
     subsection (a) shall not apply with respect to fees collected 
     before the date of the enactment of this Act.

TITLE III--JUDICIAL PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION, BENEFITS, AND PROTECTIONS

     SEC. 301. JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS RETIREMENT 
                   MATTERS.

       (a) Director of Administrative Office.--Section 611 of 
     title 28, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (d), by inserting ``a congressional 
     employee in the capacity of primary administrative assistant 
     to a Member of Congress or in the capacity of staff director 
     or chief counsel for the majority or the minority of a 
     committee or subcommittee of the Senate or House of 
     Representatives,'' after ``Congress,'';
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by striking ``who has served at least fifteen years 
     and'' and inserting ``who has at least fifteen years of 
     service and has''; and
       (B) in the first undesignated paragraph, by striking ``who 
     has served at least ten years,'' and inserting ``who has at 
     least ten years of service,''; and
       (3) in subsection (c)--
       (A) by striking ``served at least fifteen years,'' and 
     inserting ``at least fifteen years of service,''; and
       (B) by striking ``served less than fifteen years,'' and 
     inserting ``less than fifteen years of service,''.
       (b) Director of the Federal Judicial Center.--Section 627 
     of title 28, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (e), by inserting ``a congressional 
     employee in the capacity of primary administrative assistant 
     to a Member of Congress or in the capacity of staff director 
     or chief counsel for the majority or the minority of a 
     committee or subcommittee of the Senate or House of 
     Representatives,'' after ``Congress,'';
       (2) in subsection (c)--
       (A) by striking ``who has served at least fifteen years 
     and'' and inserting ``who has at least fifteen years of 
     service and has''; and
       (B) in the first undesignated paragraph, by striking ``who 
     has served at least ten years,'' and inserting ``who has at 
     least ten years of service,''; and
       (3) in subsection (d)--
       (A) by striking ``served at least fifteen years,'' and 
     inserting ``at least fifteen years of service,''; and
       (B) by striking ``served less than fifteen years,'' and 
     inserting ``less than fifteen years of service,''.

     SEC. 302. TRAVEL EXPENSES OF JUDGES.

       Section 456 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(h)(1) In this subsection, the term `travel expenses'--
       ``(A) means the expenses incurred by a judge for travel 
     that is not directly related to any case assigned to such 
     judge; and
       ``(B) shall not include the travel expenses of a judge if--
       ``(i) the payment for the travel expenses is paid by such 
     judge from the personal funds of such judge; and
       ``(ii) such judge does not receive funds (including 
     reimbursement) from the United States or any other person or 
     entity for the payment of such travel expenses.
       ``(2)(A) Each circuit judge of a court of appeals shall 
     annually submit the information required under paragraph (3) 
     to the chief judge for the circuit in which the judge is 
     assigned.
       ``(B) Each district judge shall annually submit the 
     information required under paragraph (3) to the chief judge 
     for the district in which the judge is assigned.
       ``(3)(A) Each chief judge of each circuit and each district 
     shall submit an annual report to the Director of the 
     Administrative Office of the United States Courts on the 
     travel expenses of each judge assigned to the applicable 
     circuit or district (including the travel expenses of the 
     chief judge of such circuit or district).
       ``(B) The annual report under this paragraph shall 
     include--
       ``(i) the travel expenses of each judge, with the name of 
     the judge to whom the travel expenses apply;
       ``(ii) a description of the subject matter and purpose of 
     the travel relating to each travel expense identified under 
     clause (i), with the name of the judge to whom the travel 
     applies; and
       ``(iii) the number of days of each travel described under 
     clause (ii), with the name of the judge to whom the travel 
     applies.
       ``(4)(A) The Director of the Administrative Office of the 
     United States Courts shall--
       ``(i) consolidate the reports submitted under paragraph (3) 
     into a single report; and
       ``(ii) annually submit such consolidated report to 
     Congress.
       ``(B) The consolidated report submitted under this 
     paragraph shall include the specific information required 
     under paragraph (3)(B), including the name of each judge with 
     respect to clauses (i), (ii), and (iii) of paragraph 
     (3)(B).''.

     SEC. 303. TRANSFER OF COUNTY TO MIDDLE DISTRICT OF 
                   PENNSYLVANIA.

       (a) Transfer.--Section 118 of title 28, United States Code, 
     is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a) by striking ``Philadelphia, and 
     Schuylkill'' and inserting ``and Philadelphia''; and
       (2) in subsection (b) by inserting ``Schuylkill,'' after 
     ``Potter,''.
       (b) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--This section and the amendments made by 
     this section shall take effect 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.
       (2) Pending cases not affected.--This section and the 
     amendments made by this section shall not affect any action 
     commenced before the effective date of this section and 
     pending on such date in the United States District Court for 
     the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
       (3) Juries not affected.--This section and the amendments 
     made by this section shall not affect the composition, or 
     preclude the service, of any grand or petit jury summoned, 
     impaneled, or actually serving on the effective date of this 
     section.

     SEC. 304. PAYMENTS TO MILITARY SURVIVORS BENEFITS PLAN.

       Section 371(e) of title 28, United States Code, is amended 
     by inserting after ``such retired or retainer pay'' the 
     following: ``, except such pay as is deductible from the 
     retired or retainer pay as a result of participation in any 
     survivor's benefits plan in connection with the retired 
     pay,''.

     SEC. 305. CREATION OF CERTIFYING OFFICERS IN THE JUDICIAL 
                   BRANCH.

       (a) Appointment of Disbursing and Certifying Officers.--
     Chapter 41 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new section:

     ``Sec. 613. Disbursing and certifying officers

       ``(a) Disbursing Officers.--The Director may designate in 
     writing officers and employees of the judicial branch of the 
     Government, including the courts as defined in section 610 
     other than the Supreme Court, to be disbursing officers in 
     such numbers and locations as the Director considers 
     necessary. Such disbursing officers shall--
       ``(1) disburse moneys appropriated to the judicial branch 
     and other funds only in strict accordance with payment 
     requests certified by the Director or in accordance with 
     subsection (b);
       ``(2) examine payment requests as necessary to ascertain 
     whether they are in proper form, certified, and approved; and
       ``(3) be held accountable for their actions as provided by 
     law, except that such a disbursing officer shall not be held 
     accountable or responsible for any illegal, improper, or 
     incorrect payment resulting from any false, inaccurate, or 
     misleading certificate for which a certifying officer is 
     responsible under subsection (b).
       ``(b) Certifying Officers.--(1) The Director may designate 
     in writing officers and employees of the judicial branch of 
     the Government, including the courts as defined in section 
     610 other than the Supreme Court, to certify payment requests 
     payable from appropriations and funds. Such certifying 
     officers shall be responsible and accountable for--
       ``(A) the existence and correctness of the facts recited in 
     the certificate or other request for payment or its 
     supporting papers;
       ``(B) the legality of the proposed payment under the 
     appropriation or fund involved; and
       ``(C) the correctness of the computations of certified 
     payment requests.
       ``(2) The liability of a certifying officer shall be 
     enforced in the same manner and to the same extent as 
     provided by law with respect to the enforcement of the 
     liability of disbursing and other accountable officers. A 
     certifying officer shall be required to make restitution to 
     the United States for the amount of any illegal, improper, or 
     incorrect payment resulting from any false, inaccurate, or 
     misleading certificates made by

[[Page S10926]]

     the certifying officer, as well as for any payment prohibited 
     by law or which did not represent a legal obligation under 
     the appropriation or fund involved.
       ``(c) Rights.--A certifying or disbursing officer--
       ``(1) has the right to apply for and obtain a decision by 
     the Comptroller General on any question of law involved in a 
     payment request presented for certification; and
       ``(2) is entitled to relief from liability arising under 
     this section in accordance with title 31.
       ``(d) Other Authority Not Affected.--Nothing in this 
     section affects the authority of the courts with respect to 
     moneys deposited with the courts under chapter 129 of this 
     title.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for 
     chapter 41 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following item:

``613. Disbursing and certifying officers.''.
       (c) Rule of Construction.--The amendment made by subsection 
     (a) shall not be construed to authorize the hiring of any 
     Federal officer or employee.
       (d) Duties of Director.--Paragraph (8) of subsection (a) of 
     section 604 of title 28, United States Code, is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(8) Disburse appropriations and other funds for the 
     maintenance and operation of the courts;''.

     SEC. 306. AUTHORITY TO PRESCRIBE FEES FOR TECHNOLOGY 
                   RESOURCES IN THE COURTS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 41 of title 28, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 614. Authority to prescribe fees for technology 
       resources in the courts

       ``The Judicial Conference is authorized to prescribe 
     reasonable fees pursuant to sections 1913, 1914, 1926, 1930, 
     and 1932, for collection by the courts for use of information 
     technology resources provided by the judiciary for remote 
     access to the courthouse by litigants and the public, and to 
     facilitate the electronic presentation of cases. Fees under 
     this section may be collected only to cover the costs of 
     making such information technology resources available for 
     the purposes set forth in this section. Such fees shall not 
     be required of persons financially unable to pay them. All 
     fees collected under this section shall be deposited in the 
     Judiciary Information Technology Fund and be available to the 
     Director without fiscal year limitation to be expended on 
     information technology resources developed or acquired to 
     advance the purposes set forth in this section.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for 
     chapter 41 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new item:

``614. Authority to prescribe fees for technology resources in the 
              courts.''.
       (c) Technical Amendment.--Chapter 123 of title 28, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating the section 1932 entitled ``Revocation 
     of earned release credit'' as section 1933 and placing it 
     after the section 1932 entitled ``Judicial Panel on 
     Multidistrict Litigation''; and
       (2) in the table of sections by striking the 2 items 
     relating to section 1932 and inserting the following:

``1932. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.
``1933. Revocation of earned release credit.''.

                   TITLE IV--FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDERS

     SEC. 401. TORT CLAIMS ACT AMENDMENT RELATING TO LIABILITY OF 
                   FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDERS.

       Section 2671 of title 28, United States Code, is amended in 
     the second undesignated paragraph--
       (1) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``includes''; and
       (2) by striking the period at the end and inserting the 
     following: ``, and (2) any officer or employee of a Federal 
     public defender organization, except when such officer or 
     employee performs professional services in the course of 
     providing representation under section 3006A of title 18.''.
                                 ______
                                 

                             By Mr. GRAMS:

  S. 2517. A bill to amend the Federal Crop Insurance Act to establish 
a pilot program commencing in crop year 2000 for a period of 2 years in 
certain States to provide improved crop insurance options for 
producers; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.

                          ____________________