[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 62 (Thursday, May 18, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4191-S4207]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mr. Abraham, Mr. Leahy, Mr.
Jeffords, Mr. Reid, Mr. Moynihan, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Graham, Mr.
Durbin, and Mr. DeWine):
S. 2586. A bill to reduce the backlog in the processing of
immigration benefit applications and to make improvements to
infrastructure necessary for the effective provision of immigration
services, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
immigration services and infrastructure improvements act of 2000
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing bipartisan
legislation that, if enacted, will enable the Immigration and
Naturalization Service (INS) to cut through and eventually eliminate
the unacceptably long backlogs in its processing of applications for
naturalization, adjustment of status, and other immigration benefits.
I am pleased that Senators Abraham, Jeffords, DeWine, Leahy, Reid,
Moynihan, Mikulski, Graham, and Durbin have joined me as original
cosponsors of this important bill.
All of us have heard the horror stories of the long delays in
processing naturalization and immigration applications. What was once a
6-month process has now become a 3- to 4-year ordeal.
The ``Immigration Services and Infrastructure Improvement Act of
2000,'' which I am introducing today, would provide the Immigration and
Naturalization Service with the direction and resources it needs to
reduce the current immigration backlogs and hold it accountable to get
the job done.
It is unacceptable that millions of people who have followed our
nation's laws, made outstanding contributions to our nation, and paid
the requisite fees have had to wait months--and in too many cases,
years--to obtain the immigration services they need. The enormous
delays in processing have had a negative impact on the reunification of
spouses and minor children, and on businesses seeking to employ
essential workers to help keep them globally competitive.
The fact is, there are many victims of an agency that is in dire need
of a change in the way it does business. Today, it has become all too
clear that the INS needs to re-engineer its adjudication process, which
will require both additional resources and strong congressional
direction and oversight.
The ``Immigration Services and Infrastructure Improvement Act'' would
enable millions of law-abiding residents, immigrants, and businesses,
who have played by the rules and paid fees to the INS, to have their
applications processed in a timely manner.
This bill evolved from discussions with immigration advocates, the
business community, State and local leaders, and the Administration.
Specifically, this legislation would do three things.
First, it would create a separate ``Immigration Services and
Infrastructure Improvement Account'' (``Account'') and authorize such
sums as may be necessary to fund it.
This account would permit the INS to fund across several fiscal years
infrastructure improvements, including additional staff, computer
records management, fingerprinting, and nationwide computer
integration. Moreover, it would pay for these infrastructure
improvements through direct appropriations rather than through
increased application fees.
Second, the ``Immigration Services and Infrastructure Improvement Act
of 2000'' would require the INS to put together a plan on how it will
eliminate existing backlogs and report on this plan before it could
access any of the funds.
In its report, the INS would be required to describe its current
processing capabilities and detail its plans to eliminate existing
backlogs in immigration benefit applications and petitions.
And third, it would require the Department of Justice to submit an
annual, detailed report to Congress, including data on the number of
naturalization applications and immigration petitions processed and
adjudicated in each of the fiscal years following enactment of the act.
The act would also require the INS to report on the number of cases
still pending in the naturalization, immigrant and nonimmigrant visa
categories. In some cases this would involve a state-by-state or
regional analysis of INS's progress in processing applications in a
timely fashion.
In the past 7 years, 6.4 million people applied for U.S.
citizenship--more than the previous 37 years combined. Today, INS faces
a backlog of 1.3 million naturalization applications. Although the INS
has put more resources into processing naturalization applications,
this has come at the expense of processing other immigration-related
applications, such as those for lawful permanent residence. At the
beginning of this year, the INS had a pending caseload of 951,350
adjustment of status applications--an eightfold increase since 1994.
As a result, major cities continue to face tremendous delays in the
processing of INS naturalization and immigrant applications. Five
cities--Los Angeles, New York, San Francisco, Miami, and Chicago--
handle 65 percent of the nation's naturalization workload.
By now, most of us are familiar with the numbers. Indeed, it would be
easy for one to look at and decry the statistics reflecting the
enormous number of backlogged applications. Instead, I come to floor of
the Senate today to talk about the human cost of these backlogs and
what I intend to do through legislation to help the INS put itself on
its proper course.
As one who represents California, a State that is number one among
immigrant-receiving States, I have seen firsthand how families and
businesses can be disproportionately affected by the smallest
fluctuations in INS resources and services.
One out of every four Californians--about 8.5 million people--is
foreign born. The average number of new immigrants to the State is more
than 300,000 annually. Population growth of this magnitude is like
adding a city the size of Anaheim, California each year.
The constant processing delays at the INS have had a tremendous
impact on the ability of immigrants to naturalize, and seek services
related to their application for green cards, work authorization, and
family reunification.
On almost a daily basis, my office fields calls from people who have
been waiting three or four years to naturalize or to adjust their
status to that of lawful permanent resident. And this is after having
paid a fee of $225 per naturalization application, and $220 for an
adjustment of status application--per person. Imagine how much of an
investment a family makes in order to play by the rules.
Applicants for these services are never really sure if their
application is still in the process or lost, especially when the
expected time for a fingerprint or interview notice comes and goes.
I have received numerous letters from constituents that vividly
portray the human toil these backlogs have taken.
For example, one person wrote that he and his family have been in the
country legally for more than 10 years. They filed their request for
permanent residency at the right time. Their file, however, has moved
so slowly within the INS that one of their sons is now about to ``age
out'' of qualifying for permanent residence because he will turn 21
soon.
Just recently, I received a letter from a young student at Berkeley
who filed a citizenship application in October 1996. She is still
waiting to receive word from the INS on the correct status of her file.
She was told by the INS in January this year that it had closed her
case in June 1999 without her knowledge or ability to address any
concerns they might have had with her case. In fact, she was never told
there were problems with her case.
Up until January, she had been told by the INS that she would be
receiving her interview notice within six weeks. Unfortunately, six
weeks became three years. Now, almost four years later, she has come to
my office for assistance, wondering what she might have done to create
this situation.
The fact is, like millions of others throughout the country, she is a
victim of an agency that is in dire need of a change in the way it does
business.
[[Page S4192]]
Millions of people are being prevented from participating in American
civic life because of the inability of INS to process their
naturalization applications in a timely fashion (e.g., they cannot
vote, run for public office, assume certain government positions). U.S.
citizens are unable to be reunited with their spouses and minor
children because of the delays in INS processing.
And thousands of American businesses, such as high tech companies
like Sun Microsystems and others, have been prevented from getting
qualified workers because of the INS's inability to provide access to a
critical portion of their workforce. Lengthy delays and inconsistencies
in INS processing have taken a toll on company projects, planning and
goals.
How does this legislation help Congress hold the INS accountable for
the prompt delivery of services? If INS does not met the goals of set
out in this legislation, it would have to explain to Congress why the
backlogs persist and what the agency is doing to fix them. This
legislation would also require the INS to describe the additional
mechanisms and resources needed to meet Congress's mandate that
backlogs be eliminated and that the processing of applications take
place in an acceptable time frame.
While funds devoted to enforcing our immigration laws have rightfully
been increased in recent years, until very recently, Congress had not
provided increases in funding to the INS specifically to deal with the
increased missions that Congress has imposed on it. Nor has Congress
provided adequate funding to deal with the increased number of
naturalization and other immigration benefits applications that have
been submitted in recent years and continue to be submitted.
The business community, immigration community, and the Administration
have indicated their support for mechanisms such as those included in
my legislation. I wish to thank the following organizations whose
valuable input and ideas helped shaped this important legislation:
American Business for Legal Immigration; American Council on
International Personnel; American Immigration Lawyers Association;
Hebrew Immigration Aid Society; Mexican American Legal Defense and
Education Fund; National Association of Latino Elected Officials;
National Asian Pacific American Legal Consortium; National Council of
La Raza; United Jewish Communities; and United States Catholic
Conference.
Mr. President, the ``Immigration Services and Infrastructure
Improvement Act of 2000'' would provide direction and accountability on
how the INS uses appropriated funds. Passage of this legislation would
send a strong congressional directive to the INS that timely and
efficient service is not merely goal, but a mandate.
I urge the Senate to act swiftly and pass this urgently needed
legislation.
______
By Mr. NICKLES (for himself and Mr. Voinovich):
S. 2587. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
simplify the excise tax on heavy truck tires; to the Committee on
Finance.
simplification of excise tax on heavy truck tires
Mr. NICKLES. 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. 2587
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SIMPLIFICATION OF EXCISE TAX ON HEAVY TRUCK TIRES.
(a) Tax Based on Tire Load Capacity Not Weight.--Subsection
(a) of section 4071 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
(relating to imposition of tax on tires) is amended to read
as follows:
``(a) Imposition and Rate of Tax.--There is hereby imposed
on tires of the type used on highway vehicles, if wholly or
in part made of rubber, sold by the manufacturer, producer,
or importer a tax equal to 8 cents for each 10 pounds of the
tire load capacity in excess of 3500 pounds.''.
(b) Tire Load Capacity.--Subsection (c) of section 4071 of
such Code is amended to read as follows:
``(c) Tire Load Capacity.--For purposes of this section,
tire load capacity is the maximum load rating labeled on the
tire pursuant to section 571.109 or 571.119 of title 49, Code
of Federal Regulations. In the case of any tire that is
marked for both single and dual loads, the higher of the 2
shall be used for purposes of this section.''.
(c) Tires to Which Tax Applies.--Subsection (b) of section
4072 of such Code (defining tires of the type used on highway
vehicles) is amended by striking ``tires of the type'' the
second place it appears and all that follows and inserting
``tires--
``(1) of the type used on--
``(A) motor vehicles which are highway vehicles, or
``(B) vehicles of the type used in connection with motor
vehicles which are highway vehicles, and
``(2) marked for highway use pursuant to section 571.109 or
571.119 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations.''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on January 1 of the first calendar year
which begins more than 30 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
______
By Mr. BENNETT:
S. 2588. A bill to assist the economic development of the Ute Indian
Tribe by authorizing the transfer to the Tribe of Oil Shale Reserve
Numbered 2, to protect the Colorado River by providing for the removal
of the tailings from the Atlas uranium milling site near Moab, Utah,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Armed Services.
ute-moab land restoration act
Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I take the floor today to
introduce the Ute-Moab Land Restoration Act, a proposal that enjoys
great support from the State of Utah and many of my constituents. This
legislation contains two major components that will enable the
restoration of Ute Indian Tribal lands and the remediation of a uranium
mill tailings site near Moab, Utah.
The first component is the transfer of the Naval Oil Shale Reserve
Numbered 2 (NOSR 2) lands east of the Green River to the Ute Indian
Tribe. The lands that contain the NOSR 2 were taken from the Ute tribe
in 1916 by the government to provide the Navy with a source of
petroleum for oil-burning ships. This transfer will return these
traditional homelands to the Ute tribe. Additionally, the return of
these lands will spur economic development on the Uintah and Ouray
Indian Reservation, home of the Ute Tribe. The increased economic
development will include oil and gas production. It should be noted
that the Ute Tribe has a history of environmentally responsible
petroleum development on one of Utah's largest oil and gas fields. The
bill also incorporates a provision whereby a nine percent royalty will
be returned to the Secretary of Energy for the purposes of offsetting
the cost of removing the Atlas tailings pile as I shall describe in a
moment. I expect the tribe will give all future petroleum developments
the same amount of care they have demonstrated in the past.
The economy of the Uintah Basin will not be the sole beneficiary of
the land transfer. There are numerous conservation provisions
incorporated into the transfer. These provisions include the
establishment of a quarter mile corridor along 75 miles of the Green
River to conserve its scenic qualities and protections for wild horses
and threatened and endangered plants life.
The second component will facilitate the removal of the tailings from
the Atlas uranium milling site across the Colorado River from Moab,
Utah. It should be noted that the determination to locate the Atlas
milling facility at MOAB was driven by encouragement from the former
Atomic Energy Commission. Further, the Department of Energy (DOE) bears
responsibility for approximately 56 percent of the 10.5 million tons of
mildly radioactive debris left as a residue from the Cold War and our
nation's effort to maintain its nuclear weapons stockpile. These
tailings, produced from 156 to 1988, are currently leaching ammonia
into the waters of the Colorado River. Additionally, the pile is a
significant source of airborne radon. Both of these pollutants need to
be addressed.
In January of this year, Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson
announced the intention of DOE to move the Atlas tailings pile to a
remote location where this waste could be contained in a sealed cell.
This proposal follows work done previously by DOE on 22 former uranium
mill tailings sites. The legislation I am introducing today amends the
Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) by adding the
Atlas tailings site as the 23rd site for DOE remediation.
I note that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission conducted a
lengthy five-year environmental impact statement on the Atlas site. Its
[[Page S4193]]
conclusion held that the site could be remediated in place by
dewatering the pile, treating the ground water, and capping the
tailings. Indeed, the NRC has appointed a trustee that is moving
forward with this remediation process today. However, given the
interests of the State of Utah and the people of Grand County, I am
introducing this legislation so the tailings can be removed and treated
in a more secure manner.
I am concerned that securing the funding for this clean-up may be
difficult. Therefore, I have a included a provision which will enable
the NRC trustee to continue on-site remediation up to the point that
DOE obtains the necessary appropriations to step up and take over the
process. I believe this is the responsible approach to ensure that
public health and the environment are protected regardless of the
outcome of future appropriations.
I look forward to working with my colleagues in moving this
legislation forward and restoring these Utah lands.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the legislation be printed
in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 2588
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 ``Ute-Moab Land Restoration
Act''.
SEC. 2. TRANSFER OF OIL SHALE RESERVE.
Section 3405 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (10 U.S.C. 7420 note;
Public Law 105-261) is amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 3405. TRANSFER OF OIL SHALE RESERVE NUMBERED 2.
``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Map.--The term ``map'' means the map entitled
`Boundary Map, .............', numbered ____ and dated
________, to be kept on file and available for public
inspection in the offices of the Department of the Interior.
``(2) Moab site.--The term `Moab site' means the Moab
uranium milling site located approximately 3 miles northwest
of Moab, Utah, and identified in the Final Environmental
Impact Statement issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
in March 1996, in conjunction with Source Material License
No. SUA 917.
``(3) NOSR-2.--The term `NOSR-2' means Oil Shale Reserve
Numbered 2, as identified on a map on file in the Office of
the Secretary of the Interior.
``(4) Tribe.--The term `Tribe' means the Ute Indian Tribe
of the Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation.
``(b) Conveyance.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the
United States conveys to the Tribe, subject to valid existing
rights in effect on the day before the date of enactment of
this section, all Federal land within the exterior boundaries
of NOSR-2 in fee simple (including surface and mineral
rights).
``(2) Reservations.--The conveyance under paragraph (1)
shall not include the following reservations of the United
States:
``(A) A 9 percent royalty interest in the value of any oil,
gas, other hydrocarbons, and all other minerals from the
conveyed land that are produced, saved, and sold, the
payments for which shall be made by the Tribe or its designee
to the Secretary of Energy during the period that the oil,
gas, hydrocarbons, or minerals are being produced, saved,
sold, or extracted.
``(B) The portion of the bed of Green River contained
entirely within NOSR-2, as depicted on the map.
``(C) The land (including surface and mineral rights) to
the west of the Green River within NOSR-2, as depicted on the
map.
``(D) A \1/4\ mile scenic easement on the east side of the
Green River within NOSR-2.
``(3) Conditions.--
``(A) Management authority.--On completion of the
conveyance under paragraph (1), the United States
relinquishes all management authority over the conveyed land
(including tribal activities conducted on the land).
``(B) No reversion.--The land conveyed to the Tribe under
this subsection shall not revert to the United States for
management in trust status.
``(C) Use of easement.--The reservation of the easement
under paragraph (2)(D) shall not affect the right of the
Tribe to obtain, use, and maintain access to, the Green River
through the use of the road within the easement, as depicted
on the map.
``(c) Withdrawals.--All withdrawals in effect on NOSR-2 on
the date of enactment of this section are revoked.
``(d) Administration of Reserved land, Interests in land.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall administer the land
and interests in land reserved from conveyance under
subparagraphs (B) and (C) of subsection (b)(2) in accordance
with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43
U.S.C. 1701 et seq.).
``(2) Management plan.--Not later than 3 years after the
date of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall submit
to Congress a land use plan for the management of the land
and interests in land referred to in paragraph (1).
``(3) Authorization of appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary such sums as
are necessary to carry out this subsection.
``(e) Royalty.--
``(1) Payment of royalty.--
``(A) In general.--The royalty interest reserved from
conveyance in subsection (b)(2)(A) that is required to be
paid by the Tribe shall not include any development,
production, marketing, and operating expenses.
``(B) Federal tax responsibility.--The United States shall
bear responsibility for and pay--
``(i) gross production taxes;
``(ii) pipeline taxes; and
``(iii) allocation taxes assessed against the gross
production.
``(2) Report.--The Tribe shall submit to the Secretary of
Energy and to Congress an annual report on resource
development and other activities of the Tribe concerning the
conveyance under subsection (b).
``(3) Financial audit.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 5 years after the date of
enactment of this section, and every 5 years thereafter, the
Tribe shall obtain an audit of all resource development
activities of the Tribe concerning the conveyance under
subsection (b), as provided under chapter 75 of title 31,
United States Code.
``(B) Inclusion of results.--The results of each audit
under this paragraph shall be included in the next annual
report submitted after the date of completion of the audit.
``(f) River Management.--
``(1) In general.--The Tribe shall manage, under Tribal
jurisdiction and in accordance with ordinances adopted by the
Tribe, land of the Tribe that is adjacent to, and within \1/
4\ mile of, the Green River in a manner that--
``(A) maintains the protected status of the land; and
``(B) is consistent with the government-to-government
agreement and in the memorandum of understanding dated
February 11, 2000, as agreed to by the Tribe and the
Secretary.
``(2) No management restrictions.--An ordinance referred to
in paragraph (1) shall not impair, limit, or otherwise
restrict the management and use of any land that is not
owned, controlled, or subject to the jurisdiction of the
Tribe.
``(3) Repeal or amendment.--An ordinance adopted by the
Tribe and referenced in the government-to-government
agreement may not be repealed or amended without the written
approval of--
``(A) the Tribe; and
``(B) the Secretary.
``(g) Plant Species.--
``(1) In general.--In accordance with a government-to-
government agreement between the Tribe and the Secretary, in
a manner consistent with levels of legal protection in effect
on the date of enactment of this section, the Tribe shall
protect, under ordinances adopted by the Tribe, any plant
species that is--
``(A) listed as an endangered species or threatened species
under section 4 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16
U.S.C. 1533); and
``(B) located or found on the NOSR-2 land conveyed to the
Tribe.
``(2) Tribal jurisdiction.--The protection described in
paragraph (1) shall be performed solely under tribal
jurisdiction
``(h) Horses.--
``(1) In general.--The Tribe shall manage, protect, and
assert control over any horse not owned by the Tribe or
tribal members that is located or found on the NOSR-2 land
conveyed to the Tribe in a manner that is consistent with
Federal law governing the management, protection, and control
of horses in effect on the date of enactment of this section.
``(2) Tribal jurisdiction.--The management, control, and
protection of horses described in paragraph (1) shall be
performed solely--
``(A) under tribal jurisdiction; and
``(B) in accordance with a government-to-government
agreement between the Tribe and the Secretary.
``(i) Remedial Action at Moab Site.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this subsection, the Secretary of Energy shall
prepare a plan for the commencement, not later than 1 year
after the date of completion of the plan, of remedial action
(including groundwater restoration) at the Moab site in
accordance with section 102(a) of the Uranium Mill Tailings
Radiation Control Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 7912(a)).
``(2) Limit on expenditures.--The Secretary shall limit the
amounts expended in carrying out the remedial action under
paragraph (1) to--
``(A) amounts specifically appropriated for the remedial
action in an Act of appropriation; and
``(B) other amounts made available for the remedial action
under this subsection.
``(3) Retention of royalties.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary of Energy shall retain the
amounts received as royalties under subsection (e)(1).
[[Page S4194]]
``(B) Availability.--Amounts referred to in subparagraph
(A) shall be available, without further Act of appropriation,
to carry out the remedial action under paragraph (1).
``(C) Excess amounts.--On completion of the remedial action
under paragraph (1), all remaining royalty amounts shall be
deposited in the General Fund of the Treasury.
``(D) Authorization of appropriations.--
``(i) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated
to the Secretary of Energy to carry out the remedial action
under paragraph (1) such sums as are necessary.
``(ii) Continuation of nrc trustee remediation
activities.--After the date of enactment of this section and
until such date as funds are made available under clause (i),
the Secretary, using funds available to the Secretary that
are not otherwise appropriated, shall carry out--
``(I) this subsection; and
``(II) any remediation activity being carried out at the
Moab site by the trustee appointed by the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission for the Moab site on the date of enactment of this
section.
``(4) Sale of moab site.--
``(A) In general.--If the Moab site is sold after the date
on which the Secretary of Energy completes the remedial
action under paragraph (1), the seller shall pay to the
Secretary of Energy, for deposit in the miscellaneous
receipts account of the Treasury, the portion of the sale
price that the Secretary determines resulted from the
enhancement of the value of the Moab site that is
attributable to the completion of the remedial action, as
determined in accordance with subparagraph (B).
``(B) Determination of enhanced value.--The enhanced value
of the Moab site referred to in subparagraph (A) shall be
equal to the difference between--
``(i) the fair market value of the Moab site on the date of
enactment of this section, based on information available on
that date; and
``(ii) the fair market value of the Moab site, as appraised
on completion of the remedial action.''.
SEC. 3. URANIUM MILL TAILINGS.
Section 102(a) of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation
Control Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 7912(a)) is amended by
inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
``(4) Designation as processing site.--
``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the Moab uranium milling site (referred to in this
paragraph as the `Moab Site') located approximately 3 miles
northwest of Moab, Utah, and identified in the Final
Environmental Impact Statement issued by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission in March 1996, in conjunction with
Source Material License No. SUA 917, is designated as a
processing site.
``(B) Applicability.--This title applies to the Moab Site
in the same manner and to the same extent as to other
processing sites designated under this subsection, except
that--
``(i) sections 103, 107(a), 112(a), and 115(a) of this
title shall not apply;
``(ii) a reference in this title to the date of the
enactment of this Act shall be treated as a reference to the
date of enactment of this paragraph; and
``(iii) the Secretary, subject to the availability of
appropriations and without regard to section 104(b), shall
conduct remediation at the Moab site in a safe and
environmentally sound manner, including--
``(I) groundwater restoration; and
``(II) the removal, to at a site in the State of Utah, for
permanent disposition and any necessary stabilization, of
residual radioactive material and other contaminated material
from the Moab Site and the floodplain of the Colorado
River.''.
SEC. 4. CONFORMING AMENDMENT.
Section 3406 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (10 U.S.C. 7420 note)
is amended by inserting after subsection (e) the following:
``(f) Oil Shale Reserve Numbered 2.--This section does not
apply to the transfer of Oil Shale Reserve Numbered 2 under
section 3405.''.
______
By Mr. VOINOVICH:
S. 2590. A bill to reauthoize and amend the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980; to the
Committee on Environmental and Public Works.
BROWNFIELDS REVITALIZATION ACT OF 2000
Mr. VOINOVICH. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce
legislation that will provide incentives to clean up abandoned
industrial sites--or brownfields--across the country and put them back
into productive use and preserve our greenspaces.
It is time to create more certainty in the brownfields cleanup
process. Parties that clean up non-Superfund sites under state cleanup
laws need certainty about the rules that apply to them, particularly
that their actions terminate the risk of future liability under the
federal Superfund program.
The bill that I introduce today, the Brownfield Revitalization Act of
2000, creates that certainty by allowing states to release parties that
have cleaned up sites under state laws and programs from federal
liability. This bill has strong bipartisan support from our nation's
Governors who have written to me expressing their support for this
legislation.
I strongly believe that there should be no requirement that the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) pre-approve state laws and
programs. State brownfields programs address sites that are not on the
National Priorities List (NPL) and where the federal government has
played little or no role.
States are leading the way in cleaning up sites more efficiently and
cost-effectively. According to state solid waste management officials,
states average more than 1,400 cleanups per year. And they are
addressing approximately 4,700 sites at any given time.
This is helping to recycle our urban wastelands, prevent urban sprawl
and preserve our farmland and greenspaces. These programs are cleaning
up eyesores in our inner cities, making them more desirable places to
live. Because they are putting abandoned sites back into productive
use, they are the key to providing economic rebirth to our urban areas,
and good-paying jobs to local residents. This bill makes sense for our
environment and it makes sense for our economy.
The bill I am introducing today is similar to the brownfields
provisions in S. 1090, the Superfund Program Completion Act of 1999, by
Senator Bob Smith and the late-Senator John Chafee. The purpose of my
bill is to build upon the success of state programs by providing even
more incentives to clean up brownfield sites in order to provide better
protection for the health and safety of our citizens and the
environment. What we don't need are delays caused by the U.S. EPA's
second-guessing of state decisions.
A good example of second-guessing occurred in my own state of Ohio.
One company, TRW completed a cleanup at its site in Minerva under
Ohio's enforcement program in 1986. Despite these cleanup efforts, the
U.S. EPA placed the site on the NPL in 1989. However, after listing the
site, the U.S. EPA took no aggressive steps for additional cleanup. The
site has been untouched for years. In fact, it is now likely that the
site will be delisted.
To enhance and encourage further cleanup efforts, Ohio has
implemented a private sector-based program to clean up brownfields
sites. When I was Governor, Ohio EPA, Republicans and Democrats in the
Ohio Legislature and I worked hard to implement a program that we
believe works for Ohio. Our program is already successful in improving
Ohio's environment and economy.
In almost 20 years under the federal Superfund program, the U.S. EPA
has only cleaned up 18 sites in Ohio. In contrast, 103 sites have been
cleaned up under Ohio's voluntary cleanup program in 5 years. And many
more cleanups are underway.
States clearly have been the innovators in developing voluntary
cleanup programs, and Ohio's program has been very successful in
getting cleanups done more quickly and cost effectively. For example,
the first cleanup conducted under our program--the Kessler Products
facility, near Canton--was estimated to cost $2 million and take 3 to 5
years to complete if it had been cleaned under Superfund. However,
under Ohio's voluntary program, the cost was $600,000 and took 6 months
to complete. These cleanups are good for the environment and good for
the economy.
Mr. President, Ohio and other states have very successful programs
that clean up sites more efficiently and cost effectively. This bill
would help build on their success by providing assurances to parties
that when they clean up a site correctly, they will not be held liable
under Superfund down the road. The bill precludes the federal
government from taking action at a site where cleanup is being
conducted under a state program except under certain circumstances,
such as when a state requests federal action, when the U.S. EPA
determines that a state is unwilling or unable to take appropriate
action, or when contamination has migrated across state lines. The bill
does not take away the U.S. EPA's authority to conduct emergency
removals or their authority to conduct tests at a site to determine if
a site should be listed on the NPL.
This legislation also ensures that Federal facilities are subject to
the
[[Page S4195]]
same environmental cleanup requirements as private sites. In 1992,
Congress enacted the Federal Facilities Compliance Act (FFCA), which
holds Federal facilities accountable to meet State and Federal
environmental laws regulating hazardous waste. However, subsequent
Federal court decisions have undermined the intent of FFCA and similar
language in other statutes. We should be reminded that contamination
problems at Federal facilities are largely the result of years of self-
regulation by Federal agencies. It is essential that States have the
authority to oversee cleanup and enforce their own laws and standards.
My bill merely ensures that Federal agencies are held accountable to
the same state and federal regulations that govern private entities.
This bill is just plain commonsense. It provides more protection for
the environment by providing incentives to clean up hazardous waste
sites. It helps preserve our greenspaces. And it helps our economy by
putting abandoned sites back into productive use, providing jobs and
better places to live in our urban areas.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that additional material be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 2590
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the
``Brownfields Revitalization Act of 2000''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
TITLE I--BROWNFIELDS REVITALIZATION
Sec. 101. Brownfields.
TITLE II--STATE RESPONSE PROGRAMS
Sec. 201. State response programs.
Sec. 202. State cost share.
TITLE III--PROPERTY CONSIDERATIONS
Sec. 301. Contiguous properties.
Sec. 302. Prospective purchasers and windfall liens.
Sec. 303. Safe harbor innocent landholders.
TITLE IV--FEDERAL ENTITIES AND FACILITIES
Sec. 401. Applicability of law; immunity.
TITLE I--BROWNFIELDS REVITALIZATION
SEC. 101. BROWNFIELDS.
Title I of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et
seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 127. BROWNFIELDS.
``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Brownfield facility.--
``(A) In general.--The term `brownfield facility' means
real property, the expansion or redevelopment of which is
complicated by the presence or potential presence of a
hazardous substance.
``(B) Exclusions.--The term `brownfield facility' does not
include--
``(i) any portion of real property that, as of the date of
submission of an application for assistance under this
section, is the subject of an ongoing removal under this
title;
``(ii) any portion of real property that has been listed on
the National Priorities List or is proposed for listing as of
the date of the submission of an application for assistance
under this section;
``(iii) any portion of real property with respect to which
cleanup work is proceeding in substantial compliance with the
requirements of an administrative order on consent, or
judicial consent decree that has been entered into, or a
permit issued by, the United States or a duly authorized
State under this Act, the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C.
6901 et seq.), section 311 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1321), the Toxic Substances Control
Act (15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.), or the Safe Drinking Water Act
(42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.);
``(iv) a land disposal unit with respect to which--
``(I) a closure notification under subtitle C of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.) has been
submitted; and
``(II) closure requirements have been specified in a
closure plan or permit; or
``(v) a portion of a facility, for which portion assistance
for response activity has been obtained under subtitle I of
the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6991 et seq.) from
the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund established
under section 9508 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
``(C) Facilities other than brownfield facilities.--That a
facility may not be a brownfield facility within the meaning
of subparagraph (A) has no effect on the eligibility of the
facility for assistance under any provision of Federal law
other than this section.
``(2) Eligible entity.--
``(A) In general.--The term `eligible entity' means--
``(i) a general purpose unit of local government;
``(ii) a land clearance authority or other quasi-
governmental entity that operates under the supervision and
control of or as an agent of a general purpose unit of local
government;
``(iii) a government entity created by a State legislature;
``(iv) a regional council or group of general purpose units
of local government;
``(v) a redevelopment agency that is chartered or otherwise
sanctioned by a State;
``(vi) a State; and
``(vii) an Indian Tribe.
``(B) Exclusion.--The term `eligible entity' does not
include any entity that is not in substantial compliance with
the requirements of an administrative order on consent,
judicial consent decree that has been entered into, or a
permit issued by, the United States or a duly authorized
State under this Act, the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C.
6901 et seq.), the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), the Toxic Substances Control Act (15
U.S.C. 2601 et seq.), or the Safe Drinking Water Act (42
U.S.C. 300f et seq.) with respect to any portion of real
property that is the subject of the administrative order on
consent, judicial consent decree, or permit.
``(3) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary
of Housing and Urban Development.
``(b) Brownfield Site Characterization and Assessment Grant
Program.--
``(1) Establishment of program.--The Administrator shall
establish a program to provide grants for the site
characterization and assessment of brownfield facilities.
``(2) Assistance for site characterization and assessment
and response actions.--
``(A) In general.--On approval of an application made by an
eligible entity, the Administrator may make grants to the
eligible entity to be used for the site characterization and
assessment of 1 or more brownfield facilities.
``(B) Site characterization and assessment.--A site
characterization and assessment carried out with the use of a
grant under subparagraph (A)--
``(i) shall be performed in accordance with section
101(35)(B); and
``(ii) may include a process to identify or inventory
potential brownfield facilities.
``(c) Brownfield Remediation Grant Program.--
``(1) Establishment of program.--In consultation with the
Secretary, the Administrator shall establish a program to
provide grants to be used for response actions (excluding
site characterization and assessment) at 1 or more brownfield
facilities.
``(2) Assistance for response actions.--On approval of an
application made by an eligible entity, the Administrator, in
consultation with the Secretary, may make grants to the
eligible entity to be used for response actions (excluding
site characterization and assessment) at 1 or more brownfield
facilities.
``(d) General Provisions.--
``(1) Maximum grant amount.--
``(A) In general.--The total of all grants under
subsections (b) and (c) shall not exceed, with respect to any
individual brownfield facility covered by the grants,
$350,000.
``(B) Waiver.--The Administrator may waive the $350,000
limitation under subparagraph (A) based on the anticipated
level of contamination, size, or status of ownership of the
facility.
``(2) Prohibition.--
``(A) In general.--No part of a grant under this section
may be used for payment of penalties, fines, or
administrative costs.
``(B) Exclusions.--For the purposes of subparagraph (A),
the term `administrative cost' does not include the cost of--
``(i) investigation and identification of the extent of
contamination;
``(ii) design and performance of a response action; or
``(iii) monitoring of natural resources.
``(3) Audits.--The Inspector General of the Environmental
Protection Agency shall conduct such reviews or audits of
grants under this section as the Inspector General considers
necessary to carry out the objectives of this section. Audits
shall be conducted in accordance with the auditing procedures
of the General Accounting Office, including chapter 75 of
title 31, United States Code.
``(4) Leveraging.--An eligible entity that receives a grant
under this section may use the funds for part of a project at
a brownfield facility for which funding is received from
other sources, but the grant shall be used only for the
purposes described in subsection (b) or (c).
``(5) Agreements.--Each grant made under this section shall
be subject to an agreement that--
``(A) requires the eligible entity to comply with all
applicable State laws (including regulations);
``(B) requires that the eligible entity shall use the grant
exclusively for purposes specified in subsection (b) or (c);
``(C) in the case of an application by an eligible entity
under subsection (c), requires payment by the eligible entity
of a matching share (which may be in the form of a
contribution of labor, material, or services) of at least 20
percent of the costs of the response action for which the
grant is made, is from non-Federal sources of funding.
``(D) contains such other terms and conditions as the
Administrator determines to be necessary to carry out this
section.
``(e) Grant Applications.--
``(1) Submission.--
[[Page S4196]]
``(A) In general.--Any eligible entity may submit an
application to the Administrator, through a regional office
of the Environmental Protection Agency and in such form as
the Administrator may require, for a grant under this section
for 1 or more brownfield facilities.
``(B) Coordination.--In developing application
requirements, the Administrator shall coordinate with the
Secretary and other Federal agencies and departments, such
that eligible entities under this section are made aware of
other available Federal resources.
``(C) Guidance.--The Administrator shall publish guidance
to assist eligible entities in obtaining grants under this
section.
``(2) Approval.--The Administrator, in consultation with
the Secretary, shall make an annual evaluation of each
application received during the prior fiscal year and make
grants under this section to eligible entities that submit
applications during the prior year and that the
Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary, determines
have the highest rankings under the ranking criteria
established under paragraph (3).
``(3) Ranking criteria.--The Administrator, in consultation
with the Secretary, shall establish a system for ranking
grant applications that includes the following criteria:
``(A) The extent to which a grant will stimulate the
availability of other funds for environmental remediation and
subsequent redevelopment of the area in which the brownfield
facilities are located.
``(B) The potential of the development plan for the area in
which the brownfield facilities are located to stimulate
economic development of the area on completion of the
cleanup, such as the following:
``(i) The relative increase in the estimated fair market
value of the area as a result of any necessary response
action.
``(ii) The demonstration by applicants of the intent and
ability to create new or expand existing business,
employment, recreation, or conservation opportunities on
completion of any necessary response action.
``(iii) If commercial redevelopment is planned, the
estimated additional full-time employment opportunities and
tax revenues expected to be generated by economic
redevelopment in the area in which a brownfield facility is
located.
``(iv) The estimated extent to which a grant would
facilitate the identification of or facilitate a reduction of
health and environmental risks.
``(v) The financial involvement of the State and local
government in any response action planned for a brownfield
facility and the extent to which the response action and the
proposed redevelopment is consistent with any applicable
State or local community economic development plan.
``(vi) The extent to which the site characterization and
assessment or response action and subsequent development of a
brownfield facility involves the active participation and
support of the local community.
``(vii) The extent to which the applicant coordinated with
the State agency.
``(viii) Such other factors as the Administrator considers
appropriate to carry out the purposes of this section.
``(C) The extent to which a grant will enable the creation
of or addition to parks, greenways, or other recreational
property.
``(D) The extent to which a grant will meet the needs of a
community that has an inability to draw on other sources of
funding for environmental remediation and subsequent
redevelopment of the area in which a brownfield facility is
located because of the small population or low income of the
community.''.
TITLE II--STATE RESPONSE PROGRAMS
SEC. 201. STATE RESPONSE PROGRAMS.
(a) Definitions.--Section 101 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(39) Bona fide prospective purchaser.--The term `bona
fide prospective purchaser' means a person that acquires
ownership of a facility after the date of enactment of this
paragraph, or a tenant of such a person, that establishes
each of the following by a preponderance of the evidence:
``(A) Disposal prior to acquisition.--All deposition of
hazardous substances at the facility occurred before the
person acquired the facility.
``(B) Inquiries.--
``(i) In general.--The person made all appropriate
inquiries into the previous ownership and uses of the
facility and the facility's real property in accordance with
generally accepted good commercial and customary standards
and practices.
``(ii) Standards and practices.--The standards and
practices referred to in paragraph (35)(B)(ii) or those
issued or adopted by the Administrator under that paragraph
shall be considered to satisfy the requirements of this
subparagraph.
``(iii) Residential use.--In the case of property for
residential or other similar use purchased by a
nongovernmental or noncommercial entity, a facility
inspection and title search that reveal no basis for further
investigation shall be considered to satisfy the requirements
of this subparagraph.
``(C) Notices.--The person provided all legally required
notices with respect to the discovery or release of any
hazardous substances at the facility.
``(D) Care.--The person exercised appropriate care with
respect to each hazardous substance found at the facility by
taking reasonable steps to stop any continuing release,
prevent any threatened future release and prevent or limit
human or natural resource exposure to any previously released
hazardous substance.
``(E) Cooperation, assistance, and access.--The person has
not failed to substantially comply with the requirement
stated in section 122(p)(2)(H) with respect to the facility.
``(F) No affiliation.--The person is not affiliated through
any familial or corporate relationship with any person that
is or was a party potentially responsible for response costs
at the facility.
``(40) Facility subject to state cleanup.--The term
`facility subject to State cleanup' means a facility other
than a facility--
``(A) that is listed on the National Priorities List;
``(B) that is proposed for listing on the National
Priorities List, based on a determination by the
Administrator published in the Federal Register that the
facility qualifies for listing under section 105; or
``(C) for which an administrative order on consent or
judicial consent decree requiring response action has been
entered into by the United States with respect to the
facility under--
``(i) this Act;
``(ii) the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et
seq.);
``(iii) the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C.
1251 et seq.);
``(iv) the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2601 et
seq.); or
``(v) the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.).
``(41) Qualifying state response program.--The term
`qualifying State response program' means a State program
that includes the elements described in section 128(b).''.
(b) Qualifying State Response Programs.--Title I of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.) (as amended by
section 101(a)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``SEC. 128. QUALIFYING STATE RESPONSE PROGRAMS.
``(a) Assistance to States.--The Administrator shall
provide grants to States to establish and expand qualifying
State response programs that include the elements listed in
subsection (b).
``(b) Elements.--The elements of a qualifying State
response program are the following:
``(1) Oversight and enforcement authorities or other
mechanisms that are adequate to ensure that--
``(A) response actions will protect human health and the
environment and be conducted in accordance with applicable
Federal and State law; and
``(B) in the case of a voluntary response action, if the
person conducting the voluntary response action fails to
complete the necessary response activities, including
operation and maintenance or long-term monitoring activities,
the response activities will be completed as necessary to
protect human health and the environment.
``(2) Adequate opportunities for public participation,
including prior notice and opportunity for comment in
appropriate circumstances, in selecting response actions.
``(3) Mechanisms for approval of a response action plan, or
a requirement for certification or similar documentation from
the State to the person conducting a response action
indicating that the response is complete.
``(c) Enforcement in Cases of a Release Subject to a State
Plan.--
``(1) Enforcement.--
``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B),
in the case of a release or threatened release of a hazardous
substance at a facility subject to State cleanup, neither the
President nor any other person, except the State, may use any
authority under this Act to take an administrative or
enforcement action against any person regarding any matter
that is within the scope of a response action--
``(i) that is being conducted or has been completed under
State law; or
``(ii) at a site, the cleanup of which shall be subject to
State oversight.
``(B) Exceptions.--The President may bring an enforcement
action under this Act with respect to a facility described in
subparagraph (A) if--
``(i) the enforcement action is authorized under section
104;
``(ii) the State requests that the President provide
assistance in the performance of a response action and that
the enforcement bar in subparagraph (A) be lifted;
``(iii) at a facility at which response activities are
ongoing the Administrator--
``(I) makes a written determination that the State is
unwilling or unable to take appropriate action, after the
Administrator has provided the Governor notice and an
opportunity to cure; and
``(II) the Administrator determines that the release or
threat of release constitutes a public health or
environmental emergency under section 104(a)(4);
``(iv) the Administrator determines that contamination has
migrated across a State line, resulting in the need for
further response action to protect human health or the
environment; or
[[Page S4197]]
``(v) in the case of a facility at which all response
actions have been completed, the Administrator--
``(I) makes a written determination that the State is
unwilling or unable to take appropriate action, after the
Administrator has provided the Governor notice and an
opportunity to cure; and
``(II) makes a written determination that the facility
presents a substantial risk that requires further remediation
to protect human health or the environment, as evidenced by--
``(aa) newly discovered information regarding contamination
at the facility;
``(bb) the discovery that fraud was committed in
demonstrating attainment of standards at the facility;
``(cc) the failure of the remedy to prepare a site for the
intended use of the site;
``(dd) a structural failure of the remedy; or
``(ee) a change in land use giving rise to a clear threat
of exposure to which a State is unwilling to respond.
``(C) EPA notification.--
``(i) In general.--In the case of a facility at which there
is a release or threatened release of a hazardous substance,
pollutant, or contaminant and for which the Administrator
intends to undertake an administrative or enforcement action,
the Administrator, prior to taking the administrative or
enforcement action, shall notify the State of the action the
Administrator intends to take and wait a for a period of 30
days for an acknowledgment from the State under clause (ii).
``(ii) State response.--Not later than 30 days after
receiving a notice from the Administrator under clause (i),
the State shall notify the Administrator if the facility
contains a site, the cleanup of which--
``(I) is being conducted or has been completed under State
law; or
``(II) shall be subject to State oversight.
``(iii) Public health or environmental emergency.--If the
Administrator finds that a release or threatened release
constitutes a public health or environmental emergency under
section 104(a)(4), the Administrator may take appropriate
action immediately after giving notification under clause (i)
without waiting for State acknowledgment.
``(2) Cost or damage recovery actions.--Paragraph (1) shall
not apply to an action brought by a State, Indian Tribe, or
general purpose unit of local government for the recovery of
costs or damages under this Act.
``(3) Savings provision.--
``(A) Existing agreements.--A memorandum of agreement,
memorandum of understanding, or similar agreement between the
President and a State or Indian tribe defining Federal and
State or tribal response action responsibilities that was in
effect as of the date of enactment of this section with
respect to a facility to which paragraph (1)(C) does not
apply shall remain effective until the agreement expires in
accordance with the terms of the agreement.
``(B) New agreements.--Nothing in this subsection precludes
the President from entering into an agreement with a State or
Indian tribe regarding responsibility at a facility to which
paragraph (1)(C) does not apply.''.
SEC. 202. STATE COST SHARE.
Section 104(c) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9604(c))
is amended--
(1) by striking ``(c)(1) Unless'' and inserting the
following:
``(c) Miscellaneous Limitations and Requirements.--
``(1) Continuance of obligations from fund.--Unless'';
(2) in paragraph (1), by striking ``taken obligations'' and
inserting ``taken, obligations'';
(3) by striking ``(2) The President'' and inserting the
following:
``(2) Consultation.--The President''; and
(4) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
``(3) State cost share.--
``(A) In general.--The Administrator shall not provide any
funding for remedial action under this section unless the
State in which the release occurs first enters into a
contract or cooperative agreement with the Administrator that
provides assurances that the State will pay, in cash or
through in-kind contributions, 10 percent of--
``(i) the remedial action costs; and
``(ii) operation and maintenance costs.
``(B) Activities with respect to which state cost share is
required.--No State cost share shall be required except for
remedial actions under this section.
``(C) Indian tribes.--The requirements of this paragraph
shall not apply in the case of remedial action to be taken on
land or water--
``(i) held by an Indian Tribe;
``(ii) held by the United States in trust for an Indian
Tribe;
``(iii) held by a member of an Indian Tribe (if the land or
water is subject to a trust restriction on alienation); or
``(iv) within the borders of an Indian reservation.
TITLE III--PROPERTY CONSIDERATIONS
SEC. 301. CONTIGUOUS PROPERTIES.
(a) In General.--Section 107 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980 (42 U.S.C. 9607) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(o) Contiguous Properties.--
``(1) Not considered to be an owner or operator.--
``(A) In general.--A person that owns or operates real
property that is contiguous to or otherwise similarly
situated with respect to real property on which there has
been a release or threatened release of a hazardous substance
and that is or may be contaminated by the release shall not
be considered to be an owner or operator of a vessel or
facility under paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (a) solely
by reason of the contamination if--
``(i) the person did not cause, contribute, or consent to
the release or threatened release;
``(ii) the person is not affiliated through any familial or
corporate relationship with any person that is or was a party
potentially responsible for response costs at the facility;
and
``(iii) the person exercised appropriate care with respect
to each hazardous substance found at the facility by taking
reasonable steps to stop any continuing release, prevent any
threatened future release and prevent or limit human or
natural resource exposure to any previously released
hazardous substance.
``(B) Ground water.--With respect to hazardous substances
in ground water beneath a person's property solely as a
result of subsurface migration in an aquifer from a source or
sources outside the property, appropriate care shall not
require the person to conduct ground water investigations or
to install ground water remediation systems.
``(2) Cooperation, assistance, and access.--A party
described in paragraph (1) may be considered an owner or
operator of a vessel or facility under paragraph (1) or (2)
of subsection (a) if the party has failed to substantially
comply with the requirement stated in section 122(p)(2)(H)
with respect to the facility.
``(3) Assurances.--The Administrator may--
``(A) issue an assurance that no enforcement action under
this Act will be initiated against a person described in
paragraph (1); and
``(B) grant a person described in paragraph (1) protection
against a cost recovery or contribution action under section
113(f).''.
(b) National Priorities List.--
(1) In general.--Section 105 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980 (42 U.S.C. 9605) is amended--
(A) in subsection (a)(8)--
(i) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ``and'' after the
semicolon at the end; and
(ii) by adding at the end the following:
``(C) provision that in listing a facility on the National
Priorities List, the Administrator shall not--
``(i) list the facility unless the Administrator first
obtains concurrence for the listing from the Governor of the
State in which the facility is located; and
``(ii) include in a listing any parcel of real property at
which no release has actually occurred, but to which a
released hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant has
migrated in ground water that has moved through subsurface
strata from another parcel of real estate at which the
release actually occurred, unless--
``(I) the ground water is in use as a public drinking water
supply or was in such use at the time of the release; and
``(II) the owner or operator of the facility is liable, or
is affiliated with any other person that is liable, for any
response costs at the facility, through any direct or
indirect familial relationship, or any contractual,
corporate, or financial relationship other than that created
by the instruments by which title to the facility is conveyed
or financed.''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(h) Listing of Particular Parcels.--
``(1) Definition.--In subsection (a)(8)(C) and paragraph
(2) of this subsection, the term `parcel of real property'
means a parcel, lot, or tract of land that has a separate
legal description from that of any other parcel, lot, or
tract of land the legal description and ownership of which
has been recorded in accordance with the law of the State in
which it is located.
``(2) Statutory construction.--Nothing in subsection
(a)(8)(C) limits the Administrator's authority under section
104 to obtain access to and undertake response actions at any
parcel of real property to which a released hazardous
substance, pollutant, or contaminant has migrated in the
ground water.''.
(2) Revision of National Priorities List.--Not later than
180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
President shall revise the National Priorities List to
conform with the amendments made by paragraph (1).
(c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 107(a) of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9607) is amended by striking
``of this section'' and inserting ``and the exemptions and
limitations stated in this section''.
SEC. 302. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASERS AND WINDFALL LIENS.
Section 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9607) (as
amended by section 301(a)) is amended by adding at the end
the following:
``(p) Prospective Purchaser and Windfall Lien.--
``(1) Limitation on liability.--Notwithstanding subsection
(a), a bona fide prospective purchaser whose potential
liability for a release or threatened release is based solely
[[Page S4198]]
on the purchaser's being considered to be an owner or
operator of a facility shall not be liable as long as the
bona fide prospective purchaser does not impede the
performance of a response action or natural resource
restoration.
``(2) Lien.--If there are unrecovered response costs at a
facility for which an owner of the facility is not liable by
reason of subsection (n)(1) and each of the conditions
described in paragraph (3) is met, the United States shall
have a lien on the facility, or may obtain from appropriate
responsible party a lien on any other property or other
assurances of payment satisfactory to the Administrator, for
such unrecovered costs.
``(3) Conditions.--The conditions referred to in paragraph
(1) are the following:
``(A) Response action.--A response action for which there
are unrecovered costs is carried out at the facility.
``(B) Fair market value.--The response action increases the
fair market value of the facility above the fair market value
of the facility that existed 180 days before the response
action was initiated.
``(C) Sale.--A sale or other disposition of all or a
portion of the facility has occurred.
``(4) Amount.--A lien under paragraph (2)--
``(A) shall not exceed the increase in fair market value of
the property attributable to the response action at the time
of a subsequent sale or other disposition of the property;
``(B) shall arise at the time at which costs are first
incurred by the United States with respect to a response
action at the facility;
``(C) shall be subject to the requirements of subsection
(l)(3); and
``(D) shall continue until the earlier of satisfaction of
the lien or recovery of all response costs incurred at the
facility.''.
SEC. 303. SAFE HARBOR INNOCENT LANDHOLDERS.
(a) Amendment.--Section 101(35) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601(35)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A)--
(A) in the matter that precedes clause (i), by striking
``deeds or'' and inserting ``deeds, easements, leases, or'';
and
(B) in the matter that follows clause (iii)--
(i) by striking ``he'' and inserting ``the defendant''; and
(ii) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``,
has provided full cooperation, assistance, and facility
access to the persons that are responsible for response
actions at the facility, including the cooperation and access
necessary for the installation, integrity, operation, and
maintenance of any complete or partial response action at the
facility, and has taken no action that impeded the
effectiveness or integrity of any institutional control
employed under section 121 at the facility.''; and
(2) by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the
following:
``(B) Reason to know.--
``(i) All appropriate inquiries.--To establish that the
defendant had no reason to know of the matter described in
subparagraph (A)(i), the defendant must show that--
``(I) at or prior to the date on which the defendant
acquired the facility, the defendant undertook all
appropriate inquiries into the previous ownership and uses of
the facility in accordance with generally accepted good
commercial and customary standards and practices; and
``(II) the defendant exercised appropriate care with
respect to each hazardous substance found at the facility by
taking reasonable steps to stop any continuing release,
prevent any threatened future release and prevent or limit
human or natural resource exposure to any previously released
hazardous substance.
``(ii) Standards and practices.--The Administrator shall by
regulation establish as standards and practices for the
purpose of clause (i)--
``(I) the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
Standard E1527-94, entitled `Standard Practice for
Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment Process'; or
``(II) alternative standards and practices under clause
(iii).
``(iii) Alternative standards and practices.--
``(I) In general.--The Administrator may by regulation
issue alternative standards and practices or designate
standards developed by other organizations than the American
Society for Testing and Materials after conducting a study of
commercial and industrial practices concerning the transfer
of real property in the United States.
``(II) Considerations.--In issuing or designating
alternative standards and practices under subclause (I), the
Administrator shall consider including each of the following:
``(aa) The results of an inquiry by an environmental
professional.
``(bb) Interviews with past and present owners, operators,
and occupants of the facility and the facility's real
property for the purpose of gathering information regarding
the potential for contamination at the facility and the
facility's real property.
``(cc) Reviews of historical sources, such as chain of
title documents, aerial photographs, building department
records, and land use records to determine previous uses and
occupancies of the real property since the property was first
developed.
``(dd) Searches for recorded environmental cleanup liens,
filed under Federal, State, or local law, against the
facility or the facility's real property.
``(ee) Reviews of Federal, State, and local government
records (such as waste disposal records), underground storage
tank records, and hazardous waste handling, generation,
treatment, disposal, and spill records, concerning
contamination at or near the facility or the facility's real
property.
``(ff) Visual inspections of the facility and facility's
real property and of adjoining properties.
``(gg) Specialized knowledge or experience on the part of
the defendant.
``(hh) The relationship of the purchase price to the value
of the property if the property was uncontaminated.
``(ii) Commonly known or reasonably ascertainable
information about the property.
``(jj) The degree of obviousness of the presence or likely
presence of contamination at the property, and the ability to
detect such contamination by appropriate investigation.
``(iv) Site inspection and title search.--In the case of
property for residential use or other similar use purchased
by a nongovernmental or noncommercial entity, a facility
inspection and title search that reveal no basis for further
investigation shall be considered to satisfy the requirements
of this subparagraph.''.
(b) Standards and Practices.--
(1) Establishment by regulation.--The Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency shall issue the regulation
required by section 101(35)(B)(ii) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980 (as added by subsection (a)) not later than 1 year after
the date of enactment of this Act.
(2) Interim standards and practices.--Until the
Administrator issues the regulation described in paragraph
(1), in making a determination under section 101(35)(B)(i) of
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980 (as added by subsection (a)), there
shall be taken into account--
(A) any specialized knowledge or experience on the part of
the defendant;
(B) the relationship of the purchase price to the value of
the property if the property was uncontaminated;
(C) commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information
about the property;
(D) the degree of obviousness of the presence or likely
presence of contamination at the property; and
(E) the ability to detect the contamination by appropriate
investigation.
TITLE IV--FEDERAL ENTITIES AND FACILITIES
SEC. 401. APPLICABILITY OF LAW; IMMUNITY.
Section 120 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9620) is
amended--
(1) by striking the section heading and inserting the
following:
``SEC. 120. FEDERAL ENTITIES AND FACILITIES.'';
(2) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
``(1) In general.--
``(A) Definition of service charges.--In this paragraph,
the term `service charge' includes--
``(i) a fee or charge assessed in connection with--
``(I) the processing or issuance of a permit, renewal of a
permit, or amendment of a permit;
``(II) review of a plan, study, or other document; or
``(III) inspection or monitoring of a facility; and
``(ii) any other charge that is assessed in connection with
a State, interstate, or local response program.
``(B) Application of federal, state, interstate, and local
law.--
``(i) In general.--Each department, agency, and
instrumentality of the executive, legislative, or judicial
branch of the United States shall be subject to and shall
comply with this Act and all other Federal, State,
interstate, and local substantive and procedural requirements
and other provisions of law relating to a response action or
restoration action or the management of a hazardous waste,
pollutant, or contaminant in the same manner, and to the same
extent, as any nongovernmental entity is subject to those
provisions of law.
``(ii) Provisions included.--The provisions of law referred
to in clause (i) include--
``(I) a permit requirement;
``(II) a reporting requirement;
``(III) a provision authorizing injunctive relief
(including such sanctions as a court may impose to enforce
injunctive relief);
``(IV) sections 106 and 107 and similar provisions of
Federal, State, or local law relating to enforcement and
liability for cleanup, reimbursement of response costs,
contribution, and payment of damages;
``(V) a requirement to pay reasonable service charges; and
``(VI) all administrative orders and all civil and
administrative penalties and fines, regardless of whether the
penalties or fines are punitive or coercive in nature or are
imposed for an isolated, intermittent, or continuing
violation.
``(C) Waiver of immunity.--
``(i) In general.--The United States waives any immunity
applicable to the United States with respect to any provision
of law described in subparagraph (B).
``(ii) Limitation.--The waiver of sovereign immunity under
clause (i) does not apply to the extent that a State law
would apply any
[[Page S4199]]
standard or requirement to the Federal department, agency, or
instrumentality in a manner that is more stringent than the
manner in which the standard or requirement would apply to
any other person.
``(D) Civil and criminal liability.--
``(i) Injunctive relief.--Neither the United States nor any
agent, employee, or officer of the United States shall be
immune or exempt from any process or sanction of any Federal
or State court with respect to the enforcement of injunctive
relief referred to in subparagraph (B)(ii)(III).
``(ii) No personal liability for civil penalty.--No agent,
employee, or officer of the United States shall be personally
liable for any civil penalty under any Federal or State law
relating to a response action or to management of a hazardous
substance, pollutant, or contaminant with respect to any act
or omission within the scope of the official duties of the
agent, employee, or officer.
``(iii) Criminal liability.--An agent, employee, or officer
of the United States shall be subject to any criminal
sanction (including a fine or imprisonment) under any Federal
or State law relating to a response action or to management
of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant, but no
department, agency, or instrumentality of the executive,
legislative, or judicial branch of the United States shall be
subject to any such sanction.
``(E) Enforcement.--
``(i) Abatement actions.--The Administrator may issue an
order under section 106 to any department, agency, or
instrumentality of the executive, legislative, or judicial
branch of the United States. The Administrator shall initiate
an administrative enforcement action against such a
department, agency, or instrumentality in the same manner and
under the same circumstances as an action would be initiated
against any other person.
``(ii) Consultation.--No administrative order issued to a
department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States
shall become final until the department, agency, or
instrumentality has had the opportunity to confer with the
Administrator.
``(iii) Use of penalties and fines.--Unless a State law in
effect on the date of enactment of this clause requires the
funds to be used in a different manner, all funds collected
by a State from the Federal Government as penalties or fines
imposed for violation of a provision of law referred to in
subparagraph (B) shall be used by the State only for projects
designed to improve or protect the environment or to defray
the costs of environmental protection or enforcement.
``(F) Contribution.--A department, agency, or
instrumentality of the United States shall have the right to
contribution under section 113 if the department, agency, or
instrumentality resolves its liability under this Act.'';
(B) in the second sentence of paragraph (3), by inserting
``(other than the indemnification requirements of section
119)'' after ``responsibility''; and
(C) by striking paragraph (4); and
(2) in subsection (e), by adding at the end the following:
``(7) State requirements.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of this Act, an interagency agreement under this
section shall not impair or diminish the authority of a
State, political subdivision of a State, or any other person
or the jurisdiction of any court to enforce compliance with
requirements of State or Federal law, unless those
requirements have been specifically addressed in the
agreement or waived without objection after notice to the
State before or on the date on which the response action is
selected.''.
____
National Governors Association,
Washington, DC, May 16, 2000.
Hon. George V. Voinovich,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Voinovich: On behalf of the National
Governors' Association (NGA), we are pleased with the
introduction of the Brownfields Revitalization Act of 2000.
NGA has reviewed the bill and believe that it addresses key
issues raised by the nation's Governors to facilitate the
speedy cleanup of brownfields sites and make some important
corrections to the Superfund statute. We hope that all
Senators will work with you to ensure passage of legislation
that the President can sign this year.
We would like to briefly comment on four provisions in the
bill. We applaud the inclusion of a provision dealing with
certainty at state brownfields sites. The bill's finality
provision would improve the effectiveness and pace of
hazardous waste cleanups by allowing state voluntary cleanup
programs to provide assurance to landowners who wish to
develop their property without fear of being engulfed in the
federal liability scheme. There is no question that voluntary
cleanup programs and brownfields redevelopment are currently
hindered by the pervasive fear of federal liability under the
Superfund law. Your bill addresses this problem by precluding
enforcement by the federal government at sites where cleanup
has occurred or is being conducted under a state program. In
instances when a state is unwilling or unable to take
appropriate action, or if contamination has migrated across
state lines, your bill contains reasonable exceptions to this
preclusion of enforcement.
In addition, the Governors greatly appreciate the inclusion
of a provision requiring gubernatorial concurrence before a
site is listed on the National Priorities List. Such a
requirement will help avoid duplication of effort when a
state can take the lead in restoring a site to productive
use. As you know, states are currently overseeing most
cleanups; listing a site on the NPL when a state is prepared
to apply its own authority is not only wasteful of federal
resources, it is often counterproductive, resulting in
increased delays and greater costs.
We also support the provision in the bill that clarifies
that the state cost-share at Superfund sites is limited to
ten percent for both remedial activities and operations and
maintenance (O & M). This provision has been interpreted to
require states to be responsible for 100 percent of the O & M
expenses at a site. Your provision will correct this
inequitable situation, and at the same time, help ensure that
there is no financial bias toward remedies that involve more
intensive O & M than necessary.
The funding provisions in the bill that provide grants to
states and local governments for both response actions as
well as site assessments are very positive steps in assuring
that financial assistance is available so that sites can
actually move toward final cleanups.
Lastly, we applaud you for adding a provision that makes
all federal facilities subject to CERCLA and state hazardous
waste laws to the same extent as other nongovernmental
entities. There is no legitimate rationale for exempting the
federal government from the same environmental protection
laws that apply to businesses, individuals and state and
local government.
We look forward to continuing our strong working
relationship with you on these issues. The nation's Governors
believe that brownfields revitalization and some reasonable
Superfund ``fixes'' can be accomplished if done in a
bipartisan manner and we believe that your bill will go a
long way toward accomplishing that goal. We will work with
you to ensure that this bill has bipartisan support as it
begins to move. If we can be of any assistance, please
contact us directly or have your staff contact Diane S. Shea
at 202/624-5389.
Sincerely,
Governor Kenny C. Guinn,
Chair,
Committee on Natural Resources.
Gov. Thomas J. Vilsack,
Vice Chair,
Committee on Natural Resources.
______
By Mr. JEFFORDS (for himself, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr.
Robb, Mr. L. Chafee, Mr. Bryan, and Mr. Kerry):
S. 2591. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow
tax credits for alternative fuel vehicles and retail sale of
alternative fuels, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
alternative fuels tax incentives act
Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, today, Senator Hatch and I,
together with Senators Rockefeller, Chafee, Bryan, and Kerry are
introducing a bill which we believe will serve two important national
interests: air quality and energy security. We call it the
``Alternative Fuels Tax Incentives Act,'' and it consists of a series
of temporary tax provisions to encourage purchases of cars and trucks
operating on alternative fuels, and to promote the retail sale of these
fuels.
The sharp gasoline price spikes earlier this year were a reminder of
what can happen when the United States is not in control of the source
of the energy it consumes. Some of us remember the long lines in the
mid-1970s, when the Middle East pipeline was shut down, when service
stations rationed the amount of gas you could buy, and when fistfights
broke out over gasoline purchases. Science is now taking us to a point
where we can develop other sources of energy and free ourselves from
this over-reliance on foreign oil.
Imports of foreign oil now exceed 50 percent of our oil consumption.
Most of the oil that we use--more than two-thirds--is used for
transportation. But there's some good news: cars and trucks that
operate with alternative fuels are rapidly becoming a fact of life.
Each of the major automobile manufacturers offers alternative fuel
vehicles, but low production volume and high initial costs have impeded
their widespread use and adoption. Consumers and businesses are
receptive to alternative fuel vehicles and electric vehicles, but are
often reluctant to pay the additional costs manufacturers charge for
them.
This bill's tax incentives will make those vehicles more cost
competitive. With their environmentally-friendly fuels, these vehicles
will mean significant benefits to the air we breathe. The levels of
pollutants emitted by these alternative fuels vehicles are a tiny
fraction of those released from a conventional gasoline or diesel
engine. Some of these cars don't even have tail-pipes. To assure that
owners of alternative fuel vehicles can find fuels
[[Page S4200]]
for their cars, the bill also provides for two incentives to encourage
the retail sales of alternative fuels: a tax credit for retailers for
each gasoline gallon-equivalent of alternative fuel sold, and a
provision allowing retailers to immediately expense up to $100,000 of
the costs of alternative fuel refueling infrastructure.
Passing this bill would mean cleaner air, energy independence, and
more jobs in a developing sector of the auto industry. We have the
technology and the resources to accomplish these goals. And we have
manufacturers ready to deliver. It shouldn't take another oil crisis
for us to get moving on this.
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise today with my friend and colleague,
Senator Jeffords, to introduce the Alternative Fuels Tax Incentives
Act. I am pleased that we are being joined by Senators Rockefeller,
Robb, Chafee, and Bryan as original cosponsors.
This bill is an outgrowth of S. 1003, the Alternative Fuels Promotion
Act of 1999, which was sponsored by many of the same sponsors of this
year's bill. And, like S. 1003, the bill we are introducing today is
designed to achieve two vital goals--reduce our dependency on foreign
oil and reduce air pollution from motor vehicles.
While the goals of both of these bills are the same, Mr. President,
the Alternative Fuels Incentive Act takes a similar, but more
comprehensive approach to achieving them.
There is a little dispute that our growing dependency on imported oil
is dangerous, not only to our continued economic growth, but also to
our national security. We are witnessing again this year just how
volatile the price of gasoline and other motor fuels are and how
decisions made by oil producers far from our shores affect the everyday
lives of all Americans. As we increase our dependence of energy from
others nations, we are literally placing our future in the hands of
foreign entities. Yet, we are stymied at every turn in trying to
significantly increase the discovery and development of new domestic
sources of oil.
At the same time, we continue to face serious air quality challenges
from our almost exclusive use of conventional fuels for motor vehicles.
Just in my home state of Utah, transportation vehicles account for 87
percent of carbon monoxide emissions, 52 percent of nitrogen oxide
emissions, 34 percent of hydrocarbon emissions, and 22 percent of
coarse particulate matter in the air. All of these emissions can be
harmful to individuals suffering from chronic respiratory illnesses,
heart disease, asthma, and other ailments.
More than just harming our health, however, these emissions detract
from the natural beauty of our country. Furthermore, as the United
States grows in population and dependency on automobile transportation,
these problems will only become worse unless something is done to turn
the tide.
Fortunately, Mr. President, answers to both problems exist. Vehicle
technology using domestically plentiful and clean-burning alternative
fuels have advanced to the point that, if widely adapted by Americans,
we could reverse the course on both foreign dependence and clean air.
The challenge is in getting over the hurdle of initial acceptance of
the new technologies by the American public.
In essence, there are currently three market barriers to this initial
acceptance of alternative fuels vehicles by Americans--the incremental
cost of the vehicles over conventionally-fueled vehicles, the cost of
the fuel, and the lack of convenient fueling stations. Providing
incentives--not mandates--to overcome all three of these barriers is
what this bill is all about.
Mr. President, the bill addresses the first barrier--the extra cost
of the alternative fuels vehicles--by providing a tax credit for a
portion of the difference in cost. This is key component of the bill
that was lacking in S. 1003. By bringing the cost of these vehicles
within the range where savings on the cost of the alternative fuel will
make owning these vehicles economically viable over the life of the
vehicle, public acceptance of the technology should rapidly increase.
Once this occurs, production economies of scale will bring the price of
the vehicles down further.
The bill addresses the second and third market barriers, that of fuel
cost and availability, by providing tax credits for the alternative
fuels and tax benefits for suppliers who decide to sell it to the
public. This is important because the ready availability of the fuel in
all geographic locations where the public needs to go or to send goods
is key to their acceptance of alternative fuels vehicles. These tax
benefits, when combined with the market effect caused by the demand for
more fueling stations created by the purchase of more vehicles, will
help ensure that such stations will appear where people need them.
Mr. President, the incentive approach taken by this bill is meant to
provide a temporary bridge over these barriers. If this approach works,
the tax incentives will not be needed in the long run. This is why we
have placed a seven-year sunset on these provisions. At the end of this
period, Congress should take a close look at how well these incentives
worked and how the market has developed.
There is little doubt that sooner or later this Nation will have to
turn to alternative fuels to help solve the two problems I mentioned
earlier. I believe it should be sooner and the move should be
incentive-based and market-driven. The bill we are introducing today
can create the momentum to get us to a cleaner and more secure America
much sooner. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, today I gladly lend my support to the
Alternative Fuels Tax Incentives Act being introduced by Senator
Jeffords, along with Senators Hatch, Robb, Kerry, Bryan, and Chafee. I
join with my colleagues because of my longstanding dedication to
increasing the use of alternative fuels for transportation, and my
understanding that to do so we must stimulate interest in the still
fledgling alternative fuel vehicle industry. The success of this
industry, and the acceptance of these vehicles in the market place, is
critical to lowering our dependence on imported oil, improving the
quality of the air we breathe, and reducing the greenhouse gases our
nation emits.
Let me take a few moments to relate some of the reasons why it is so
important that we reduce our consumption of petroleum and use
alternative sources of energy. The first and most tangible reason is
the need to reduce our nation's dependence on foreign oil. Currently,
we import more than half of the oil consumed in this nation. That
translates to $180,000 per minute that is being spent to purchase
foreign oil. That's bad for our balance of trade, but more important,
none of us want to continue to have our energy costs fluctuate and
spike at the whim of OPEC or any other foreign organization. The recent
price increase shows just how important this is, and how vulnerable we
are.
A second reason is that it is critical that we reduce the
transportation sector's negative impact on air quality. While the
automobile industry has made great strides in reducing the emissions of
cars and trucks, the improvement has been largely offset by the
dramatically increasing number of miles these vehicles are driven each
year, and by our increasing desire for larger, more powerful vehicles.
In 1980, light trucks, a category that includes minivans and SUVs,
accounted for only 19.9 percent of the U.S. automobile market.
Traditionally, these vehicles have been exempted from corporate average
fuel economy (CAFE) standards. In the past couple of years, some in
Congress have been successful in blocking any adjustment to CAFE
standards, including the inclusion of SUVs and minivans. Now the reason
for including them is even more obvious. By 1998, these larger vehicles
accounted for 47.5 percent of the automobile market, with SUVs alone
accounting for 18.1 percent. Clearly, doing something to cut air
pollution and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will require an
enormous change in our transportation sector.
Because I believe it is the right thing to do for the people of West
Virginia, and for the nation as a whole, I have been a long-time
supporter of research into, incentives for, and commercial
implementation of alternative fuel technologies. During my first term
in the United States Senate, I introduced the Alternative Motor Vehicle
Act of 1988. That legislation has been credited with a dramatic
increase in the production of alternatively fueled vehicles,
[[Page S4201]]
notably the so-called flexibly-fueled vehicles, which run on either
alternative fuels or gasoline. In fact, 500,000 of the 17 million cars
sold in the United States in 1999 were flexible-fuel vehicles. In 1992,
when Congress passed the Energy Policy Act (EPAct), I authored and
supported a number of provisions in that law to promote the use of
alternatively-fueled and electric vehicles through tax credits for
vehicle purchase and installation of supporting infrastructure.
Finally, just over a year ago, along with my colleagues Senators
Hatch, Crapo, and Bryan, I introduced the Alternative Fuels Promotion
Act, S. 1003. Both the Alternative Fuels Tax Incentives Act introduced
today, and the Alternative Fuels Promotion Act introduced last year,
would provide the alternative fuel vehicle industry some of the help it
needs to begin to get a sustainable foothold in the market place. While
these bills differ in the size and type of tax incentives, I strongly
believe that both bills are appropriate steps toward a cleaner
environment and a more energy independent nation.
As I have stated on the Floor of the Senate before, the options for
bringing about change in the transportation sector are somewhat
limited. Congress could impose new taxes, mandates, or regulations.
However, these approaches are sometimes unpopular with both the
American people and our colleagues in Congress. I believe the best way
to bring about the change we need is to provide incentives for
manufacturers to develop and sell clean technology and for consumers to
buy and use this technology. I believe that the Alternative Fuels Tax
Incentives Act being introduced today offers manufacturers and
consumers these necessary incentives.
Our domestic automobile manufacturers have developed a number of
clean-running and efficient vehicles. These vehicles are virtually
indistinguishable from their gasoline-powered counterparts in terms of
performance, safety, and comfort. However, there are still two major
barriers to widespread acceptance. The first is cost. Though
manufacturers have made great strides in reducing the cost of these
vehicles, most, including those powered by natural gas, propane,
methanol, and electricity, are still significantly more expensive than
their gasoline-powered counterparts.
A second critical roadblock impeding acceptance of alternatively
fueled vehicles is the lack of an adequate refueling infrastructure. I
received a call a few months ago from a woman who had just purchased a
compressed natural gas-powered car made by a domestic manufacturer. Her
entire car pool loved the car, especially the absence of any ``exhaust
smell'' when you stood behind the car. She was calling to find out if
we could help her locate more places to fuel it. She lives in Boston,
and knew of only three fueling stations within a reasonable driving
area. If this is the case in a major metropolitan area--which has a
significant number of compressed natural gas-powered fleets in
operation--it is clear that we have a long way to go. The Alternative
Fuels Promotion Act offers strong incentives aimed at minimizing these
roadblocks.
We know that when national policy supports the creative energies and
potential of the private sector, progress is made at a faster rate. The
private sector is leading the way in developing alternative fuel
vehicle technology. We need to provide consumers with a strong
financial incentive to use this technology. Certainly, our continued
dependence on foreign oil and the contribution of conventionally-
powered vehicles to air pollution--including greenhouse gases--compels
us to try. I encourage my colleagues to take a hard look at our
environment and our national energy security, and to pass the
Alternative Fuels Tax Incentives Act during this Congress.
I ask unanimous consent that this statement be inserted in the Record
immediately after Senator Jeffords' statement introducing the
Alternative Fuels Tax Incentives Act.
Mr. ROBB. Mr. President, I am pleased to be an original co-sponsor of
the Alternative Fuels Tax Incentive Act. This legislation will help
accomplish two things. First, it will promote the production and use of
cars that use clean fuels, and will consequently improve air quality.
Secondly, the tax credit will improve our energy independence. I
honestly believe that one of the best things we can do for this country
is to find a way to fuel transportation that is cleaner, and more
reliable. Our automobile emissions get cleaner every year. But there
are more of us on the road every year, and we drive more miles every
year. So we have to keep increasing our efforts in the direction of
more efficient vehicles and cleaner fuels.
Earlier this year, we experienced a sharp spike in fuel prices,
courtesy of OPEC. It wasn't the first time and it won't be the last. It
is imperative for our country to keep moving in the direction of energy
independence, and I am convinced that it can be done without
sacrificing convenience, mobility, or the environment. But we need to
find a substitute for gasoline, and we need to combine the most
efficient technologies in a way that provides convenient
transportation.
New automotive technologies are being developed by automobile
companies, in concert with some of our fine engineering schools. All
these technologies show promise, but after the pilot stage and before
achieving mass appeal, there is a critical phase at which we can help a
new idea grow, or we can ignore it and perhaps let it fail. This tax
credit is a tool that can be used to bridge the gap between an
experimental vehicle and a commercially available vehicle. It
encompasses the kind of creative thinking that we need to employ if we
are going to reach a new standard of efficiency in automotive
technology.
I look forward to a full discussion of the benefits of this bill, and
hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this bill, and move for
quick passage.
______
By Mr. SARBANES (for himself, Mr. Daschle, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Kerry,
Mr. Bryan, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Reed, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Bayh, and
Mr. Edwards):
S. 2592. A bill to establish a program to promote access to financial
services, in particular for low- and moderate-income persons who lack
access to such services, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
First Accounts Act of 2000
Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I rise today to address a very
serious problem facing our nation: millions of low- and moderate-income
Americans lack adequate access to basic financial services. I am
pleased to introduce the First Accounts Act of 2000 (``FAA''). This
bill, which has been proposed by the Administration, establishes a
pilot program within the Department of the Treasury designed to promote
access to financial services for the millions of low- and moderate
income persons currently facing barriers to affordable and convenient
banking services. Joining as original co-sponsors in the introduction
of this legislation are the Senate Democratic leader, Senator Daschle,
and my fellow Democratic members of the Banking Committee--Senators
Dodd, Kerry, Bryan, Johnson, Reed, Schumer, Edwards, and Bayh.
Access to basic banking services is essential for Americans seeking
to participate fully in our increasingly complex financial and economic
system. Unfortunately, recent studies show that millions of families
lack access to affordable banking accounts and safe and secure ATMs,
and do not have adequate knowledge of beneficial financial services and
products. The lack of information and access to such financial services
limits economic opportunities for low- and moderate-income persons,
steers them toward high cost services offered by fringe operators in
the financial services industry, reduces their ability to manage their
finances and plan for the future, and may even place these individuals
at a risk to their personal safety. Under the bill, the Treasury
Department is authorized to partner with financial institutions,
community organizations, and financial services electronic networks to
improve access to mainstream financial services in four ways:
affordable banking accounts, safe and secure ATMs, extensive financial
literacy, and research and development efforts.
Affordable Banking Accounts
First, the bill would promote access to financial services by helping
write-down the cost to depository institutions of establishing low-cost
accounts
[[Page S4202]]
for low- and moderate-income consumers. According to the Federal
Reserve, approximately 8.4 million low- and moderate-income families
did not have a bank account in 1998. This represents 22% of such
households. The high cost of banking services--particularly high
minimum opening balances and monthly fee--remains a major obstacle to
many families establishing a relationship with a federally-insured
depository institution. According to the Federal Reserve Board, the
average minimum opening balance requirement was $115 in 1997. Moreover,
a 1999 U.S. Public Interest Research Group study revealed that
consumers who could not meet account minimum balances at banks paid an
average of $217 annually.
Althoguh seven states currently require banks to offer some form of
low-cost banking accounts, there is a growing recognition that banks
would voluntarily expand access to affordable accounts with appropriate
encouragement. For instance, Treasury currently provides incentives
under the Electronic Funds Transfer (``EFT'') program to banks that
provide low-cost accounts for recipients of government checks. More
than 538 federally-insured institutions signed up to offer the low-cost
account during the first nine months of the EFT program.
I am pleased to have worked closely with Treasury in developing the
EFT program to extend its benefits to the ``unbanked'' who receive
government checks. This legislation would build on that experience to
extend the benefits of direct deposit accounts to those who receive
private sector checks.
The lack of access to basic banking services creates numerous
difficulties for the ``unbanked.'' First, it increases the cost of
financial transactions for law- and moderate-income persons. These
individuals pay high service fees to check cashing outlets and other
nonbanks when cashing checks and purchasing money orders. A 1998 study
by the Organization for a New Equality showed that over a lifetime, a
low-income family could pay over $15,000 in fees for cashing checks and
paying bills outside the financial services mainstream.
Moreover, the lack of a banking account often makes it difficult for
low- and moderate-income individuals to establish traditional credit
and limits their ability to access other financial products. First-time
homeowner programs, rental property managers, utility companies, and
credit card companies are increasingly requiring applicants to have
bank accounts. In the absence of a relationship with banks, low- and
moderate-income individuals often end up as customers of fringe bankers
who charge them exorbitant fees to access credit.
safe and secure atms
Second, Treasury would provide assistance to banks and financial
services automated networks that expand the availability of ATMs in
safe, secure, and convenient locations in low-income neighborhoods. The
availability of convenient and safe ATMs and point-of-sale terminals is
taken for granted by most Americans. However, a substantial number of
Americans live in communities where there are either no ATMs or the
ATMs are located in unsafe and insecure environments. A recent Treasury
analysis of census tracts in Los Angeles and New York showed that there
were nearly twice as many ATMs in middle-income census tracts than
there were in low-income areas. The absence of safe and secure ATMs in
many neighborhoods places residents in situations that risk their
personal safety. Every day many low- and moderate-income Americans
decide between the risk of carrying large sums of money on their
persons and going to an ATM at night. The FAA would increase the number
of safe and secure access points into the financial mainstream by
working with financial institutions and financial services networks to
install ATMs in secure locations such as U.S. post offices. A pilot
program between Treasury and a major financial institution has already
placed ATMs in post offices in underserved communities in Baltimore and
Tallahassee, and there are plans to expand the program to post offices
across the country.
financial literacy
Third, FAA would support financial education for low- and moderate-
income Americans. Proponents of affordable banking services and
products have come to recognize that the creation and design of these
services only represents an initial step to improving access for this
segment of the population. States such as New York have discovered that
despite the existence of affordable banking accounts targeted towards
underserved communities, many people do not take advantage of such
services because they either do not know that such services are
available or do not believe that they would benefit. This lack of
information remains one of the greatest obstacles to bringing
``unbanked'' Americans into the economic mainstream. Through
partnerships with community organizations and a public awareness
campaign, Treasury will educate low- and moderate-income Americans
about the availability of affordable financial services and the
usefulness of having a bank account, managing household finances and
building assets.
research and development
Finally, the FAA authorizes the Treasury to conduct research and
development in order to expand access to financial services for low-
and moderate-income communities.
The Administration has strongly supported expanding access to
financial services for all Americans. The FAA would build upon and
expand current initiatives by the Administration. The Administration's
FY 2001 budget seeks an appropriation of $30 million in fiscal year
2001 for this program.
The First Accounts Act will help millions of low- and moderate-income
Americans who lack access to affordable and convenient financial
services to become part of the economic mainstream. This will be to
their benefit, the benefit of the financial institutions with which
they do business, and the benefit of our society as a whole. This
modest legislation can make an enormous contribution to giving all
Americans the opportunity to participate fully in our current economic
prosperity. I urge its support by all of my colleagues.
______
By Mr. GORTON (for himself, Mr. DeWine, Mr. Voinovich, Mrs.
Murray, Mr. Crapo, and Mr. Craig):
S. 2597. A bill to clarify that environmental protection, safety, and
health provisions continue to apply to the functions of the National
Nuclear Security Administration to the same extent as those provisions
applied to those functions before transfer to the Administration; to
the Committee on Armed Services.
legislation assuring cleanup of defense sites
Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, in 1989, the Department of Energy
signed an historic agreement with the State of Washington and the
Environmental Protection Agency, committing to clean up the Hanford
Nuclear Reservation in the South-Central part of the State of
Washington. This pact, known as ``The Tri-Party Agreement'' has, for
the most part, worked well to assure that the federal government keeps
its commitment to the citizens of the state of Washington to keep the
byproducts of nuclear materials production from harming the people who
live and work in that area.
Last year, responding to different pressures, Congress created the
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). Some officials,
including my own state Attorney General, are concerned that the
creation of the NNSA may create some uncertainty as to the Department
of Energy's continued legal obligation to clean up the site. The NNSA
was never intended to disrupt the enforceability of legal agreements
that assure sites such as Hanford are to be cleaned up under specific
timelines.
The purpose of this legislation is to clarify that environmental,
safety and health provisions continue to apply to the functions of the
recently created NNSA to the same extent as they applied to those
functions before transfer to the NNSA.
While the legislative history of the legislation creating the
National Nuclear Security Administration demonstrated clear
Congressional intent that the NNSA remain subject to state, federal and
local environment, safety and health requirements, some have raised
concern that the legislation could be construed as narrowing the
existing waivers of federal sovereign immunity with respect to these
requirements.
[[Page S4203]]
The Department of Energy hosts some of the most challenging
environmental contamination sites in the country. Although the Hanford
site is perhaps the biggest challenge, there are sites in several other
states as well.
It is critical to the preservation of the environment and the
protection of human health that states maintain their existing
authority to enforce environmental, safety, and health requirements
with respect to Department of Energy facilities under the NNSA's
control.
A wide range of support exists for this legislation clarifying that
the earlier legislation creating the NNSA was not intended to impair
state regulatory authority over facilities under the NNSA's
jurisdiction. Organizations supporting this legislation include the
National Governors Association, the National Conference of State
Legislatures, and the National Association of Attorneys General.
Just as this bill will clarify that the NNSA does not impair state
regulatory authority over facilities under the NNSA's jurisdiction, the
bill is carefully worded so as not to expand the states' authority in
this regard. This bill simply reaffirms the ability of states to use
the enforcement measures that are contained in cleanup agreements made
with the federal government, such as the Tri-Party Agreement.
______
By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Mr. Murkowski, Mr. Hatch, Mr.
Daschle, Mr. Abraham, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Moynihan, Mrs. Boxer,
Mr. Schumer, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Smith of Oregon, Mr. Kohl, Mr.
Levin, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Robb, Mr. Wellstone, Mr.
Lieberman, and Mr. Inouye):
S. 2598. A bill to authorize appropriations for the United States
Holocaust Memorial Museum, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources.
united states holocaust memorial museum reauthorization
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, today I am introducing
legislation which reauthorizes appropriations for the United States
Holocaust Memorial Museum. In addition to extending the authorization
for the museum and the United States Holocaust Memorial Council, the
bill makes several clarifying and conforming changes to the 1980
enabling legislation to incorporate the recommendations of a recently
completed review of the museum and the council by the National Academy
of Public Administration.
As described in the museum's mission statement, the United States
Holocaust Memorial Museum is America's national institution for the
documentation, study, and interpretation of Holocaust history, and
serves as this country's memorial to the millions of people murdered
during the Holocaust. The Museum's primary mission is to advance and
disseminate knowledge about this unprecedented tragedy; to preserve the
memory of those who suffered; and to encourage its visitors to reflect
upon the moral and spiritual questions raised by the events of the
Holocaust as well as their own responsibilities as citizens of a
democracy.
Since the museum was opened to the public in 1993, it has been one of
the most heavily visited sites in our nation's capital, with more than
2 million visitors last year. Previous bills authorizing appropriations
for the museum have enjoyed broad bipartisan support, and I am pleased
that this bill is no exception, with over 17 original cosponsors on
both sides of the aisle.
Mr. President, identical legislation has already been introduced in
the other body. Given the broad support for the museum and the memorial
council, it is my hope that the Senate will approve this legislation
expeditiously. 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. 2598
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. AMENDMENT.
Chapter 23 of title 36, United States Code, is amended to
read as follows:
``CHAPTER 23--UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM
``Sec. 2301. Establishment of the United States Holocaust Memorial
Museum; functions.
``Sec. 2302. Functions of the Council; membership.
``Sec. 2303. Compensation; travel expenses; full-time officers or
employees of United States or Members of Congress.
``Sec. 2304. Administrative provisions.
``Sec. 2305. Staff.
``Sec. 2306. Memorial museum.
``Sec. 2307. Gifts, bequests, and devises of property; tax treatment.
``Sec. 2308. Annual report.
``Sec. 2309. Audit of financial transactions.
``Sec. 2310. Authorization of appropriations.
``SEC. 2301. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST
MEMORIAL MUSEUM; FUNCTIONS.
``The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (hereinafter
in this chapter referred to as the `Museum') is an
independent establishment of the United States Government.
The Museum shall--
``(1) provide for appropriate ways for the Nation to
commemorate the Days of Remembrance, as an annual, national,
civic commemoration of the Holocaust, and encourage and
sponsor appropriate observances of such Days of Remembrance
throughout the United States;
``(2) operate and maintain a permanent living memorial
museum to the victims of the Holocaust, in cooperation with
the Secretary of the Interior and other Federal agencies as
provided in section 2306 of this title; and
``(3) carry out the recommendations of the President's
Commission on the Holocaust in its report to the President of
September 27, 1979, to the extent such recommendations are
not otherwise provided for in this chapter.
``SEC. 2302. FUNCTIONS OF THE COUNCIL; MEMBERSHIP.
``(a) In General.--The United States Holocaust Memorial
Council (hereinafter in this chapter referred to as the
`Council') shall be the board of trustees of the Museum and
shall have overall governance responsibility for the Museum,
including policy guidance and strategic direction, general
oversight of Museum operations, and fiduciary responsibility.
The Council shall establish an Executive Committee which
shall exercise ongoing governance responsibility when the
Council is not in session.
``(b) Composition of Council; Appointment; Vacancies.--The
Council shall consist of 65 voting members appointed (except
as otherwise provided in this section) by the President and
the following ex officio nonvoting members:
``(1) 1 appointed by the Secretary of the Interior.
``(2) 1 appointed by the Secretary of State.
``(3) 1 appointed by the Secretary of Education. Of the 65
voting members, 5 shall be appointed by the Speaker of the
United States House of Representatives from among Members of
the United States House of Representatives and 5 shall be
appointed by the President pro tempore of the United States
Senate upon the recommendation of the majority and minority
leaders from among Members of the United States Senate. Any
vacancy in the Council shall be filled in the same manner as
the original appointment was made.
``(c) Term of Office.--
``(1) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection,
Council members shall serve for 5-year terms.
``(2) The terms of the 5 Members of the United States House
of Representatives and the 5 Members of the United States
Senate appointed during any term of Congress shall expire at
the end of such term of Congress.
``(3) Any member appointed to fill a vacancy occurring
before the expiration of the term for which his predecessor
was appointed shall be appointed only for the remainder of
such term. A member, other than a Member of Congress
appointed by the Speaker of the United States House of
Representatives or the President pro tempore of the United
States Senate, may serve after the expiration of his term
until his successor has taken office.
``(d) Chairperson and Vice Chairperson; Term of Office.--
The Chairperson and Vice Chairperson of the Council shall be
appointed by the President from among the members of the
Council and such Chairperson and Vice Chairperson shall each
serve for terms of 5 years.
``(e) Reappointment.--Members whose terms expire may be
reappointed, and the Chairperson and Vice Chairperson may be
appointed to those offices.
``(f) Bylaws.--The Council shall adopt bylaws to carry out
its functions under this chapter. The Chairperson may waive a
bylaw when the Chairperson decides that waiver is in the best
interest of the Council. Immediately after waiving a bylaw,
the Chairperson shall send written notice of the waiver to
every voting member of the Council. The waiver becomes final
30 days after the notice is sent unless a majority of Council
members disagree in writing before the end of the 30-day
period.
``(g) Quorum.--One-third of the members of the Council
shall constitute a quorum, and any vacancy in the Council
shall not affect its powers to function.
``(h) Associated Committees.--Subject to appointment by the
Chairperson, an individual who is not a member of the Council
may be designated as a member of a committee associated with
the Council. Such an
[[Page S4204]]
individual shall serve without cost to the Federal
Government.
``SEC. 2303. COMPENSATION; TRAVEL EXPENSES; FULL-TIME
OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES OF UNITED STATES OR
MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.
``(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b) of
this section, members of the Council are each authorized to
be paid the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay
in effect for positions at level IV of the Executive Schedule
under section 5315 of title 5, for each day (including travel
time) during which they are engaged in the actual performance
of duties of the Council. While away from their homes or
regular places of business in the performance of services for
the Council, members of the Council shall be allowed travel
expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, in the
same manner as persons employed intermittently in Government
service are allowed expenses under suction 5703 of title 5.
``(b) Exception.--Members of the Council who are full-time
officers or employees of the United States or Members of
Congress shall receive no additional pay by reason of their
service on the Council.
``SEC. 2304. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.
``(a) Experts and Consultants.--The Museum may obtain the
services of experts and consultants in accordance with the
provisions of section 3109 of title 5, at rates not to exceed
the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay in
effect for positions at level IV of the Executive Schedule
under section 5315 of title 5.
``(b) Authority To Contract.--The Museum may, in accordance
with applicable law, enter into contracts and other
arrangements with public agencies and with private
organizations and persons and may make such payments as may
be necessary to carry out its functions under this chapter.
``(c) Assistance From Other Federal Departments and
Agencies.--The Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, the
Library of Congress, and the heads of all executive branch
departments, agencies, and establishments of the United
States may assist the Museum in the performance of its
functions under this chapter.
``(d) Administrative Services and Support.--The Secretary
of the Interior may provide administrative services and
support to the Museum on a reimbursable basis.
``SEC. 2305. STAFF.
``(a) Establishment of the Museum Director as Chief
Executive Officer.--There shall be a director of the Museum
(hereinafter in this chapter referred to as the `Director')
who shall serve as chief executive officer of the Museum and
exercise day-to-day authority for the Museum. The Director
shall be appointed by the Chairperson of the Council, subject
to confirmation of the Council. The Director may be paid with
nonappropriated funds, and, if paid with appropriated funds
shall be paid the rate of basic pay for positions at level IV
of the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of title 5. The
Director shall report to the Council and its Executive
Committee through the Chairperson. The Director shall serve
at the pleasure of the Council.
``(b) Appointment of Employees.--The Director shall have
authority to--
``(1) appoint employees in the competitive service subject
to the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter
53 of title 5, relating to classification and general
schedule pay rates;
``(2) appoint and fix the compensation (at a rate not to
exceed the rate of basic pay in effect for positions at level
IV of the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of title 5)
of us to 3 employees not-withstanding any other provision of
law; and
``(3) implement the decisions and strategic plan for the
Museum, as approved by the Council, and perform such other
functions as may be assigned from time to time by the
Council, the Executive Committee of the Council, or the
Chairperson of the Council, consistent with this legislation.
``SEC. 2306. MEMORIAL MUSEUM.
``(a) Architectural Design Approval.--The architectural
design for the memorial museum shall be subject to the
approval of the Secretary of the Interior, in consultation
with the Commission of Fine Arts and the National Capital
Planning Commission.
``(b) Insurance.--The Museum shall maintain insurance on
the memorial museum to cover such risks, in such amount, and
containing such terms and conditions as the Museum deems
necessary.
``SEC. 2307. GIFTS, BEQUESTS, AND DEVISES OF PROPERTY: TAX
TREATMENT.
``The Museum may solicit, and the Museum may accept, hold,
administer, invest, and use gifts, bequests, and devises of
property, both real and personal, and all revenues received
or generated by the Museum to aid or facilitate the operation
and maintenance of the memorial museum. Property may be
accepted pursuant to this section, and the property and the
proceeds thereof used as nearly as possible in accordance
with the terms of the gift, bequest, or devise donating such
property. Funds donated to and accepted by the Museum
pursuant to this section or otherwise received or
generated by the Museum are not to be regarded as
appropriated funds and are not subject to any requirements
or restrictions applicable to appropriated funds. For the
purposes of Federal income, estate, and gift taxes,
property accepted under this section shall be considered
as a gift, bequest, or devise to the United States.
``SEC. 2308. ANNUAL REPORT.
``The Director shall transmit to Congress an annual report
on the Director's stewardship of the authority to operate and
maintain the memorial museum. Such report shall include the
following:
``(1) An accounting of all financial transactions involving
donated funds.
``(2) A description of the extent to which the objectives
of this chapter are being met.
``(3) An examination of future major endeavors,
initiatives, programs, or activities that the Museum proposes
to undertake to better fulfill the objectives of this
chapter.
``(4) An examination of the Federal role in the funding of
the Museum and its activities, and any changes that may be
warranted.
``SEC. 2309. AUDIT OF FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS.
``Financial transactions of the Museum, including those
involving donated funds, shall be audited by the Comptroller
General as requested by Congress, in accordance with
generally accepted auditing standards. In conducting any
audit pursuant to this section, appropriate representatives
of the Comptroller General shall have access to all books,
accounts, financial records, reports, files and other papers,
items or property in use by the Museum, as necessary to
facilitate such audit, and such representatives shall be
afforded full facilities for verifying transactions with the
balances.
``SEC. 2310. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
``To carry out the purposes of this chapter, there are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none of the funds
authorized to carry out this chapter may be made available
for construction. Authority to enter into contracts and to
make payments under this chapter, using funds authorized to
be appropriated under this chapter, shall be effective only
to the extent, and in such amounts, as provided in advance in
appropriations Acts.''.
Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill
with my good friend, Senator Bingaman that will reauthorize the United
States Holocaust Memorial Museum.
The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum is America's national
institution for the documentation, study, and interpretation of the
history of the Holocaust and serves as this country's memorial to the
millions of people murdered during the Holocaust.
The Museum's primary mission is to advance and disseminate knowledge
about the unprecedented tragedy; to preserve the memory of those who
suffered; and to encourage its visitors to reflect upon the moral
questions raised by the events of the Holocaust as well as their own
responsibilities as citizens of a democracy.
The work of the Museum is not limited to the building which overlooks
the tidal basin here in Washington, D.C. I and my constituents in
Alaska have benefitted from the work of the Museum. Through a system of
very well designed traveling exhibits the Museum has been able to bring
the story of the Holocaust, and its related history to millions of
Americans nationwide. I know my constituents in Anchorage and Fairbanks
will never forget their opportunity to view the traveling programs.
The legislation makes some changes in the management authorities for
the Museum and streamlines the procedures to appoint the Museum's
Director. The legislation also provides the United States Holocaust
Memorial Museum with the same permanent authorization as we have
previously provided for the Smithsonian Institution.
Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan
legislation.
______
By Mr. ABRAHAM (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Grams, Mr. Kennedy,
Ms. Snowe, Mr. Craig, Ms. Collins, Mr. Gorton, Mr. Jeffords,
Mr. Schumer, Mr. Graham, Mr. Levin, Mr. DeWine, and Mrs.
Murray):
S. 2599. A bill to amend section 110 of the Illegal Immigration
Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
immigration and naturalization service data management improvement act
of 2000
Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Immigration
and Naturalization Service Data Management Improvement Act of 2000.
This bill is designed to save jobs in Michigan and other states and
prevent potentially enormous, hours-long traffic delays on the U.S.-
Canadian border. That is achieved by amending Section 110 of the 1996
immigration law.
Mr. President, Section 110 of the 1996 Immigration Act mandated that
an automated system be established to record the entry and exit of all
aliens as a means to provide more information on individuals who ``over
stay''
[[Page S4205]]
their visas. In the opinion of many it became clear that this well-
intentioned measured, if implemented, could have an unforeseen impact.
Today, when INS or Customs officials inspect people at land borders,
they examine papers as necessary and make quick determinations, using
their discretion on when to solicit more information. According to Dan
Stamper, President of the Detroit International Bridge Company, if
every single passenger of every single vehicle were required to provide
detailed information in a form that could be entered into a computer--
even assuming an incredibly quick 30 seconds per individual--the
traffic delays could exceed 20 hours in numerous jurisdictions at the
Northern border. This would obviously create significant economic and
even environmental harm. Moreover, it would divert scarce law
enforcement resources away from more effective measures.
Out of concern for its harmful impact on Michigan and law
enforcement, I passed legislation in 1998 to delay implementation of
Section 110 from its original start date of Sept. 30, 1998, until March
30, 2001. But it remained clear that a delay could not sufficiently
satisfy concerns that the INS might develop a system that would prove
harmful to the people of Michigan and other states.
Mr. President, Fred Upton showed great leadership in the House on
this issue and served his constituents extraordinarily well in helping
to forge this compromise. Lamar Smith deserves great credit for working
closely with us and his other House colleagues in making an agreement
that meets the economic and security interests of all sides on this
issue.
This is a great victory for the people of Michigan. This agreement
strikes the right balance in enhancing our security and immigration
enforcement needs while ensuring that we preserve the jobs and the
other economic benefits Michigan receives from our close relationship
with Canada.
This bill, the product of the agreement with the House, replaces the
current requirement that by March 30, 2001, a record of arrival and
departure be collected for every alien at all ports of entry with a
more achievable requirement that the Immigration and Naturalization
Service develop an ``integrated entry and exit data system'' that
focuses on data INS already regularly collects at ports of entry.
The goal of Section 110 has been to track individuals who overstay
their allowable stay in the United States. That goal is redirected into
a more achievable direction. INS will be directed to put in electronic
and retrievable form the information already collected at ports of
entry and pursue other measures steps to improve enforcement of U.S.
immigration laws. In addition, a task force chaired by the Attorney
General that will include representatives of other government agencies
and the private sector is established to examine the need for and costs
of any additional measures, including additional security measures, at
our borders. The bill also calls for increased international
cooperation in securing the land borders.
In essence, the agreement substitutes this approach in place of a
mandate that a system be developed that would have required that all
foreign travelers or U.S. permanent residents be individually recorded
into a system at ports of entry and exit, thereby likely bringing
traffic to a halt on the northern border for miles, trapping U.S.
travelers in the process and costing potentially tens of thousands of
jobs in manufacturing, tourism and other industries. The agreement also
maintains the status quo in preventing new documentary requirements on
Canadian travelers.
Mr. President, the bottom line is that we will have a system that
enhances law enforcement capabilities and will not impose new or
onerous requirements on travelers that would damage Americans or the
American economy.
I would like to thank the cosponsors of this legislation who have
been so important in achieving success in this long three-year effort:
Senators Leahy, Grams, Kennedy, Snowe, Collins, Craig, Gorton,
Jeffords, Schumer, Graham, Levin, DeWine, and Murray.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the
legislation be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 2599
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 ``Immigration and
Naturalization Service Data Management Improvement Act of
2000''.
SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 110 OF IIRIRA.
(a) In General.--Section 110 of the Illegal Immigration
Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C.
1221 note) is amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 110. INTEGRATED ENTRY AND EXIT DATA SYSTEM.
``(a) Requirement.--The Attorney General shall implement an
integrated entry and exit data system.
``(b) Integrated entry and exit data system defined.--For
purposes of this section, the term `integrated entry and exit
data system' means an electronic system that--
``(1) provides access to, and integrates, alien arrival and
departure data that are--
``(A) authorized or required to be created or collected
under law;
``(B) in an electronic format; and
``(C) in a data base of the Department of Justice or the
Department of State, including those created or used at ports
of entry and at consular offices;
``(2) uses available data described in paragraph (1) to
produce a report of arriving and departing aliens by country
of nationality, classification as an immigrant or
nonimmigrant, and date of arrival in, and departure from, the
United States;
``(3) matches an alien's available arrival data with the
alien's available departure data;
``(4) assists the Attorney General (and the Secretary of
State, to the extent necessary to carry out such Secretary's
obligations under immigration law) to identify, through on-
line searching procedures, lawfully admitted nonimmigrants
who may have remained in the United States beyond the period
authorized by the Attorney General; and
``(5) otherwise uses available alien arrival and departure
data described in paragraph (1) to permit the Attorney
General to make the reports required under subsection (e).
``(c) Construction.--
``(1) No additional authority to impose documentary or data
collection requirements.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to permit the Attorney General or the Secretary of
State to impose any new documentary or data collection
requirements on any person in order to satisfy the
requirements of this section, including--
``(A) requirements on any alien for whom the documentary
requirements in section 212(a)(7)(B) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(7)(B)) have been waived by
the Attorney General and the Secretary of State under section
212(d)(4)(B) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(B)); or
``(B) requirements that are inconsistent with the North
American Free Trade Agreement.
``(2) No reduction of authority.--Nothing in this section
shall be construed to reduce or curtail any authority of the
Attorney General or the Secretary of State under any other
provision of law.
``(d) Deadlines.--
``(1) Airports and seaports.--Not later than December 31,
2003, the Attorney General shall implement the integrated
entry and exit data system using available alien arrival and
departure data described in subsection (b)(1) pertaining to
aliens arriving in, or departing from, the United States at
an airport or seaport. Such implementation shall include
ensuring that such data, when collected or created by an
immigration officer at an airport or seaport, are entered
into the system and can be accessed by immigration officers
at other airports and seaports.
``(2) High-traffic land border ports of entry.--Not later
than December 31, 2004, the Attorney General shall implement
the integrated entry and exit data system using the data
described in paragraph (1) and available alien arrival and
departure data described in subsection (b)(1) pertaining to
aliens arriving in, or departing from, the United States at
the 50 land border ports of entry determined by the Attorney
General to serve the highest numbers of arriving and
departing aliens. Such implementation shall include ensuring
that such data, when collected or created by an immigration
officer at such a port of entry, are entered into the system
and can be accessed by immigration officers at airports,
seaports, and other such land border ports of entry.
``(3) Remaining data.--Not later than December 31, 2005,
the Attorney General shall fully implement the integrated
entry and exit data system using all data described in
subsection (b)(1). Such implementation shall include ensuring
that all such data are available to immigration officers at
all ports of entry into the United States.
``(e) Reports.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than December 31 of each year
following the commencement of implementation of the
integrated entry and exit data system, the Attorney General
shall use the system to prepare an annual report to the
Committees on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives
and of the Senate.
``(2) Information.--Each report shall include the following
information with respect
[[Page S4206]]
to the preceding fiscal year, and an analysis of that
information:
``(A) The number of aliens for whom departure data was
collected during the reporting period, with an accounting by
country of nationality of the departing alien.
``(B) The number of departing aliens whose departure data
was successfully matched to the alien's arrival data, with an
accounting by the alien's country of nationality and by the
alien's classification as an immigrant or nonimmigrant.
``(C) The number of aliens who arrived pursuant to a
nonimmigrant visa, or as a visitor under the visa waiver
program under section 217 of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1187), for whom no matching departure data have
been obtained through the system or through other means as of
the end of the alien's authorized period of stay, with an
accounting by the alien's country of nationality and date of
arrival in the United States.
``(D) The number of lawfully admitted nonimmigrants
identified as having remained in the United States beyond the
period authorized by the Attorney General, with an accounting
by the alien's country of nationality.
``(f) Authority to Provide Access to System.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to subsection (d), the Attorney
General, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall
determine which officers and employees of the Departments of
Justice and State may enter data into, and have access to the
data contained in, the integrated entry and exit data system.
``(2) Other law enforcement officials.--The Attorney
General, in the discretion of the Attorney General, may
permit other Federal, State, and local law enforcement
officials to have access to the data contained in the
integrated entry and exit data system for law enforcement
purposes.
``(g) Use of Task Force Recommendations.--The Attorney
General shall continuously update and improve the integrated
entry and exit data system as technology improves and using
the recommendations of the task force established under
section 3 of the Immigration and Naturalization Service Data
Management Improvement Act of 2000.
``(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section such
sums as may be necessary for fiscal years 2001 through
2008.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents of the
Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act
of 1996 is amended by amending the item relating to section
110 to read as follows:
``Sec. 110. Integrated entry and exit data system.''.
SEC. 3. TASK FORCE.
(a) Establishment.--Not later than 6 months after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Attorney General, in
consultation with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of
Commerce, and the Secretary of the Treasury, shall establish
a task force to carry out the duties described in subsection
(c) (in this section referred to as the ``Task Force'').
(b) Membership.--
(1) Chairperson; appointment of members.--The Task Force
shall be composed of the Attorney General and 16 other
members appointed in accordance with paragraph (2). The
Attorney General shall be the chairperson and shall appoint
the other members.
(2) Appointment requirements.--In appointing the other
members of the Task Force, the Attorney General shall
include--
(A) representatives of Federal, State, and local agencies
with an interest in the duties of the Task Force, including
representatives of agencies with an interest in--
(i) immigration and naturalization;
(ii) travel and tourism;
(iii) transportation;
(iv) trade;
(v) law enforcement;
(vi) national security; or
(vii) the environment; and
(B) private sector representatives of affected industries
and groups.
(3) Terms.--Each member shall be appointed for the life of
the Task Force. Any vacancy shall be filled by the Attorney
General.
(4) Compensation.--
(A) In general.--Each member of the Task Force shall serve
without compensation, and members who are officers or
employees of the United States shall serve without
compensation in addition to that received for their services
as officers or employees of the United States.
(B) Travel expenses.--The members of the Task Force shall
be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of
subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies
under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States
Code, while away from their homes or regular places of
business in the performance of service for the Task Force.
(c) Duties.--The Task Force shall evaluate the following:
(1) How the Attorney General can efficiently and
effectively carry out section 110 of the Illegal Immigration
Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C.
1221 note), as amended by section 2 of this Act.
(2) How the United States can improve the flow of traffic
at airports, seaports, and land border ports of entry
through--
(A) enhancing systems for data collection and data sharing,
including the integrated entry and exit data system described
in section 110 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1221 note), as
amended by section 2 of this Act, by better use of
technology, resources, and personnel;
(B) increasing cooperation between the public and private
sectors;
(C) increasing cooperation among Federal agencies and among
Federal and State agencies; and
(D) modifying information technology systems while taking
into account the different data systems, infrastructure, and
processing procedures of airports, seaports, and land border
ports of entry.
(3) The cost of implementing each of its recommendations.
(d) Staff and Support Services.--
(1) In general.--The Attorney General may, without regard
to the civil service laws and regulations, appoint and
terminate an executive director and such other additional
personnel as may be necessary to enable the Task Force to
perform its duties. The employment and termination of an
executive director shall be subject to confirmation by a
majority of the members of the Task Force.
(2) Compensation.--The executive director shall be
compensated at a rate not to exceed the rate payable for
level V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of title
5, United States Code. The Attorney General may fix the
compensation of other personnel without regard to the
provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of
title 5, United States Code, relating to classification of
positions and General Schedule pay rates, except that the
rate of pay for such personnel may not exceed the rate
payable for level V of the Executive Schedule under section
5316 of such title.
(3) Detail of government employees.--Any Federal Government
employee, with the approval of the head of the appropriate
Federal agency, may be detailed to the Task Force without
reimbursement, and such detail shall be without interruption
or loss of civil service status, benefits, or privilege.
(4) Procurement of temporary and intermittent services.--
The Attorney General may procure temporary and intermittent
services for the Task Force under section 3109(b) of title 5,
United States Code, at rates for individuals not to exceed
the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay
prescribed for level V of the Executive Schedule under
section 5316 of such title.
(5) Administrative support services.--Upon the request of
the Attorney General, the Administrator of General Services
shall provide to the Task Force, on a reimbursable basis, the
administrative support services necessary for the Task Force
to carry out its responsibilities under this section.
(e) Hearings and Sessions.--The Task Force may, for the
purpose of carrying out this section, hold hearings, sit and
act at times and places, take testimony, and receive evidence
as the Task Force considers appropriate.
(f) Obtaining Official Data.--The Task Force may secure
directly from any department or agency of the United States
information necessary to enable it to carry out this section.
Upon request of the Attorney General, the head of that
department or agency shall furnish that information to the
Task Force.
(g) Reports.--
(1) Deadline.--Not later than December 31, 2002, and not
later than December 31 of each year thereafter in which the
Task Force is in existence, the Attorney General shall submit
a report to the Committees on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives and of the Senate containing the findings,
conclusions, and recommendations of the Task Force. Each
report shall also measure and evaluate how much progress the
Task Force has made, how much work remains, how long the
remaining work will take to complete, and the cost of
completing the remaining work.
(2) Delegation.--The Attorney General may delegate to the
Commissioner, Immigration and Naturalization Service, the
responsibility for preparing and transmitting any such
report.
(h) Legislative Recommendations.--
(1) In general.--The Attorney General shall make such
legislative recommendations as the Attorney General deems
appropriate--
(A) to implement the recommendations of the Task Force; and
(B) to obtain authorization for the appropriation of funds,
the expenditure of receipts, or the reprogramming of existing
funds to implement such recommendations.
(2) Delegation.--The Attorney General may delegate to the
Commissioner, Immigration and Naturalization Service, the
responsibility for preparing and transmitting any such
legislative recommendations.
(i) Termination.--The Task Force shall terminate on a date
designated by the Attorney General as the date on which the
work of the Task Force has been completed.
(j) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section such sums as may
be necessary for fiscal years 2001 through 2003.
SEC. 4. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING INTERNATIONAL BORDER
MANAGEMENT COOPERATION.
It is the sense of the Congress that the Attorney General,
in consultation with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of
Commerce, and the Secretary of the Treasury,
[[Page S4207]]
should consult with affected foreign governments to improve
border management cooperation.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am pleased to cosponsor this bill, which
will help protect both America's economy and our relationship with
Canada. In particular, citizens of states all across our Northern
Border should breathe a sigh of relief that we appear to be close to
finding a legislative solution to a potentially serious problem brewing
along our border with Canada.
This bill will replace section 110 of the Illegal Immigration Reform
and Responsibility Act (IIRIRA). Section 110 would mandate that the
Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) establish an automated
system to record the entry and exit of all aliens in order to track
their movements within the United States and to determine those who
``overstay'' their visas. the system has not yet been implemented.
By requiring an automated system for monitoring the entry and exit of
``all aliens,'' this provision requires that INS and Customs agents
stop each vehicle or individual entering or exiting the United States
at all ports of entry. Canadians, U.S. permanent residents and many
others who are not currently required to show documentation of their
status would likely either have to carry some form of identification or
fill out paperwork at the points of entry.
This sort of tracking system would be costly to implement along the
Northern Border, especially since there is no current system or
infrastructure to track the departure of citizens and others leaving
the United States.
Section 110 would also lead to excessive and costly traffic delays
for those living and working near the border. These delays would surely
have a negative impact on the $2.4 billion in goods and services
shipped annually from Vermont to Canada and would likely reduce the
$120 million per year which Canadians spend in Vermont.
The Immigration and Naturalization Service Data Management
Improvement Act will replace the existing Section 110 with a new
provision that requires the Attorney General to implement an
``integrated entry and exit data system.'' This system would simply
integrate the arrival and departure data which already is authorized or
required to be collected under current law, and which is in electronic
format within databases held by the Justice and State Departments. The
INS would not be required to take new steps to collect information from
those entering and leaving the country, meaning that Canadians will
have the same ability to enter the United States as they do today.
This bill will ensure that tourists and trade continue to freely
cross the border, without additional documentation requirements. This
bill will also guarantee that more than $1 billion daily cross-border
trade is not hindered in any way. Just as importantly, Vermonters and
others who cross our nation's land borders on a daily basis to work or
visit with family or friends should be able to continue to do so
without additional border delays.
This is an issue that I have worked on ever since section 110 was
originally adopted in 1996. In 1997, along with Senator Abraham and
others, I introduced the ``Border Improvement and Immigration Act of
1997.'' Among other things, that legislation would have (1)
specifically exempted Canadians from any new documentation or paperwork
requirements when crossing the border into the United States; (2)
required the Attorney General to discuss the development of
``reciprocal agreements'' with the Secretary of State and the
governments of contiguous countries to collect the data on visa
overstayers; and (3) required the Attorney General to increase the
number of INS inspectors by 300 per year and the number of Customs
inspectors by 150 per year for the next three years, with at least half
of those inspectors being assigned to the Northern Border.
I also worked with Senator Abraham, Senator Kennedy, and other
Senators to obtain postponements in the implementation date for the
automated system mandated by section 110. We were successful in those
attempts, delaying implementation until March 30, 2001. But delays are
by nature only a temporary solution; in the legislation we introduce
today, I believe we have found a permanent solution that allows us to
keep track of the flow of foreign nationals entering and leaving the
United States without crippling commerce or our important relationship
with Canada. That is why I am proud to support this legislation, and
why I urge prompt action.
____________________