[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 102 (Friday, July 20, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8015-S8023]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. CAMPBELL (for himself, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Daschle, Mr. 
        Johnson, and Mr. Burns):
  S. 1210. A bill to reauthorize the Native American Housing Assistance 
and Self-Determination Act of 1996; to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I am pleased to be joined by Senators 
Inouye, Daschle, Johnson, and Burns in introducing a bill that 
reauthorizes the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-
Determination Act, NAHASDA, of 1996, P.L. 104-330. As many of my 
colleagues know, NAHASDA promotes tribal self-determination and self-
sufficiency as it builds upon the government-to-government relationship 
that exists between Indian tribes and the Federal Government.
  NAHASDA became effective on October 1, 1997 and provides a single, 
flexible block grant for tribes or tribally-designated housing 
entities, TDHE, to administer Federal housing assistance. Under this 
block grant system, NAHASDA empowers tribes to determine local needs 
and authorizes tribal decision making when it comes to Indian housing 
policy.
  Before NAHASDA, the Federal Government dictated the planning, 
financing and building of Indian housing. Since NAHASDA's enactment, 
tribes are in the ``driver's seat,'' and have the right to make certain 
decisions with regard to resource allocation; and also have the 
responsibility to determine the needs of their members and to make 
every effort to satisfy those needs.

  In the past five years, NAHASDA has assisted tribes in making great 
strides in the quality and quantity of housing provided to Indian and 
Alaska Native communities. In fact, HUD estimates that over 25,000 new 
units of housing have been placed in Indian and Alaska Native 
communities under NAHASDA. This number is 10 times the maximum annual 
number of units provided for Indian communities under the previous 
Indian housing program.
  Even with all the success of NAHASDA, Indian communities continue to 
live in the worst housing conditions in the United States. In fact, 
Indian housing is often and justifiably compared to the conditions 
present in Third World countries. Some of the startling statistics that 
characterize housing in Indian communities show that: 1 out of every 5 
Indian homes lacks complete plumbing; 40 percent of homes on Indian 
lands are overcrowded and have serious physical deficiencies; and 69 
percent of homes on Indian lands are severely overcrowded with up to 4 
or 5 families living in the same two bedroom house.
  These statistics illustrate that there is still much work to be done. 
NAHASDA has been a good first step in improving living conditions in 
Indian and Alaska Native communities, however there is still a 
tremendous need for adequate housing in these communities.
  In the first few years of NAHASDA implementation, some bumps in the 
road were experienced. To provide a better transition from the old HUD 
dominated regime to the new policies of NAHASDA, I introduced a bill to 
provide technical amendments to strengthen and clarify NAHASDA. These 
technical amendments were necessary to ensure the proper implementation 
and enforcement of NAHASDA. With the recent enactment of the Native 
American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act Amendments of 
1999, P.L. 106-568, NAHASDA is better suited to meet its goals and 
responsibilities.
  The bill I am introducing today will extend NAHASDA for an additional 
five years. With the groundwork now laid, both Indian tribes and HUD 
should be able to provide improved housing assistance to Indian and 
Alaska Native communities.
  Moreover, the extension of NAHASDA will encourage greater utilization 
of NAHASDA programs including its Title VI Loan Guarantee program, 
designed to aid tribes in leveraging federal funds in partnership with 
the private sector.
  As Chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs, I am committed to 
ensuring that NAHASDA is implemented in a fair, efficient and 
productive manner. It is my hope that the enactment of certain 
technical amendments in P.L. 106-568, and the reauthorization of 
NAHASDA will ensure improved housing assistance to all Indian and 
Alaska Native communities for years to come.
  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. 1210

       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 ``Native American Housing 
     Assistance and Self-Determination Reauthorization Act of 
     2001''.

     SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF THE NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING 
                   ASSISTANCE AND SELF-DETERMINATION ACT OF 1996.

       (a) Block Grants.--Section 108 of the Native American 
     Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (25 
     U.S.C. 4117) is amended by striking ``, 1999, 2000, and 
     2001'' and inserting ``through 2006''.
       (b) Federal Guarantees.--Subsections (a) and (b) of section 
     605 of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-
     Determination Act of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4195) are each amended 
     by striking ``, 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001'' and inserting 
     ``through 2006''.
       (c) Training and Technical Assistance.--Section 703 of the 
     Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act 
     of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4212) is amended by striking ``, 1998, 
     1999, 2000, and 2001'' and inserting ``through 2006''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HOLLINGS (for himself and Mr. Graham):
  S. 1214. A bill to amend the Merchant Marine Act, 1936, to establish 
a program to ensure greater security for United States seaports, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Port and 
Maritime Security Act of 2001. This legislation is long overdue. It is 
needed to facilitate future technological and advances and increases in 
international trade, and ensure that we have the sort of security 
control necessary to ensure that our borders are protected from drug 
smuggling, illegal aliens, trade fraud, threats of terrorism as well as 
potential threats to our ability to mobilize U.S. military force. I 
introduced similar legislation in the last Congress, but time did not 
allow us to proceed any further with the legislative process. However, 
this is just too important an issue to let it go by, and I intend to 
work with Senator Graham, and others to try and craft a policy to help 
protect our maritime borders.
  The Department of Transportation recently conducted an evaluation of 
our marine transportation needs for the 21st Century. In September 
1999, then Transportation Secretary Slater issued a preliminary report 
of the Marine Transportation System, (MTS) Task Force--An Assessment of 
the U.S. Marine Transportation System. The report reflected a highly 
collaborative effort among public sector agencies, private sector 
organizations and other stakeholders in the MTS.
  The report indicates that the United States has more than 1,000 
channels and 25,000 miles of inland, intracoastal, and coastal 
waterways in the United States which serve over 300 ports, with more 
than 3,700 terminals that handle passenger and cargo movements. These 
waterways and ports link to 152,000 miles of railways, 460,000 miles of 
underground pipelines and 45,000 miles of

[[Page S8016]]

interstate highways. Annually, the U.S. marine transportation system 
moves more than 2 billion tons of domestic and international freight, 
imports 3.3 billion tons of domestic oil, transports 134 million 
passengers by ferry, serves 78 million Americans engaged in 
recreational boating, and hosts more than 5 million cruise ship 
passengers.
  The MTS provides economic value, as waterborne cargo contributes more 
than $742 billion to U.S. gross domestic product and creates employment 
for more than 13 million citizens. While these figures reveal the 
magnitude of our waterborne commerce, they don't reveal the spectacular 
growth of waterborne commerce, or the potential problems in coping with 
this growth. It is estimated that the total volume of domestic and 
international trade is expected to double over the next twenty years. 
The doubling of trade also brings up the troubling issue of how the 
U.S. is going to protect our maritime borders from crime, threats of 
terrorism, or even our ability to mobilize U.S. armed forces.
  Security at our maritime borders is given substantially less Federal 
consideration than airports or land borders. In the aviation industry, 
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is intimately involved in 
ensuring that security measures are developed, implemented, and funded. 
The FAA works with various Federal officials to assess threats direct 
toward commercial aviation and to target various types of security 
measures as potential threats change. For example, during the Gulf War, 
airports were directed to ensure that no vehicles were parked within a 
set distance of the entrance to a terminal.
  Currently, each air carrier, whether a U.S. carrier or foreign air 
carrier, is required to submit a proposal on how it plans to meet its 
security needs. Air carriers also are responsible for screening 
passengers and baggage in compliance with FAA regulations. The types of 
machines used in airports are all approved, and in many instances paid 
for by the FAA. The FAA uses its laboratories to check the machinery to 
determine if the equipment can detect explosives that are capable of 
destroying commercial aircrafts. Clearly, we learned from the Pan Am 
103 disaster over Lockerbie, Scottland in 1988. Congress passed 
legislation in 1990 ``the Aviation Security Improvement Act,'' which 
was carefully considered by the Commerce Committee, to develop the 
types of measures I noted above. We also made sure that airports, the 
FAA, air carriers and law enforcement worked together to protect the 
flying public.
  Following the crash of TWA flight 800 in 1996, we also leaped to 
spend money, when it was first thought to have been caused by a 
terrorist act. The FAA spent about $150 million on additional screening 
equipment, and we continue today to fund research and development for 
better, and more effective equipment. Finally, the FAA is responsible 
for ensuring that background checks, employment records/criminal 
records, of security screeners and those with access to secured 
airports are carried out in an effective and thorough manner. The FAA, 
at the direction of Congress, is responsible for certifying screening 
companies, and has developed ways to better test screeners. This is all 
done in the name of protecting the public. Seaports deserve no less 
consideration.
  At land borders, there is a similar investment in security by the 
Federal Government. In TEA-21, approved $140 million a year for five 
years for the National Corridor Planning and Development and 
Coordinated Border Infrastructure Program. Eligible activities under 
this program include improvements to existing transportation and 
supporting infrastructure that facilitate cross-border vehicles and 
cargo movements; construction of highways and related safety 
enforcement facilities that facilitate movements related to 
international trade; operational improvements, including improvements 
relating to electronic data intercharge and use of telecommunications, 
to expedite cross border vehicle and cargo movements; and planning, 
coordination, design and location studies.
  By way of contrast, at U.S. seaports, the Federal Government invests 
nothing in infrastructure, other than the human presence of the U.S. 
Coast Guard, U.S. Customs Service, and the Immigration and 
Naturalization Service, and whatever equipment those agencies have to 
accomplish their mandates. Physical infrastructure is provided by 
state-controlled port authorities, or by private sector marine terminal 
operators. There are no controls, or requirements in place, except for 
certain standards promulgated by the Coast Guard for the protection of 
cruise ship passenger terminals. Essentially, where sea ports are 
concerned, we have abrogated the Federal responsibility of border 
control to the state and private sector.

  I think that the U.S. Coast Guard and Customs Agency are doing an 
outstanding job, but they are outgunned. There is simply too much money 
in the illegal activities they are seeking to curtail or eradicate, and 
there is too much traffic coming into, and out of the United States. 
For instance, in the latest data available, 1999, we had more than 10 
million TEU's imported into the United States. For the uninitiated, a 
TEU refers to a twenty-foot equivalent unit shipping container. By way 
of comparison, a regular truck measures 48-feet in length. So in 
translation, we imported close to 5 million truckloads of cargo. 
According to the Customs Service, seaports are able to inspect between 
1 percent and 2 percent of the containers, so in other words, a drug 
smuggler has a 98 percent chance of gaining illegal entry.
  It is amazing to think, that when you or I walk through an 
international airport we will walk through a metal detector, and our 
bags will be x-rayed, and Customs will interview us, and may check our 
bags. However, at a U.S. seaport you could import a 48 foot truck load 
of cargo, and have at least a 98 percent chance of not even being 
inspected. It just doesn't seem right.
  For instance, in my own state, the Port of Charleston which is the 
fourth largest container port in the United States, just recently we 
got our first unit even capable of x-raying intermodal shipping 
containers, and we have the temporary deployment of a canine unit. By 
way of comparison, the Dallas/Fort Worth is the fourth largest airport 
in the United States, it would be inconceivable that an airport of this 
magnitude have just one single canine, and one piece of screening 
equipment. This is simply not sufficient.
  The need for the evaluation of higher scrutiny of our system of 
seaport security came at the request of Senator Graham, and I would 
like to commend him for his persistent efforts in addressing this 
issue. Senator Graham has had problems with security at some of the 
Florida seaports, and although the state has taken some steps to 
address the issue, there is a great need for considerable improvement. 
Senator Graham laudably convinced the President to appoint a 
Commission, designed similarly to the Aviation Security Commission, to 
review security at U.S. seaports.
  The Commission visited twelve major U.S. seaports, as well as two 
foreign ports. It compiled a record of countless hours of testimony and 
heard from, and reviewed the security practices of the shipping 
industry. It also met with local law enforcement officials to discuss 
the issues and their experiences as a result of seaport related crime.
  For instance, the Commission found that the twelve U.S. seaports 
accounted for 56 percent of the number of cocaine seizures, 32 percent 
of the marijuana seizures, and 65 percent of heroin seizures in 
commercial cargo shipments and vessels at all ports of entry 
nationwide. Yet, we have done relatively little, other than send in an 
undermanned contingency of Coast Guards and Customs officials to do 
whatever they can.
  Drugs are not the only criminal problem confronting U.S. seaports. 
For example, alien smuggling has become increasingly lucrative 
enterprise. To illustrate, in August of 1999, INS officials found 132 
Chinese men hiding aboard a container ship docked in Savannah, GA. The 
INS district director was quoted as saying; ``This was a very 
sophisticated ring, and never in my 23 years with the INS have I seen 
anything as large or sophisticated''. According to a recent GAO report 
on INS efforts on alien smuggling RPT-Number: B-283952, smuggling 
collectively may earn as much as several billion dollars per year 
bringing in illegal aliens.

[[Page S8017]]

  Another problem facing seaports is cargo theft. Cargo theft does not 
always occur at seaports, but in many instances the theft has occurred 
because of knowledge of cargo contents. International shipping provides 
access to a lot of information and a lot of cargo to many different 
people along the course of its journey. We need to take steps to ensure 
that we do not facilitate theft. Losses as a result of cargo theft have 
been estimated as high as $12 billion annually, and it has been 
reported to have increased by as much as 20 percent recently. The FBI 
has become so concerned that it recently established a multi-district 
task force, Operation Sudden Stop, to crack down on cargo crime.
  The other issues facing seaport security may be less evident, but 
potentially of greater threat. As a Nation in general, we have been 
relatively lucky to have been free of some of the terrorist threats 
that have plagued other nations. However, we must not become 
complacent. U.S. seaports are extremely exposed. On a daily basis many 
seaports have cargo that could cause serious illness and death to 
potentially large populations of civilians living near seaports if 
targeted by terrorism. Most of the population of the United States lies 
in proximity to our coastline.
  The sheer magnitude of most seaports, their historical proximity to 
established population bases, the open nature of the facility, and the 
massive quantities of hazardous cargoes being shipped through a port 
could be extremely threatening to the large populations that live in 
areas surrounding our seaports. The same conditions in U.S. seaports, 
that could expose us to threats from terrorism, could also be used to 
disrupt our abilities to mobilize militarily. During the Persian Gulf 
War, 95 percent of our military cargo was carried by sea. Disruption of 
sea service, could have resulted in a vastly different course of 
history. We need to ensure that it does not happen to any future 
military contingencies.
  As I mentioned before, our seaports are international borders, and 
consequently we should treat them as such. However, I am realistic 
about the possibilities for increasing seaport security, the realities 
of international trade, and the many functional differences inherent in 
the different seaport localities. Seaports by their very nature, are 
open and exposed to surrounding areas, and as such it will be 
impossible to control all aspects of security, however, sensitive or 
critical safety areas should be protected. I also understand that U.S. 
seaports have different security needs in form and scope. For instance, 
a seaport in Alaska, that has very little international cargo does not 
need the same degree of attention that a seaport in a major 
metropolitan center, which imports and exports thousands of 
international shipments. However, the legislation we are introducing 
today will allow for public input and will consider local issues in the 
implementation of new guidelines on port security, so as to address 
such details.
  Substantively, the Port and Maritime Security Act establishes a 
multi-pronged effort to address security needs at U.S. Seaports, and in 
some cases formalizes existing practices that have proven effective. 
The bill authorizes the Department of Transportation to establish a 
task force on port security and to work with the private sector to 
develop solutions to address the need to initiate a system of security 
to protect our maritime borders.
  The purpose of the task force is to implement the provisions of the 
act; to coordinate programs to enhance the security and safety of U.S. 
seaports; to provide long-term solutions for seaport safety issues; to 
coordinate with local port security committees established by the Coast 
Guard to implement the provisions of the bill; and to ensure that the 
public and local port security committees are kept informed about 
seaport security enhancement developments.
  The bill requires the U.S. Coast Guard to establish local port 
security committees at each U.S. seaport. The membership of these 
committees is to include representatives of the port authority, labor 
organizations, the private sector, and Federal, State, and local 
government officials. These committees will be chaired by the U.S. 
Coast Guard's Captain-of-the-Port, and will be used to establish 
quarterly meetings with local law enforcement and attempt to coordinate 
security and help facilitate law enforcement.
  The bill also requires the Coast Guard to develop a system of 
providing vulnerability assessments for U.S. seaports. After completion 
of the assessment, the seaport would be required to submit a security 
program to the Coast Guard for review and approval. The assessment 
shall be performed with the cooperation and assistance of local 
officials, through local port security committees, and ensure the port 
is made aware of and participates in the analysis of security concerns. 
I continue to believe there is a need to perform background checks on 
transportation workers in sensitive positions to reveal potential 
threats to facilitate crime or terrorism. While the bill is silent on 
this matter, we will continue our discussions with law enforcement and 
transportation workers to develop a system that facilitates law 
enforcement but focusus more narrowly on those employees who have 
access to sensitive information.
  The bill authorizes MarAd to provide loan guarantees to help cover 
some of the costs of port security infrastructure improvements, such as 
cameras and other monitoring equipment, fencing systems and other types 
of physical enhancements. The bill authorizes $8 million, annually for 
four years, to cover costs, as defined by the Credit Reform Act, which 
could guarantee up to $320 million in loans for security enhancements. 
The bill also establishes a grant program to help cover some of the 
same infrastructure costs. Additionally, the bill provides funds for 
the U.S. Customs Service to purchase screening equipment and other 
types of non-intrusive detection equipment. We have to provide Customs 
with the tools they need to help prevent further crime.
  The bill requires a report to be attached on security and a revision 
of 1997 document entitled ``Port Security: A National Planning Guide.'' 
The report and revised guide are to be submitted to Congress and are to 
include a description of activities undertaken under the Port and 
Maritime Security Act of 2001, in addition to analysis of the effect of 
those activities on port security and preventing acts of terrorism and 
crime.
  The bill requires the Department of Transportation, to the extent 
feasible, to coordinate reporting of seaport related crimes and to work 
with state law enforcement officials to harmonize the reporting of data 
on cargo theft and alternatively, the feasibility of utilizing private 
data on cargo theft. Better data will be crucial in identifying the 
extent and location of criminal threats and will facilitate law 
enforcement efforts combating crime. The bill also requires the 
Secretaries of Agriculture, Treasury, and Transportation, as well as 
the Attorney General to work together to establish shared dockside 
inspection facilities at seaports for federal and state agencies, and 
provides $1 million, annually for four years, to carry out this 
section. Currently there are some U.S. ports that do not have 
inspection space in the organic port area. It is crucial that 
inspections occur as close to the point of entry as possible.
  The bill also establishes a program to train personnel involved in 
maritime transportation and maritime security. A better prepared 
security force will help enable us to more effectively combat potential 
threats of crime and terrorism. The bill also requires the Customs 
Service to improve reporting of imports at seaports to help ensure that 
Customs will have adequate information in advance of having the entry 
of cargo, and to do so in a manner consistent with their plans for the 
Automated Commercial Environmental ACE program.
  Finally, the bill reauthorizes an extension of tonnage duties through 
2006, and makes the proceeds of these collections available to carry 
out the Port and Maritime Security Act. These fees currently are set at 
certain levels, and are scheduled to be reduced in 2002. The 
legislation reauthorizes and extends the current fee level for an 
additional four years, but dedicates its use to enhancing our efforts 
to fight crime at U.S. seaports and to facilitating improved protection 
of our borders, as well as to enhance our efforts to ward off potential 
threats of terrorism.

[[Page S8018]]

  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. 1214

       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 ``Port and Maritime Security 
     Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) There are 361 public seaports in the United States 
     which have a broad range of characteristics, and all of which 
     are an integral part of our Nation's commerce.
       (2) United States seaports conduct over 95 percent of 
     United States overseas trade. Over the next 20 years, the 
     total volume of imported and exported goods at seaports is 
     expected to more than double.
       (3) The variety of trade and commerce that are carried out 
     at seaports has greatly expanded. Bulk cargo, containerized 
     cargo, passenger cargo and tourism, intermodal transportation 
     systems, and complex domestic and international trade 
     relationships have significantly changed the nature, conduct, 
     and complexity of seaport commerce.
       (4) The top 50 seaports in the United States account for 
     about 90 percent of all the cargo tonnage. Twenty-five United 
     States seaports account for 98 percent of all container 
     shipments. Cruise ships visiting foreign destinations embark 
     from 16 seaports.
       (5) In the larger seaports, the activities can stretch 
     along a coast for many miles, including public roads within 
     their geographic boundaries. The facilities used to support 
     arriving and departing cargo are sometimes miles from the 
     coast.
       (6) Seaports often are a major locus of Federal crime, 
     including drug trafficking, cargo theft, and smuggling of 
     contraband and aliens. The criminal conspiracies often 
     associated with these crimes can pose threats to the people 
     and critical infrastructures of seaport cities. Seaports that 
     accept international cargo have a higher risk of 
     international crimes like drug and alien smuggling and trade 
     fraud.
       (7) Seaports are often very open and exposed and, by the 
     very nature of their role in promoting the free flow of 
     commerce, are susceptible to large scale terrorism that could 
     pose a threat to coastal, Great Lake, or riverain 
     populations. Seaport terrorism could pose a significant 
     threat to the ability of the United States to pursue its 
     national security objectives.
       (8) United States seaports are international boundaries, 
     however, unlike United States airports and land borders, 
     United States seaports receive no Federal funds for security 
     infrastructure.
       (9) Current inspection levels of containerized cargo are 
     insufficient to counter potential security risks. Technology 
     is currently not adequately deployed to allow for the non-
     intrusive inspection of containerized cargo. Additional 
     promising technology is in the process of being developed 
     that could inspect cargo in a non-intrusive and timely 
     fashion.
       (10) The burgeoning cruise ship industry poses a special 
     risk from a security perspective. The large number of United 
     States citizens sailing on international cruises provides an 
     attractive target to terrorists seeking to cause mass 
     casualties. Approximately 80 percent of cruise line 
     passengers are United States citizens and 20 percent are 
     aliens. Approximately 92 percent of crewmembers are aliens.
       (11) Effective physical security and access control in 
     seaports is fundamental to deterring and preventing potential 
     threats to seaport operations, cargo shipments for smuggling 
     or theft or other cargo crimes.
       (12) Securing entry points, open storage areas, and 
     warehouses throughout the seaport, controlling the movements 
     of trucks transporting cargo through the seaport, and 
     examining or inspecting containers, warehouses, and ships at 
     berth or in the harbor are all important requirements that 
     should be implemented.
       (13) Identification procedures for arriving workers and 
     deterring and preventing internal conspiracies are 
     increasingly important.
       (14) On April 27, 1999, the President established the 
     Interagency Commission on Crime and Security in United States 
     Seaports to undertake a comprehensive study of the nature and 
     extent of the problem of crime in our seaports, as well as 
     the ways in which governments at all levels are responding.
       (15) The Commission has issued findings that indicate the 
     following:
       (A) Frequent crimes in seaports include drug smuggling, 
     illegal car exports, fraud (including Intellectual Property 
     Rights and other trade violations), and cargo theft.
       (B) Data about crime in seaports have been very difficult 
     to collect.
       (C) Internal conspiracies are an issue at many seaports, 
     and contribute to Federal crime.
       (D) Intelligence and information sharing among law 
     enforcement agencies needs to be improved and coordinated at 
     many seaports.
       (E) Many seaports do not have any idea about the threats 
     they face from crime, terrorism, and other security-related 
     activities because of a lack of credible threat information.
       (F) A lack of minimum physical, procedural, and personnel 
     security standards at seaports and at terminals, warehouses, 
     trucking firms, and related facilities leaves many seaports 
     and seaport users vulnerable to theft, pilferage, and 
     unauthorized access by criminals.
       (G) Access to seaports and operations within seaports is 
     often uncontrolled.
       (H) Coordination and cooperation between law enforcement 
     agencies in the field is often fragmented.
       (I) Meetings between law enforcement personnel, carriers, 
     and seaport authorities regarding security are not being held 
     routinely in the seaports. These meetings could increase 
     coordination and cooperation at the local level.
       (J) Security-related equipment such as small boats, 
     cameras, and vessel tracking devices is lacking at many 
     seaports.
       (K) Detection equipment such as large-scale x-ray machines 
     is lacking at many high-risk seaports.
       (L) A lack of timely, accurate, and complete manifest 
     (including in-bond) and trade (entry, importer, etc.) data 
     negatively impacts law enforcement's ability to function 
     effectively.
       (M) Criminal organizations are exploiting weak security in 
     seaports and related intermodal connections to commit a wide 
     range of cargo crimes. Levels of containerized cargo volumes 
     are forecasted to increase significantly, which will create 
     more opportunities for crime while lowering the statistical 
     risk of detection and interdiction.
       (16) United States seaports are international boundaries 
     that--
       (A) are particularly vulnerable to threats of drug 
     smuggling, illegal alien smuggling, cargo theft, illegal 
     entry of cargo and contraband;
       (B) may present weaknesses in the ability of the United 
     States to realize its national security objectives; and
       (C) may serve as a vector for terrorist attacks aimed at 
     the population of the United States.
       (17) It is in the best interests of the United States--
       (A) to be mindful that United States seaports are 
     international ports of entry and that the primary obligation 
     for the security of international ports of entry lies with 
     the Federal government;
       (B) to be mindful of the need for the free flow of 
     interstate and foreign commerce and the need to ensure the 
     efficient movement of cargo in interstate and foreign 
     commerce;
       (C) to increase United States seaport security by 
     establishing a better method of communication amongst law 
     enforcement officials responsible for seaport boundary, 
     security, and trade issues;
       (D) to formulate guidance for the review of physical 
     seaport security, recognizing the different character and 
     nature of United States seaports;
       (E) to provide financial incentives to help the States and 
     private sector to increase physical security of United States 
     seaports;
       (F) to invest in long-term technology to facilitate the 
     private sector development of technology that will assist in 
     the non-intrusive timely detection of crime or potential 
     crime;
       (G) to harmonize data collection on seaport-related and 
     other cargo theft, in order to address areas of potential 
     threat to safety and security;
       (H) to create shared inspection facilities to help 
     facilitate the timely and efficient inspection of people and 
     cargo in United States seaports; and
       (I) to improve Customs reporting procedures to enhance the 
     potential detection of crime in advance of arrival or 
     departure of cargoes.

     SEC. 3. PORT SECURITY TASK FORCE.

       (a) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a Port 
     Security Task Force--
       (1) to help implement the provisions of this Act;
       (2) to help coordinate programs to enhance the security and 
     safety of United States seaports;
       (3) to help provide long-term solutions for seaport 
     security issues;
       (4) to help coordinate the security operations of local 
     seaport security committees;
       (5) to help ensure that the public and local seaport 
     security committees are kept informed about seaport security 
     enhancement developments;
       (6) to help provide guidance for the conditions under which 
     loan guarantees and grants are made; and
       (7) to consult with the Coast Guard and the Maritime 
     Administration in establishing port security program 
     guidance.
       (b) Membership.--
       (1) In general.--The Task Force shall include 
     representatives of the Coast Guard and the Maritime 
     Administration.
       (2) Other agencies.--The Secretary shall consult with the 
     Secretary of the Treasury to invite the participation of the 
     United States Customs Service, and may invite the 
     participation of other departments and agencies of the United 
     States with an interest in port security, port security-
     related matters, and border protection issues.
       (3) Required private sector representatives.--The Task 
     Force shall include representatives, appointed by the 
     Secretary of--
       (A) port authorities;
       (B) coastwise management units;
       (C) longshore labor organizations;
       (D) ocean shipping companies;
       (E) trucking companies;
       (F) railroad companies;
       (G) transportation workers;

[[Page S8019]]

       (H) ocean shippers;
       (I) freight forwarding companies; and
       (J) other representatives whose participation the Secretary 
     deems beneficial.
       (c) Subcommittees.--The Task Force may establish 
     subcommittees to facilitate consideration of specific issues, 
     including port security border protection and maritime domain 
     awareness issues.
       (d) Law Enforcement Subcommittee.--The Task Force shall 
     establish a subcommittee comprised of Federal, State, and 
     local government law enforcement agencies to address port 
     security issues, including resource commitments and law 
     enforcement sensitive matters.
       (e) Exemption from FACA.--The Federal Advisory Committee 
     Act (5 U.S.C. App.) does not apply to the Task Force.
       (f) Acceptance of Contributions; Joint Venture 
     Arrangements.--In carrying out its responsibilities under 
     this Act, the Task Force, or a member organization or 
     representative acting with the Task Force's consent, may 
     accept contributions of funds, material, services, and the 
     use of personnel and facilities from public and private 
     entities by contract or other arrangement if the 
     confidentiality of security-sensitive information is 
     maintained and access to such information is limited 
     appropriately.
       (g) Funding.--Of the amounts made available under section 
     17(b) there shall be made available to the Secretary of 
     Transportation for activities of the Task Force $1,000,000 
     for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2006 without further 
     appropriation.

     SEC. 4. ESTABLISHMENT OF LOCAL PORT SECURITY COMMITTEES.

       (a) In General.--The United States Coast Guard shall 
     establish seaport security committees--
       (1) to utilize the information made available under this 
     Act;
       (2) to define the physical boundaries within which to 
     conduct vulnerability assessments in recognition of the 
     unique characteristics of each port;
       (3) to review port security vulnerability assessments 
     promulgated under section 5;
       (4) to implement the guidance promulgated under section 7;
       (5) to help coordinate planning and other necessary 
     security activities by conducting meetings no less frequently 
     than 4 times each year, to disseminate information that will 
     facilitate law enforcement activities; and
       (6) to conduct an exercise at least once every 3 years to 
     verify the effectiveness of each port authority and marine 
     terminal security plan.
       (b) Membership.--In establishing those committees, the 
     United States Coast Guard may utilize or augment any existing 
     harbor safety committee or seaport readiness committee, but 
     the membership of the seaport security committee shall 
     include representatives of--
       (1) the port authority;
       (2) Federal, State and local government;
       (3) Federal, State, and local government law enforcement 
     agencies;
       (4) labor organizations and transportation workers;
       (5) local management organizations; and
       (6) private sector representatives whose inclusion is 
     deemed beneficial by the Captain-of-the-Port.
       (c) Chairman.--The local seaport security committee shall 
     be chaired by the Captain-of-the-Port.
       (d) Exemption from FACA.--The Federal Advisory Committee 
     Act (5 U.S.C. App.) does not apply to a local seaport 
     security committee.
       (e) Acceptance of Contributions; Joint Venture 
     Arrangements.--In carrying out its responsibilities under 
     this Act, a local seaport security committee, or a member 
     organization or representative acting with the committee's 
     consent, may accept contributions of funds, material, 
     services, and the use of personnel and facilities from public 
     and private entities by contract or other arrangement if the 
     confidentiality of security-sensitive information is 
     maintained and access to such information is limited 
     appropriately.
       (f) Funding.--Of the amounts made available under section 
     17(b) there shall be made available to the Commandant 
     $3,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2006 without 
     further appropriation to carry out this section, such sums to 
     remain available until expended.

     SEC. 5. COAST GUARD PORT SECURITY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTS.

       (a) In General.--The Commandant of the Coast Guard, in 
     consultation with the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, the 
     Center for Civil Force Protection, and other appropriate 
     public and private sector organizations, shall develop 
     standards and procedures for conducting seaport security 
     vulnerability assessments.
       (b) Initial Schedule.--The Coast Guard, in cooperation with 
     local port authority committee officials with proper security 
     clearances, shall complete no fewer than 10 seaport security 
     vulnerability assessments annually, until it has completed 
     such assessments for the 50 ports determined by the 
     Commandant to be the most strategic or economically strategic 
     ports in the United States. If a seaport security 
     vulnerability assessment has been conducted within 5 years by 
     or on behalf of a port authority or marine terminal 
     authority, and the Commandant determines that it was 
     conducted in a manner that is generally consistent with the 
     standards and procedures developed under subsection (a), the 
     Commandant may accept that assessment rather than conducting 
     another seaport security vulnerability assessment for that 
     port.
       (c) Review by Port Authority.--The Commandant shall make 
     the seaport security vulnerability assessment for a seaport 
     available for review and comment by officials of the port 
     authority with proper security clearances or marine terminal 
     operator representatives with proper security clearances.
       (d) Maps and Charts.--
       (1) Collection and distribution.--The Commandant and the 
     Administrator shall, working through local seaport security 
     committees where appropriate--
       (A) collect, store securely, and maintain maps and charts 
     of all United States seaports that clearly indicate the 
     location of infrastructure and overt-security equipment;
       (B) make those maps and charts available upon request, on a 
     secure and confidential basis, to--
       (i) the Maritime Administration;
       (ii) the United States Coast Guard;
       (iii) the United States Customs Service;
       (iv) the Department of Defense;
       (v) the Federal Bureau of Investigation; and
       (vi) the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
       (2) Other Agencies.--The Coast Guard and the Maritime 
     Administration shall establish a process for providing 
     relevant maps and charts collected under paragraph (1), and 
     other relevant material, available, on a secure and 
     confidential basis, to appropriate Federal, State, and local 
     government agencies, and seaport authorities, for the purpose 
     of obtaining the comments of those agencies before completing 
     a seaport vulnerability assessment for each such seaport.
       (3) Secure storage and limited access.--The Coast Guard and 
     the Maritime Administration shall establish procedures that 
     ensure that maps, charts, and other material made available 
     to Federal, State, and local government agencies, seaport 
     authorities, and local seaport security committees are 
     maintained in a secure and confidential manner and that 
     access thereto is limited appropriately.
       (e) Annual Status Report to Congress.--Notwithstanding 
     section 7(c) of the Ports and Waterways Safety Act (33 U.S.C. 
     1226(c)), the Coast Guard and the Maritime Administration 
     shall report annually to the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
     Science, and Transportation and the House of Representatives 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on the status 
     of seaport security in a form that does not compromise, or 
     present a threat to the disclosure of security-sensitive 
     information about, the seaport security vulnerability 
     assessments conducted under this Act. The report may include 
     recommendations for further improvements in seaport security 
     measures and for any additional enforcement measures 
     necessary to ensure compliance with the seaport security plan 
     requirements of this Act.
       (f) Funding.--Of the amounts made available under section 
     17(b) there shall be made available to the Commandant 
     $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2006 
     without further appropriation to carry out this section, such 
     sums to remain available until expended.

     SEC. 6. MARITIME TRANSPORTATION SECURITY PROGRAMS.

       (a) In General.--The Commandant and the Administrator shall 
     jointly initiate a rulemaking proceeding to prescribe 
     regulations to protect the public from threats originating 
     from vessels in maritime transportation originating or 
     terminating in a United States seaport against an act of 
     crime or terrorism. In prescribing a regulation under this 
     subsection, the Commandant and the Administrator shall--
       (1) consult with the Secretary of the Treasury, the 
     Attorney General, the heads of other departments, agencies, 
     and instrumentalities of the United States Government, State 
     and local authorities, and the Task Force; and
       (2) consider whether a proposed regulation is consistent 
     with--
       (A) protecting the public; and
       (B) the public interest in promoting maritime 
     transportation and commerce.
       (b) Security Programs.--
       (1) Program to be established.--Each port authority and 
     marine terminal authority for an area designated under 
     section 4(a)(2) at which a port security vulnerability 
     assessment has been conducted under this Act shall establish 
     a maritime transportation security program within 1 year 
     after the assessment is completed.
       (2) General requirements.--A security program established 
     under paragraph (1) shall provide a law enforcement program 
     and capability at that seaport that is adequate to ensure the 
     safety of the public from threats of crime and terrorism.
       (3) Specific requirements.--A security program established 
     under paragraph (1) shall be linked to the Captain-of-the-
     Port authorities for maritime trade and shall include--
       (A) provisions for establishing and maintaining physical 
     security for seaport areas and approaches;
       (B) provisions for establishing and maintaining procedural 
     security for processing passengers, cargo, and crewmembers, 
     and personnel security for the employment of individuals and 
     service providers;
       (C) a credentialing process to limit access to sensitive 
     areas;
       (D) a process to restrict vehicular access to seaport areas 
     and facilities;

[[Page S8020]]

       (E) restrictions on carrying firearms and other prohibited 
     weapons; and
       (F) a private security officer certification program, or 
     provisions for using the services of qualified State, local, 
     and private law enforcement personnel.
       (c) Incorporation of Marine Terminal Operator's Program.--
     Notwithstanding the requirements of subsection (b)(3), the 
     Captain-of-the-Port may approve a security program of a port 
     authority, or an amendment to an existing program, that 
     incorporates a security program of a marine terminal operator 
     tenant with access to a secured area of the seaport, if the 
     program or amendment incorporates--
       (1) the measures the tenant will use, within the tenant's 
     leased areas or areas designated for the tenant's exclusive 
     use under an agreement with the port authority, to carry out 
     the security requirements imposed by the Commandant and the 
     Administration on the port authority; and
       (2) the methods the port authority will use to monitor and 
     audit the tenant's compliance with the security requirements.
       (d) Incorporation of Other Security Programs and Laws.--
     Notwithstanding the requirements of subsection (b)(3), the 
     Captain-of-the-Port may approve a security program of a port 
     authority, or an existing program, that incorporates a State 
     or local security program, policy, or law. In reviewing any 
     such program, the Captain-of-the-Port shall--
       (1) endeavor to avoid duplication and to recognize the 
     State or local security program or policy; and
       (2) ensure that no security program established under 
     subsection (b)(3) conflicts with any applicable provision of 
     State or local law.
       (e) Review and Approval of Security Programs.--
       (1) In general.--The Captain-of-the-Port shall review and 
     approve or disapprove each security program established under 
     subsection (b). If the Captain-of-the-Port disapproves a 
     security program, then--
       (A) the Captain-of-the-Port shall notify the port authority 
     or marine terminal authority in writing of the reasons for 
     the disapproval; and
       (B) the port authority or marine terminal authority shall 
     submit a revised security plan within 6 months after 
     receiving the notification of disapproval.
       (f) 5-Year Reviews.--Whenever appropriate, but in no event 
     less frequently than once every 5 years, each port authority 
     or marine terminal operator required to develop a security 
     program under this section shall review its program, make 
     such revisions to the program as are necessary or 
     appropriate, and submit the results of its review and the 
     revised program to the Captain-of-the-Port.
       (g) No Erosion of Other Authority.--Nothing in this section 
     precludes any agency, instrumentality, or department of the 
     United States from exercising, or limits its authority to 
     exercise, any other statutory or regulatory authority to 
     initiate or enforce seaport security standards.

     SEC. 7. SECURITY PROGRAM GUIDANCE.

       (a) In General.--The Commandant and the Administrator, in 
     consultation with the Task Force, shall develop voluntary 
     security guidance that will serve as a benchmark for the 
     review of security plans that--
       (1) are linked to the Captain-of-the-Port authorities for 
     maritime trade;
       (2) include a set of recommended ``best practices'' 
     guidelines for the use of maritime terminal operators; and
       (3) take into account the different nature and 
     characteristics of United States seaports and the need to 
     promote commerce.
       (b) Revision.--The Commandant and the Maritime 
     Administrator shall review the guidelines developed under 
     subsection (a) not less frequently than every 5 years and 
     revise them as necessary.
       (c) Areas Covered.--The guidance developed under subsection 
     (a) shall include the following areas:
       (1) General security.--The establishment of practices for 
     physical security of seaport areas and approaches, procedural 
     security for processing passengers, cargo, and crewmembers, 
     and personnel security for employment of individuals and 
     service providers.
       (2) Access to sensitive areas.--The use of a credentials 
     process, administered by public or private sector security 
     services, to limit access to sensitive areas.
       (3) Vehicular access.--The use of restrictions on vehicular 
     access to seaport areas and facilities, including 
     requirements that seaport authorities and primary users of 
     seaports implement procedures that achieve appropriate levels 
     of control of vehicular access and accountability for 
     enforcement of controlled access by vehicles.
       (4) Firearms.--Restrictions on carrying firearms.
       (5) Certification of private security officers.--A private 
     security officer certification program to improve the 
     professionalism of seaport security officers.

     SEC. 8. INTERNATIONAL SEAPORT SECURITY.

       (a) Coast Guard; International Application.--The Commandant 
     shall make every effort to have the guidance developed under 
     section 7(a) adopted by appropriate international 
     organizations as an international standard and shall, acting 
     through appropriate officers of the United States Government, 
     seek to encourage the development and adoption of seaport 
     security standards under international agreements in other 
     countries where adoption of the same or similar standards 
     might be appropriate.
       (b) Maritime Administration; Port Accreditation Program.--
     The Administrator shall make every effort to have the 
     guidance developed under section 7(a) adopted by appropriate 
     organizations as security standards and shall encourage the 
     establishment of a program for the private sector 
     accreditation of seaports that implement security standards 
     that are consistent with the guidance.
       (c) International Port Security Improvement Activities.--
       (1) In general.--The Administrator shall establish a 
     program to assist foreign seaport operators in identifying 
     port security risks, conducting port security vulnerability 
     assessments, and implementing port security standards.
       (2) Identification of strategic foreign ports.--The 
     Administrator shall work with the Secretary of Defense and 
     the Attorney General to identify those foreign seaports where 
     inadequate security or a high level of port security 
     vulnerability poses a strategic threat to United States 
     defense interests or may be implicated in criminal activity 
     in the United States.
       (3) Dissemination of information abroad.--The Administrator 
     shall work with the Secretary of State to facilitate the 
     dissemination of seaport security program information to port 
     authorities and marine terminal operators in other countries.
       (d) Funding.--Of the amounts made available under section 
     17(b) there shall be made available to the Administrator 
     $500,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2006 without 
     further appropriation to carry out this section, such sums to 
     remain available until expended.

     SEC. 9. MARITIME SECURITY PROFESSIONAL TRAINING.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall establish a program, 
     in consultation with the Federal Law Enforcement Center, the 
     United States Merchant Marine Academy's Global Maritime and 
     Transportation School, and the Maritime Security Council, and 
     the International Association of Airport and Seaport Police, 
     to develop standards and procedures for training and 
     certification of maritime security professionals.
       (b) Establishment of Security Institute.--The Secretary 
     shall establish the Maritime Security Institute at the United 
     States Merchant Marine Academy's Global Maritime and 
     Transportation School to train and certify maritime security 
     professionals in accordance with internationally recognized 
     law enforcement standards. Institute instructors shall be 
     knowledgeable about Federal and international law 
     enforcement, maritime security, and port and maritime 
     operations.
       (c) Training and Certification.--The following individuals 
     shall be eligible for training at the Institute:
       (1) Individuals who are employed, whether in the public or 
     private sector, in maritime law enforcement or security 
     activities.
       (2) Individuals who are employed, whether in the public or 
     private sector, in planning, executing, or managing security 
     operations--
       (A) at United States ports;
       (B) on passenger or cargo vessels with United States 
     citizens as passengers or crewmembers;
       (C) in foreign ports used by United States-flagged vessels 
     or by foreign-flagged vessels with United States citizens as 
     passengers or crewmembers.
       (d) Program Elements.--The program established by the 
     Secretary under subsection (a) shall include the following 
     elements:
       (1) The development of standards and procedures for 
     certifying maritime security professionals.
       (2) The training and certification of maritime security 
     professionals in accordance with internationally accepted law 
     enforcement and security guidelines, policies, and 
     procedures.
       (3) The training of students and instructors in all aspects 
     of prevention, detection, investigation, and reporting of 
     criminal activities in the international maritime 
     environment.
       (4) The provision of offsite training and certification 
     courses and certified personnel at United States and foreign 
     ports used by United States-flagged vessels, or by foreign-
     flagged vessels with United States citizens as passengers or 
     crewmembers, to develop and enhance security awareness and 
     practices.
       (e) Annual Report.--The Institute shall transmit an annual 
     report to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure on the expenditure of 
     appropriated funds and the training and other activities of 
     the Institute.
       (f) Funding.--Of the amounts made available under section 
     17(b), there shall be made available to the Secretary, 
     without further appropriation, to carry out this section--
       (1) $2,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 and 2004, and
       (2) $1,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 and 2006,
     such amounts to remain available until expended.

     SEC. 10. PORT SECURITY INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT.

       (a) In General.--Title XI of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936 
     (46 U.S.C. App. 1271 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end 
     thereof the following:

     ``SEC. 1113. LOAN GUARANTEES FOR PORT SECURITY INFRASTRUCTURE 
                   IMPROVEMENTS.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary, under section 1103(a) and 
     subject to the terms the

[[Page S8021]]

     Secretary shall prescribe and after consultation with the 
     United States Coast Guard, the United States Customs Service, 
     and the Port Security Task Force established under section 3 
     of the Port and Maritime Security Act of 2001, may guarantee 
     or make a commitment to guarantee the payment of the 
     principal of, and the interest on, an obligation for seaport 
     security infrastructure improvements for an eligible project 
     at any United States seaport involved in international trade.
       ``(b) Limitations.--Guarantees or commitments to guarantee 
     under this section are subject to the extent applicable to 
     all the laws, requirements, regulations, and procedures that 
     apply to guarantees or commitments to guarantee made under 
     this title.
       ``(c) Transfer of Funds.--The Secretary may accept the 
     transfer of funds from any other department, agency, or 
     instrumentality of the United States Government and may use 
     those funds to cover the cost (as defined in section 502 of 
     the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (2 U.S.C. 61a)) of 
     making guarantees or commitments to guarantee loans entered 
     into under this section.
       ``(d) Eligible Projects.--A project is eligible for a loan 
     guarantee or commitment under subsection (a) if it is for the 
     construction or acquisition of--
       ``(1) equipment or facilities to be used for seaport 
     security monitoring and recording;
       ``(2) security gates and fencing;
       ``(3) security-related lighting systems;
       ``(4) remote surveillance systems;
       ``(5) concealed video systems; or
       ``(6) other security infrastructure or equipment that 
     contributes to the overall security of passengers, cargo, or 
     crewmembers.

     ``SEC. 1114. GRANTS.

       ``(a) Financial Assistance.--The Secretary may provide 
     financial assistance for eligible projects (within the 
     meaning of section 1113(d).
       ``(b) Matching Requirements.--
       ``(1) 75-percent federal funding.--Except as provided in 
     paragraph (2), Federal funds for any eligible project under 
     this section shall not exceed 75 percent of the total cost of 
     such project. In calculating that percentage, the non-Federal 
     share of project costs may be provided by in-kind 
     contributions and other noncash support.
       ``(2) Exceptions.--
       ``(A) Small projects.--There are no matching requirements 
     for grants under subsection (a) for projects costing not more 
     than $25,000.
       ``(B) Higher level of support required.--If the Secretary 
     determines that a proposed project merits support and cannot 
     be undertaken without a higher rate of Federal support, then 
     the Secretary may approve grants under this section with a 
     matching requirement other than that specified in paragraph 
     (1).
       ``(c) Allocation.--The Secretary shall ensure that 
     financial assistance provided under subsection (a) during a 
     fiscal year is distributed so that funds are awarded for 
     eligible projects that address emerging priorities or threats 
     identified by the Task Force under section 5 of the Port and 
     Maritime Security Act of 2001.
       ``(d) Project Proposals.--Each proposal for a grant under 
     this section shall include the following:
       ``(1) The name of the individual or entity responsible for 
     conducting the project.
       ``(2) A succinct statement of the purposes of the project.
       ``(3) A description of the qualifications of the 
     individuals who will conduct the project.
       ``(4) An estimate of the funds and time required to 
     complete the project.
       ``(5) Evidence of support of the project by appropriate 
     representatives of States or territories of the United States 
     or other government jurisdictions in which the project will 
     be conducted.
       ``(6) Information regarding the source and amount of 
     matching funding available to the applicant, as appropriate.
       ``(7) Any other information the Secretary considers to be 
     necessary for evaluating the eligibility of the project for 
     funding under this title.''.
       (b) Annual Accounting.--The Secretary of Transportation 
     shall submit an annual summary of loan guarantees and 
     commitments to make loan guarantees under section 1113 of the 
     Merchant Marine Act, 1936, and grants made under section 1114 
     of that Act, to the Task Force. The Task Force shall make 
     that information available to the public and to local seaport 
     security committees through appropriate media of 
     communication, including the Internet.
       (c) Funding.--Of amounts made available under section 
     17(b), there shall be made available to the Secretary of 
     Transportation without further appropriation--
       (1) $8,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2003, 2004, 
     2005, and 2006 as guaranteed loan costs (as defined in 
     section 502(5) of the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990; 2 
     U.S.C. 661a(5)),
       (2) $10,000,000 for each of such fiscal years for grants 
     under section 1114 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936, and
       (3) $2,000,000 for each such fiscal year to cover 
     administrative expenses related to loan guarantees and 
     grants,
     such amounts to remain available until expended.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--In addition to the 
     amounts made available under subsection (c)(2), there are 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of 
     Transportation for grants under section 1114 of the Merchant 
     Marine Act, 1936, $10,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 
     2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006.

     SEC. 11. SCREENING AND DETECTION EQUIPMENT.

       (a) Funding.--Of amounts made available under section 
     17(b), there shall be made available to the Commissioner of 
     Customs without further appropriation for the purchase of 
     non-intrusive screening and detection equipment for use at 
     United States seaports--
       (1) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2003,
       (2) $16,000,000 for fiscal year 2004,
       (3) $18,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, and
       (4) $19,000,000 for fiscal year 2006,
     such sums to remain available until expended.
       (b) Accounting.--The Commissioner shall submit a report for 
     each such fiscal year to the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
     Science, and Transportation and the House of Representatives 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on the 
     expenditure of funds appropriated pursuant to this section.

     SEC. 12. ANNUAL REPORT ON MARITIME SECURITY AND TERRORISM.

       Section 905 of the International Maritime and Port Security 
     Act (46 U.S.C. App. 1802) is amended by adding at the end 
     thereof the following: ``Beginning with the first report 
     submitted under this section after the date of enactment of 
     the Port and Maritime Security Act of 2001, the Secretary 
     shall include a description of activities undertaken under 
     that Act and an analysis of the effect of those activities on 
     seaport security against acts of terrorism.''.

     SEC. 13. REVISION OF PORT SECURITY PLANNING GUIDE.

       The Secretary of Transportation, acting through the 
     Maritime Administration and after consultation with the Task 
     Force and the United States Coast Guard, shall publish a 
     revised version of the document entitled ``Port Security: A 
     National Planning Guide'', incorporating the guidance 
     promulgated under section 7, within 3 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, and make that document available on 
     the Internet.

     SEC. 14. SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION TO COORDINATE PORT-
                   RELATED CRIME DATA COLLECTION.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation shall--
       (1) require, to the extent feasible, United States 
     government agencies with significant regulatory or law 
     enforcement responsibilities at United States seaports to 
     modify their information databases to ensure the collection 
     and retrievability of data relating to crime at or affecting 
     such seaports;
       (2) evaluate the feasibility of capturing data on cargo 
     theft offenses (including such offenses occurring outside 
     such seaports) that would indicate the port of entry, the 
     port where the shipment originated, where the theft occurred, 
     and maintaining the confidentiality of shipper and carrier 
     unless voluntarily disclosed, and, if feasible, implement its 
     capture;
       (3) if feasible, and in conjunction with the Task Force, 
     establish an outreach program to work with State law 
     enforcement officials to harmonize the reporting of data on 
     cargo theft among the States and with the United States 
     government's reports;
       (4) if the harmonization of the reporting of such data 
     among the States is not feasible, evaluate the feasibility of 
     using private data bases on cargo theft and disseminating 
     confidential cargo theft information to local port security 
     committees for further dissemination to appropriate law 
     enforcement officials; and
       (5) in conjunction with the Task Force, establish an 
     outreach program to work with local port security committees 
     to disseminate cargo theft information to appropriate law 
     enforcement officials.
       (b) Report on Feasibility.--The Secretary of Transportation 
     shall report to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, 
     and Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee 
     on Transportation and Infrastructure within 1 year after the 
     date of enactment of this Act on the feasibility of each 
     activity authorized by subsection (a).
       (c) Interstate or Foreign Shipments by Carrier.--
       (1) In general.--Section 659 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (A) by striking ``with intent to convert to his own use'' 
     each place it appears;
       (B) by inserting ``trailer,'' after ``motortruck,'' in the 
     first undesignated paragraph;
       (C) by inserting ``air cargo container,'' after 
     ``aircraft,'' in the first undesignated paragraph;
       (D) by inserting a comma and ``or from any intermodal 
     container, trailer, container freight station, warehouse, or 
     freight consolidation facility,'' after ``air navigation 
     facility'' in the first undesignated paragraph;
       (E) by striking ``one year'' and inserting ``3 years'' in 
     the fifth undesignated paragraph;
       (F) by adding at the end of the fifth undesignated 
     paragraph the following: ``Notwithstanding the preceding 
     sentence, the court may, upon motion of the Attorney General, 
     reduce any penalty imposed under this paragraph with respect 
     to any defendant who provides information leading to the 
     arrest and conviction of any dealer or wholesaler of stolen 
     goods or chattels moving as or which are a part of or which 
     constitute an interstate or foreign shipment.'';
       (G) by inserting after the first sentence in the 
     penultimate undesignated paragraph the following: ``For 
     purposes of this section,

[[Page S8022]]

     goods and chattel shall be construed to be moving as an 
     interstate or foreign shipment at all points between the 
     point of origin and the final destination (as evidenced by 
     the waybill or other shipping document of the shipment), 
     regardless of any temporary stop while awaiting transshipment 
     or otherwise.''; and
       (H) by adding at the end the following:
       ``It shall be an affirmative defense (on which the 
     defendant bears the burden of persuasion by a preponderance 
     of the evidence) to an offense under this section that the 
     defendant bought, received, or possessed the goods, chattels, 
     money, or baggage at issue with the sole intent to report the 
     matter to an appropriate law enforcement officer or to the 
     owner of the goods, chattels, money, or baggage.''.
       (2) Federal sentencing guidelines.--Pursuant to section 994 
     of title 28, United States Code, the United States Sentencing 
     Commission shall amend the Federal sentencing guidelines to 
     provide a sentencing enhancement of not less than 2 levels 
     for any offense under section 659 of title 18, United States 
     Code, as amended by this section.
       (3) Report to congress.--The Attorney General shall 
     annually submit to Congress a report, which shall include an 
     evaluation of law enforcement activities relating to the 
     investigation and prosecution of offenses under section 659 
     of title 18, United States Code.
       (d) Funding.--Out of amounts made available under section 
     17(b), there shall be made available to the Secretary of 
     Transportation, without further appropriation, $1,000,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006, to modify 
     existing data bases to capture data on cargo theft offenses 
     and to make grants to States to harmonize data on cargo 
     theft, such sums to remain available until expended.

     SEC. 15. SHARED DOCKSIDE INSPECTION FACILITIES.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Treasury, the 
     Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Transportation, 
     and the Attorney General shall work with each other, the Task 
     Force, and the States to establish shared dockside inspection 
     facilities at United States seaports for Federal and State 
     agencies.
       (b) Funding.--Of the amounts made available under section 
     17(b), there shall be made available to the Secretary of the 
     Transportation, without further appropriation, $1,000,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006, such sums to 
     remain available until expended, to establish shared dockside 
     inspection facilities at United States seaports in 
     consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, the 
     Secretary of Agriculture, and the Attorney General.

     SEC. 16. IMPROVED CUSTOMS REPORTING PROCEDURES.

       In an manner that is consistent with the promulgation of 
     the manifesting and in-bond regulations and with the phased-
     in implementation of those regulations in the development of 
     the Automated Commercial Environment Project, the United 
     States Customs Service shall improve reporting of imports at 
     United States seaports--
       (1) by promulgating regulations to require, notwithstanding 
     the second sentence of section 411(b) of the Tariff Act of 
     1930 (19 U.S.C. 1411(b)), all ocean manifests to be 
     transmitted in electronic form to the Service in sufficient 
     time for the information to be used effectively by the 
     Service;
       (2) by promulgating regulations to require, notwithstanding 
     sections 552, 553, and 1641 of such Act (19 U.S.C. 1552, 
     1553, and 1641), all entries of goods, including in-bond 
     entries, to provide the same information required for entries 
     of goods released into the commerce of the United States to 
     the Service before the goods are released for shipment from 
     the seaport of first arrival; and
       (3) by distributing the information described in paragraphs 
     (1) and (2) on a real-time basis to any Federal, State, or 
     local government agency that has a regulatory or law-
     enforcement interest in the goods.

     SEC. 17. 4-YEAR REAUTHORIZATION OF TONNAGE DUTIES.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Extension of duties.--Section 36 of the Act of August 
     5, 1909 (36 Stat. 111; 46 U.S.C. App. 121) is amended by 
     striking ``through 2002,'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``through 2006,''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--The Act entitled ``An Act 
     concerning tonnage duties on vessels entering otherwise than 
     by sea'', approved March 8, 1910 (36 Stat 234; 46 U.S.C. App. 
     132) is amended by striking ``through 2002,'' and inserting 
     ``through 2006,''.
       (b) Availability of Funds.--Amounts deposited in the 
     general fund of the Treasury as receipts of tonnage charges 
     collected as a result of the amendments made by subsection 
     (a) shall be made available in each of fiscal years 2003 
     through 2006 to carry out this Act, as provided in sections 
     3(g), 4(f), 5(f), 8(d), 9(f), 10(c), 11(a), 14(d), and 15(b).

     SEC. 18. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the 
     Administrator of the Maritime Administration.
       (1) Captain-of-the-Port.--The term ``Captain-of-the-Port'' 
     means the United States Coast Guard's Captain-of-the-Port.
       (2) Commandant.--The term ``Commandant'' means the 
     Commandant of the United States Coast Guard.
       (1) Secretary.--Except as otherwise provided, the term 
     ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of Transportation.
       (2) Task Force.--The term ``Task Force'' means the Port 
     Security Task Force established under section 3.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DODD (for himself, Mr. DeWine, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. 
        Roberts, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Edwards, Mrs. Feinstein, Ms. Collins, 
        Mr. Wellstone, Mr. Bingaman, and Mrs. Murray):
  S. 1217. A bill to provide for the acquisition, construction, and 
improvement of child care facilities or equipment, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my colleague from 
Ohio, Senator DeWine, in introducing the Child Care Facilities 
Financing Act. We are also joined by Senator Snowe, Senator Kennedy, 
Senator Roberts, Senator Johnson, Senator Edwards, Senator Feinstein, 
Senator Collins, Senator Wellstone, Senator Bingaman, and Senator 
Murray as original cosponsors.
  According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, about 13 million 
children under age 6 and 31 million children between the ages of 6 and 
17 have both parents or their only parent in the work force.
  The demand for quality child care is exploding. But the supply of 
care has not kept pace, particularly in low-income communities where 
demand has been stimulated by a strong economy and employment 
requirements under welfare reform.
  Studies show that the supply of home-based and center-based child 
care is far more abundant in affluent areas than in low-income areas. 
Moreover, despite increased child care spending by states and the 
expansion of Head Start, physical space continues to remain scarce or 
unaffordable in low-income communities.
  Existing child care programs in too many low-income neighborhoods are 
crammed into inadequate, temporary quarters, leaky church basements, 
apartments, and other locations that were never designed for this 
purpose. Between the overall shortage of child care and inadequate 
existing facilities, parents have limited choices among inferior 
quality care, at times unsafe care for children.
  The United States has carried out the most extensive systematic, and 
rigorous research on investing in early education and child care 
programs. This research has shown that brain development is fastest 
during a child's earliest years.
  We know that quality child care can significantly assist in preparing 
children for school. The shortage in the supply of quality child care 
too often translates to inferior quality care for children.
  One of the contributing factors to the child care shortage is the 
difficulty that would-be providers face in financing child care 
facility development. Financial institutions often view child care 
providers as high risks for loans.
  In low-income neighborhoods, child care providers face severely 
restricted revenues and low real estate values. In urban areas, would-
be child care providers must contend with buildings in poor physical 
condition and high property costs.
  In all areas, reimbursement rates for child care subsidies are 
generally too low to cover the recovery cost of purchasing or 
developing facilities, especially after allowing for the cost of 
running the program. In addition, new providers often have no business 
training, and may need to learn how to manage their finances and 
business.
  The Child Care Facilities Financing Act would provide grants to 
intermediary organizations, enabling them to provide financial and 
technical assistance to existing or new child care providers--
including both center-based and home-based child care.

  The financial assistance may be in the form of loans, grants, 
investments, or other assistance, allowing for flexibility depending on 
the situation of the child care provider. The assistance may be used 
for acquisition, construction, or renovation of child care facilities 
or equipment. It may also be used for improving child care management 
and business practices.
  Grant funds under our legislation are required to be matched 50-50, 
further enhancing local capacity by leveraging

[[Page S8023]]

Federal funding and creating valuable public/private partnerships. The 
added benefit in providing this kind of assistance is that it will spur 
further community and economic development by building local 
partnerships.
  Reducing parental anxiety about child care means that parents can 
become more reliable and productive workers. An evaluation of 
California's welfare-to-work program found that mothers participating 
in the program were twice as likely to drop out during the first year 
if they expressed dissatisfaction with the child care provider or 
facility they were using.
  Let me share with you an example from my state of Connecticut. In the 
Hill neighborhood of New Haven, one of the most underserved areas of 
the city, there are more than 2,500 children under the age of five, but 
just 200 licensed child care spaces, including family care.
  LULAC Head Start has been serving the Hill neighborhood since 1983, 
operating a part-day, early childhood program out of a cramped and 
poorly lit church basement. This basement program could no longer be 
licensed by the state and recently closed. The 54 children being served 
were moved to another location which is overcrowded.
  Thanks to a collaboration between the Hill Development Corporation, 
LULAC Head Start and the New Haven Child Development Program, low-
income families in the Hill community will have more access to 
affordable and high-quality child care services.
  A new facility, the Hill Parent Child Center, is under construction 
and will provide multicultural child care, school readiness, and Head 
Start services for 172 low-income children in New Haven.
  Fortunately for this Hill Community, Connecticut has a new child care 
financing program. Connecticut multi-Cities Local Initiatives Support 
Corporation and the National Child Care Initiative joined forces with 
the State of Connecticut to design a program to finance the development 
of child care facilities.
  Unfortunately, there are many more children in New Haven and other 
parts of Connecticut as well as across the Nation who sill need child 
care. Sadly, most States do not have a child care financing system in 
place.
  We should do all we can to ensure that safe, affordable, quality 
child care is available for more families, particularly low-income 
families, so that we can truly leave no child behind. When the economic 
situation of families improve, distressed communities become 
revitalized.
  Expanding the supply of quality child care is an important step in 
investing in the needs of families with young children.
  I hope that you will join with Senator DeWine and me in supporting 
this legislation to ensure that parents have as many choices as 
possible in selecting child care while they work. It is hard enough for 
low-income families to make ends meet without the additional anxiety of 
poor choices of care for their children.
  I ask unanimous consent that a brief summary of the legislation be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                The Child Care Facilities Financing Act


                              the problem

       Many low-income communities face a severe shortage of child 
     care and equipment.
       Child care providers in low-income areas often lack the 
     access to capital and management expertise to expand the 
     capacity and the quality of their programs.
       A lack of affordable child care threatens the ability of 
     low-income parents to find and maintain stable employment.
       Quality child care can really make a difference in a 
     child's ability to start school ready to learn.


                              the solution

       The Child Care Facilities Financing Act authorizes $50 
     million annually to fund grants to non-profit intermediaries 
     to enhance the ability of home- and center-based child care 
     providers to serve their communities. Funds will be used to 
     provide:
       Financial assistance by intermediaries, in the form of 
     loans, grants, and interest subsidies, for the acquisition, 
     construction, or improvement of facilities for home- and 
     center-based child care and technical assistance to improve 
     business management and entrepreneurial skills to ensure 
     long-term viability of child care providers.
       The Child Care Facilities Financing Act requires that the 
     federal investment be matched, dollar for dollar, by funds 
     from the private sector, stimulating valuable public/private 
     partnerships.


                       building on a proven model

       The Child Care Facilities Financing Act draws from the 
     community development model--using small, seed-money 
     investments to leverage existing community resources.
       Tested in communities across the nation, this approach has 
     been proven to be successful in expanding child care 
     capacity:
       In New Haven, Connecticut, the Local Initiatives Support 
     Corporation (LISC) established the Community Investment 
     Collaborative for Kids--closing on $3.6 million in public-
     private financing to construct a new 10 room, 171 child Head 
     Start and child care center on a vacant lot in a low-income 
     neighborhood.
       The Ohio Community Development Finance Fund offers stable 
     resources for planning, technical assistance and funding for 
     the development of expanded quality child care space. It 
     leverages $26.11 for every $1.00 in public funding and has 
     touched the lives of over 13,000 Ohio children. Wonder World, 
     an urban child car center in Akron, Ohio, was operating in a 
     dingy and poorly lit space of an old church. Despite these 
     conditions the center had a waiting list. With help from the 
     Ohio Community Development Finance Fund, a new eight room 
     child care facility was constructed serving approximately 200 
     children.

                          ____________________