[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 173 (Thursday, December 13, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S13146-S13155]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. MURKOWSKI (for himself and Mr. Stevens):
  S. 1816. A bill to provide for the continuation of higher education 
through the conveyance of certain public lands in the State of Alaska 
to the University of Alaska, and for other purposes; to the Committee 
on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, the University of Alaska, the 
University, is Alaska's oldest post-secondary school. The University 
was chartered prior to statehood and has played a vital role in 
educating Alaskans as well as students from around the world. But the 
University of Alaska is also an important asset for our Nation. Today 
it provides a leadership role in Arctic Science and Arctic Engineering 
Research. Bringing Arctic energy to the Nation has required new 
breakthroughs in technology and engineering and our need to better 
understand global climate change has placed a high value of studying 
the Arctic where climate changes are most easily detected.
  Additionally, the University has served as an important cornerstone 
in Alaska's history. For example, the University housed the Alaska 
Constitutional Convention where the fathers of statehood carved out the 
rights and privilege guaranteed to Alaska's citizens. Further, the 
University of Alaska is proud of the fact that it began life as the 
Alaska Agricultural and Mining College. However, what makes the 
University of Alaska truly unique is the fact that it is the only land 
grant college in the Nation that is virtually landless.
  As my colleagues know, one of the oldest and most respected ways of 
financing America's educational system has been the land grant system. 
Established in 1785, this practice gives land to schools and 
universities for their use in supporting their educational endeavors. 
In 1862, Congress passed the Morrill Act which created the land grant 
colleges and universities as a way to underwrite the cost of higher 
education to more and more Americans. These colleges and universities 
received land from the Federal Government for facility location and, 
more importantly, as

[[Page S13147]]

a way to provide sustaining revenues to these educational institutions.
  The University of Alaska received the smallest amount of land of any 
State, with the exception of Delaware, that has a land grant college. 
Even the land grant college in Rhode Island received more land from the 
Federal Government than has the University of Alaska. In a state the 
size of Alaska, we should logically have one of the best and most fully 
funded land grant colleges in the country. Unfortunately, without the 
land promised under the land grant allocation system and earlier 
legislation, the University is unable to share as one of the premier 
land grant colleges in the country.
  Previous efforts in Congress were made to fix this problem. These 
efforts date back to 1915, less than 50 years after the passage of the 
Morrill Act, when Alaska's Delegate James Wickersham shepherded a 
measure through Congress that set aside potentially more than a quarter 
of a million acres, in the Tanana Valley outside of Fairbanks, for the 
support of an agricultural college and school of mines. Following the 
practice established in the lower 48 for other land grant colleges, 
Wickersham's bill set aside every Section 33 of the unsurveyed Tanana 
Valley for the Alaska Agricultural College and School of Mines. 
Alaska's educational future looked very bright.
  Many Alaskans saw the opportunity to set up an endowment system 
similar to that established by the University of Washington in the 
downtown center of Seattle, where valuable University lands are leased 
and provide funding for the University of Washington which uses those 
revenues in turn to provide for its programs and facilities.
  Before that land could be transferred to the Alaska Agricultural 
College and School of Mines, renamed the University of Alaska in 1935, 
the land had to be surveyed in order to establish the exact acreage 
included in the reserved land. The sections reserved for education 
could not be transferred to the College until they had been delineated. 
According to records of the time, it was unlikely, given the incredibly 
slow speed of surveying, that the land could be completely surveyed 
before the 21st century. Surveying was and is an extraordinarily slow 
process in Alaska's remote and unpopulated terrain. In all, only 19 
sections of land, approximately 11,211 acres, were ever transferred to 
the University. Of this amount, 2,250 were used for the original campus 
and the remainder was left to support educational opportunities.
  Recognizing the difficulties of surveying in Alaska, subsequent 
legislation was passed in 1929 that simply granted land for the benefit 
of the University. This grant totaled approximately 100,000 acres and 
to this day comprises the bulk of the University's roughly 112,000 
acres of land, less than one-third of what it was originally promised. 
In 1958, the Alaska Statehood Act was passed which extinguished the 
original land grants for all lands that remained unsurveyed. Thus, the 
University was left with little land with which to support itself and 
thus is unable to completely fulfill its mission as a land grant 
college.
  The legislation I am introducing today would redeem the promises made 
to the University in 1915 and put it on an even footing with the other 
land grant colleges in the United States. The bill provides the 
University with the land needed to support itself financially and 
offers it the chance to grow and continue to act as a responsible 
steward of the land and educator of our young people. The legislation 
also provides a concrete timetable under which the University must 
select its lands and the Secretary of the Interior must act upon those 
selections.
  This legislation also contains significant restrictions on the land 
the University can select. The University cannot select land located 
within a Conservation System Unit. The University cannot select old 
growth timber lands in the Tongass National Forest. Finally, the 
University cannot select land validly conveyed to the State or an ANCSA 
corporation, or land used in connection with federal or military 
institutions.
  Additionally, under my bill the University must relinquish extremely 
valuable inholdings in Alaska once it receives its State/Federal 
selection awarded under Section 2 of this bill. Therefore, the result 
of this legislation will mean the relinquishment of prime University 
inholdings in such magnificent areas as the Alaska Peninsula & Maritime 
National Wildlife Refuge, The Kenai Fjords National Park, Wrangell St. 
Elias National Park and Preserve, and Glacier Bay National Park. So, 
not only does this bill uphold a decades old promise to the University 
of Alaska, it provides the Secretary of the Interior the opportunity to 
acquire thousands of acres of inholdings that will further protect 
Alaska's parks and refuges.
  Specifically, this Section 2 of the bill would grant to the 
University up to 250,000 acres of federal land. Additionally, Section 5 
of the bill establishes a matching program so that the University would 
be eligible to receive up to an additional 250,000 acres on a matching 
basis, acre-for-acre, with the State. This, obviously, would be done 
through the state legislative process involving the Governor, the 
Legislature, and the University's Board of Regents. The State matching 
provision is an important component of this legislation. Most agree 
with the premise that the University was shorted land. However, some 
believe it is solely the responsibility of the State to grant the 
University land. The legislation I am introducing today offers a 
compromise giving both the State and the Federal Government the 
opportunity to contribute while at the same time providing the Federal 
Government with thousands of aces of valuable inholdings in parks and 
refuges.
  Finally, this bill contains a provision that incorporates a concept 
put forth by the Governor of Alaska. This provision directs the 
Secretary of the Interior to attempt to conclude an agreement with the 
University and the Governor of Alaska providing for sharing NPRA 
leasing revenues in lieu of land selections to prevent the University 
from obtaining more than ten percent of such annual revenues or more 
than nine million dollars each fiscal year. If an agreement is reached 
and provides for disposition of some portion of NPRA mineral leasing 
revenues to the University, the Secretary shall submit the proposed 
agreement to Congress for ratification. If the Secretary fails to reach 
an agreement within two years of enactment, or if Congress fails to 
ratify such agreement within three years from enactment, the University 
may select up to 92,000 of its 250,000 initial land grant from lands 
within NPRA north of latitude 69.
  Therefore, this bill has been substantially changed from versions 
introduced in previous Congresses in two dramatic ways. First, in 
response to concerns from the Administration and environmental 
organizations the old growth areas of the Tongass National Forest are 
off limits for selection by the University. The only areas of the 
Tongass that could be selected by the University are those areas 
previously harvested. It is important that the University be allowed to 
select lands in this area as having the ability to study and manage as 
such areas are important tools for the University's School of Forestry.
  The second substantial change to the bill, which was previously 
noted, is the revenue sharing component. This aspect provides an 
alternative means of providing for the needs of the University. With 
the passage of this bill, the University of Alaska will finally be able 
to act fully as a land grant college. It will be able to select lands 
that can provide the University with a stable revenue source as well as 
provide responsible stewardship for the land.
  This is an exciting time for the University of Alaska. The promise 
that was made more than 80 years ago could be fulfilled by passage of 
this legislation, and Alaskans could look forward to a very bright 
future for the University of Alaska and those seeking an education or 
to conduct research.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Ms. Milulski):
  S. 1818. A bill to ensure that a Federal employee who takes leave 
without pay in order to perform service as a member of the uniformed 
services or member of the National Guard shall continue to receive pay 
and allowances such individual is receiving for such service, will be 
no less than the basic pay such individual would then be receiving if 
no interruption in employment has occurred; to the Committee on 
Government Affairs.

[[Page S13148]]

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, today I would like to discuss the 
financial burden faced by many of the men and women who serve in the 
military Reserves or National Guard and who are forced to take unpaid 
leave from their jobs when called to active duty. While these 
individuals receive pay for the time they are on active duty, it is 
often significantly less than what they receive in their normal jobs. 
It is unfair to ask the men and women who have volunteered to serve 
their country, often in dangerous situation, to also face a financial 
strain on their families.
  A number of employers have wisely acted to remedy this hardship by 
establishing a financial compensation plan for their employees in the 
Reserves or National Guard. In response to the recent terrorist attacks 
of September 11, the Netherlands-based ABN AMRO Bank N.V., one of the 
world's largest banks, has set up a special pay differential program to 
provide their employees in the Reserves and National Guard compensation 
equaling the income they would normally have to forfeit when called to 
active duty. LaSalle Bank, a subsidiary of ABN AMRO in Chicago, has 
already seen this program help 12 reservists in its ranks. The 
spokesperson for LaSalle described the program as something the company 
wanted to do ``to be supportive of the country's efforts''.
  Let us take similar action in Washington and set an example for 
employers throughout the country. Today, I am introducing with my 
colleague from Maryland Senator Barbara Mikulski, the Reservist Pay 
Security Act of 2001, legislation that will help alleviate the 
financial problems faced by many Federal employees who serve in the 
Reserves and must take time off from their jobs when called to active 
duty. This bill would allow these employees to maintain their normal 
salary when called to active service by requiring Federal agencies to 
make up the difference between their military pay and what they would 
have earned on their Federal job.
  As the symbol of American values and ideals, the Federal Government 
should give these special employees of our government more than just 
words of support. We should not encourage Americans to protect their 
country and then punish those who enlist in the armed forces by taking 
away a large segment of the salary. We must provide our reservist 
employees with financial support so that they can leave their civilian 
lives to serve in the military without worrying about the financial 
well-being of their families.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BIDEN (for himself, Mr. Sessions, Mr. Cleland, Mr. 
        Cochran, and Mr. Dayton):
  S. 1819. A bill to provide that members of the Armed Forces 
performing services in the Republic of Korea shall be entitled to tax 
benefits in same manner as if such services were performed in a combat 
zone, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation, along 
with Senators Sessions, Cleland, Cochran, and Dayton that simply 
ensures that personnel serving in Korea get the same tax benefits as 
personnel serving in other forward deployed areas of the world such as 
Kuwait and the Balkans. I am hoping that this legislation can be added 
to the economic stimulus package, but if not, I want to make other 
Senators aware of the need to take this action for the brave men and 
women serving in Korea.
  We cannot fix all of the quality of life problems in Korea overnight, 
but we can at least provide basic equity in the tax treatment of 
military personnel who serve there so that they get the same benefits 
those in Kuwait and the Balkans get.
  Let me share with my colleagues some of the facts that led us to 
decide that this tax equity is needed and is needed now.
  While we have representatives of every service in Korea, the bulk of 
our force is from the Army. Seventeen percent of the entire Army is 
stationed in, on orders to, or returning from the Republic of Korea at 
any given time. That's about 37,000 soldiers.
  Unlike most Army postings, which tend to be for six months, ninety-
six percent of those stationed in Korea are there for at least one year 
of unaccompanied duty. In some Army specialities, personnel are asked 
to serve for far more than one unaccompanied, year-long tour in Korea, 
which encourages experienced personnel to leave the Army.
  Duty tours in Korea involve longer separations from family, under 
worse quality of life conditions than almost any other overseas Army 
post, in a military zone that is clearly hostile, for less pay. This is 
a serious moral issue. Let me give you an example, a typical E-5 will 
make $5,136 less, $2,292 in Federal taxes that must be paid and not 
getting the $2,844 separation ration if sent to Korea rather than the 
Balkans. Our men and women in the military do not serve to become rich, 
but people notice and morale suffers when one assignment means working 
in poor conditions for a year and taking a $5,000 pay-cut.
  When I say the conditions are poor, I want people to know that I am 
not exaggerating. The quality of life in Korea is recognized as 
substantially lower than other overseas posts and far lower than within 
the United States. Consider that orders for Korea have the highest 
command declination rate and the highest ``no show'' rate in the Army.
  Even worse, look at the housing situation. Only ten percent of the 
command sponsored service members serving in Korea can be housed, and 
that housing is generally substandard. Compare this to seventy-two 
percent of forces deployed to Japan and seventy-four percent of forces 
in Europe having housing available.
  Let me explain what I mean by substandard housing in Korea. The same 
Quonset huts built in the 1950s as temporary structures are still being 
used in 2001 to house troops today. Those huts are being shared by 4 or 
more personnel, often at a level of Sergeant or higher, which is well 
below standard quarters for such rank.
  I visited those Quonset huts when I traveled to Korea in August. I 
saw the sand bags they have to put out when it rains to prevent major 
flooding. I witnessed the cramped living quarters; even worse than my 
freshman college dorm room. I have heard that when winter comes, and 
Korean winters are famous for their severity, these buildings are much 
like living in an igloo.
  Our troops make the best of this deplorable situation, but they 
deserve some relief. These are the men and women on whom we rely to 
deter North Korean aggression on a peninsula that is still technically 
in a state of war.
  Because the tour of duty is unaccompanied for ninety-six percent of 
the service members there, most of the approximately 21,000 married 
military personnel in Korea are forced to maintain 2 households. The 
substandard accommodations available force significant out-of-pocket 
expenses for basic items like food for both households, phone access, 
transportation, and other items basic to other posts. The Command 
estimates that $3,000 to $5,000 per year are spent by deployed 
personnel on these ``hidden costs.'' Any family that has had to budget 
knows that this is a significant economic burden at a time when these 
families are already enduring a year of separation.
  It is no wonder that the Army has trouble filling billets in Korea. 
If you combine the tax disparity and the ``hidden costs'', a mid-level 
E-5 will make $8,000 to $10,000 less if deployed to Korea versus the 
Balkans or Kuwait. This is unacceptable, and it is something that we 
can fix now. The command estimates that granting pay equity would cost 
approximately $85 million a year. That is surely the least we owe the 
fine men and women serving in Korea today.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CLELAND (for himself, Mr. Rockefeller, and Mr. Wyden):
  S. 1820. A bill to enhance authorities relating to emergency 
preparedness grants; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.
  Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, the horrific events of September 11 
underscore in red the heroism of the men and women who put their lives 
on the line every day, the courageous fire fighters and police officers 
of this Nation, the domestic defenders of America. Each and every day, 
fire fighters and police officers wake up knowing that they may have to 
run into burning buildings or respond to chemical or biological 
attacks. As thousands and thousands of

[[Page S13149]]

people were running for their lives out of the World Trade Center and 
the Pentagon, police officers and fire fighters were running in the 
opposite direction, into the danger and toward the people who could not 
save themselves. Tragically, many of those first responders did not 
come out. Sixty police officers and 344 fire fighters are missing or 
have been declared dead in the World Trade Center attacks. The majority 
of the fire fighters who responded to the first five alarms of the 
terrorist attacks, including the city's entire search and rescue fleet 
of five squad companies, were in the Twin Towers when they collapsed. 
They are, by any definition, heroes.
  We ask for a tremendous amount of responsibility from a small group 
of people. Fire fighters and police officers are the first responders 
to almost every tragedy imaginable. From car accidents to plane 
crashes, from kitchen fires to towering infernos, from domestic 
disputes to hazardous material spills, we depend upon their service and 
training each and every day. This Nation's fire fighters and police 
officers stand ready to respond to the needs of America. The terrible 
tragedy of September 11 is a daily reminder of how critical it is that 
America respond to the needs of its first responders.
  For the last three months our Nation has focused on how we may best 
increase the security of our borders. During this time, experts on 
terrorism have warned us to think outside the box, that if we fail to 
do so, this Nation will put itself in the vulnerable position of 
forever responding to the last terrorist attack. The number of anthrax 
cases is a warning in red that biological and chemical agents are 
available as weapons of mass destruction. Given this fact, the capacity 
of our police officers and fire fighter to respond quickly to 
emergencies involving hazardous materials becomes more important than 
ever.
  The U.S. Department of Transportation administers the Emergency 
Preparedness Grants Program, which helps State local governments train 
police and fire fighters to respond to hazmat emergencies. Currently 
that program is funded at $14 million, and the money comes from 
registration fees paid by certain hazmat carriers and shippers. Given 
the growing need for expertise in handling hazardous materials, the $14 
million pot of money is clearly inadequate. It is estimated that 
current funding can provide training to only about 120,000 emergency 
personnel a year out of a pool of almost 3 million. Grants to local 
governments are small, ranging from $100,000 to $300,000 on average. In 
fact, a recent Washington Post article stated that Washington, D.C. is 
supposed to have a fire department team to respond to a chemical or 
biological attack, but according to the article, its members rarely 
train, and are used instead for routine firefighting.
  Because money has never been fully allocated for hazmat training 
grants, there is a current $15 million surplus in the Emergency 
Preparedness Grants Program. This is $15 million which could be going 
for critical first responder training. Today I am joined by Senators 
Rockefeller and Wyden in introducing the Heroic Emergency Response 
Operations Act, the HERO bill, which would allow the Department of 
Transportation to access the $15 million in surplus funds, at no cost 
to the taxpayer, and disperse the lion's share of this money to State 
and local governments for hazmat training of the men and women who are 
at ground zero during emergencies involving hazardous materials.
  Under our legislation, $1 million of the $15 million surplus would be 
authorized to go to the International Association of Fire Fighters, 
IAFF, which provides specialized hazmat training free of charge to 
local fire departments. According to the IAFF, funding of $1 million 
per year would quadruple the number of fire fighters who receive the 
necessary training to safeguard their health and safety as well as that 
of the citizens they protect during emergency response at or along our 
Nation's transportation corridor. In addition, the HERO bill would also 
require the Department of Transportation to develop national standards 
for security training related to the deliberate release of hazardous 
materials used as weapons of mass destruction. These standards would be 
in addition to the existing standards which address emergency response 
to accidental hazmat spills which may occur during the transportation 
of hazardous materials.
  In this era of potential chemical and biological attacks, we need to 
do everything we can to ensure that our local police officers and fire 
fighters receive the proper training to do the difficult job we ask 
them to do. We in Congress must do all we can to help the first 
responders of this Nation because they do everything they can to help 
us, including giving their lives in the line of duty, as we are 
painfully reminded by the tragic events of September 11. Our 
legislation is endorsed by the International Association of Fire 
Fighters, IAFF, and the International Brotherhood of Police Officers, 
IBPO. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the HERO bill be printed 
in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to the printed in the 
Record, as follows.

                                S. 1820

       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 ``Heroic Emergency Response 
     Operations Act'' or ``HERO Act''.

     SEC. 2. ENHANCEMENT OF EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS GRANTS.

       (a) Security Training for Transportation of Hazardous 
     Material.--Subsection (i) of section 5116 of title 49, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) to develop minimum national standards for, and to 
     develop and conduct, security training relating to the 
     transportation of hazardous material in commerce, except that 
     not more than 5 percent of the amount in the account 
     available in any fiscal year may be used for activities under 
     this paragraph.''.
       (b) Amount Available for Supplemental Training Grants.--
     Subsection (j) of that section is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new paragraph:
       ``(6) The amount made available each fiscal year from the 
     account under subsection (i)(1) for grants under this 
     subsection shall be $1,000,000.''.
       (c) Availability of Funds Generally.--Notwithstanding any 
     limitation in section 5127 of title 49, United States Code, 
     or in any appropriations Act (including any appropriations 
     Act enacted after the date of the enactment of this Act), all 
     fees collected pursuant to section 5108 of that title, 
     including any fees collected before the date of the enactment 
     of this Act that remain available for obligation, shall be 
     available for obligation, without further appropriation in 
     accordance with section 5116(i) of that title, as amended by 
     subsection (a).

  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, it is my distinct pleasure to join my 
friend from Georgia, Senator Cleland, in cosponsoring the Heroic 
Emergency Response Operations, or HERO, Act. The legislation we 
introduce today honors individuals whom the tragic events of the past 
few months have truly shown to be heroes, our firefighters and police 
officers. The HERO Act honors these men and women by providing grants 
to State and local governments to allow there dedicated public servants 
to be trained in the proper handling of hazardous materials 
emergencies.
  The HERO Act expands upon the existing Department of Transportation, 
DOT, Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness Grants, which are 
intended to provide financial and technical assistance to enhance State 
and local hazardous materials planning and training. The program is 
authorized to distribute up to $14 million in fees that have been 
collected from shippers and carriers of hazardous materials to 
emergency responders for hazmat training. Unfortunately, this money has 
never been fully allocated to this important endeavor, and there is now 
a $15 million surplus.
  The HERO Act will allow the Secretary of Transportation to access 
this $15 million in surplus funds and use it for its intended purpose. 
Additionally, the HERO Act authorizes that $1 million of the surplus 
funds go to the International Association of Fire Fighters, (IAFF), 
which offers a specialized program of hazmat training, free of charge, 
to firefighters across the country. The IAFF is the only organization 
currently offering this specialized hazmat training, and the additional 
funding will quadruple the number of firefighters with access to it.
  In the course of learning some important, but painful, lessons during 
the

[[Page S13150]]

past few months, our nation has had the opportunity to focus on some 
positives that we may have taken for granted. As surely as the epic 
tragedies of September 11 made us aware of the unspeakable evil in the 
world, it also gave us great pride in the heroes in our midst. When an 
anthrax-laden letter contaminated the offices of the Majority Leader 
and others, we came to understand our vulnerability to chemical and 
biological terrorism. At the same time, we came to more fully 
appreciate the dedication of the Capitol Police, and the highly trained 
biohazard units from several agencies of the Federal Government and the 
armed forces. I am among a group of displaced Senators and staff 
anxiously waiting for these experts to determine that the Hart Building 
is safe to re-enter, and I am confident that when we do go back in, the 
health of Senators and staff members will have been safeguarded by 
these brave men and women.
  I believe it is our duty as members of Congress to see to it that 
when firefighters and police officers anywhere in the country respond 
to an accident, crime, or act of terrorism that has resulted in the 
release of hazardous materials, these heroes have the proper training 
to protect themselves and the general public. I further believe it is 
unconscionable that while hazmat teams in every State in the Union go 
without this much-needed training, this stockpile of money sits unused 
in the Treasury.
  Even before the events of the past few months highlighted the need 
for enhanced and expanded hazardous materials training, DOT and the 
IAFF were training as many emergency personnel as possible. However, at 
its current level of funding, the Emergency Preparedness Grants Program 
can only provide hazmat training to approximately 120,000 of the 
nation's 3 million emergency workers each year. Given what has 
happened, it should be obvious that the need for specialized hazmat 
training has quickly outpaced the money currently available. This 
leaves emergency workers in big cities and small towns in the untenable 
situation of knowing the risks they face, but lacking the proper 
training to react appropriately.
  The legislation I am cosponsoring with Senator Cleland offers an 
excellent solution to this problem. At no cost to taxpayers, the HERO 
Act will allow many thousands of emergency personnel to receive 
hazardous materials training that they would not otherwise be able to 
receive. Further, it will require DOT to develop minimal national 
standards for providing security training to those who transport 
hazardous materials in commerce, which should reduce the likelihood 
that emergency personnel will have to put their lives at risk to 
protect us. I commend Senator Cleland for his work on this issue, and I 
wholeheartedly recommend it to my colleagues. I believe the Congress 
should enact this bill at its earliest opportunity, and that the 
President should sign it into law.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Mr. Craig, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Wyden, Mr. 
        Smith of Oregon, and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 1825. A bill to authorize the Secretary of Commerce to provide 
financial assistance to the States of Alaska, Washington, Oregon, 
California, and Idaho and tribes in the region for salmon habitat 
restoration projects in coastal waters and upland drainages, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I am very pleased to be introducing the 
Pacific Salmon Recovery Act to grant Federal funding for salmon 
recovery efforts in California, Idaho, Washington, Oregon, and Alaska. 
The Salmon Recovery Act authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to provide 
$350 million during each of the next six fiscal years to these five 
western States and the Tribes in that region.
  In California, as in much of the West, wild salmon stocks have 
collapsed. Their precipitous decline is the result of habitat 
destruction, overfishing, pollution, and dams that block the passage of 
fish to and from their spawning areas. The results have been tragic. 
Fishermen have lost their jobs. Tribes have lost species that are their 
religious and cultural icons. And, the environment is suffering.
  This bill would help to remedy these problems by investing in the 
restoration of these economic and culturally important fish. 
Specifically, it will provide funds to support projects in coastal 
waters and river habitats that will help restore and recover wild 
salmon. It directs that priority be given to the restoration of species 
listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act. It 
establishes criteria to ensure that funds are not wasted on projects 
that will not benefit fish. It directs the Secretary of Commerce to 
develop a process for peer reviewing proposed projects to ensure that 
only scientifically sound projects receive funding. And, it requires 
States and Tribes to provide an annual spending plan to Congress as 
well as a one-time comprehensive plan for salmon restoration.
  It is important to note that Idaho and the Tribes will finally be 
eligible for Pacific Salmon Recovery Fund dollars as a result of this 
bill. There is no justification for them to have been excluded in the 
past. Additionally, this bill requires that the funds be divided 
equally among the 5 States. This will ensure that the funding 
distribution is not distorted by political pressures.
  I am particularly pleased that the supporters of this bill come from 
across the political spectrum. I am joined in the introduction of this 
bill by Senators Craig, R-ID, Crapo, R-ID, Wyden, D-OR, Smith, R-OR, 
and Feinstein, D-CA. We worked together for many months to craft this 
legislation. We were ultimately successful because we all share the 
same goal, saving wild salmon.
  Finally, this bill illustrates clearly that our economy and our 
environment are linked. I have always said we cannot have a healthy 
economy without a healthy environment. In restoring the salmon, we will 
also be restoring the economy of many communities in the West that are, 
or were, dependent on healthy salmon runs.
  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. 1825

       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 ``Pacific Salmon Recovery 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. SALMON CONSERVATION AND SALMON HABITAT RESTORATION 
                   ASSISTANCE.

       (a) Requirement To Provide Assistance.--Subject to the 
     availability of appropriations, the Secretary shall provide 
     financial assistance in accordance with this Act to eligible 
     States and eligible tribal governments for conservation of 
     salmon and salmon habitat restoration activities.
       (b) Allocation.--Subject to section 3(f), of the amounts 
     available to provide assistance under this section each 
     fiscal year, the Secretary--
       (1) shall allocate 85 percent among eligible States, in 
     equal amounts; and
       (2) shall allocate 15 percent among eligible tribal 
     governments, in amounts determined by the Secretary.
       (c) Transfer.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall promptly transfer--
       (A) to an eligible State that has submitted and had 
     approved an annual spending plan under section 3(a) and a 
     Salmon Conservation and Salmon Habitat Restoration Plan 
     approved under section 3(b), amounts allocated to the 
     eligible State under subsection (b)(1); and
       (B) to an eligible tribal government that has submitted and 
     had approved an annual spending plan under section 3(a) and a 
     memorandum of understanding under section 3(c), amounts 
     allocated to the eligible tribal government under subsection 
     (b)(2).
       (2) Transfers to eligible states.--The Secretary shall make 
     the transfer under paragraph (1)(A)--
       (A) to the Washington State Salmon Recovery Board, in the 
     case of amounts allocated to Washington;
       (B) to the Oregon State Watershed Enhancement Board, in the 
     case of amounts allocated to Oregon;
       (C) to the California Department of Fish and Game for the 
     California Coastal Salmon Recovery Program, in the case of 
     amounts allocated to California;
       (D) to the Governor of Alaska, in the case of amounts 
     allocated to Alaska; and
       (E) to the Office of Species Conservation, in the case of 
     amounts allocated to Idaho.
       (d) Reallocation.--
       (1) Amounts allocated to eligible states.--Amounts that are 
     allocated to an eligible State for a fiscal year shall be 
     reallocated under subsection (b)(1) among the other eligible 
     States, if--

[[Page S13151]]

       (A) the eligible State does not have an annual salmon 
     spending plan approved under section 3(a);
       (B) the eligible State does not have in effect at the end 
     of the first fiscal year after the amounts have been 
     allocated a Salmon Conservation and Salmon Habitat 
     Restoration Plan approved under section 3(b); or
       (C) the amounts allocated remain unobligated at the end of 
     the year following the fiscal year for which the amounts were 
     allocated.
       (2) Amounts allocated to eligible tribal governments.--
     Amounts that are allocated to an eligible tribal government 
     for a fiscal year shall be reallocated under subsection 
     (b)(2) to the other eligible tribal governments, if the 
     eligible tribal government--
       (A) does not have an annual salmon spending plan approved 
     under section 3(a); or
       (B) has not entered into a memorandum of understanding with 
     the Secretary in accordance with section 3(c) at the end of 
     the fiscal year following the fiscal year for which the 
     amounts were allocated.

     SEC. 3. RECEIPT AND USE OF ASSISTANCE.

       (a) Annual Salmon Spending Plan.--In order to receive 
     assistance under this Act, an eligible State or eligible 
     tribe shall submit and have approved by the Secretary an 
     annual salmon plan which shall include a description of the 
     projects and programs that the State or tribe plans to 
     implement with the funds allocated. The Secretary shall 
     review a State or tribal plan within 90 days and provide a 
     State or tribe an opportunity to resubmit the plan if 
     necessary. Funds shall not be transferred to a State or tribe 
     until an annual salmon plan is approved.
       (b) Eligible State Salmon Conservation and Restoration 
     Plan.--
       (1) In general.--In order to receive assistance under this 
     Act, an eligible State shall submit to the Secretary by the 
     end of the first fiscal year after the amounts have been 
     allocated, and, not later than 90 days after receipt of such 
     a plan, the Secretary shall approve or deny, a Salmon 
     Conservation and Salmon Habitat Restoration Plan that meets 
     the requirements of paragraph (3).
       (2) Negative determination.--If the Secretary determines 
     that a plan described in paragraph (1) submitted by an 
     eligible State does not meet the requirements of paragraph 
     (3), the Secretary shall inform the State of the deficiencies 
     of the plan, and the State may resubmit the plan for review 
     by the Secretary.
       (3) Contents.--Each Salmon Conservation and Salmon Habitat 
     Restoration Plan shall, at a minimum--
       (A) be consistent with all applicable Federal laws;
       (B) promote the recovery of salmon;
       (C) except as provided in subparagraph (D), give priority 
     to use of assistance under this Act for projects that--
       (i) provide a direct and demonstrable benefit to salmon or 
     their habitat;
       (ii) provide the greatest benefit to salmon conservation 
     and salmon habitat restoration relative to the cost of the 
     projects; and
       (iii) conserve and restore habitat for--

       (I) salmon that are listed as an endangered species or 
     threatened species, proposed for such listing, or a candidate 
     for such listing, under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 
     (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); or
       (II) salmon that are given special protection under the 
     laws or regulations of the eligible State;

       (D) in the case of a plan submitted by an eligible State in 
     which, on the date of enactment of this Act, there is no area 
     at which a salmon species referred to in subparagraph 
     (C)(iii)(I) spawns--
       (i) give priority to use of assistance for projects 
     referred to in clauses (i) and (ii) of subparagraph (C) that 
     contribute to programs that prevent the decline of unlisted 
     species and that conserve species of salmon that intermingle 
     with, or are otherwise related to, species referred to in 
     subparagraph (C)(iii)(I), which may include (among other 
     matters)--

       (I) salmon habitat restoration;
       (II) salmon supplementation and enhancement only for the 
     purposes of restoring naturally reproducing salmon stocks and 
     conserving salmon genetic diversity;
       (III) salmon-related research, data collection, and 
     monitoring; and
       (IV) national and international cooperative habitat 
     programs; and

       (ii) provide for revision of the plan within 1 year after 
     any date on which any salmon species that spawns in the 
     eligible State--

       (I) is listed as an endangered species or threatened 
     species;
       (II) is proposed for such listing; or
       (III) becomes a candidate for such listing, under the 
     Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.);

       (E) establish specific goals and time lines for activities 
     funded with assistance under this Act;
       (F) include measurable criteria by which such activities 
     may be evaluated;
       (G) require that activities carried out with such 
     assistance shall--
       (i) contribute to the conservation and recovery of salmon;
       (ii) be scientifically based in accordance with the 
     requirements prescribed by the Secretary under section 4;
       (iii) be cost-effective; and
       (iv) not be conducted on private land, except with the 
     consent of the owner of the land; and
       (H) consider whether activities funded under this Act will 
     have long-term benefits based, in part, on consideration of 
     upstream or downstream activities or activities occurring 
     elsewhere in the watershed.
       (4) Submission of regional plans.--If the State is unable 
     to complete a comprehensive statewide Salmon Conservation and 
     Restoration Plan within the timeframe established in section 
     3(b) the State may submit 1 or more Plans covering distinct 
     regions within the State. Funding shall only be available for 
     States or regions within the State for which there is an 
     approved Plan.
       (c) Memorandum of Understanding Between Tribal Government 
     and the Secretary.--
       (1) In general.--To receive assistance under this Act, an 
     eligible tribal government shall--
       (A) have an approved annual spending plan; and
       (B) enter into a memorandum of understanding with the 
     Secretary regarding use of the assistance by the end of the 
     second fiscal year after the amounts have been allocated.
       (2) Contents.--Each memorandum of understanding shall, at a 
     minimum--
       (A) be consistent with all applicable Federal laws;
       (B) be consistent with the goal of recovering salmon;
       (C) give priority to use of assistance under this Act for 
     activities that--
       (i) provide a direct and demonstrable benefit to salmon or 
     their habitat;
       (ii) provide the greatest benefit to salmon conservation 
     and salmon habitat restoration relative to the cost of the 
     projects; and
       (iii) conserve and restore habitat for--

       (I) salmon that are listed as an endangered species or 
     threatened species, proposed for such listing, or a candidate 
     for such listing, under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 
     (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); or
       (II) salmon that are given special protection under the 
     resolutions, ordinances, or regulations of the eligible 
     tribal government;

       (D) in the case of a memorandum of understanding entered 
     into by an eligible tribal government for an area in which, 
     as of the date of enactment of this Act, there is no area at 
     which a salmon species referred to in subparagraph 
     (C)(iii)(I) spawns--
       (i) give priority to use of assistance for projects 
     referred to in clauses (i) and (ii) of subparagraph (C) that 
     contribute to programs described in subsection (a)(3)(D)(i); 
     and
       (ii) include a requirement that the memorandum shall be 
     revised within 1 year after any date on which any salmon 
     species that spawns in the area--

       (I) is listed as an endangered species or threatened 
     species;
       (II) is proposed for such listing; or
       (III) becomes a candidate for such listing, under the 
     Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.);

       (E) establish specific goals and time lines for activities 
     funded with assistance under this Act;
       (F) include measurable criteria by which such activities 
     may be evaluated;
       (G) establish specific requirements for reporting to the 
     Secretary by the eligible tribal government; and
       (H) require that activities carried out with such 
     assistance shall--
       (i) contribute to the conservation or recovery of salmon;
       (ii) be scientifically based, in accordance with the 
     requirements prescribed by the Secretary under section 4;
       (iii) be cost-effective; and
       (iv) not be conducted on private land, except with the 
     consent of the owner of the land.
       (d) Eligible Activities.--
       (1) In general.--Assistance under section 2 may be used by 
     an eligible State in accordance with a plan approved under 
     section 3(b), or by an eligible tribal government in 
     accordance with a memorandum of understanding entered into by 
     the government under section 3(c), to carry out or make 
     grants or provide loans to carry out, among other 
     activities--
       (A) protection and restoration of salmon habitat, including 
     riparian areas;
       (B) acquisition from willing sellers of conservation 
     easements for riparian habitat protection;
       (C) watershed evaluation, assessment, and planning 
     necessary to develop a site-specific and clearly prioritized 
     plan to implement watershed improvements, including for 
     making multiyear grants;
       (D) research and collection of data on salmon, and 
     monitoring of salmon and salmon habitat;
       (E) salmon supplementation and enhancement projects only 
     for the purposes of restoring naturally reproducing salmon 
     stocks and conserving salmon genetic diversity;
       (F) maintenance and monitoring of projects completed with 
     assistance under this Act;
       (G) technical training and education projects, including 
     teaching private landowners about practical means of 
     improving land and water management practices to contribute 
     to the conservation and restoration of salmon habitat; and
       (H) other activities related to conservation of salmon and 
     salmon habitat restoration.
       (2) Peer review.--Eligible science-based activities in 
     paragraph (1) shall be validated through a peer review 
     process that satisfies the requirements prescribed by the 
     Secretary under section 4.

[[Page S13152]]

       (3) Columbia river basin.--Funds allocated to eligible 
     States and tribal governments for projects or activities 
     located within the Columbia River Basin shall be used in a 
     manner consistent with the Northwest Power Planning Council's 
     Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program.
       (e) Use of Assistance for Activities Outside Jurisdiction 
     of Recipient.--
       (1) Assistance to states.--Assistance under this Act 
     provided to an eligible State only may be used for activities 
     within that State's borders.
       (2) Assistance to tribal governments.--Assistance under 
     this Act provided to an eligible tribal government may be 
     used for activities conducted within the borders of its 
     resident State (or States).
       (f) Cost-Sharing by Eligible States.--
       (1) In general.--An eligible State shall provide 25 percent 
     non-Federal match, in the aggregate, of any financial 
     assistance provided to the eligible State for a fiscal year 
     under this Act. The non-Federal match may be in the form of 
     monetary contributions or in-kind contributions of services 
     for projects carried out with assistance under this Act. For 
     purposes of this paragraph, monetary contributions by the 
     State shall not be considered to include funds received from 
     other Federal sources.
       (2) Limitation on requirement for matching funds.--The 
     Secretary may not require an eligible State to provide 
     matching funds for each project carried out with assistance 
     under this Act.
       (3) Treatment of monetary contributions.--For purposes of 
     subsection (a)(3)(H), the amount of monetary contributions by 
     an eligible State under this subsection shall be treated as 
     expenditures from non-Federal sources for salmon conservation 
     and salmon habitat restoration programs.
       (4) Bonneville power administration fish and wildlife 
     funding.--Funds collected by the Bonneville Power 
     Administration from electricity ratepayers and allocated to 
     eligible States and tribal governments for fish and wildlife 
     activities shall not be considered to be funds from a Federal 
     source under this Act.
       (g) Supplementation of State and Tribal Funding.--An 
     eligible State or tribal government shall maintain its 
     aggregate expenditures of funds from non-Federal sources for 
     salmon and salmon habitat restoration programs at or above 
     the average annual level of such expenditures in the 2 fiscal 
     years preceding the date of enactment of this Act or 
     $10,000,000 for each fiscal year, whichever is less.
       (h) Coordination of Activities.--Each eligible State and 
     each eligible tribal government receiving assistance under 
     this Act is encouraged to carefully coordinate the salmon 
     conservation activities of that State or tribal government 
     to--
       (1) eliminate duplicative and overlapping activities; and
       (2) provide consideration of upstream or downstream 
     activities or activities occurring elsewhere in the watershed 
     that may impact the efficacy of restoration efforts.
       (i) Limitations on Use of Funds.--
       (1) Administrative expenses.--
       (A) Federal administrative expenses.--Of the amounts 
     available to carry out this Act for a fiscal year, not more 
     than 1 percent may be used by the Secretary for 
     administrative expenses incurred in carrying out this Act.
       (B) State and tribal administrative expenses.--Of the 
     amount allocated under this Act to an eligible State or 
     eligible tribal government each fiscal year, not more than 3 
     percent may be used by the eligible State or eligible tribal 
     government, respectively, for administrative expenses 
     incurred in carrying out this Act.
       (2) Activities required for environmental permit.--No funds 
     available to carry out this Act may be used by a private 
     entity for activities that would otherwise be required as a 
     condition or requirement of a Federal, State, or local 
     environmental permit.

     SEC. 4. PEER REVIEW REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall prescribe the 
     requirements for expedited peer review of science-based 
     activities contained in the annual spending plan for each 
     eligible State or tribal government. In order to achieve 
     salmon recovery throughout the coastal salmon's range, each 
     plan shall be considered separately on its own merits.
       (b) Content.--The requirements for expedited peer review 
     shall include the following:
       (1) Panels.--Establishment of sufficient peer review 
     panels, as determined by the Secretary, to achieve timely 
     peer review of activities contained in the annual spending 
     plan. The of number of members, qualifications for 
     membership, and procedure for selection of members for each 
     panel shall be substantially in the same manner as the peer 
     review panel provided for under section 4(h)(10)(D) of the 
     Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation 
     Act (16 U.S.C. 839b(h)(10)(D)).
       (2) Necessary information.--A description of the 
     information that must be provided to the peer review panel in 
     order to evaluate the activities. Each State's Salmon 
     Conservation and Salmon Habitat Restoration Plan and each 
     tribal government's memorandum of understanding shall 
     establish the mechanism for providing needed information to 
     the peer review panel.
       (3) Review of proposed activities.--Review, by the panels, 
     of activities proposed for funding with assistance under this 
     Act, within the time prescribed by the Secretary.
       (4) Determination and recommendations.--Submittal of the 
     peer review panel's determinations and recommendations 
     regarding the activities within each State's or tribe's 
     annual spending plan to the Secretary, in order to be 
     considered by the Secretary in approving or disapproving the 
     annual spending plan, in accordance with the provisions of 
     section 3(a). States or tribes shall be provided an 
     opportunity to resubmit any plan, if necessary, or to propose 
     alternative projects within their respective jurisdictions.
       (c) Interim Funding.--An eligible State or tribal 
     government may receive funding under this Act prior to the 
     finalization by the Secretary of the peer review requirements 
     under this section.
       (d) Peer Review Funding.--The Secretary shall pay the 
     expenses incurred by peer review panels in an amount not to 
     exceed $500,000 a year from the administrative costs 
     described in section 3(i)(1)(A).

     SEC. 5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.

       (a) Eligible States.--Each eligible State seeking 
     assistance under this Act shall establish a citizen advisory 
     committee or provide a similar forum for local governments 
     and the public to participate in obtaining and using the 
     assistance, as well as in the development of the State Salmon 
     Conservation and Restoration Plan. Each eligible State 
     receiving assistance under this Act shall hold public 
     meetings to receive recommendations on the use of the 
     assistance.
       (b) Eligible Tribal Governments.--Each eligible tribal 
     government receiving assistance under this Act shall hold 
     public meetings to receive recommendations on the use of the 
     assistance.

     SEC. 6. CONSULTATION NOT REQUIRED.

       Consultation under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act 
     of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1536) shall not be required based solely 
     on the provision of financial assistance under this Act. 
     Projects or activities that affect listed species shall 
     remain subject to applicable provisions of the Endangered 
     Species Act of 1973.

     SEC. 7. REPORTS.

       Each eligible State and tribal government shall, not later 
     than December 31 of the second year in which amounts are 
     available to carry out this Act, and every 2 years 
     thereafter, submit to the Secretary a biennial report on the 
     use of financial assistance received by the eligible State or 
     tribal government under this Act. The report shall contain an 
     evaluation of the success of that State or tribal government 
     in meeting the criteria listed in section 3 (b) and (c), 
     whichever is applicable.

     SEC. 8. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the 
     meaning given that term in section 4(e) of the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 
     450b(e)).
       (2) Eligible state.--The term ``eligible State'' means each 
     of the States of Alaska, Washington, Oregon, California, and 
     Idaho.
       (3) Eligible tribal government.--The term ``eligible tribal 
     government'' means--
       (A) a federally recognized tribal government of an Indian 
     tribe in Alaska, Washington, Oregon, California, or Idaho 
     that the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of the 
     Interior, determines--
       (i) is involved in salmon management and recovery 
     activities under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 
     U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); and
       (ii) has the management and organizational capability to 
     maximize the benefits of assistance provided under this Act; 
     or
       (B) an Alaska Native village or regional or village 
     corporation, as defined in or established pursuant to the 
     Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), 
     or a federally recognized tribe in Alaska, that the 
     Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of the 
     Interior, determines--
       (i) is involved in salmon conservation and management; and
       (ii) has the management and organizational capability to 
     maximize the benefits of assistance provided under this Act.
       (4) Salmon.--The term ``salmon'' means any naturally 
     produced salmonid or naturally produced trout of the 
     following species:
       (A) Coho salmon (oncorhynchus kisutch).
       (B) Chinook salmon (oncorhynchus tshawytscha).
       (C) Chum salmon (oncorhynchus keta).
       (D) Pink salmon (oncorhynchus gorbuscha).
       (E) Sockeye salmon (oncorhynchus nerka).
       (F) Steelhead trout (oncorhynchus mykiss).
       (G) Sea-run cutthroat trout (oncorhynchus clarki clarki).
       (H) For purposes of applying this Act to Oregon, the term 
     ``salmon'' also includes--
       (i) lahontan cutthroat trout (oncorhnychus clarki 
     henshawi); and
       (ii) bull trout (salvelinus confluentus).
       (I) For purposes of applying this Act to Washington and 
     Idaho, the term ``salmon'' also includes bull trout 
     (salvelinus confluentus).
       (5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Commerce.

     SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated $350,000,000 for 
     each of the fiscal years 2002 through 2007 to carry out the 
     provisions of this Act. Any funds appropriated pursuant to 
     this Act shall remain available until expended.

[[Page S13153]]

                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HARKIN (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, and Mr. Baucus):
  S. 1827. A bill to provide permanent authorization for International 
Labor Affairs Bureau to continue and enhance their work to alleviate 
child labor and improve respect for internationally recognized worker 
rights and core labor standards, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Foreign Relations.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, laws are only as effective as their 
implementation and enforcement. That is why today I am introducing the 
Fair International Standards in Trade and Investment Act of 2001 along 
with my distinguished colleagues, Senator Kennedy, chairman of the 
Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and Senator 
Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.
  This legislation will provide much-needed policy direction to the 
U.S. Labor Department DOL, and enhance the standing and capacity of the 
International Labor Affairs Bureau, ILAB, within that Department in the 
formulation and conduct of our nation's international economic 
policies. With these tools, ILAB can better inform and equip U.S. 
policy-makers in all three branches of our Federal Government to assist 
and induce our foreign trading partners to enforce their own national 
laws against abusive child labor and to comply with thirteen U.S. laws 
that have been enacted since 1983 which link U.S. trade, investment, 
and aid policies to the elimination of abusive child labor and growing 
international respect for the other internationally-recognized worker 
rights and core labor standards.
  Currently, ILAB does not have any underlying, permanent statutory 
authority for any of its international activities. It simply operates 
as an adjunct to the personal office of the Secretary of Labor. 
Practically speaking, this gives ILAB very little clout in inter-agency 
policy-making and no real voice to insist on better enforcement of the 
child labor provisions and other worker rights provisions in U.S. law, 
international law, or any of the bilateral trade and investment 
agreements that America has with more than 150 foreign countries.
  The time has come for better equipping our government and the rest of 
the world with urgently-needed tools to constructively link compliance 
with child labor laws and other basic worker rights to the conduct of 
continued trade and investment liberalization. We need new thinking and 
new resolve to crackdown on abusive child labor throughout the global 
economy and to beef up protection of internationally-recognized worker 
rights and core labor standards. If enacted, this legislation will lay 
a solid statutory foundation underneath ILAB. It will empower ILAB to 
help ensure that as our Nation enters into additional trade and 
investmennt agreements, that those new agreements as well as all of our 
pre-existing agreements serve to raise the living standards and protect 
the rights of working people as well as corporate managers and 
investors.
  I have spent more than a decade in this Senate leading the charge 
against the commercial exploitation of children in the workplace at 
home and abroad. Just last year, the Congress enacted provisions I 
authored in the Trade and Development Act of 2000 which prohibit trade 
preferences and duty-free access to the U.S. marketplace for any 
trading nation that is not meeting its international legal obligations 
to eliminate the worst forms of child labor. Now we have to make 
certain that these new provisions and our other trade-linked worker 
rights laws are practically enforced and that means improving ILAB's 
capacity to meet this increasingly-immportant responsibility.
  In the final analysis, increased trade and investment are not ends in 
themselves. They are means for achieving more broad-based, sustainable 
development and greater economic and social justice in the global 
economy. Our real choice is not between free trade or protectionism. 
Our policy challenge is to identify new and constructive ways in which 
the power of government can be used to manage globalization in ways 
that curb abusive child labor and protect worker rights as much as 
property rights. A well-grounded and enhanced ILAB within the one 
Cabinet department in our government that was created to advance the 
needs and protect the fundamental rights of working people everywhere 
can help us meet this challenge for the 21st century and beyond.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LEAHY (for himself and Mr. Hatch):
  S. 1828. A bill to amend subchapter III of chapter 83 and chapter 84 
of title 5, United States Code, to include Federal prosecutors within 
the definition of a law enforcement officer, and for other purposes; to 
the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I rise to introduce, with my good friend 
Senator Hatch, the Federal Prosecutors' Retirement Benefit Equity Act 
of 2001. This bill would correct an inequity that exists under current 
law, whereby Federal prosecutors receive substantially less favorable 
retirement benefits than other nearly all other people involved in the 
Federal criminal justice system. The bill would increase the retirement 
benefits given to Assistant United States Attorneys by including them 
as ``law enforcement officers'' ``LEOs'', under the Federal Employees' 
Retirement System and the Civil Service Retirement System. The bill 
would also allow the Attorney General to designate other attorneys 
employed by the Department of Justice who act primarily as criminal 
prosecutors as LEO's for purposes of receiving these retirement 
benefits.
  The primary reason for granting enhanced retirement benefits to LEOs 
is the often dangerous work of law enforcement. Currently, Assistant 
United States Attorneys, ``AUSAs'', and other Federal prosecutors are 
not eligible for these enhanced benefits, which are enjoyed by the vast 
majority of other employees in the criminal justice system. This 
exclusion is unjustified. The relevant provisions of the United States 
Code dealing with retirement benefits define an LEO as an employee 
whose duties are, ``primarily the investigation, apprehension, or 
detention'' of individuals suspected or convicted of violating Federal 
law. See 5 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 8331(20) and 8401(17). AUSAs and other 
Federal prosecutors participate in planning investigations, 
interviewing witnesses both inside and outside of the office setting, 
debriefing defendants, obtaining warrants, negotiating plea agreements 
and representing the government at trials and sentencings, all of which 
fall within the definition of the duties performed by law enforcement 
officers. Indeed, once a defendant is brought into the criminal justice 
system, the person with whom they have the most fact-to-face contact, 
and often in an extremely confrontational environment, is the Federal 
prosecutor.
  Although prosecutors do not personally execute arrests, searches and 
other physically dangerous activities, LEO status is accorded to many 
criminal justice employees who do not perform such tasks, such as 
pretrial services officers and probation officers and accountants, 
cooks and secretaries of the Bureau of Prisons. Moreover, because they 
are often the most conspicuous representatives of the government in the 
criminal justice system, Federal prosecutors are natural targets for 
threats of reprisals by vengeful criminals. Indeed, there are numerous 
incidents in which assaults and serious death threats have been made 
against Federal prosecutors, sometimes resulting in significant 
disruption of their personal and family lives.
  Only recently a veteran Federal prosecutor in the Western District of 
Washington was murdered in his home, and, although the crime remains 
unsolved, based upon the facts of the case the authorities have 
referred to the crime as a hit. In addition, I have received many other 
accounts from Federal prosecutors regarding specific threats to which 
they and their families have been subjected because of the performance 
of their duties. Federal prosecutors have written to me that they have 
been forced to relocate themselves and their families due to death 
threats; that they have been assaulted; that they and their families 
have been followed by members of criminal organizations; that have been 
forced to install security systems at their homes and to change 
their routes to and from the office to protect their safety and the 
safety of their families.

  As our war against terrorism continues, Federal prosecutors will be 
on the front lines once again as the symbols of our criminal justice 
system, and

[[Page S13154]]

unfortunately therefore the targets of those who seek its downfall. 
Among other tasks, the Attorney General has designated AUSA's to play a 
major role working with police and Federal agents in forming each 
judicial district's Anti-Terrorism Task Force. One Federal prosecutors 
wrote to me stating that shortly after his name was in the local news 
as heading his district's Anti-Terrorism Task Force and he had spoken 
to his family about taking suitable precautions, that his young son 
came into his bedroom one night holding a hockey stick for protection 
asking about their safety. Thus, Federal prosecutors and their families 
will deal more than ever with a level of stress and danger that 
justifies their being treated as LEOs.
  Enhanced retirement benefits are also justified by the Federal 
Government's need for experienced prosecutors to bring ever more 
sophisticated cases under increasingly complex Federal criminal laws. 
In recent years, we have seen the growth of complex Federal prosecutors 
to combat the threats posed by organized crime, drug cartels, terrorist 
groups and other sophisticated criminals. The prosecution of such 
difficult cases is best handled by experienced prosecutors. It is 
therefore in the public interest to provide reasonable financial 
incentives for talented, experienced prosecutors to remain in 
government service.
  This bill would make Assistant United States Attorneys and other 
Federal prosecutors designated by the Attorney General eligible for 
immediate, unreduced retirement benefits at age 50 with 20 years of 
service. For example, prosecutors who are covered by the Civil Service 
Retirement System would receive 50 percent of the average of their 
three highest years' salary. At the same time, it would exempt 
prosecutors from the mandatory retirement provisions that require other 
law enforcement officers to retire at age 57. Because the loss of 
physical strength and agility does not adversely affect a person's 
ability to function as a prosecutor, there is no reason to mandate 
early retirement.
  Two important features of this bill will contain its costs. First, 
the bill provides that incumbent Federal prosecutors are themselves 
responsible for making up the difference in individual contributions 
owed to the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund for their 
prior service. An incumbent has the choice of making up this difference 
either by making a payment up front or by accepting a reduction in 
retirement benefits. Second, government contributions for the prior 
service of incumbents are made ratably over a ten-year period under 
this bill. Thus, payments for prior government contributions are spread 
out to lessen the financial impact. These two provisions will insure 
that the cost of the bill is kept well within reasons.
  This bill enjoys broad, grass root support. In the last month alone, 
I have received literally hundreds of letters supporting this bill, 
sent from over 40 States, District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. The 
bill also enjoys support in the law enforcement community. The National 
Association of Assistant United States Attorneys, the Federal Criminal 
Investigators Association, and the Southern States Police Benevolent 
Association have all written me to voice support for the inclusion of 
AUSAs in the definition of an LEO.
  In addition, I know that other Senators, including Senator Mikulski, 
are considering additional measures to expand these same retirement 
benefits to other Federal employees who perform law enforcement 
functions, including IRS employees whose primary duty is to collect 
delinquent taxes. I support and commend their leadership in bringing 
these matters to the forefront.
  For all of these reasons, I am pleased to introduce this legislation 
with Senator Hatch, and I urge its swift enactment into law.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record along with a sectional analysis.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1828

       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 ``Federal Prosecutors 
     Retirement Benefit Equity Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. INCLUSION OF FEDERAL PROSECUTORS IN THE DEFINITION OF 
                   A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER.

       (a) Civil Service Retirement System.--
       (1) In general.--Paragraph (20) of section 8331 of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended by striking ``position.'' and 
     inserting ``position and a Federal prosecutor.''.
       (2) Federal prosecutor defined.--Section 8331 of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (27), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) in paragraph (28), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(29) `Federal prosecutor' means--
       ``(A) an assistant United States attorney under section 542 
     of title 28; or
       ``(B) an attorney employed by the Department of Justice and 
     designated by the Attorney General of the United States.''.
       (b) Federal Employees' Retirement System.--
       (1) In general.--Paragraph (17) of section 8401 of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (A) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) in subparagraph (D), by adding ``and'' after the 
     semicolon; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(E) a Federal prosecutor;''.
       (2) Federal prosecutor defined.--Section 8401 of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (33), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) in paragraph (34), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(35) `Federal prosecutor' means--
       ``(A) an assistant United States attorney under section 542 
     of title 28; or
       ``(B) an attorney employed by the Department of Justice and 
     designated by the Attorney General of the United States.''.
       (c) Treatment Under Certain Provisions of Law (Unrelated to 
     Retirement) To Remain Unchanged.--
       (1) Original appointments.--Subsections (d) and (e) of 
     section 3307 of title 5, United States Code, are amended by 
     adding at the end of each the following: ``The preceding 
     sentence shall not apply in the case of an original 
     appointment of a Federal prosecutor as defined under section 
     8331(29) or 8401(35).''.
       (2) Mandatory separation.--Sections 8335(b) and 8425(b) of 
     title 5, United States Code, are amended by adding at the end 
     of each the following: ``The preceding provisions of this 
     subsection shall not apply in the case of a Federal 
     prosecutor as defined under section 8331(29) or 8401(35).''.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on the first day of the first applicable 
     pay period beginning on or after 120 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 3. PROVISIONS RELATING TO INCUMBENTS.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section, the term--
       (1) ``Federal prosecutor'' means--
       (A) an assistant United States attorney under section 542 
     of title 28, United States Code; or
       (B) an attorney employed by the Department of Justice and 
     designated by the Attorney General of the United States; and
       (2) ``incumbent'' means an individual who is serving as a 
     Federal prosecutor on the effective date of this section.
       (b) Designated Attorneys.--If the Attorney General of the 
     United States makes any designation of an attorney to meet 
     the definition under subsection (a)(1)(B) for purposes of 
     being an incumbent under this section,--
       (1) such designation shall be made before the effective 
     date of this section; and
       (2) the Attorney General shall submit to the Office of 
     Personnel Management before that effective date--
       (A) the name of the individual designated; and
       (B) the period of service performed by that individual as a 
     Federal prosecutor before that effective date.
       (c) Notice Requirement.--Not later than 9 months after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Department of Justice 
     shall take measures reasonably designed to provide notice to 
     incumbents on--
       (1) their election rights under this Act; and
       (2) the effects of making or not making a timely election 
     under this Act.
       (d) Election Available to Incumbents.--
       (1) In general.--An incumbent may elect, for all purposes, 
     to be treated--
       (A) in accordance with the amendments made by this Act; or
       (B) as if this Act had never been enacted.
       (2) Failure to elect.--Failure to make a timely election 
     under this subsection shall be treated in the same way as an 
     election under paragraph (1)(A), made on the last day 
     allowable under paragraph (3).
       (3) Time limitation.--An election under this subsection 
     shall not be effective unless the election is made not later 
     than the earlier of--
       (A) 120 days after the date on which the notice under 
     subsection (c) is provided; or
       (B) the date on which the incumbent involved separates from 
     service.
       (e) Limited Retroactive Effect.--
       (1) Effect on retirement.--In the case of an incumbent who 
     elects (or is deemed to have elected) the option under 
     subsection (d)(1)(A), all service performed by that 
     individual as a Federal prosecutor shall--

[[Page S13155]]

       (A) to the extent performed on or after the effective date 
     of that election, be treated in accordance with applicable 
     provisions of subchapter III of chapter 83 or chapter 84 of 
     title 5, United States Code, as amended by this Act; and
       (B) to the extent performed before the effective date of 
     that election, be treated in accordance with applicable 
     provisions of subchapter III of chapter 83 or chapter 84 of 
     such title, as if the amendments made by this Act had then 
     been in effect.
       (2) No other retroactive effect.--Nothing in this Act 
     (including the amendments made by this Act) shall affect any 
     of the terms or conditions of an individual's employment 
     (apart from those governed by subchapter III of chapter 83 or 
     chapter 84 of title 5, United States Code) with respect to 
     any period of service preceding the date on which such 
     individual's election under subsection (d) is made (or is 
     deemed to have been made).
       (f) Individual Contributions for Prior Service.--
       (1) In general.--An individual who makes an election under 
     subsection (d)(1)(A) may, with respect to prior service 
     performed by such individual, contribute to the Civil Service 
     Retirement and Disability Fund the difference between the 
     individual contributions that were actually made for such 
     service and the individual contributions that should have 
     been made for such service if the amendments made by section 
     2 had then been in effect.
       (2) Effect of not contributing.--If no part of or less than 
     the full amount required under paragraph (1) is paid, all 
     prior service of the incumbent shall remain fully creditable 
     as law enforcement officer service, but the resulting annuity 
     shall be reduced in a manner similar to that described in 
     section 8334(d)(2) of title 5, United States Code, to the 
     extent necessary to make up the amount unpaid.
       (3) Prior service defined.--For purposes of this section, 
     the term ``prior service'' means, with respect to any 
     individual who makes an election under subsection (d)(1)(A), 
     service performed by such individual before the date as of 
     which appropriate retirement deductions begin to be made in 
     accordance with such election.
       (g) Government Contributions for Prior Service.--
       (1) In general.--If an incumbent makes an election under 
     subsection (d)(1)(A), the Department of Justice shall remit 
     to the Office of Personnel Management, for deposit in the 
     Treasury of the United States to the credit of the Civil 
     Service Retirement and Disability Fund, the amount required 
     under paragraph (2) with respect to such service.
       (2) Amount required.--The amount the Department of Justice 
     is required to remit is, with respect to any prior service, 
     the total amount of additional Government contributions to 
     the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund (over and 
     above those actually paid) that would have been required if 
     the amendments made by section 2 had then been in effect.
       (3) Contributions to be made ratably.--Government 
     contributions under this subsection on behalf of an incumbent 
     shall be made by the Department of Justice ratably (on at 
     least an annual basis) over the 10-year period beginning on 
     the date referred to in subsection (f)(3).
       (h) Regulations.--Except as provided under section 4, the 
     Office of Personnel Management shall prescribe regulations 
     necessary to carry out this Act, including provisions under 
     which any interest due on the amount described under 
     subsection (f) shall be determined.
       (i) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect 120 
     days after the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 4. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS.

       (a) Definition.--In this section the term ``Federal 
     prosecutor'' has the meaning given under section 3(a)(1).
       (b) Regulations.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 120 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Attorney General of the United 
     States shall--
       (A) consult with the Office of Personnel Management on this 
     Act (including the amendments made by this Act); and
       (B) promulgate regulations for making designations of 
     Federal prosecutors who are not assistant United States 
     attorneys.
       (2) Contents.--Any regulations promulgated under paragraph 
     (1) shall ensure that attorneys designated as Federal 
     prosecutors who are not assistant United States attorneys 
     have routine employee responsibilities that are substantially 
     similar to those of assistant United States attorneys 
     assigned to the litigation of criminal cases, such as the 
     representation of the United States before grand juries and 
     in trials, appeals, and related court proceedings.
       (c) Designations.--The designation of any Federal 
     prosecutor who is not an assistant United States attorney for 
     purposes of this Act (including the amendments made by this 
     Act) shall be at the discretion of the Attorney General of 
     the United States.
                                  ____


 Federal Prosecutors Retirement Benefit Equity Act of 2001--Section-by-
                            Section Analysis

       Sec. 1. Short title. Contains the short title, the 
     ``Federal Prosecutors Retirement Benefit Equity Act of 
     2001.''
       Sec. 2. Inclusion of Federal prosecutors in the definition 
     of a law enforcement officer. Amends 5 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 8331 
     and 8401 to extend the enhanced law enforcement officer 
     (``LEO'') retirement benefits to Federal prosecutors, defined 
     to include assistant United States attorneys (``AUSAs'') and 
     such other attorneys in the Department of Justice as are 
     designated by the Attorney General of the United States. This 
     section also exempts Federal prosecutors from mandatory 
     retirement provisions for LEO's under the civil service laws.
       Sec. 3. Provisions relating to incumbents. Governs the 
     treatment of incumbent federal prosecutors who would be 
     eligible for LEO retirement benefits under this Act. This 
     section requires the Office of Personnel Management to 
     provide notice to incumbents of their rights under this 
     subtitle; allows incumbents to opt out of the LEO retirement 
     program; governs the crediting of prior service by 
     incumbents; and provides for make-up contributions for prior 
     service of incumbents to the Civil Service Retirement and 
     Disability Fund. The section gives incumbents the option of 
     either contributing their own share of any make-up 
     contributions or receiving a proportionally lesser retirement 
     benefit. The section allows the government to contribute its 
     share of any make-up contribution ratably over a ten year 
     period.
       Sec. 4. Department of Justice administrative actions. 
     Allows the Attorney General to designate additional 
     Department of Justice attorneys with substantially similar 
     responsibilities, in addition to assistant United States 
     attorneys, as Federal prosecutors for purposes of this Act 
     and thus be eligible for the LEO retirement benefits.

                          ____________________