[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 129 (Friday, October 4, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9985-S9995]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Ms. LANDRIEU (for herself and Mr. Bayh):
S. 3057. A bill to support the establishment or expansion and
operation of programs using a network of public and private community
entities to provide mentoring for children in foster care; to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, in 1999, several of us, including the
late John Chafee and former First Lady, Hillary Clinton, took a long
hard look at our Nation's foster care system and in particular those
whom the system failed. Each year 25,000 young people leave our foster
care system without ever finding a permanent family. Too many of these
young people have been in this system for the majority of their lives,
moved from home to home to home, school to school, with no one to count
on or turn to for guidance and no where to call ``home.''
Studies show that within two to four years of leaving foster care,
only half have completed high school, fewer than half are employed,
one-fourth have been homeless for at least one night, 30 percent did
not have access to needed health care, 60 percent of the young women
have given birth, and less than one-in-five are completely self-
supporting. In addition, many States report that the overwhelming
majority of youth offenders housed in their State prisons were once a
part of our Nation's foster care system.
While these statistics are, in and of themselves. disturbing, as
author, Ruth Sidel, once said, ``statistics are people with the tears
wiped away.'' It is easier for us to think of the almost 600,000
children making their way through our foster care system as numbers,
but they are not. They are children. And like every child, they are
born with a need to belong, to be loved, to feel protected and
sheltered. When we were working on the John Chafee Foster Care
Independence Act of 1999, a young woman named Lisa, who had spent her
life in foster care explained this concept better than I ever could.
She said, ``even at 21, I dream about having someone to call when I am
not sure whether you wash whites in warm or cold water, someone to tell
me that they are proud that I got an A on my Biology test, and most
importantly someone who will love me no matter what. Other kids have
that and they are lucky.''
One of my goals as United States Senator is to change our foster care
system so children like Lisa do not fall through it's cracks. When you
stop and think about it, there is no such thing as a foster care
``system'', its just people, and these children do not fall through
``cracks'', they fall through our fingers. I, for one, intend to do
what I can to ensure that each and every child in the world goes to bed
at night blanketed with the security that only a family of their own
can provide. The legislation that I am here to introduce today by no
means solves the many problems facing our kids in care, but it will go
a long way toward ensuring that they do not fall through our fingers.
The Foster Care Mentoring Act of 2002 authorizes $15 million a year
to be used by States to create a statewide foster care mentor program
that aims to match a trained, responsible adult with each and every
child in care. Last week, I had the chance to sit down with an
organization, Children Uniting Nations and the First Lady of
California, Sharon Davis, and they shared with me the enormous success
they have had in California with a program like this. The mentors
provide friendship, guidance, academic tutoring and most importantly
consistency to children who are in desperate need of such things. In
addition, this legislation provides Federal student loan forgiveness
for each mentor that contributes at least 200 hours a year to a child
in need.
Although a mentor can never take the place of a permanent family,
they can make sure these children do not get lost in a system designed
to protect them. Mentors can give these children the tools they need to
survive and help guide and protect them as they wait for the permanent
home they need and deserve. I hope that my colleagues will join me in
support of this legislation.
Mr. BAYH. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in support of
legislation I have been working on with Senator Landrieu to ensure our
foster care youth are provided every opportunity to develop into
bright, capable adults and become productive and valuable members of
our society. The Foster Care Mentoring Act will help provide a foster
care child with a role model, tutor and friend.
Although there are several concerns with the administration of our
child welfare system, this bill is one way we can immediately provide
necessary relief and guidance to children who have been the victims of
abuse and neglect. This legislation takes a necessary step toward
providing these children with a healthy stable environment. There are
over half a million children in the nation's foster care system, 7,482
children in Indiana alone. As the guardian of these children, the
government should take all possible steps to help them overcome their
barriers.
As a result of the abuse foster care children have experienced, they
are less likely to trust adults, create healthy relationships, and
perform academically. Mentors will help them establish trusting
relationships, assist them with their school work, and develop
emotionally. Mentors will remind foster care youth that they are wanted
members of our society who deserve every opportunity to achieve their
dreams.
Mentors have proven to have positive impacts on the youth they
mentor. Children that have mentors have better relationships with
adults, fewer disciplinary referrals, and more confidence to achieve
their goals. Research shows that caring adults can make a difference in
children's lives: 46 percent of mentored teens are less likely to use
drugs; 59 percent of mentored
[[Page S9986]]
teens have better academic performance; 73 percent of mentored teens
achieve higher goals generally.
The Foster Care Mentoring Act authorizes $15 million a year to ensure
that each mentor receives the appropriate training, makes a long-term
commitment to the program, and fulfills educational requirements to
mentor foster care youth. Mentoring foster care youth is another way
young citizens can serve their country. This bill would reward those
who take time to assist those in need. Each college-bound individual
will have $2,000 forgiven from their student loans for every 200 hours
they serve as a mentor to a foster care child. States will have the
flexibility to coordinate with already existing programs to create
mentor-child partnerships. In addition, the legislation would provide
$4 million a year for the creation and administration of a national
hotline and website to coordinate mentoring efforts.
Although we should work together to ensure each child in the foster
care system is placed in a loving, stable, safe, and permanent home, in
the meantime we can at least provide them with a guiding friend. I look
forward to working with my colleagues to implement this important
legislation.
______
By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Harkin, Mr.
Allard, Mr. Reid, and Mrs. Clinton):
S. 3058. A bill to amend the Energy Employees Occupational Illness
Compensation Program Act of 2000 to provide benefits for contractor
employees of the Department of Energy who were exposed to toxic
substances at Department of Energy facilities, to provide coverage
under subtitle B of that Act for certain additional individuals, to
establish an ombudsman and otherwise reform the assistance provided to
claimants under that Act, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, two years ago we enacted the Energy
Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act, EEOICPA. This
important legislation was intended to give timely, uniform and
reasonable compensation to Department of Energy employees suffering
injury and disease resulting from working in the nuclear weapons
program.
The program has two parts: a Federal component for certain diseases,
and, for all others, an assistance program for the filing of State
workers' compensation claims. The Federal component, for workers made
ill by exposure to substances unique to DOE facilities, gives a one-
time $150,000 payment and covers medical payments for illnesses like
beryllium disease, certain cancers and silicosis.
Since the passage of the original act in October 2000 a number of
additional issues, complicating factors and implementation barriers
have emerged. Recently I held a public meeting in Espanola, New Mexico
with Representative Tom Udall, to review the performance of the
program. The gathering, attending by over 300 present and former
workers, focused on three broad issues: delays in processing claims,
missing radiation exposure records and difficulty gaining compensation
for exposure to toxic substances, like mercury.
Upon my return I continued to investigate the implementation barriers
facing the program. Meetings with Department of Energy, Labor and HHS
officials as well as experts in occupational health and workers
compensation revealed further flaws. Let me describe some of the
problems this legislation is intended to address based on what I have
recently learned.
First, with regard to subtitle D, the program relies on an
amalgamation of private insurance, state workers compensation programs
and DOE contractor self-insurance for the timely and fair payment of
medical costs and lost wages. Unfortunately, Department of Energy
officials recently stated that up to 50 percent of all eligible
beneficiaries would not have access to a willing payor. Assistant
Secretary of Energy Beverly Cook in a June 7, 2002 letter noted DOE
cannot give directives to ``persons who are not DOE contractors, such
as insurers or lessees of DOE facilities.'' In short, workers found to
have a meritorious claim under the program may not have a payor. The
legislation introduced today would address this problem by making DOE
the defacto for all claims.
Further, the Department of Energy failed, for nearly two years
following the passage of the legislation, to publish a rule crucial for
the submission of subtitle D claims. The physician panel rule is a
critical component allowing injury claims to be adjudicated by a panel
of physicians specializing in occupational medicine. Since the
inception of the program and because of delays like the one described
above, only four claims have been sent to the physician panel for
review. Clearly, we must do better. My legislation simplifies the
process to allow the expeditious handling of claims.
The dangers faced by these workers is only now being fully
understood. In addition to certain cancers, silicosis and beryllium
disease, increased risk for other maladies are now being discovered. In
my own State of New Mexico I have workers suffering from mercury
poisoning, once known as ``Mad Hatters'' disease. Mr. Alex Smith of
Espanola operated a mercury still for many years at the Los Alamos
National Laboratory. At one point Mr. Smith displayed all the signs of
both acute and chronic mercury poisoning. He approached LANL's medical
clinic seeking treatment only to be told he was not suffering from
mercury poisoning. Documentation later revealed a different story. In
fact, the physician did suspect Mr. Smith suffered from mercury
toxicity but, for reasons we can only speculate on now, failed to act.
According to the Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance, during the
1950's a majority of the world's mercury was used in the production of
nuclear weapons. Although mercury usage is not unique to DOE
facilities, the volumes utilized in these facilities, at one point 70
percent of the world's supply, set mercury toxicity in this setting
apart from other exposures.
Recent data has revealed an increased risk of chronic renal disease
and lung cancer from exposure to uranium and beryllium, respectively.
Although lung cancer can arise from many causes, clear scientific data
points to beryllium disease as a precursor for this devastating
illness. As well, chronic renal disease has many etiologies with
uranium among them. Like mercury, these exposures and the consequent
illnesses are unique to the environment workers found themselves in and
should be recognized.
The legislation I am introducing today, along with Senators Bunning,
Harkin, Allard and Reid, entitled the Energy Workers Compensation Act
of 2002 is intended to fulfill the original legislative objectives of
Congress, address unforeseen obstacles and assure just compensation for
our Nation's energy workers.
The Energy Workers Compensation Act of 2002 addresses and improves
the shortcomings of the original legislation by: Establishing the
Department of Labor as the willing payor of benefits for claimants
approved by the Department of Energy under Subtitle D. Benefit payments
are authorized from the previously established EEOICPA fund. Setting
time limits for DOE to make determinations regarding claimant's
employment records. Setting at 150 days the time limit for the
reconstruction of worker's radiation dosages. Adding lung cancer to a
list of covered beryllium related diseases. Adding chronic renal
disease as a covered illness for uranium workers. Adding mercury
disease as a covered illness for workers employed at facilities
utilizing more than 100 kilograms of mercury. Establishing an ombudsman
to help claimants with administration of claims. Allowing individuals
otherwise eligible for compensation under EEOICPA, but who previously
received Radiation Exposure Compensation Act awards, to be compensated
at levels equal to EEOICPA.
It is imperative we protect those who helped America win the cold
war. Members of the House of Representatives have come to similar
conclusion. Representatives Whitfield and Strickland have recently
introduced legislation similar to ours. They too realize that promises
made to cold war era workers and families must be kept. A debt of
gratitude to these workers, who became sick through no fault of their
own, must be paid.
I request unanimous consent that the bill and selected testimony be
printed in the Record.
[[Page S9987]]
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 3058
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 ``Energy Workers Compensation
Act of 2002''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS; PURPOSE.
(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation
Program Act of 2000 (the ``Act'') was intended to ensure
timely, uniform, and adequate compensation of covered
employees (and, where applicable, survivors of such
employees) suffering from illnesses incurred by such
employees in the performance of duty for the Department of
Energy and certain of its contractors, subcontractors, and
vendors, and to provide parity for uranium miners under the
Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note).
(2) Four Federal agencies, the Departments of Labor, Health
and Human Services, Energy, and Justice, have been assigned
responsibilities under the Act pursuant to Executive Order
No. 13179, dated December 7, 2000 (42 U.S.C. 7384 note).
(3) The Department of Labor began accepting claims July 31,
2001, and the Department of Health and Human Services,
through the National Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health, will perform radiation dose reconstruction for cancer
claims and evaluate petitions for Special Exposure Cohorts.
(4) The Department of Energy finalized its regulations
governing claims under Subtitle D of the Act on August 14,
2002. Those regulations require claimants to use a State
workers' compensation system to secure benefits after
receiving a positive findings from a Department of Energy
physicians panel. The Department of Energy has conceded,
however, that it will not have a willing payor for as many as
50 percent of the claims that are meritorious. As a
consequence, many deserving claimants with a positive
determination from a Department of Energy physicians panel
will nonetheless be denied benefits.
(5) The Department of Energy's regulations (at 10 C.F.R.
Part 852) direct contractors of the Department to adopt a
non-adversarial posture in state workers' compensation
proceedings, which are structured as an adversarial forum.
The policy of inserting a non-adversarial respondent in an
adversarial system should be remedied by utilizing a non-
adversarial dispute resolution system. Taxpayers would also
benefit from placing claimants in a non-adversarial system,
such as the type of systems administered by the Department of
Labor under subtitle B of the Act or under chapter 81 of
title 5, United States Code (known as the Federal Employees
Compensation Act), as doing so would assure that disabilities
related to occupational illnesses would be compensated
proportional to the degree of injury.
(6) In order to assure that congressional intent is honored
with respect to the Department of Energy's program of worker
assistance with state worker compensation for occupational
illnesses that arose out of the course of employment from
exposure to toxic substances at Department of Energy
facilities, the Department of Energy's implementation of
subtitle D of the Act requires reform, refinement, and
clarification.
(7) Certain renal diseases related to uranium exposure and
cancers related to employment by beryllium vendors should be
added to coverage under subtitle B.
(8) Congress intended that follow-up implementing
legislation would be required when it passed the Act and, in
section 3613 of the Act, directed the administration to
provide such legislation. Although such legislation was
forwarded on January 15, 2001, and Congress adopted technical
amendments to the Act in 2001, significant shortcomings in
the Act have been identified as the Act has been implemented.
(b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to amend the
Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program
Act of 2000 to--
(1) ensure that meritorious claims for exposure to toxic
substances at Department of Energy facilities are compensated
under subtitle D of the Act;
(2) enhance assistance to claimants at the Department of
Labor;
(3) ensure that there is parity in treatment of chronic
renal disease between uranium-exposed Department of Energy
employees (including employees of contractors,
subcontractors, and atomic weapons employer facilities) and
the uranium-exposed workers under the Radiation Exposure
Compensation Act;
(4) provide coverage of lung cancer for covered beryllium
workers; and
(5) make administrative improvements and technical
corrections.
TITLE I--WORKERS' COMPENSATION BENEFITS FOR DOE CONTRACTOR EMPLOYEES
EXPOSED TO TOXIC SUBSTANCES
SEC. 101. BENEFITS.
Subtitle D of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness
Compensation Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 7385o) is amended
to read as follows:
``Subtitle D--Workers' Compensation Benefits for DOE Contractor
Employees Exposed to Toxic Substances
``SEC. 3661. DEFINITIONS.
``In this subtitle:
``(1) The term `DOE contractor' means any of the following:
``(A) A contractor (or subcontractor at any tier) of the
Department of Energy.
``(B) A contractor (or subcontractor at any tier) of USEC,
a Government-owned corporation, during the period beginning
on July 1, 1993, and ending on July 28, 1998.
``(2) The term `DOE contractor employee' means any of the
following:
``(A) An employee of a contractor (or subcontractor at any
tier) of the Department of Energy.
``(B) An employee of a contractor (or subcontractor at any
tier) of USEC, a Government-owned corporation, during the
period beginning on July 1, 1993, and ending on July 28,
1998.
``(3) The term `covered DOE contractor employee' means a
DOE contractor employee, if a claim relating to that employee
is forwarded by the Secretary of Energy under section
3662(d)(3)(A) to the Secretary of Labor for payment under
section 3663.
``(4) The term `specified illness' means, with respect to a
covered DOE contractor employee, the illness by reason of
which the claim relating to that employee was forwarded by
the Secretary of Energy under section 3662(d)(3)(A) to the
Secretary of Labor for payment under section 3663.
``SEC. 3662. DETERMINATIONS OF CAUSATION BY DEPARTMENT OF
ENERGY.
``(a) Procedure for Submitting Claims.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary of Energy shall establish,
by regulation, procedures under which an individual may
submit a claim for benefits under this subtitle due to
occupational illness from exposure to toxic substances.
``(2) Notice to claimant.--Not later than 10 days after the
receipt of a claim under paragraph (1), the Secretary of
Energy shall notify the claimant of the receipt of the claim
and provide the name, address, and phone number of a person
capable of answering questions and providing additional
information with respect to the procedures and benefits under
this subtitle.
``(b) Initial Review by DOE.--
``(1) Evidence required.--The Secretary of Energy shall
review each claim submitted under this section and, for each
such claim, determine not later than 30 days after receipt of
the claim whether the claimant submitted reasonable evidence
of both of the following:
``(A) The claim was filed by or on behalf of a DOE
contractor employee or such employee's estate.
``(B) The illness or death of the DOE contractor employee
may have been related to employment at a Department of Energy
facility.
``(2) Determinations.--
``(A) If the Secretary determines that the claimant did not
submit reasonable evidence under either paragraph (1)(A) or
(1)(B), or both, the Secretary shall, not later than 10 days
after making such determination, notify the claimant of such
determination and include the claimant's options for appeal
or for submitting additional evidence.
``(B) If the Secretary determines that the claimant did
submit reasonable evidence under both paragraphs (1)(A) and
(1)(B), the Secretary shall--
``(i) not later than 10 days after making such
determination, notify the claimant of such determination;
``(ii) ensure that the claimant is afforded the opportunity
to review the entire record, and to supplement the record
within 30 days after the date on which information is
provided by the DOE contractor, before the claim is submitted
to a physicians panel;
``(iii) not later than 10 days after the end of the 30-day
period referred to in clause (ii) or the date on which the
claimant completes the supplement of the record under that
clause, whichever is later, submit the claim to a physicians
panel for review under subsection (c); and
``(iv) not later than 10 days after submitting the claim to
a physicians panel, notify the claimant of such submission.
``(c) Review by Physicians Panels.--
``(1) Composition.--
``(A) The Secretary of Energy shall inform the Secretary of
Health and Human Services of the number of physicians panels
the Secretary of Energy has determined to be appropriate to
administer this section, the number of physicians needed for
each panel, and the area of jurisdiction of each panel.
``(B) The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall
appoint panel members with experience and competency in
diagnosing occupational illnesses under section 3109 of title
5, United States Code. Each member of a panel shall be paid
at the rate of pay payable for level III of the Executive
Schedule for each day (including travel time) the member is
engaged in the work of a panel.
``(C) A panel established under this subsection shall not
be subject to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C.
App.).
``(2) Operation.--
``(A) The Secretary of Energy shall assist the claimant in
obtaining additional evidence within the control of the
Department of Energy or a DOE contractor who employed a DOE
contractor employee and relevant to the panel's
deliberations.
``(B) At the request of a panel, the Secretary of Energy
and a DOE contractor who employed a DOE contractor employee
shall provide additional information relevant to
[[Page S9988]]
the panel's deliberations. A panel may consult specialists in
relevant fields as it determines necessary.
``(C) In any case in which the panel finds that additional
diagnostic testing or an exposure assessment is necessary to
the panel's deliberations--
``(i) the panel shall so notify the Secretary of Energy and
the claimant;
``(ii) the claimant may obtain such diagnostic testing or
exposure assessment using a qualified physician chosen by the
claimant or a qualified occupational health expert (as
applicable) or, if the claimant so desires, may obtain such
diagnostic testing or exposure assessment using the program
carried out under section 3162 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (42 U.S.C. 7274i) to
monitor Department of Energy workers exposed to hazardous and
radioactive substances; and
``(iii) any costs of such diagnostic testing or exposure
assessment shall be paid for from the Fund established under
section 3612 and shall be provided by the Secretary of Energy
through a method under which the claimant is not required to
advance any amount toward payment of such costs.
``(D) The Secretary of Energy is authorized to enter into
or modify cooperative agreements with providers who are
implementing the program carried out under section 3162 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993
(42 U.S.C. 7274i) to provide assessments of exposures to
toxic substances at Department of Energy facilities to
claimants under circumstances covered by subparagraph (C).
``(3) Determination of causation.--A panel shall review a
claim submitted to it under this subsection and shall
determine, under guidelines established by the Secretary of
Energy, by regulation, whether the illness or death that is
the subject of the claim arose out of and in the course of
employment by the Department of Energy and exposure to a
toxic substance at a Department of Energy facility. For
purposes of the preceding sentence, illness or death shall be
deemed to arise out of and in the course of employment by the
Department of Energy and exposure to a toxic substance at a
Department of Energy facility if exposure to the toxic
substance (or substances, as the case may be) was a
significant factor which aggravated, contributed to, or
caused the illness or death.
``(4) Majority vote.--A determination under paragraph (3)
shall be made by majority vote.
``(5) Report to secretary.--Once a panel has made a
determination under paragraph (3), it shall report to the
Secretary of Energy its determination and the basis for the
determination.
``(d) Review of Panel Determinations.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary of Energy shall review a
panel's determination under subsection (c)(3), information
the panel considered in reaching its determination, any
relevant new information not reasonably available at the time
of the panel's deliberations, and the basis for the panel's
determination.
``(2) Acceptance of panel determination.--As a result of
the review under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall accept
the panel's determination in the absence of a preponderance
of evidence to the contrary.
``(3) Action upon accepted claims.--If the panel has made a
positive determination under subsection (c)(3) and the
Secretary accepts the determination under paragraph (2), or
the panel has made a negative determination under subsection
(c)(3) and the Secretary finds significant evidence to the
contrary--
``(A) the Secretary of Energy shall within 10 days forward
the claim to the Secretary of Labor for payment under section
3663, together with information relating to--
``(i) the DOE contractor employee to whom the claim
relates;
``(ii) the illness to which the claim relates;
``(iii) the determination of the panel and the basis for
the determination;
``(iv)(I) the acceptance of the Secretary and the basis for
the acceptance; or
``(II) the reversal of the negative determination by the
panel and the basis for the reversal;
``(v) the employment to which the claim relates, including
available wage or salary information; and
``(vi) any other matter that the Secretary of Labor
considers necessary;
``(B) the Secretary of Energy thereafter--
``(i) shall not contest the claim;
``(ii) shall not contest an award made regarding the claim;
and
``(iii) shall direct the DOE contractor who employed the
DOE contractor employee to which the claim relates not to
contest the claim or such award in any administrative or
judicial forum, and such obligation in no case shall be
considered discretionary; and
``(C) any costs of contesting a claim or an award regarding
the claim incurred by the DOE contractor who employed the DOE
contractor employee who is the subject of the claim shall not
be an allowable cost under a Department of Energy contract.
``(e) Access to Information.--
``(1) duty to provide information.--At the request of the
Secretary of Energy, a DOE contractor who employed a DOE
contractor employee and any other entity possessing
information related to such employee relevant to
deliberations under this section shall make such information
available to the Secretary.
``(2) Copies to claimant.--The Secretary of Energy shall
require that a DOE contractor who provides any information to
the Secretary or a panel under this section shall
simultaneously provide such information to the claimant.
``(f) Outreach.--The Secretary of Energy, in cooperation
with the Secretary of Labor, shall carry out a program of
outreach and education about the availability of benefits
under this subtitle. The Secretary shall make available in
paper and electronic format forms and information available
for potential claimants. As part of the program of outreach,
the Secretary shall conduct notification by mail and use the
former worker medical screening programs to notify, educate,
and assist claimants.
``(g) Administrative and Judicial Review.--The Secretary of
Energy shall establish a process under which a claimant may
obtain prompt and independent administrative review of any
adverse determination by the Secretary under subsection (b)
or (d) or by a panel under subsection (c). The results of any
such administrative review shall be deemed to be a final
agency action subject to judicial review.
``(h) Report to Congress.--Not later than February 1 of
each year, the Secretary of Energy shall submit to Congress a
report on the implementation and operation of this section.
The report shall include, for the preceding calendar year--
``(1) the number of claims received under this subtitle;
``(2) the size of the backlog in processing such claims;
``(3) the number of such claims submitted to a physicians
panel;
``(4) the number of such claims for which a panel made a
determination, including the number of determinations that
were positive and the number that were negative;
``(5) the number of determinations accepted, reversed, and
denied by the Secretary;
``(6) the number of claims denied under subsection (b) for
failure to submit reasonable evidence;
``(7) the number and type of diagnostic tests and exposure
assessments requested by a panel, and the number and type of
such tests and assessments that were carried out;
``(8) the number and type of claims appealed, and the
dispositions of such appeals; and
``(9) the expenditures made, and staff and contractors
employed, in carrying out the Department of Energy's
responsibilities under this section.
``(i) Applicability of Existing Regulations.--In
implementing the Energy Workers Compensation Act of 2002 and
the amendments to this title made by that Act, regulations
prescribed by the Secretary of Energy before the date of the
enactment of that Act may, to the extent not inconsistent
with this title (as so amended), continue to apply to this
title.
``SEC. 3663. PAYMENT OF BENEFITS BY DEPARTMENT OF LABOR.
``(a) In General.--
``(1) Payments.--Payments shall be made with respect to a
covered DOE contractor employee in accordance with this
section for the disability or death of that employee
resulting from that employee's specified illness.
``(2) Medical benefits.--A covered DOE contractor employee
shall receive medical benefits under section 3629 for that
employee's specified illness.
``(3) Payment from fund.--The compensation provided under
this section shall be paid from the Fund established under
section 3612.
``(b) Duty of Secretary of Labor.--The Secretary of Labor
shall have the duty to carry out this section.
``(c) Nature and Amount of Payments.--
``(1) In general.--The following provisions of subchapter I
of chapter 81 of title 5, United States Code, apply to a
covered DOE contractor employee (including the regulations
prescribed with respect to those provisions, adapted as
appropriate), and the Secretary of Labor shall provide, with
respect to that employee and that employee's specified
illness, payments determined in accordance with those
provisions: Sections 8102(a), 8105, 8106, 8107, 8108, 8109,
8110, 8111(a), 8112, 8114, 8115, 8116, 8117, 8133, 8134, and
8146a.
``(2) Organs and physiological systems.--For purposes of
carrying out this subtitle, the Secretary of Labor shall
prescribe additional regulations for resolving claims under
this subtitle of partial or total loss of use of function of
organs or physiological systems that are not already covered
by existing regulations. Such additional regulations shall
cover the liver, brain, stomach, heart, esophagus, bladder,
thyroid, pancreas, and nervous system, and such additional
organs and physiological systems as the Secretary considers
appropriate. The Secretary shall issue such regulations not
later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of the
Energy Workers Compensation Act of 2002.
``(d) Administrative and Judicial Review.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary of Labor shall establish a
process under which a claimant may obtain administrative
review of any adverse determination by the Secretary of Labor
under this section. Such process shall not apply to any
adverse determination by the Secretary of Energy.
``(2) Judicial review.--The results of any such
administrative review shall be deemed to be a final agency
action subject to judicial review in the United States
district
[[Page S9989]]
court for the district in which the claimant resides.
``(3) Attorney fees.--In any proceeding pursuant to this
subsection, attorney fees shall be available on the same
basis as such fees are available under section 28 of the
Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (33 U.S.C.
928).
``SEC. 3664. GENERAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO RESOLUTION OF
CLAIMS.
``(a) Nonadversarial.--The Secretary of Energy and the
Secretary of Labor shall each ensure that claims under this
subtitle are resolved in a nonadversarial manner.
``(b) No Statute of Limitations.--A claim under this
subtitle shall not be barred by any statute of limitations.
``SEC. 3665. OFFSET FOR CERTAIN PAYMENTS.
``A claimant awarded benefits under this subtitle as a
result of a specified illness or death of a DOE contractor
employee who receives benefits because of the same illness or
death from any State workers' compensation system shall
receive the benefits specified in this subtitle for such
illness or death, reduced by the amount of any workers'
compensation benefits that the claimant receives or will
receive on account of such illness or death under any State
workers' compensation system during the period that awarded
benefits are provided under this subtitle, after deducting
the reasonable costs, as determined by the Secretary of Labor
by regulation, of obtaining such benefits.
``SEC. 3666. SUBROGATION OF THE UNITED STATES NOT APPLICABLE.
``Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the United
States has no right of subrogation against any person by
reason of payments or other benefits provided under this
subtitle.
``SEC. 3667. CERTIFICATION OF TREATMENT OF PAYMENTS UNDER
OTHER LAWS.
``Compensation or benefits provided to an individual under
this subtitle--
``(1) shall be treated for purposes of the internal revenue
laws of the United States as damages for human suffering; and
``(2) shall not be included as income or resources for
purposes of determining eligibility to receive benefits
described in section 3803(c)(2)(C) of title 31, United States
Code, or the amount of such benefits.
``SEC. 3668. CERTAIN CLAIMS NOT AFFECTED BY AWARDS OF
DAMAGES.
``A payment under this subtitle shall not be considered as
any form of compensation or reimbursement for a loss for
purposes of imposing liability on any individual receiving
such payment, on the basis of such receipt, to repay any
insurance carrier for insurance payments; and a payment under
this subtitle shall not affect any claim against an insurance
carrier with respect to insurance.
``SEC. 3669. FORFEITURE OF BENEFITS BY CONVICTED FELONS.
``(a) Forfeiture of Compensation.--Any individual convicted
of a violation of section 1920 of title 18, United States
Code, or any other Federal or State criminal statute relating
to fraud in the application for or receipt of any benefit
under this title or under any other Federal or State workers'
compensation law, shall forfeit (as of the date of such
conviction) any entitlement to any compensation or benefit
under this subtitle such individual would otherwise be
awarded for any injury, illness, or death covered by this
subtitle for which the time of injury was on or before the
date of the conviction.
``(b) Information.--Notwithstanding section 552a of title
5, United States Code, or any other Federal or State law, an
agency of the United States, a State, or a political
subdivision of a State shall make available to the President,
upon written request from the President and if the President
requires the information to carry out this section, the names
and Social Security account numbers of individuals confined,
for conviction of a felony, in a jail, prison, or other penal
institution or correctional facility under the jurisdiction
of that agency.
``SEC. 3670. EXCLUSIVITY OF REMEDY.
``The liability of the United States or a DOE contractor in
its capacity as an employer of a DOE contractor employee
under this subtitle with respect to the specified illness or
death of a DOE contractor employee for which compensation is
made under this subtitle is exclusive and instead of all
other liability of the United States or DOE contractor in
such capacity to the employee, his legal representative,
spouse, dependents, next of kin, and any other person
otherwise entitled to recover damages from the United States
or DOE contractor in such capacity because of the specified
illness or death in a direct judicial proceeding, in a civil
action, or in admiralty, except for a State workers'
compensation proceeding or a State intentional tort liability
proceeding. However, this section shall not apply to illness
or death for which compensation under this subtitle is not
made.
``SEC. 3671. COORDINATION WITH BENEFITS UNDER SUBTITLE B.
``(a) Receipt of Subtitle B Benefits No Bar to Application
Under This Subtitle.--An individual may apply for benefits
under this subtitle without regard to whether the individual
received a lump sum payment under subtitle B.
``(b) Offset for Benefits Paid on Same Illness of Same
Person.--If a lump sum payment is made under subtitle B by
reason of a specified illness of a person, any payment
(excluding medical costs) made under this subtitle by reason
of the same specified illness of the same person shall be
offset by the amount of such lump sum payment. In no case
shall a claimant obtain double indemnity wage replacement
benefits for specified illness under this subtitle.
``SEC. 3672. ASSIGNMENT OF CLAIM.
``An assignment of a claim for compensation under this
subtitle is void. Compensation and claims for compensation
are exempt from claims of creditors.''.
SEC. 102. GAO REPORT.
Not later than February 1, 2004, the Comptroller General
shall submit to Congress a report on the implementation by
the Department of Energy of subtitle D of the Energy
Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of
2000 (42 U.S.C. 7385o et seq.), as amended by section 101,
and of the effectiveness of such subtitle in assisting DOE
contractor employees in obtaining compensation for exposure
to a toxic substance at a Department of Energy facility.
TITLE II--AMENDMENTS RELATING TO SUBTITLE B OF PROGRAM
SEC. 201. COVERAGE FOR CHRONIC RENAL DISEASE.
(a) Definitions for Program Administration.--Section 3621
of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation
Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 7384l) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by adding at the end the following
new subparagraph:
``(D) A covered employee with chronic renal disease.'';
(2) in paragraph (15), by striking ``or chronic silicosis''
and inserting ``chronic silicosis, chronic renal disease,'';
and
(3) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(19) The term `chronic renal disease' includes nephritis
and kidney tubal tissue injury and related illnesses of the
urogenitoury tract.
``(20) The term `covered employee with chronic renal
disease' means an individual determined to have sustained
chronic renal disease in the performance of duty in
accordance with section 3623(f).''.
(b) Exposure in the Performance of Duty.--Section 3623 of
such Act (42 U.S.C. 7384n) is amended by adding at the end
the following new subsection:
``(f) Chronic Renal Disease.--(1) An individual with
chronic renal disease shall, in the absence of substantial
evidence to the contrary, be determined to have sustained
chronic renal disease in the performance of duty for purposes
of the compensation program if the individual--
``(A) was employed in a Department of Energy facility (in
the case of a Department of Energy employee or a Department
of Energy contractor employee) or an atomic weapons employer
facility (in the case of an atomic weapons employee) that
conducted uranium processing, converting, refining,
enriching, extruding, calcining, machining, or rolling, or
that operated as a uranium foundry;
``(B) carried out job functions while so employed that
resulted in the potential for exposure, inhalation, or uptake
of uranium or uranium compounds for at least 250 days; and
``(C) submits medical evidence that the individual, after
commencing the employment specified in subparagraph (A),
contracted chronic renal disease.
``(2) Not later than 60 days after the date of the
enactment of the Energy Workers Compensation Act of 2002, the
Secretary of Energy shall designate a list of Department of
Energy facilities and atomic weapons employer facilities that
were engaged in uranium processing, converting, refining,
enriching, extruding, calcining, machining, or rolling, or
that operated as a uranium foundry, including the dates such
activities were performed. The list of facilities shall not
include facilities for which uranium millers and transporters
are already covered under the Radiation Exposure Compensation
Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note).
``(3) Not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of the Energy Workers Compensation Act of 2002, the
Secretary of Labor, in consultation with the Secretary of
Health and Human Services, shall establish, by regulation,
procedures to be followed and medical evidence to be
submitted by claimants for chronic renal disease claims.''.
(c) Offset for Certain Payments.--Section 3641 of such Act
(42 U.S.C. 7385) is amended--
(1) by striking ``or covered uranium employee (as defined
in section 3630),'' and inserting ``covered uranium employee
(as defined in section 3630), covered employee with chronic
renal disease,''; and
(2) by striking ``or radiation,'' and inserting
``radiation, uranium,''.
(d) Conforming Amendments.--The following provisions of
such Act are amended by inserting ``chronic renal disease,''
after ``chronic silicosis,'' each place such term appears:
(1) Subsections (a)(1) and (b)(2)(A) of section 3631 (42
U.S.C. 7384v).
(2) Section 3644(a) (42 U.S.C. 7385c(a))--
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1);
(B) in paragraph (2)(C); and
(C) in the matter following paragraph (2)(C).
SEC. 202. COVERAGE FOR MERCURY POISONING.
(a) Definitions for Program Administration.--Section 3621
of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation
Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 7384l), as amended by section
201(a) of this Act, is further amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by adding at the end the following
new subparagraph:
``(E) A covered employee with mercury poisoning.'';
[[Page S9990]]
(2) in paragraph (15), by inserting ``or mercury
poisoning'' after ``chronic renal disease,''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(21) The term `covered employee with mercury poisoning'
means an individual determined to have sustained mercury
poisoning in the performance of duty in accordance with
section 3627A.''.
(b) Participation in Compensation Program.--Subtitle B of
that Act (42 U.S.C. 7384l et seq.) is further amended by
inserting after section 3627 the following new section:
``SEC. 3627A. MERCURY POISONING.
``(a) In General.--A Department of Energy employee or
Department of Energy contractor employee who was exposed to
mercury in the performance of duty and who experiences
mercury poisoning shall be treated as a covered employee for
purposes of the compensation program.
``(b) Exposure to Mercury in Performance of Duty.--A
Department of Energy employee or Department of Energy
contractor employee shall, in the absence of substantial
evidence to the contrary, be treated as having been exposed
to mercury in the performance of duty for purposes of
subsection (a) if while employed in activities associated
with the design, production, or testing of atomic weapons, or
clean-up related thereto, such employee was present in a
Department of Energy facility that--
``(1) contained more than 100 kilograms of mercury; and
``(2) did not confine mercury operations to work spaces
with dedicated ventilation systems for the removal of
airborne toxic substances.
``(c) Mercury Poisoning.--A Department of Energy employee
or Department of Energy contractor employee shall be treated
as experiencing mercury poisoning for purposes of subsection
(a) if such employee manifests a physical, psychological, or
neurological illness consistent with mercury poisoning.
``(d) Determinations of Mercury Poisoning.--The Secretary
of Labor shall utilize evaluations, tests, or other medical
information obtained pursuant to section 3162 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (42 U.S.C.
7274i), and may utilize any other evaluations, tests,
information, or other means that the Secretary considers
appropriate, to determine whether a Department of Energy
employee or Department of Energy contractor employee
manifests a physical, psychological, or neurological illness
consistent with mercury poisoning for purposes of subsection
(a).''.
(c) Offset for Certain Payments.--Section 3641 of such Act
(42 U.S.C. 7385), as amended by section 201(c) of this Act,
is further amended--
(1) by inserting ``or covered employee with mercury
poisoning'' after ``covered employee with chronic renal
disease,''; and
(2) by inserting ``or mercury'' after ``uranium,''.
(d) Conforming Amendments.--The following provisions of
such Act, as amended by section 201(d) of this Act, are
further amended by inserting ``mercury poisoning,'' after
``chronic renal disease,'' each place such term appears:
(1) Subsections (a)(1) and (b)(2)(A) of section 3631 (42
U.S.C. 7384v).
(2) Section 3644(a) (42 U.S.C. 7385c(a))--
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1);
(B) in paragraph (2)(C); and
(C) in the matter following paragraph (2)(C).
SEC. 203. COVERAGE FOR LUNG CANCER IN COVERED BERYLLIUM
EMPLOYEES.
Section 3621(8) of the Energy Employees Occupational
Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 7384l(8))
is amended--
(1) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D)
and, in that subparagraph, by striking ``or (B)'' and
inserting ``(B), or (C)''; and
(2) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following new
subparagraph:
``(C) Lung cancer, if such cancer occurs within 5 years
after the date on which the employee is determined to have
been first exposed to beryllium in the performance of duty in
accordance with section 3623(a).''.
SEC. 204. CLARIFICATION OF SPECIAL EXPOSURE COHORT EXPANSION
PROCEDURE.
(a) Automatic Designation by Lapse of Time.--Section 3626
of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation
Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 7384q) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following new
subsection:
``(c) Automatic Designation by Lapse of Time.--
Notwithstanding subsection (b), if a class of employees
described in subsection (a)(1) petitions to be treated as
members of the Special Exposure Cohort under subsection
(a)(3), the members of that class shall, as of the expiration
of the 180-day period beginning with the date on which the
petition was received, be deemed to be members of the Special
Exposure Cohort for purposes of the compensation program,
unless before the expiration of that period the petition is
denied.''.
(b) Individual Presumption by Lapse of Time.--Section 3623
of that Act (42 U.S.C. 7384n) is amended by adding at the end
of subsection (d) the following new paragraph:
``(3) An estimate referred to in paragraph (1) shall be
completed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services
within 150 days after the date on which the Department of
Labor submits to the Secretary of Health and Human Services
the claim for which the estimate is required. If such
estimate cannot be completed before the expiration of such
period, it shall be deemed, for purposes of section
3626(b)(1), that it is not feasible to estimate with
sufficient accuracy the radiation dose received by the
individual to which the claim relates.''.
SEC. 205. CORRECTING PROBLEMS IN THE RADIOEPIDEMIOLOGIC MODEL
FOR DETERMINING COMPENSATION.
Section 3623(c)(3) of the Energy Employees Occupational
Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C.
7384n(c)(3)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in subparagraph (C)--
(A) by striking ``past health-related activities (such as
smoking),''; and
(B) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``;
and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(D) provide the benefit of the doubt to the claimant
wherever there is reasonable scientific evidence to justify
compensation, including such factors as dose rate
effectiveness of low dose radiation, bias due to selection
effects, and increasing risks from radiation with increasing
age at exposure.''.
SEC. 206. ADDITIONAL SPECIFIED CANCERS.
(a) Report.--The National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health shall prepare a report that identifies each type
of cancer (other than specified cancers, as already defined
in section 3621(17) of the Energy Employees Occupational
Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C.
7384l(17))) that the Institute has determined from
epidemiology studies of workers or atomic bomb survivors to
be radiosensitive and, for each cancer so identified,
provides a basis for that determination. Not later than 90
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Institute shall submit the report to Congress, the Secretary
of Labor, and the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker
Health, and shall publish the report in the Federal Register,
for public review and comment.
(b) Final Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Institute shall submit to
Congress, the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Health and
Human Services, and the Advisory Board on Radiation and
Worker Health a final report, taking into account comments
received in response to the report under subsection (a), that
identifies each type of cancer that is appropriate to be
deemed an additional specified cancer for purposes of the
Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program
Act of 2000.
SEC. 207. COVERAGE FOR INDIVIDUALS EMPLOYED BY ATOMIC WEAPONS
EMPLOYERS OR BERYLLIUM EMPLOYEES DURING PERIOD
OF RESIDUAL CONTAMINATION.
Paragraphs (3) and (7)(C) of section 3621 of the Energy
Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of
2000 (42 U.S.C. 7384l) are each amended by inserting before
the period at the end the following: ``, or during a period
when, as specified by the National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health in the reports required by section
3151(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2002 (42 U.S.C. 7384 note) or any subsequent
report, significant contamination remained in a facility of
the employer after such facility discontinued activities
relating to the production of nuclear weapons and such
contamination could have caused or substantially contributed
to the cancer of a covered employee with cancer or a covered
beryllium illness, as the case may be''.
SEC. 208. COORDINATION OF COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS FOR
CANCER WITH COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS UNDER
OTHER RADIATION COMPENSATION LAWS.
(a) Coordination.--Section 3651 of the Energy Employees
Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (42
U.S.C. 7385j) is amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 3651. COORDINATION WITH OTHER RADIATION COMPENSATION
LAWS.
``(a) In General.--Except in accordance with section 3630
and except as provided in subsection (b), an individual may
not receive compensation or benefits under the compensation
program for cancer and also receive compensation under either
of the following:
``(1) The Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C.
2210 note).
``(2) Section 112(c) of title 38, United States Code.
``(b) Offset.--A payment of compensation may be made to an
individual, or the survivor of an individual, under subtitle
B for cancer for which payment has been made under the
Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, but the amount of such
payment shall be offset by the amount of any payment made
pursuant to section 4(a)(1)(A)(i)(III) or 4(a)(2)(C) of that
Act on account of such cancer.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 209. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.
(a) Findings.--Section 3602(a)(6) of the Energy Employees
Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (42
U.S.C. 7384(a)(6)) is amended by striking the second sentence
and inserting the following: ``Furthermore, studies indicate
that 98 percent of radiation-induced cancers within the
Department of Energy nuclear weapons complex
[[Page S9991]]
occur at dose levels below the existing thresholds for
establishing proof of causation. Those studies further
indicate that workers at Department of Energy sites were
exposed to levels of silica, heavy metals, and toxic
substances that will lead, contribute to, or aggravate
illnesses or diseases.''.
(b) Payments in the Case of Deceased Persons.--Section
3628(e)(3)(A) (42 U.S.C. 7384s(e)(3)(A)) of such Act is
amended by inserting before the semicolon the following: ``,
or a wife or husband of that individual who was married to
that individual immediately before the death of that
individual and filed, on or before December 28, 2001, a claim
in that capacity under this subtitle''.
TITLE III--ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANCE FOR CLAIMANTS UNDER EITHER
SUBTITLE OF ACT
SEC. 301. PROVIDING ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF IN CASES WHERE
MEDICAL RECORDS ARE NOT AVAILABLE.
Subtitle C of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness
Compensation Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 7385 et seq.) is
amended by adding at the end the following new section:
``SEC. 3652. PROOF WHEN MEDICAL RECORDS NOT AVAILABLE.
``For any claim under any subtitle of this title, if the
Department of Energy, a contractor of the Department of
Energy (including a DOE contractor, as defined in section
3661), an atomic energy weapons employer, or a beryllium
vendor is unable to locate medical records necessary for the
processing of that claim that it possessed or was required to
possess within 120 days after receiving a written request
from the claimant to locate such records, an affidavit of the
employee as to the contents of those records, together with
any medical records possessed by the claimant or otherwise
made available, shall be considered in determining the
medical evidence relating to the claim.''.
SEC. 302. RESOURCE CENTERS AND OUTREACH PROGRAMS.
Subtitle C of such Act is further amended by adding after
section 3652 (as added by section 301) the following new
section:
``SEC. 3653. RESOURCE CENTERS AND OUTREACH PROGRAMS.
``(a) Requirement.--The Secretary of Labor and the
Secretary of Energy shall maintain resource centers and
outreach programs relating to the availability of benefits
under any subtitle of this title. Such centers shall be
staffed and maintained proportional to the demand for
assistance and follow-up.
``(b) Underserved Areas.--The resource centers required by
subsection (a) shall include one or more resource centers in
each underserved area near a Department of Energy facility.
``(c) Duration.--(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2),
such centers and programs shall be maintained through
September 30, 2004.
``(2) In the case of a resource center in an underserved
area referred to in subsection (b), such center shall be
maintained until demand is exhausted.''.
SEC. 303. OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN.
(a) In General.--Subtitle C of such Act is further amended
by adding after section 3653 (as added by section 302) the
following new section:
``SEC. 3654. OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN.
``(a) Establishment.--There is established within the
Office of the Secretary of Labor an office, to be known as
the Office of the Ombudsman for Occupational Illness
Compensation (in this section referred to as the `Office'),
to assist claimants under this title.
``(b) Ombudsman.--
``(1) Appointment.--The head of the Office shall be the
Ombudsman. The Ombudsman shall be appointed by the Secretary
of Labor, after consultation with claimants or claimant
advocates, worker compensation experts, and members of the
advisory committees to Federal agencies implementing this
title, from among individuals with at least one of the
following qualifications:
``(A) Experience or training as an advocate.
``(B) Training as a health care provider with knowledge of
occupational illness and disease.
``(C) Experience in assisting claimants with worker
compensation claims.
``(2) Removal.--The Secretary of Labor may remove the
Ombudsman for just cause and shall, in such a case,
communicate to Congress the circumstances forming the basis
of such just cause.
``(c) Duties.--The duties of the Ombudsman are as follows:
``(1) To direct the operations of the Office.
``(2) To report to the Secretary of Labor with respect to
the activities of the Office.
``(3) To assist claimants under this title with claims
filed with the Department of Labor or the Department of
Energy.
``(4) To receive and investigate complaints or inquiries
regarding the status of a claim under this title.
``(5) To provide claimants under this title with contacts
at agencies with responsibilities under this title.
``(6) To offer informal advice on options available to
claimants under this title.
``(7) To identify whether claimants under this title are
encountering systematic difficulties or delays with respect
to claims under this title, and to make recommendations for
improvement, with respect to such claims, in speed, equity,
fairness, or compliance with statutes and regulations.
``(8) With respect to individuals filing complaints or
requests for information under this title--
``(A) to respond within 30 days after receiving such a
complaint or request;
``(B) to maintain reasonable communication with the
individual until the matter is resolved; and
``(C) to maintain, as confidential and privileged, the
identity of the individual, unless such confidentiality or
privilege is otherwise waived.
``(9) To maintain and publish a telephone number, facsimile
number, electronic mail address, and post office address for
the Office.
``(d) Limitation.--The Ombudsman may not reverse or make
decisions regarding any claim under this title.
``(e) Authority.--The Ombudsman is authorized to carry out
the following activities:
``(1) Investigate questions regarding a claim under this
title, or procedures or systems for processing such claims,
with the offices of the Department of Energy, Department of
Labor, and Department of Health and Human Services (including
the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health),
and any contractor of any such department, that has
responsibility under this title.
``(2) Contract for expert advice with respect to the
Ombudsman's responsibilities under this title.
``(3) Access any material relating to a matter under
investigation under paragraph (1).
``(4) Request explanations from any Federal agency with
responsibilities under this title about the activities of
that agency under this title.
``(5) Enter and inspect places in order to carry out an
investigation under paragraph (1).
``(6) Refer any matter within the responsibility of the
Ombudsman to an appropriate inspector general.
``(f) Cooperation With Federal Agencies.--Federal agencies
and the officials responsible for the implementation of this
title shall assist the Ombudsman in carrying out this section
and shall promptly make available to the Ombudsman all
information requested by the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman shall
cooperate with such agencies and officials.
``(g) Coordination.--The Ombudsman shall coordinate the
activities of the Office with the activities of the
Secretaries of Energy, Health and Human Services, and Labor
in carrying out this title. Such coordination shall be
carried out pursuant to memoranda of agreement entered into
among and between the Ombudsman and such Secretaries.
``(h) Annual Report.--Not later than January 1 of each
year, the Ombudsman shall submit a report on this title to
the President, Congress, and the Secretaries of Energy,
Health and Human Services, and Labor. No official outside the
Office may require such outside official's approval before
submitting the report. The report shall contain the
following:
``(1) The number and types of complaints, grievances, and
requests for assistance received by the Ombudsman in the
previous year.
``(2) Identification of the most common difficulties
encountered by claimants under this title.
``(3) Recommended changes to the administrative practices
of the Federal agencies with responsibility under this title.
``(4) Recommended legislative changes that may be
appropriate to mitigate problems with the implementation of
this title.
``(i) Publication.--The Secretaries of Energy, Health and
Human Services, and Labor shall publicize the availability of
the services of the Office.
``(j) Separate Line Item.--The budget of the President
under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, shall
include funding for the Office as a separate line item.
``(k) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section
$800,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007.''.
(b) Initial Appointment.--Not later than 60 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor
shall appoint the Ombudsman required by section 3654 of the
Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program
Act of 2000 (as added by subsection (a)).
(c) Memoranda of Agreement.--Not later than 90 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Ombudsman shall
enter into the memoranda of agreement required by such
section 3654 (as added by subsection (a)).
____
Meeting on the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation
Program, May 11, 2002, 3:00 p.m., Espanola, New Mexico
You know, these people are all good people. And after 9/11,
when there's been so much talk about patriotism and doing the
right thing by people who helped their country, on behalf of
Levi and others similarly situated, I would just ask the
Congress and the Administration to remember those words and
not let them be hollow, empty phrases. Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
Mr. Smith: My name is Alex Smith. I'm a 33-year employee
with the Lab. I testified before Tom and Senator Bingaman and
David Michaels the last time. I went to work for the Lab in
1947 in the chemical warehouse. Tom and Bingaman already know
and I've been doing this for your benefit.
I went to work for the chemical warehouse there at the Lab
in the old TA 1. My duties
[[Page S9992]]
were clerk and to issue laboratory chemicals and laboratory
glassware, and when we had time, I'd run a mercury, still, me
and another fellow named Lewis Devetima.
In 1948, early in 1948, I started having trouble. My face
would swell up, and my gums were bleeding. And I would go
down to Q Building to see Dr. Whipple, and he would send me
home. He said, ``You're allergic to something,'' and that was
it.
And when my face went back down, I'd come back to work and
it would happen all over again. About the fourth time, I got
to see Dr. Harriet Harding, who was a consultant there, and
she interviewed me. Luckily, I got to see her. And she asked
me where I worked, and I told her. She asked me what my
duties were, and I told her that I run a mercury still when I
didn't issue chemicals.
She said, ``You're operating what?''
I said, ``I operate a mercury still.''
She said, ``Take me up there and show it to me.''
So I did. She shut it down. And so we were full, me and
Lewis Devetima were full of mercury. We used to heat it, and
it had a still, like it was made out of glassware. It would
go through this, heat it, and form a gas, go through that,
come out condensed on that end, pure mercury. And we would
breathe in vapors, and it was in a small 10 x 10. The old
warehouse there in TA 1 was a shed. It was formerly the
stable for the school that was there before the Lab took
over, and they converted it into a chemical shop.
Anyway, when I retired in 1982--prior to 1982, I suffered
from depression, bleeding gums, and so I went to the doctor
there at the Lab. I was in very bad shape, and she sent me to
a sanitarium in Albuquerque, and I spent some time there,
about two or three weeks. I then was on an outpatient to Dr.
Kenneth Poole there in Albuquerque for about three years.
And then I came back and was under the tutelage of Dr.
William Oakes who worked for the H Division, and then he
retired. And I saw Dr. Charles Shafer, and then he retired.
And then I saw Dr. Ralph Greer. And anyway, when I retired, I
noticed that there was no record of this sickness on my
medical records.
And I asked Dr. Greer why. And he said they searched and
they searched and they searched and they even went back into
the microfilms, and they could find no evidence of anything
to do with a mercury still or anything. So I retired thinking
that.
When I testified before Mr. Bingaman and Mr. Udall and Mr.
Michaels, I didn't have any evidence. It was my story against
theirs. And I have met a fellow named Ken Silver. He found
these letters from Dr. Harding telling the whole story in six
letters, and the DOE database of historical documents, it
tells the whole story about me and Devetima's sickness, about
the mercury still, their shutting it down.
These are all H Division letters to our division leader,
Van Gammer, Assistant Property Division leader. Yet they
couldn't find them. There was no evidence. They're here,
right here. Everything I have reverts back to those six
letters. In one of them, she refers to a fellow name Carl
Butler. I happen to know Carl Butler, so I wrote him a
letter telling him what was happening. He wrote me back a
five-page handwritten letter confirming everything that I
said when I testified, everything, even to closing down
and admitted that nobody in 1947 and 1948 in H Division
knew anything about mercury until an industrial engineer
named Harold Sheeton--Harry Sheeton--came on board, and
this was months later.
And after I got that letter from Butler, I wrote a letter
to Mr. Udall and Mr. Bingaman, asking him--I sent them a copy
of those six letters. I didn't give them a copy of this, but
I did take it to Mr. Udall's office, everything I had, when
you were in Federal Place over there, and I gave it to Raul
and he made copies of it. He said he would forward it on to
you, your office.
And this is my letter to Senator Bingaman asking that you
amend that Act to include mercury. I don't know what happened
there. I got a letter from Mr. Udall there, and he asked that
I get documentation. So I've got it. Don't you think I have
it? And you asked for names and addresses of people that are
working. I can give you names, Mr. Udall, but they all got
one address: Cemetery. There's no--me and Mr. Butler are the
only ones alive that I know that knew about that mercury
still, and why I'm still around, I don't know.
After that, Mr. Silver came up with a couple more
publications by Dr. Harriet Potter on mercury poisoning.
Anybody that knows anything about mercury should read it. She
even enlightened me. I guess she really dug in to her
research. And in this--the other one is Challenging Manmade
Decisions by Harriet Potter. I'll read you just one paragraph
here.
On page 54 it tells about the year 1948 in Los Alamos,
nonradioactive acting hazard material in use in Los Alamos.
``An example will make this clear. Very soon after I began
active duty, a worker came to the nurse in H-2 complaining
with bleeding gums and skin rash.'' That's me. ``In taking
his job history, I found he and three other men were engaged
in cleaning dirty mercury, an element widely used.
``Next, I visited the job site. And even though I had no
engineering skill, I knew from my Massachusetts Department of
Occupational Hygiene experience that the mercury hazard was
great in this dirty, shed-like building.''
I could go on, but I haven't got time, but you get the
drift. And I don't know where to go from here. I know mercury
is not covered in the Act. Like I say, I'm asking you to
amend it to include mercury. Thank you very much for
listening to me. I'm probably out of time. (Applause.)
Mr. Leyba: The next person will be Phil Schofield.
Mr. Schofield: Thank you for coming, Beverly Cook and
Congressman Udall, Senator Bingaman, Mr. Turcic, Mr. Elliot.
I'll try to keep my time short here.
I worked for Los Alamos National Lab for 2 years. I suffer
from several severe health problems, multiple chemical
sensitivities, HO cervical syndrome, respiratory problems,
severe dermatology problems, swelling of my extremities. I
have short-term memory and concentration deficits, and plus I
lost almost half my hearing.
Mainly what I would like to address is some problems with
the reconstruction of people's dosages. I can give you two
quick examples where personnel worked in the same room. One
was a--it depended on your job. You * * *
____
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I rise today as a cosponsor of the Energy
Workers Compensation Act of 2002, EWCA.
During the Cold War, workers employed at the Department of Energy
sites across the country served our country by helping to make nuclear
weapons. But, for over 50 years of manufacturing these weapons, we now
know that the Department of Energy consistently sacrificed health and
safety of the workers and placed them in harm's way without their
knowledge. Many of these workers subsequently became ill due to their
work with radioactive and toxic substances at the sites.
In 2000, Congress passed legislation, the Energy Employees
Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act, EEOICPA, to establish
compensation programs for Department of Energy workers who became sick
as a result of their work. The bill addressed compensation for
illnesses caused by the workers' exposure to radiation, beryllium, and
numerous toxic substances. EEOICPA created two separate programs:
Subtitle B of the law provided a program administered by the Department
of Labor that would give a lump sum $150,000 payment to workers exposed
to radiation and beryllium; and, subtitle D of the law provided a
program administered by the Department of Energy that relied on State
worker compensation programs to make compensation payments to workers
exposed to toxic substances. Subtitle D is what the EWCA legislation
addresses.
Currently, under subtitle D the Department of Energy uses a
physician's panel to review workers' claims and determine whether a
worker's illness is related to work at a Department of Energy site.
Upon a positive finding, the panel relies upon individual State worker
compensation programs to make payments for wage loss and medical
benefits. The Department of Energy, however, has admitted that nearly
half of the claimants will not be able to pinpoint a responsible payor
who will be able to honor the Department of Energy Physician Panel
finding because many contractors no longer are associated with DoE.
Congress intended a uniform and equitable Federal compensation
program for these employees who worked to serve our country. The
Government should not sit idly by and let this problem fester knowing
that so many claimants will not receive any compensation.
Introduction of the Energy Workers Compensation Act of 2002 will
fulfill the original legislative objectives of Congress to assure
compensation to all of our country's energy workers who were made ill
due to their work with toxic substances. The legislation would correct
subtitle D by making the Department of Labor responsible for paying
those sick workers who are determined eligible to receive compensation.
We are only now beginning to realize the dangers that the energy
workers faced. These workers thought they were serving our country and
were unaware of the risks they took to win the Cold War. We must do all
we can to protect the energy workers to make sure they receive just
compensation for the illnesses and disabilities they incurred from
their jobs at the Department of Energy nuclear weapons sites.
______
By Mr. BAUCUS:
[[Page S9993]]
S. 3059. A bill to provide for the distribution of judgment funds to
the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation; to the
Committee on Indian Affairs.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill to
provide for the use and distribution of judgment funds awarded to the
Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation in northeast
Montana.
In 1987, the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck
Reservation brought suit against the United States to recover interest
earned on their trust funds while those funds were in Special Deposit
and IMPL-Agency accounts. The case was filed in the United States
Claims court, and docketed as No. 773-87-L.
After the Court ruled that the United States was liable to the Fort
Peck Tribes and individual Indians for interest on those funds, the
Tribes and the United States reached an agreement for settling claims
in the case, for the sum of $4,522,551.84. The court approved the
settlement agreement.
The settlement agreement further provided that the judgment be
divided between the Fort Peck Tribes and those individual Indians who
are found to be eligible to share in the judgment. On January 31, 2001,
the court approved a stipulation between the parties that defined the
procedures by which the Fort Peck Tribes' and individual Indians'
respective shares in the judgment would be determined and distributed
to them.
Pursuant to the Court-approved stipulation in the case, on February
14, 2001, a portion of the Tribe's share of the judgment was deposited
into an account in Treasury for the use of the Fort Peck Tribes. As
provided by the Court-approved stipulation, those funds are to be
available for immediate use by the Tribe pursuant to a plan adopted
under the Indian Tribal Judgment Funds Use or Distribution Act, 25
U.S.C. 1401 et seq. The Court-approved stipulation further recognized
that the Tribe will most likely receive additional payments from this
settlement once the work identifying all individuals eligible to share
in the judgment is completed and the pro rata shares are finally
computed. Those funds, too, are to be available for use by the Tribe in
accord with a plan adopted under the Tribal Judgment Funds Use or
Distribution Act.
As required by the stipulation and the Tribal Judgment Funds Use or
Distribution Act, the Tribe developed a plan for the use of the Tribe's
share of the settlement. Under the plan, the Tribe's share of the
judgment will be used for tribal health, education, housing and social
services program.
The Tribe submitted its plan to the Department of the Interior for
review and approval. Public hearings were held during which the views
and recommendations of Tribal members were heard regarding the plan.
The Tribe has been advised that the Department of Interior has no
objection to the Tribe's plan and can approve it. However, although the
plan was developed and public hearing held during 2001, the Interior
Department did not complete its review of the plan, nor submit the
approved plan to Congress within the one-year deadline imposed by the
Tribal Judgment Funds Use or Distribution Act. As a result, in order
for the Fort Peck Tribe to make use of the judgment awarded to the
Tribe, it is necessary for Congress to formally adopt legislation
approving the Tribe's plan. The proposed bill language, would serve
this purpose.
This judgment is based on money that rightfully belongs to the Fort
Peck tribes and should be moved expeditiously through Congress. I look
forward to working with the Committee on Indian Affairs to move this
legislation forward.
______
By Mr. KENNEDY:
S. 3060. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide
protections for human participants in research; to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to
achieve reforms in our system of oversight for protecting the safety of
human subjects in research. As the Institute of Medicine report
released today again demonstrates, reforms are long overdue. The moment
has come to take action to restore the trust and confidence of those
who serve as subjects in clinical trials and other forms of research.
We passed the National Research Act over twenty years ago as an
important step toward protecting against inhuman research experiments
and conditions. We have developed guidelines to ensure that people
participating in medical research have clearly agreed to be a part of
the study and will be treated humanely during the study.
These protections benefit the people participating as subjects in
medical research, but they also help those conducting the research. If
patients fear that they will not be protected or that the researchers
do not have their best interests in mind, patients will not volunteer
to take part in these needed tests.
As we all know, a revolution is taking place in medicine today.
Scientists have mapped the human genome. They have made incredible
breakthroughs in treatments for cancer and AIDS. It is not unreasonable
to expect that we will see cancer cured, a quadriplegic stand up and
walk, new drugs that prevent Alzheimer's and AIDS, and other advances
we cannot even begin to imagine. But for all these advances to take
place, new treatments will first have to be tested on human subjects.
For these studies to succeed, patients must have confidence in our
system and must be willing to participate in medical research. We must
protect patients when they volunteer for these tests. To do otherwise
would jeopardize this very hopeful future.
Many of those who participate in these studies are the most
vulnerable members of our society and are the most in need of our
protection. We are now benefiting from drugs that have been developed
and tested outside the United States. Our country is based on the
premise that all people are created equal. Basic protections that are
good enough for research subjects in the United States should be good
enough for research subjects in other nations who volunteer for tests
that will benefit all of us.
We also must face the fact that medical research is constantly
changing. Protections that were put in place 20 years ago no longer
cover all human research projects. New studies in areas such as gene
therapy have raised safety and ethical concerns requiring special
scrutiny.
Institutional Review Boards, which review the safety and ethical
acceptability of research involving human subjects, are overworked and
underfunded. Loopholes in the system allow researchers who have had
proposals rejected by one Board to reapply to a second Board in the
hope of obtaining a more lenient review--all without notifying the
second Board of the decision of the first. We do little to train
researchers about methods for protecting human subjects. Many
researchers with the best intentions are not knowledgeable of the
latest changes to regulations.
These shortcomings cry out for a response, especially at this moment
in history that holds so much promise for future medical research. The
legislation I am introducing addresses these issues by expanding
research subject protections and strengthening the review and oversight
mechanisms to ensure that all human subjects are properly protected.
The legislation will, for the first time, ensure that all
participants in such research are protected by a comprehensive and
strong set of safeguards. The legislation provides clear statutory
authorization for these protections and establishes a central office to
review and amend current rules for the protections.
The legislation will improve Institutional Review Boards by
strengthening firewalls against conflicts of interest and enhancing
training for Board members. The bill will provide the Boards with the
funding they need to be effective, by allowing human subject protection
costs to be charged as direct costs on federal grants. The bill will
end ``IRB shopping'', the practice in which a proposal rejected by one
Board for ethical reasons is submitted to a second Board in the hope of
obtaining a more lenient review. The legislation will require that
every Board receives accreditation to assure that it is carrying out
its duties effectively and rigorously.
The legislation will assist researchers in learning more about the
best practices for protecting human subjects, by creating programs to
improve
[[Page S9994]]
training for researchers in good research practices. The bill
strengthens the firewalls against financial conflicts of interest for
researchers, and will require the establishment of regulations to
govern payment of research subjects.
The legislation will also enhance the ethical review of clinical
trials conducted overseas with federal funding or submitted to FDA for
review, by requiring that research conducted overseas that falls within
U.S. regulatory jurisdiction must be reviewed and approved by a U.S.
Institutional Review Board. The bill enhances the review of areas of
research that raise special safety concerns, such as gene therapy and
xenotransplantation.
We must act now to improve our protections for human research
subjects, so that patients will feel confident enough to volunteer for
the many vital research projects that will be developed in coming
years. These reforms will have a significant role in improving medical
care. But even more important, these safeguards will protect our fellow
human beings. The people this bill protects are not numbers of
statistics. They are someone's mother, daughter, or spouse. Mistakes
and abuses that hurt them affect their families, friends, and
communities.
We are a great people and a great nation. We are a moral people and
an ethical nation. We must do all we can to see that our great medical
advances of the future do not come at an unnecessary cost of death and
suffering by patients who first volunteered to test these new medical
treatments. I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact these
needed reforms as soon as possible.
I ask unanimous consent that a section-by-section analysis of the
bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the analysis was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
The Research Revitalization Act
The current oversight system for protecting human subjects
is overdue for reform. Rules for research subject protection
do not cover all research. Protections for research subjects
are largely based on regulation rather than statute. There is
no Federal lead agency charged with amending and issuing
guidance on the rules for research subject protections,
resulting in an often confusing set of divergent regulations
across different Federal research agencies. In addition,
since no single agency can amend the research rules, the
rules themselves have not been updated in years and have not
kept pace with the changing nature of research. To address
these problems, the bill will: 1. Ensure that all human
subjects in all research are covered by strong protections.
2. Provide a clear statutory authorization for research
subject protections. 3. Establish a central office to amend
the rules for research subject protection.
Institutional Review Boards, IRBs are committees at
universities and hospitals that review the safety and ethical
acceptability of research involving human subjects. The IRB
system is under severe strain for several reasons. First,
IRBs are overworked and underfunded. Second, IRBs vary widely
in their training and effectiveness. Third, conflicts of
interest threaten the integrity or research. Fourth,
investigators can engage in ``IRB shopping'' whereby a
proposal rejected by one IRB for ethical reasons can be
submitted to a second board in the hope of a more lenient
review all without notifying the second IRB of the decision
of the first. To address these problems the bill will: 1.
Require accreditation of all IRBs to ensure that they do
their jobs adequately. To be accredited, IRBs would not only
have to review proposals to conduct research, but also
monitor such research once it is initiated. 2. End ``IRB
shopping'' by requiring notification of previous proposal
rejection. 3. Establish rules for financial conflict of
interest for IRB members. 4. Allow IRB expenses to be charged
as direct costs on Federal grants, so that universities can
give IRBs the resources they need to do their job. 5. Allow,
on a voluntary basis, a central IRB to review projects
conducted a multiple local research sites to provide for more
effective and efficient review.
Investigators conducting human subject research are often
poorly trained in protecting human subjects. As revealed by
the controversies surrounding gene therapy, financial
conflicts of interest can often compromise the objectivity or
researchers. Finally, payment of research subjects is
becoming common, but few standards have been established to
govern when and how a subject can or should be compensated.
To address these problems, the bill will: 1. Require HHS to
establish a model program to train researchers in good
research practices and then provide grants to allow
universities to establish similar programs. 2. Strengthen
current rules on financial conflict of interest for
researchers. Numerous studies have shown that the existing
system does a poor job in protecting against conflict of
interest. The proposal follows recent recommendations by the
AAMC. 3. Establish standards to govern payments to research
subjects.
Research projects involving human subjects that use federal
funds or support a submission to the FDA are subject to US
regulations even when conducted overseas. When conducted on
poorly educated and/or impoverished populations in nations
with weak local oversight, such research raises special
ethical concerns. First, subjects may not be adequately
protected when an ethical review is conduced in a country
without a strong infrastructure for research subject
protection. Second, there are significant ethical concerns
about conducting high-risk research on local populations who
will never receive the benefits of the products being tested
on them. Third, some subjects receive placebos or non-
treatment, even when effective treatments are available and
could be given to patients. The bill will: 1. Require review
by a US-accredited IRB of all human subject research
conducted overseas that falls within US regulatory
jurisdiction. This requirement would be waived where
standards of review are equivalent to those in the US, e.g.
EU, Australia, Canada. 2. Require rules governing the use of
placebos or non-treatment when effective therapies could be
administered to research subjects.
Certain areas of research, such as gene therapy or
xenotransplantation, raise unusual safety concerns. NBAC has
recommended special scrutiny for such areas, beyond simple
IRB review. The bill will require special monitoring of
adverse events in clinical trials of such research so that
threats to patient safety can be identified.
______
By Mr. LOTT:
S. 3061. A bill to impose greater accountability on the Tennessee
Valley Authority with respect to capital investment decisions and
financing operations by increasing Congressional and Executive Branch
oversight; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, the Tennessee Valley Authority has long
served as an engine for economic development in my part of the country
and has enjoyed widespread support for its efforts to provide power
that is needed to fuel the economy and enhance the quality of life of
those it serves. It is my desire to assist the TVA in continuing its
legacy and carrying out its mission. To provide that assistance, the
Congress, the Administration, and the TVA itself must determine whether
TVA's policies, practices, and long-term strategies are consistent with
the realities of today's marketplace.
The TVA is at a crossroads in its illustrious history. The United
States taxpayer and the power consumers in the TVA service area have
provided the capital necessary to develop, finance, and operate one of
the largest, if not the largest, public power systems in history. The
TVA is now facing a number of challenges with respect to its existing
generating system in the form of environmental compliance, aging and
obsolete plants, and the urgent need to provide additional generating
capacity to meet the demands of the future. It is my belief that the
United States taxpayer is unwilling and unable to continue to bear the
financial burden and risks associated with addressing these challenges.
The reality of the marketplace for energy and the political
imperatives with which we are confronted mandate that any new financing
strategies and supplemental sources of capital be considered and
utilized by the TVA. Likewise, we need to review and analyze the short-
term and long-term financing and risk management strategies employed by
the TVA with respect to its almost $26 billion of debt.
During 2002, we have witnessed the results of risky and sometimes
corrupt corporate financing and management practices. Although I have
no reason to believe that TVA has been involved in any such practices,
I believe we have a responsibility to the taxpayers to examine the
financing and disclosure practices of the TVA to ensure that their
investment is being protected. I note that TVA has utilized short-term
financing facilities and derivative securities as hedging and interest
rate management techniques. We need to better understand the risks and
rewards associated with these strategies.
The legislation that I am introducing today would require that the
TVA provide the Congress and the Administration with a 10-year business
outlook and strategic plan with respect to its development and
financing needs, as well as an analysis of its ongoing financing and
risk management strategies. During the period in which the
[[Page S9995]]
TVA is responding to this Congressional mandate, the TVA would be
required to cease and desist from incurring new obligations or entering
into any arrangements for the development or financing of new,
additional, or replacement plant, equipment, or capacity. Likewise,
during this period the TVA would be required to gain the concurrence of
the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the appropriate
Senate and House Committee leaders before undertaking any additional
financing or refinancing activities. The legislation specifically
provides for the necessary flexibility for the TVA to continue normal
operations and fund necessary maintenance activities while complying
with this Congressional mandate.
I strongly support the TVA and I recognize its importance to the
economic health of several states in the southeastern United States,
including my own. Indeed, the TVA is a critical component of the
infrastructure that supports the economy of the entire United States.
It is my desire in introducing this legislation that the TVA be
positioned to meet the challenges of the 21st Century. Introduction of
this legislation is the first step to help the TVA achieve that goal.
______
By Mr. CRAIG
S. 3062. A bill to direct the Secretary of agriculture to conduct a
study of the effectiveness of silver-based biocides as an alternative
treatment to preserve wood; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition,
and Forestry.
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Wood
Preservation Safety Act of 2002. If enacted, this legislation would
authorize the Forest Products Laboratory of the U.S. Forest Service to
study the effectiveness of silver-based biocides as a wood preservative
treatment.
According to silver experts and academics, silver biocides could
serve as a viable, safe and cost effective alternative wood
preservative. Given silver's long-standing role as an effective
biocide, testing should be undertaken to determine silver's suitability
as a wood preservative. Thus, I feel it is important to study and fully
explore the potential of silver as a wood preservative.
Mining has been an important part of Idaho's history since the late
1800s. It became Idaho's first industry and remains a critical part of
Idaho and the nation's economy. Mining in Idaho has supplied the nation
with minerals necessary for today's modern lifestyle which many of us
take for granted. In 1985, the mines of Idaho's Coeur d'Alene mining
district produced their one billionth ounce of silver. The Sunshine
Mine was America's richest silver mine, producing over 300 million
ounces of silver, more than the entire output of Nevada's famous
Comstock Lode. Silver contributes to our quality of life in many ways,
and its use as a biocide in wood products is an important application
that must be explored.
I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass legislation that
would create a comprehensive research program to test the viability of
silver-based biocides for the treatment of wood products.
____________________