[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 48 (Wednesday, April 20, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4024-S4036]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. LUGAR:
S. 853. A bill to direct the Secretary of State to establish a
program to bolster the mutual security and safety of the United States,
Canada, and Mexico, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Foreign
Relations.
Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the North American
Cooperative Security Act, NACSA. The purpose of this bill is to enhance
the mutual security and safety of the United States, Canada, and Mexico
by providing a framework for better management, communication and
coordination between the Governments of North America. To advance these
goals, this bill would: Improve procedures for exchanging relevant
security information with Mexico and Canada; improve our military-to-
military relations with Mexico; improve the security of Mexico's
southern border; establish a database to track the movement of members
of Central American gangs between the United States, Mexico, and
Central American countries; require U.S. government agencies to develop
a strategy for achieving an agreement with the Mexican government on
joint measures to impede the ability of third country nationals from
using Mexico as a transit corridor for unauthorized entry into the
United States.
Our Nation is inextricably intertwined with Mexico and Canada
historically, culturally, and commercially. The flow of goods and
people across our borders helps drive our economy and strengthen our
culture. The Department of Transportation reports that goods worth more
than $633 billion crossed our land borders in 2004. According to the
Census Bureau more than 26 million of the 39 million individuals of
Hispanic-origin who are legal residents in the United States are of
Mexican background.
But our land borders also serve as a conduit for illegal immigration,
drugs, and other illicit items. Given the threat of international
terrorism, there is great concern that our land borders could also
serve as a channel for international terrorists and weapons of mass
destruction.
The threat of terrorist penetration is particularly acute along our
southern border. In 2004, fewer than 10,000 inividuals were apprehended
entering the U.S. illegally through our 5,000 mile land border with
Canada. This compared with the more than 1.1 million that were
apprehended while trying to cross our 2,000 mile border with Mexico.
The Department of Homeland Security reports that about 996,000 of these
individuals were Mexicans crossing the border for economic or family
reasons.
The Homeland Security Department refers to the rest as ``other than
Mexicans,''--or ``OTMs.'' Of the approximately 100,000 OTMs
apprehended, 3,000 to 4,000 were from so-called ``countries of
interest'' like Somalia, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, which have
produced or been associated with terrorist cells.
A few of the individuals who have been apprehended at our southern
border were known to have connections to terrorists or were entering
the U.S. under highly suspicious circumstances. For example, one
Lebanese national, who had paid a smuggler to transport him across the
U.S.-Mexican border in 2001, was recently convicted of holding a
fundraiser in his Michigan home for the Hizbollah terrorist group.
Last July, a Pakistani woman swam across the Rio Grande River from
Mexico to Texas. She was detained when she tried to board a plane to
New York with $6,000 in cash and a severely altered South African
passport. Her husband's name was found to be on a terrorism watch list.
She was convicted on immigration charges and deported in December 2004.
Since September 11, 2001, progress has been made in deterring cross-
border threats, while maintaining the efficient movement of people and
cargo across North America. The United States signed ``Smart Border''
agreements with Canada and Mexico, in December 2001 and March 2002,
respectively. These agreements seek to improve pre-screening of
immigrants, refugees, and cargo. They include new documentation
requirements and provisions for adding inspectors and updating border
security technologies. We also have established Integrated Border
Enforcement Teams to coordinate law enforcement efforts with Canada.
Additional initiatives are included in the Presidents' Security and
Prosperity Partnership of North America Agreement announced on March
23, 2005, at the North American Summit meeting in Texas. But,
additional work lies ahead. We must sustain attention and
accountability at home for enhancing our Continental security, and
continue to press our neighbors for improved cooperation in combating
security threats.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 853
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 ``North American Cooperative
Security Act''.
SEC. 2. NORTH AMERICAN SECURITY INITIATIVE.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of State shall enhance the
mutual security and safety of the United States, Canada, and
Mexico by providing a framework for better management,
communication, and coordination between the Governments of
North America.
(b) Responsibilities.--In implementing the provisions of
this Act, the Secretary of State shall carry out all of the
activities described in this Act.
SEC. 3. IMPROVING THE EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION ON NORTH
AMERICAN SECURITY.
(a) Report.--Not later than 6 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, and every 6 months thereafter, the
Secretary of State, in coordination with the Secretary of
Homeland Security and the Secretary of Defense, each
responsible for their pertinent areas of jurisdiction, shall
submit a joint report, to the congressional committees listed
under subsection (b) that contains a description of the
efforts to carry out this section and sections 4 through 7.
(b) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.--The
congressional committees listed under this subsection are--
(1) the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate;
(2) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs of the Senate;
(3) the Committee on International Relations of the House
of Representatives;
(4) the Select Committee on Homeland Security of the House
of Representatives;
(5) the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate; and
(6) the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives.
(c) Contents.--A report submitted under subsection (a)
shall contain a description of each of the following:
(1) Security and the movement of goods.--The progress of
the development and expansion of public-private partnerships
to secure the supply chain of goods coming into North America
and expedite the movement of low-risk goods, including the
status of--
(A) the Fast and Secure Trade program (referred to in this
subsection as ``FAST'') at major crossings, and the progress
made in implementing the Fast and Secure Trade program at all
remaining commercial crossings between Canada and the United
States;
(B) marketing programs to promote enrollment in FAST;
(C) finding ways and means of increasing participation in
FAST; and
(D) the implementation of FAST at the international border
between Mexico and the United States.
(2) Cargo security and movement of goods.--The progress
made in developing and implementing a North American cargo
security strategy that creates a common security perimeter by
enhancing technical assistance for programs and systems to
support advance reporting and risk management of cargo data,
improved integrity measures through automated collection of
fees, and advance technology to rapidly screen cargo.
(3) Border wait times.--The progress made by the Secretary
of State, in consultation with national, provincial, and
municipal governments, to--
(A) reduce waiting times at international border crossings
through low-risk land ports of entry facilitating programs,
including the status of the Secure Electronic Network for
Travelers Rapid Inspection program (referred to in this
section as ``SENTRI'') and the NEXUS program--
(B) measure and report wait times for commercial and non-
commercial traffic at the land ports, and establish
compatible performance standards for operating under normal
security alert conditions; and
(C) identify, develop, and deploy new technologies to--
(i) further advance the shared security goals of Canada,
Mexico, and the United States; and
(ii) promote the legitimate flow of both people and goods
across international borders.
[[Page S4025]]
(4) Border infrastructure.--Efforts to pursue joint
investments in and protection of border infrastructure,
including--
(A) priority ports of entry;
(B) plans to expand dedicated lanes and approaches and
improve border infrastructure in order to meet the objectives
of FAST;
(C) the development of a strategic plan for expanding the
number of dedicated FAST lanes at major crossings at the
international border between Mexico and the United States;
and
(D) an inventory of border transportation infrastructure in
major transportation corridors.
(5) Security clearances and document integrity.--The
development of more common or otherwise equivalent
enrollment, security, technical, and biometric standards for
the issuance, authentication, validation, and repudiation of
secure documents, including--
(A) technical and biometric standards based on best
practices and consistent with international standards for the
issuance, authentication, validation, and repudiation of
travel documents, including--
(i) passports;
(ii) visas; and
(iii) permanent resident cards;
(B) working with the Governments of Canada and Mexico to
encourage foreign governments to enact laws controlling alien
smuggling and trafficking, use, and manufacture of fraudulent
travel documents and information sharing;
(C) applying the necessary pressures and support to ensure
that other countries meet proper travel document standards
and are equally committed to travel document verification
before transit to other countries, including the United
States; and
(D) providing technical assistance for the development and
maintenance of a national database built upon identified best
practices for biometrics associated with visa and travel
documents.
(6) Immigration and visa management.--The progress on
efforts to share information on high-risk individuals that
might attempt to travel to Canada, Mexico, or the United
States, including--
(A) immigration lookout data on high risk individuals by
implementing the Statement of Mutual Understanding on
Information Sharing, which was signed by Canada and the
United States in February 2003; and
(B) immigration fraud trends and analysis, including asylum
and document fraud.
(7) Visa policy coordination and immigration security.--The
progress made by the Governments of Canada, Mexico, and the
United States to enhance North American security by
cooperating on visa policy and identifying best practices
regarding immigration security, including--
(A) enhancing consultation among visa issuing officials at
consulates or embassies of Canada, Mexico, and the United
States throughout the world to share information, trends, and
best practices on visa flows;
(B) comparing the procedures and policies of Canada and the
United States related to visitor visa processing, including--
(i) application process;
(ii) interview policy;
(iii) general screening procedures;
(iv) visa validity;
(v) quality control measures; and
(vi) access to appeal or review;
(C) converging the list of ``visa waiver'' countries;
(D) providing technical assistance for the development and
maintenance of a national database built upon identified best
practices for biometrics associated with immigration
violators;
(E) developing and implementing a North American
immigration security strategy that works toward the
development of a common security perimeter by enhancing
technical assistance for programs and systems to support
advance automated reporting and risk targeting of
international passengers;
(F) the progress made toward sharing information on lost
and stolen passports on a real-time basis among immigration
or law enforcement officials of the Governments of Canada,
Mexico, and the United States; and
(G) the progress made by the Department of State in
collecting 10 fingerprints from all visa applicants.
(8) North american visitor overstay program.--The progress
made to implement parallel entry-exit tracking systems
between Canada and the United States--
(A) to share information on third country nationals who
have overstayed in either country; and
(B) that respect the privacy laws of each country.
(9) Terrorist watch lists.--The progress made to enhance
capacity of the United States to combat terrorism through the
coordination of counterterrorism efforts, including--
(A) bilateral agreements between Canada and the United
States and between Mexico and the United States to govern the
sharing of terrorist watch list data and to comprehensively
enumerate the uses of such data by the governments of each
country;
(B) establishing appropriate linkages between Canada,
Mexico, and the United States Terrorist Screening Center; and
(C) working to explore with foreign governments the
establishment of a multilateral watch list mechanism that
would facilitate direct coordination between the country that
identifies an individual as an individual included on a watch
list, and the country that owns such list, including
procedures that satisfy the security concerns and are
consistent with the privacy and other laws of each
participating country.
(10) Money laundering, income tax evasion, currency
smuggling, and alien smuggling.--The progress made to improve
information sharing and law enforcement cooperation in
organized crime, including--
(A) information sharing and law enforcement cooperation,
especially in areas of currency smuggling, money laundering,
alien smuggling and trafficking in alcohol, firearms, and
explosives;
(B) implementing the Canada-United States Firearms
Trafficking Action Plan;
(C) the feasibility of formulating a firearms trafficking
action plan between Mexico and the United States;
(D) developing a joint threat assessment on organized crime
between Canada and the United States;
(E) the feasibility of formulating a joint threat
assessment on organized crime between Mexico and the United
States;
(F) developing mechanisms to exchange information on
findings, seizures, and capture of individuals transporting
undeclared currency; and
(G) developing and implementing a plan to combat the
transnational threat of illegal drug trafficking.
(11) Counterterrorism programs.--Enhancements to
counterterrorism coordination, including--
(A) reviewing existing counterterrorism efforts and
coordination to maximize effectiveness; and
(B) identifying best practices regarding the sharing of
information and intelligence.
(12) Law enforcement cooperation.--The enhancement of law
enforcement cooperation through enhanced technical assistance
for the development and maintenance of a national database
built upon identified best practices for biometrics
associated with known and suspected criminals or terrorists,
including--
(A) exploring the formation of law enforcement teams that
include personnel from the United States and Mexico, and
appropriate procedures from such teams; and
(B) assessing the threat and risk of the St. Lawrence
Seaway System and the Great Lakes and developing appropriate
marine enforcement programs based on the integrated border
team framework.
(13) Biosecurity cooperation.--The progress made to
increase and promote cooperation in the analysis and
assessments of intentional threats to biosecurity, including
naturally occurring threats, as well as in the United States
prevention and response capacity and plans to respond to
these threats, including--
(A) mapping relationships among key regulatory and border
officials to ensure effective cooperation in planning and
responding to a biosecurity threat; and
(B) working jointly in support of the Public Health
Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of
2002 (Public Law 107-188; 116 Stat. 594) to develop a regime
that employs a risk management approach to the movement of
foods and food products in our countries and across our
shared border, and which builds upon and harmonizes with
customs processes.
(14) Protection against nuclear and radiological threats.--
The progress made to increase cooperation to prevent nuclear
and radiological smuggling, including--
(A) identifying opportunities to increase cooperation to
prevent smuggling of nuclear or radioactive materials,
including improving export controls for all materials
identified on the high-risk sources list maintained by the
International Atomic Energy Agency;
(B) working collectively with other countries to install
radiation detection equipment at foreign land crossings to
examine cargo destined for North America;
(C) enhancing border controls through effective technical
cooperation and other forms of cooperation to--
(i) prevent the smuggling of radiological materials; and
(ii) examine related next-generation equipment;
(D) enhancing physical protection of nuclear facilities in
North America through effective technical and other forms of
cooperation; and
(E) developing a program on physical protection for Mexican
nuclear installations that increases the level of the
``nuclear security culture'' of those responsible for the
physical protection of nuclear installations and transport of
nuclear material.
(15) Emergency management cooperation.--The progress made
regarding the appropriate coordination of our systems and
planning and operational standards for emergency management,
including the development of an interoperable communications
system or the appropriate coordination of existing systems
for Canada, Mexico, and the United States for cross-border
incident management.
(16) Cooperative energy policy.--The progress of efforts
to--
(A) increase reliable energy supplies for the region's
needs and development;
(B) streamline and update regulations concerning energy;
(C) promote energy efficiency, conservation, and
technologies;
(D) work with the Governments of Canada and Mexico to
develop a North American energy alliance to bolster our
collective security by increased reliance on North American
energy sources; and
[[Page S4026]]
(E) work with the Government of Mexico to--
(i) increase Mexico's crude oil and natural gas production
by obtaining the technology and financial resources needed by
Mexico for energy sector development;
(ii) attract sufficient private direct investment in the
upstream sector, within its constitutional framework, to
foster the development of additional crude oil and natural
gas production; and
(iii) attract the private direct investment in the
downstream sector, within its domestic legal framework, to
foster the development of additional domestic refining
capacity to reduce costs for consumers and to move Mexico
toward self-sufficiency in meeting its domestic energy needs.
(17) Feasibility of common external tariff and development
assistance to the economy of mexico.--The progress of efforts
to determine the feasibility of--
(A) harmonizing external tariffs on a sector-by-sector
basis to the lowest prevailing rate consistent with
multilateral obligations, with the goal of creating a long-
term common external tariff;
(B) accelerating and expanding the implementation of
existing ``smart border'' actions plans to facilitate intra-
North American travel and commerce;
(C) working with Mexican authorities to devise a set of
policies designed to stimulate the Mexican economy that--
(i) attracts investment;
(ii) stimulates growth; and
(iii) commands broad public support and provides for
Mexicans to find jobs in Mexico; and
(D) working to support the development of Mexican
industries, job growth, and appropriate improvements to
social services.
SEC. 4. INFORMATION SHARING AGREEMENTS.
The Secretary of State, in coordination with the Secretary
of Homeland Security and the Government of Mexico, is
authorized to negotiate an agreement with Mexico to--
(1) cooperate in impeding the ability of third country
nationals from using Mexico as a transit corridor for
unauthorized entry into the United States; and
(2) provide technical assistance to support stronger
immigration control at the border with Mexico.
SEC. 5. IMPROVING THE SECURITY OF MEXICO'S SOUTHERN BORDER.
(a) Technical Assistance.--The Secretary of State, in
coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, the
Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs, and the Government of
Mexico, shall establish a program to--
(1) assess the specific needs of Guatemala and Belize in
maintaining the security of the borders of such countries;
(2) use the assessment made under paragraph (1) to
determine the financial and technical support needed by
Guatemala and Belize from Canada, Mexico, and the United
States to meet such needs;
(3) provide technical assistance to Guatemala and Belize to
secure issuance of passports and travel documents by such
countries; and
(4) encourage Guatemala and Belize to--
(A) control alien smuggling and trafficking;
(B) prevent the use and manufacture of fraudulent travel
documents; and
(C) share relevant information with Mexico, Canada, and the
United States.
(b) Immigration.--The Secretary of Homeland Security, in
consultation with the Secretary of State and appropriate
officials of the Governments of Guatemala and Belize, shall
provide robust law enforcement assistance to Guatemala and
Belize that specifically addresses migratory issues to
increase the ability of the Government of Guatemala to
dismantle human smuggling organizations and gain tighter
control over the border.
(c) Border Security Between Mexico and Guatemala or
Belize.--The Secretary of State, in consultation with the
Secretary of Homeland Security, the Government of Mexico, and
appropriate officials of the Governments of Guatemala,
Belize, and neighboring contiguous countries, shall establish
a program to provide needed equipment, technical assistance,
and vehicles to manage, regulate, and patrol the
international border between Mexico and Guatemala and between
Mexico and Belize.
(d) Tracking Central American Gangs.--The Secretary of
State, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland
Security, the Director of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, the Government of Mexico, and appropriate
officials of the Governments of Guatemala, Belize, and other
Central American countries, shall--
(1) assess the direct and indirect impact on the United
States and Central America on deporting violent criminal
aliens;
(2) establish a program and database to track Central
American gang activities, focusing on the identification of
returning criminal deportees;
(3) devise an agreed-upon mechanism for notification
applied prior to deportation and for support for
reintegration of these deportees; and
(4) devise an agreement to share all relevant information
with the appropriate agencies of Mexico and other Central
American countries.
(e) Aerial Interdiction of Narcotrafficking Through Central
America and Panama.--The Secretary of State shall examine the
feasibility of entering into an agreement with Panama and the
other countries of Central America regarding the aerial
interdiction program commonly known as ``Airbridge Denial''.
SEC. 6. NORTH AMERICAN DEFENSE INSTITUTIONS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense, in consultation
with the Secretary of State, shall examine the feasibility
of--
(1) strengthening institutions for consultations on defense
issues among the United States, Mexico, and Canada,
specifically through--
(A) the Joint Interagency Task Force South;
(B) the Permanent Joint Board on Defense;
(C) joint-staff talks; and
(D) senior Army border talks;
(2) proposing mechanisms to reach agreements with the
Government of Canada or Mexico regarding contingency plans
for responding to threats along the international borders of
the United States;
(3) in consultation with the Governments of Canada and
Mexico, and with input from the United States Northern
Command--
(A) developing bilateral and trilateral capabilities and
coordination mechanisms to address common threats along
shared borders; and
(B) work together to clearly define the term ``threats'' to
only encompass military or defense-related threats, rather
than other threats to homeland security;
(4) offering technical support to willing regional parties
to maintain air space security, including consultation
mechanisms with the Joint Interagency Task Force and the
North American Aerospace Defense Command, to improve security
in the North American and Central American space; and
(5) proposing mechanisms to strengthen communication
information and intelligence sharing on defense issues among
the United States, Mexico, and Canada.
SEC. 7. REPATRIATION.
The Secretary of State shall--
(1) apply the necessary pressure on, and negotiate with,
other countries to accept the International Civil Aviation
Organization Annex 9 one-time travel document provided by the
United States in lieu of official travel documents if an
inadmissible immigrant has not presented official travel
documents or has presented fraudulent ones; and
(2) provide the proper support and international pressure
necessary to facilitate the removal of inadmissible aliens
from the United States and their repatriation in, or
reinstatement by, a responsible country, with a focus on
criminal aliens that are deemed particularly dangerous or
potential terrorists.
______
By Mr. FEINGOLD:
S. 854: A bill to require labeling of raw agricultural forms of
ginseng, including the country of harvest, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I would like to discuss legislation I am
introducing that would protect ginseng farmers and consumers by
ensuring that ginseng is labeled accurately with where the root was
harvested. The ``Ginseng Harvest Labeling Act of 2005'' is similar to
bills that I introduced in previous Congresses and developed after
hearing suggestions from ginseng growers and the Ginseng Board of
Wisconsin.
I would like to take the opportunity to discuss American ginseng and
the problems facing Wisconsin's ginseng growers so that my colleagues
understand the need for this legislation. Chinese and Native American
cultures have used ginseng for thousands of years for herbal and
medicinal purposes. As a dietary supplement, American ginseng is widely
touted for its ability to improve energy and vitality, particularly in
fighting fatigue or stress.
In the U.S., ginseng is experiencing increasing popularity as a
dietary supplement, and I am proud to say that my home State of
Wisconsin is playing a central role in ginseng's resurgence. Wisconsin
produces 97 percent of the ginseng grown in the United States, and 85
percent of the country's ginseng is grown in just one Wisconsin county,
Marathon County. Ginseng is also grown in a number of other States such
as Maine, Maryland, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina,
and West Virginia.
For Wisconsin, ginseng has been an economic boon. Wisconsin ginseng
commands a premium price in world markets because it is of the highest
quality and because it has a low pesticide and chemical content. In
2002, U.S. exports of ginseng totaled nearly $45 million, much of which
was grown in Wisconsin. With a huge market for this high-quality
ginseng overseas, and growing popularity for the ancient root here at
home, Wisconsin's ginseng industry should have a prosperous future
ahead.
Unfortunately, the outlook for ginseng farmers is marred by a serious
[[Page S4027]]
problem--smuggled and mislabeled ginseng. Wisconsin ginseng is
considered so superior to ginseng grown abroad that smugglers will go
to great lengths to label ginseng grown in Canada or Asia as
``Wisconsin-grown.''
Here's how the switch takes place: Wisconsin ginseng is shipped to
China to be sorted into various grades. While the sorting process is
itself a legitimate part of distributing ginseng, smugglers too often
use it as a ruse to switch Wisconsin ginseng with Asian- or Canadian-
grown ginseng considered inferior by consumers. The lower quality
ginseng is then shipped back to the U.S. for sale to American consumers
who think they are buying the Wisconsin-grown product.
There is good reason consumers should want to know that the ginseng
they buy is American-grown considering that the only accurate way of
testing ginseng to determine where it was grown is to test for
pesticides that are banned in the United States. The Ginseng Board of
Wisconsin has been testing some ginseng found on store shelves, and in
many of the products, residues of chemicals such as DDT, lead, arsenic,
and quintozine (PCNB) have been detected. Since the majority of ginseng
sold in the U.S. originates from countries with less stringent
pesticide standards, it is vitally important that consumers know which
ginseng is really grown in the U.S.
To capitalize on their product's preeminence, the Ginseng Board of
Wisconsin has developed a voluntary labeling program, stating that the
ginseng is ``Grown in Wisconsin, U.S.A.'' However, Wisconsin ginseng is
so valuable that counterfeit labels and ginseng smuggling have become
widespread around the world. As a result, consumers have no way of
knowing the most basic information about the ginseng they purchase--
where it was grown, what quality or grade it is, or whether it contains
dangerous pesticides.
My legislation, the Ginseng Harvest Labeling Act of 2005, proposes
some common sense steps to address some of the challenges facing the
ginseng industry. My legislation requires that ginseng, as a raw
agricultural commodity, be sold at retail with a label clearly
indicating the country that the ginseng was harvested in. ``Harvest''
is important because some Canadian and Chinese growers have ginseng
plants that originated in the U.S., but because these plants were
cultivated in a foreign country, they may have been treated with
chemicals not allowed for use in the U.S. This label would also allow
buyers of ginseng to more easily prevent foreign companies from mixing
foreign-produced ginseng with ginseng harvested in the U.S. The country
of harvest labeling is a simple but effective way to enable consumers
to make an informed decision.
These common sense reforms would give ginseng growers the support
they deserve and help consumers make informed choices about the ginseng
that they consume. We must ensure that when ginseng consumers reach for
a high-quality ginseng product--such as Wisconsin-grown ginseng--they
are getting the real thing, not a knock-off.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of my bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 854
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 ``Ginseng Harvest Labeling Act
of 2005 ''.
SEC. 2. DISCLOSURE OF COUNTRY OF HARVEST.
The Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621 et
seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Subtitle E--Ginseng
``SEC. 291. DISCLOSURE OF COUNTRY OF HARVEST.
``(a) Definition of Ginseng.--In this section, the term
`ginseng' means an herb or herbal ingredient that--
``(1) is derived from a plant classified within the genus
Panax; and
``(2) is offered for sale as a raw agricultural commodity
in any form intended to be used in or as a food or dietary
supplement under the name of `ginseng'.
``(b) Disclosure.--
``(1) In general.--A person that offers ginseng for sale as
a raw agricultural commodity shall disclose to potential
purchasers the country of harvest of the ginseng.
``(2) Importation.--A person that imports ginseng into the
United States shall disclose the country of harvest of the
ginseng at the point of entry of the United States, in
accordance with section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19
U.S.C. 1304).
``(c) Manner of Disclosure.--
``(1) In general.--The disclosure required by subsection
(b) shall be provided to potential purchasers by means of a
label, stamp, mark, placard, or other clear and visible sign
on the ginseng or on the package, display, holding unit, or
bin containing the ginseng.
``(2) Retailers.--A retailer of ginseng shall--
``(A) retain disclosure provided under subsection (b); and
``(B) provide disclosure to a retail purchaser of the raw
agricultural commodity.
``(3) Regulations.--The Secretary of Agriculture shall by
regulation prescribe with specificity the manner in which
disclosure shall be made in transactions at wholesale or
retail (including transactions by mail, telephone, or
Internet or in retail stores).
``(d) Failure to Disclose.--The Secretary of Agriculture
may impose on a person that fails to comply with subsection
(b) a civil penalty of not more than--
``(1) $1,000 for the first day on which the failure to
disclose occurs; and
``(2) $250 for each day on which the failure to disclose
continues.''.
SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Act and the amendments made by this Act take effect on
the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of this
Act.
______
By Ms. COLLINS:
S. 855. A bill to improve the security of the Nation's ports by
providing Federal grants to support Area Maritime Transportation
Security Plans and to address vulnerabilities in port areas identified
in approved vulnerability assessments or by the Secretary of Homeland
Security; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Port
Security Grants Act of 2005. This legislation would establish a
dedicated grant program within the Department of Homeland Security to
enhance terrorism prevention and response efforts at our ports. It
would provide the resources needed to better protect the American
people from attack through these vital yet still extremely vulnerable
centers of our economy and points of entry.
I am very pleased that my partner in this effort, Representative Jane
Harman, today is introducing the same legislation in the House of
Representatives. Congresswoman Harman knows well the vulnerability of
our Nation's ports. Indeed, earlier this year, I accompanied her to the
ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles to witness first hand the
incredible volume of activity that occurs at these thriving economic
centers--and the incredible security challenges that they pose.
Congresswoman Harman's dedication to the security of our ports and our
Nation as a whole makes her one of Congress' acknowledged leaders on
homeland security matters. I am pleased that we have been able to join
forces on this important initiative.
Funding to date to address security needs at our ports has been
woefully inadequate. The Coast Guard estimates that implementing the
provisions of the Maritime Transportation Security Act and similar
requirements for international port security will cost $7.3 billion
over the next decade. Yet, since MTSA was enacted, only the fiscal year
2005 budget request contained a line item for this crucial need, and
that at a mere $46 million. Although the Administration's fiscal year
2006 budget request includes $600 million for infrastructure
protection, it does not contain a dedicated line item for port security
grant funding.
As a point of comparison, the Transportation Security
Administration's fiscal year 2006 budget dedicates $4.9 billion for
aviation security. As Dr. Stephen Flynn of the Council on Foreign
Relations testified at a Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Committee hearing in January, port security has received approximately
5 cents on the dollar--with the remaining 95 cents going to aviation
security.
The legislation we propose will break the hand-to-mouth cycle that
ports have faced for years. It does the following: First, it creates a
competitive grant program administered by the Office of State and Local
Government Coordination and Preparedness at the Department of Homeland
Security. This is the same office that administers the State Grant and
Urban Area Security Initiative programs.
Second, under our bill, grant funds will be used to address port
security
[[Page S4028]]
vulnerabilities identified through Area Maritime Transportation
Security Plans, currently required by Federal statute, or through other
DDS-sanctioned vulnerability assessments. In other words, grant dollars
must be spent consistent with an established plan, not through a
process divorced from efforts already underway.
Authorized uses of these grant funds include: acquiring, operating,
and maintaining equipment that contributes to the overall security of
the port area; conducting port-wide exercises to strengthen emergency
preparedness; developing joint harbor operations centers to focus
resources on port area security; implementing Area Maritime
Transportation Security Plans; and covering the costs of additional
security personnel during times of heightened alert levels.
Third, we require DHS to prioritize efforts to promote coordination
among port stakeholders and integration of port-wide security, as well
as information and intelligence sharing among first responders and
federal, state, and local officials.
Fourth, we authorize funding for port security grants at $400 million
per year for fiscal years 2007 through 2012. This steady, dedicated
stream of funding would represent a substantial down payment on the
billions of dollars of port security needs identified by the Coast
Guard. It is also the amount the American Association of Ports
Authorities believes needs to be dedicated annually to port security in
order to begin addressing serious vulnerabilities.
Under our bill, port security dollars will originate from duties
collected by Customs and Border Protection, and--with exceptions made
for small or extraordinary projects--recipients will be required to
contribute 25 percent of the cost. This cost-sharing requirement has
precedents in other transportation funding and will ensure the
development of true partnerships between the federal government and
grant recipients.
Fifth, our legislation includes strong accountability measures--
including audits and reporting requirements--to ensure the grant funds
awarded under the bill are properly accounted for and spent as
intended.
This legislation does call for a major commitment of resources. I am
confident, however, that my colleagues recognize, as I do, that this
commitment is fully proportional to what is at stake.
Approximately 95 percent of our Nation's trade, worth nearly $1
trillion, enters through one of our 361 seaports on board some 8,555
foreign vessels, which make more than 55,000 port calls per year.
Clearly, an attack on the U.S. maritime transportation system could
devastate our economy.
The potential for this devastation was amply demonstrated by the 2002
West Coast dock labor dispute, which cost our economy an estimated $1
billion per day, affected operations in 29 West Coast ports, and harmed
businesses throughout the country. An unanticipated and violent act
against a cargo port could result in economic costs that are
incalculable, not to mention a potential loss of life that would be
horrifying.
Much of the discussion regarding port security revolves around the
security of inbound containers. At his confirmation hearing, Homeland
Security Secretary Chertoff stated that his major concern is the
introduction into the United States of chemical, biological,
radiological, nuclear, or explosive threats via a shipping container.
Secretary Chertoff is absolutely correct in identifying this as a major
vulnerability.
But there are many other threats against ports. Just last month, the
State Department issued a warning concerning information that
terrorists may attempt to mount a maritime attack using speedboats
against a Western ship, possibly in East Africa. This isn't the first
instance of this type of attack--the USS Cole in 2000 and the French
tanker Limberg in 2002 were both attacked by this method. The repeated
use of suicide bombers and truck bombs around the world also raises
great concern about our ports, and the critical infrastructure and
population centers located around them.
Coming from a State with a strong maritime tradition and vital
maritime industry, I am keenly aware of what is at stake. Maine has
three international cargo ports. Each is a vital and multi-faceted part
of our economy: State, regional, and even national.
The Port of Portland, for example, is the largest port by tonnage in
New England and the largest oil port on the East Coast. Ninety percent
of its foreign cargo was crude oil. In addition, Portland has a booming
cruise-ship industry, a vigorous fishing fleet, and an international
ferry terminal. This wide range of activity provides economic
opportunity and also provides terrorism vulnerability.
It is not my intention to suggest that our security agencies and
ports are at a standstill. Indeed, much has been done to improve port
security. The Coast Guard's Sea Marshals program places armed units on
ships at sea to ensure their safe arrival and departure. The Container
Security Initiative Bureau of Customs and Border Protection works with
foreign governments to target high-risk cargo and to prevent terrorists
from exploiting cargo containers. Detailed information is now required
on each ship and its passengers, crew, and cargo. To upgrade security
at international ports, the United States worked with the International
Maritime Organization for the adoption of the International Ship and
Port Security Code, the first multilateral port security standard ever
created.
It is, however, my intention to assert that we must do more to
improve port security on the front lines--the ports that line the
harbor of cities and towns along our vast coastlines, the Great Lakes,
our immense inland river network and in Alaska and Hawaii.
We observed this week two anniversaries that bear upon this issue.
Monday was Patriot's Day, the 230th anniversary of the ride of Paul
Revere. While I am not suggesting ``one if by land, two if by sea'' be
adopted as a funding formula for homeland security, that famous phrase
does remind us of the bond between security and transportation that has
existed since our nation's very first days.
On a far more somber note, Tuesday was the 10th anniversary of
Oklahoma City. As we paused to reflect on that horrific attack, we once
again were confronted with the harsh reality that terrorists--whether
foreign or domestic--will strike wherever they see vulnerability.
Our seaports are vulnerable. I urge my colleagues to join me in
cosponsoring this legislation that will help deny terrorists an
opportunity to strike at a vulnerable target.
______
By Mr. VOINOVICH (for himself and Mr. Inhofe):
S. 858. A bill to reauthorize Nuclear Regulatory Commission user
fees, and or other purposes; to the Committee on Environmental and
Public Works.
Mr. VOINOVICH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text
of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 858
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Nuclear
Fees Reauthorization Act of 2005''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
TITLE I--NRC USER FEES
Sec. 101. Nuclear Regulatory Commission user fees and annual charges.
TITLE II--NRC REFORM
Sec. 201. Treatment of nuclear reactor financial obligations.
Sec. 202. Period of combined license.
Sec. 203. Elimination of NRC antitrust reviews.
Sec. 204. Scope of environmental review.
Sec. 205. Medical isotope production.
Sec. 206. Cost recovery from government agencies.
Sec. 207. Conflicts of interest relating to contracts and other
arrangements.
Sec. 208. Hearing procedures.
Sec. 209. Authorization of appropriations.
TITLE III--NRC HUMAN CAPITAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 301. Provision of support to university nuclear safety, security,
and environmental protection programs.
Sec. 302. Promotional items.
Sec. 303. Expenses authorized to be paid by the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
[[Page S4029]]
Sec. 304. Nuclear Regulatory Commission scholarship and fellowship
program.
Sec. 305. Partnership program with institutions of higher education.
Sec. 306. Elimination of pension offset for certain rehired Federal
retirees.
Sec. 307. Authorization of appropriations.
TITLE I--NRC USER FEES
SEC. 101. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION USER FEES AND ANNUAL
CHARGES.
(a) In General.--Section 6101 of the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 2214) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Except as provided in
paragraph (3), the'' and inserting ``The''; and
(B) by striking paragraph (3); and
(2) in subsection (c)(2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) in clause (i), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(ii) in clause (ii), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following:
``(iii) amounts appropriated to the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission for the fiscal year for implementation of section
3116 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (118 Stat. 2162; 50 U.S.C. 2601
note)''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B)(v), by inserting ``and each fiscal
year thereafter'' after ``2005''.
(b) Nuclear Regulatory Commission Annual Charges.--Section
7601 of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of
1985 (42 U.S.C. 2213) is repealed.
TITLE II--NRC REFORM
SEC. 201. TREATMENT OF NUCLEAR REACTOR FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS.
Section 523 of title 11, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(f) Treatment of Nuclear Reactor Financial Obligations.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of this title--
``(1) any funds or other assets held by a licensee or
former licensee of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or by
any other person, to satisfy the responsibility of the
licensee, former licensee, or any other person to comply with
a regulation or order of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
governing the decontamination and decommissioning of a
nuclear power reactor licensed under section 103 or 104 b. of
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2133, 2134(b)) shall
not be used to satisfy the claim of any creditor in any
proceeding under this title, other than a claim resulting
from an activity undertaken to satisfy that responsibility,
until the decontamination and decommissioning of the nuclear
power reactor is completed to the satisfaction of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission;
``(2) obligations of licensees, former licensees, or any
other person to use funds or other assets to satisfy a
responsibility described in paragraph (1) may not be
rejected, avoided, or discharged in any proceeding under this
title or in any liquidation, reorganization, receivership, or
other insolvency proceeding under Federal or State law; and
``(3) private insurance premiums and standard deferred
premiums held and maintained in accordance with section 170
b. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2210(b)) shall
not be used to satisfy the claim of any creditor in any
proceeding under this title, until the indemnification
agreement executed in accordance with section 170 c. of that
Act (42 U.S.C. 2210(c)) is terminated.''.
SEC. 202. PERIOD OF COMBINED LICENSE.
Section 103 c. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2133(c)) is amended by striking ``forty years'' and inserting
``40 years from the authorization to commence operations''.
SEC. 203. ELIMINATION OF NRC ANTITRUST REVIEWS.
Section 105 c. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2135(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(9) Applicability.--This subsection does not apply to an
application for a license to construct or operate a
utilization facility or production facility under section 103
or 104 b., if the application is filed on or after, or is
pending on, the date of enactment of this paragraph.''.
SEC. 204. SCOPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW.
(a) In General.--Chapter 10 of title I of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2131 et seq.) is amended--
(1) by redesignating sections 110 and 111 as section 111
and 112, respectively; and
(2) by inserting after section 109 the following:
``SEC. 110. SCOPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW.
``In conducting any environmental review (including any
activity conducted under section 102 of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332)) in
connection with an application for a license or a renewed
license under this chapter, the Commission shall not give any
consideration to the need for, or any alternative to, the
facility to be licensed.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) The table of contents of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954
(42 U.S.C. prec. 2011) is amended by striking the item
relating to section 110 and inserting the following:
``Sec. 110. Scope of environmental review.
``Sec. 111. Exclusions.
``Sec. 112. Licensing by Nuclear Regulatory Commission of distribution
of certain materials by Department of Energy.'';
(2) Section 57 b. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42
U.S.C. 2077(b)) is amended in the last sentence by striking
``section 111 b.'' and inserting ``section 112 b.''.
(3) Section 131 a.(2)(C) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954
(42 U.S.C 2160(a)(2)(C), by striking ``section 111 b.'' and
inserting ``section 112 b.''.
(4) Section 202 of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974
(42 U.S.C. 5842) is amended--
(A) by striking ``section 110 a.'' and inserting ``section
111 a.''; and
(B) by striking ``section 110 b.'' and inserting ``section
111 b.''.
SEC. 205. MEDICAL ISOTOPE PRODUCTION.
Section 134 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2160d) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections a. and b. as subsections
b. and a., respectively, and by moving subsection b. (as so
redesignated) to the end of the section;
(2) in subsection b. (as so redesignated), by striking ``b.
The Commission'' and inserting ``b. Restrictions.--Except as
provided in subsection c., the Commission''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``c. Medical Isotope Production.--
``(1) Definitions.--In this subsection:
``(A) Medical isotope.--The term `medical isotope' includes
Molybdenum 99, Iodine 131, Xenon 133, and other radioactive
materials used to produce a radiopharmaceutical for
diagnostic, therapeutic procedures or for research and
development.
``(B) Radiopharmaceutical.--The term `radiopharmaceutical'
means a radioactive isotope that--
``(i) contains byproduct material combined with chemical or
biological material; and
``(ii) is designed to accumulate temporarily in a part of
the body for therapeutic purposes or for enabling the
production of a useful image for use in a diagnosis of a
medical condition.
``(C) Recipient country.--The term `recipient country'
means Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, and the Netherlands.
``(2) Licenses.--The Commission may issue a license
authorizing the export (including shipment to and use at
intermediate and ultimate consignees specified in the
license) to a recipient country of highly enriched uranium
for medical isotope production if, in addition to any other
requirements of this Act (except subsection b.), the
Commission determines that--
``(A) a recipient country that supplies an assurance letter
to the United States Government in connection with the
consideration by the Commission of the export license
application has informed the United States Government that
any intermediate consignees and the ultimate consignee
specified in the application are required to use the highly
enriched uranium solely to produce medical isotopes; and
``(B) the highly enriched uranium for medical isotope
production will be irradiated only in a reactor in a
recipient country that--
``(i) uses an alternative nuclear reactor fuel; or
``(ii) is the subject of an agreement with the United
States Government to convert to an alternative nuclear
reactor fuel when alternative nuclear reactor fuel can be
used in the reactor.
``(3) Review of physical protection requirements.--
``(A) In general.--The Commission shall review the adequacy
of physical protection requirements that, as of the date of
an application under paragraph (2), are applicable to the
transportation and storage of highly enriched uranium for
medical isotope production or control of residual material
after irradiation and extraction of medical isotopes.
``(B) Imposition of additional requirements.--If the
Commission determines that additional physical protection
requirements are necessary (including a limit on the quantity
of highly enriched uranium that may be contained in a single
shipment), the Commission shall impose such requirements as
license conditions or through other appropriate means.
``(4) First report to congress.--
``(A) National academy of sciences study.--The Secretary
shall enter into an arrangement with the National Academy of
Sciences to conduct a study to determine--
``(i) the feasibility of procuring supplies of medical
isotopes from commercial sources that do not use highly
enriched uranium;
``(ii) the current and projected demand and availability of
medical isotopes in regular current domestic use;
``(iii) the progress that is being made by the Department
of Energy and others to eliminate all use of highly enriched
uranium in reactor fuel, reactor targets, and medical isotope
production facilities; and
``(iv) the potential cost differential in medical isotope
production in the reactors and target processing facilities
if the products were derived from production systems that do
not involve fuels and targets with highly enriched uranium.
``(B) Feasibility.--For the purpose of this subsection, the
use of low enriched uranium to produce medical isotopes shall
be determined to be feasible if--
``(i) low enriched uranium targets have been developed and
demonstrated for use in the reactors and target processing
facilities that produce significant quantities of medical
isotopes to serve United States needs for such isotopes;
[[Page S4030]]
``(ii) sufficient quantities of medical isotopes are
available from low enriched uranium targets and fuel to meet
United States domestic needs; and
``(iii) the average anticipated total cost increase from
production of medical isotopes in such facilities without use
of highly enriched uranium is less than 10 percent.
``(C) Report by the secretary.--Not later than 5 years
after the date of enactment of the Nuclear Fees
Reauthorization Act of 2005, the Secretary shall submit to
Congress a report that--
``(i) contains the findings of the National Academy of
Sciences made in the study under subparagraph (A); and
``(ii) discloses the existence of any commitments from
commercial producers to provide domestic requirements for
medical isotopes without use of highly enriched uranium
consistent with the feasibility criteria described in
subparagraph (B) not later than the date that is 4 years
after the date of submission of the report.
``(5) Second report to congress.--If the study of the
National Academy of Sciences determines under paragraph
(4)(A)(i) that the procurement of supplies of medical
isotopes from commercial sources that do not use highly
enriched uranium is feasible, but the Secretary is unable to
report the existence of commitments under paragraph
(4)(C)(ii), not later than the date that is 6 years after the
date of enactment of the Nuclear Fees Reauthorization Act of
2005, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report that
describes options for developing domestic supplies of medical
isotopes in quantities that are adequate to meet domestic
demand without the use of highly enriched uranium consistent
with the cost increase described in paragraph (4)(B)(iii).
``(6) Certification.--At such time as commercial facilities
that do not use highly enriched uranium are capable of
meeting domestic requirements for medical isotopes, within
the cost increase described in paragraph (4)(B)(iii) and
without impairing the reliable supply of medical isotopes for
domestic utilization, the Secretary shall submit to Congress
a certification to that effect.
``(7) Sunset provision.--After the Secretary submits a
certification under paragraph (6), the Commission shall, by
rule, terminate the review of the Commission of export
license applications under this subsection.''.
SEC. 206. COST RECOVERY FROM GOVERNMENT AGENCIES.
Section 161 w. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2201(w)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``for or is issued'' and all that follows
through ``1702'' and inserting ``to the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission for, or is issued by the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, a license or certificate'';
(2) by striking ``483a'' and inserting ``9701''; and
(3) by striking ``, of applicants for, or holders of, such
licenses or certificates''.
SEC. 207. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST RELATING TO CONTRACTS AND
OTHER ARRANGEMENTS.
Section 170A b. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2210a(b)) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as
subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively, and indenting
appropriately;
(2) by striking ``b. The Commission'' and inserting the
following:
``b. Evaluation.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the
Commission''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Nuclear regulatory commission.--Notwithstanding any
conflict of interest, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission may
enter into a contract, agreement, or arrangement with the
Department of Energy or the operator of a Department of
Energy facility, if the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
determines that--
``(A) the conflict of interest cannot be mitigated; and
``(B) adequate justification exists to proceed without
mitigation of the conflict of interest.''.
SEC. 208. HEARING PROCEDURES.
Section 189 a. (1) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42
U.S.C. 2239(a)(1)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(C) Hearings.--A hearing under this section shall be
conducted using informal adjudicatory procedures unless the
Commission determines that formal adjudicatory procedures are
necessary--
``(i) to develop a sufficient record; or
``(ii) to achieve fairness.''.
SEC. 209. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this
title and the amendments made by this title such sums as are
necessary for fiscal year 2006 and each subsequent fiscal
year.
TITLE III--NRC HUMAN CAPITAL PROVISIONS
SEC. 301. PROVISION OF SUPPORT TO UNIVERSITY NUCLEAR SAFETY,
SECURITY, AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
PROGRAMS.
Section 31 b. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2051(b)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``b. The Commission is further authorized
to make'' and inserting the following:
``b. Grants and Contributions.--The Commission is
authorized--
``(1) to make'';
(2) in paragraph (1) (as designated by paragraph (1)) by
striking the period at the end and inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) to provide grants, loans, cooperative agreements,
contracts, and equipment to institutions of higher education
(as defined in section 102 of the Higher Education Act of
1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002)) to support courses, studies, training,
curricula, and disciplines pertaining to nuclear safety,
security, or environmental protection, or any other field
that the Commission determines to be critical to the
regulatory mission of the Commission.''.
SEC. 302. PROMOTIONAL ITEMS.
Chapter 14 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2201
et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 170C. PROMOTIONAL ITEMS.
``The Commission may purchase promotional items of nominal
value for use in the recruitment of individuals for
employment.''.
SEC. 303. EXPENSES AUTHORIZED TO BE PAID BY THE NUCLEAR
REGULATORY COMMISSION.
Chapter 14 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2201
et seq.) (as amended by section 302) is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``SEC. 170D. EXPENSES AUTHORIZED TO BE PAID BY THE
COMMISSION.
``The Commission may--
``(1) pay transportation, lodging, and subsistence expenses
of employees who--
``(A) assist scientific, professional, administrative, or
technical employees of the Commission; and
``(B) are students in good standing at an institution of
higher education (as defined in section 102 of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002)) pursuing courses
related to the field in which the students are employed by
the Commission; and
``(2) pay the costs of health and medical services
furnished, pursuant to an agreement between the Commission
and the Department of State, to employees of the Commission
and dependents of the employees serving in foreign
countries.''.
SEC. 304. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION SCHOLARSHIP AND
FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM.
Chapter 19 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 is amended by
inserting after section 242 (42 U.S.C. 2015a) the following:
``SEC. 243. SCHOLARSHIP AND FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM.
``(a) Scholarship Program.--To enable students to study,
for at least 1 academic semester or equivalent term, science,
engineering, or another field of study that the Commission
determines is in a critical skill area related to the
regulatory mission of the Commission, the Commission may
carry out a program to--
``(1) award scholarships to undergraduate students who--
``(A) are United States citizens; and
``(B) enter into an agreement under subsection (c) to be
employed by the Commission in the area of study for which the
scholarship is awarded.
``(b) Fellowship Program.--To enable students to pursue
education in science, engineering, or another field of study
that the Commission determines is in a critical skill area
related to its regulatory mission, in a graduate or
professional degree program offered by an institution of
higher education in the United States, the Commission may
carry out a program to--
``(1) award fellowships to graduate students who--
``(A) are United States citizens; and
``(B) enter into an agreement under subsection (c) to be
employed by the Commission in the area of study for which the
fellowship is awarded.
``(c) Requirements.--
``(1) In general.--As a condition of receiving a
scholarship or fellowship under subsection (a) or (b), a
recipient of the scholarship or fellowship shall enter into
an agreement with the Commission under which, in return for
the assistance, the recipient shall--
``(A) maintain satisfactory academic progress in the
studies of the recipient, as determined by criteria
established by the Commission;
``(B) agree that failure to maintain satisfactory academic
progress shall constitute grounds on which the Commission may
terminate the assistance;
``(C) on completion of the academic course of study in
connection with which the assistance was provided, and in
accordance with criteria established by the Commission,
engage in employment by the Commission for a period specified
by the Commission, that shall be not less than 1 time and not
more than 3 times the period for which the assistance was
provided; and
``(D) if the recipient fails to meet the requirements of
subparagraph (A), (B), or (C), reimburse the United States
Government for--
``(i) the entire amount of the assistance provided the
recipient under the scholarship or fellowship; and
``(ii) interest at a rate determined by the Commission.
``(2) Waiver or suspension.--The Commission may establish
criteria for the partial or total waiver or suspension of any
obligation of service or payment incurred by a recipient of a
scholarship or fellowship under this section.
``(d) Competitive Process.--Recipients of scholarships or
fellowships under this section shall be selected through a
competitive process primarily on the basis of academic merit
and such other criteria as the Commission may establish, with
consideration given
[[Page S4031]]
to financial need and the goal of promoting the participation
of individuals identified in section 33 or 34 of the Science
and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a,
1885b).
``(e) Direct Appointment.--The Commission may appoint
directly, with no further competition, public notice, or
consideration of any other potential candidate, an individual
who has completed the academic program for which a
scholarship or fellowship was awarded by the Commission under
this section.''.
SEC. 305. PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM WITH INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER
EDUCATION.
Chapter 19 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2015
et seq.) (as amended by section 304) is amended by inserting
after section 243 the following:
``SEC. 244. PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM WITH INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER
EDUCATION.
``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Hispanic-serving institution.--The term `Hispanic-
serving institution' has the meaning given the term in
section 502(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1101a(a)).
``(2) Historically black college and university.--The term
`historically Black college or university' has the meaning
given the term `part B institution' in section 322 of the
Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1061).
``(3) Tribal college.--The term `Tribal college' has the
meaning given the term `tribally controlled college or
university' in section 2(a) of the Tribally Controlled
College or University Assistance Act of 1978 (25 U.S.C.
1801(a)).
``(b) Partnership Program.--The Commission may establish
and participate in activities relating to research,
mentoring, instruction, and training with institutions of
higher education, including Hispanic-serving institutions,
historically Black colleges or universities, and Tribal
colleges, to strengthen the capacity of the institutions--
``(1) to educate and train students (including present or
potential employees of the Commission); and
``(2) to conduct research in the field of science,
engineering, or law, or any other field that the Commission
determines is important to the work of the Commission.''.
SEC. 306. ELIMINATION OF PENSION OFFSET FOR CERTAIN REHIRED
FEDERAL RETIREES.
Chapter 14 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2201
et seq.) (as amended by sections 302 and 303) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 170E. ELIMINATION OF PENSION OFFSET FOR CERTAIN
REHIRED FEDERAL RETIREES.
``(a) In General.--The Commission may waive the application
of section 8344 or 8468 of title 5, United States Code, on a
case-by-case basis for employment of an annuitant--
``(1) in a position of the Commission for which there is
exceptional difficulty in recruiting or retaining a qualified
employee; or
``(2) when a temporary emergency hiring need exists.
``(b) Procedures.--The Commission shall prescribe
procedures for the exercise of authority under this section,
including--
``(1) criteria for any exercise of authority; and
``(2) procedures for a delegation of authority.
``(c) Effect of Waiver.--An employee as to whom a waiver
under this section is in effect shall not be considered an
employee for purposes of subchapter II of chapter 83, or
chapter 84, of title 5, United States Code.''.
SEC. 307. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this
title and amendments made by this title such sums as may be
necessary for fiscal year 2006 and each fiscal year
thereafter.
______
By Mr. SANTORUM (for himself, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Smith, Ms. Stabenow,
Mr. Allard, and Mr. Sarbanes):
S. 859. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow an
income tax credit for the provision of homeownership and community
development, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Community
Development Homeownership Tax Credit Act. I am very pleased to be
joined in this effort by Senators Kerry, Smith, Stabenow, Allard, and
Sarbanes, who are original cosponsors of this legislation.
Homeownership is a key component of the American Dream. Many people
around this country dream of and plan for the day they can buy a home
of their own in which to raise their children, to settle down in a
community, and to build equity and wealth. They see the importance of
homeownership and the stability it can bring to families and
neighborhoods. It is often homeownership that financially anchors
American families and civically anchors our communities. But I believe
our focus on homeownership also returns our attention to the basic
ideals of the American Dream. Ensuring access to homeownership is among
the most significant ways we can empower our citizens to achieve the
happy, productive and stable lifestyle everyone desires.
Having a house of one's own that provides security and comfort to
one's family and that gives families an active, vested interest in the
quality of life their community provides is central to our collective
ideas about freedom and self-determination. As a nation, we know that
homeownership helps the emotional and intellectual growth and
development of children. We know that homeowners show greater interest
and more frequent participation in civic organizations and neighborhood
issues. We know that when people own homes, they are more likely to
accumulate wealth and assets and to prepare themselves financially for
such things as their children's education and retirement.
In America today, homeownership is at a record high. Unfortunately,
there remains a significant homeownership gap between minority and non-
minority populations, leaving homeownership an elusive financial
prospect for many. According to the Census Bureau, in 2004, the
homeownership rate for non-Hispanic whites reached 76 percent, compared
to 49.1 percent for African-Americans and 48.1 percent for Hispanics or
Latinos.
The bill I introduce today enjoys strong bipartisan support in the
Senate and will encourage increased homeownership rates, more stable
neighborhoods and strong communities. This legislation would give
developers and investors an incentive to participate in the
rehabilitation and construction of homes for low- and moderate-income
buyers. It will also spur economic development in low- and moderate-
income communities across our country and provide an important stimulus
for the development of our nation's economy.
This proposal is modeled after the very successful low-income rental
tax credit. It will allow states to allocate tax credits to developers
and investors to construct or substantially rehabilitate homes in
economically disadvantaged communities, including rural areas, for sale
to low- or moderate-income buyers. These tax credits will help bridge
the gap between the cost of developing affordable housing and the price
at which these homes can be sold to eligible buyers in low-income
neighborhoods where housing is scarce. It provides investors with a tax
credit of up to 50 percent of the cost of home construction or
rehabilitation. It is estimated that this legislation will encourage
the construction and substantial rehabilitation of up to 500,000 homes
for low- and moderate-income families in economically distressed areas
over the next ten years.
President Bush has long supported the creation of a homeownership tax
credit as have the majority of both the House and Senate in the last
Congress. This proposal also has the backing of a large and broad
coalition of housing-related groups, including the National Association
of Home Builders, the National Council of State Housing Agencies, and
the National Association of Realtors. In addition, this initiative has
the backing of major non-profit groups, including Habitat for Humanity,
as well as the Local Initiatives Support Corporation and the Enterprise
Foundation.
This important legislation addresses a key issue facing many
Americans today, housing affordability. It also addresses the community
development needs of many neighborhoods. It continues to have strong
bipartisan support, and I am hopeful that it will be enacted this year.
I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting homeownership by
cosponsoring this legislation.
______
By Mr. ALEXANDER (for himself and Mr. Kennedy):
S. 860. A bill to amend the National Assessment of Educational
Progress Authorization Act to require State academic assessments of
student achievement in United States history and civics, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, today I am introducing the ``American
History Achievement Act'' and am pleased to be joined in this effort by
the senior Senator from Massachusetts. This is part of my effort to put
the teaching of American history and civics back in its rightful place
in our
[[Page S4032]]
schools so our children can grow up learning what it means to be an
American.
The ``American History Achievement Act'' gives the National
Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) the authority to administer a ten
State pilot study of the National Assessment of Education Progress
(NAEP) test in U.S. history in 2006. They already have that authority
for reading, math, science, and writing. The bill also includes a new
provision that would permit a 10-state pilot study for the Civics NAEP
test if funding is available.
This modest bill provides for improved testing of American history so
that we can determine where history is being taught well--and where it
is being taught poorly--so that improvements can be made. We also know
that when testing is focused on a specific subject, states and school
districts are more likely to step up to the challenge and improve
performance.
We could certainly use improvement in the teaching of American
history. According to the National Assessment of Education Progress
(NAEP), commonly referred to as the ``Nation's Report Card,'' fewer
students have just a basic understanding of American history than have
a basic understanding of any other subject which we test--including
math, science, and reading. When you look at the national report card,
American history is our children's worst subject.
Yet, according to recent poll results, the exact opposite outcome is
desired by the American people. Hart-Teeter conducted a poll last year
of 1300 adults for the Educational Testing Service (ETS), where they
asked what the principal goal of education should be. The top response
was ``producing literate, educated citizens who can participate in our
democracy.'' Twenty-six percent of respondents felt that should be our
principal goal. ``Teach basics: math, reading, writing'' was selected
by only 15 percent as the principal goal of education. You can't be an
educated participant in our democracy if you don't know our history.
Our children don't know American history because they are not being
taught it. For example, the state of Florida recently passed a bill
permitting high school students to graduate without taking a course in
U.S. history.
And when our children are being taught our history, they're not
learning what's most important. According to Harvard scholar Samuel
Huntington, ``A 1987 study of high school students found that more knew
who Harriet Tubman was than knew that Washington commanded the American
army in the Revolution or that Abraham Lincoln wrote the Emancipation
Proclamation.'' Now I'm all for teaching about the history of the
Underground Railroad--my ancestor, the Reverend John Rankin, like
Harriet Tubman, was a conductor on the Underground Railroad--but surely
children ought to learn first about the most critical leaders and
events in the Revolution and the Civil War.
Let me give a few examples of just how bad things have gotten:
The 4th grade NAEP test asks students to identify the following
passage: ``We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are
created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain
unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit
of happiness. . . .'' Students were given four choices for the source
of that passage: (a) Constitution, (b) Mayflower Compact, (c)
Declaration of Independence, and (d) Article of the Confederation.
Only 46 percent of students answered correctly that it came from the
Declaration of Independence. The Declaration is the fundamental
document for the founding of our Nation, but less than half the
students could identify that famous passage from it.
The 8th grade test asks students to ``Imagine you could use a time
machine to visit the past. You have landed in Philadelphia in the
summer of 1776. Describe an important event that is happening.'' Nearly
half the students--46 percent were not able to answer the question
correctly that the Declaration of Independence was being signed. They
must wonder why the Fourth of July is Independence Day.
We can't allow this to continue. Our children are growing up without
even learning the basics of our Nation's history. Something has to be
done. This legislation aims to help in that effort.
The pilot program authorized in the bill should collect enough data
to attain a state-by-state comparison of 8th and 12th grades student's
knowledge and understanding of U.S. history. That data will allow us to
know which States are doing a better job of teaching American history
and allow other States to model their programs on those that are
working well. It will also put a spotlight on American history that
should encourage States and school districts to improve their efforts
at teaching the subject.
I suspect that the pilot program will tell us that history programs
like those of the House Page School, right here on Capitol Hill, are
the model to follow. On January 25, the College Board announced that
the House page school ranked first in the Nation among institutions
with fewer than 500 pupils for the percentage of the student body who
achieved college-level mastery on the advanced placement exam in U.S.
history. The page school achieved this result not only by teaching
American history, but also because teachers highlight American history
in all of their classes--from science to literature--as well as taking
students on field trips around the Washington area, from Monticello to
the American History Museum here in Washington, to historical sites in
Philadelphia. The House Page School's success is evidence that we can
succeed in teaching our children the history of this great Nation. I
suspect we will uncover more effective models for the teaching of
American history with the enactment of this legislation.
Our children are growing up ignorant of our Nation's history. Yet a
recent poll tells us that Americans believe the principal goal of
education is ``producing literate, educated citizens who can
participate in our democracy.'' It is time to put the teaching of
American history and civics back in its rightful place in our schools
so our children can grow up learning what it means to be an American.
This bill takes us one step closer to achieving that noble goal. I urge
my colleagues to support it.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I'm pleased to join Senator Alexander
again this year in introducing the American History Achievement Act.
This bill is part of a continuing effort to renew the national
commitment to teaching history and civics in the Nation's public
schools. It lays the foundation for more effective ways of teaching
children about the Nation's past and the value of civic responsibility.
It contains no new requirements for schools, but it does offer a more
frequent and effective analysis of how America's schoolchildren are
learning these important subjects.
Our economy and our future security rely on good schools that help
students develop specific skills, such as reading and math. But the
strength of our democracy and our standing in the world also depend on
ensuring that children have a basic understanding of the nation's past
and what it takes to engage in our democracy. An appreciation for the
defining events in our nation's history can be a catalyst for civic
involvement.
Helping to instill appreciation of America's past--and teaching the
values of justice, equality, and civic responsibility--should be an
important mission of public schools. Thanks to the hard work of large
numbers of history and civics teachers in classrooms throughout
America, we're making progress. Results from the most recent assessment
under the NAEP show that fourth and eighth graders are improving their
knowledge of U.S. history. Research conducted in history classrooms
shows that children are using primary sources and documents more often
to explore history, and are being assigned historical and biographical
readings by their teachers more frequently.
But much more remains to be done to advance the understanding of both
of these subjects, and see to it that they are not left behind in
classrooms.
A recent study by Dr. Sheldon Stern--the Chief Historian Emeritus at
my brother's Presidential Library--suggests that State standards for
teaching American history need improvement. His research reveals that
22 States have American history standards that are either weak or lack
clear
[[Page S4033]]
chronology, appropriate political and historical context, or sufficient
information about real events and people. As many as 9 States still
have no standards at all for American history.
Good standards matter. They're the foundation for teaching and
learning in every school. With the right resources, time, and
attention, it's possible to develop creative and effective history
standards in every State. Massachusetts began to work on this effort in
2000, through a joint review of history standards that involved
teachers, administrators, curriculum coordinators, and university
professors. After monthly meetings and three years of development and
revision, the state released a new framework for teaching history in
2003. Today, our standards in American history and World history
receive the highest marks.
School budget problems at the local level are also a serious threat
to these goals.
Other accounts report that schools are narrowing their curriculums
away from the social sciences, arts, and humanities, in favor of a more
concentrated approach to the teaching of reading and math in order to
meet the strict standards of the No Child Left Behind Act.
Meeting high standards in reading and math is important, but it
should not come at the expense of scaling back teaching in other core
subjects such as history and civics. Integrating reading and math with
other subjects often gives children a better way to master literacy and
number skills, even while learning in a history, geography, or
government lesson. That type of innovation deserves special attention
in our schools. Making it happen requires added investments in teacher
preparation and teacher mentoring, so that teachers are well prepared
to use interdisciplinary methods in their lesson plans.
Our bill today takes several important steps to strengthen the
teaching of American history and civics, and raise the standing of
these subjects in school curriculums. Through changes to the National
Assessment for Educational Progress, schools will be better able to
achieve success on this important issue.
First, we propose a more frequent national assessment of children in
American history under the NAEP. For years, NAEP has served as the gold
standard for measuring the progress of students and reporting on that
progress. Students last participated in the U.S. history NAEP in 2001,
and that assessment generated encouraging results. But the preceding
assessment with which we can compare data--was administered in 1994--
too long before to be of real assistance.
It makes sense to measure the knowledge and skills of children more
frequently. This bill would place priority on administering the
national U.S. history NAEP assessment, to generate a more timely
picture of student progress. We should have an idea of children's
knowledge and skills in American history more often than every 6 or 7
years, in order to address gaps in learning.
The bill also proposes a leap forward to strengthen State standards
in American history and civics, through a new State-level pilot
assessment of these subjects under NAEP. The assessment would be
conducted on an experimental basis in 10 States, in grades 8 and 12.
The National Assessment Governing Board would ensure that States with
model standards, as well as those that are still under development,
participate in this assessment.
Moving NAEP to the State level does not carry any high stakes for
schools. But it will provide an additional benchmark for States to
develop and improve their standards. It's our hope that states will
also be encouraged to undertake improvements in their history curricula
and in their teaching of civics, and ensure that both subjects are a
beneficiary and not a victim of school reform.
America's past encompasses great leaders and great ideas that
contributed to our heritage and to the principles of freedom, equality,
justice, and opportunity for all. Today's students will be better
citizens in the future if they learn more about that history and about
the skills needed to participate in our democracy. The American History
Achievement Act is an important effort toward that goal, and I
encourage my colleagues to support it.
______
By Mr. ISAKSON (for himself and Mr. Rockefeller):
S. 861. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
transition funding rules for certain plans electing to cease future
benefit accruals, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, today I join with Senator Rockefeller to
introduce the Employee Pension Preservation Act of 2005. This bill
seeks to eliminate the threat that airline employees are facing to
their earned pensions as a result of funding laws that make pension
funding schedule volatile and unpredictable. The Employee Pension
Preservation Act of 2005 would allow their employers to make the
required pension payments in a more predictable and manageable way.
This common sense, industry specific approach is supported by airline
employees and their employers.
We are giving airlines the ability to fund their pension obligations
to their employees on a more manageable and stabilized 25-year schedule
using stable long-term assumptions. It is analogous to refinancing a
short-term adjustable rate mortgage to a more predictable long-term
fixed rate mortgage. It protects the interests of the American taxpayer
by capping the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation's liabilities at
current levels, and ensures that a uniform evenhanded policy is taken
with respect to the entire industry. Finally, this must be a joint
decision made by the airline and its employees.
We are establishing a payment schedule for unfunded liabilities that
is both affordable and practical, while properly protecting the
interests of airline employees, airlines, and the American taxpayer. I
commend Senator Rockefeller for joining me in introducing this
important legislation, and look forward to its passage so that we can
provide stability to airline employees with regards to the funding of
their earned pensions.
Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, the U.S. airline industry continues
to teeter on the brink of financial collapse. The industry lost over $9
billion in 2004 and the airlines are expected to lose another $1.9
billion in 2005. Our Nation cannot afford to let this vital part of our
economy collapse. Our economic prosperity is tied to a healthy and
growing aviation industry.
As we saw after the events of September 11, 2001, the shutdown of our
aviation systems caused a massive disruption to the flow of people and
goods throughout the world. Without a healthy airline industry, our
economy will not grow. I do not believe the significance of aviation to
our economy can be overstated. I do not think many in Congress and
across the country realize that over 10 million people are employed
directly in the aviation industry. For every job in the aviation
industry, 15 related jobs are produced. In my State of West Virginia,
aviation represents $3.4 billion of the State's gross domestic product
and directly and indirectly employs 51,000 people.
The airline industry has been hard hit in recent years by high oil
prices, weak revenue, and low fare competition. Since 2001, the airline
industry has lost more than $30 billion collectively, and while
aviation analysts expect 2005 will be a significant improvement over
recent years, most estimates assume oil prices drop significantly from
current levels--a matter that increasingly remains in doubt.
Many airlines have aggressively cut costs through a number of means,
most notably by reducing labor expenditures and through decreasing
capacity by cutting flight frequencies, using smaller aircraft, or
eliminating service to some communities.
Despite the airlines' efforts, they have not been able to return to
financial stability. The Federal Government is faced with serious and
difficult choices in how to ensure both the short-term and long-term
viability of the Nation's aviation industry. The one choice we do not
have is the choice not to act. Although Congress cannot restore
profitability to the airline industry with a law, we can create the
atmosphere for the industry to succeed, grow, and bring people back to
work. If we fail to act, tens of thousands of employees will lose their
jobs on top of the 200,000 that have already lost their jobs, small
communities will lose their
[[Page S4034]]
air service, and the United States will lose its global leadership in
aviation.
One of the greatest threats to the future financial viability of the
airlines is pension funding. Congress needs to reform the pension rules
to provide the tools airlines need to maintain their pension plans. As
a step in the right direction, I am pleased to introduce legislation
today with Senator Isakson that protects the retirement plans airline
employees depend on.
The Employee Pension Preservation Act of 2005 provides critical
pension funding relief to the commercial airline industry by allowing
the airlines to fund their pension obligations over a 25-year time
horizon. Last year, recognizing that the airlines were facing
extraordinary circumstances, Congress provided airlines a temporary
reprieve from deficit reduction contributions.
However, when that temporary relief expires at the end of the year,
airlines will face immediate and crushing pension bills. Congress needs
to provide permanent, appropriate remedies that enable airlines to
maintain their pension plans. If we do not provide any flexibility in
paying the pension obligations, then certainly more airlines will be
forced to terminate their plans altogether. The legislation that
Senator Isakson and I are offering enables airlines to meet all of
their pension obligations on a reasonable schedule.
Some people may worry that by granting airlines an extended payment
period we are increasing the risks to the Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation, which insures the airlines' defined benefit plans.
However, I am hopeful that by making the funding rules more flexible
this bill will actually decrease the likelihood that pension plans will
be terminated and the PBGC saddled with unfunded obligations. Let me be
clear, this legislation requires airlines to fully fund all of their
past and future pension promises. It merely provides a more reasonable
schedule for recovering from the recent downturn that hurt many pension
plans.
Moreover, the bill includes provisions to limit the liability
potentially faced by the Government insurance agency. In contrast to
the status quo, any pension plans that take advantage of the funding
relief offered by our legislation would accrue no additional PBGC
obligation. To the extent that any additional pension benefits are
earned by employees, the benefits would have to be immediately and
fully funded by the employer.
As a member of the Senate Finance Committee, I have been working for
years to improve our defined benefit pension system. I recognize that
there are few easy answers or quick fixes. And I do not suggest that
the legislation we are introducing today is a silver bullet for the
airlines' defined benefit plans. Still, I am pleased to support this
bill because it is a responsible compromise agreed to by both the labor
and management representatives in the airline industry. That is very
important to me, because this legislation will require some difficult
sacrifices especially on the part of workers who may no longer accrue
guaranteed benefits. While I have reservations about any agreement to
limit the PBGC guarantee of pensions, I have been assured that in this
particular case employees support this compromise and see it as the
best opportunity to save their hard earned retirement benefits.
I hope that my colleagues will carefully examine this proposal and
join Senator Isakson and me in a debate about how we can better secure
the pensions of airline employees. I appreciate that our legislation is
not likely to pass the Congress without negotiation and compromise.
Indeed, I welcome opportunities to improve this legislation. But I do
not believe that we can ignore the plight that the airlines face, and I
will work to enact prudent reforms as soon as possible.
______
By Mr. CONRAD (for himself, Mr. Allen, Mr. Alexander, Mr. Baucus,
Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Chafee, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Corzine, Mr. Craig,
Mr. Dodd, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Durbin, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Hagel,
Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr.
Levin, Mr. McCain, Mr. Nelson of Florida, Mr. Nelson of
Nebraska, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Salazar, Mr. Schumer,
Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Stevens, and Mr. Warner):
S. 863. A bill to require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins
in commemoration of the centenary of the bestowal of the Nobel Peace
Prize on President Theodore Roosevelt, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce, with Senator
Allen, and 27 of our colleagues, the Theodore Roosevelt Commemorative
Coin Act, which would commemorate the centenary of the bestowal of the
Nobel Peace Prize on President Theodore Roosevelt. This bill authorizes
the Secretary of the Treasury to mint and issue coins bearing the
likeness of Theodore Roosevelt. The sales of these coins would support
programs to educate the public about the impressive achievements of our
26th President.
President Roosevelt is one of our most celebrated presidents. Among
his many achievements, Roosevelt received the Congressional Medal of
Honor for leading a daring charge up San Juan Hill, which turned the
tide in that battle near Santiago, Cuba.
North Dakota has a special connection with Theodore Roosevelt.
Roosevelt liked to say that the years he spent in the Badlands of North
Dakota were the best of his life. He even attributed his success as
President to his experiences as a hunter and rancher in western North
Dakota.
It is with great pride that I introduce the Theodore Roosevelt
Commemorative Coin Act, which honors President Roosevelt's foreign
policy achievements and commitment to conservation in this country. In
particular, the bill highlights his success in drawing up the 1905
peace treaty ending the Russo-Japanese War. This accomplishment earned
him the 1906 Nobel Peace Prize--making him the first citizen of the
United States to receive the Peace Prize. The bill also pays tribute to
his enduring respect for our nation's wildlife and natural resources.
During his tenure as President, Roosevelt established 51 Bird Reserves,
4 Game Preserves, 150 National Forests, 5 National Parks, and 18
National Monuments, totaling nearly 230 million acres of land placed
under public protection.
It is fitting that the proceeds from the surcharge associated with
the coin be used for educational programs at two very important sites
in the life of Theodore Roosevelt--his home in New York, Sagamore Hill
National Historic Site, and the national park that bears his name and
honors his conservation efforts, Theodore Roosevelt National Park,
located in Medora, North Dakota. These two sites played a significant
role in the development of Teddy Roosevelt's policies and offered him
refuge away from the stress associated with public life.
As a North Dakotan and an American, it is my hope that this bill will
renew interest in the life of Theodore Roosevelt. Roosevelt's courage,
patriotism, optimism, and spirit reflect what is best about our
country, and he is remembered not only as a great statesman, but also a
friend to the environment. I encourage my colleagues to support this
important legislation to honor Theodore Roosevelt's contributions to
U.S. foreign and domestic policy and build upon his efforts to promote
respect for our Nation's lands.
______
By Mr. INHOFE (for himself and Mr. Voinovich):
S. 864. A bill to amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to modify
provisions relating to nuclear safety and security, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of
the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 864
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 ``Nuclear Safety and Security
Act of 2005''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF COMMISSION.
In this Act, the term ``Commission'' means the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
SEC. 3. GENERAL PROVISIONS.
Section 161 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2201) is amended--
(1) by striking ``Sec. 161'' and all that follows through
``authorized to--'' and inserting the following:
[[Page S4035]]
``SEC. 161. GENERAL PROVISIONS.'';
(2) in each of subsections a., b., c., d., e., f., h., i.,
j., m., n., o., p., s., t., v., and w., by inserting ``In
carrying out the duties of the Commission, the Commission
may'' after the subsection designation;
(3) in subsection u., by striking ``(1) enter into'' and
inserting ``In carrying out the duties of the Commission, the
Commission may--
``(1) enter into'';
(4) in subsection x., by striking ``Establish'' and
inserting ``In carrying out the duties of the Commission, the
Commission may establish'';
(5) in each of subsections a., b., c., d., e., f., h., j.,
m., n., s., and v., by striking the semicolon at the end and
inserting a period;
(6) in subsection o., by striking ``; and'' at the end and
inserting a period;
(7) in subsection t., by striking the semicolon at the end;
and
(8) by indenting each subdivision appropriately.
SEC. 4. USE OF FIREARMS BY SECURITY PERSONNEL.
The Atomic Energy Act of 1954 is amended by inserting after
section 161 (42 U.S.C. 2201) the following:
``SEC. 161A. USE OF FIREARMS BY SECURITY PERSONNEL.
``(a) Definitions.--In this section, the terms `handgun',
`rifle', `shotgun', `firearm', `ammunition', `machinegun',
`short-barreled shotgun', and `short-barreled rifle' have the
meanings given the terms in section 921(a) of title 18,
United States Code.
``(b) Authorization.--Notwithstanding subsections (a)(4),
(a)(5), (b)(2), (b)(4), and (o) of section 922 of title 18,
United States Code, section 925(d)(3) of title 18, United
States Code, section 5844 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, and any law (including regulations) of a State or a
political subdivision of a State that prohibits the transfer,
receipt, possession, transportation, importation, or use of a
handgun, a rifle, a shotgun, a short-barreled shotgun, a
short-barreled rifle, a machinegun, a semiautomatic assault
weapon, ammunition for any such gun or weapon, or a large
capacity ammunition feeding device, in carrying out the
duties of the Commission, the Commission may authorize the
security personnel of any licensee or certificate holder of
the Commission (including an employee of a contractor of such
a licensee or certificate holder) to transfer, receive,
possess, transport, import, and use 1 or more such guns,
weapons, ammunition, or devices, if the Commission determines
that--
``(1) the authorization is necessary to the discharge of
the official duties of the security personnel; and
``(2) the security personnel--
``(A) are not otherwise prohibited from possessing or
receiving a firearm under Federal or State laws relating to
possession of firearms by a certain category of persons;
``(B) have successfully completed any requirement under
this section for training in the use of firearms and tactical
maneuvers;
``(C) are engaged in the protection of--
``(i) a facility owned or operated by a licensee or
certificate holder of the Commission that is designated by
the Commission; or
``(ii) radioactive material or other property owned or
possessed by a licensee or certificate holder of the
Commission, or that is being transported to or from a
facility owned or operated by such a licensee or certificate
holder, and that has been determined by the Commission to be
of significance to the common defense and security or public
health and safety; and
``(D) are discharging the official duties of the security
personnel in transferring, receiving, possessing,
transporting, or importing the weapons, ammunition, or
devices.
``(c) Background Checks.--A person that receives,
possesses, transports, imports, or uses a weapon, ammunition,
or a device under subsection (b) shall be subject to a
background check by the Attorney General, based on
fingerprints and including a background check under section
103(b) of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (Public
Law 103-159; 18 U.S.C. 922 note) to determine whether the
person is prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm
under Federal or State law.
``(d) Effective Date.--This section takes effect on the
date on which regulations are promulgated by the Commission,
with the approval of the Attorney General, to carry out this
section.''
SEC. 5. FINGERPRINTING AND CRIMINAL HISTORY RECORD CHECKS.
Section 149 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2169) is amended--
(1) in subsection a.--
(A) by striking ``a. The Nuclear'' and all that follows
through ``section 147.'' and inserting the following:
``a.(1)(A)(i) The Commission shall require each individual
or entity described in clause (ii) to fingerprint each
individual described in subparagraph (B) before the
individual described in subparagraph (B) is permitted access
under subparagraph (B).
``(ii) The individuals and entities referred to in clause
(i) are individuals and entities that, on or before the date
on which an individual is permitted access under subparagraph
(B)--
``(I) are licensed or certified to engage in an activity
subject to regulation by the Commission;
``(II) have filed an application for a license or
certificate to engage in an activity subject to regulation by
the Commission; or
``(III) have notified the Commission in writing of an
intent to file an application for licensing, certification,
permitting, or approval of a product or activity subject to
regulation by the Commission.
``(B) The Commission shall require to be fingerprinted any
individual who--
``(i) is permitted unescorted access to--
``(I) a utilization facility; or
``(II) radioactive material or other property subject to
regulation by the Commission that the Commission determines
to be of such significance to the public health and safety or
the common defense and security as to warrant fingerprinting
and background checks; or
``(ii) is permitted access to safeguards information under
section 147.'';
(B) by striking ``All fingerprints obtained by a licensee
or applicant as required in the preceding sentence'' and
inserting the following:
``(2) All fingerprints obtained by an individual or entity
as required in paragraph (1)'';
(C) by striking ``The costs of any identification and
records check conducted pursuant to the preceding sentence
shall be paid by the licensee or applicant.'' and inserting
the following:
``(3) The costs of an identification or records check under
paragraph (2) shall be paid by the individual or entity
required to conduct the fingerprinting under paragraph
(1)(A).''; and
(D) by striking ``Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the Attorney General may provide all the results of the
search to the Commission, and, in accordance with regulations
prescribed under this section, the Commission may provide
such results to licensee or applicant submitting such
fingerprints.'' and inserting the following:
``(4) Notwithstanding any other provision of law--
``(A) the Attorney General may provide any result of an
identification or records check under paragraph (2) to the
Commission; and
``(B) the Commission, in accordance with regulations
prescribed under this section, may provide the results to the
individual or entity required to conduct the fingerprinting
under paragraph (1)(A).'';
(2) in subsection c.--
(A) by striking ``, subject to public notice and comment,
regulations--'' and inserting ``requirements--''; and
(B) in paragraph (2)(B), by striking ``unescorted access to
the facility of a licensee or applicant'' and inserting
``unescorted access to a utilization facility, radioactive
material, or other property described in subsection
a.(1)(B)'';
(3) by redesignating subsection d. as subsection e.; and
(4) by inserting after subsection c. the following:
``d. The Commission may require a person or individual to
conduct fingerprinting under subsection a.(1) by authorizing
or requiring the use of any alternative biometric method for
identification that has been approved by--
``(1) the Attorney General; and
``(2) the Commission, by regulation.''.
SEC. 6. UNAUTHORIZED INTRODUCTION OF DANGEROUS WEAPONS.
Section 229 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2278a) is amended--
(1) by striking ``Sec. 229, Trespass Upon Commission
Installations.--'' and inserting the following:
``SEC. 229. TRESPASS ON COMMISSION INSTALLATIONS.'';
(2) by adjusting the indentations of subsections a., b.,
and c. so as to reflect proper subsection indentations; and
(3) in subsection a.--
(A) in the first sentence, by striking ``a. The'' and
inserting the following:
``a.(1) The'';
(B) in the second sentence, by striking ``Every'' and
inserting the following:
``(2) Every''; and
(C) in paragraph (1) (as designated by subparagraph (A))--
(i) by striking ``or in the custody'' and inserting ``in
the custody''; and
(ii) by inserting ``, or subject to the licensing authority
of the Commission or certification by the Commission under
this Act or any other Act'' before the period.
SEC. 7. SABOTAGE OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES, FUEL, OR DESIGNATED
MATERIAL.
(a) In General.--Section 236a. of the Atomic Energy Act of
1954 (42 U.S.C. 2284(a)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``storage facility'' and
inserting ``treatment, storage, or disposal facility'';
(2) in paragraph (3)--
(A) by striking ``such a utilization facility'' and
inserting ``a utilization facility licensed under this Act'';
and
(B) by striking ``or'' at the end;
(3) in paragraph (4)--
(A) by striking ``facility licensed'' and inserting ``,
uranium conversion, or nuclear fuel fabrication facility
licensed or certified''; and
(B) by striking the comma at the end and inserting a
semicolon; and
(4) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following:
``(5) any production, utilization, waste storage, waste
treatment, waste disposal, uranium enrichment, uranium
conversion, or nuclear fuel fabrication facility subject to
licensing or certification under this Act during construction
of the facility, if the destruction or damage caused or
attempted to
[[Page S4036]]
be caused could adversely affect public health and safety
during the operation of the facility;
``(6) any primary facility or backup facility from which a
radiological emergency preparedness alert and warning system
is activated; or
``(7) any radioactive material or other property subject to
regulation by the Commission that, before the date of the
offense, the Commission determines, by order or regulation
published in the Federal Register, is of significance to the
public health and safety or to common defense and
security;''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 236 of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2284) is amended by striking
``intentionally and willfully'' each place it appears and
inserting ``knowingly''.
______
By Mr. VOINOVICH:
S. 865. A bill to amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to reauthorize
the Price-Anderson provisions; to the Committee on Environment and
Public Works.
Mr. VOINOVICH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text
of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 865
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 ``Price-Anderson Amendments
Act of 2005''.
SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF INDEMNIFICATION AUTHORITY.
(a) Indemnification of Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Licensees.--Section 170c. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954
(42 U.S.C. 2210(c)) is amended--
(1) in the subsection heading, by striking ``LICENSES'' and
inserting ``LICENSEES'';
(2) by striking ``December 1, 2003'' and inserting
``December 1, 2025''; and
(3) by striking ``December 31, 2003'' each place it appears
and inserting ``December 31, 2025''.
SEC. 3. REPORTS.
Section 170p. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2210(p)) is amended by striking ``August 1, 1998'' and
inserting ``August 1, 2025''.
SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.
The amendments made by this Act take effect on December 1,
2003.
____________________