[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 126 (Monday, October 3, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10824-S10827]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. WARNER:
S. 1810. A bill to amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to
allow certain coastal States to share in qualified Outer Continental
Shelf revenues; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Outer Continental
Shelf Revenue Sharing Act of 2005.
Earlier this year, the Congress passed a bill, and the President
signed it into law. It is the first comprehensive energy package in
over a decade.
Great strides were made in addressing the Nation's energy needs. This
new law contains a number of valuable conservation measures and, as the
chairman of the Energy Committee once stated, passage of this
legislation means we will need 170 fewer powerplants by 2020. On the
energy supply side, however, we still have much work to do. The recent
disruptions in the Nation's energy supply caused by Hurricanes Katrina
and Rita--tragedies, natural disasters of proportions never really seen
before in this county--underscore the fragility of our energy supply
system. The estimates are that 20 to 25 percent of our energy needs
come in through that narrow nexus of Louisiana and Mississippi, right
in that area.
During debate on the bill, I offered an amendment to provide for an
increased domestic supply of oil and natural gas from Outer Continental
Shelf lands. Regrettably, my amendment and other similar measures were
not successful.
I thank the distinguished manager of that bill, Mr. Domenici, and
others. They gave me a great deal of encouragement, as did the Senators
from Louisiana, who likewise participated in that debate. But,
nevertheless, I was not successful. I did say--and I suppose in a
prophetic way--and I remember beckoning to fellow Senators on the
floor, ``The day will come when I will once again stand on this floor
and offer this same legislation, not knowing, of course, of the
tragedies of Katrina. But that did give this Nation a serious wake-up
call as to the fragility of our energy system.
Again, the tragic events of the past month along the gulf coast have
thrust the issue of energy supplies back into the spotlight. We need
only look at the rising gas prices all over our pumps in this Nation's
land, where people--men and women--on small budgets are struggling to
find the resources to meet their daily requirements of the use of the
automobile and to inject these increased gasoline prices into their
budgets. Prices at the pump have climbed quickly, and with the winter
heating season approaching, we can expect natural gas and home heating
oil prices to increase, perhaps going as high as 50 percent more than
last year's level.
We need to address our inadequate refining capacity and expand
conservation incentives. With more than 30 percent of our domestic
supply of oil coming in from the Gulf of Mexico and a significant
portion of our refining capacity located in the Gulf States, we must
also look at ways to increase and diversify the location and sources of
our domestic supplies of energy, as well as the refining capabilities;
and natural gas, likewise.
Before passage of the energy bill, production revenues totaling more
than $7.5 billion annually from offshore oil and gas belonged to the
Federal Government. This is an inconsistent policy, however, because 55
percent of the revenues from land-based oil and gas production has
always been returned to the States. The one exception to this rule is
Alaska, which receives back 90 percent of such revenues. Thanks to the
diligence of my colleagues from Louisiana, this inequity was partially
addressed in the energy bill by providing that current offshore energy-
producing States will now share in the Federal Government's royalties.
Indeed, it is a matter of fairness that these revenues be shared with
the energy producing States. After all, it is the states closest to oil
and gas production facilities that are assuming the risks that those
production facilities will not have harmful environmental or economical
impacts. Tourism is often the lifeblood of these regions which could be
adversely affected by any environmental accidents. So it is very
appropriate that they should receive a share of the revenues derived
from offshore oil and gas production.
While the issue of revenue sharing was addressed in the energy bill
for States currently producing oil and gas off their coasts, it does
not include a comprehensive policy for offshore production
opportunities.
Specifically, the bill does not allow other States to share revenues
when and if they ever become producing regions. As we all know, the
production of oil and natural gas has been subject to a moratorium
along most of the Nation's coastline. While this moratorium has been in
effect for some time, many Americans believe that it is now time to
reevaluate its need. This past year in Virginia, both houses of the
state legislature passed legislation asking for production to occur off
the Virginia coast if the State is allowed to receive a share of the
revenue. I think the rising costs of oil and gas are now leading other
States to consider the same possibility.
The bill I am introducing today would provide a portion of revenues
to States under the current moratorium that may decide to undertake
future offshore exploration and production activities. My legislation
is based, in large part, on the hard work of my colleagues who achieved
a revenue-sharing proposal for their States and local governments in
the recently enacted energy bill. The new law provides State and local
governments with a share of the royalties from offshore energy
production, but it is limited only to the five States that are
currently exempt from the moratorium on offshore oil and gas leases.
As provided by current law, my bill requires the Federal Government
to transfer 50 percent of the revenues received from any offshore
leases to the States based upon the production levels. This would put
oil and gas production in coastal areas on par with the production on
other Federal lands throughout the United States. It is a matter of
equity for all producing regions and represents a fair revenue-sharing
model for the Federal and State governments.
My proposal does not affect the current moratorium on offshore energy
production. As the moratorium expires, however, my legislation enables
States that wish to pursue oil and gas production to be eligible for a
portion of the royalty payments that otherwise would go exclusively to
the Federal Government.
The amendment does not supersede a State's ability to veto any
production proposals under their authority of the Coastal Zone
Management Act, CZMA. It does not change the manner in which the
Federal Government grants these production leases, and it does not lift
the moratorium for any OCS land that is currently in place.
While I believe very strongly that the States should have a role in
determining whether or not to utilize these resources, I also believe
that they should receive a fair share of the revenues from any
production that may follow.
I understand the concerns of some of my colleagues and their desire
to avoid drawing specific boundary lines. While this amendment does not
address all of the concerns, it offers a fair starting point to discuss
this issue. It is my hope that we can all work together in addressing
these concerns that will result in a commonsense approach to expand our
domestic supply of oil and gas, to diversify the geographic
concentration of our current industry, and to allow the States to have
a role in the process.
[[Page S10825]]
Mr. President, the time has come for the Senate to speak boldly. We
can all agree that more supply is needed and that there is a vast
resource yet to be tapped. My proposal offers a fair way to encourage
production in States that wish to do so. In the long term our Nation
will benefit by reducing its dependence on foreign sources of energy
and by diversifying the geographic source of our domestic supply.
I believe this proposal will solve a necessary part of the energy
puzzle. I believe it is essential for our energy security, our economic
security, and our national security to evaluate this, and other
proposals, that address our energy supply needs.
Mr. President, as I say, today I introduce, again, this bill, which I
put in a few months ago. It provides for the offshore drilling of oil.
I recognize the sensitivity of that, but I say to my colleagues, we can
not continually ignore these warnings, whether they are brought about
by Mother Nature or political problems or wars or conflicts across our
shores. Now is the time to lay down that framework of legislation for
those States which, by actions taken by the Governor and the State
legislature, say: We will permit offshore drilling off of this State's
boundaries. Hopefully, we can receive for those States, should that
take place, an additional source of revenue.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record, and I will seek to have it considered by the Senate as a whole
at the earliest possible opportunity.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 1810
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 ``Outer Continental Shelf
Revenue Sharing Act of 2005''.
SEC. 2. OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF REVENUE SHARING.
Section 31 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1356a) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking paragraph (7);
(B) by redesignating paragraphs (8), (9), and (10) as
paragraphs (7), (8), and (9), respectively;
(C) in paragraph (8) (as redesignated by subparagraph (B)),
by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the following:
``(B) Inclusion.--The term `producing State' includes any
State that begins production on a leased tract on or after
the date of enactment of the Outer Continental Shelf Revenue
Sharing Act of 2005, regardless of whether the leased tract
was on any date subject to a leasing moratorium.''; and
(D) in paragraph (9) (as redesignated by subparagraph (B)),
by striking subparagraph (C); and
(2) in subsection (b)(4), by striking subparagraph (E).
SEC. 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF SEAWARD LATERAL BOUNDARIES FOR
COASTAL STATES.
Section 4(a)(2)(A) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
(43 U.S.C. 1333(a)(2)(A)) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(i)'' after ``(A)'';
(2) in the first sentence--
(A) by striking ``President shall'' and inserting
``Secretary shall by regulation''; and
(B) by inserting before the period at the end the
following: ``not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of the Outer Continental Shelf Revenue Sharing Act
of 2005''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(ii)(I) For purposes of this Act (including determining
boundaries to authorize leasing and preleasing activities and
any attributing revenues under this Act and calculating
payments to producing States and coastal political
subdivisions under section 31), the Secretary shall delineate
the lateral boundaries between coastal States in areas of the
Outer Continental shelf under exclusive Federal jurisdiction,
to the extent of the exclusive economic zone of the United
States, in accordance with article 15 of the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea of December 10, 1982.
``(II) This clause shall not affect any right or title to
Federal submerged land on the outer Continental Shelf.''.
SEC. 4. OPTION TO PETITION FOR LEASING WITHIN CERTAIN AREAS
ON THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF.
Section 12 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1341) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(g) Leasing Within the Seaward Lateral Boundaries of
Coastal States.--
``(1) Definition of affected area.--In this subsection, the
term `affected area' means any area located--
``(A) in the areas of northern, central, and southern
California and the areas of Oregon and Washington;
``(B) in the north, middle, or south planning area of the
Atlantic Ocean;
``(C) in the eastern Gulf of Mexico planning area and
lying--
``(i) south of 26 degrees north latitude; and
``(ii) east of 86 degrees west longitude; or
``(D) in the Straits of Florida.
``(2) Restrictions on leasing.--The Secretary shall not
offer for offshore leasing, preleasing, or any related
activity--
``(A) any area located on the outer Continental Shelf that,
as of the date of enactment of this subsection, is designated
as a marine sanctuary under the Marine Protection, Research,
and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.); or
``(B) except as provided in paragraphs (3) and (4), during
the period beginning on the date of enactment of this
subsection and ending on June 30, 2012, any affected area.
``(3) Resource assessments.--
``(A) In general.--Beginning on the date on which the
Secretary delineates seaward lateral boundaries under section
4(a)(2)(A)(ii), a Governor of a State in which an affected
area is located, with the consent of the legislature of the
State, may submit to the Secretary a petition requesting a
resource assessment of any area within the seaward lateral
boundary of the State.
``(B) Eligible resources.--A petition for a resource
assessment under subparagraph (A) may be for--
``(i) oil and gas leasing;
``(ii) gas-only leasing; or
``(iii) any other energy source leasing, including
renewable energy leasing.
``(C) Action by secretary.--Not later than 90 days after
receipt of a petition under subparagraph (A), the Secretary
shall approve the petition, unless the Secretary determines
that a resource assessment of the area would create an
unreasonable risk of harm to the marine, human, or coastal
environment of the State.
``(D) Failure to act.--If the Secretary fails to approve or
deny a petition in accordance with subparagraph (C)--
``(i) the petition shall be considered to be approved; and
``(ii) a resource assessment of any appropriate area shall
be carried out as soon as practicable.
``(E) Submission to state.--As soon as practicable after
the date on which a petition is approved under subparagraph
(C) or (D), the Secretary shall--
``(i) complete the resource assessment for the area; and
``(ii) submit the completed resource assessment to the
State.
``(4) Petition for leasing.--
``(A) In general.--On receipt of a resource assessment
under paragraph (3)(E)(ii), the Governor of a State in which
an affected area is located, with the consent of the
legislature of the State, may submit to the Secretary a
petition requesting that the Secretary make available any
land that is within the seaward lateral boundaries of the
State (as established under section 4(a)(2)(A)(ii)) and that
is greater than 20 miles from the coastline of the State for
the conduct of offshore leasing, pre-leasing, or related
activities with respect to--
``(i) oil and gas leasing;
``(ii) gas-only leasing; or
``(iii) any other energy source leasing, including
renewable energy leasing.
``(B) Action by secretary.--Not later than 90 days after
receipt of a petition under subparagraph (A), the Secretary
shall approve the petition, unless the Secretary determines
that leasing the area would create an unreasonable risk of
harm to the marine, human, or coastal environment of the
State.
``(C) Failure to act.--If the Secretary fails to approve or
deny a petition in accordance with subparagraph (B)--
``(i) the petition shall be considered to be approved; and
``(ii) any appropriate area shall be made available for oil
and gas leasing, gas-only leasing, or any other energy source
leasing, including renewable energy leasing.
``(5) Revenue sharing.--
``(A) In general.--Beginning on the date on which
production begins in an area under this subsection, the State
shall, without further appropriation, share in any qualified
outer Continental Shelf revenues of the production under
section 31.
``(B) Applicable law.--
``(i) In general.--Except as provided in clause (ii), a
State shall not be required to comply with subsections (c)
and (d) of section 31 to share in qualified outer Continental
Shelf revenues under subparagraph (A).
``(ii) Exception.--Of any qualified outer Continental Shelf
revenues received by a State (including a political
subdivision of a State) under subparagraph (A), at least 25
percent shall be used for 1 or more of the purposes described
in section 31(d)(1).
``(6) Effect.--Nothing in this subsection affects any right
relating to an area described in paragraph (1) or (2) under a
lease that was in existence on the day before the date of
enactment of this subsection.''.
SEC. 5. REGULATIONS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of the Interior shall issue
such regulations as are necessary to carry out this Act and
the amendments made by this Act, including regulations
establishing procedures for entering into gas-only leases.
(b) Gas-Only Leases.--In issuing regulations establishing
procedures for entering into gas-only leases, the Secretary
shall--
(1) ensure that gas-only leases under the Outer Continental
Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.) are not available in
a State that (as of the day before the date of enactment of
this Act) did not contain an affected area
[[Page S10826]]
(as defined in section 12(g)(1) of that Act (as added by
section 4)); and
(2) define ``natural gas'' as--
(A) unmixed natural gas; or
(B) any mixture of natural or artificial gas (including
compressed or liquefied petroleum gas) and condensate
recovered from natural gas.
______
By Mr. HATCH (for himself and Mr. Bennett):
S. 1811. A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to study
the feasibility of enlarging the Arthur V. Watkins Dam Weber Basin
Project, Utah, to provide additional water for the Weber Basin Project
to fulfill the purposes for which that project was authorized; to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
______
By Mr. HATCH (for himself and Mr. Bennett):
S. 1812. A bill to amend the Reclamation Projects Authorization and
Adjustment Act of 1992 to provide for the conjunctive use of surface
and ground water in Juab County, Utah; to the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources.
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, in recent years, Utahns have suffered
through a devastating drought. While it appears that we are beginning
to return to normal precipitation levels, the drought has instilled in
all Utahns the need to plan for the future and ensure sound management
of our water resources. For that reason, I rise to introduce two
important bills that will help make better use of Utah's scarce water
supply.
The first bill is the Arthur V. Watkins Dam Enlargement Act of 2005.
The bill would authorize the Bureau of Reclamation to conduct a
feasibility study on raising the height of the Arthur V. Watkins Dam in
Weber County. The dam is roughly 14 miles long and encloses a reservoir
containing more than 200,000 acre-feet of water.
Thousands of Utahns currently rely on the water provided by the
reservoir. And the Weber Basin is one of Utah's fastest growing areas,
making the need to find additional water resources even more pressing.
Enlarging the dam would help ensure that the area can meet its ever-
increasing demand for water. In my view, expanding the dam is an easy
way to increase water storage capacity in an area that desperately
needs it.
The next bill I am introducing today, is the Juab County Ground Water
Study and Development Act of 2005. This legislation would amend the
Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 2005 to
include Juab County. It would allow Juab County to use Central Utah
Project funds to complete water resource development projects, enabling
the County to better utilize their existing water resources. It will
ensure that farmers, ranchers, and other citizens of Juab County have a
reliable water supply.
Under the original plan for the Bonneville Unit of the Central Utah
Project, several counties in central Utah, including Juab, were to be
delivered supplemental water through an irrigation and drainage
delivery system. Over the years, however, many central Utah Counties
have elected not to participate in the plan and no longer pay the
requisite taxes to the Central Utah Water Conservancy District, the
political division of the State of Utah established to manage CUP
activities in Utah.
Unlike other central Utah Counties, Juab County remained active in
the Central Utah Water Conservancy District's efforts and has paid
property taxes to the District hoping to benefit from its membership.
Unfortunately, that has not been the case. Presently, most of the water
allocated to the Bonneville Unit of the Central Utah Project is planned
for use in Wasatch, Salt Lake, and Utah Counties. This legislation
would simply ensure that the citizens of Juab County can benefit from
the system they help support.
I urge my colleagues to support these bills.
______
By Mr. CRAIG (for himself, Mr. Roberts, and Mr. Brownback):
S. 1813. A bill to amend titles 10 and 38 of the United States Code,
to modify the circumstances under which a person who has committed a
capital offense is denied certain burial-related benefits and funeral
honors; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I have sought recognition to comment on
legislation I am introducing that will fix a problem that many of us
thought was corrected 8 years ago. My legislation will close a loophole
in the law that now allows capital offenders to be buried in America's
national cemeteries. My legislation will ensure that no one who may be
given a life sentence or who may be sentenced to death for murder will
be honored at their funerals by the presence of a military funeral
detail. And, finally, my legislation will direct the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs, the Secretary of the Army, and other military service
Secretaries to each prescribe a proactive process by which officials
can ascertain whether there exists a burial or funeral honors
prohibition on individuals who may have been capital offenders.
In 1997, the Congress learned that the perpetrator of the Oklahoma
City bombings--Timothy McVeigh--was, in fact, eligible for burial and
memorialization in a VA national cemetery and, under certain
circumstances, Arlington National Cemetery. Largely, but not
exclusively, in response to McVeigh's eligibility, Public Law 105-116
was enacted to deny interment in Arlington National Cemetery, VA
National Cemeteries, and State veterans' cemeteries funded with VA
grants, to any person convicted of a Federal capital crime or a State
capital crime for which a sentence of death or life imprisonment
without parole is given. Later, in 2002, Public Law 107-330 was enacted
to deny to capital offenders VA-provided flags, headstones and markers,
and Presidential Memorial Certificates. The intent of the 1997 and 2002
laws was clear: We should not bury brutal murderers alongside America's
honored dead and we should not provide memorialization benefits to
those who have so dishonored themselves through their own post-service
conduct.
The circumstances surrounding the placement of the cremated remains
of a convicted double-murderer--Russell Wayne Wagner--at Arlington
National Cemetery in late July caused me, and many of my colleagues, to
wonder what impact the 1997 law actually had. The media coverage of
former Chief Justice William Rehnquist's Arlington Cemetery funeral
only served to confirm my bewilderment: How could an individual like
Wagner who committed such heinous acts be placed in the same hallowed
ground as Chief Justice Rehnquist, Justice Thurgood Marshall, President
Kennedy, and hundreds upon hundreds of servicemembers to whom this
country owes its eternal respect?
Russell Wayne Wagner's two life sentences carried with them the
possibility of parole. The 1997 law only bars national cemetery
interment to State capital offenders sentenced to death or life in
prison without parole. Thus, we have our first example of the ``parole
loophole.''
To further explore how wide the ``parole loophole'' is for State
capital offenders, I asked the Congressional Research Service to
analyze the sentencing of Dennis Rader, the infamous ``BTK serial
killer,''--``BTK'' being short for Rader's method to dispose of his 10
victims: Bind, Torture, Kill. Rader was given ten consecutive life
terms for which he must serve a minimum of 175 years in prison.
However, because the Kansas law under which Rader was tried did not
allow for a sentence of death, nor did it allow for a sentence of life
without parole, CRS concluded that, as an honorably discharged veteran
of the Air Force, ``it would appear that he is not statutorily
precluded from interment in a national cemetery.'' If the 1997 law
cannot prevent the interment of a notorious serial killer, then what
good is it? I called a hearing in September to find an answer to that
question.
The Committee heard from Mr. Vernon Davis, son of Wagner's victims,
who described in vivid detail how Wagner repeatedly stabbed his elderly
parents to death. I was so astounded that an individual who committed
such a cowardly action could be buried at Arlington that I immediately
introduced legislation--S. 1759--to have his remains removed.
The Committee also heard from VA and Arlington cemetery officials who
described the process that is in place to deny burial in national
cemeteries to capital offenders. Unfortunately, the process appears to
be a passive one. The Deputy Superintendent at Arlington told me that
Arlington officials do
[[Page S10827]]
not even ask whether a person on whose behalf burial is sought is a
convicted capital offender. While I understand that finding out such
information needs to be handled delicately and with tact, to have no
screening process at all is unacceptable.
Finally, we heard the unified testimony of 5 veterans' organizations,
who reminded us that decisions to take away benefits earned by virtue
of honorable military service should never be made without careful,
reasoned deliberation.
Based on the testimony from the Committee's hearing, I have joined
with my colleagues from Kansas--Senators Roberts and Brownback--in
introducing this legislation today. Section 1 of the legislation would
remove the language in law that provides capital offenders--like Wagner
and the BTK Killer--with their continued burial eligibility.
Furthermore, to address situations where a capital offender may have
plea-bargained his or her way out of a death or life sentence, section
1 would remove the language in statute that ties the prohibition of
cemetery burial to a capital crime sentence that was received and would
replace it with language tying the prohibition to a capital crime
sentence that may be received. This statutory language change would
recognize that while the actual sentence for those who commit heinous
acts may vary, the underlying action meriting those criminal sentences
should be treated equally for purposes of burial prohibition.
Section 2 of the legislation would deny the provision of military
honors and burial at a military cemetery of a person convicted of a
Federal capital crime or a State capital crime for which a life
sentence or the death penalty may be imposed. Section 3 would deny
funeral honors--where at least two members of the Armed Forces are made
available at veterans' funerals to fold and present the American flag,
and play Taps--to those same persons, irrespective of whether burial is
sought at national, state, or private cemeteries.
Finally, section 4 of the legislation would require the appropriate
military service and VA to each prescribe regulations to ensure that a
person is neither buried, nor provided funeral honors, before a good-
faith effort is made to determine whether such person is ineligible as
a capital offender.
This legislation is a necessary reform to the 1997 law. Let me be
clear that while the effect of the legislation would be to take away
benefits that were otherwise earned by honorable military service, the
intent of it is not punitive. Rather, my intention is to preserve the
dignity of America's national cemeteries.
President Lincoln delivered his Gettysburg Address at one of our
Nation's first, and most revered, national cemeteries. Then he spoke of
the ``honored dead'' who gave their ``last full measure of devotion.''
My legislation will ensure that we bring no dishonor to those who
belong in our national cemeteries by inappropriately honoring those
who, by their own actions, do not.
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. 1813
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. PROHIBITION AGAINST INTERMENT IN NATIONAL
CEMETERY.
Section 2411 of title 38, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``for which the person
was sentenced to death or life imprisonment''; and
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``for which the person
was sentenced to death or life imprisonment without parole'';
and
(2) in subsection (d)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``the death penalty or
life imprisonment'' and inserting ``a life sentence or the
death penalty''; and
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``the death penalty or
life imprisonment without parole may be imposed'' and
inserting ``a life sentence or the death penalty may be
imposed''.
SEC. 2. DENIAL OF CERTAIN BURIAL-RELATED BENEFITS.
Section 985 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``who has been convicted
of a capital offense under Federal or State law for which the
person was sentenced to death or life imprisonment without
parole.'' and inserting ``described in section 2411(b) of
title 38.'';
(2) in subsection (b), by striking ``convicted of a capital
offense under Federal law'' and inserting ``described in
section 2411(b) of title 38''; and
(3) by amending subsection (c) to read as follows:
``(c) Definition.--In this section, the term `burial'
includes inurnment.''.
SEC. 3. DENIAL OF FUNERAL HONORS.
Section 1491(h) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as
subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively;
(2) by striking `` means a decedent who--'' and inserting
the following: ``--
``(1) means a decedent who--'';
(3) in subparagraph (B), as redesignated, by striking the
period at the end and inserting ``; and''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) does not include any person described in section
2411(b) of title 38.''.
SEC. 4. RULEMAKING.
(a) Department of Defense.--The Secretary of Defense shall
prescribe regulations to ensure that a person is not interred
in any military cemetery under the authority of the Secretary
or provided funeral honors under section 1491 of title 10,
United States Code, unless a good faith effort has been made
to determine whether such person is described in section
2411(b) of title 38, United States Code, or is otherwise
ineligible for such interment or honors under Federal law.
(b) Department of Veterans Affairs.--The Secretary of
Veterans Affairs shall prescribe regulations to ensure that a
person is not interred in any cemetery in the National
Cemetery System unless a good faith effort has been made to
determine whether such person is described in section 2411(b)
of title 38, United States Code, or is otherwise ineligible
for such interment under Federal law.
____________________