[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 96 (Thursday, June 14, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7733-S7753]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. HATCH (for himself, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Obama, Mr. Kerry, 
        Ms. Stabenow, and Mr. Salazar):
  S. 1617. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
incentives for plug-in electric drive motor vehicles; to the Committee 
on Finance.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Fuel Reduction 
using Electrons to End Our Dependence on the Mideast Act of 2007, or 
the FREEDOM Act. Senators Maria Cantwell, Barack Obama, and I have been 
working closely together since the beginning of the year to author this 
very important legislation. We believe the FREEDOM Act will begin a 
dramatic shift in the transportation sector away from liquid fuels and 
toward the greater use of electrons.
  For years I worked hard to pass a strong tax incentive package for 
alternative fuel and hybrid electric vehicles in the form of the CLEAR 
Act, which was passed into law as part of the Energy Policy Act of 
2005. When I first introduced the CLEAR Act, more than 7 years ago, 
there were only two hybrid vehicles available commercially. Today there 
are dozens of models of hybrids from which consumers can choose.
  Already, the move toward hybrid-electric vehicles has helped to 
reduce the demand for liquid fuel in this country. It has also set the 
stage for the next technological step, the plug-in hybrid electric 
vehicle. This vehicle would have an extra battery pack, recharged from 
the electricity grid, giving the vehicle all the benefits of a plug-in 
battery electric vehicle but also the freedom and fuel efficiency of a 
hybrid electric vehicle once the battery has used up its charge.
  With today's advanced plug-in electric and the coming plug-in hybrid 
electric vehicles, most commuters will be able to make the round trip 
from home to work and back using very little or no fuel, relying 
instead on cheap, clean, and abundant electricity.
  As you and many of our colleagues know, per mile, electricity can be 
much cheaper and cleaner than petroleum, and electrons are generated 
domestically and independent of the global oil market.
  It is difficult to overstate the potential the change to plug-in 
electric vehicles could make in terms of our energy dependence on 
liquid fuels. R. James Woolsey, who is a member of the National 
Commission on Energy Policy, testified before the Finance Committee 
this spring. In his testimony, he cited a Department of Energy study 
that estimated that adopting plug-in vehicles would not create a need 
for new base load electricity generation plants until plug-ins 
constitute over 84 percent of the country's 220 million passenger 
vehicles. In other words, we already have the power we need to fuel the 
vast majority of the cars in this country right now, and it exists in 
the excess capacity of our existing powerplants. Because plug-in 
vehicles could mostly be charged at night, during the off-peak hours 
for electric utilities, this technology represents an elegant solution.
  In terms of technology and industry focus, the United States is 
positioned to lead the world into the future with plug-in electric 
drive motor vehicles. The FREEDOM Act would help our Nation to take up 
that position by helping to develop the market, the technology, and the 
domestic production capacity needed to fulfill this role.
  The FREEDOM Act's goals would be achieved through four strong tax 
incentives: First, a tax credit for consumers who purchase plug-in 
electric or plug-in hybrid electric vehicles; second, for a limited 
time, a tax credit for consumers who convert their hybrid vehicles to 
high quality plug-in hybrid vehicles; third, a strong tax incentive for 
the U.S. manufacture of plug-in vehicles and of major components of 
plug-in vehicles, such as batteries, electric motors, and electronic 
controllers; and finally, a tax credit for electric utilities that 
provide rebates to customers who purchase plug-in electric drive 
vehicles.
  Freedom plug-in credits would cover the consumer purchase of vehicles 
that use batteries and that plug into the electric grid for at least 
part of their power. This would include plug-in electrics, plug-in 
hybrids, and others. The amount of the credit would be based on the 
kilowatt hours of the vehicle's battery pack, with a cap of $7,500 for 
passenger vehicles. The same is true for heavier duty vehicles, except 
that the caps are scaled up for each vehicle weight class.
  Freedom conversion credits would go to hybrid-electric vehicle owners 
who choose to convert their existing hybrid vehicle to a high quality 
plug-in hybrid electric vehicle. These credits would also be scaled to 
the kilowatt-hours of the new battery installed in their vehicle. Only 
high quality conversion kits, which are certified to meet all highway 
safety and emissions standards would qualify for a freedom conversion 
credit, and the credits would be available until the market transitions 
to commercially available plug-in hybrid vehicles.
  The FREEDOM Act also offers first-year expensing for companies 
setting up production capacity in the United States for plug-in 
electric drive vehicles and for major components of those vehicles.
  Finally, in the case that an electric utility in the U.S. chooses to 
offer rebates to customers who purchase plug-in electric drive 
vehicles, the FREEDOM Act would reimburse the utility for part of that 
rebate in the form of a freedom utility credit. The amount of the 
Government reimbursement would be based on the rate of greenhouse gas 
emissions for each utility.
  I want to emphasize that like the tax credits available under current 
law for hybrid electric vehicles, the tax incentives in the FREEDOM Act 
are temporary. They are needed in order to help get these products over 
the initial stage of production, when they are quite a bit more 
expensive than older technology vehicles, to the mass production stage, 
where economies of scale will drive costs down and the credits will no 
longer be necessary. Consumer acceptance of this exciting new 
technology is vital, and these credits will make it easier and more 
economical for consumers to choose vehicles that will move us away from 
dependence on less clean and more expensive transportation fuel 
produced by other nations.
  The consumer acceptance of the hybrid electric vehicle has already 
proven a benefit to our Nation's energy security, and the plug-in 
hybrid will lead to an even more dramatic reduction in fuel use in this 
country. Years ago, I argued that the technologies developed to make 
hybrids possible would eventually lead us to a commercially available 
hydrogen fuel cell vehicle. I stand by that argument, and I believe 
that by the time plug-in hybrid electric vehicles become mass produced 
in this country, we will be ready to use hydrogen fuel cells to 
disconnect these vehicles from the grid and begin a new age in 
transportation with much greater freedom of movement and freedom from 
dependence of foreign oil.

[[Page S7734]]

  Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to throw their full support for 
the FREEDOM Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. Bennett):
  S. 1619. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
a credit for fuel-efficient motor vehicles, and for other purposes; to 
the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today Senator Bennett and I are 
reintroducing legislation to provide a significant financial incentive 
for automakers to produce, and for their customers to buy, more fuel 
efficient cars and light trucks in the form of consumer tax credits. 
Reducing our Nation's dependence on oil should not be a partisan issue 
and Senator Bennett and I have worked together to come up with a plan 
that will encourage consumers to buy more energy efficient vehicles 
even if those vehicles employ technologies, such as electric hybrid 
drive trains or clean diesels, that cost more to produce.
  Under our bipartisan, market-oriented bill, consumers who buy 
vehicles that are at least 25 percent more fuel efficient than the 
current corporate fuel economy standards, called CAFE, would get a 
rebate of at least $630 and as much as $1,860 for the most fuel-
efficient cars. We have separate standards for cars and trucks so 
consumers can choose the type of vehicle they want and still get the 
credit as long as they choose a fuel-efficient model. Similarly, our 
bill is technology neutral. We don't provide a credit based on the kind 
of engine or drive train that a car or truck has. We provide a credit 
based on the level of fuel economy the vehicle achieves. So, 
manufacturers are free to pursue whichever efficiency technology they 
want and consumers have a greater choice of vehicles to purchase.
  In the past, the automobile industry has said that increasing fuel 
economy standards is hard to achieve because car buyers place little 
value on fuel economy, especially if that fuel efficiency comes with 
added cost. They also argue that initial purchaser of a new car or 
truck will not keep that car or truck long enough to recognize the 
life-cycle fuel savings of a more efficient vehicle. The new program 
created by our bill directly addresses these concerns by providing tax 
credits to consumers for purchasing fuel-efficient vehicles.
  Providing these credits to purchasers of fuel efficient vehicles will 
focus consumer attention on fuel efficiency at the time of purchase. 
For vehicles that qualify, the rebate amount would be printed on the 
window sticker on new vehicles, so consumers would know exactly how 
much they would receive at the time they buy a new vehicle.

  The consumer would claim that rebate as a tax credit on his or her 
tax return. Alternatively, the rebate could be transferred to auto 
dealers, allowing dealers to provide the rebates to consumers as ``cash 
back'' at the time of purchase.
  This legislation builds on the incentives that were provided in the 
2005 energy bill specifically for hybrid gasoline/electric, lean-burn 
and fuel-cell powered cars. We believe the approach that we are 
advocating will be simpler and fairer. Unlike the 2005 credits, we 
don't pick specific technologies. Unlike the 2005 credits, we don't 
limit the amount of the credits to a specific number of vehicles or 
manufacturer. This approach does not pick winners and losers among 
competitive technology or companies. It takes a technology-neutral 
approach that allows any vehicle that has superior fuel efficiency to 
qualify for a tax credit, whether it uses hybrid or any other 
technology.
  Finally, legislation already passed by the Senate Commerce Committee 
calls for the U.S. Department of Transportation to begin to increase 
the fuel efficiency standards of cars beginning in model year 2011. Our 
tax credit program, which will cover model years 2009, 2010 and 2011, 
will help bridge the gap between where we are now and implementation of 
the new fuel economy standards by encouraging consumers to buy those 
more fuel efficient vehicles earlier while helping manufacturers gear 
up to produce them.
  I urge colleagues to help jumpstart our Nation on the road to oil 
independence and chart a new direction for our Nation's energy policy 
by supporting the OILSAVE Act.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no ojection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1619

       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 ``Oil Independence, Limiting 
     Subsidies, and Accelerating Vehicle Efficiency (OILSAVE) 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. TAX CREDIT FOR FUEL-EFFICIENT MOTOR VEHICLES.

       (a) In General.--Subpart B of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 
     other credits) is amended by inserting after section 30C the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 30D. FUEL-EFFICIENT MOTOR VEHICLE CREDIT.

       ``(a) Allowance of Credit.--There shall be allowed a credit 
     against the tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable year 
     an amount equal to the applicable amount for each new 
     qualified fuel-efficient motor vehicle placed in service by 
     the taxpayer during the taxable year.
       ``(b) New Qualified Fuel-Efficient Motor Vehicle.--For 
     purposes of this section, the term `new qualified fuel-
     efficient motor vehicle' means a motor vehicle (as defined 
     under section 30(c)(2))--
       ``(1) which is a passenger automobile or a light truck,
       ``(2) which--
       ``(A) in the case of a passenger automobile, achieves a 
     fuel economy of not less than 34.5 miles per gallon, and
       ``(B) in the case of a light truck, achieves a fuel economy 
     of not less than 27.5 miles per gallon,
       ``(3) the original use of which commences with the 
     taxpayer,
       ``(4) which is acquired for use or lease by the taxpayer 
     and not for resale, and
       ``(5) which is made by a manufacturer for model year 2009, 
     2010, or 2011.
       ``(c) Applicable Amount.--For purposes of this section, the 
     applicable amount shall be determined as follows:


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               In the case
                                                  of a       In the case
                                                passenger    of a light
If the motor vehicle achieves a fuel economy   automobile,   truck, the
                     of:                           the       applicable
                                               applicable    amount is:
                                               amount is:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
27.5 miles per gallon.......................            $0          $630
28.5........................................             0           710
29.5........................................             0           780
30.5........................................             0           850
31.5........................................             0           920
32.5........................................             0           980
33.5........................................             0         1,040
34.5........................................           630         1.090
35.5........................................           700         1,140
36.5........................................           760         1,190
37.5........................................           820         1,240
38.5........................................           880         1,280
39.5........................................           940         1,320

[[Page S7735]]

 
40.5........................................           990         1,360
41.5........................................         1,040         1,400
42.5........................................         1,090         1,430
43.5........................................         1,140         1,470
44.5........................................         1,180         1,500
45.5........................................         1,220         1,530
46.5........................................         1,260         1,560
47.5........................................         1,300         1,590
48.5........................................         1,340         1,620
49.5........................................         1,370         1,640
50.5........................................         1,410         1,670
51.5........................................         1,440         1,690
52.5........................................         1,470         1,720
53.5........................................         1,500         1,740
54.5........................................         1,530         1,760
55.5........................................         1,560         1,780
56.5........................................         1,590         1,800
57.5........................................         1,610         1,820
58.5........................................         1,640         1,840
59.5 or more................................         1,660         1,860
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       ``(d) Other Definitions and Special Rules.--For purposes of 
     this section--
       ``(1) Fuel economy.--The term `fuel economy' has the 
     meaning given such term under section 32901(a)(10) of title 
     49, United States Code.
       ``(2) Model year.--The term `model year' has the meaning 
     given such term under section 32901(a)(14) of such title.
       ``(3) Other terms.--The terms `passenger automobile', 
     `light truck', and `manufacturer' have the meaning given such 
     terms in regulations prescribed by the Administrator of the 
     Environmental Protection Agency for purposes of the 
     administration of title II of the Clean Air Act.
       ``(4) Reduction in basis.--For purposes of this subtitle, 
     the basis of any property for which a credit is allowable 
     under subsection (a) shall be reduced by the amount of such 
     credit so allowed.
       ``(5) No double benefit.--
       ``(A) Coordination with other vehicle credits.--No credit 
     shall be allowed under subsection (a) with respect to any new 
     qualified fuel-efficient motor vehicle for any taxable year 
     if a credit is allowed with respect to such motor vehicle for 
     such taxable year under section 30 or 30B.
       ``(B) Other tax benefits.--The amount of any deduction or 
     credit (other than the credit allowable under this section 
     and any credit described in subparagraph (A)) allowable under 
     this chapter with respect to any new qualified fuel-efficient 
     motor vehicle shall be reduced by the amount of credit 
     allowed under subsection (a) for such motor vehicle for such 
     taxable year.
       ``(6) Property used outside the united states, etc., not 
     qualified.--No credit shall be allowable under subsection (a) 
     with respect to any property referred to in section 50(b)(1) 
     or with respect to the portion of the cost of any property 
     taken into account under section 179.
       ``(7) Election not to take credit.--No credit shall be 
     allowed under subsection (a) for any vehicle if the taxpayer 
     elects not to have this section apply to such vehicle.
       ``(8) Interaction with air quality and motor vehicle safety 
     standards.--Unless otherwise provided in this section, a 
     motor vehicle shall not be considered eligible for a credit 
     under this section unless such vehicle is in compliance 
     with--
       ``(A) the applicable provisions of the Clean Air Act for 
     the applicable make and model year of the vehicle (or 
     applicable air quality provisions of State law in the case of 
     a State which has adopted such provision under a waiver under 
     section 209(b) of the Clean Air Act), and
       ``(B) the motor vehicle safety provisions of sections 30101 
     through 30169 of title 49, United States Code.
       ``(e) Credit May Be Transferred.--
       ``(1) In general.--A taxpayer may, in connection with the 
     purchase of a new qualified fuel-efficient motor vehicle, 
     transfer any credit allowable under subsection (a) to any 
     person who is in the trade or business of selling new 
     qualified fuel-efficient motor vehicles, but only if such 
     person clearly discloses to such taxpayer, through the use of 
     a window sticker attached to the new qualified fuel-efficient 
     vehicle--
       ``(A) the amount of any credit allowable under subsection 
     (a) with respect to such vehicle, and
       ``(B) a notification that the taxpayer will not be eligible 
     for any credit under section 30 or 30B with respect to such 
     vehicle unless the taxpayer elects not to have this section 
     apply with respect to such vehicle.
       ``(2) Consent required for revocation.--Any transfer under 
     paragraph (1) may be revoked only with the consent of the 
     Secretary.
       ``(3) Regulations.--The Secretary may prescribe such 
     regulations as necessary to ensure that any credit described 
     in paragraph (1) is claimed once and not retransferred by a 
     transferee.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 1016(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
     amended by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (36), by 
     striking the period at the end of paragraph (37) and 
     inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(38) to the extent provided in section 30D(d)(4).''.
       (2) Section 6501(m) of such Code is amended by inserting 
     ``30D(d)(7),'' after ``30C(e)(5),''.
       (3) The table of section for subpart C of part IV of 
     subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by 
     inserting after the item relating to section 30C the 
     following new item:

``Sec. 30D. Fuel-efficient motor vehicle credit.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to property placed in service after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act with respect to model years 2009, 
     2010, and 2011.

     SEC. 3. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING OFFSETTING REVENUES.

       It is the sense of the Senate that the cost of the 
     amendments made by section 2 shall be offset by equivalent 
     revenues specified in related legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. CANTWELL (for herself and Mr. Kerry):
  S. 1620. A bill to provide the Coast Guard and NOAA with additional 
authorities under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, to strengthen the Oil 
Pollution Act of 1990, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Oil 
Pollution Prevention and Response Act of 2007 with my colleague Senator 
Kerry, This comprehensive legislation strengthens and builds upon the 
Oil Pollution Act of 1990, OPA 90. Congress passed OPA 90 shortly after 
the Exxon Valdez ran aground in 1989, spilling 11 million gallons of 
crude oil in Alaska's pristine Prince William Sound, the largest spill 
in U.S, history. OPA 90 revolutionized oilspill risk management and we 
have OPA 90 to thank or improving oil spill prevention, preparedness, 
and response.
  It is important to recognize that we have come a long way since OPA 
90. This is especially true in my home State of Washington. The Coast 
Guard's District 13 leads the Nation in oilspill prevention and works 
closely with the State of Washington, tribal governments, and industry.
  While we recognize the good work that is already being carried out in 
Washington and elsewhere, we must also look to continually improve our

[[Page S7736]]

ability to prevent and respond to oilspills. While the probability of a 
major oilspill has been greatly reduced since OPA 90, the potential 
impact of such a spill is now greater than ever.
  According to Coast Guard data, although the number of oilspills from 
vessels has decreased enormously since passage of OPA 90, the volume of 
oil spilled nationwide is still significant. In 1992, vessels spilled 
665,432 gallons of oil; in 2004, the total was higher, at 722,768 
gallons, and a significant numbers of spills are still occurring. In 
2004, there were 36 spills from tank ships, 141 spills from barges, and 
1,562 spills from other vessels, including cargo ships. Furthermore, 
even though the number of spills from tankers declined from 193 spills 
in 1992 to 36 spills in 2004, a single incident from a vessel like the 
Exxon Valdez can be devastating.
  Again, to use examples from Washington State: endangered species like 
salmon and southern resident orca whales are increasingly vulnerable to 
the acute and chronic impacts of an oilspill. We have a National Marine 
Sanctuary off our coast that demands stepped-up protection, and we must 
take care to hold up our trust obligations to treaty tribes whose usual 
and accustomed fishing grounds would be devastated by a major spill. 
This is all to say that we must factor the consequence major spill into 
our equations for risk. My colleagues from around the country can, I am 
sure, point to similar examples.
  In August of 2005, I chaired a Commerce Committee Subcommittee on 
Fisheries and Coast Guard field hearing in Seattle. This hearing 
focused on improving our oil pollution prevention and response 
capabilities. As a result of testimony from that hearing and 
conversations with the Coast Guard and other stakeholders, I introduced 
the Oil Pollution Prevention and Response Act of 2006 last March.
  The bill I introduce today, the Oil Pollution Prevention and Response 
Act of 2007, updates that effort and includes additional provisions.
  New provisions include a requirement that the Coast Guard notify 
States and tribal governments of maritime incidents in Federal waters 
that have the potential to impact state resources. The bill would also 
atlthorize the Coast Guard to train and work with qualified State 
vessel inspectors to bolster their existing ability to inspect vessels 
in port.
  Other new provisions include a requirement for the Coast Guard to 
promulgate regulations allowing vessel owners to form nonprofit 
cooperatives to streamline their compliance with vessel response plan 
requirements. Also new is an authorization for an education and 
outreach grant program to prevent the frequency of small spills that 
occur from recreational vessels.
  The Oil Pollution Prevention and Response Act of 2007 retains key 
provisions from last year's bill that address a number of areas to 
improve prevention and response.
  First, my bill directs the Coast Guard to finalize all rulemakings 
remaining from OPA 90 within 18 months. Remaining OPA 90 rules include 
the critical salvage and firefighting requirements, which would 
establish a national network of salvage and response vessels and 
equipment capable of assisting ships in distress. Implementation of the 
salvage and firefighting rule has been consistently pushed back, most 
recently in February of this year. It has been 17 years since the 
passage of OPA 90 and finalizing these rules in a timely manner will 
greatly improve our prevention and response capabilities.
  Because human error is the leading cause of accidental oilspills, the 
Coast Guard would be required to identify and pass regulations to 
address the most frequent sources of human error that have led to 
oilspills from vessels as well as ``near-misses.'' It would require the 
Coast Guard to ensure the safety of single hull tankers and other high-
risk vessels by increasing inspections of such vessels. My bill would 
require the Coast Guard to address and reduce the increased risk of 
oilspills from oil transfers. It would also make companies that 
knowingly hire substandard single-hull tank vessels after 2010 
``responsible parties'' in order to provide a disincentive for such 
contracts.
  Of particular importance to my State, the bill would provide a 
mechanism for year-round funding of the Neah Bay response tug, a key 
element of the oilspill prevention safety net for Washington State's 
Olympic coast. It would also increase oil spill preparedness in the 
Strait of Juan de Fuca by changing the definition of ``High Volume 
Port'' for Puget Sound to make westerly boundary begin at the entrance 
to the strait. This change would require oilspill response equipment to 
be stationed along the entire strait and not just east of the current 
line at Port Angeles. In addition, the Oil Pollution Prevention and 
Response Act of 2007 would require improved coordination with federally 
recognized tribes on oilspill prevention, preparedness, and response.
  The bill would codify into federal law the establishment of the 
oilspill Advisory Council, which was created by the Washington State 
Legislature and Governor Gregoire in the wake of the October 2004 Dalco 
Passage Oilspill, and provide $1 million annually to support the 
council's important work. Finally, this bill would reiterate an OPA 90 
directive for the Coast Guard and Department of State to enter into 
negotiations with Canada to ensure tug escorts for all tank ships with 
a capacity greater than 40,000 dead weight tons in the Strait of Juan 
de Fuca, Strait of Georgia, and Haro Strait.
  The slow response to the oilspill in Daleo Passage in the Puget Sound 
was largely attributed to difficulties with detecting the oil that was 
spilled. The Oil Pollution Prevention and Response Act of 2007 would 
reinvigorate a Federal research program on oilspill prevention, 
detection, and response, and would establish a grant program for the 
development of cost-effective technologies for detecting discharges of 
oil from vessels, including infrared, pressure sensors, and remote 
sensing. It would also require the Secretary of Homeland Security, in 
conjunction with other Federal agencies, to conduct an analysis of the 
condition and safety of all aspects of oil transportation in the United 
States, and provide recommendations to improve such safety. This was a 
specific recommendation of the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy.
  The Department of Justice has also noted that a major category of 
oilspills are intentional discharges of oil from vessels. The United 
States cannot address this problem alone. Thus, the bill would require 
the Coast Guard to pursue stronger enforcement measures for oil 
discharges in the International Maritime Organization and other 
appropriate international organizations.
  Oilspill prevention and response is timely for Congress to consider 
because waterborne transportation of oil in the United States continues 
to increase, significant volumes of oil continue to be released, and 
the potential for a major spill remains unacceptably high. Recent 
spills involving significant quantities of oil have occurred off the 
coasts of Alaska, Maine, Massachusetts, Oregon, Virginia, Hawaii, and 
Washington, and involved barges, tankers, nontank vessels, and oil 
transfer operations.
  One thing we have learned from these spills is that prevention is 
more cost-effective than cleaning up oil once it is released into the 
environment. We have also learned that although double hulls and 
redundant steering do increase tanker safety, these technologies are 
not a panacea and we need to do more to ensure against oilspills.
  The Federal Government has a responsibility to protect the Nation's 
natural resources, public health, and environment by improving Federal 
measures to prevent and respond to oilspills. I urge my colleagues to 
consider this legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no ojection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1620

       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 ``Oil Pollution Prevention and 
     Response Act of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       The table of contents for this Act is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title.
Sec. 2. Table of contents.

[[Page S7737]]

Sec. 3. Findings.
Sec. 4. Definitions.

                   Title I--Prevention of Oil Spills

                   Subtitle A--Coast Guard Provisions

Sec. 101. Rulemakings. 
Sec. 102. Oil spill response capability.
Sec. 103. Inspections by Coast Guard.
Sec. 104. Oil transfers from vessels. 
Sec. 105. Improvements to reduce human error and near-miss incidents. 
Sec. 106. Navigational measures for protection of natural resources.
Sec. 107. Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary.
Sec. 108. Higher volume port area regulatory definition change.
Sec. 109. Prevention of small oil spills.
Sec. 110. Improved coordination with tribal governments. 
Sec. 111. Oil spill advisory council. 
Sec. 112. Notification requirements.
Sec. 113. Cooperative State inspection authority.
Sec. 114. Tug escorts for laden oil tankers.
Sec. 115. Tank and non-tank vessel response plans.
Sec. 116. Report on the availability of technology to detect the loss 
              of oil.

 Subtitle B--National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Provisions

Sec. 151. Hydrographic surveys.
Sec. 152. Electronic navigational charts.

                           Title II--Response

Sec. 201. Rapid response system.
Sec. 202. Coast Guard oil spill database.
Sec. 203. Use of oil spill liability trust fund.
Sec. 204. Extension of financial responsibility.
Sec. 205. Liability for use of unsafe single-hull vessels.
Sec. 206. Response tugs.
Sec. 207. International efforts on enforcement. 
Sec. 208. Investment of amounts in damage assessment and restoration 
              revolving fund.

             Title III--Research and Miscellaneous Reports

Sec. 301. Federal Oil Spill Research Committee.
Sec. 302. Grant project for development of cost-effective detection 
              technologies.
Sec. 303. Status of implementation of recommendations by the National 
              Research Council.
Sec. 304. GAO report.
Sec. 305. Oil transportation infrastructure analysis.

     SEC. 3. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds the following:
       (1) Oil released into the Nation's marine waters can cause 
     substantial, and in some cases irreparable, harm to the 
     marine environment.
       (2) The economic impact of oil spills is substantial. 
     Billions of dollars have been spent in the United States for 
     cleanup of, and damages due to, oil spills; while many 
     social, cultural, economic, and environmental damages remain 
     uncompensated.
       (3) The Oil Pollution Act of 1990, enacted in response to 
     the worst vessel oil spill in United States history, 
     substantially reduced the amount of oil spills from vessels. 
     However, significant volumes of oil continue to be released, 
     and the potential for a major spill remains unacceptably 
     high.
       (4) Although the total number of oil spills from vessels 
     has decreased since passage of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, 
     more oil was spilled in 2004 from vessels nationwide than was 
     spilled from vessels in 1992.
       (5) Waterborne transportation of oil in the United States 
     continues to increase.
       (6) Although the number of oil spills from tankers declined 
     from 193 in 1992 to 36 in 2004, spills from oil tankers tend 
     to be large with devastating impacts.
       (7) While the number of oil spills from tank barges has 
     declined since 1992 (322 spills to 141 spills in 2004), the 
     volume of oil spilled from tank barges has remained constant 
     at approximately 200,000 gallons spilled each year.
       (8) Oil spills from non-tank vessels averaged between 
     125,000 gallons and 400,000 gallons per year from 1992 
     through 2004 and accounted for over half of the total number 
     of spills from all sources, including vessels and non-vessel 
     sources.
       (9) Recent spills involving significant quantities of oil 
     have occurred off the coasts of Alaska, Maine, Massachusetts, 
     Oregon, Virginia, and Washington, and involved barges, tank 
     vessels, and non-tank vessels. The value of waterfront 
     property, sport, commercial and tribal treaty fisheries, 
     recreation, tourism, and threatened and endangered species 
     continue to increase.
       (10) It is more cost-effective to prevent oil spills than 
     it is to clean-up oil once it is released into the 
     environment.
       (11) Of the 20 major vessel oil spill incidents since 1990 
     where liability limits have been exceeded, 10 involved tank 
     barges, 8 involved non-tank vessels, 2 involved tankers, and 
     only 1 involved a vessel that was double-hulled.
       (12) Although recent technological improvements in oil 
     tanker design, such as double hulls and redundant steering, 
     increase tanker safety, these technologies are not a panacea 
     and cannot ensure against oil spills, the leading cause of 
     which is human error.
       (13) The Federal government has a responsibility to protect 
     the Nation's natural resources, public health, and 
     environment by improving Federal measures to prevent and 
     respond to oil spills.
       (14) Environmentally fragile coastal areas are vitally 
     important to local economies and the way of life in coastal 
     States and federally recognized tribal governments. These 
     areas are particularly vulnerable to the threat of oil 
     spills. Coastal waters contribute approximately 75 percent of 
     all commercial shellfish and finfish catches, and over 81 
     percent of all recreational fishing catches in the United 
     States, outside of Alaska and Hawaii.
       (15) The northern coast of Washington State and entrance to 
     Puget Sound is the principal corridor conveying Pacific Rim 
     commerce into the State, to Canada's largest port, and to the 
     United States' third largest naval complex. The area contains 
     a National Marine Sanctuary, a National Park, and many 
     National Wildlife Refuges contiguous with marine waters.
       (16) State, local, and tribal governments have important 
     human resources and spill response capabilities which can 
     contribute to response efforts in the event of a significant 
     oil spill. State, local, and tribal governments may have 
     unique local knowledge of natural resources which can improve 
     the quality of spill response. For these reasons, State, 
     local and tribal governments need appropriate information to 
     have knowledge of spills, as well as incidents and activities 
     that may result in a spill, which can impact State waters.

     SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Area to be avoided.--The term ``area to be avoided'' 
     means a routing measure established by the International 
     Maritime Organization as an area to be avoided.
       (2) Coastal state.--The term ``coastal State'' has the 
     meaning given that term by section 304(4) of the Coastal Zone 
     Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1453(4)).
       (3) Commandant.--The term ``Commandant'' means the 
     Commandant of the Coast Guard.
       (4) Non-tank vessel.--The term ``non-tank vessel'' means a 
     self-propelled vessel other than a tank vessel.
       (5) Oil.--The term ``oil'' has the meaning given that term 
     by section 1001(23) of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 
     U.S.C. 2701(23)).
       (6) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating 
     except where otherwise explicitly stated.
       (7) Tank vessel.--The term ``tank vessel'' has the meaning 
     given that term by section 1001(34) of the Oil Pollution Act 
     of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2701(34)).
       (8) Waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United 
     States.--The term ``waters subject to the jurisdiction of the 
     United States'' means navigable waters (as defined in section 
     1001(21) of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 
     2701(21)) as well as--
       (A) the territorial sea of the United States as defined in 
     Presidential Proclamation Number 5928 of December 27, 1988; 
     and
       (B) the Exclusive Economic Zone of the United States 
     established by Presidential Proclamation Number 5030 of March 
     10, 1983.
       (9) Other terms.--The terms ``facility'', ``gross ton'', 
     ``exclusive economic zone'', ``incident'', ``oil'', ``tank 
     vessel'', ``territorial seas'', and ``vessel'' have the 
     meaning given those terms in section 1001 of the Oil 
     Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2701).

                   TITLE I--PREVENTION OF OIL SPILLS

                   Subtitle A--Coast Guard Provisions

     SEC. 101. RULEMAKINGS.

       (a) Status Report.--
       (1) In general.--Within 90 days after the date of enactment 
     of this Act, the Secretary shall provide a report to the 
     Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and 
     the House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure on the status of all Coast Guard rulemakings 
     required (but for which no final rule has been issued as of 
     the date of enactment of this Act)--
       (A) under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2701 et 
     seq.); and
       (B) for--
       (i) automatic identification systems required under section 
     70114 of title 46, United States Code; and
       (ii) inspection requirements for towing vessels required 
     under section 3306(j) of that title.
       (2) Information required.--The Secretary shall include in 
     the report required by paragraph (1)--
       (A) a detailed explanation with respect to each such 
     rulemaking as to--
       (i) what steps have been completed;
       (ii) what areas remain to be addressed; and
       (iii) the cause of any delays; and
       (B) the date by which a final rule may reasonably be 
     expected to be issued.
       (b) Final Rules.--The Secretary shall issue a final rule in 
     each pending rulemaking under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 
     (33 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.) as soon as practicable, but in no 
     event later than 18 months after the date of enactment of 
     this Act.

     SEC. 102. OIL SPILL RESPONSE CAPABILITY.

       (a) Safety Standards for Towing Vessels.--In promulgating 
     regulations for towing vessels under chapter 33 of title 46, 
     United States Code, the Secretary of the department in which 
     the Coast Guard is operating shall--
       (1) give priority to completing such regulations for towing 
     operations involving tank vessels; and
       (2) consider the possible application of standards that, as 
     of the date of enactment

[[Page S7738]]

     of this Act, apply to self-propelled tank vessels, and any 
     modifications that may be necessary for application to towing 
     vessels due to ship design, safety, and other relevant 
     factors.
       (b) Reduction of Oil Spill Risk in Buzzards Bay.--No later 
     than January 1, 2008, the Secretary of the department in 
     which the Coast Guard is operating shall promulgate a final 
     rule for Buzzards Bay, Massachusetts, pursuant to the notice 
     of proposed rulemaking published on March 29, 2006, (71 Fed. 
     Reg. 15649), after taking into consideration public comments 
     submitted pursuant to that notice, to adopt measures to 
     reduce the risk of oil spills in Buzzards Bay, Massachusetts.
       (c) Reporting.--The Secretary shall transmit an annual 
     report to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee on 
     Resources on the extent to which tank vessels in Buzzards 
     Bay, Massachusetts, are using routes recommended by the Coast 
     Guard.

     SEC. 103. INSPECTIONS BY COAST GUARD.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall ensure that the 
     inspection schedule for all United States and foreign-flag 
     tank vessels that enter a United States port or place 
     increases the frequency and comprehensiveness of Coast Guard 
     safety inspections based on such factors as vessel age, hull 
     configuration, past violations of any applicable discharge 
     and safety regulations under United States and international 
     law, indications that the class societies inspecting such 
     vessels may be substandard, and other factors relevant to the 
     potential risk of an oil spill.
       (b) Enhanced Verification of Structural Condition.--The 
     Coast Guard shall adopt, as part of its inspection 
     requirements for tank vessels, additional procedures for 
     enhancing the verification of the reported structural 
     condition of such vessels, taking into account the Condition 
     Assessment Scheme adopted by the International Maritime 
     Organization by Resolution 94(46) on April 27, 2001.

     SEC. 104. OIL TRANSFERS FROM VESSELS.

       (a) Regulations.--Within 1 year after the date of enactment 
     of this Act, the Secretary shall promulgate regulations to 
     reduce the risks of oil spills in operations involving the 
     transfer of oil from or to a tank vessel. The regulations--
       (1) shall focus on operations that have the highest risks 
     of discharge, including operations at night and in inclement 
     weather; and
       (2) shall consider--
       (A) requirements for use of equipment, such as putting 
     booms in place for transfers;
       (B) operational procedures such as manning standards, 
     communications protocols, and restrictions on operations in 
     high-risk areas; or
       (C) both such requirements and operational procedures.
       (b) Application with State Laws.--The regulations 
     promulgated under subsection (a) do not preclude the 
     enforcement of any State law or regulation the requirements 
     of which are at least as stringent as requirements under the 
     regulations (as determined by the Secretary) that--
       (1) applies in State waters;
       (2) does not conflict with, or interfere with the 
     enforcement of, requirements and operational procedures under 
     the regulations; and
       (3) has been enacted or promulgated before the date of 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 105. IMPROVEMENTS TO REDUCE HUMAN ERROR AND NEAR-MISS 
                   INCIDENTS.

       (a) Report.--Within 1 year after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary shall transmit a report to the Senate 
     Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, the 
     Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, and the 
     House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure that, using available data--
       (1) identifies the types of human errors that, combined, 
     account for over 50 percent of all oil spills involving 
     vessels that have been caused by human error in the past 10 
     years;
       (2) identifies the most frequent types of near-miss oil 
     spill incidents involving vessels such as collisions, 
     groundings, and loss of propulsion in the past 10 years;
       (3) describes the extent to which there are gaps in the 
     data with respect to the information required under 
     paragraphs (1) and (2) and explains the reason for those 
     gaps; and
       (4) includes recommendations by the Secretary to address 
     the identified types of errors and incidents and to address 
     any such gaps in the data.
       (b) Measures.--Based on the findings contained in the 
     report required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall take 
     appropriate action, both domestically and at the 
     International Maritime Organization, to reduce the risk of 
     oil spills from human errors.

     SEC. 106. NAVIGATIONAL MEASURES FOR PROTECTION OF NATURAL 
                   RESOURCES.

       (a) Designation of At-risk Areas.--The Secretary and the 
     Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere shall 
     jointly identify areas where routing or other navigational 
     measures are warranted in waters subject to the jurisdiction 
     of the United States to reduce the risk of oil spills and 
     potential damage to natural resources. In identifying those 
     areas, the Secretary and the Under Secretary shall give 
     priority consideration to natural resources of particular 
     ecological importance or economic importance, including 
     commercial fisheries, aquaculture facilities, marine 
     sanctuaries designated by the Secretary of Commerce pursuant 
     to the National Marine Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. 1431 et 
     seq.), estuaries of national significance designated under 
     section 319 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 
     U.S.C. 1330), critical habitats (as defined in section 3(5) 
     of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1532(5)), 
     estuarine research reserves within the National Estuarine 
     Research Reserve System established by section 315 of the 
     Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, and national parks and 
     national seashores administered by the National Park Service 
     under the National Park Service Organic Act (16 U.S.C. 1 et 
     seq.).
       (b) Factors Considered.--In determining whether 
     navigational measures are warranted, the Secretary and the 
     Under Secretary shall consider, at a minimum--
       (1) the frequency of transits of vessels required to 
     prepare a response plan under section 311(j) of the Federal 
     Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1321(j));
       (2) the type and quantity of oil transported as cargo or 
     fuel;
       (3) the expected benefits of routing measures in reducing 
     risks of spills;
       (4) the costs of such measures;
       (5) the safety implications of such measures; and
       (6) the nature and value of the resources to be protected 
     by such measures.
       (c) Establishment of Routing and Other Navigational 
     Measures.--The Secretary shall establish such routing or 
     other navigational measures for areas identified under 
     subsection (a).
       (d) Establishment of Avoidance Areas.--To the extent that 
     the Secretary and the Under Secretary conclude that the 
     establishment of areas to be avoided is warranted under this 
     section, they shall seek to establish such areas through the 
     International Maritime Organization or establish comparable 
     areas pursuant to regulations and in a manner that is 
     consistent with international law.
       (e) Oil Shipment Data and Report.--
       (1) Data collection.--The Secretary, through the Commandant 
     and in consultation with the Army Corps of Engineers, shall 
     analyze data on oil transported as cargo on vessels in the 
     navigable waters of the United States, including information 
     on--
       (A) the quantity and type of oil being transported;
       (B) the vessels used for such transportation;
       (C) the frequency with which each type of oil is being 
     transported; and
       (D) the point of origin, transit route, and destination of 
     each such shipment of oil.
       (2) Report.--The Secretary shall transmit a report, not 
     less frequently than quarterly, to the Senate Committee on 
     Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House of 
     Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce, on the data 
     collected and analyzed under paragraph (1) in a format that 
     does not disclose information exempted from disclosure under 
     section 552b(e) of title 5, United States Code.

     SEC. 107. OLYMPIC COAST NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY.

       (a) Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary Area to be 
     Avoided.--The Secretary and the Under Secretary of Commerce 
     for Oceans and Atmosphere shall revise the area to be avoided 
     off the coast of the State of Washington so that restrictions 
     apply to all vessels required to prepare a response plan 
     under section 311(j) of the Federal Water Pollution Control 
     Act (33 U.S.C. 1321(j)) (other than fishing or research 
     vessels while engaged in fishing or research within the area 
     to be avoided).
       (b) Emergency Oil Spill Drill.--
       (1) In general.--In cooperation with the Secretary, the 
     Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere shall 
     conduct a Safe Seas oil spill drill in the Olympic Coast 
     National Marine Sanctuary in fiscal year 2008. The Secretary 
     and the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere 
     jointly shall coordinate with other Federal agencies, State, 
     local, and tribal governmental entities, and other 
     appropriate entities, in conducting this drill.
       (2) Other required drills.--Nothing in this subsection 
     supersedes any Coast Guard requirement for conducting 
     emergency oil spill drills in the Olympic Coast National 
     Marine Sanctuary. The Secretary shall consider conducting 
     regular field exercises, such as National Preparedness for 
     Response Exercise Program (PREP) in other national marine 
     sanctuaries as well as areas identified in section 106(a) of 
     this bill.
       (3) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Under Secretary of Commerce for 
     Oceans and Atmosphere for fiscal year 2008 $700,000 to carry 
     out this subsection.

     SEC. 108. HIGHER VOLUME PORT AREA REGULATORY DEFINITION 
                   CHANGE.

       (a) In General.--Within 30 days after the date of enactment 
     of this Act, notwithstanding subchapter 5 of title 5, United 
     States Code, the Commandant shall modify the definition of 
     the term ``higher volume port area'' in section 155.1020 of 
     the Coast Guard regulations (33 C.F.R. 155.1020) by striking 
     ``Port Angeles, WA'' in paragraph (13) of that section and 
     inserting ``Cape Flattery, WA'' without initiating a 
     rulemaking proceeding.
       (b) Emergency Response Plan Reviews.--Within 5 years after 
     the date of enactment of this Act, the Coast Guard shall 
     complete its review of any changes to emergency response

[[Page S7739]]

     plans pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 
     U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) resulting from the modification of the 
     higher volume port area definition required by subsection 
     (a).

     SEC. 109. PREVENTION OF SMALL OIL SPILLS.

       (a) In General.--The Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans 
     and Atmosphere, in consultation with other appropriate 
     agencies, shall establish an oil spill prevention and 
     education program for small vessels. The program shall 
     provide for assessment, outreach, and training and voluntary 
     compliance activities to prevent and improve the effective 
     response to oil spills from vessels and facilities not 
     required to prepare a vessel response plan under the Federal 
     Water Pollution Control Act, including recreational vessels, 
     commercial fishing vessels, marinas, and aquaculture 
     facilities. The Under Secretary may provide grants to sea 
     grant colleges and institutes designated under section 207 of 
     the National Sea Grant College Program Act (33 U.S.C. 1126) 
     and to State agencies, tribal governments, and other 
     appropriate entities to carry out--
       (1) regional assessments to quantify the source, incidence 
     and volume of small oil spills, focusing initially on regions 
     in the country where, in the past 10 years, the incidence of 
     such spills is estimated to be the highest;
       (2) voluntary, incentive-based clean marina programs that 
     encourage marina operators, recreational boaters and small 
     commercial vessel operators to engage in environmentally 
     sound operating and maintenance procedures and best 
     management practices to prevent or reduce pollution from oil 
     spills and other sources;
       (3) cooperative oil spill prevention education programs 
     that promote public understanding of the impacts of spilled 
     oil and provide useful information and techniques to minimize 
     pollution including methods to remove oil and reduce oil 
     contamination of bilge water, prevent accidental spills 
     during maintenance and refueling and properly cleanup and 
     dispose of oil and hazardous substances; and
       (4) support for programs, including outreach and education 
     to address derelict vessels and the threat of such vessels 
     sinking and discharging oil and other hazardous substances, 
     including outreach and education to involve efforts to the 
     owners of such vessels.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Under Secretary of Commerce for 
     Oceans and Atmosphere to carry out this section, $10,000,000 
     annually for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012.

     SEC. 110. IMPROVED COORDINATION WITH TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Within 6 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall complete the 
     development of a tribal consultation policy, which recognizes 
     and protects to the maximum extent practicable tribal treaty 
     rights and trust assets in order to improve the Coast Guard's 
     consultation and coordination with the tribal governments of 
     federally recognized Indian tribes with respect to oil spill 
     prevention, preparedness, response and natural resource 
     damage assessment.
       (b) National Planning.--The Secretary shall assist tribal 
     governments to participate in the development and capacity to 
     implement the National Contingency Plan and local Area 
     Contingency Plans to the extent they affect tribal lands, 
     cultural and natural resources. The Secretary shall ensure 
     that in regions where oil spills are likely to have an impact 
     on natural or cultural resources owned or utilized by a 
     federally recognized Indian tribe, the Coast Guard will--
       (1) ensure that representatives of the tribal government of 
     the potentially affected tribes are included as part of the 
     regional response team cochaired by the Coast Guard and the 
     Environmental Protection Agency to establish policies for 
     responding to oil spills; and
       (2) provide training of tribal incident commanders and 
     spill responders.
       (c) Inclusion of Tribal Government.--The Secretary shall 
     ensure that, as soon as practicable after identifying an oil 
     spill that is likely to have an impact on natural or cultural 
     resources owned or utilized by a federally recognized Indian 
     tribe, the Coast Guard will--
       (1) ensure that representatives of the tribal government of 
     the affected tribes are included as part of the incident 
     command system established by the Coast Guard to respond to 
     the spill;
       (2) share information about the oil spill with the tribal 
     government of the affected tribe; and
       (3) to the extent practicable, involve tribal governments 
     in deciding how to respond to such spill.
       (d) Cooperative Arrangements.--The Coast Guard may enter 
     into memoranda of agreement and associated protocols with 
     Indian tribal governments in order to establish cooperative 
     arrangements for oil pollution prevention, preparedness, and 
     response. Such memoranda may be entered into prior to the 
     development of the tribal consultation and coordination 
     policy to provide Indian tribes grant and contract assistance 
     and may include training for preparedness and response and 
     provisions on coordination in the event of a spill. As part 
     of these memoranda of agreement, the Secretary may carry out 
     demonstration projects to assist tribal governments in 
     building the capacity to protect tribal treaty rights and 
     trust assets from oil spills to the maximum extent possible.
       (e) Funding for Tribal Participation.--Subject to the 
     availability of appropriations, the Commandant of the Coast 
     Guard shall provide assistance to participating tribal 
     governments in order to facilitate the implementation of 
     cooperative arrangements under subsection (d) and ensure the 
     participation of tribal governments in such arrangements. 
     There are authorized to be appropriated to the Commandant 
     $500,000 for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012 to be 
     used to carry out this section.

     SEC. 111. OIL SPILL ADVISORY COUNCIL.

       Section 5002(k) of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 
     2732(k)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Washington state program.--
       ``(A) In general.--For purposes of this paragraph, the oil 
     spill advisory council established by section 90.56.120 of 
     title 90 of the Revised Code of Washington is deemed to be an 
     advisory council established under this section. The 
     provisions of this section, other than this paragraph, do not 
     apply to that oil spill advisory council.
       ``(B) Funding.--The owners or operators of terminal 
     facilities or crude oil tankers operating in Washington State 
     waters shall provide, on an annual basis, an aggregate amount 
     of not more than $1,000,000, as determined by the Secretary. 
     Such amount--
       ``(i) shall be made available to the oil spill advisory 
     council established by section 90.56.120 of title 90 of the 
     Revised Code of Washington;
       ``(ii) shall be adjusted annually by the Consumer Price 
     Index; and
       ``(iii) may be adjusted periodically upon the mutual 
     consent of the owners or operators of terminal facilities or 
     crude oil tankers operating in Washington State waters and 
     the Council.''.

     SEC. 112. NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Marine Casualties.--Section 6101 of title 46, United 
     States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(j) Notice to States and Tribal Governments.--Within 1 
     hour after receiving a report under this section, the 
     Secretary shall forward the report to each State and 
     federally recognized Indian tribal government that has 
     jurisdiction concurrent with the United States or adjacent to 
     waters in which the casualty occurred. Each State shall 
     identify for the Secretary the agency to which such reports 
     shall be forwarded and shall be responsible for forwarding 
     appropriate information to local and tribal governments 
     within its jurisdiction.''.
       (b) State-required Notice of Bulk Oil Transfers.--
     Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a coastal State 
     may, by law, require a person to provide notice of 24 hours 
     or more to the State and to the United States Coast Guard 
     before transferring oil in bulk in an amount equivalent to 
     250 barrels or more to, from, or within a vessel in State 
     waters. The Commandant may assist coastal States in 
     developing appropriate methodologies for joint Federal and 
     State notification of any such transfers to minimize any 
     potential burden to vessels.

     SEC. 113. COOPERATIVE STATE INSPECTION AUTHORITY.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized to execute a 
     joint enforcement agreement with the Governor of a coastal 
     state that meets the requirements of subsection (b) under 
     which--
       (1) State law enforcement officers with marine law 
     enforcement responsibilities may be authorized to perform 
     duties of the Secretary relating to law enforcement 
     provisions under this title or any other marine resource law 
     enforced by the Secretary; and
       (2) State inspectors are authorized to conduct inspections 
     of United States and foreign-flag vessels in United States 
     ports under the supervision of the Coast Guard and report and 
     refer any documented deficiencies or violations to the Coast 
     Guard for action.
       (b) State Qualifications.--To be eligible to participate in 
     a joint enforcement agreement under subsection (a), a coastal 
     state shall--
       (1) submit an application to the Secretary at such time, in 
     such form, and containing such information as the Secretary 
     may require; and
       (2) demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Secretary that--
       (A) its State inspectors possess, or qualify for, a 
     merchant mariner officer or engineer license for at least a 
     1600 gross-ton vessel under subchapter B of title 46, Code of 
     Federal Regulations;
       (B) it has established support for its inspection program 
     to track, schedule, and monitor shipping traffic within its 
     waters; and
       (C) it has a funding mechanism to maintain an inspection 
     program for at least 5 years.
       (c) Technical Support and Training.--The Secretary may 
     provide technical support and training for State inspectors 
     who participate in a joint enforcement agreement under this 
     section.

     SEC. 114. TUG ESCORTS FOR LADEN OIL TANKERS.

       Within 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
     Secretary of State, in consultation with the Commandant, 
     shall enter into negotiations with the Government of Canada 
     to ensure that tugboat escorts are required for all tank 
     ships with a capacity over 40,000 deadweight tons in the 
     Strait of Juan de Fuca, Strait of Georgia, and in Haro 
     Strait. The Commandant shall consult with

[[Page S7740]]

     the State of Washington and affected tribal governments 
     during negotiations with the Government of Canada.

     SEC. 115. TANK AND NON-TANK VESSEL RESPONSE PLANS.

       Within 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
     Secretary shall promulgate regulations authorizing owners and 
     operators of tank and non-tank vessel to form non-profit 
     cooperatives for the purpose of complying with section 311(j) 
     of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 
     1321(j)).

     SEC. 116. REPORT ON THE AVAILABILITY OF TECHNOLOGY TO DETECT 
                   THE LOSS OF OIL.

       Within 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
     Secretary shall submit a report to the Senate Committee on 
     Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House of 
     Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce on the 
     availability, feasibility, and potential cost of technology 
     to detect the loss of oil carried as cargo or as fuel on tank 
     and non-tank vessels greater than 400 gross tons.

 Subtitle B--National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Provisions

     SEC. 151. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEYS.

       (a) Reduction of Backlog.--The Under Secretary of Commerce 
     for Oceans and Atmosphere shall continue survey operations to 
     reduce the survey backlog in navigationally significant 
     waters outlined in its National Survey Plan, concentrating on 
     areas where oil and other hazardous materials are 
     transported.
       (b) New Surveys.--By no later than January 1, 2010, the 
     Under Secretary shall complete new surveys, together with 
     necessary data processing, analysis, and dissemination, for 
     all areas in United States coastal areas determined by the 
     Under Secretary to be critical areas.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Under Secretary for the purpose of 
     carrying out the new surveys required by subsection (b) such 
     sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2008 
     through 2012.

     SEC. 152. ELECTRONIC NAVIGATIONAL CHARTS.

       (a) In General.--By no later than September 1, 2008, the 
     Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere shall 
     complete the electronic navigation chart suite for all 
     coastal waters of the United States.
       (b) Priorities.--In completing the suite, the Under 
     Secretary shall give priority to producing and maintaining 
     the electronic navigation charts of the entrances to major 
     ports and the coastal transportation routes for oil and 
     hazardous materials, and for estuaries of national 
     significance designated under section 319 of the Federal 
     Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1330).
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Under Secretary for the purpose of 
     completing the electronic navigation chart suite $6,200,000 
     for fiscal years 2008 and 2009.

                           TITLE II--RESPONSE

     SEC. 201. RAPID RESPONSE SYSTEM.

       The Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere 
     shall develop and implement a rapid response system to 
     collect and predict in situ information about oil spill 
     behavior, trajectory and impacts, and a mechanism to provide 
     such information rapidly to Federal, State, tribal, and other 
     entities involved in a response to an oil spill.

     SEC. 202. COAST GUARD OIL SPILL DATABASE.

       The Secretary shall modify the Coast Guard's oil spill 
     database as necessary to ensure that it--
       (1) includes information on the cause of oil spills 
     maintained in the database;
       (2) is capable of facilitating the analysis of trends and 
     the comparison of accidents involving oil spills; and
       (3) makes the data available to the public.

     SEC. 203. USE OF OIL SPILL LIABILITY TRUST FUND.

       (a) In General.--Section 1012(a)(5) of the Oil Pollution 
     Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2712(a)(5)) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) and (C) as 
     subparagraphs (C) and (D), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following:
       ``(B) not more than $15,000,000 in each fiscal year shall 
     be available to the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans 
     and Atmosphere for expenses incurred by, and activities 
     related to, response and damage assessment capabilities of 
     the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration;''.
       (b) Use of Fund in National Emergencies.--Notwithstanding 
     any provision of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 
     2701 et seq.) to the contrary, no amount may be made 
     available from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund established 
     by section 9509 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for 
     claims described in section 1012(a)(4) of that Act (33 U.S.C. 
     2712(a)(4)) attributable to any national emergency or major 
     disaster declared by the President under the Robert T. 
     Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5121 et seq.).

     SEC. 204. EXTENSION OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY.

       Section 1016(a) of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 
     2716(a)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``or'' after the semicolon in paragraph 
     (1);
       (2) by inserting ``or'' after the semicolon in paragraph 
     (2); and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
       ``(3) any tank vessel over 100 gross tons (except a non-
     self-propelled vessel that does not carry oil as cargo) using 
     any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United 
     States;''.

     SEC. 205. LIABILITY FOR USE OF UNSAFE SINGLE-HULL VESSELS.

       Section 1001(32) of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 
     U.S.C. 2702(d)) is amended by striking subparagraph (A) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(A) Vessels.--In the case of a vessel--
       ``(i) any person owning, operating, or demise chartering 
     the vessel; and
       ``(ii) the owner of oil being transported in a tank vessel 
     with a single hull after December 31, 2010, if the owner of 
     the oil knew, or should have known, from publicly available 
     information that the vessel had a poor safety or operational 
     record.''.

     SEC. 206. RESPONSE TUGS.

       (a) In General.--Paragraph (5) of section 311(j) of the 
     Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1321(j)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(J) Response tug.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall require the 
     stationing of a year round response tug of a minimum of 70-
     tons bollard pull in the entry to the Strait of Juan de Fuca 
     at Neah Bay capable of providing rapid assistance and towing 
     capability to disabled vessels during severe weather 
     conditions.
       ``(ii) Shared resources.--The Secretary may authorize 
     compliance with the response tug stationing requirement of 
     clause (i) through joint or shared resources between or among 
     entities to which this subsection applies.
       ``(iii) Existing state authority not affected.--Nothing in 
     this subparagraph supersedes or interferes with any existing 
     authority of a State with respect to the stationing of rescue 
     tugs in any area under State law or regulations.
       ``(iv) Administration.--In carrying out this subparagraph, 
     the Secretary--

       ``(I) shall require the vessel response plan holders to 
     negotiate and adopt a cost-sharing formula and a schedule for 
     carrying out this subparagraph by no later than June 1, 2008;
       ``(II) shall establish a cost-sharing formula and a 
     schedule for carrying out this subparagraph by no later than 
     July 1, 2008 (without regard to the requirements of chapter 5 
     of title 5, United States Code) if the vessel response plan 
     holders fail to adopt the cost-sharing formula and schedule 
     required by subclause (I) of this clause by June 1, 2008; and
       ``(III) shall implement clauses (i) and (ii) of this 
     subparagraph by June 1, 2008, without a rulemaking and 
     without regard to the requirements of chapter 5 of title 5, 
     United States Code.

       ``(v) Long term tug capabilities.--Within 6 months after 
     implementing clauses (i) and (ii), and section 110 of the Oil 
     Pollution Prevention and Response Act of 2007, the Secretary 
     shall execute a contract with the National Academy of 
     Sciences to conduct a study of regional response tug and 
     salvage needs for Washington's Olympic coast. In developing 
     the scope of the study, the National Academy of Sciences 
     shall consult with Federal, State, and Tribal trustees as 
     well as relevant stakeholders. The study--

       ``(I) shall define the needed capabilities, equipment, and 
     facilities for a response tug in the entry to the Strait of 
     Juan de Fuca at Neah Bay in order to optimize oil spill 
     protection on Washington's Olympic coast, provide rescue 
     towing services, oil spill response, and salvage and fire-
     fighting capabilities;
       ```(II) shall analyze the tug's multi-mission capabilities 
     as well as its ability to utilize cached salvage, oil spill 
     response, and oil storage equipment while responding to a 
     spill or a vessel in distress and make recommendations as to 
     the placement of this equipment;
       ``(III) shall address scenarios that consider all vessel 
     types and weather conditions and compare current Neah Bay tug 
     capabilities, costs, and benefits with other United States 
     industry funded response tugs, including those currently 
     operating in Alaska's Prince William Sound;
       ``(IV) shall determine whether the current level of 
     protection afforded by the Neah Bay response tug and 
     associated response equipment is comparable to protection in 
     other locations where response tugs operate, including Prince 
     William Sound, and if it is not comparable, shall make 
     recommendations as to how capabilities, equipment, and 
     facilities should be modified to achieve optimum 
     protection.''.

       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary for fiscal year 2008 such 
     sums as necessary to carry out section 311(j)(5)(J)(v) of the 
     Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 
     1321(j)(5)(J)(v)).

     SEC. 207. INTERNATIONAL EFFORTS ON ENFORCEMENT.

       The Secretary, in consultation with the heads of other 
     appropriate Federal agencies, shall ensure that the Coast 
     Guard pursues stronger enforcement in the International 
     Maritime Organization of agreements related to oil 
     discharges, including joint enforcement operations, training, 
     and stronger compliance mechanisms.

     SEC. 208. INVESTMENT OF AMOUNTS IN DAMAGE ASSESSMENT AND 
                   RESTORATION REVOLVING FUND.

       The Secretary of the Treasury shall invest such portion of 
     the damage assessment and restoration revolving fund 
     described in title I of the Departments of Commerce, Justice,

[[Page S7741]]

     and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations 
     Act, 1991 (33 U.S.C. 2706 note) as is not, in the Secretary's 
     judgment, required to meet current withdrawals in interest-
     bearing obligations of the United States in accordance with 
     section 9602 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

             TITLE III--RESEARCH AND MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS

     SEC. 301. FEDERAL OIL SPILL RESEARCH COMMITTEE.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established a committee to be 
     known as the Federal Oil Spill Research Committee.
       (b) Membership.--The members of the Committee shall be 
     designated by the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and 
     Atmosphere and shall include representatives from the 
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the United 
     States Coast Guard, the Environmental Protection Agency, and 
     such other Federal agencies as the President may designate. A 
     representative of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration, designated by the Under Secretary, shall 
     serve as Chairman.
       (c) Duties.--The Committee shall coordinate a comprehensive 
     program of oil pollution research, technology development, 
     and demonstration among the Federal agencies, in cooperation 
     and coordination with industry, universities, research 
     institutions, State governments, tribal governments, and 
     other nations, as appropriate, and shall foster cost-
     effective research mechanisms, including the joint funding of 
     research.
       (d) Reports to Congress.--
       (1) Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, the Committee shall submit to Congress a report on 
     the current state of oil spill prevention and response 
     capabilities that--
       (A) identifies current research programs conducted by 
     governments, universities, and corporate entities;
       (B) assesses the current status of knowledge on oil 
     pollution prevention, response, and mitigation technologies;
       (C) establishes national research priorities and goals for 
     oil pollution technology development related to prevention, 
     response, mitigation, and environmental effects;
       (D) identifies regional oil pollution research needs and 
     priorities for a coordinated program of research at the 
     regional level developed in consultation with the State and 
     local governments, tribes;
       (E) assesses the current state of spill response equipment, 
     and determines areas in need of improvement including amount, 
     age, quality, effectiveness, or necessary technological 
     improvements;
       (F) assesses the current state of real time data available 
     to mariners, including water level, currents and weather 
     information and predictions, and assesses whether lack of 
     timely information increases the risk of oil spills; and
       (G) includes such recommendations as the Committee deems 
     appropriate.
       (2) Quinquennial updates.--The Committee shall submit a 
     report every fifth year after its first report under 
     paragraph (1) updating the information contained in its 
     previous report under this subsection.
       (e) Advice and Guidance.--The Committee shall accept 
     comments and input from State and local governments, Indian 
     tribes, industry representatives, and other stakeholders.
       (f) National Academy of Science Participation.--The 
     Chairman, through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration, shall contract with the National Academy of 
     Sciences to--
       (1) provide advice and guidance in the preparation and 
     development of the research plan; and
       (2) assess the adequacy of the plan as submitted, and 
     submit a report to Congress on the conclusions of such 
     assessment.
       (g) Research and Development Program.--
       (1) In general.--The Committee shall establish a program 
     for conducting oil pollution research and development. Within 
     180 days after submitting its report to the Congress under 
     subsection (d), the Committee shall submit to Congress a plan 
     for the implementation of the program.
       (2) Program elements.--The program established under 
     paragraph (1) shall provide for research, development, and 
     demonstration of new or improved technologies which are 
     effective in preventing, detecting, or mitigating oil 
     discharges and which protect the environment, and include--
       (A) high priority research areas described in the report;
       (B) environmental effects of acute and chronic oil spills;
       (C) long-term effects of major spills and the long-term 
     cumulative effects of smaller endemic spills;
       (D) new technologies to detect accidental or intentional 
     overboard discharges;
       (E) response capabilities, such as improved booms, oil 
     skimmers, and storage capacity;
       (F) methods to restore and rehabilitate natural resources 
     damaged by oil discharges; and
       (G) research and training, in consultation with the 
     National Response Team, to improve industry's and 
     Government's ability to remove an oil discharge quickly and 
     effectively.
       (h) Grant Program.--
       (1) In general.--The Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans 
     and Atmosphere shall manage a program of competitive grants 
     to universities or other research institutions, or groups of 
     universities or research institutions, for the purposes of 
     conducting the program established under subsection (g).
       (2) Applications and conditions.--In conducting the 
     program, the Under Secretary--
       (A) shall establish a notification and application 
     procedure;
       (B) may establish such conditions, and require such 
     assurances, as may be appropriate to ensure the efficiency 
     and integrity of the grant program; and
       (C) may make grants under the program on a matching or 
     nonmatching basis.
       (i) Facilitation.--The Committee may develop memoranda of 
     agreement or memoranda of understanding with universities, 
     States, or other entities to facilitate the research program.
       (j) Annual Reports.--The chairman of the Committee shall 
     submit an annual report to Congress on the activities carried 
     out under this section in the preceding fiscal year, and on 
     activities proposed to be carried out under this section in 
     the current fiscal year.
       (k) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary of Commerce to carry out 
     this section--
       (1) $200,000 for fiscal year 2008, to remain available 
     until expended, for contracting with the National Academy of 
     Sciences and other expenses associated with developing the 
     report and research program; and
       (2) $2,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2008, 2009, and 
     2010, to remain available until expended, to fund grants 
     under subsection (h).
       (l) Committee Replaces Existing Authority.--The authority 
     provided by this section supersedes the authority provided by 
     section 7001 of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 
     2761) for the establishment of the Interagency Committee on 
     Oil Pollution Research under subsection (a) of that section, 
     and that Committee shall cease operations and terminate on 
     the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 302. GRANT PROJECT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF COST-EFFECTIVE 
                   DETECTION TECHNOLOGIES.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Commandant shall establish a grant 
     program for the development of cost-effective technologies, 
     such as infrared, pressure sensors, and remote sensing, for 
     detecting discharges of oil from vessels as well as methods 
     and technologies for improving detection and recovery of 
     submerged and sinking oils.
       (b) Matching Requirement.--The Federal share of any project 
     funded under subsection (a) may not exceed 50 percent of the 
     total cost of the project.
       (c) Report to Congress.--Not later than 3 years after the 
     date of enactment of this Act the Secretary shall provide a 
     report to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation, and to the House of Representatives Committee 
     on Transportation and Infrastructure on the results of the 
     program.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Commandant to carry out this 
     section $2,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2008, 2009, and 
     2010, to remain available until expended.
       (e) Transfer Prohibited.--Administration of the program 
     established under subsection (a) may not be transferred 
     within the Department of Homeland Security or to another 
     department or Federal agency.

     SEC. 303. STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE 
                   NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL.

       (a) In General.--Within 90 days after the date of enactment 
     of this Act, the Secretary shall provide a report to the 
     Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and 
     the House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure on whether the Coast Guard has implemented 
     each of the recommendations directed at the Coast Guard, or 
     at the Coast Guard and other entities, in the following 
     National Research Council reports:
       (1) ``Double-Hull Tanker Legislation, An Assessment of the 
     Oil Pollution Act of 1990'', dated 1998.
       (2) ``Oil in the Sea III, Inputs, Fates and Effects'', 
     dated 2003.
       (b) Content.--The report shall contained a detailed 
     explanation of the actions taken by the Coast Guard pursuant 
     to the National Research Council reports. If the Secretary 
     determines that the Coast Guard has not fully implemented the 
     recommendations, the Secretary shall include a detailed 
     explanation of the reasons any such recommendation has not 
     been fully implemented, together with any recommendations the 
     Secretary deems appropriate for implementing any such non-
     implemented recommendation.

     SEC. 304. GAO REPORT.

       Within 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
     Comptroller General shall provide a written report with 
     recommendations for reducing the risks and frequency of 
     releases of oil from vessels (both intentional and 
     accidental) to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure that includes the 
     following:
       (1) Continuing oil releases.--A summary of continuing 
     sources of oil pollution from vessels, the major causes of 
     such pollution, the extent to which the Coast Guard or other 
     Federal or State entities regulate such sources and enforce 
     such regulations, possible measures that could reduce such 
     releases of oil.
       (2) Double hulls.--
       (A) A description of the various types of double hulls, 
     including designs, construction, and materials, authorized by 
     the Coast

[[Page S7742]]

     Guard for United States flag vessels, and by foreign flag 
     vessels pursuant to international law, and any changes with 
     respect to what is now authorized compared to the what was 
     authorized in the past.
       (B) A comparison of the potential structural and design 
     safety risks of the various types of double hulls described 
     in subparagraph (A) that have been observed or identified by 
     the Coast Guard, or in public documents readily available to 
     the Coast Guard, including susceptibility to corrosion and 
     other structural concerns, unsafe temperatures within the 
     hulls, the build-up of gases within the hulls, ease of 
     inspection, and any other factors affecting reliability and 
     safety.
       (3) Alternative designs for non-tank vessels.--A 
     description of the various types of alternative designs for 
     non-tank vessels to reduce risk of an oil spill, known 
     effectiveness in reducing oil spills, and a summary of how 
     extensively such designs are being used in the United States 
     and elsewhere.
       (4) Response equipment.--An assessment of the sufficiency 
     of oil pollution response and salvage equipment, the quality 
     of existing equipment, new developments in the United States 
     and elsewhere, and whether new technologies are being used in 
     the United States.

     SEC. 305. OIL TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE ANALYSIS.

       The Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security shall, 
     in conjunction with the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary 
     of Transportation, the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency, and the heads of other appropriate Federal 
     agencies, contract with the National Research Council to 
     conduct an analysis of the condition and safety of all 
     aspects of oil transportation infrastructure in the United 
     States, and provide recommendations to improve such safety, 
     including an assessment of the adequacy of contingency and 
     emergency plans in the event of a natural disaster or 
     emergency.
                                 
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE:
  S. 1622. A bill to require the Federal Communications Commission to 
reevaluate the band plans for the upper 700 megaHertz band and the un-
auctioned portions of the lower 700 megaHertz band and recongifure them 
to include spectrum to be licensed for small geographic areas; to the 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to once again introduce 
legislation to encourage the deployment of next generation wireless 
services in rural areas. Cell phones have become a vital part of so 
many lives. Today, there are more than 200 million wireless subscribers 
in the United States alone, a subscribership that continues to grow. 
This burgeoning success makes it all the more imperative that we foster 
an environment where this technology and future wireless advancements 
can flourish and thrive.
  As we consider the myriad issues affecting this debate, we must bear 
in mind that along with mobility, convenience and safety, cell phones 
today engender countless additional benefits from access to 
information, global satellite positioning, to entertainment. While 
wireless phones have been rapidly adopted by the general public, 
wireless service faces flaws that could hinder further adoption. I can 
tell you from firsthand experience how frustrated it can be when I am 
at home in Maine when I cannot get cellular service. Something must be 
done in order to improve advance the capability of wireless service 
that people across my State and others are relying on in increasing 
numbers every day.
  We must be vigilant in safeguarding our smaller communities from 
remaining under served and strive to ensure that they are taken into 
account as the Federal Government shapes policy in response to this 
changing technological landscape. As many of my colleagues are well 
aware, wireless services, such as cell phones, handheld devices, and 
some Internet services use frequencies on the radio spectrum to 
transfer voice and data from one user to another. It is the job of the 
service provider to convert these airwaves into the valuable services 
that consumers demand. The quality of service in a given place depends 
on how much investment the service provider has put into 
infrastructure. More urban locations tend to have better service 
because the return on investment is much higher because of the 
concentration of customers. This reality does not mean that rural areas 
are left without service. Viable business models exist that can sustain 
service in these more remote locations. Oftentimes smaller, local 
wireless companies can serve these areas better than nationwide service 
providers.
  But one of the greatest barriers to entry in the wireless industry is 
acquiring a spectrum license in which a service can be operated. 
Companies bid billions of dollars for rights to be one of the Nation's 
most critical technological resources. The digital television 
transition is on the verge of releasing new spectrum into the 
marketplace, the much-anticipated 700 megaHertz spectrum auction. While 
I am grateful that the Federal Communications Commission has stated its 
intention to auction off the spectrum in licenses that cover both large 
and small geographic areas, without this consideration, smaller 
companies will be unable to compete in the bidding process. That is 
patently unacceptable.
  The bill I introduce today aims to address this problem by 
reiterating to the Federal Communications Commission the necessity of 
protecting smaller communities during the 700 MHz spectrum that will be 
auctioned as a result of the digital television transition. In the 
final auction rules, the FCC must divide some of the frequency 
allocations into smaller area licenses so that local and regional 
wireless companies can have an opportunity to compete in the bidding 
process. The proper balance of large and small licenses will encourage 
the deployment of advanced services throughout all parts of the United 
States.
  This bill is not meant to circumvent the expertise or purview of the 
Federal Communications Commission, nor call into question its 
intentions. It merely directs the FCC to use its acumen and good 
offices to develop a plan that will benefit the entire Nation. Rural 
America deserves the same benefits of wireless technologies that are 
available in urban areas. This act gives those best able to serve 
remote areas the required tools to deploy those services.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. INHOFE (for himself, Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, Ms. Snowe, 
        Mr. Stevens, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Craig, Mr. Kyl, Mr. 
        Ensign, Mr. Coburn, Mr. Shelby, Mr. Chambliss, Mrs. Hutchison, 
        Mr. Vitter, Mr. Sessions, Mr. Thune, Mr. Bond, Mr. Cochran, Mr. 
        Burr, Mrs. Dole, and Mr. Allard):
  S. 1623. A bill to require the withholding of United States 
contributions to the United Nations until the President certifies that 
the United Nations is not engaged in global taxation schemes; to the 
Committee on Foreign Relations.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, today I introduce S. 1623. I introduce 
this bill to prevent the imposition of global taxes on the United 
States. The current efforts of the United Nations and other 
international organizations are to develop and advocate a type of tax 
system that will keep them from having to answer to anybody.
  Last year, I introduced legislation, S. 3633, which garnered the 
support of 31 cosponsors, and I am pleased to reintroduce this bill 
today with 23 cosponsors.
  This bill states if the United Nations or other international 
organizations continue to pursue global taxation, the United States 
will withhold 20 percent of the assessed contributions to the regular 
budget of these organizations. This measure will last until 
certification is given by the President to the Congress that no 
international organization has legal taxation authority in the United 
States, that no taxes or fees have been imposed on the United States, 
and that no taxes have been proposed by any of these international 
organizations.
  One has to wonder sometimes what has happened to sovereignty in 
America. There are people in this body who don't think anything is good 
unless it is somehow proposed by some international organization, and 
quite often the interests of international organizations are not the 
same interests of our Nation. Our Government's primary leverage with 
the United Nations is controlling the flow of our regular 
contributions. By collecting enormous and global taxes on top of our 
regular contributions, the United Nations, or any other of these 
international organizations, would be accountable to no one. The United 
Nations' abuse of international trust, rampant corruption, and 
widespread waste are now all well-known. Allowing this clearly 
dysfunctional institution to extract U.S. dollars is absurd. Permitting 
this would

[[Page S7743]]

condone the U.N.'s long sought-after goal of a U.N.-led global 
governance--something not in the best interest of the United States.
  The United States already pays 27 percent of the U.N. Peacekeeping 
budget and 22 percent of the regular U.N. dues and special assessments, 
the majority of which our Government tracks very poorly. To further 
loosen the reins on the United Nations would be disastrous. We can't 
allow this to happen.
  It is fascinating to watch the various things that are not in the 
best interests of this country and the fact that we are paying for 25 
percent of that. This is a way we would be able to inject into this 
system something that would be far better and would take care of just 
the sovereignty of the United States; those things that are in our best 
interests and not just in the best interests of some international 
organization.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself and Mr. Grassley):
  S. 1624. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
that the exception from the treatment of publicly traded partnerships 
as corporations for partnerships with passive-type income shall not 
apply to partnerships directly or indirectly deriving income from 
providing investment adviser and related asset management services; to 
the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my friend and 
colleague, Senator Grassley, in introducing legislation to preserve the 
corporate tax base.
  The Federal Government taxes corporations. The tax law treats 
corporations as economic entities, and taxes them separately from the 
corporation's shareholders. And the tax law treats partnerships 
differently from corporations.
  Recently, some private equity and hedge fund entities have sought to 
go public without paying a corporate tax. The bill that we introduce 
today would treat all publicly traded partnerships that directly or 
indirectly receive income from providing investment advisory or asset 
management services as corporations. The tax law ought to treat as 
corporations entities that function as corporations.
  Congress enacted the publicly traded partnership rules in 1987 to 
preserve the corporate tax base. Congress was concerned that publicly 
traded partnerships might be able to enjoy the privilege of going 
public like a corporation without the corporate toll charge. The House 
committee report stated:

       These changes [referring to the corporate minimum tax 
     included in the 1986 Act] reflect an intent to preserve the 
     corporate level tax. The committee is concerned that the 
     intent of these changes is being circumvented by the growth 
     of publicly traded partnerships that are taking advantage of 
     an unintended opportunity for disincorporation and elective 
     integration of the corporate and shareholder levels of tax.

  Congress carved out an exception for those partnerships that receive 
90 percent or more of their income from passive income. Passive income 
includes dividends, rents, royalties, interest, and the sale of capital 
gains. But Congress generally treated publicly traded partnerships that 
derive income from active businesses as corporations.
  To emphasize that point, in 1987, the House committee report stated:

       In general, the purpose of distinguishing between passive-
     type income and other income is to distinguish those 
     partnerships that are engaged in activities commonly 
     considered as essentially no more than investments, and those 
     activities more typically conducted in corporate form that 
     are in the nature of active business activities.

  This year, some private equity and hedge fund management firms are 
attempting to qualify for partnership tax treatment. They seek to do so 
even though they derive virtually all of their income from providing 
asset management and financial advisory services. These management 
firms argue that they are able to achieve this result by claiming that 
all of their income from asset management and investment advisory 
services is passive. But objective observers would say that this income 
actually arises from active businesses. Congress's intent in 1987 was 
to treat such publicly traded partnerships as corporations. In the 
legislation that we introduce today, we seek to ensure that Congress's 
original intent is carried out.
  This legislation is also important to ensure that some corporations 
are not disadvantaged because they conduct business in the corporate 
form and pay taxes as a corporation. Asset management service and 
investment advisory partnerships provide the same types of active 
business services as their corporate competitors. Our tax system 
functions best when it is fair. The tax law ought to treat similarly 
situated taxpayers the same. Thus, these publicly traded partnerships 
should be taxed as corporations.
  The legislation that we introduce today would clarify the purpose of 
the publicly traded partnership rules. Our bill would deny the ability 
of an active financial advisory and asset management business to go 
public and avoid a corporate level tax on a significant amount of its 
income.
  Senator Grassley and I have asked the staff of the Treasury 
Department for their views on these transactions, how they plan to 
address this issue, and whether they think additional statutory changes 
are necessary to clarify the intent of the publicly traded partnership 
rules. If a statutory change is needed, then this legislation will 
accomplish that change. If a change is not needed, then this 
legislation does not alter the ability of Treasury Department and the 
Internal Revenue Service to issue guidance and enforce congressional 
intent.
  I urge my colleagues to join with Senator Grassley and me to protect 
the original intent of Congress, to protect the tax base, and to treat 
similarly situated entities similarly. I urge my colleagues to support 
this bill.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and an explanation 
and reasons for change be printed in the Record.
  There being no ojection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1624

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. EXCEPTION FROM TREATMENT OF PUBLICLY TRADED 
                   PARTNERSHIPS AS CORPORATIONS NOT TO APPLY TO 
                   PARTNERSHIPS DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY DERIVING 
                   INCOME FROM PROVIDING INVESTMENT ADVISER AND 
                   RELATED ASSET MANAGEMENT SERVICES.

       (a) In General.--Section 7704(c) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (relating to exception for partnerships with 
     passive-type income) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(4) Exception not to apply to partnerships providing 
     certain investment adviser and related asset management 
     services.--This subsection shall not apply to any partnership 
     which directly or indirectly has any item of income or gain 
     (including capital gains or dividends), the rights to which 
     are derived from--
       ``(A) services provided by any person as an investment 
     adviser (as defined in section 202(a)(11) of the Investment 
     Advisers Act of 1940, 15 U.S.C. 80b-2(a)(11)) or as a person 
     associated with an investment adviser (as defined in section 
     202(a)(17) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, 15 U.S.C. 
     80b-2(a)(17)), or
       ``(B) asset management services provided by any person 
     described in subparagraph (A) (or any related person) in 
     connection with the management of assets with respect to 
     which services described in subparagraph (A) were provided.
     For purposes of subparagraph (A), the determination as to 
     whether services provided by any person were provided as an 
     investment adviser shall be made without regard to whether 
     the person is required to register as an investment adviser 
     under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     amendment made by this section shall apply to taxable years 
     of a partnership beginning on or after June 14, 2007.
       (2) Transition rule for certain partnerships.--In the case 
     of a partnership--
       (A) the interests in which on June 14, 2007, were--
       (i) traded on an established securities market, or
       (ii) readily tradeable on a secondary market (or the 
     substantial equivalent thereof), or
       (B) which, on or before June 14, 2007, filed a registration 
     statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission under 
     section 6 of the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77f) which 
     was required solely by reason of an initial public offering 
     of interests in the partnership,
     the amendment made by this section shall apply to taxable 
     years of the partnership beginning on or after June 14, 2012. 
     Subparagraph (B) shall not apply to a registration statement 
     which is filed with respect to securities which are to be 
     issued on a delayed or continuous basis (as determined under 
     the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission 
     promulgated under such Act).

[[Page S7744]]

     
                                  ____
  A. Treatment of Publicly Traded Partnerships Directly or Indirectly 
  Deriving Income From Investment Adviser Services and Related Asset 
                          Management Services


                              Present Law

       Under present law, a publicly traded partnership generally 
     is treated as a corporation for Federal tax purposes (sec. 
     7704(a)). For this purpose, a publicly traded partnership 
     means any partnership if interests in the partnership are 
     traded on an established securities market, or interests in 
     the partnership are readily tradable on a secondary market 
     (or the substantial equivalent thereof).
       An exception from corporate treatment is provided for 
     certain publicly traded partnerships, 90 percent or more of 
     whose gross income is qualifying income (sec. 7704(c)(2)). 
     However, this exception does not apply to any partnership 
     that would be described in section 851 (a) if it were a 
     domestic corporation, which includes a corporation registered 
     under the Investment Company Act of 1940 as a management 
     company or unit investment trust.
       Qualifying income includes interest, dividends, and gains 
     from the disposition of a capital asset (or of property 
     described in section 1231 (b)) that is held for the 
     production of income that is qualifying income. Qualifying 
     income also includes rents from real property, gains from the 
     sale or other disposition of real property, and income and 
     gains from the exploration, development, mining or 
     production, processing, refining, transportation (including 
     pipelines transporting gas, oil, or products thereof), or the 
     marketing of any mineral or natural resource (including 
     fertilizer, geothermal energy, and timber). It also includes 
     income and gains from commodities (not described in section 
     1221 (a)(1)) or futures, options, or forward contracts with 
     respect to such commodities (including foreign currency 
     transactions of a commodity pool) in the case of partnership, 
     a principal activity of which is the buying and selling of 
     such commodities, futures, options or forward contracts.


                           Reasons for Change

       The rules generally treating publicly traded partnerships 
     as corporations were enacted in 1987 to address concern about 
     long-term erosion of the corporate tax base. At that time, 
     Congress stated, ``[t]o the extent that activities would 
     otherwise be conducted in corporate form, and earnings would 
     be subject to two levels of tax (at the corporate and 
     shareholder levels), the growth of publicly traded 
     partnerships engaged in such activities tends to jeopardize 
     the corporate tax base.'' (H.R. Rep. No. 100-391, 100th 
     Cong., 1st Sess. 1065.) Referring to recent tax law changes 
     affecting corporations, the Congress stated, ``[t]hese 
     changes reflect an intent to preserve the corporate level 
     tax. The committee is concerned that the intent of these 
     changes is being circumvented by the growth of publicly 
     traded partnerships that are taking advantage of an 
     unintended opportunity for disincorporation and elective 
     integration of the corporate and shareholder levels of tax.'' 
     (H.R. Rep. No. 100-391, 100th Cong., 1st Sess. 1066.)
       These same concerns hold true today, as industry sectors 
     that have never conducted business as publicly traded 
     partnerships start to shift into that form of doing business. 
     News reports have called attention to transactions set in 
     motion in recent months in which partnerships earning income 
     from investment adviser and related asset management services 
     made or will make their interests available on an exchange or 
     market. This trend causes deep concern about preservation 
     of the corporate tax base as it presages the transfer of 
     corporate assets to publicly traded partnerships. When 
     corporate assets are moved to partnership form without 
     relinquishing that hallmark of corporate status, access to 
     capital markets, some businesses are able to lower their 
     cost of capital at the expense of the Federal Treasury. 
     This result subverts a principal purpose and policy of the 
     present-law rules treating publicly traded partnerships as 
     corporations: to preserve the corporate tax base.
       To the extent these transactions represent a trend toward 
     increased utilization of publicly traded partnerships in the 
     case of businesses earning income from investment adviser and 
     related asset management services, there is the additional 
     concern of distortions caused by inconsistent treatment under 
     the tax law. The present-law exception in the case of 
     partnerships, 90 percent or more of whose gross income is 
     qualifying income, is not intended to encompass income from 
     investment adviser and related asset management services. The 
     bill serves to address this troubling trend by strengthening 
     the rules treating publicly traded partnerships as 
     corporations.


                        Explanation of Provision

       The bill provides generally that the exception from 
     corporate treatment for a publicly traded partnership, 90 
     percent or more of whose gross income is qualifying income, 
     does not apply in the case of a partnership that directly or 
     indirectly derives income from investment adviser services or 
     related asset management services. Thus, such a partnership 
     is treated as a corporation for Federal tax purposes and is 
     subject to the corporate income tax.
       Under the bill, the exception from corporate treatment for 
     a publicly traded partnership does not apply to any 
     partnership that, directly or indirectly, has any item of 
     income or gain (including capital gains or dividends), the 
     rights to which are derived from services provided by any 
     person as an investment adviser, as defined in the Investment 
     Advisers Act of 1940, or as a person associated with an 
     investment adviser, as defined in that Act. Further, the 
     exception from corporate treatment does not apply to a 
     partnership that, directly or indirectly, has any item of 
     income or gain (including capital gains or dividends), the 
     rights to which are derived from asset management services 
     provided by an investment adviser, a person associated with 
     an investment adviser, or any person related to either, in 
     connection with the management of assets with respect to 
     which investment adviser services were provided. For purposes 
     of the bill, these determinations are made without regard to 
     whether the person is required to register as an investment 
     adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. In the 
     absence of regulatory guidance as to the definition of a 
     related person, it is intended that the definition of a 
     related person in section 197(f)(9)(C)(i) apply.
       For example, a publicly traded partnership that has income 
     (including capital gains or dividend income) from a profits 
     interest in a partnership, the rights to which income are 
     derived from the performance of services by any person as an 
     investment adviser, is treated as a corporation for Federal 
     tax purposes under the bill. As a further example, a publicly 
     traded partnership that receives a dividend from a 
     corporation that receives or accrues income, the rights to 
     which are derived from services provided by any person as an 
     investment adviser, is treated as a corporation for Federal 
     tax purposes under the bill.
       Under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 definition, an 
     investment adviser means any person who, for compensation, 
     engages in the business of advising others, either directly 
     or through publications or writings, as to the value of 
     securities or as to the advisability of investing in, 
     purchasing, or selling securities, or who, for compensation 
     and as part of a regular business, issues or promulgates 
     analyses or reports concerning securities. Under this 
     definition, exceptions are provided in the case of certain 
     banks, certain brokers or dealers, as well as certain others, 
     provided criteria specified in that Act are met. These 
     exceptions apply for purposes of the bill. No inference is 
     intended that income from activities described in the 
     exceptions is qualifying income for purposes of section 7704.


                             Effective Date

       The bill generally is effective for taxable years of a 
     partnership beginning on or after June 14, 2007.
       Under a transition rule for certain partnerships, the bill 
     applies for taxable years beginning on or after June 14, 
     2012. The transition rule applies in the case of a 
     partnership the interests in which on June 14, 2007, were 
     traded on an established securities market, or were readily 
     tradable on a secondary market (or the substantial equivalent 
     thereof). In addition, the transition rule generally applies 
     in the case of a partnership which, on or before June 14, 
     2007, filed a registration statement with the Securities and 
     Exchange Commission under section 6 of the Securities Act of 
     1933 (15 U.S.C. 77f) that was required solely by reason of an 
     initial public offering of interests in the partnership. 
     However, the transition rule does not apply if the 
     registration statement is filed with respect to securities 
     that are to be issued on a delayed or continuous basis 
     (pursuant to Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933). 
     Thus, a shelf registration on or before June 14, 2007, of 
     interests in a partnership does not cause the partnership to 
     be eligible for the transition rule. Rather, in the case of 
     such a partnership, the bill is effective for taxable years 
     of the partnership beginning on or after June 14, 2007.

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, this legislation that Senator Baucus and 
I are introducing addresses an important issue--preserving the 
integrity of the Tax Code. Recent public offerings, effected and 
announced, by private equity and hedge fund management firms have 
raised serious tax concerns that if left unaddressed have the potential 
to fundamentally reduce the corporate tax base over the long run, 
leading other individuals and business taxpayers with a greater share 
of the Nation's tax burden.
  Congress enacted the publicly traded partnership rules in 1987 out of 
concern with erosion of the corporate tax base. Given the ease with 
which taxpayers can choose the type of entity for their business, an 
appropriate ``bright line'' to define entities that should be subject 
to a corporate level tax was considered to be those entities that are 
publicly traded. A hallmark of corporate status is access to public 
markets. Another concern was that the ability to be publicly traded 
without paying an entity level tax would create an unwarranted 
competitive advantage over publicly traded corporations.
  These concerns--corporate tax base erosion and a tax-created 
competitive advantage--were not considered to be implicated in cases 
where the partnership's income is from passive investments because 
investors could earn

[[Page S7745]]

such income directly--e.g., interest--or because the income is already 
subject to a corporate level tax--e.g., dividends. The following key 
quote from the legislative history illustrates this point:

       In general, the purpose of distinguishing between passive-
     type income and other income is to distinguish those 
     partnerships that are engaged in activities commonly 
     considered as essentially no more than investments, and those 
     activities more typically conducted in corporate form that 
     are in the nature of active business activities.

  The recent and proposed public offerings of private equity and hedge 
fund management firms claim to qualify for partnership tax treatment, 
even though virtually all of their income is derived from providing 
asset management and financial advisory services. This result is 
claimed to be accomplished by structuring service fees in a way that 
purports to characterize those fees as passive-type income. Whether or 
not these structures comply with the letter of the law, they are 
inconsistent with the purposes of the publicly traded partnership 
rules.
  This legislation clarifies the purpose of the publicly traded 
partnership rules by denying the ability of an active financial 
advisory and asset management business to go public and avoid a 
corporate level tax on a significant amount of its income. Senator 
Baucus and I have asked Treasury for their views on these structures, 
how they plan to address this issue, and whether they think additional 
statutory changes are necessary to clarify the intent of the publicly 
traded partnership rules. If a change is necessary, this legislation 
will accomplish that change. If a change isn't necessary, this 
legislation does not alter the ability of Treasury and the Internal 
Revenue Service to issue guidance and enforce Congressional intent.
  In his introductory remarks, Senator Baucus gave a technical 
description of this legislation and reasons for change, which reflects 
my understanding and intent in introducing this bill.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Mr. Coleman, Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. 
        Nelson of Nebraska, Mr. Kerry, and Ms. Collins):
  S. 1628. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to authorize 
programs to increase the number of nurse faculty and to increase the 
domestic nursing and physical therapy workforce, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, today I introduce legislation with my 
colleagues, Senator Coleman, Senator Lincoln, Senator Ben Nelson, 
Senator Kerry, and Senator Collins, that will help to address the 
critical shortage of nurse faculty and physical therapists that is 
facing our Nation. The nationwide nursing shortage is growing rapidly, 
because the average age of the nursing workforce is near retirement and 
because the aging population has increasing health care needs. And the 
shortage is one that affects the entire Nation. A 2006 Health Resources 
and Services Administration report estimated that the national nursing 
shortage would more than triple, to more than 1 million nurses, by the 
year 2020. The report also predicts that all 50 States will experience 
nursing shortages by 2015. Quite simply, we need to educate more 
nurses, or we, as a Nation, will not have enough trained nurses to meet 
the needs of our aging society.
  One of the biggest constraints to educating more nurses is a shortage 
of nursing faculty. Almost three-quarters of nursing programs surveyed 
by the American Association of Colleges of Nursing cited faculty 
shortages as a reason for turning away qualified applicants. Although 
applications to nursing programs have surged 59 percent over the past 
decade, the National League for Nursing estimates that 147,000 
qualified applications were turned away in 2004. This represents a 27 
percent decrease in admissions over the previous year, indicating the 
need to scale up capacity in nursing programs is more critical than 
ever.
  I know that in my home state of New Mexico, nursing programs turned 
down almost half of qualified applicants, even though the Health 
Resources and Services Administration predicts that New Mexico will 
only be able to meet 64 percent of its demand for nurses by 2020. With 
a national nurse faculty workforce that averages 53.5 years of age, and 
an average nurse faculty retirement age of 62.5 years, we cannot and 
must not wait any longer to address nurse faculty shortages.
  Nursing faculty are not the only segment of the population that is 
aging. As the baby boom generation ages, there will be an increased 
need for nurses to care for the elderly. However, less than 1 percent 
of practicing nurses have a certification in geriatrics.
  The Nurse Faculty and Physical Therapist Education Act will amend the 
Public Health Service Act, to help alleviate the faculty shortage by 
providing funds to help nursing schools increase enrollment and 
graduation from nursing doctoral programs. The act will increase 
partnering opportunities between academic institutions and medical 
practices, enhance cooperative education, support marketing outreach, 
and strengthen mentoring programs. The bill will increase the number of 
nurses who complete nursing doctoral programs and seek employment as 
faculty members and nursing leaders in academic institutions. In 
addition, the bill authorizes awards to train nursing faculty in 
clinical geriatrics, so that more nursing students will be equipped for 
our aging population.
  By addressing the faculty shortage, we are addressing the nursing 
shortage.
  The aging population will also require additional health workers in 
other fields. Physical therapy was listed as one of the fastest growing 
occupations by the U.S. Department of Labor, with a projected job 
growth of greater than 36 percent between 2004 and 2014. The need for 
physical therapists is particularly acute in rural and urban 
underserved areas, which have three to four times fewer physical 
therapists per capita than suburban areas. To address this need, the 
bill also authorizes a distance education pilot program to improve 
access to educational opportunity for both nursing and physical therapy 
students. Finally, the bill calls for a study by the Institute of 
Medicine at the National Academy of Sciences which will recommend how 
to balance education, labor, and immigration policies to meet the 
demand for qualified nurses and physical therapists.
  The provisions of the Nurse Faculty and Physical Therapist Education 
Act are vital to overcoming workforce challenges. By addressing nurse 
faculty and physical therapist shortages, we will enhance both access 
to care and the quality of care. I would like to thank my colleagues, 
Senator Coleman, Senator Lincoln, and Senator Ben Nelson, for their 
leadership and hard work on this important issue.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1628

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; FINDINGS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Nurse 
     Faculty and Physical Therapist Education Act of 2007''.
       (b) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The Nurse Reinvestment Act (Public Law 107-205) has 
     helped to support students preparing to be nurse educators. 
     Yet, nursing schools nationwide are forced to deny admission 
     to individuals seeking to become nurses and nurse educators 
     due to the lack of qualified nurse faculty.
       (2) The American Association of Colleges of Nursing 
     reported that 42,866 qualified applicants were denied 
     admission to nursing baccalaureate and graduate programs in 
     2006, with faculty shortages identified as a major reason for 
     turning away students.
       (3) Seventy-one percent of schools have reported 
     insufficient faculty as the primary reason for not accepting 
     qualified applicants. The primary reasons for lack of faculty 
     are lack of funds to hire new faculty, inability to identify, 
     recruit and hire faculty in the competitive job market as of 
     May 2007, and lack of nursing faculty available in different 
     geographic areas.
       (4) Despite the fact that in 2006, 52.4 percent of 
     graduates of doctoral nursing programs enter education roles, 
     the 103 doctoral programs nationwide produced only 437 
     graduates, which is only an additional 6 graduates from 2005. 
     This annual graduation rate is insufficient to meet the needs 
     for nurse faculty. In keeping with other professional 
     academic disciplines, nurse faculty at colleges and 
     universities are typically doctorally prepared.
       (5) The nursing faculty workforce is aging and will be 
     retiring.

[[Page S7746]]

       (6) With the average retirement age of nurse faculty at 
     62.5 years of age, and the average age of doctorally prepared 
     faculty, as of May 2007, that hold the rank of professor, 
     associate professor, and assistant professor is 58.6, 55.8, 
     and 51.6 years, respectively, the health care system faces 
     unprecedented workforce and health access challenges with 
     current and future shortages of deans, nurse educators, and 
     nurses.
       (7) Research by the National League of Nursing indicates 
     that by 2019 approximately 75 percent of the nursing faculty 
     population (as of May 2007) is expected to retire.
       (8) A wave of nurses will be retiring from the profession 
     in the near future. As of May 2007, the average age of a 
     nurse in the United States is 46.8 years old. The Bureau of 
     Labor Statistics estimates that more than 1,200,000 new and 
     replacement registered nurses will be needed by 2014.
       (9) By 2030, the number of adults age 65 and older is 
     expected to double to 70,000,000, accounting for 20 percent 
     of the population. As the population ages, the demand for 
     nurses and nursing faculty will increase.
       (10) Despite the need for nurses to treat an aging 
     population, few registered nurses in the United States are 
     trained in geriatrics. Less than 1 percent of practicing 
     nurses have a certification in geriatrics and 3 percent of 
     advanced practice nurses specialize in geriatrics.
       (11) Specialized training in geriatrics is needed to treat 
     older adults with multiple health conditions and improve 
     health outcomes. Approximately 80 percent of Medicare 
     beneficiaries have 1 chronic condition, more than 60 percent 
     have 2 or more chronic conditions, and at least 10 percent 
     have coexisting Alzheimer's disease or other dementias that 
     complicate their care and worsen health outcomes. Two-thirds 
     of Medicare spending is attributed to 20 percent of 
     beneficiaries who have 5 or more chronic conditions. Research 
     indicates that older persons receiving care from nurses 
     trained in geriatrics are less frequently readmitted to 
     hospitals or transferred from nursing facilities to hospitals 
     than those who did not receive care from a nurse trained in 
     geriatrics.
       (12) The Department of Labor projected that the need for 
     physical therapists would increase by 36.7 percent between 
     2004 and 2014.
       (13) The need for physical therapists is particularly acute 
     rural and urban underserved areas, which have 3 to 4 times 
     fewer physical therapists per capita than suburban areas.

                 TITLE I--GRANTS FOR NURSING EDUCATION

     SEC. 101. NURSE FACULTY EDUCATION.

       Part D of title VIII of the Public Health Service Act (42 
     U.S.C. 296p et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 832. NURSE FACULTY EDUCATION.

       ``(a) Establishment.--The Secretary, acting through the 
     Health Resources and Services Administration, shall establish 
     a Nurse Faculty Education Program to ensure an adequate 
     supply of nurse faculty through the awarding of grants to 
     eligible entities to--
       ``(1) provide support for the hiring of new faculty, the 
     retaining of existing faculty, and the purchase of 
     educational resources;
       ``(2) provide for increasing enrollment and graduation 
     rates for students from doctoral programs; and
       ``(3) assist graduates from the entity in serving as nurse 
     faculty in schools of nursing;
       ``(b) Eligibility.--To be eligible to receive a grant under 
     subsection (a), an entity shall--
       ``(1) be an accredited school of nursing that offers a 
     doctoral degree in nursing in a State or territory;
       ``(2) submit to the Secretary an application at such time, 
     in such manner, and containing such information as the 
     Secretary may require;
       ``(3) develop and implement a plan in accordance with 
     subsection (c);
       ``(4) agree to submit an annual report to the Secretary 
     that includes updated information on the doctoral program 
     involved, including information with respect to--
       ``(A) student enrollment;
       ``(B) student retention;
       ``(C) graduation rates;
       ``(D) the number of graduates employed part-time or full-
     time in a nursing faculty position; and
       ``(E) retention in nursing faculty positions within 1 year 
     and 2 years of employment;
       ``(5) agree to permit the Secretary to make on-site 
     inspections, and to comply with the requests of the Secretary 
     for information, to determine the extent to which the school 
     is complying with the requirements of this section; and
       ``(6) meet such other requirements as determined 
     appropriate by the Secretary.
       ``(c) Use of Funds.--Not later than 1 year after the 
     receipt of a grant under this section, an entity shall 
     develop and implement a plan for using amounts received under 
     this grant in a manner that establishes not less than 2 of 
     the following:
       ``(1) Partnering opportunities with practice and academic 
     institutions to facilitate doctoral education and research 
     experiences that are mutually beneficial.
       ``(2) Partnering opportunities with educational 
     institutions to facilitate the hiring of graduates from the 
     entity into nurse faculty, prior to, and upon completion of 
     the program.
       ``(3) Partnering opportunities with nursing schools to 
     place students into internship programs which provide hands-
     on opportunity to learn about the nurse faculty role.
       ``(4) Cooperative education programs among schools of 
     nursing to share use of technological resources and distance 
     learning technologies that serve rural students and 
     underserved areas.
       ``(5) Opportunities for minority and diverse student 
     populations (including aging nurses in clinical roles) 
     interested in pursuing doctoral education.
       ``(6) Pre-entry preparation opportunities including 
     programs that assist returning students in standardized test 
     preparation, use of information technology, and the 
     statistical tools necessary for program enrollment.
       ``(7) A nurse faculty mentoring program.
       ``(8) A Registered Nurse baccalaureate to Ph.D. program to 
     expedite the completion of a doctoral degree and entry to 
     nurse faculty role.
       ``(9) Career path opportunities for 2nd degree students to 
     become nurse faculty.
       ``(10) Marketing outreach activities to attract students 
     committed to becoming nurse faculty.
       ``(d) Priority.--In awarding grants under this section, the 
     Secretary shall give priority to entities from States and 
     territories that have a lower number of employed nurses per 
     100,000 population.
       ``(e) Number and Amount of Grants.--Grants under this 
     section shall be awarded as follows:
       ``(1) In fiscal year 2008, the Secretary shall award 10 
     grants of $100,000 each.
       ``(2) In fiscal year 2009, the Secretary shall award an 
     additional 10 grants of $100,000 each and provide continued 
     funding for the existing grantees under paragraph (1) in the 
     amount of $100,000 each.
       ``(3) In fiscal year 2010, the Secretary shall award an 
     additional 10 grants of $100,000 each and provide continued 
     funding for the existing grantees under paragraphs (1) and 
     (2) in the amount of $100,000 each.
       ``(4) In fiscal year 2011, the Secretary shall provide 
     continued funding for each of the existing grantees under 
     paragraphs (1) through (3) in the amount of $100,000 each.
       ``(5) In fiscal year 2012, the Secretary shall provide 
     continued funding for each of the existing grantees under 
     paragraphs (1) through (3) in the amount of $100,000 each.
       ``(f) Limitations.--
       ``(1) Payment.--Payments to an entity under a grant under 
     this section shall be for a period of not to exceed 5 years.
       ``(2) Improper use of funds.--An entity that fails to use 
     amounts received under a grant under this section as provided 
     for in subsection (c) shall, at the discretion of the 
     Secretary, be required to remit to the Federal Government not 
     less than 80 percent of the amounts received under the grant.
       ``(g) Reports.--
       ``(1) Evaluation.--The Secretary shall conduct an 
     evaluation of the results of the activities carried out under 
     grants under this section.
       ``(2) Reports.--Not later than 3 years after the date of 
     the enactment of this section, the Secretary shall submit to 
     Congress an interim report on the results of the evaluation 
     conducted under paragraph (1). Not later than 6 months after 
     the end of the program under this section, the Secretary 
     shall submit to Congress a final report on the results of 
     such evaluation.
       ``(h) Study.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 3 years after the date of 
     the enactment of this section, the Comptroller General of the 
     United States shall conduct a study and submit a report to 
     Congress concerning activities to increase participation in 
     the nurse educator program under the section.
       ``(2) Contents.--The report under paragraph (1) shall 
     include the following:
       ``(A) An examination of the capacity of nursing schools to 
     meet workforce needs on a nationwide basis.
       ``(B) An analysis and discussion of sustainability options 
     for continuing programs beyond the initial funding period.
       ``(C) An examination and understanding of the doctoral 
     degree programs that are successful in placing graduates as 
     faculty in schools of nursing.
       ``(D) An analysis of program design under this section and 
     the impact of such design on nurse faculty retention and 
     workforce shortages.
       ``(E) An analysis of compensation disparities between 
     nursing clinical practitioners and nurse faculty and between 
     higher education nurse faculty and higher education faculty 
     overall.
       ``(F) Recommendations to enhance faculty retention and the 
     nursing workforce.
       ``(i) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       ``(1) In general.--For the costs of carrying out this 
     section (except the costs described in paragraph (2), there 
     are authorized to be appropriated $1,000,000 for fiscal year 
     2008, $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2009, and $3,000,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2010 through 2012.
       ``(2) Administrative costs.--For the costs of administering 
     this section, including the costs of evaluating the results 
     of grants and submitting reports to the Congress, there are 
     authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary 
     for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012.''.

     SEC. 102. GERIATRIC ACADEMIC CAREER AWARDS FOR NURSES.

       Part I of title VIII of the Public Health Service Act (42 
     U.S.C. 298 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

[[Page S7747]]

     ``SEC. 856. GERIATRIC FACULTY FELLOWSHIPS.

       ``(a) Establishment of Program.--The Secretary shall 
     establish a program to provide Geriatric Academic Career 
     Awards to eligible individuals to promote the career 
     development of such individuals as geriatric nurse faculty.
       ``(b) Eligible Individuals.--To be eligible to receive an 
     Award under subsection (a), an individual shall--
       ``(1) be a registered nurse with a doctorate degree in 
     nursing;
       ``(2)(A) have completed an approved advanced education 
     nursing program in geriatric nursing or geropsychiatric 
     nursing; or
       ``(B) have a State or professional nursing certification in 
     geriatric nursing or geropsychiatric nursing; and
       ``(3) have a faculty appointment at an accredited school of 
     nursing, school of public health, or school of medicine.
       ``(c) Application.--An eligible individual desiring to 
     receive an Award under this section shall submit to the 
     Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and 
     containing such information as the Secretary may require, 
     which shall include an assurance that the individual will 
     meet the service requirement described in subsection (d).
       ``(d) Service Requirement.--An individual who receives an 
     Award under this section shall provide training in clinical 
     geriatrics, including the training of interdisciplinary teams 
     of health care professionals. The provision of such training 
     shall constitute at least 50 percent of the obligations of 
     such individual under the Award.
       ``(e) Amount and Number.--
       ``(1) Amount.--The amount of an Award under this section 
     shall equal $75,000 annually, adjusted for inflation on the 
     basis of the Consumer Price Index. The Secretary may increase 
     the amount of an Award by not more than 25 percent, taking 
     into account the fringe benefits and other research expenses, 
     at the recipient's institutional rate.
       ``(2) Number.--The Secretary shall award up to 125 Awards 
     under this section from 2008 through 2016.
       ``(3) Regional distribution.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall provide Awards to 
     individuals from 5 regions in the United States, of which--
       ``(i) 2 regions shall be an urban area;
       ``(ii) 2 regions shall be a rural area; and
       ``(iii) 1 region shall include a State with--

       ``(I) a medical school that has a department of geriatrics 
     that manages rural outreach sites and is capable of managing 
     patients with multiple chronic conditions, 1 of which is 
     dementia; and
       ``(II) a college of nursing that has a required course in 
     geriatric nursing in the baccalaureate program.

       ``(B) Geographic diversity.--The Secretary shall ensure 
     that the 5 regions established under subparagraph (A) are 
     located in different geographic areas of the United States.
       ``(f) Term of Award.--The term of an Award made under this 
     section shall be 5 years.
       ``(g) Reports.--
       ``(1) Evaluation.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct an 
     evaluation of the results of the activities carried out under 
     the Awards established under this section.
       ``(B) Reports to congress.--Not later than 3 years after 
     the date of the enactment of this section, the Secretary 
     shall submit to Congress an interim report on the results of 
     the evaluation conducted under this paragraph. Not later than 
     180 days after the expiration of the program under this 
     section, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a final 
     report on the results of such evaluation.
       ``(2) Content.--The evaluation under paragraph (1) shall 
     examine--
       ``(A) the program design under this section and the impact 
     of the design on nurse faculty retention; and
       ``(B) options for continuing the program beyond fiscal year 
     2016.
       ``(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       ``(1) In general.--To fund Awards under subsection (e), 
     there are authorized to be appropriated $1,875,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 2008 through 2016.
       ``(2) Administrative costs.--To carry out this section 
     (except to fund Awards under subsection (e)), there are 
     authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary 
     for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2016.
       ``(3) Separation of funds.--The Secretary shall ensure that 
     the amounts appropriated pursuant to paragraph (1) are held 
     in a separate account from the amounts appropriated pursuant 
     to paragraph (2).''.

  TITLE II--DISTANCE EDUCATION PILOT PROGRAM AND OTHER PROVISIONS TO 
          INCREASE THE NURSING AND PHYSICAL THERAPY WORKFORCE

     SEC. 201. INCREASING THE DOMESTIC SUPPLY OF NURSES AND 
                   PHYSICAL THERAPISTS.

       (a) Establishment of Nurse and Physical Therapists Distance 
     Education Pilot Program.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services 
     (referred to in this section as the ``Secretary''), in 
     conjunction with the Secretary of Education, shall establish 
     a Nurse and Physical Therapist Distance Education Pilot 
     Program through which grants may be awarded for the conduct 
     of activities to increase accessibility to nursing and 
     physical therapy education.
       (2) Purpose.--The purpose of the Nurse and Physical 
     Therapist Distance Education Pilot Program established under 
     paragraph (1) shall be to increase accessibility to nursing 
     and physical therapy education to--
       (A) provide assistance to individuals in rural areas who 
     want to study nursing or physical therapy to enable such 
     individuals to receive appropriate nursing education and 
     physical therapy education;
       (B) promote the study of nursing and physical therapy at 
     all educational levels;
       (C) establish additional slots for nursing and physical 
     therapy students at existing accredited schools of nursing 
     and physical therapy education programs; and
       (D) establish new nursing and physical therapy education 
     programs at institutions of higher education.
       (3) Application.--To be eligible to receive a grant under 
     the Pilot Program under paragraph (1), an entity shall submit 
     to the Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, 
     and containing such information as the Secretary may require.
       (4) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out 
     this subsection.
       (b) Increasing the Domestic Supply of Nurses and Physical 
     Therapists.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than January 1, 2008, the 
     Secretary, in conjunction with the Secretary of Education, 
     shall--
       (A) submit to Congress a report concerning the country of 
     origin or professional school of origin of newly licensed 
     nurses and physical therapists in each State, that shall 
     include--
       (i) for the most recent 3-year period for which data is 
     available--

       (I) separate data relating to teachers at institutions of 
     higher education for each related occupation who have been 
     teaching for not more than 5 years; and
       (II) separate data relating to all teachers at institutions 
     of higher education for each related occupation regardless of 
     length of service;

       (ii) for the most recent 3-year period for which data is 
     available, separate data for each related occupation and for 
     each State;
       (iii) a separate identification of those individuals 
     receiving their initial professional license and those 
     individuals licensed by endorsement from another State;
       (iv) with respect to those individuals receiving their 
     initial professional license in each year, a description of 
     the number of individuals who received their professional 
     education in the United States and the number of individuals 
     who received such education outside the United States; and
       (v) to the extent practicable, a description, by State of 
     residence and country of education, of the number of nurses 
     and physical therapists who were educated in any of the 5 
     countries (other than the United States) from which the most 
     nurses and physical therapists arrived;
       (B) in consultation with the Department of Labor, enter 
     into a contract with the Institute of Medicine of the 
     National Academy of Sciences for the conduct of a study and 
     submission of a report that includes--
       (i) a description of how the United States can balance 
     health, education, labor, and immigration policies to meet 
     the respective policy goals and ensure an adequate and well-
     trained nursing and physical therapy workforce;
       (ii) a description of the barriers to increasing the supply 
     of nursing and physical therapy faculty, domestically trained 
     nurses, and domestically trained physical therapists;
       (iii) recommendations of strategies to be utilized by 
     Federal and State governments that would be effective in 
     removing the barriers described in clause (ii), including 
     strategies that address barriers to advancement to become 
     registered nurses for other health care workers, such as home 
     health aides and nurses assistants;
       (iv) recommendations for amendments to Federal laws that 
     would increase the supply of nursing faculty, domestically 
     trained nurses, and domestically trained physical therapists;
       (v) recommendations for Federal grants, loans, and other 
     incentives that would provide increases in nurse and physical 
     therapist educators and training facilities, and other 
     measures to increase the domestic education of new nurses and 
     physical therapists;
       (vi) an identification of the effects of nurse and physical 
     therapist emigration on the health care systems in their 
     countries of origin; and
       (vii) recommendations for amendments to Federal law that 
     would minimize the effects of health care shortages in the 
     countries of origin from which immigrant nurses arrived; and
       (C) collaborate with the heads of other Federal agencies, 
     as appropriate, in working with ministers of health or other 
     appropriate officials of the 5 countries from which the most 
     nurses and physical therapists arrived into the United 
     States, to--
       (i) address health worker shortages caused by emigration; 
     and
       (ii) ensure that there is sufficient human resource 
     planning or other technical assistance needed to reduce 
     further health worker shortages in such countries.
       (2) Access to data.--The Secretary shall grant the 
     Institute of Medicine access to the data described under 
     paragraph (1)(A), as such data becomes available to the 
     Secretary for use by the Institute in carrying out the 
     activities under paragraph (1)(B).
       (3) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $1,400,000 to carry out paragraph (1)(B).

[[Page S7748]]

                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CRAPO (for himself and Mr. Craig):
  S. 1630. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude 
certain tax-exempt financing of electric transmission facilities from 
the private business use test; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce today a bill to 
address the increasing need for electric power transmission in our 
country.
  The Nation's network of transmission lines is the super-highway of 
the electric utility industry and the backbone of the electric grid. It 
serves as the means of moving large amounts of electricity continuously 
from powerplants to substations where it is distributed to homes and 
businesses.
  A vibrant transmission system helps prevent reliability problems such 
as blackouts which have wreaked havoc in California, the Northeast, and 
the Midwest in the last 5 years. It enables regions rich in energy 
resources like wind, coal, natural gas, and hydropower, to export 
energy to power-starved regions of the country. It also serves as the 
engine of our Nation's economic well-being.
  It has been widely acknowledged by Government and industry experts 
that investment in the transmission system has tapered off 
significantly and more investment is needed. Planning for the Nation's 
future electricity needs is a key consideration as adding transmission 
can take many years, even in the most streamlined process. Decisions on 
system enhancements needed in the next decade must be made today. As 
with other components of utility infrastructure, siting and building 
transmission lines is both difficult and very expensive, often costing 
much more than $1 million per mile.
  Over the last two decades, transmission investment has decreased by 
$115 million a year, dropping from $5 billion annually in 1975 to $2 
billion in 2000. The electric transmission line grid capacity has not 
been upgraded to meet growth demands, particularly in the rapidly 
growing West. In 2001, the estimated cost for infrastructure renewal 
was $1.3 trillion over a 5-year period. Today, that cost has risen to 
over $2 trillion.
  Other investment barriers include lack of regional integrated 
planning and difficulty in siting new transmission lines. The process 
can involve acquiring land easements from property owners, and creating 
a cleared corridor, 70 to 100 feet wide and often many miles long. On 
top of all this is the uncertainty regarding investment risks and 
returns.
  Adding large transmission lines also requires State regulatory 
approval, which involves significant permitting, research and modeling 
data, environmental information, cost comparisons, analyses of various 
options, discussions of scenarios and criteria used in evaluation, and 
other information.
  Lack of new transmission directly affects the price of retail 
electricity as a decrease in available transmission lines leads to more 
limited access to electric generation plants. Any addition of 
powerplants, including nuclear facilities and renewables such as wind, 
would also require new transmission lines and facilities.
  In short our Nation's economy and population are still growing, and 
so too are its power needs, but without new transmission, access to new 
power generation is static, which will in turn lead to rising retail 
and industrial power costs.
  The Energy Policy Act of 2005 included several important provisions 
to encourage transmission investment. I believe there is more that we 
can do to accelerate the pace of investment in transmission 
infrastructure and to lower the cost of those investments.
  My State of Idaho and several others have created State 
infrastructure authorities to finance and promote needed transmission 
investments. The creation of these State authorities is a new and 
innovative development that could be the appropriate catalyst for this 
needed investment. However, the full potential of these State 
authorities will not be realized under existing law.
  As instrumentalities of the State, these authorities can issue tax-
exempt bonds to finance transmission projects. But under current law, 
only a very limited number of industry participants such as other 
governmental entities, can use these facilities built with tax-exempt 
bonds. Clearly, we need a system in which new transmission facilities, 
regardless of the source of financing, are available for use by 
industry participants.
  The legislation I am introducing today amends section 141 of the 
Internal Revenue Code to modify the so-called private use restrictions 
on tax-exempt financing of transmission facilities. Under this 
legislation, any issuer of tax-exempt bonds to finance transmission 
facilities would continue to be required to own the facilities. 
However, the operation or use of those facilities by a nongovernmental 
private party would not jeopardize the tax-exempt status of the bonds. 
As an example from my State, the Idaho Energy Resources Authority could 
issue tax-exempt bonds to finance a transmission line and all parties, 
private utilities, rural electric cooperatives, municipal utilities, 
independent power producers, could move power across that facility.
  Thus, all segments of the industry benefit from new, low-cost 
investment in transmission. The basic requirement of section 141 that 
tax-exempt financed facilities serve a general public purpose and are 
owned by an eligible issuer is retained. And our whole Nation benefits 
from a transmission system that is more robust, reliable and cost 
effective.
  My legislation sunsets in 5 years. This will provide Congress an 
opportunity to review the effectiveness and implications of this change 
in the code.
  In addition to support for this proposal from various parties in 
Idaho, this concept has been endorsed by the Western Governors 
Association.
  It is my hope that this commonsense proposal can be quickly enacted 
and that lower cost investments in the Nation's transmission grid can 
be made.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KERRY (for himself and Ms. Cantwell):
  S. 1631. A bill to establish an emergency fuel assistance grant 
program for small businesses during energy emergencies; to the 
Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, last month, Americans emptied their wallets 
at the pump, paying record prices that reached $3.22 a gallon according 
to the Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration. This 
price represented a 28-percent increase over a period of just 2 months, 
and 52-percent increase since the end of January. Rising prices 
underscore the increased attention that small business owners are 
paying to this issue. According to a survey conducted by the National 
Small Business Association, NSBA, 62 percent of small businesses use 
vehicles for delivery or customer transportation, and a majority of 
those who use vehicles travel more than 50 mile a day.
  According to the Energy Information Administration's June 12 update 
to the ``Short Term Energy Outlook,'' gas prices are expected to 
average $3.05 through the 2007 summer months, an increase of 21-cents 
over last summer's average price. Meanwhile, small businesses that 
operate close to the margin and that rely on vehicles every day to 
remain competitive are struggling to keep up.
  These are the same businesses coping with considerable increases in 
the cost of providing their employees health care, the same burgeoning 
entrepreneurs that we count on to create roughly two-thirds of the new 
jobs in this country. These businesses can no longer be expected to 
shoulder a burden created by a Government that has been reluctant to 
shift its priorities from serving the same old special interests.
  The good news is that right now, the Senate is debating legislation 
that would put the country on a clear path towards energy independence. 
In a single month, we could rewrite the shameful story of 
procrastination, manipulation and, most of all, failed leadership that 
has defined our energy policy for 30 years.
  Democrats in the Senate are working to develop a comprehensive energy 
policy that will make America safer and will stabilize and lower fuel 
costs for small businesses and all Americans. But in order to 
effectively address energy security, the final legislation must include 
three components: 1. a major increase in the efficiency of all sources 
and uses of energy, from pickup trucks to fluorescent light bulbs; 2. 
dramatic incentives for all renewable

[[Page S7749]]

energy sources, including the requirement that at least 20 percent of 
our energy come from renewable sources like wind and solar by 2020; and 
3. a comprehensive plan to get clean coal technologies and carbon 
sequestration off the drawing board and under construction.
  These are the first steps Congress must take to address the long term 
security and stability of this country's fuel supply. But there are 
other steps we can take in the short term to make sure our small 
businesses are protected against dramatic interruptions in fuel.
  Today, I am introducing legislation that creates an emergency fuel 
assistance program for small businesses in the event of a severe fuel 
interruption. Under this program, small businesses and farms that rely 
on fuel as a key operating cost would be eligible to receive grants to 
help them stay afloat during periods of extraordinarily high gas 
prices. This program could go a long way toward helping businesses 
operating close to the margin deal with costs that are beyond their 
control.
  Specifically, the Small Business Emergency Fuel Assistance Act of 
2007 would create a program within the Economic Development Agency at 
the Department of Commerce to assist small businesses through State 
grants during declarations of fuel emergency. The program is triggered 
by a Presidential declaration of fuel emergency, and would authorize 
the Secretary of Commerce to give grants to States to provide 
assistance to fuel-dependent small businesses. Eligibility for these 
grants is restricted to businesses with fewer than 50 employees or less 
than $5 million in annual gross receipts. Furthermore, to ensure that 
these businesses are also contributing to America's energy conservation 
efforts, eligibility would be contingent upon a business having a plan 
to become more energy efficient. The program would be authorized at 
$100 million per year, for 5 years.
  For too long, we have asked Americans to put up with an energy supply 
that is unstable and flat out dangerous. The path to energy security, a 
path that is being cut in the Senate as we speak, will lead to 
stability and lower prices at the pump. In the meantime, this is a 
commonsense policy to aid our small business and small farm owners in 
the short term, so that they can continue to do what they do best, grow 
the American economy.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1631

       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 ``Small Business Emergency 
     Fuel Assistance Act of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. EMERGENCY FUEL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.

       There is established within the Economic Development 
     Administration of the Department of Commerce, an emergency 
     assistance program for small businesses and small farms 
     dependent on fuel.

     SEC. 3. PRESIDENTIAL DECLARATION OF ENERGY EMERGENCY.

       (a) In General.--If the President determines that the 
     health, safety, welfare, or economic well-being of the 
     citizens of the United States is at risk because of a 
     shortage or imminent shortage of adequate supplies of crude 
     oil, gasoline or petroleum distillates due to a disruption in 
     the national distribution system for crude oil, gasoline or 
     petroleum distillates (including such a shortage related to a 
     major disaster (as defined in section 102(2) of the Robert T. 
     Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5122(2))), or significant pricing anomalies in 
     national energy markets for crude oil, gasoline, or petroleum 
     distillates, the President may declare that a Federal energy 
     emergency exists.
       (b) Scope and Duration.--The emergency declaration declared 
     pursuant to subsection (a) shall specify--
       (1) the period, not to exceed 30 days, for which the 
     declaration applies;
       (2) the circumstance or condition necessitating the 
     declaration; and
       (3) the area or region to which it applies which may not be 
     limited to a single State; and
       (4) the product or products to which it applies.
       (c) Extensions.--The President may--
       (1) extend a declaration under subsection (a) for a period 
     of not more than 30 days;
       (2) extend such a declaration more than once; and
       (3) discontinue such a declaration before its expiration.

     SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF GRANTS.

       (a) In General.--During any energy emergency declared by 
     the President under section 3, the Secretary of Commerce is 
     authorized to award grants to States under a declaration of 
     fuel supply interruption in accordance with this Act.
       (b) Allocation Formula.--Subject to subsection (c), the 
     Secretary shall award grants to States, in accordance with an 
     allocation formula established by the Secretary, that is 
     based on the pro rata share of each State of the total need 
     among all States, as applicable, for emergency assistance for 
     fuel interruption, as determined on the basis of--
       (1) the number and percentage of qualifying small 
     businesses and small farms operating within a State;
       (2) the increase in price of fuel in a State; and
       (3) such other factors as the Secretary determines to be 
     appropriate.
       (c) State Allocation Plan.--Each State shall establish, 
     after giving notice to the public, an opportunity for public 
     comment, and consideration of public comments received, an 
     allocation plan for the distribution of financial assistance 
     under this section, which shall be submitted to the Secretary 
     and shall be made available to the public by the State, and 
     shall include--
       (1) application requirements for qualifying small 
     businesses and small farms seeking to receive financial 
     assistance under this section, including a requirement that 
     each application include--
       (A) demonstration of need for assistance under this 
     section;
       (B) a plan to decrease the total commercial energy usage of 
     the small business through energy efficiency measures, such 
     as those promoted through the Energy Star Program; and
       (C) if a small business or small farm has previously 
     received assistance under this section, evidence that the 
     small business or small farm has implemented the plan 
     previously documented under subparagraph (B); and
       (2) factors for selecting among small businesses and small 
     farms that meet the application requirements, with preference 
     given to small businesses and small farms based on the 
     percentage of operating costs expended on fuel.

     SEC. 5. ELIGIBILITY.

       A small business or small farm is eligible for a grant 
     under this Act if--
        (a) the average gross receipts of the small business or 
     small farm for the 3 preceding taxable years does not exceed 
     $5,000,000; or
       (b) the small business or small farm employed an average of 
     more than 1 and fewer than 50 qualified employees on business 
     days during the preceding taxable year.

     SEC. 6. DEFINED TERM.

       In this Act, the term ``aggregate gross assets'' has the 
     meaning given such term in section 1202(d)(2) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986.

     SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to the Department 
     of Commerce $100,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2008 
     through 2012 to carry out this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE:
  S. 1632. A bill to ensure that vessels of the United States conveyed 
to eligible recipients for educational, cultural, historical, 
charitable, recreational, or other public purposes are maintained and 
utilized for the purposes for which they were conveyed; to the 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Vessel 
Conveyance Act, a bill which would prevent inappropriate transfers of 
surplus United States vessels to nongovernmental organizations.
  It has recently come to my attention that two decommissioned U.S. 
Coast Guard ships that had been conveyed in legislation to a certain 
charitable organization are no longer being used for the purpose 
explicitly stated by law. In fact, the ships are no longer in the 
organization's possession. Unaware of the costs affiliated with 
maintenance of the ships, the recipient found itself unable to afford 
the upkeep. Against the spirit, if not the letter, of the law, the 
charity sold first one, and then the second ship, and pocketed the 
proceeds, which totaled $415,000.
  Though the U.S. General Services Administration has a process in 
place for disposal of surplus vessels, I understand the value of 
dedicated vessel conveyances under certain circumstances. But we must 
recognize that these assets are the property of the American people, 
and they represent a significant investment of public funds. When 
Congress acts to convey such valuable items to a private entity, it 
also conveys the responsibility to use the vessel for a specific 
purpose. In cases where that responsibility has not been carried out, 
we must be able to seek recourse, and this bill would provide that 
tool.

[[Page S7750]]

  Specifically, this legislation would expressly prohibit the recipient 
of a conveyed vessel from either selling it, or using it for commercial 
purposes. It would require the Administrator of the GSA to monitor 
conveyed vessels the same way he monitors ships dispersed under the 
standard GSA process to ensure that they are being used appropriately, 
and it gives her the power to reclaim the ship if she determines that 
those conditions have been violated. The bill would also eliminate the 
possibility of transfer to an organization lacking sufficient financial 
stability to maintain a given vessel. Finally, it includes civil 
enforcement provisions making recipients liable for fines of up to 
$10,000 per day that they are in violation of their conveyance 
agreement.
  On the rare occasions when Congress determines that a certain asset 
is uniquely suited to assist a worthy and capable organization, I do 
not oppose a legislative conveyance. But I will not allow any 
organization to fleece the American taxpayers by biting the hand that 
has provided such a generous gift. I am pleased to introduce this bill 
today, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no ojection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1632

       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 ``Vessel Conveyance Act''.

     SEC. 2. CONVEYANCE OF UNITED STATES VESSELS FOR PUBLIC 
                   PURPOSES.

       (a) In General.--The conveyance of a United States 
     Government vessel to an eligible entity for use as an 
     educational, cultural, historical, charitable, or 
     recreational or other public purpose shall be made subject to 
     any conditions, including the reservation of such rights on 
     behalf of the United States, as the Secretary considers 
     necessary to ensure that the vessel will be maintained and 
     used in accordance with the purposes for which it was 
     conveyed, including conditions necessary to ensure that 
     unless approved by the Secretary--
       (1) the eligible entity to which the vessel is conveyed may 
     not sell, convey, assign, exchange, or encumber the vessel, 
     any part thereof, or any associated historic artifact 
     conveyed to the eligible entity in conjunction with the 
     vessel; and
       (2) the eligible entity to which the vessel is conveyed may 
     not conduct any commercial activities at the vessel, any part 
     thereof, or in connection with any associated historic 
     artifact conveyed to the eligible entity in conjunction with 
     the vessel, in any manner.
       (b) Reversion.--In addition to any term or condition 
     established pursuant to this section, the conveyance of a 
     United States Government vessel shall include a condition 
     that the vessel, or any associated historic artifact conveyed 
     to the eligible entity in conjunction with the vessel, at the 
     option of the Secretary, shall revert to the United States 
     and be placed under the administrative control of the 
     Administrator if, without approval of the Secretary--
       (1) the vessel, any part thereof, or any associated 
     historic artifact ceases to be available for the educational, 
     cultural, historical, charitable, or recreational or other 
     public purpose for which it was conveyed under reasonable 
     conditions which shall be set forth in the eligible entity's 
     application;
       (2) the vessel or any part thereof ceases to be maintained 
     in a manner consistent with the commitments made by the 
     eligible entity to which it was conveyed;
       (3) the eligible entity to which the vessel is conveyed, 
     sells, conveys, assigns, exchanges, or encumbers the vessel, 
     any part thereof, or any associated historic artifact; or
       (4) the eligible entity to which the vessel is conveyed, 
     conducts any commercial activities at the vessel, any part 
     thereof, or in conjunction with any associated historic 
     artifact.
       (c) Agreement Required.--Except as may be otherwise 
     explicitly provided by statute, a United States Government 
     vessel may not be conveyed to an entity unless that entity 
     agrees to comply with any terms or conditions imposed on the 
     conveyance under this section.
       (d) Records and Monitoring.--
       (1) Compilation and transfer.--The Secretary shall provide 
     a written or electronic record for each vessel conveyed 
     pursuant to the Secretary's authority, including the vessel 
     registration, the application for conveyance, the terms and 
     conditions of conveyance, and any other documents associated 
     with the conveyance, and any post-conveyance correspondence 
     or other documentation, to the Administrator.
       (2) Monitoring.--For a period not less than 5 years after 
     the date of conveyance the Administrator shall monitor the 
     eligible entity's use of the vessel conveyed to ensure that 
     the vessel is being used in accordance with the purpose for 
     which it was conveyed. The Administrator shall create a 
     written or electronic record of such monitoring activities 
     and their findings.
       (3) Maintenance.--The Administrator shall maintain vessel 
     conveyance records provided under paragraph (1), and 
     monitoring records created under paragraph (2), on each 
     vessel conveyed until such time as the vessel is destroyed, 
     scuttled, recycled, or otherwise disposed of. The 
     Administrator may make the records available to the public.
       (e) Cost Estimates.--The Secretary may provide an estimate 
     to an eligible entity of the cost of maintaining and 
     operating any vessel to be conveyed to that entity.
       (f) Guidance.--The Secretary may issue guidance concerning 
     the types and extent of commercial activities, including the 
     sale of goods or services incidental to, and consistent with, 
     the purposes for which a vessel was conveyed, that are 
     approved by the Secretary for purposes of subsections (a)(2) 
     and (b)(4) of this section.

     SEC. 3. WORKING GROUP ON CONVEYANCE OF UNITED STATES VESSELS.

       Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, 
     the Secretary of Transportation shall convene a working 
     group, composed of representatives from the Maritime 
     Administration, the Coast Guard, and the United States Navy 
     to review and to make recommendations on a common set of 
     conditions for the conveyance of vessels of the United States 
     to eligible entities (as defined in section 2(d)(2)). The 
     Secretary may request the participation of senior 
     representatives of any other Federal department or agency, as 
     appropriate.

     SEC. 4. CIVIL ENFORCEMENT OF CONVEYANCE CONDITIONS.

       (a) Civil Administrative Penalties.--
       (1) Any eligible entity found by the Secretary, after 
     notice and opportunity for a hearing in accordance with 
     section 554 of title 5, United States Code, to have failed to 
     comply with the terms and conditions under which a vessel was 
     conveyed to it shall be liable to the United States for a 
     civil penalty. The amount of the civil penalty under this 
     paragraph shall not exceed $10,000 for each violation. Each 
     day of a continuing violation shall constitute a separate 
     violation.
       (2) Compromise or other action by the secretary.--The 
     Secretary may compromise, modify, or remit, with or without 
     conditions, any civil administrative penalty imposed under 
     this section that has not been referred to the Attorney 
     General for further enforcement action.
       (b) Hearing.--For the purposes of conducting any 
     investigation or hearing under this section, the Secretary 
     may issue subpoenas for the attendance and testimony of 
     witnesses and the production of relevant papers, books, and 
     documents, and may administer oaths. Witnesses summoned shall 
     be paid the same fees and mileage that are paid to witnesses 
     in the courts of the United States. In case of contempt or 
     refusal to obey a subpoena served upon any person pursuant to 
     this subsection, the district court of the United States for 
     any district in which such person is found, resides, or 
     transacts business, upon application by the United States and 
     after notice to such person, shall have jurisdiction to issue 
     an order requiring such person to appear and give testimony 
     before the Secretary or to appear and produce documents 
     before the Secretary, or both, and any failure to obey such 
     order of the court may be punished by such court as a 
     contempt thereof. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to 
     grant jurisdiction to a district court to entertain an 
     application for an order to enforce a subpoena issued by the 
     Secretary of Commerce to the Federal Government or any entity 
     thereof.
       (c) Jurisdiction.--The United States district courts shall 
     have original jurisdiction of any action under this section 
     arising out of or in connection with the operation, 
     maintenance, or disposition of a conveyed vessel, and 
     proceedings with respect to any such action may be instituted 
     in the judicial district in which any defendant resides or 
     may be found. For the purpose of this section, American Samoa 
     shall be included within the judicial district of the 
     District Court of the United States for the District of 
     Hawaii.
       (d) Collection.--If an eligible entity fails to pay an 
     assessment of a civil penalty after it has become a final and 
     unappealable order, or after the appropriate court has 
     entered final judgment in favor of the Secretary, the matter 
     may be referred to the Attorney General, who may recover the 
     amount (plus interest at currently prevailing rates from the 
     date of the final order). In such action the validity, 
     amount, and appropriateness of the final order imposing the 
     civil penalty shall not be subject to review. Any eligible 
     entity that fails to pay, on a timely basis, the amount of an 
     assessment of a civil penalty shall be required to pay, in 
     addition to such amount and interest, attorney's fees and 
     costs for collection proceedings and a quarterly nonpayment 
     penalty for each quarter during which such failure to pay 
     persists. Such nonpayment penalty shall be in an amount equal 
     to 20 percent of the aggregate amount of such the entity's 
     penalties and nonpayment penalties which are unpaid as of the 
     beginning of such quarter.
       (e) Nationwide Service of Process.--In any action by the 
     United States under this Act, process may be served in any 
     district where the defendant is found, resides, transacts 
     business or has appointed an agent for the service of 
     process, and for civil cases may also be served in a place 
     not within the United States in accordance with Rule 4 of the 
     Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

[[Page S7751]]

     SEC. 5. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the 
     Administrator of General Services.
       (2) Eligible entity.--The term ``eligible entity'' means a 
     State or local government, nonprofit corporation, educational 
     agency, community development organization, or other entity 
     that agrees to comply with the conditions established under 
     this section.
       (3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the department or agency on whose authority a vessel is 
     conveyed to an eligible entity.
       (4) United states government vessel.--The term ``United 
     States government vessel'' means a vessel owned by the United 
     States Government.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. McCONNELL (for himself, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. McCain, Mr. 
        Allard, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Biden, Mr. Bingaman, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. 
        Brown, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Burr, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. 
        Chambliss, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Coburn, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Coleman, 
        Ms. Collins, Mr. Cornyn, Mrs. Dole, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Durbin, 
        Mr. Ensign, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Hagel, Mr. Harkin, Mrs. 
        Hutchison, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Kerry, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Kohl, Ms. 
        Landrieu, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Lott, 
        Mr. Lugar, Mr. Martinez, Mrs. McCaskill, Mr. Menendez, Ms. 
        Mikulski, Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Obama, Mr. Reid, Mr. 
        Salazar, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Smith, Ms. Snowe, Mr. 
        Specter, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Sununu, Mr. Voinovich, 
        Mr. Whitehouse, and Mr. Wyden:)
  S.J. Res. 16. A joint resolution approving the renewal of import 
restrictions contained in the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 
2003; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, earlier this year, while the Senate was 
resuming its business in a new Congress, two dozen families on the 
other side of the world were fleeing their homes. Ninety-four men and 
women, some young some old, grabbed whatever belongings they could 
carry and headed north along the eastern Burmese border to escape the 
torment of a brutal regime.
  Human rights officials tell us what happened next. Late last month, 
these families were forced to move again. And as I stand here today, 
they are cramped inside the homes of other refugees. We are looking 
forward to summer vacations. They are looking ahead at the bitter work 
of building new homes in the rain, with their hands, in a remote corner 
of a stark, isolated wasteland the world seems to have forgotten.
  Mr. President, I am here to report that the United States has not 
forgotten. We will continue to shine a light on the oppressive and 
illegitimate military regime that drove these families from their 
homes. And I will rise every year, as I do today, with my good friend 
the senior Senator from California, to reintroduce a bill that extends 
for another year a ban on imports from Burma.
  Republicans and Democrats work together proudly on some things in the 
Senate. The Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act is one of them. I am 
pleased to say that even though the control of Congress has changed, 
its commitment to the people of Burma has not. Senator Feinstein and I 
are joined this year by 57 cosponsors, more than last year and the year 
before that. On the Republican side, for example, the people of Burma 
have no better friend than the senior Senator from Arizona, Mr. McCain.
  Support for the people of Burma is growing on Capitol Hill. Senator 
Feinstein and the senior Senator from Texas recently formed the Women's 
Caucus on Burma. The First Lady attended its first meeting last month, 
adding her voice to a growing chorus of those opposed to the Burmese 
regime. The voices are not just coming from Washington. But the words 
and actions of Washington are beginning to cause others to take note of 
this dire situation.
  Last year, the United Nations Security Council agreed for the first 
time to put Burma on its agenda. In January, a U.N. Security Council 
resolution that enjoyed the support of a majority of the Council's 
member nations was unfortunately blocked by Russian and Chinese vetoes. 
We remain encouraged by the fact that nine countries agreed to hold the 
regime accountable. We urge Russia and China to reconsider their 
stance.
  We know others are beginning to notice Burma because 3 years ago the 
Association of Southeast Asian nations called the sufferings in Burma 
``an internal matter.'' Yet today ASEAN recognizes that the ``Burma 
problem'' is its problem, too.
  Southeast Asian leaders have spoken out more frequently and 
forcefully over the last year in calling for democratic reforms. They 
join the United States and other freedom-loving people who have 
demanded for years that the military thugs who control Burma loosen 
their grip.
  We know others are starting taking notice because earlier this year 
the United Nations Secretary General, Ban ki-Moon, urged the release of 
Burma's roughly 1,300 political prisoners, including the world's only 
imprisoned Nobel Laureate, Aung San Suu Kyi.
  And we know others are starting to take notice because that effort 
was followed by a letter signed by 59 former heads of state.
  The Burmese military regime, the State Peace and Development Council, 
is on notice: the wider international community, including its 
neighbors, are increasingly aware and increasingly outraged by its 
behavior.
  Mr. President, The purpose of sanctions is to change behavior. And 
the changes we seek, in partnership with the Burmese people, are these: 
concrete, irreversible steps toward reconciliation and democratization 
that include the full, unfettered participation of the National League 
for Democracy and ethnic minorities; ending attacks on ethnic 
minorities; and the immediate, unconditional release of all prisoners 
of conscience, including Suu Kyi. The regime also needs to know that a 
sham constitutional process and token prisoner releases will not be 
regarded by anyone as progress toward these goals.
  The argument against sanctions--that they are most harmful to those 
they are meant to help--is well known. But it does not apply to Burma. 
It has long been the policy of the NLD, the winner of Burma's last 
democratic election, to seek reform through sanctions against the 
current regime.
  And for good reason. Burma's military junta has maintained an iron 
grip on every aspect of the country's economy. Its leaders flaunt and 
squander whatever wealth they can squeeze from Burmese workers, leaving 
the country's economy in ruins--but leaving enough aside for its 
current leader, GEN Than Shwe, to impulsively relocate the Burmese 
capital from Rangoon at a cost of millions, or to throw a wedding for 
his daughter that is reported to have cost millions more.
  The military junta has complete control over the flow of goods and 
money in and out of Burma. And every dollar that is spent on Burmese 
products is money spent on financing the regime. It is the SPDC, not 
the allies of the Burmese people, who are responsible for Burma's 
economic woes.
  As diplomatic pressure intensifies, as the rest of the international 
community undertakes the kind of change we have seen in ASEAN, the 
supporters of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act are confident this 
regime will be forced to change its ways.
  The situation is urgent. Burma's military regime has become 
increasingly reckless. And the humanitarian situation is grave and 
deteriorating: the junta has intensified its abuse of minority groups 
through rape and forced labor. It continues to harass and detain a new 
generation of peaceful activists, activists like a young woman named Su 
Su Nway, who has inspired the world with her resolute defiance of 
forced labor practices.
  In standing up to the Burmese regime, Su Su Nway drew inspiration 
from Suu Kyi. Now she is inspiring another generation of Burmese 
activists who are willing to defend their rights and, despite the 
danger to themselves, refuse to remain silent in the face of the abuses 
they see.
  According to the Los Angeles Times, Su Su Nway was asked by a radio 
reporter last year whether she feared imprisonment. Her simple but 
eloquent response should give us hope in the determination of this new 
generation of

[[Page S7752]]

activists. ``I will stand for the truth,'' she said.
  The crimes of the Burmese government are well documented. Here is 
what we know: nearly 70,000 children have been taken from their homes 
and forcibly conscripted--that's more children than live in all of 
Lexington, the second-largest city in my State.
  Forced labor is a daily threat in the southeastern Karen State, where 
military personnel force villagers to build roads and shelters, without 
food or pay, and to leave their homes and farms to do the work. Some 
are used as human shields against democratic insurgents.
  These are the lucky ones. Others are forced to walk ahead of military 
convoys to act as human minesweepers. If there is a landmine, they blow 
up. It is from diabolical thugs like these that desperate, exhausted 
families are fleeing their homes.
  Drugs and disease are spreading across Burma's borders along with its 
people, and it is no secret why. According to the World Health 
Organization, Burma is home to one of the worst AIDS epidemics in 
Southeast Asia. Yet it spent just $137,000 last year on the care and 
treatment of people with HIV/AIDS, even as it spends countless millions 
on Chinese and Russian tanks and jets.
  You can tell a lot about a man from the company he keeps. We could 
say the same about governments. In late April, Burma established 
diplomatic relations with the government of North Korea for the first 
time in two decades. It was reported last month that a North Korean 
cargo ship docked in Burma. This is a disturbing development to those 
of us on the outside looking in. It can only be discouraging to 
democratic reformers inside Burma.
  News of North Korea's presence on the Burmese coast came shortly 
after another troubling piece of news. In early April, Burma's second 
in command led a delegation on the nation's first-ever high-level trip 
to Russia. And last month, the Burmese government announced an 
agreement with Russia to build a nuclear research reactor in Burma.
  This should send a chill up the spine of every one of us. Even 
peaceful nations that lack the proper legal and regulatory framework 
should not be allowed to have a nuclear program. Those that torture and 
abuse their own people and consort with rogue regimes such as North 
Korea should not be allowed to even contemplate it.
  And this is how this rogue regime has held onto its power: Internal 
efforts at reform are violently stamped out, as they were when 
thousands of peaceful prodemocracy protesters were slaughtered in 1988. 
In response to a national election in 1990, in which Suu Kyi's party, 
the NLD, won 80 percent of the seats in a new parliament, the regime 
simply threw out the results.
  By refusing to accept imports from a regime that terrorizes people 
like Suu Kyi, Su Su Nway, and so many others, we are standing up and 
facing these tyrants at our own borders and turning them back--until 
they release these prisoners and begin the process of democratization 
and reconciliation. Every dollar we keep out of the hands of this junta 
is one less dollar it can use to fund the conscription of children, its 
nuclear program, and the war it has waged against its own people for 
nearly two decades.
  Later this month, Suu Kyi will celebrate her 62nd birthday, alone. I 
urge my colleagues to stand with her as that day approaches. By denying 
support for those who imprison her, we will pressure them to change.
  There are fresh signs that these sanctions have begun to do their 
work. But we need to keep the pressure on. So I ask my colleagues to 
join me in supporting the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the joint 
resolution be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                              S.J. Res. 16

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress 
     approves the renewal of the import restrictions contained in 
     section 3(a)(1) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 
     2003.

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today with Senator McConnell 
and 54 of our colleagues to introduce a joint resolution renewing the 
ban on all imports from Burma for another year.
  Simply put, the ruling State Peace and Development Council--SPDC--has 
not taken the necessary actions to warrant a lifting of the sanctions 
at this time.
  Indeed, Burma represents one of the most critical human rights 
situations in the world today.
  Aung San Suu Kyi, Nobel Peace Prize recipient and leader of the 
National League for Democracy, is confined to her home by orders of the 
military junta.
  She has spent the better part of the past 17 years imprisoned or 
under house arrest and on May 25, 2003 her sentence was extended for 
another year.
  There is no indication that the regime will free her anytime soon.
  This is simply unacceptable. She should be released immediately and 
unconditionally and the regime should begin real and substantive 
national reconciliation talks with Suu Kyi's National League for 
Democracy--NLD.
  The NLD, the winning party in Burma's last free elections in 1990 
with 82 percent of the seats in parliament, is forbidden from 
participating in public life. For over 20 years, the military junta has 
been unwilling to take meaningful steps towards political 
reconciliation.
  And let us not forget: 4 years ago government sponsored thugs 
attempted to assassinate Suu Kyi and other members of the National 
League for Democracy by attacking her motorcade in northern Burma.
  Indeed, the human rights situation in Burma is deplorable and demands 
a clear, unified response from the international community: 1,300 
political prisoners are still in jail; according to the U.N. Special 
Rapporteur, over 3,000 villages have been destroyed by the military 
junta; 70,000 child soldiers have been forcibly recruited; over 500,000 
people are internally displaced in Burma today, and over 1 million 
people have fled Burma over the past two decades, destabilizing Burma's 
neighbors. Also, the practice of rape as a form of repression has been 
sanctioned by the Burmese military; use of forced labor is widespread; 
human trafficking is rampant; Burma is the world's second-largest opium 
producer after Afghanistan and increasingly a source of trafficking of 
synthetic narcotics.
  Some may argue that while the human rights situation is indeed 
deplorable, sanctions are not the proper solution and we should try a 
new course.
  I agree that sanctions are not a panacea for every foreign policy 
concern. I am disappointed that Aung San Suu Kyi remains under house 
arrest and we still have not realized our goal of a free and democratic 
Burma.
  Yet now is not the time to lift the import ban on Burma. First, the 
military junta has not fulfilled any of the obligations of the 
``Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003'' that would allow a 
lifting of the ban. It has not made ``substantial and measurable 
progress'' towards: ending violations of internationally recognized 
human rights; releasing all political prisoners; allowing freedom of 
speech and press; allowing freedom of association; permitting the 
peaceful exercise of religion and; bringing to a conclusion an 
agreement between the SPDC and the National League for Democracy and 
Burma's ethnic nationalities on the restoration of a democratic 
government.
  If we were to allow the import ban to expire, we would reward the 
military junta for its inaction, its failure to fulfill these basic 
obligations, and its continued brutal crackdown on the human rights of 
the citizens of Burma.
  We simply cannot afford to send that message to those who bravely 
stand up to the SPDC and reject their abuses.
  I remind my colleagues that we are not voting to enact the import ban 
in perpetuity.
  We are renewing it for one more year and we will have another 
opportunity to review its effectiveness next year.
  Second, Aung San Suu Kyi and the democratic opposition continue to 
support the import ban.
  They recognize that it is not directed at the people of Burma, but at 
the military junta that dominates economic and political activity in 
their country and denies them their rights.

[[Page S7753]]

  Third, we are seeing progress in the international community in 
putting additional pressure on Burma.
  In a recent letter addressed to the State Peace and Development 
Council, a distinguished group of 59 former heads of state--including 
former Filipino president Corazon Aquino, former Czech president Vaclav 
Havel, former British prime minister John Major and former Presidents 
Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, and George H.W. Bush--called for the regime 
to release Aung San Suu Kyi.
  They correctly noted that ``Aung San Suu Kyi is not calling for 
revolution in Burma, but rather peaceful, nonviolent dialogue between 
the military, National League for Democracy, and Burma's ethnic 
groups.''
  The calls for Suu Kyi's release are also coming from Burma's 
neighbors.
  The Association of Southeast Asian Nations--ASEAN--now recognizes 
that Burma's actions are not an ``internal matter'' but a significant 
threat to peace and stability in the region.
  At a meeting of senior diplomats last month, ASEAN made a clear call 
for Aung San Suu Kyi's release.
  As Philippine foreign under secretary Erlinda Basilio said: ``It's a 
consensus that we want to see her early release.''
  An editorial in the Jakarta Post recently commented that the regime's 
refusal to heed these calls ``shows its complete disregard for the 
growing values of ASEAN.'' That is from the Jakarta Post, May 29, 2007.
  We are also seeing progress at the United Nations. In January, for 
the first time, the United Nations debated a binding, non-punitive 
resolution on Burma.
  Among other things that resolution called on the military junta:

     . . . to take concrete steps to allow full freedom of 
     expression, association, and movement by unconditionally 
     releasing Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and all political prisoners, 
     lifting all constraints on all political leaders and 
     citizens, and allowing the National League for Democracy 
     (NLD) and other political parties to operate freely.

  While nine countries voted in favor of the resolution, I am extremely 
disappointed that China and Russia exercised their veto.
  A report by former Czech President Vaclav Havel and retired 
archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa--``Threat to Peace: A Call for 
the U.N. Security Council to Act on Burma''--confirms the need for U.N. 
intervention. It details how the situation in Burma fulfills each of 
the criteria used for past intervention by the Security Council: 
overthrow of an elected government; armed conflicts with ethnic 
minorities; widespread human rights violations; outflow of refugees--
over 700,000; and drug production and trafficking and the spread of 
HIV/AIDS.
  I firmly believe that momentum for United Nations Security Council 
action is on our side and I am confident that body will revisit this 
resolution again this year.
  I am also hopeful that the new United Nations Secretary General Ban 
Ki-moon will personally get involved in putting pressure on the 
military junta to respect the wishes of the people of Burma and the 
international community by releasing Aung San Suu Kyi and restoring 
democratic government.
  In a letter signed by myself, Senator McConnell and a bipartisan 
group of 43 other U.S. Senators we wrote:

       We urge you to personally intervene with the regime on a 
     regular basis to establish concrete benchmarks and timetables 
     for democratic progress in Burma. We also urge you to hold 
     the Burmese government accountable for achieving those goals. 
     The Burmese people deserve more than talk--they deserve 
     action.

  We can demonstrate to the Secretary General that we too are committed 
to action by passing this joint resolution promptly.
  In conclusion, let me say that I believe the women of the U.S. Senate 
have a special obligation to speak out on this issue. Last month we 
came together to form the United States Senate Women's Caucus on Burma 
and hold our inaugural event with First Lady Laura Bush. I am proud to 
cochair that caucus with my friend and colleague from Texas, Senator 
Kay Bailey Hutchison. Together we expressed our solidarity with Aung 
San Suu Kyi and called for her immediate and unconditional release so 
that a peaceful transition to a democratic government may begin.
  It is my great hope that one day the United States Senate Women's 
Caucus on Burma will welcome Aung San Suu Kyi to Washington, DC, as the 
woman who led her nation from repression to freedom.
  Archbishop Desmond Tutu has rightly said, ``As long as [Suu Kyi] 
remains under house arrest, not one of us is truly free.''
  Today, I urge the State Peace and Development Council to release Aung 
San Suu Kyi immediately and unconditionally.
  I urge the United Nations Security Council to pass a binding 
resolution on Burma.
  And I urge the U.S. Senate to pass this joint resolution to renew the 
import ban on Burma for another year.

                          ____________________