[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 36 (Tuesday, March 4, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1523-S1529]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. INOUYE (for himself and Mr. Stevens):
  S. 2688. A bill to improve the protections afforded under Federal law 
to consumers from contaminated seafood by directing the Secretary of 
Commerce to establish a program, in coordination with other appropriate 
Federal agencies, to strengthen activities for ensuring that seafood 
sold or offered for sale to the public in or affecting interstate 
commerce is fit for human consumption; to the Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Commercial 
Seafood Consumer Protection Act. I am joined by Senator Stevens, the 
Vice Chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation 
Committee. I thank him for his work on this important issue.
  The average American eats approximately 16 pounds of fish and 
shellfish each year. Given this fact, it is essential that Americans 
have confidence in the safety and quality of the seafood they consume. 
Yet just last year, Americans faced news reports of tainted seafood 
imports reaching their kitchen tables. The Commercial Seafood Consumer 
Protection Act will help prevent such contaminated seafood from ever 
reaching the mouths of consumers.
  The Commercial Seafood Consumer Protection Act would work to ensure 
that commercially distributed seafood in the United States is fit for 
human consumption by strengthening the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration's, NOAA, fee-for-service seafood inspection program, 
SIP. Specifically, the bill would increase the number and capacity of 
NOAA laboratories that are involved with the SIP under the National 
Marine Fisheries Service.
  The bill would further direct the Secretary of Commerce and the 
Secretary of Health and Human Services to work together to create an 
infrastructure that provides a better system for importing safe 
seafood. This new system would provide a means to inspect foreign 
facilities, and examine and test imported seafood. It would also 
provide technical assistance and training to foreign facilities and 
governments. Additionally, it would also expedite seafood imports from 
countries that consistently maintain high standards.
  The Commercial Seafood Consumer Protection Act is a strong step in 
protecting the safety and quality of the seafood products Americans 
consume.
  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. 2688

       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 ``Commercial Seafood Consumer 
     Protection Act''.

     SEC. 2. SEAFOOD SAFETY.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Commerce shall, in 
     coordination with the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
     and other appropriate Federal agencies, establish a program 
     to strengthen Federal activities for ensuring that 
     commercially distributed seafood in the United States meets 
     the food quality and safety requirements of Federal law.
       (b) Memorandum of Understanding.--The Secretary of Commerce 
     and the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall enter 
     into an agreement within 180 days after enactment of this Act 
     to strengthen cooperation on seafood safety. The agreement 
     shall include provisions for--
       (1) cooperative arrangements for examining and testing 
     seafood imports;
       (2) coordination of inspections of foreign facilities;
       (3) technical assistance and training of foreign facilities 
     for marine aquaculture, technical assistance for foreign 
     governments concerning United States regulatory requirements, 
     and appropriate information transfer arrangements between the 
     United States and foreign governments;
       (4) developing a process for expediting imports of seafood 
     into the United States from foreign countries and exporters 
     that consistently adhere to the highest standards for 
     ensuring seafood safety;
       (5) establishing a system to track shipments of seafood in 
     the distribution chain within the United States;
       (6) labeling requirements to assure species identity and 
     prevent fraudulent practices;
       (7) a process by which officers and employees of the 
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and National 
     Marine Fisheries Service may be commissioned by the Secretary 
     of Health and Human Services for seafood examinations and 
     investigations conducted under section 801 of the Federal 
     Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 381);
       (8) the sharing of information concerning observed non-
     compliance with United States food requirements domestically 
     and in foreign countries and new regulatory decisions and 
     policies that may affect regulatory outcomes; and
       (9) conducting joint training on subjects that affect and 
     strengthen seafood inspection effectiveness by Federal 
     authorities.

     SEC. 3. CERTIFIED LABORATORIES.

       Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, 
     the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Secretary 
     of Health and Human Services, shall increase the number of 
     laboratories certified to the standards of the Food and Drug 
     Administration in the United States and in countries that 
     export seafood to the United States for the purpose of 
     analyzing seafood and ensuring that it complies with Federal 
     law. Such laboratories may include Federal, State, and 
     private facilities. The Secretary of commerce shall publish 
     in the Federal Register a list of certified laboratories, and 
     shall update the list, and publish the updated list, no less 
     frequently than annually.

     SEC. 4. NOAA LABORATORIES.

       In any fiscal year beginning after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Commerce may increase the number 
     and capacity of laboratories operated by the National Oceanic 
     and Atmospheric Administration involved in carrying out 
     testing and other activities under this Act to the extent the 
     Secretary determines that increased laboratory capacity is 
     necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act and as 
     provided for in appropriations Acts.

     SEC. 5. CONTAMINATED SEAFOOD.

       (a) Refusal of Entry.--The Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services shall issue an order refusing admission into the 
     United States of all imports of seafood or seafood products 
     originating from a country or exporter if the Secretary 
     determines, on the basis of reliable evidence, that shipments 
     of such seafood or seafood products is not likely to meet the 
     requirements of Federal law.
       (b) Increased Testing.--If the Secretary determines, on the 
     basis of reliable evidence that seafood imports originating 
     from a country may not meet the requirements of Federal law, 
     and determines that there is a lack of adequate certified 
     laboratories to provide for the entry of shipments pursuant 
     to section 3, then the Secretary shall order an increase in 
     the percentage of shipments tested of seafood originating 
     from such country to improve detection of potential 
     violations of such requirements.
       (c) Allowance of Individual Shipments from Exporting 
     Country or Exporter.--Notwithstanding an order under 
     subsection (a) with respect to seafood originating from a 
     country or exporter, the Secretary may permit individual 
     shipments of seafood originating in that country or from that 
     exporter to be admitted into the United States if--
       (1) the exporter presents evidence from a laboratory 
     certified by the Secretary that a shipment of seafood meets 
     the requirements of Federal law;
       (2) the Secretary, or an entity commissioned to carry out 
     examinations and investigations under section 702(a) of the 
     Federal Food, Cosmetic, and Drug Act (21 U.S.C. 372(a)), has 
     inspected the shipment and has found that the shipment meets 
     the requirements of Federal law.
       (d) Cancellation of Order.--The Secretary may cancel an 
     order under subsection (a) with respect to seafood exported 
     from a country or exporter if all shipments into the United 
     States under subsection (c) of seafood originating in that 
     country or from that exporter more than 1 year after the date 
     on which the Secretary issued the order have been found, 
     under the procedures described in subsection (c), to meet the 
     requirements of Federal law. If the Secretary determines that 
     an exporter has failed to comply with the requirements of an 
     order under subsection (a), the 1-year period in the 
     preceding sentence shall run from the date of that 
     determination rather than the date on which the order was 
     issued.
       (e) Reliable Evidence Defined.--In this section, the term 
     ``reliable evidence'' includes--
       (1) the detection of failure to meet Federal law 
     requirements under subsection (a) by the Secretary;
       (2) the detection of all seafood products that fail to meet 
     Federal law requirements by an entity commissioned to carry 
     out examinations and investigations under section 702(a) of 
     the Federal Food, Cosmetic, and Drug Act (21 U.S.C. 372(a)) 
     or a laboratory certified under subsection (c);
       (3) findings from an inspection team formed under section 
     6; or
       (4) the detection by other importing countries of non-
     compliance of shipments of seafood or seafood products that 
     originate from the exporting country or exporter.

[[Page S1524]]

       (f) Effect.--This section shall be in addition to, and 
     shall have no effect on, the authority of the Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services under the Federal Food, Drug, and 
     Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) with respect to seafood, 
     seafood products, or any other product.

     SEC. 6. INSPECTION TEAMS.

       The Secretary of Commerce, in cooperation with the 
     Secretary of Health and Human Services, may send 1 or more 
     inspectors to a country or exporter from which seafood 
     exported to the United States originates. The inspection team 
     will assess whether any prohibited drug, practice, or process 
     is being used in connection with the farming, cultivation, 
     harvesting, preparation for market, or transportation of such 
     seafood. The inspection team shall prepare a report for the 
     Secretary with its findings. The Secretary of Commerce shall 
     cause the report to be published in the Federal Register no 
     later than 90 days after the inspection team makes its final 
     report. The Secretary of Commerce shall notify the country or 
     exporter through appropriate means as to the findings of the 
     report no later than the date on which the report is 
     published in the Federal Register. A country may offer a 
     rebuttal to the assessment within 90 days after publication 
     of the report.

     SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated for each of fiscal 
     years 2009 through 2013, for purposes of carrying out the 
     provisions of this Act, $15,000,000.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BOND:
  S. 2691. A bill to amend the Federal Crop Insurance Reform and 
Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 to provide 
enhanced agricultural input into Federal rulemakings, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that I call 
the Farm Red Tape Reduction Act.
  This act will give farmers a voice in Federal rulemakings whenever a 
new Federal regulation threatens to impose severe economic pain on 
farmers.
  As we saw with small businesses, many times the Government overlooks 
the plight of the little guy, who does not have the resources or know-
how to weigh-in with big Government agencies in Washington. In 1976, 
Congress created the Office of Advocacy to ensure that small businesses 
have an advocate in Government and a seat at the table when new 
regulations affecting them are drafted. I want to share that same 
success now with farmers.
  The idea is simple. This act would help provide a more transparent 
Government that listens to the people most affected by the regulations. 
It will hold the Government more accountable for its actions. It is a 
message that the Federal Government is meant to serve to its citizens, 
not bully them. We want to make this an easy process. Citizens should 
be heard while the Government is deciding on a regulation that affects 
them--not after the decision is made. The difference is subtle, but 
important. Listen to farmers and agriculture first--be inclusive.
  Cutting unnecessary red tape will provide greater flexibility for 
agriculture businesses by removing barriers to enterprise. Encouraging 
enterprise is essential if the United States is to compete in a global 
environment.
  Farms and other agricultural businesses will benefit from simplified 
rules.
  This measure will help in cutting red tape with a view to improving 
the environment for agricultural business. My experience on the Small 
Business Committee tells me that there are currently dozens of 
regulatory proposals before Federal agencies--but most without a true 
assessment of impact on the very people they will most affect.
  The question we must ask ourselves is this: Are all these initiatives 
necessary and what are the consequences? I want agencies to look into 
this question. The best way to do that is to hear from the folks most 
affected.
  The Office of Advocacy celebrated its 30th anniversary this year. The 
Regulatory Flexibility Act, RFA, is 27 years old and the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, SBREFA, is 11 years old.
  The common theme: They have all gone a long way in making agencies 
aware of the unique concerns of small business. With the passage of 
these laws small business concerns were given a voice at the table, 
they have been putting that voice to use ever since--with great 
success.
  These laws have been successful. Early intervention and improved 
compliance have led to less burdensome regulations. For example, in 
fiscal year 2001, involvement in agency rulemakings helped save small 
businesses an estimated $4.4 billion in new regulatory compliance 
costs.
  Similarly, in fiscal year 2002, efforts to improve agency compliance 
with the RFA on behalf of small entities secured more than $21 billion 
in first-year cost savings, with an additional $10 billion in annually 
recurring cost savings. Most recently, in fiscal year 2003, they 
achieved more than $6.3 billion in regulatory cost savings and more 
than $5.7 billion in recurring annual savings on behalf of small 
entities.
  If we can add farmers to the table and save them any portion of that 
kind of money--just that fact will make this bill a success.
  Just as important is that these laws have not hindered the 
development of regulations. In fact, these laws are credited with 
helping regulators come up with better plans. Plans that work--because 
the people who will be regulated are involved in the development of the 
rules. This gives them some ownership and that makes successful 
compliance and implementation.
  Our economy and the lives of farmers is constantly changing--this is 
due in no small part to what we are doing today--making changes to farm 
legislation, new technologies, new trade deals, new regulations of 
every kind being implemented year round. This creates new and constant 
challenges for analyzing regulatory impacts on farmers. If there was 
ever a time farmers needed a voice at the table when new regulations 
are made--it is now.
  It is not my intention to throw out regulations simply as a matter of 
principle if, for example, they involve costs for businesses. I am more 
concerned with obtaining solid impact analyses that can serve as a 
basis for informed decision-making.
  It is also quite clear that better regulations will be possible only 
if those affected also play their part, since it is they who will be 
responsible for implementation.
  What I have heard from some who oppose this, is that they are 
concerned about the burden of red tape. However, they are not concerned 
about the burden of red tape on farmers. They are concerned about the 
burden of red tape on Washington regulators working to impose red tape 
on farmers.
  Surely the Senate should be more concerned with red tape on our 
farmers than red tape on our Washington regulators. We should have a 
rulemaking advocate for farmers just as we have one at Small Business 
Administration for small businesses. Advocates do not have the power to 
change standards or stop regulations, only inform them. We should all 
support a more informed process so burdens are reduced and regulations 
are more effective and widely supported. We all know what having a USDA 
rulemaking advocate means in Washington; there will still be 20 
officials from other agencies in the room working to regulate farmers. 
But now, there may be one from USDA also in the room.
  This bill has received support from the American Farm Bureau 
Federation, the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, the National 
Cotton Council, the American Soybean Association, National Milk 
Producers Federation, South East Dairy Farmers Association, National 
Association of Wheat Growers, USA Rice Federation, Western United 
Dairymen, and the National Pork Producers Council.
  I ask my colleagues to support this bill and join me in helping 
farmers and agricultural business reduce unnecessary bureaucratic red 
tape by including them at the table.
  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. 2691

       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 ``Farmer Red Tape Reduction 
     Act of 2008''.

     SEC. 2. AGRICULTURAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY.

       The Federal Crop Insurance Reform and Department of 
     Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 6901 et 
     seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

            ``TITLE IV--AGRICULTURAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY

     ``SEC. 401. DEFINITIONS.

       ``In this title:

[[Page S1525]]

       ``(1) Agency.--The term `agency' has the meaning given the 
     term in section 551 of title 5, United States Code.
       ``(2) Agricultural entity.--The term `agricultural entity' 
     means any person or entity that has income derived from--
       ``(A) farming, ranching, or forestry operations;
       ``(B) the production of crops, livestock, or unfinished raw 
     forestry products;
       ``(C) the sale (including the sale of easements and 
     development rights) of farm, ranch, or forest products, 
     including water or hunting rights;
       ``(D) the sale of equipment to conduct farming, ranching, 
     or forestry operations;
       ``(E) the rental or lease of land used for farming, 
     ranching, or forestry operations, including water or hunting 
     rights;
       ``(F) the provision of production inputs or services to 
     farmers, ranchers, or foresters;
       ``(G) the processing (including packing), storing 
     (including shedding), or transporting of farm, ranch, or 
     forestry products; or
       ``(H) the sale of land used for agriculture.
       ``(3) Chief counsel for advocacy.--The term `Chief Counsel 
     for Advocacy' means the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 
     Office of Advocacy of the Department of Agriculture appointed 
     under section 413(b).
       ``(4) Collection of information.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `collection of information' 
     means obtaining, causing to be obtained, soliciting, or 
     requiring the disclosure to third parties or the public, of 
     facts or opinions by or for an agency, regardless of form or 
     format, calling for--
       ``(i) answers to identical questions posed to, or identical 
     reporting or recordkeeping requirements imposed on, 10 or 
     more persons, other than agencies, instrumentalities, or 
     employees of the United States; or
       ``(ii) answers to questions posed to agencies, 
     instrumentalities, or employees of the United States that are 
     to be used for general statistical purposes.
       ``(B) Exclusion.--The term `collection of information' does 
     not include collection of information described in section 
     3518(c)(1) of title 44, United States Code.
       ``(5) Recordkeeping requirement.--The term `recordkeeping 
     requirement' means a requirement imposed by an agency on 
     persons to maintain specified records.
       ``(6) Rule.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `rule' means any rule for which 
     an agency publishes a general notice of proposed rulemaking 
     pursuant to section 553(b) of title 5, United States Code, or 
     any other law.
       ``(B) Inclusion.--The term `rule' includes any rule of 
     general applicability governing Federal grants to State and 
     local governments for which an agency provides an opportunity 
     for notice and public comment.
       ``(C) Exclusions.--The term `rule' does not include a rule 
     of particular applicability relating to--
       ``(i) rates, wages, corporate or financial structures or 
     reorganizations of the structures, prices, facilities, 
     appliances, services, or allowances; or
       ``(ii) valuations, costs, accounting, or practices relating 
     to those rates, wages, structures, prices, facilities, 
     appliances, services, or allowances.

     ``SEC. 402. AGRICULTURAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY AGENDA.

       ``(a) In General.--During the months of October and April 
     of each year, each agency shall publish in the Federal 
     Register an agricultural regulatory flexibility agenda that 
     shall contain--
       ``(1) a brief description of the subject area of any rule 
     that the agency expects to propose or promulgate that is 
     likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
     number of agricultural entities;
       ``(2) a summary of--
       ``(A) the nature of the rule under consideration for each 
     subject area listed in the agenda under paragraph (1);
       ``(B) the objectives and legal basis for the issuance of 
     the rule; and
       ``(C) an approximate schedule for completing action on any 
     rule for which the agency has issued a general notice of 
     proposed rulemaking; and
       ``(3) the name and telephone number of an agency official 
     who is knowledgeable concerning the rule described in 
     paragraph (1).
       ``(b) Notice and Comment by Chief Counsel for Advocacy.--
     Each agency shall transmit the agricultural regulatory 
     flexibility agenda of the agency to the Chief Counsel for 
     Advocacy for any comment.
       ``(c) Notice and Comment by Agricultural Entities.--Each 
     agency shall, to the maximum extent practicable--
       ``(1) provide notice of each agricultural regulatory 
     flexibility agenda to agricultural entities or the 
     representatives of agricultural entities through direct 
     notification or publication of the agenda in publications 
     likely to be obtained by the agricultural entities; and
       ``(2) invite comments on each subject area on the agenda.
       ``(d) Administration.--Nothing in this section--
       ``(1) precludes an agency from considering or acting on any 
     matter not included in an agricultural regulatory flexibility 
     agenda; or
       ``(2) requires an agency to consider or act on any matter 
     listed in the agenda.

     ``SEC. 403. INITIAL AGRICULTURAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY 
                   ANALYSIS.

       ``(a) In General.--If an agency is required by section 553 
     of title 5, United States Code, or any other law, to publish 
     general notice of proposed rulemaking for any proposed rule, 
     or publishes a notice of proposed rulemaking for an 
     interpretative rule involving the internal revenue laws of 
     the United States, the agency shall prepare and make 
     available for public comment an initial agricultural 
     regulatory flexibility analysis of the proposed rule that 
     describes the impact of the proposed rule on agricultural 
     entities.
       ``(b) Publication.--The agency shall publish the initial 
     agricultural regulatory flexibility analysis or a summary of 
     the analysis in the Federal Register at the time of the 
     publication of general notice of proposed rulemaking for the 
     rule.
       ``(c) Notice and Comment by Chief Counsel for Advocacy.--
     The agency shall transmit a copy of the initial agricultural 
     regulatory flexibility analysis to the Chief Counsel for 
     Advocacy for any comment.
       ``(d) Interpretative Rules.--In the case of an 
     interpretative rule that involves the internal revenue laws 
     of the United States, this title applies to interpretative 
     rules published in the Federal Register for codification in 
     the Code of Federal Regulations only to the extent that the 
     interpretative rule impose on agricultural entities a 
     collection of information requirement.
       ``(e) Contents.--Each initial agricultural regulatory 
     flexibility analysis of an agency for a proposed rule 
     required under this section shall contain--
       ``(1) a description of the reasons why action by the agency 
     is being considered;
       ``(2) a succinct statement of the objectives of, and legal 
     basis for, the proposed rule;
       ``(3) a description of and, if feasible, an estimate of the 
     number of agricultural entities to which the proposed rule 
     will apply;
       ``(4) a description of the projected reporting, 
     recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements of the 
     proposed rule, including an estimate of the classes of 
     agricultural entities that will be subject to the requirement 
     and the type of professional skills necessary for preparation 
     of the report or record; and
       ``(5) an identification, to the maximum extent practicable, 
     of all relevant Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or 
     conflict with the proposed rule.
       ``(f) Alternatives.--
       ``(1) In general.--Each initial agricultural regulatory 
     flexibility analysis of an agency for a proposed rule shall 
     contain a description of any significant alternatives to the 
     proposed rule that--
       ``(A) accomplish the purposes of the applicable law; and
       ``(B) minimize any significant economic impact of the 
     proposed rule on agricultural entities.
       ``(2) Types of alternatives.--Consistent with the purposes 
     of the applicable law, the analysis shall discuss significant 
     alternatives such as--
       ``(A) the establishment of differing compliance or 
     reporting requirements or timetables that take into account 
     the resources available to agricultural entities;
       ``(B) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification 
     of compliance and reporting requirements under the rule for 
     agricultural entities;
       ``(C) the use of performance rather than design standards; 
     and
       ``(D) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part 
     of the rule, for agricultural entities.

     ``SEC. 404. FINAL AGRICULTURAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY 
                   ANALYSIS.

       ``(a) In General.--If an agency promulgates a final rule 
     under section 553 of title 5, United States Code, after being 
     required by that section or any other law to publish a 
     general notice of proposed rulemaking, or promulgates a final 
     interpretative rule involving the internal revenue laws of 
     the United States as described in section 403(a), the agency 
     shall prepare a final agricultural regulatory flexibility 
     analysis of the final rule that describes the impact of the 
     final rule on agricultural entities.
       ``(b) Contents.--Each final agricultural regulatory 
     flexibility analysis of an agency for a final rule required 
     under this section shall contain--
       ``(1) a succinct statement of the need for, and objectives 
     of, the rule;
       ``(2)(A) a summary of the significant issues raised by the 
     public comments in response to the initial agricultural 
     regulatory flexibility analysis;
       ``(B) a summary of the assessment of the agency of the 
     issues; and
       ``(C) a statement of any changes made in the proposed rule 
     as a result of the comments;
       ``(3) a description of and an estimate of the number of 
     agricultural entities to which the rule will apply or an 
     explanation of why no such estimate is available;
       ``(4) a description of the projected reporting, 
     recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements of the rule, 
     including an estimate of the classes of agricultural entities 
     that will be subject to the requirements and the type of 
     professional skills necessary for preparation of the report 
     or record; and
       ``(5) a description of the steps the agency has taken to 
     minimize the significant economic impact on agricultural 
     entities consistent with the purposes of applicable law, 
     including a statement of--
       ``(A) the factual, policy, and legal reasons for selecting 
     the alternative adopted in the final rule; and
       ``(B) why each 1 of the other significant alternatives to 
     the rule considered by the agency that affect the impact on 
     agricultural entities was rejected.
       ``(c) Public Availability.--The agency shall--

[[Page S1526]]

       ``(1) make copies of the final agricultural regulatory 
     flexibility analysis available to members of the public; and
       ``(2) publish in the Federal Register the analysis or a 
     summary of the analysis.

     ``SEC. 405. AVOIDANCE OF DUPLICATIVE OR UNNECESSARY ANALYSIS.

       ``(a) Other Agenda or Analysis.--An agency may perform the 
     analyses required by section 402, 403, or 404 in conjunction 
     with or as a part of any other agenda or analysis required by 
     any other law if the other analysis meets the requirements of 
     that section.
       ``(b) No Significant Economic Impact on Agricultural 
     Entities.--
       ``(1) In general.--Sections 403 and 404 shall not apply to 
     a proposed or final rule of an agency if the head of the 
     agency certifies that the rule will not, if promulgated, have 
     a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
     agricultural entities.
       ``(2) Publication of certification.--If the head of the 
     agency makes a certification under subsection (a), at the 
     time of publication of general notice of proposed rulemaking 
     for the rule or at the time of publication of the final rule, 
     the agency shall publish in the Federal Register the 
     certification and a statement providing the factual basis for 
     the certification.
       ``(3) Notice and comment by chief counsel for advocacy.--
     The agency shall provide the certification and statement to 
     the Chief Counsel for Advocacy for comment.
       ``(c) Closely Related Rules.--In order to avoid duplicative 
     action, an agency may consider a series of closely related 
     rules as 1 rule for the purposes of sections 402, 403, 404, 
     and 410.

     ``SEC. 406. EFFECT ON OTHER LAW.

       ``The requirements of sections 403 and 404 do not alter any 
     standards otherwise applicable by law to agency action.

     ``SEC. 407. PREPARATION OF ANALYSES.

       ``In complying with sections 403 and 404, an agency may 
     provide--
       ``(1) a quantifiable or numerical description of the 
     effects of a proposed rule or alternatives to the proposed 
     rule; or
       ``(2) more general descriptive statements, if 
     quantification is not practicable or reliable.

     ``SEC. 408. WAIVER OR DELAY OF COMPLETION.

       ``(a) Initial Agricultural Regulatory Flexibility 
     Analysis.--An agency head may waive or delay the completion 
     of all or part of the requirements of section 403 for a 
     proposed rule by publishing in the Federal Register, not 
     later than the date of publication of the proposed rule, a 
     written finding, with a statements of the reasons for the 
     finding, that the final rule is being promulgated in response 
     to an emergency that makes compliance or timely compliance 
     with section 403 impracticable.
       ``(b) Final Agricultural Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in section 405(b), an 
     agency head may not waive the requirements of section 404 for 
     a final rule.
       ``(2) Delayed completion.--An agency head may delay the 
     date for complying with section 404 for a final rule for a 
     period of not more than 180 days after the date of 
     publication in the Federal Register of the final rule by 
     publishing in the Federal Register, not later than the date 
     of publication of the final rule, a written finding, with a 
     statement of the reasons for the finding, that the final rule 
     is being promulgated in response to an emergency that makes 
     timely compliance with section 104 impracticable.
       ``(3) Effect of noncompliance.--If the agency has not 
     prepared a final agricultural regulatory analysis for a final 
     rule pursuant to section 404 within 180 days after the date 
     of publication of the final rule--
       ``(A) the rule shall lapse and have no effect; and
       ``(B) the rule shall not be repromulgated until a final 
     regulatory flexibility analysis has been completed by the 
     agency.

     ``SEC. 409. COMMENTS.

       ``(a) Definition of Covered Agency.--In this section, the 
     term `covered agency' means--
       ``(1) the Environmental Protection Agency; and
       ``(2) the Department of the Interior.
       ``(b) In General.--If a rule is promulgated that will have 
     a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
     agricultural entities, the head of the agency promulgating 
     the rule or the official of the agency with statutory 
     responsibility for the promulgation of the rule shall ensure 
     that agricultural entities are given an opportunity to 
     participate in the rulemaking for the rule through the use of 
     techniques such as--
       ``(1) the inclusion in an advanced notice of proposed 
     rulemaking, if issued, of a statement that the proposed rule 
     may have a significant economic effect on a substantial 
     number of agricultural entities;
       ``(2) the publication of general notice of proposed 
     rulemaking in publications likely to be obtained by 
     agricultural entities;
       ``(3) the direct notification of interested agricultural 
     entities;
       ``(4) the conduct of open conferences or public hearings 
     concerning the rule for agricultural entities, including 
     soliciting and receiving comments over computer networks; and
       ``(5) the adoption or modification of agency procedural 
     rules to reduce the cost or complexity of participation in 
     the rulemaking by agricultural entities.
       ``(c) Requirements for Covered Agencies.--Prior to 
     publication of an initial agricultural regulatory flexibility 
     analysis for a proposed rule that a covered agency is 
     required to conduct under this title--
       ``(1) the covered agency shall--
       ``(A) notify the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the proposed 
     rule; and
       ``(B) provide the Chief Counsel for Advocacy with 
     information on the potential impact of the proposed rule on 
     agricultural entities;
       ``(2) not later than 15 days after the date of receipt of 
     the materials described in paragraph (1), the Chief Counsel 
     for Advocacy shall identify individuals representative of 
     affected agricultural entities for the purpose of obtaining 
     advice and recommendations from those individuals on the 
     potential impact of the proposed rule;
       ``(3) the covered agency shall convene a review panel for 
     the proposed rule consisting of--
       ``(A) full-time Federal employees of the office within the 
     covered agency responsible for carrying out the proposed 
     rule;
       ``(B) the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of 
     the Office of Management and Budget; and
       ``(C) the Chief Counsel for Advocacy;
       ``(4) the panel convened under paragraph (3) for the 
     proposed rule of a covered agency shall--
       ``(A) review any material the covered agency has prepared 
     in connection with the proposed rule, including any draft 
     proposed rule;
       ``(B) collect advice and recommendations of each individual 
     agricultural entity representative identified by the covered 
     agency, after consultation with the Chief Counsel for 
     Advocacy, on issues related to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) 
     of subsection (b), and subsection (c), of section 403(e); and
       ``(C) not later than 60 days after the date the panel is 
     convened, submit to the covered agency a report on--
       ``(i) the comments of the agricultural entity 
     representatives; and
       ``(ii) the findings of the panel on issues related to 
     paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) of subsection (b), and 
     subsection (c), of section 403(e); and
       ``(5) the covered agency shall--
       ``(A) make the report provided under paragraph (4)(C) 
     public as part of the rulemaking record; and
       ``(B) if appropriate, modify--
       ``(i) the proposed rule;
       ``(ii) the initial agricultural flexibility analysis; or
       ``(iii) the decision on whether an initial flexibility 
     analysis is required.
       ``(d) No Significant Economic Impact on Agricultural 
     Entities.--A covered agency may apply subsection (c) to rules 
     that the covered agency--
       ``(1) intends to certify under subsection 405(b); but
       ``(2) believes may have a greater than de minimis impact on 
     a substantial number of agricultural entities.
       ``(e) Waivers.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Chief Counsel for Advocacy, in 
     consultation with the individuals described in subsection 
     (c)(2) and the Administrator of the Office of Information and 
     Regulatory Affairs of the Office of Management and Budget, 
     may waive the requirements of paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) of 
     subsection (c) by including in the rulemaking record a 
     written finding, with a statement of the reasons for the 
     finding, that those requirements would not advance the 
     effective participation of agricultural entities in the 
     rulemaking process.
       ``(2) Factors.--In making a determination on a proposed 
     rule of a covered agency under this subsection, the Chief 
     Counsel for Advocacy shall consider--
       ``(A) in developing the proposed rule, the extent to which 
     the covered agency--
       ``(i) consulted with individuals representative of affected 
     agricultural entities with respect to the potential impact of 
     the proposed rule; and
       ``(ii) took those concerns into consideration;
       ``(B) special circumstances requiring prompt issuance of 
     the rule; and
       ``(C) whether the requirements of subsection (c) would 
     provide the individuals described in subsection (b)(2) with a 
     competitive advantage relative to other agricultural 
     entities.

     ``SEC. 410. PERIODIC REVIEW OF RULES.

       ``(a) Plan for Periodic Review of Rules.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date 
     of enactment of this title, each agency shall publish in the 
     Federal Register a plan for the periodic review of the rules 
     issued by the agency that have or will have a significant 
     economic impact on a substantial number of agricultural 
     entities.
       ``(2) Amendments.--The agency may amend the plan by 
     publishing the amendment in the Federal Register.
       ``(3) Purpose of review.--The purpose of the review shall 
     be to determine whether the rules should be continued without 
     change, or should be amended or rescinded, consistent with 
     the purposes of applicable law, to minimize any significant 
     economic impact of the rules on a substantial number of 
     agricultural entities.
       ``(4) Timetable.--Subject to paragraph (5), the plan shall 
     provide for--
       ``(A) the review of all such agency rules existing on the 
     date of enactment of this title not later than 10 years after 
     that date of enactment; and
       ``(B) the review of each rule adopted after the date of 
     enactment of this title not later

[[Page S1527]]

     than 10 years after the date of the publication of the rule 
     as the final rule.
       ``(5) Extension.--If the head of the agency determines that 
     completion of the review of existing rules is not feasible by 
     the date required under paragraph (4), the head of the 
     agency--
       ``(A) shall certify the determination in a statement 
     published in the Federal Register; and
       ``(B) may extend the completion date by 1 year at a time 
     for a total of not more than 5 years.
       ``(b) Factors for Minimizing Impact.--In reviewing rules to 
     minimize any significant economic impact of a rule on a 
     substantial number of agricultural entities in a manner 
     consistent with the purposes of applicable law, the agency 
     shall consider--
       ``(1) the continued need for the rule;
       ``(2) the nature of complaints or comments received 
     concerning the rule from the public;
       ``(3) the complexity of the rule;
       ``(4) the extent to which the rule overlaps, duplicates, or 
     conflicts with other Federal rules, and, to the maximum 
     extent feasible, with State and local governmental rules; and
       ``(5) the length of time since the rule has been evaluated 
     or the degree to which technology, economic conditions, or 
     other factors have changed in the area affected by the rule.
       ``(c) Publication of List of Rules.--
       ``(1) In general.--Each year, each agency shall publish in 
     the Federal Register a list of the rules that have a 
     significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
     agricultural entities, which are to be reviewed pursuant to 
     this section during the succeeding 1-year period.
       ``(2) Content.--The list shall include a brief description 
     of each rule and the need for and legal basis of the rule.
       ``(3) Public comments.--The agency shall invite public 
     comment on the rule.

     ``SEC. 411. JUDICIAL REVIEW.

       ``(a) In General.--In the case of any rule subject to this 
     title, an agricultural entity that is adversely affected or 
     aggrieved by final agency action may seek judicial review, of 
     agency compliance with--
       ``(1) sections 404, 405(b), 408(b), and 410, in accordance 
     with chapter 7 of title 5, United States Code; and
       ``(2) sections 407 and 409(a), in connection with judicial 
     review of section 404.
       ``(b) Jurisdiction.--Each court having jurisdiction to 
     review a rule for compliance with section 553, United States 
     Code, or under any other provision of law, shall have 
     jurisdiction to review any claim of noncompliance with--
       ``(1) section 404, 405(b), 108(b), and 110 in accordance 
     with chapter 7 of title 5, United States Code; and
       ``(2) sections 407 and 409(a), in connection with judicial 
     review of section 404.
       ``(c) Timing.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this 
     subsection, an agricultural entity may seek review under this 
     section during--
       ``(A) the 1-year period beginning on the date of final 
     agency action; or
       ``(B) if a provision of law requires that an action 
     challenging a final agency action be commenced before the 
     expiration of that 1-year, during the period established 
     under the provision of law.
       ``(2) Final agricultural regulatory flexibility analysis.--
     If an agency delays the issuance of a final agricultural 
     flexibility analysis pursuant to section 408(b), an action 
     for judicial review under this section shall be filed not 
     later than--
       ``(A) 1 year after the date the analysis is made available 
     to the public; or
       ``(B) if a provision of law requires that an action 
     challenging a final agency regulation be commenced before the 
     expiration of the 1-year period, the number of days specified 
     in the provision of law that is after the date the analysis 
     is made available to the public.
       ``(d) Relief.--In granting any relief in an action under 
     this section, the court shall order the agency to take 
     corrective action consistent with this title and chapter 7 of 
     title 5, United States Code, including--
       ``(1) remanding the rule to the agency; and
       ``(2) deferring the enforcement of the rule against 
     agricultural entities unless the court finds that continued 
     enforcement of the rule is in the public interest.
       ``(e) Effective Date of Rule.--Nothing in this subsection 
     limits the authority of any court to stay the effective date 
     of any rule or provision of any rule under any other 
     provision of law or to grant any other relief in addition to 
     the relief authorized under this section.
       ``(f) Agricultural Flexibility Analysis.--In an action for 
     the judicial review of a rule, the agricultural flexibility 
     analysis for the rule (including an analysis prepared or 
     corrected pursuant to subsection (d)) shall constitute part 
     of the entire record of agency action in connection with the 
     review.
       ``(g) Sole Means of Review.--Compliance or noncompliance by 
     an agency with this title shall be subject to judicial review 
     only in accordance with this section.
       ``(h) Other Impact Statements.--Nothing in this section 
     bars judicial review of any other impact statement or similar 
     analysis required by any other law if judicial review of the 
     statement or analysis is otherwise permitted by law.

     ``SEC. 412. REPORTS AND INTERVENTION RIGHTS.

       ``(a) Monitoring and Reporting.--The Chief Counsel for 
     Advocacy shall--
       ``(1) monitor agency compliance with this title; and
       ``(2) report at least annually to the President and to the 
     Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives and 
     the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry of the 
     Senate on agency compliance with this title.
       ``(b) Intervention.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Chief Counsel for Advocacy may 
     appear as amicus curiae in any action brought in a court of 
     the United States to review a rule.
       ``(2) Views.--In any action described in paragraph (1), the 
     Chief Counsel for Advocacy may present the views of the Chief 
     Counsel for Advocacy with respect to--
       ``(A) compliance with this title;
       ``(B) the adequacy of the rulemaking record with respect to 
     agricultural entities; and
       ``(C) the effect of the rule on agricultural entities.
       ``(3) Granting of application.--A court of the United 
     States shall grant the application of the Chief Counsel for 
     Advocacy to appear in any action under this subsection for 
     the purposes described in paragraph (2).

     ``SEC. 413. OFFICE OF ADVOCACY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF 
                   AGRICULTURE.

       ``(a) Establishment.--There is established within the 
     Department of Agriculture an Office of Advocacy of the 
     Department of Agriculture.
       ``(b) Chief Counsel for Advocacy.--The management of the 
     Office shall be vested in a Chief Counsel for Advocacy who 
     shall be a private citizen appointed by the President, by and 
     with the advice and consent of the Senate.
       ``(c) Primary Functions.--The primary functions of the 
     Office of Advocacy shall be--
       ``(1)(A) to measure the direct costs and other effects of 
     government regulation on agricultural entities; and
       ``(B) to make legislative and nonlegislative proposals for 
     eliminating excessive or unnecessary regulations of 
     agricultural entities;
       ``(2)(A) to study the ability of financial markets and 
     institutions to meet agricultural entity credit needs; and
       ``(B) to determine the impact of government demands for 
     credit on agricultural entities;
       ``(3)(A) to recommend specific measures for creating an 
     environment in which all agricultural entities will have the 
     opportunity to compete effectively and expand to the full 
     potential of agricultural entities; and
       ``(B) to ascertain the common reasons, if any, for 
     agricultural entity successes and failures; and
       ``(4)(A) to evaluate the efforts of each department and 
     agency of the United States, and of private industry, to 
     assist agricultural entities owned and controlled by 
     veterans, and agricultural entities concerns owned and 
     controlled by serviced-disabled veterans;
       ``(B) to provide statistical information on the use of the 
     programs by the agricultural entities; and
       ``(C) to make appropriate recommendations to the Secretary 
     and to Congress in order to promote the establishment and 
     growth of those agricultural entities.
       ``(d) Additional Duties.--The Office of Advocacy shall--
       ``(1) serve as a focal point for the receipt of complaints, 
     criticisms, and suggestions concerning the policies and 
     activities of the President and any other Federal agency that 
     affects agricultural entities;
       ``(2) counsel agricultural entities on how to resolve 
     questions and problems concerning the relationship of the 
     agricultural entity to the Federal Government;
       ``(3) develop proposals for changes in the policies and 
     activities of any agency of the Federal Government that will 
     better fulfill the purposes of agricultural entities and 
     communicate the proposals to the appropriate Federal 
     agencies;
       ``(4) represent the views and interests of agricultural 
     entities before other Federal agencies whose policies and 
     activities may affect agricultural entities; and
       ``(5) enlist the cooperation and assistance of public and 
     private agencies, businesses, and other organizations in 
     disseminating--
       ``(A) information about the programs and services provided 
     by the Federal Government that are of benefit to agricultural 
     entities; and
       ``(B) information on how agricultural entities can 
     participate in or make use of the programs and services.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. Bingaman):
  S. 2692. A bill to authorize to be appropriated to the Department of 
the Air Force for fiscal year 2009 $4,600,000 for the construction of 
an Aerospace Ground Equipment Facility at Holloman Air Force Base, New 
Mexico; to the Committee on Armed Services.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
authorizing new construction at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico.
  I am proud to offer this bill because Holloman has a variety of 
military construction needs associated with the Air Force's decision to 
house F-22A Raptors at Holloman Air Force Base.
  One of these is an Aerospace Ground Equipment facility to support the 
F-22 transition and stationing at Holloman. The Department of Defense 
budgeted

[[Page S1528]]

for this item in its fiscal year 09 Defense budget request, and in 
keeping with that request my legislation authorizes $4.6 million for 
the construction of the Aerospace Ground Equipment facility.
  Holloman Air Force Base is an important asset to our nation, and I am 
proud to support the base and the airmen stationed there by introducing 
this bill.
  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. 2692

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

     SECTION 1. CONSTRUCTION OF AEROSPACE GROUND EQUIPMENT 
                   FACILITY, HOLLOMAN AIR FORCE BASE, NEW MEXICO.

       (a) Project Authorization.--The Secretary of the Air Force 
     may construct an Aerospace Ground Equipment Facility at 
     Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico, in the amount of 
     $4,600,000.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $4,600,000 for fiscal year 2009 for 
     military construction, land acquisition, and military family 
     housing functions of the Department of the Air Force to carry 
     out the project authorized under subsection (a).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. Bingaman):
  S. 2693. A bill to authorize to be appropriated to the Department of 
the Air Force for fiscal year 2009 $3,150,000 for additions and 
alterations to a Flight Simulator Facility at Holloman Air Force Base, 
New Mexico; to the Committee on Armed Services.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
authorizing new construction at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico.
  I am proud to offer this bill because Holloman has a variety of 
military construction needs because of a March 2006 decision by the 
Secretary of Defense to use Holloman Air Force Base as an F-22 Raptor 
base.
  One of these is for additions and alterations to a Flight Simulator 
facility to support the F-22 transition and stationing at Holloman. The 
Department of Defense budgeted for this item in its fiscal year 2009 
Defense budget request, and in keeping with that request my legislation 
authorizes $3.15 million for the additions and alterations to the 
Flight Simulator facility.
  Our Air Force fighter wings defend our homeland and support all 
global combat operations. I am proud to support those airmen, and I 
look forward to working on this bill and taking other actions to 
support our military forces.
  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. 2693

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

     SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF FLIGHT SIMULATOR FACILITY, 
                   HOLLOMAN AIR FORCE BASE, NEW MEXICO.

       (a) Project Authorization.--The Secretary of the Air Force 
     may construct additions and alterations to the Flight 
     Simulator Facility at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico, in 
     the amount of $3,150,000.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $3,150,000 for fiscal year 2009 for 
     military construction, land acquisition, and military family 
     housing functions of the Department of the Air Force to carry 
     out the project authorized under subsection (a).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. Bingaman):
  S. 2694. A bill to authorize to be appropriated to the Defense 
Logistics Agency for fiscal year 2009 $14,400,000 to replace fuel 
storage tanks at Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico; to the Committee 
on Armed Services.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
authorizing new construction at Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico.
  Kirtland Air Force Base serves many roles for the Department of 
Defense and the U.S. Air Force. The Nuclear Weapons Center, Air Force 
Research Laboratories, the New Mexico Air National Guard, and a 
Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration national 
laboratory are some of the many Federal entities doing work at 
Kirtland. As such, Kirtland's construction needs are many.
  Therefore, I am proud to offer this bill to authorize replacement of 
fuel storage tanks at Kirtland Air Force Base. The President's fiscal 
year 2009 budget requests $14.4 million for this work, and in keeping 
with that request my legislation authorizes $14.4 million for the work 
to replace the fuel storage tanks.
  Our armed forces deserve our full support, I am proud to offer my 
support for the personnel at Kirtland Air Force Base by introducing 
this bill.
  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. 2694

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

     SECTION 1. REPLACEMENT OF FUEL STORAGE TANKS AT KIRTLAND AIR 
                   FORCE BASE, NEW MEXICO.

       (a) Project Authorization.--The Secretary of Defense may 
     replace fuel storage tanks at Kirtland Air Force Base, New 
     Mexico, in the amount of $14,400,000.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $14,400,000 for fiscal year 2009 for 
     military construction, land acquisition, and military family 
     housing functions of the Department of Defense (other than 
     the military departments) to carry out the project authorized 
     under subsection (a).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. Bingaman):
  S. 2695. A bill to authorize to be appropriated to the Department of 
the Air Force for fiscal year 2009 $1,050,000 for additions and 
alterations to Aircraft Maintenance Units at Holloman Air Force Base, 
New Mexico; to the Committee on Armed Services.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
authorizing new construction at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico.
  I am proud to offer this bill because Holloman has a variety of 
military construction needs because of a March 2006 decision by the 
Secretary of Defense to use Holloman Air Force Base as an F-22 Raptor 
base.
  One of these is for additions and alterations to Aircraft Maintenance 
Units to support the F-22 transition and stationing, at Holloman. The 
Department of Defense budgeted for this item in its fiscal year 2009 
Defense budget request, and in keeping with that request my legislation 
authorizes $1.05 million for additions and alterations to Aircraft 
Maintenance Units.
  The F-22A is a unique capability, and we must ensure that our airmen 
have the facilities they need to utilize and care for that capability. 
I am proud to offer this legislation to fulfill those purposes.
  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. 2695

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

     SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE UNITS, 
                   HOLLOMAN AIR FORCE BASE, NEW MEXICO.

       (a) Project Authorization.--The Secretary of the Air Force 
     may construct additions and alterations to Aircraft 
     Maintenance Units at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico, in 
     the amount of $1,050,000.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $1,050,000 for fiscal year 2009 for 
     military construction, land acquisition, and military family 
     housing functions of the Department of the Air Force to carry 
     out the project authorized under subsection (a).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. Bingaman):
  S. 2696. A bill authorize to be appropriated to the Department of the 
Air Force for fiscal year 2009 $14,500,000 for the alteration of a 
hangar at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico, for the construction of 
a Low Observable Composite Repair Facility; to the Committee on Armed 
Services.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
authorizing new construction at Holloman Air Forc Base, New Mexico.
  I am proud to offer this bill because with F-22s scheduled to arrive 
at Holloman in 2009, military construction is needed at the base.
  One of those needs is alteration of an existing hangar for 
construction of a Low Observable Composite Repair Facility to support 
the F-22 transition

[[Page S1529]]

and stationing at Holloman. The Department of Defense budgeted for this 
item in its fiscal year 2009 Defense budget request, and in keeping 
with that request my legislation authorizes $14.5 million for the 
construction of the Low Observable Composite Repair Facility.
  Our Air Force fighter wings are an important part of our global 
combat operations. I am proud to support our airmen, and I look forward 
to working on this bill to address some of their construction needs.
  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. 2696

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

     SECTION 1. CONSTRUCTION OF LOW OBSERVABLE COMPOSITE REPAIR 
                   FACILITY, HOLLOMAN AIR FORCE BASE, NEW MEXICO.

       (a) Project Authorization.--The Secretary of the Air Force 
     may alter a hangar at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico, to 
     construct a Low Observable Composite Repair Facility, in the 
     amount of $14,500,000.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $14,500,000 for fiscal year 2009 for 
     military construction, land acquisition, and military family 
     housing functions of the Department of the Air Force to carry 
     out the project authorized under subsection (a).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. Bingaman).
  S. 2697. A bill to authorize to be appropriated to the Special 
Operations Command for fiscal year 2009 $18,100,000 for the 
construction of a Special Operations Force Maintenance Hangar at Cannon 
Air Force Base, New Mexico; to the Committee on Armed Services.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
authorizing new construction at Cannon Air Force Base, New Mexico.
  I am proud to offer this bill because Cannon has a variety of 
military construction needs because of a June 2006 decision by the 
Secretary of Defense to use Cannon Air Force Base as an Air Force 
Special Operations base.
  One of these needs is the construction of a Special Operations Forces 
Maintenance Hangar. The Department of Defense budgeted for this item in 
its fiscal year 2009 Defense budget request, and in keeping with that 
request my legislation authorized $18.1 million for the construction of 
a Special Operations Forces Maintenance Hangar.
  Our special operations forces are a part of some of the most 
important missions in the Global War on Terror, and we have more 
special operations warfighters deployed now than ever before. I am 
proud to support those soldiers, and I look forward to working on this 
bill taking other actions to support our special operations forces.
  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. 2697

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

     SECTION 1. CONSTRUCTION OF SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES 
                   MAINTENANCE HANGAR AT CANNON AIR FORCE BASE, 
                   NEW MEXICO.

       (a) Project Authorization.--The Secretary of Defense may 
     construct a Special Operations Forces Maintenance Hangar at 
     Cannon Air Force Base, New Mexico, in the amount of 
     $18,100,000.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $18,100,000 for fiscal year 2009 for 
     military construction, land acquisition, and military family 
     housing functions of the Department of Defense (other than 
     the military departments) to carry out the project authorized 
     under subsection (a).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. Bingaman):
  S. 2698. A bill to authorize to be appropriated to the Department of 
the Air Force for fiscal year 2009 $2,150,000 for additions and 
alterations to a Jet Engine Maintenance Shop at Holloman Air Force 
Base, New Mexico; to the Committee on Armed Services.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
authorizing new construction at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico.
  I am proud to offer this bill because there are a number of military 
construction needs at Holloman as a result of a decision by the 
Secretary of the Air Force to use Holloman Air Force Base as an F-22 
Raptor base.
  One of these is a Jet Engine Maintenance Shop to support the F-22 
transition and stationing at Holloman. The Department of Defense 
budgeted for this item in its fiscal year 2009 Defense budget request, 
and in keeping with that request my legislation authorizes $2.15 
million for the construction of the Jet Engine Maintenance Shop.
  Mr. President, our airmen are one of the most important assets we 
have in the Global War on Terror, and they need adequate facilities to 
do their work. I am proud to offer this legislation to support them in 
one of their newest missions, flying the F-22A Raptor.
  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. 2698

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

     SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF JET ENGINE MAINTENANCE SHOP, 
                   HOLLOMAN AIR FORCE BASE, NEW MEXICO.

       (a) Project Authorization.--The Secretary of the Air Force 
     may construct additions and alterations to the Jet Engine 
     Maintenance Shop at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico, in 
     the amount of $2,150,000.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $2,150,000 for fiscal year 2009 for 
     military construction, land acquisition, and military family 
     housing functions of the Department of the Air Force to carry 
     out the project authorized under subsection (a).

                          ____________________