[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 128 (Wednesday, July 30, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7782-S7786]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. NELSON of Florida (for himself, Ms. Stabenow, Ms. Collins, 
        Mr. Cardin, and Mr. Martinez):
  S. 3366. A bill to protect, conserve, and restore native fish, 
wildlife, and their natural habitats at national wildlife refuges 
through cooperative, incentive-based grants to control, mitigate, and 
eradicate harmful nonnative plant species, and for other purposes; to 
the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce 
legislation that will address the growing harm that nonnative or 
``invasive'' species are inflicting on the wildlife and environment of 
our National Wildlife Refuge System.
  In 1903, President Theodore Roosevelt issued an executive order that 
designated Pelican Island, located in my home State of Florida, as a 
Federal bird reservation. This designation was intended to protect the 
numerous species of waterfowl that called Indian River Lagoon and 
Pelican Island home, including the last known brown pelican rookery on 
the East Coast of Florida. President Roosevelt's action marked the 
first time that our Federal Government set aside land for the sake of 
wildlife.
  In the century that followed, the Pelican Island reservation, 27 
additional sites in Florida, and other areas nationwide were set aside 
by the Federal Government and grew into a vast network that is now the 
National Wildlife Refuge System. Today, this system is comprised of 540 
wildlife refuges and 3,000 waterfowl production areas, spanning 95 
million miles across all 50 States and several U.S. territories. These 
refuges are home to 700 bird species, more than 200 mammal species, 250 
reptile and amphibian species, and more than 200 types of fish--
including one-fourth of all federally recognized threatened and 
endangered species. The habitat afforded by our refuges will become 
even more critical to the survival of wildlife, which is already being 
forced to adapt to a rapidly changing climate.
  As if encroaching human development, water and air pollution, and 
climate change weren't great enough challenges, our wildlife refuges 
and other protected areas are also threatened by a more insidious and 
persistent problem: invasive species. These non-native plant and animal 
species compete for habitat, food, and other resources that are 
essential to native wildlife, including endangered and threatened 
species.
  According to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 
over 400 nonnative animals and nearly 1,200 exotic plant species have 
been documented in the State, with more arriving each day. The old 
world climbing fern, Lygodium, poses a greater threat than any other 
nonnative plant to south Florida's natural areas, including one of our 
national treasures, the Everglades. This plant currently infests over 
70 percent of the Arthur R. Marshall Loxahatchee National Wildlife 
Refuge near Boyton Beach, Florida. The Everglades' tree islands, which 
are a unique and extremely rare habitat for nesting wading birds and 
terrestrial wildlife, are particularly vulnerable to Lygodium. This 
invader first surrounds the islands' hardwood trees and dry ground, 
then grows over the tree canopy, and eventually smothers the native 
plants. This process essentially eliminates all of the ecological 
services that the tree islands once provided to native wildlife.
  The threats posed by nonnative species are not confined to my home 
State of Florida--this is truly a national problem. According to the 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, invasive species are one of the most 
significant problems facing the National Wildlife Refuge System. 
Resource managers cite nonnative species as the single greatest threat 
to the refuges' biological and ecological functions, and as one of 
their most pressing management challenges. Currently, experts estimate 
that nonnative plant species infest more than 2 million acres in the 
Refuge System, and that nearly 4,500 invasive animal populations are 
established.
  Efforts are underway to control or eradicate harmful, nonnative 
species in our wildlife refuges and other conservation areas. For 
example, the Fish and Wildlife Service treated 2,500 acres of Lygodium 
on tree islands in the Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge in fiscal 
year 2006. The South Florida Water Management District has partnered 
with the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Research Service 
to develop a sustained population of natural enemies, known as 
biological controls, to reduce the spread of invasive plants. The 
district has funded a biological control program for Lygodium since 
1997, and has been working to find a natural enemy for the Brazilian 
pepper, one of the most noxious, widespread weeds in Florida. Projects 
like these are having a positive impact on the Everglades restoration, 
and show why it is important that all levels of government work 
together to combat harmful, nonnative species.

  While these and other invasive species control efforts have yielded 
promising results, the job is far from complete. In the current fiscal 
year, approximately $8.7 million was budgeted for treatment and control 
of nonnative plants in the Refuge System. That may sound like a lot of 
money, but it represents a mere drop in the bucket: the Fish and 
Wildlife Service estimates that the total cost of managing invasive 
species on refuges nationwide is in excess of $300 million. Clearly, we 
need to dramatically increase the resources we devote to combating 
harmful, nonnative species if we expect our refuges to fulfill the 
wildlife conservation purposes for which they were set aside.
  That is why I have worked with Senators Stabenow, Collins, Cardin, 
and Martinez to develop and introduce the Refuge Ecology Protection, 
Assistance, and Immediate Response Act, or REPAIR Act. The primary 
purpose of this act is to protect, enhance, and restore habitats for 
native fish and wildlife within the National Wildlife Refuge System. 
The REPAIR Act would establish within the Fish and Wildlife Service a 
grant program to support projects to assess, monitor, and manage 
harmful, nonnative species.
  Specifically, REPAIR grants would be available to States, tribes, and 
territories to assess invasive plant and animal species that may 
threaten refuge resources, and to prioritize restorations needs and 
activities. Grants would also be available to State and local 
governments, universities, conservation organizations, and others to 
implement control projects to eradicate harmful, nonnative plants on 
refuges and adjoining, nonfederal lands and waters. Volunteer and 
public-interest groups would also be eligible for grants to conduct 
habitat surveys and monitor invasive plant and animal species. The 
REPAIR Act would also give the Secretary of the Interior the authority 
to provide financial assistance to States to respond quickly to 
outbreaks of invasive plants at a stage when complete eradication is 
possible and more affordable.
  The Fish and Wildlife Service would be responsible for awarding 
REPAIR grants on a peer-reviewed, competitive

[[Page S7783]]

basis. For control projects, we establish numerous criteria that give 
priority to efforts that aid threatened and endangered species, 
encourage increased coordination among Federal, State, and local 
agencies, nongovernmental groups, and private entities, and that 
contain a comprehensive plan to prevent reintroduction of target 
species. All projects include monitoring and reporting elements, with 
oversight provided by the Fish and Wildlife Service. These provisions 
will help ensure that we achieve the greatest return on our investments 
to restore and maintain native habitat in the National Wildlife Refuge 
System.
  The assessments and control projects authorized by the REPAIR Act 
will most certainly be of benefit to native wildlife living in and 
around our refuges, including the numerous threatened and endangered 
species that we have worked hard to protect. The restoration and 
preservation of native habitats and wildlife provided by the REPAIR Act 
will also benefit the 37 million people who visit our refuges each year 
and take advantage of fishing, hunting, and other recreational and 
educational opportunities that these special places provide.
  In closing, I would like to recognize the efforts of Congressman Ron 
Kind of Wisconsin, who introduced and championed the REPAIR Act in the 
U.S. House of Representatives. The House passed this important 
legislation in October of last year. I hope that we can find a way for 
the companion measure that I introduced today to pass the Senate and 
become the law of the land. I look forward to working with Chairman 
Boxer and the other members of the Senate Committee on Environment and 
Public Works to debate this important legislation.
  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. 3366

       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 ``Refuge Ecology Protection, 
     Assistance, and Immediate Response Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) The National Wildlife Refuge System is the premier land 
     conservation system in the world.
       (2) Harmful nonnative species are the leading cause of 
     habitat destruction in national wildlife refuges.
       (3) More than 675 known harmful nonnative species are found 
     in the National Wildlife Refuge System.
       (4) Nearly 8,000,000 acres of the National Wildlife Refuge 
     System contain harmful nonnative species.
       (5) The cost of early identification and removal of harmful 
     nonnative species is dramatically lower than removing an 
     established invasive population.
       (6) The cost of the backlog of harmful nonnative species 
     control projects that need to be carried out in the National 
     Wildlife Refuge System is over $361,000,000, and the failure 
     to carry out such projects threatens the ability of the 
     System to fulfill its basic mission.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to encourage 
     partnerships among the United States Fish and Wildlife 
     Service, other Federal agencies, States, Indian tribes, and 
     other interests for the following objectives:
       (1) To protect, enhance, restore, and manage a diversity of 
     habitats for native fish and wildlife resources within the 
     National Wildlife Refuge System through monitoring and 
     management of harmful nonnative species, including control of 
     harmful nonnative plant species.
       (2) To promote the development of voluntary State 
     assessments to establish priorities for controlling harmful 
     nonnative plant and animal species that threaten or 
     negatively impact refuge resources.
       (3) To promote greater cooperation among Federal, State, 
     and local land and water managers, and owners of private 
     land, water rights, or other interests, to implement 
     ecologically based strategies to eradicate, mitigate, and 
     control harmful nonnative plant species that threaten or 
     negatively impact refuge resources through a voluntary and 
     incentive-based financial assistance grant program.
       (4) To establish an immediate response capability to combat 
     incipient harmful nonnative plant species invasions.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       For the purposes of this Act:
       (1) Appropriate committees.--The term ``appropriate 
     Committees'' means the Committee on Natural Resources of the 
     House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and 
     Public Works of the Senate.
       (2) Control.--The term ``control'' means, as appropriate, 
     eradicating, suppressing, reducing, or managing harmful 
     nonnative species from areas where they are present; taking 
     steps to detect early infestations on at-risk native 
     habitats; and restoring native species and habitats to reduce 
     the effects of harmful nonnative species.
       (3) Environmental soundness.--The term ``environmental 
     soundness'' means the extent of inclusion of methods, 
     efforts, actions, or programs to prevent or control 
     infestations of harmful nonnative species, that--
       (A) minimize adverse impacts to the structure and function 
     of an ecosystem and adverse effects on nontarget species and 
     ecosystems; and
       (B) emphasize integrated management techniques.
       (4) Harmful nonnative species.--The term ``harmful 
     nonnative species'' means, with respect to a particular 
     ecosystem in a particular region, any species, including its 
     seeds, eggs, spores, or other biological material capable of 
     propagating that species, that is not native to that 
     ecosystem and has a demonstrable or potentially demonstrable 
     negative environmental or economic impact in that region.
       (5) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the 
     meaning given that term in section 4 of the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b).
       (6) National management plan.--The term ``National 
     Management Plan'' means the management plan referred to in 
     section 5 of Executive Order No. 13112 of February 3, 1999, 
     and entitled ``Meeting the Invasive Species Challenge''.
       (7) Refuge resources.--The term ``refuge resources'' means 
     all land and water, including the fish and wildlife species 
     and the ecosystems and habitats therein, that are owned, 
     leased, managed through easement or cooperative agreement, or 
     otherwise managed by the by the Federal Government through 
     the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and located 
     within the National Wildlife Refuge System administered under 
     the National Wildlife Refuge Administration Act of 1966 (16 
     U.S.C. 668dd et seq.), including any waterfowl production 
     area.
       (8) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior, acting through the Director of the United 
     States Fish and Wildlife Service.
       (9) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several 
     States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the 
     Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, 
     American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 
     Islands, any other territory or possession of the United 
     States, and any Indian tribe.

     SEC. 4. REFUGE ECOLOGY PROTECTION, ASSISTANCE, AND IMMEDIATE 
                   RESPONSE (REPAIR) GRANT PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may provide--
       (1) a grant to any eligible applicant to carry out a 
     qualified plant control project in accordance with this 
     section; and
       (2) a grant to any State to carry out an assessment project 
     consistent with relevant State plans that have been developed 
     in whole or in part for the conservation of native fish, 
     wildlife, and their habitats, and in accordance with this 
     section, to--
       (A) identify harmful nonnative plant and animal species 
     that occur in the State that threaten or negatively impact 
     refuge resources;
       (B) assess the needs to restore, manage, or enhance native 
     fish and wildlife and their natural habitats and processes in 
     the State to compliment activities to control, mitigate, or 
     eradicate harmful nonnative plant and animal species 
     negatively impacting refuge resources;
       (C) identify priorities for actions to address such needs;
       (D) identify mechanisms to increase capacity building in a 
     State or across State lines to conserve and protect native 
     fish and wildlife and their habitats and to detect and 
     control harmful nonnative plant and animal species that might 
     threaten or negatively impact refuge resources within the 
     State; and
       (E) incorporate, where applicable and to the extent 
     consistent with this Act, the guidelines of the National 
     Management Plan.

     The grant program under this section shall be known as the 
     ``Refuge Ecology Protection, Assistance, and Immediate 
     Response Grant Program'' or the ``REPAIR Program''.
       (b) Functions of the Secretary.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall--
       (A) publish guidelines for and solicit applications for 
     grants under this section not later than 6 months after the 
     date of enactment of this Act; and
       (B) receive, review, evaluate, and approve applications for 
     grants under this section.
       (2) Delegation of authority.--The Secretary may delegate to 
     another Federal instrumentality the authority of the 
     Secretary under this section, other than the authority to 
     approve applications for grants and make grants.
       (c) Eligible Applicant.--To be an eligible applicant for 
     purposes of subsection (a)(1), an applicant shall--
       (1) be a State, local government, interstate or regional 
     agency, university, conservation organization, or private 
     person;
       (2) have adequate personnel, funding, and authority to 
     carry out and monitor or maintain a control project; and
       (3) have entered into an agreement with the Secretary or a 
     designee of the Secretary,

[[Page S7784]]

     for a national wildlife refuge or refuge complex.
       (d) Qualified Control Project.--
       (1) In general.--To be a qualified control project under 
     this section, a project shall--
       (A) control harmful nonnative plant species on the lands or 
     waters on which it is conducted;
       (B) include a plan for monitoring the project area and 
     maintaining effective control of harmful nonnative plant 
     species after the completion of the project, that is 
     consistent with standards for monitoring developed under 
     subsection (i);
       (C) be conducted in partnership with a national wildlife 
     refuge or refuge complex;
       (D) be conducted on land or water, other than national 
     wildlife refuge land or water, that, for purposes of carrying 
     out the project, are under the control of the eligible 
     applicant applying for the grant under this section, on land 
     or water on which the eligible applicant has permission to 
     conduct the project, or on adjacent national wildlife refuge 
     land or water administered by the United States Fish and 
     Wildlife Service referred to in subparagraph (C); and
       (E) encourage public notice and outreach on control project 
     activities in the affected community.
       (2) Other factors for selection of projects.--In ranking 
     qualified control projects, the Director may consider the 
     following:
       (A) The extent to which a project would address the 
     operational and maintenance backlog attributed to harmful 
     nonnative plant species on refuge resources.
       (B) Whether a project will encourage increased coordination 
     and cooperation among one or more Federal agencies and State 
     or local government agencies or nongovernmental or other 
     private entities to control harmful nonnative plant species 
     threatening or negatively impacting refuge resources.
       (C) Whether a project fosters public-private partnerships 
     and uses Federal resources to encourage increased private 
     sector involvement, including consideration of the amount of 
     private funds or in-kind contributions to control harmful 
     nonnative species or national wildlife refuge lands or non-
     Federal lands in proximity to refuge resources.
       (D) The extent to which a project would aid the 
     conservation of species that are listed under the Endangered 
     Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
       (E) The extent to which a project would aid the 
     conservation of--
       (i) species listed by the United States Fish and Wildlife 
     Service as birds of management concern; and
       (ii) species identified by the Director of the United 
     States Fish and Wildlife Service as imperiled or at-risk 
     species.
       (F) The extent to which a project would aid the 
     conservation of species identified as a ``Species of Greatest 
     Conservation Need'' in a comprehensive wildlife conservation 
     plan developed under the State wildlife grants program.
       (G) The extent to which a project would contribute to the 
     restoration and protection of terrestrial, freshwater 
     aquatic, estuarine, coastal, and marine ecosystems, such as 
     the Everglades, the Great Lakes, and the Mississippi River, 
     that are determined to be priorities by the Director of the 
     United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
       (H) Whether a project includes pilot testing or a 
     demonstration of an innovative technology having the 
     potential for improved cost-effectiveness and reduced 
     environmental risks when controlling harmful nonnative plant 
     species.
       (I) The extent to which a project minimizes adverse impacts 
     of control methods on ecosystems affected by the project.
       (J) Whether a project includes a comprehensive plan to 
     prevent reintroduction of harmful nonnative plant species 
     controlled by the project.
       (e) Distribution of Control Grant Awards.--In making grants 
     for control projects under this section the Secretary shall, 
     to the greatest extent practicable, ensure--
       (1) a balance of smaller and larger projects conducted with 
     grants under this section; and
       (2) an equitable geographic distribution of projects 
     carried out with grants under this section, among all regions 
     and States within which such projects are proposed to be 
     conducted.
       (f) Grant Duration.--
       (1) In general.--Each grant under this section shall be to 
     provide funding for the Federal share of the cost of a 
     project carried out with the grant for up to 2 fiscal years.
       (2) Renewal.--
       (A) In general.--If the Secretary, after reviewing the 
     reports under subsection (g) regarding a control project, 
     finds that the project is making satisfactory progress, the 
     Secretary may renew a grant under this section for the 
     project for an additional 3 fiscal years.
       (B) Monitoring and maintenance plan.--The Secretary may 
     renew a grant under this section to implement the monitoring 
     and maintenance plan required for a control project under 
     subsection (d)(1)(B) for up to 5 fiscal years after the 
     project is otherwise completed.
       (g) Reporting by Grantee.--
       (1) Control projects; assessment projects.--
       (A) Control projects.--A grantee carrying out a control 
     project with a grant under this section shall report to the 
     Secretary every 24 months or at the expiration of the grant, 
     whichever is of shorter duration.
       (B) Assessment projects.--A State carrying out an 
     assessment project with a grant under this section shall 
     submit the assessment pursuant to subsection (a)(2) to the 
     Secretary no later than 24 months after the date on which the 
     grant is awarded.
       (2) Report contents.--Each report under this subsection 
     shall include the following information with respect to each 
     project covered by the report:
       (A) In the case of a control project--
       (i) the information described in subparagraphs (B), (D), 
     and (F) of subsection (j)(2);
       (ii) specific information on the methods and techniques 
     used to control harmful nonnative plant species in the 
     project area; and
       (iii) specific information on the methods and techniques 
     used to restore native fish, wildlife, or their habitats in 
     the project area.
       (B) A detailed report of the funding for the grant and the 
     expenditures made.
       (3) Interim update.--Each grantee under paragraph (1)(A) 
     shall also submit annually to the Secretary a brief synopsis 
     and chronological list of projects showing progress as a 
     percentage of completion and use of awarded funds.
       (h) Cost Sharing for Projects.--
       (1) Federal share.--Except as provided in paragraphs (2) 
     and (3), the Federal share of the cost of a project carried 
     out with a grant under this section shall not exceed 75 
     percent of such cost.
       (2) Innovative technology costs.--The Federal share of the 
     incremental additional cost of including in a control project 
     any pilot testing or a demonstration of an innovative 
     technology described in subsection (d)(2)(H) shall be 85 
     percent.
       (3) Projects on refuge lands or waters.--The Federal share 
     of the cost of the portion of a control project funded with a 
     grant under this section that is carried out on national 
     wildlife refuge lands or waters, including the cost of 
     acquisition by the Federal Government of lands or waters for 
     use for such a project, shall be 100 percent.
       (4) Application of in-kind contributions.--The Secretary 
     may apply to the non-Federal share of costs of a control 
     project carried out with a grant under this section the fair 
     market value of services or any other form of in-kind 
     contribution to the project made by non-Federal interests 
     that the Secretary determines to be an appropriate 
     contribution equivalent to the monetary amount required for 
     the non-Federal share of the activity.
       (5) Derivation of non-federal share.--The non-Federal share 
     of the cost of a control project carried out with a grant 
     under this section may not be derived from a Federal grant 
     program or other Federal funds.
       (i) Monitoring and Maintenance of Control Grant Projects.--
       (1) Requirements.--The Secretary shall develop requirements 
     for the monitoring and maintenance of a control project to 
     ensure that the requirements under subparagraphs (A) and (B) 
     of subsection (d)(1) are achieved.
       (2) Database of grant project information.--The Secretary 
     shall develop and maintain an appropriate database of 
     information concerning control projects carried out with 
     grants under this subsection, including information on 
     project techniques, project completion, monitoring data, and 
     other relevant information.
       (3) Use of existing programs.--The Secretary shall use 
     existing programs within the Department of the Interior to 
     create and maintain the database required under this 
     subsection.
       (4) Public availability.--The Secretary shall make the 
     information collected and maintained under this subsection 
     available to the public.
       (j) Reporting by the Secretary.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall, by not later than 3 
     years after the date of the enactment of this Act and 
     biennially thereafter in the report under section 8, report 
     to the appropriate Committees on the implementation of this 
     section.
       (2) Report contents.--A report under paragraph (1) shall 
     include an assessment of--
       (A) trends in the population size and distribution of 
     harmful nonnative plant species in the project area for each 
     control project carried out with a grant under this section, 
     and in the adjacent areas as defined by the Secretary;
       (B) data on the number of acres of refuge resources and 
     native fish and wildlife habitat restored, protected, or 
     enhanced under this section, including descriptions of, and 
     partners involved with, control projects selected, in 
     progress, and completed under this section;
       (C) trends in the population size and distribution in the 
     project areas of native species targeted for restoration, and 
     in areas in proximity to refuge resources as defined by the 
     Secretary;
       (D) an estimate of the long-term success of varying 
     conservation techniques used in carrying out control projects 
     with grants under this section;
       (E) an assessment of the status of control projects carried 
     out with grants under this section, including an accounting 
     of expenditures by the United States Fish and Wildlife 
     Service, State, regional, and local government agencies, and 
     other entities to carry out such projects;
       (F) a review of the environmental soundness of the control 
     projects carried out with grants under this section;

[[Page S7785]]

       (G) a review of efforts made to maintain an appropriate 
     database of grants under this section; and
       (H) a review of the geographical distribution of Federal 
     money, matching funds, and in-kind contributions for control 
     projects carried out with grants under this section.
       (k) Cooperation of Non-Federal Interests.--The Secretary 
     may not make a grant under this section for a control project 
     on national wildlife refuge lands or lands in proximity to 
     refuge resources before a non-Federal interest has entered 
     into a written agreement with a national wildlife refuge or 
     refuge complex under which the non-Federal interest agrees 
     to--
       (1) monitor and maintain the control project in accordance 
     with the plan required under subsection (d)(1)(B); and
       (2) provide any other items of cooperation the Secretary 
     considers necessary to carry out the project.

     SEC. 5. CREATION OF AN IMMEDIATE RESPONSE CAPABILITY TO 
                   HARMFUL NONNATIVE SPECIES.

       (a) Establishment.--The Secretary may provide financial 
     assistance for a period of not more than 3 fiscal years to 
     enable an immediate response to outbreaks of harmful 
     nonnative plant species that threaten or may negatively 
     impact refuge resources that are at a stage at which rapid 
     eradication or control is possible, and ensure eradication or 
     immediate control of the harmful nonnative plant species.
       (b) Requirements for Assistance.--The Secretary, after 
     consulting with the Governor of the State, shall provide 
     assistance under this section to local and State agencies, 
     universities, or nongovernmental entities for the eradication 
     of an immediate harmful nonnative plant species threat only 
     if--
       (1) there is a demonstrated need for the assistance;
       (2) the harmful nonnative plant species is considered to be 
     an immediate threat to refuge resources, as determined by the 
     Secretary; and
       (3) the proposed response to such threat--
       (A) is technically feasible; and
       (B) minimizes adverse impacts to the structure and function 
     of national wildlife refuge ecosystems and adverse effects on 
     nontarget species.
       (c) Amount of Financial Assistance.--The Secretary shall 
     determine the amount of financial assistance to be provided 
     under this section with respect to an outbreak of a harmful 
     nonnative species, subject to the availability of 
     appropriations.
       (d) Cost Share.--The Federal share of the cost of any 
     activity carried out with assistance under this section may 
     be up to 100 percent.
       (e) Monitoring and Reporting.--The Secretary shall require 
     that persons receiving assistance under this section monitor 
     and report on activities carried out with assistance under 
     this section in accordance with the requirements that apply 
     with respect to control projects carried out with assistance 
     under section 4.

     SEC. 6. COOPERATIVE VOLUNTEER HARMFUL NONNATIVE SPECIES 
                   MONITORING AND CONTROL PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Consistent with the National Wildlife 
     Refuge System Volunteer and Community Partnership Enhancement 
     Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-242), the Secretary shall 
     establish a cooperative volunteer monitoring and control 
     program to administer and coordinate projects implemented by 
     partner organizations concerned with national wildlife 
     refuges to address harmful nonnative species that threaten 
     national wildlife refuges or adjacent lands.
       (b) Eligible Activities.--Each project administered and 
     coordinated under this section shall include 1 of the 
     following activities:
       (1) Habitat surveys.
       (2) Detection and identification of new introductions or 
     infestations of harmful nonnative plant and animal species.
       (3) Harmful nonnative plant species control projects.
       (4) Public education and outreach to increase awareness 
     concerning harmful nonnative species and their threat to the 
     refuge system.

     SEC. 7. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER AUTHORITIES.

       (a) Authorities, etc. of Secretary.--Nothing in this Act 
     affects authorities, responsibilities, obligations, or powers 
     of the Secretary under any other statute.
       (b) State Authority.--Nothing in this Act preempts any 
     provision or enforcement of State statute or regulation 
     relating to the management of fish and wildlife resources 
     within such State.

     SEC. 8. BIENNIAL REPORT.

       Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this 
     Act and biennially thereafter, the Secretary shall prepare 
     and submit to Congress and the National Invasive Species 
     Council--
       (1) a comprehensive report summarizing all grant activities 
     relating to invasive species initiated under this Act 
     including--
       (A) State assessment projects;
       (B) qualified control projects;
       (C) immediate response activities; and
       (D) projects identified in the Refuge Operations Needs 
     database or the Service Asset and Maintenance Management 
     System database of the United States Fish and Wildlife 
     Service;
       (2) a list of grant priorities, ranked in high, medium, and 
     low categories, for future grant activities in the areas of--
       (A) early detection and rapid response;
       (B) control, management, and restoration;
       (C) research and monitoring;
       (D) information management; and
       (E) public outreach and partnership efforts; and
       (3) information required to be included under section 4(k).

     SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
     carry out this Act such sums as may be necessary.
       (b) Allowance for Immediate Response.--Of the amounts 
     appropriated to carry out this Act no more than 25 percent 
     shall be available in any fiscal year for financial 
     assistance under section 5.
       (c) Continuing Availability.--Amounts appropriated under 
     this Act may remain available until expended.
       (d) Administrative Expenses.--Of amounts available each 
     fiscal year to carry out this Act, the Secretary may expend 
     not more than 3 percent or up to $100,000, whichever is 
     greater, to pay the administrative expenses necessary to 
     carry out this Act.
                                 F_____
                                 
      By Mr. SMITH (for himself, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Tester, Mr. 
        Sanders, Mr. Barrasso, and Mr. Cochran):
  S. 3367. A bi11 to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
revise the timeframe for recognition of certain designations in 
certifying rural health clinics under the Medicare program; to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize an outstanding 
health care hero from Oregon, Maria Loredo. Through her hard work and 
tireless dedication to her community, Maria has played a critical role 
in creating access to health care for those in need in Washington 
County, OR.
  Maria Loredo is the chief operating officer for the Virginia Garcia 
Memorial Health Center, named for a 6-year-old migrant farmworker girl 
who moved from Mission, TX, to work with her family in Washington 
County's strawberry harvest. Tragically, Virginia Garcia died from a 
simple foot wound, but her death inspired a committed group of 
individuals to improve health care access in the community.
  Like 6-year-old Virginia Garcia, Maria Loredo also hails from 
Mission, TX, and as a young person worked with her family throughout 
Texas following crops. Eventually the family migrated to Oregon and 
settled there in 1966. Maria began her work with the fledgling Virginia 
Garcia Clinic in 1978 when it was only 3 years old. Her own experience 
as a migrant worker has helped her develop the programs and services of 
the clinic so that they are most effective in reaching the farmworker 
community.
  Maria has been instrumental in growing the health center from a 
clinic operating out of a three-car garage to an organization with four 
primary care clinics serving over 30,000 people in Washington and 
Yamhill Counties, OR. Her commitment to the community has enabled the 
organization to develop a farmworker outreach program that operates 
from a mobile clinic and provides medical and dental services in over 
20 migrant camps throughout the region.
  In her role as chief operating officer, Maria has helped establish 
clinics in McMinnville, Hillsboro, and Beaverton serving a diverse 
community that includes patients who not only speak English and 
Spanish, but Vietnamese, Russian, Swahili, Chinese, and Farsi.
  She has helped Virginia Garcia develop critically needed dental, 
pharmacy, and behavioral health care with an integrated approach to 
health care delivery that always remains sensitive to the language and 
cultural background of the patients. Most recently, Maria has helped 
pave the way to a new access point at the Tigard School Based Clinic 
and also to the implementation of electronic health records.
  While working full-time developing Virginia Garcia's programs, Maria 
found time to pursue her education and graduated with her B.A. from 
Portland State University in 2003. Once a migrant worker, she has gone 
on to not only serve her community, but inspire others to achieve a 
better, healthier life for themselves and their children.
  Because she has dedicated the last 30 years of her life to the 
mission of the Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Center and made a 
significant difference in the lives of so many, I recognize her as an 
Oregon health care hero and thank her for her ongoing work.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.

[[Page S7786]]

  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record as follows:

                                S. 3367

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

     SECTION 1. REVISION OF THE TIMEFRAME FOR THE RECOGNITION OF 
                   CERTAIN DESIGNATIONS IN CERTIFYING RURAL HEALTH 
                   CLINICS UNDER THE MEDICARE PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--The second sentence of section 1861(aa)(2) 
     of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(aa)(2)) is 
     amended by striking ``3-year period'' and inserting ``4-year 
     period'' in the matter in clause (i) preceding subclause (I).
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 ______