Congressional Record, Volume 156 Issue 25 (Thursday, February 25, 2010)

[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 25 (Thursday, February 25, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S797-S800]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

By Mr. INHOFE (for himself, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Risch, Mr. Barrasso,
and Mr. Vitter):
S. 3038. A bill to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to prevent the
enforcement of certain national primary drinking water regulations
unless sufficient funding is available; to the Committee on Environment
and Public Works.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce The Small System
Drinking Water Act of 2009. This is the third Congress that I have
introduced this bill which would assist water systems throughout the
country comply with the ever growing number of federal drinking water
standards. I am pleased to be joined by Senators Mike Crapo, James
Risch, John Barrasso and David Vitter as cosponsors of this
legislation. My bill will require the Federal Government to live up to
its obligations and require the EPA to use the tools it was given in
the 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act amendments, SDWA.
My goal here is to ensure that small towns across the country have
safe, affordable drinking water and that the laws are fair to small and
rural communities. Currently EPA assumes that families can afford water
rates of 2.5 percent of their annual median household income, or $1,000
per household. For some families, paying $83 a month for water may not
be a hardship but for so many more, it is nearly impossible. There must
be some flexibility inserted into the calculation that factors in the
ability of the truly disadvantaged to pay these costs. Forcing systems
to raise rates beyond what their ratepayers can afford only causes more
damage than good.
EPA needs to look more closely at how it determines affordability. My
bill directs EPA to take additional factors into consideration when
making this determination. These include ensuring that the
affordability criteria are not more costly on a per-capita basis to a
small water system than to a large water system.
In EPA's most recent drinking water needs survey, Oklahoma identified
a total of over $4.1 billion in drinking water needs over the next 20
years. $2.4 billion of that need is for community water systems that
serve fewer than 10,000 people. The $4.1 billion does not include the
total costs imposed on Oklahoma communities to meet federal clean water
requirements, the new Groundwater rule, the DBP II rule or the Long
Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule. Oklahoma continues to
have municipalities struggling with the 2002 arsenic rule. Many of our
small systems are having difficulty with the Disinfection Byproducts,
DBP, Stage I rule, and small systems who purchase water from other
systems and did not have to test, treat or monitor their water must now
comply with DBP II. EPA estimates that over the next 20 years, the
entire country will need $52.0 billion to come into compliance with
existing, proposed or recently promulgated regulations.
My bill proposes a few simple steps to help systems comply with all
these rules. First, it reauthorizes the technical assistance program in
the Safe Drinking Water Act. The DBP rules are very complex and involve
a lot of monitoring and testing. If we are going to impose complicated
requirements on systems, we need to provide them with help to implement
those requirements.
The bill creates a pilot program to demonstrate new technologies and
approaches for systems of all sizes to comply with these complicated
rules. It requires the EPA to convene a working group to examine the
science behind the rules in order to compare new developments since
each rule's publication.
Section 1412(b)(4)(E) of the SDWA Amendments of 1996 authorizes the
use of point of entry treatment, point of use treatment and package
plants to economically meet the requirements of the Act. However, to
date, these approaches are not widely used by small water systems. My
legislation directs the EPA to convene a working group to identify
barriers to the use of these approaches. The EPA will then use the
recommendations of the working group to draft a model guidance document
that states can use to create their own programs.
Most importantly this bill requires the federal government to pay for
these unfunded mandates created by laws and regulations. In 1995,
Congress passed the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act to ensure that the
Federal Government pays the costs incurred by State and local
governments in complying with Federal laws. My bill is designed to
ensure that EPA cannot take an enforcement action against a system
serving less than 10,000 people, without first ensuring that it has
sufficient funds to meet the requirements of the regulation.
Since the 108th Congress, I have coauthored and cosponsored
legislation to provide additional resources to communities through the
State Revolving Loan Funds. Unfortunately, not much has changed. We
still have too many regulations and not enough money to pay for them.
Funding legislation is important but until that money becomes
available, it is unreasonable to penalize and fine local communities
because they cannot afford to pay for regulations we imposed on them. I
thank my colleagues and look forward to their support of this
commonsense proposal.
______

By Mr. UDALL, of New Mexico (for himself and Mr. Corker):
S. 3039. A bill to prevent drunk driving injuries and fatalities, and
for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the ROADS
SAFE Act of 2010. I am pleased to be joined in introducing this
legislation by my colleague, the Senator from Tennessee, Mr. Bob
Corker.
This legislation will encourage the development of new tools to fight
drunk driving and has the potential to save 8,000 lives every year.
Tragic drunk driving crashes often prompt communities to do more to
prevent drunk driving. This was the case in my home State of New Mexico
back in 1992, when a drunk driver killed a mother and her three girls
on Christmas Eve. He was speeding down the highway 90 miles an hour,
going the wrong way down an interstate highway. This crash helped
change attitudes in my State. But it should not take a tragedy for us
to do more to prevent drunk driving.
In 2008, drunk driving killed about 12,000 Americans, including 143
people in New Mexico. That is an average of 32 people killed every day
by drunk driving. This unacceptable death toll is all the more shocking
when you consider that each one of those deaths was preventable.
The United States has already made significant progress. Compared to
20 years ago, our roads are much safer today. Yet even as the overall
number of people killed on our highways has

[[Page S798]]

declined, drunk driving still accounts for about one-third of all
traffic fatalities.
It is even more worrisome that a drunk driver has just a 2-percent
chance of being caught. In fact, one study found that a first-time
drunk driving offender has, on average, driven drunk 87 times before
being arrested. Imagine, 87 times. This is unacceptable. Something must
be done to prevent these drivers from getting on the road in the first
place.
The good news is, there are potential technologies out there that
could do that. That is why Senator Corker and I are introducing the
ROADS SAFE Act today. New safety technology has already transformed the
automobile and saved countless lives. For example, airbags and antilock
brakes are now standard features in many vehicles. These safety devices
are built into the car and are unobtrusive to the driver. Such
technologies are an important reason we have fewer traffic fatalities
today.
Imagine a future with vehicles that could detect whether a driver is
drunk when he or she gets behind the wheel--before he or she even
starts their vehicle. That would be no drunk driving crashes if it were
impossible for drunk drivers to drive. If such technology were widely
deployed in cars, an estimated 8,000 lives could be saved every year.
I realize many may think this is a farfetched idea. Yet consider that
vehicles today can already give driving directions, thanks to GPS
satellite navigation devices. Some cars can even parallel park
themselves. New Mexico and other States require convicted drunk drivers
to use an ignition interlock, a breathalyzer device they blow into
before their vehicle's engine will start. The success of ignition
interlocks for preventing repeat drunk driving offenses suggests a
better technology could be used to prevent all drunk driving.
In 2006, Mothers Against Drunk Driving convened an international
technology symposium in Albuquerque, NM. The goal of the meeting was to
review efforts to develop advanced ignition interlocks technology.
In 2008, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration partnered
with leading automakers to explore the feasibility of in-vehicle
technologies to prevent drunk driving. The recent progress of this
cooperative effort fuels optimism that such technology could be
deployed within 5 to 10 years.
Clearly, such advanced technologies must win widespread public
acceptance in order to be effective. They must be moderately priced,
absolutely reliable, and unobtrusive to sober drivers.
The aim is to stop drunk driving, not discourage responsible social
drinking. A recent Insurance Institute for Highway Safety poll found
that 64 percent of Americans believe advanced alcohol detection
technology is a good idea and that it is reliable.
What would the ROADS SAFE Act do? This legislation would authorize
$12 million in annual funding for 5 years for the Driver Alcohol
Detection System for Safety Program, also known as DADSS.
DADSS is a public-private partnership between NHTSA and the
Automobile Coalition for Traffic Safety. The goal is to explore the
feasibility, potential benefits, and public policy challenges
associated with using in-
vehicle technology to prevent drunk driving.
This increased Federal funding to combat drunk driving is a smart
investment in public safety. Drunk driving has direct and indirect
economic costs in terms of damaged property, medical bills, and lost
productivity. In economic terms, drunk driving costs $129 billion per
year. Of course, such monetary costs cannot be compared to the value of
saving 8,000 lives every year.
Several organizations dedicated to fighting drunk driving already
support this bipartisan proposal. Mothers Against Drunk Driving, the
Century Council, and the Distilled Spirits Council all support the
ROADS SAFE Act.
I urge my Senate colleagues to join me, Senator Corker, and these
important organizations in the fight against drunk driving by
supporting the ROADS SAFE Act. We have made much progress in our
efforts to prevent drunk driving, but there is so much more to be done.
______

By Ms. SNOWE (for herself and Mr. Kaufman):
S. 3042. A bill to provide for a study by the National Academy of
Sciences on the technical policy decisions and technical personnel at
the Federal Communications Commission; to the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation.
Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today, along with Senator Kaufman,
to introduce legislation that puts a greater focus on efforts to
improve the technical resources and decision-making process at the
Federal Communications Commission. The bill proposes a study by the
National Academy of Sciences on the technical policy decision-making
process and the availability of technical personnel at FCC.
Over the past several years, there have been concerns voiced by the
technical community and even Commissioners themselves about the lack of
technical resources and expertise at the Federal Communications
Commission, FCC. It is for good reason: in 1948, the FCC had 720
engineers on staff; today, it has fewer than 300--an astonishing 62
percent reduction--even though the FCC now must face technical issues
concerning the Internet, advanced wireless communications, and
broadband. Also, FCC officials have recently acknowledged a shortage of
network engineers and that a large number of experienced engineers are
eligible to retire within the next few years.
Yet, communications technologies are becoming increasingly complex--
evolving from the traditional circuit-switched phone networks to
packet-based dynamic-routing high-bandwidth data networks. The need to
thoroughly address these issues challenges staff and leads to delays or
even inaction in technical rulemakings since the Commission doesn't
have the appropriate resources for timely technical evaluation and
decisionmaking.

Technical proceedings, including those to authorize new technologies,
have been dismally slow--typically taking 2-5 years for approval--
creating a bottleneck for innovation and competition.
A December 2009 report by the Government Accountability Office, GAO-
10-10-79, reaffirms these concerns and provides additional evidence of
the need for such a study. The GAO concluded that ``weaknesses in FCC's
processes for collecting and using information also raise concerns
regarding the transparency and informed nature of FCC's decisionmaking
process.'' Furthermore, the report found the ``FCC faces challenges in
ensuring it has the expertise needed to adapt to a changing
marketplace.''
With the rapid advancement of technologies and innovation within the
telecommunications industry, the FCC must be better equipped and more
agile to address the ever-changing technical landscape from a
regulatory perspective. If it isn't, our Nation's technical leadership
in this area will continue to erode and it will be even more difficult
to lay the proper policy foundation necessary to meet future
telecommunications needs.
To better examine these significant issues and make tangible
recommendations toward a comprehensive solution, this legislation
proposes a study by the National Academy of Sciences on the technical
policy decisionmaking process and the availability of technical
personnel at FCC. Specifically, the study would include an examination
of the FCC's technical policy decisionmaking, current technical
personnel staffing levels, and agency recruiting and hiring processes
of technical staff and engineers, and recommendations to improve these
areas. The study would provide tangible and specific proposals to
streamline processes and rulemakings as well as how the FCC can be more
competitive in hiring the required technical personnel to make it more
effective. The bill authorizes $1 million over a 2-year period to
conduct this comprehensive technical study.
This bill takes a step towards ensuring the Commission has the
adequate resources and proper technical decisionmaking processes in
place to be a more effective agency. This is absolutely critical given
how rapidly technologies are changing and the implications that
regulation could have on the underlying technical catalysts of
innovation. It is also critical to overall reform at the Commission
because in

[[Page S799]]

order to properly regulate communications, the FCC must be deeply
knowledgeable of both the legal and technical aspects of the issues
before it. That is why I sincerely hope that my colleagues join Senator
Kaufman and me in supporting this important legislation.
Mr. KAUFMAN. Mr. President, I am proud to cosponsor a bill Senator
Snowe introduced today to conduct a study on the technical policy
decision-making process and the availability of technical personnel at
the Federal Communications Commission, or FCC.
Professionals in the STEM fields of science, technology, engineering,
and mathematics have always been our Nation's problem solvers. They
help us solve great challenges in energy, health, security, and
transportation. Their innovation creates jobs, jobs that will continue
to lead us on the path to economic recovery.
Still, the number of STEM professionals in some of our government's
most critical agencies has been declining. In 1948, the FCC had 720
engineers on staff. Today, while communications technologies have
become increasingly complex, it has fewer than 300 engineers. Over the
years, there has been a shift in the FCC from hiring engineers to
hiring professional staff, resulting in a shortage of network
engineers. What is more, a high proportion of these experienced
engineers are eligible to retire within the next few years. That means
that, as communications technology continues to change the way we
engage our world, the FCC may face a critical shortage.
This legislation proposes a study by the National Academy of Sciences
to address these issues. Specifically, the study will examine the FCC's
technical policy decisionmaking, including if the FCC has the adequate
resources, processes, and personnel in place to evaluate properly and
to account for the technical aspects of the Commission's rulemaking
process. It will also examine the current technical personnel staffing
levels and FCC recruiting and hiring processes of technical staff and
engineers. Finally, the study will provide recommendations to improve
each of these areas.
It is critical that we include engineers in our Nation's technical
policy and decision making, at the FCC and across the government. I am
pleased that this study will explore the implications and offer
recommendations for the decline of engineers in this important agency
and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting Senator Snowe's
efforts.
______

By Mrs. GILLIBRAND (for herself, Mr. Kaufman, Ms. Snowe, Ms.
Cantwell, Ms. Klobuchar, and Mrs. Murray):
S. 3043. A bill to award planning grants and implementation grants to
State educational agencies to enable the State educational agencies to
complete comprehensive planning to carry out activities designed to
integrate engineering education into K-12 instruction and curriculum
and to provide evaluation grants to measure efficacy of K-12
engineering education; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions.
Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I am pleased to lead a bipartisan
group of Senators today to introduce the Engineering Education for
Innovation Act, also called the E\2\ for Innovation Act. Joining me in
leading this are Senator Kaufman, Senator Snowe, Senator Murray,
Senator Cantwell, and Senator Klobuchar. The intent of this legislation
is to competitively award planning and implementation grants for State
educational agencies to integrate engineering education into K-12
curriculum and instruction to spark student interest in engineering
through comprehensive K-12 engineering education including hands-on
design and engineering components.
The bill increases the availability of K-12 engineering education
curriculum and teacher professional development programs, encourages
broader participation of girls and underrepresented minorities in K-12
engineering education, invests in afterschool engineering education
programs, and the legislation also funds the research and evaluation of
such efforts.
Our Nation today faces pressing technological challenges in renewable
energy, biotechnology, health care technology, material science, and
information technology. According to the National Science Board's 2010
Science and Engineering Indicators, only 5 percent of college graduates
in the United States major in engineering, compared with 12 percent of
European students, 20 percent of those in Asia and one-third in China.
In addition, while women earn 58 percent of all bachelor's degrees,
they constitute only 18.5 percent of bachelor's degrees awarded in
engineering. African Americans hold only 4.6 percent and Hispanics hold
only 7.2 percent of bachelor's degrees awarded in engineering.
As a woman, I am a strong proponent of programs that support girls
and underrepresented minorities. Many K-12 students, especially girls
and students from underrepresented groups or who are economically
disadvantaged, and their teachers have little knowledge about the
engineering design process or the many career possibilities in
engineering. Today, we continue to have an untapped pool of potential
technical workers, and we must leverage the diversity of these
individuals to fuel the innovation necessary for our future global
competitiveness.
I am committed to initiatives that enhance student participation in
STEM, diversify the STEM pipeline and promote competence and confidence
to teach engineering for preparing the next generation of our Nation's
high tech workforce for a sustainable and competitive economy. Long
term investments in STEM education will pay rich dividends to our
future economy by building capacity to innovate.
The introduction of engineering education has the potential to
improve student learning and achievement in science and mathematics,
increase awareness about what engineers do and of engineering as a
potential career, and boost students' technological literacy. I want to
thank all my colleagues for joining together to address the critical
needs of our Nation in a bipartisan manner. I look forward to working
together to move this legislation through this Congress.
Mr. KAUFMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to support the Engineering
Education for Innovation Act, or E-squared for Innovation Act. I am
proud to cosponsor this bill with Senator Gillibrand, introduced today,
along with Senators Snowe, Cantwell, Klobuchar, and Murray. This bill
will help us meet the engineering education challenges I have often
spoken about on the Senate floor by awarding, planning, and
implementation grants to States to integrate engineering education into
their K-12 curriculum and instruction. It also funds the research and
evaluation of all such efforts.
I believe we are at a crucial moment for science, technology,
engineering, and math, or STEM education. Today's engineers have a
central role to play in developing the innovative technologies that
will help our economy recover and promote real job growth. In turn, we
must promote policies and programs that help to generate greater
interest in STEM and actually lead to the production of a greater
number of engineers.
Last year, the National Academy of Engineering and National Research
Council released their seminal report on engineering in K-12 education.
According to their report, K-12 engineering education can improve
student learning and performance in science and math and increases
students' technological literacy. It can also increase awareness of the
engineering profession and boost student interest in pursuing a career
in the field.
The report stressed the need for greater coordination among key
stakeholders to develop common definitions and grade level appropriate
goals for engineering education. It also emphasized the need for more
research on the impacts of engineering education and potential models
for implementation. The E-squared for Innovation Act seeks to address
these recommendations in three ways.
First, the legislation awards planning grants to State educational
agencies to review any existing engineering education resources in the
State and to develop implementation plans to integrate K-12 engineering
education into curriculum and instruction. Grantees must coordinate
these activities with a number of partners, including the Governor's
office, institutions of higher education, teachers and administrators

[[Page S800]]

at public elementary and secondary schools, and other relevant players
in the State.
Second, the E-squared for Innovation Act provides implementation
grants to State educational agencies to carry out a number of
activities, including developing academic standards, curricula, and
assessments that include engineering; recruiting and training qualified
teachers to deliver engineering education; and investing in afterschool
engineering education programs. Priority will be given to applicants
who serve a significant percentage of student populations
underrepresented in engineering.
Third, the bill charges the Institute of Education Sciences with
conducting research and evaluation on the grants awarded. These studies
will determine the effectiveness of the programs and activities at
improving student achievement in STEM education and assess how
successful programs can be replicated.
The E-squared for Innovation Act is supported by a diverse list of 77
organizations. To name a few, supporters include the National Center
for Technological Literacy, the American Society for Engineering
Education, the Delaware Foundation for Science and Mathematics
Education, IBM, Intel, the University of California, the National
Society of Black Engineers, and the American Society of Mechanical
Engineers--just to name a few. I am truly amazed but genuinely pleased
at the wide-reaching support for this bill.
Norm Augustine, former CEO of Lockheed Martin, expressed strong
support for the E-squared for Innovation Act, adding:

One of the many reasons our nation does not seem to attract
young people into engineering is that many seem to have no
idea what an engineer does. Although we attempt to teach math
and science in K-12, seldom do we expose students to
engineering.

Many in my home State recognize this problem and, consequently,
support for STEM programs is growing in Delaware. Governor Jack Markell
recently launched a STEM education council in Delaware to bring
together teachers, business leaders, curriculum specialists, higher
education representatives, and others to focus on innovative STEM
programs and curricula that engage young people in Delaware in STEM
education. The council will assist in Federal grant applications for
STEM-related programs and support effective professional development
programs in STEM areas.
In STEM-focused schools across Delaware, students are learning how to
extract DNA from fruit, build robots that can throw balls, perform
forensic investigations, make ``slime'' and lip balm, and more. It is
through these types of comprehensive, hands-on activities that we will
get young people interested in tackling and learning STEM subjects and
eventually pursuing engineering jobs. The E-squared for Innovation Act
is just the kind of program we need to bolster these activities in
Delaware and ensure more students nationwide have access to these
exciting engineering opportunities.
I cannot stress enough how much I believe this Nation is at a
crossroads in STEM education and that this is our opportunity to push
forward and create an environment that will cultivate and encourage our
next generation of engineers. They will foster the research and
innovation that will help us solve challenges such as clean drinking
water, lifesaving cures for cancer and disease, renewable energy,
affordable health care, and environmental sustainability.
Our country is counting on these future engineers, and the E-squared
for Innovation Act is a step in the right direction to support and
encourage them.

____________________