[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 70 (Tuesday, May 11, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3539-S3542]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. Brown of Ohio):
S. 3336. A bill to amend the internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
for the treatment of bonds issued to finance renewable energy resources
facilities, conservation and efficiency facilities, and other specified
greenhouse gas emission technologies; to the Committee on Finance.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Private
Activity Renewable Energy Bonds Act, legislation to enable low-cost
Private Activity Bond financing for businesses and local governments
which seek to create renewable, clean and efficient sources of energy.
The bill is cosponsored by Senator Brown of Ohio. In the United
States House of Representatives, Congressman Mike Thompson has
introduced a bipartisan companion bill cosponsored by Representatives
Dean Heller and Mary Bono Mack.
The bill is supported by a host of business and government leaders
and renewable energy companies including the Solar Energy Industries
Association, Solar Millennium, Nano Solar, the National Association of
Energy Service Companies, EnLink GeoEnergy, Johnson Controls, A123
Systems, the Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies,
and the U.S. Fuel Cell Council, as well as California Treasurer Bill
Lockyer.
The bill provides businesses access to low interest tax free Private
Activity Bonds, in order to fund projects that generate renewable
energy; produce energy or water savings, or; develop highly efficient
vehicles.
To promote such activity in a fiscally responsible manner, the
legislation caps the value of bonds at $2.5 billion annually. This
represents the investment necessary to replace at least one percent of
U.S. electricity generation with renewable sources over the next ten
years.
Private Activity Bonds have long been used to generate private
involvement and investment in critically important infrastructure for
our Nation--from wharves to airports, intercity rail to solid waste
disposal facilities and hospitals.
In this century, however, we have new national goals.
Renewable, clean and efficient energy projects will produce jobs, get
our economy back-on-track and sustain us as the global leader of a
greener century.
These projects, however, require significant front-end capital
investment to which the federal government cannot be the sole provider.
Private Activity Bonds can prove a critical tool in garnering private
investment, because their interest rates typically run a few percent
points under commercially available loans.
Investors have long responded to this type of incentive. According to
the IRS, Private Activity Bond issuance in 2007 was over $130 billion--
supplying capital to our markets, providing the financing to get
projects off the ground.
Projects financed in part by Private Activity Bonds include additions
to the San Jose and San Francisco International Airports, the Capitol
Beltway High Occupancy Vehicle lanes, infrastructure improvements to
the Port of Seattle, and upgrades to Children's Hospital of Orange
County, Catholic Healthcare West in San Francisco, and many, many
important facilities and projects.
With proper access to capital, we've already seen partnerships
between States, municipalities and businesses develop into successful
renewable energy programs.
In California, Energy Financing Districts finance residents who
choose to install clean energy projects such as distributed solar
panels on their homes.
The cost of the solar panel installation or other device is paid back
through an increase in property tax only for those property owners who
choose to participate in the program.
Now, going solar or installing a geothermal heat pump, which once
cost tens of thousands of dollars upfront, has little or no upfront
cost to the property owner. It is no wonder why 150 of these programs
have been established throughout the country.
This low cost solar opportunity is just one example of the type of
programs this bill seeks to support. In partnership, businesses and
local governments will develop new and innovative was to create the new
high quality jobs of the 21st century.
This Congress and this President have outlined goals to ensure this
country leads the world in the creation of a robust, green economy.
This bill looks to connect that laudable goal with proven financing
tools to get us there by aligning private sector investment power and
job growth with good public policy.
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. 3336
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 ``Private Activity Renewable
Energy Bonds Act''.
SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF BONDS ISSUED TO FINANCE RENEWABLE ENERGY
RESOURCE FACILITIES AND CONSERVATION AND
EFFICIENCY FACILITIES AND OTHER SPECIFIED
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION TECHNOLOGIES.
(a) In General.--Section 142(a) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of
paragraph (14), by striking the period at the end of
paragraph (15) and inserting a comma, and by inserting after
paragraph (15) the following new paragraphs:
``(16) renewable energy resource facilities,
``(17) conservation and efficiency facilities and projects,
or
``(18) high efficiency vehicles and related facilities or
projects.''.
(b) Renewable Energy Resource Facility.--Section 142 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end
the following new subsection:
``(n) Renewable Energy Resource Facilities.--For purposes
of subsection (a)(16)--
``(1) In general.--The term `renewable energy resource
facility' means--
[[Page S3540]]
``(A) any facility used to produce electric or thermal
energy (including a distributed generation facility) from--
``(i) solar, wind, or geothermal energy,
``(ii) marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy,
``(iii) incremental hydropower,
``(iv) biogas and solids produced in the wastewater
treatment process, or
``(v) biomass (as defined in section 203(b)(1) of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15852(b)(1))),
``(B) any facility used to produce biogas, or
``(C) any facility or project used for the manufacture of
facilities referred to in subparagraph (A) or (B).
``(2) Special requirements for facilities producing
biogas.--
``(A) In general.--A facility shall not be treated as
described in paragraph (1)(B), unless the biogas produced--
``(i) is of pipeline quality and distributed into a vehicle
for transportation or into an intrastate, interstate, or LDC
pipeline system, or
``(ii) is used to produce onsite electricity or hydrogen
fuel for use in vehicular or stationary fuel cell
applications and has a British thermal unit content of at
least 500 per cubic foot.
``(B) Pipeline quality.--For purposes of subparagraph
(A)(i), with respect to biogas, the term `pipeline quality'
means biogas with a British thermal unit content of at least
930 per cubic foot.
``(3) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection--
``(A) Geothermal energy.--The term `geothermal energy'
means energy derived from a geothermal deposit (within the
meaning of section 613(e)(2)) or from geothermal heat pumps.
``(B) Marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy.--The term
`marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy' has the meaning
given such term in section 45(c)(10).
``(C) Incremental hydropower.--The term `incremental
hydropower' means additional energy generated as a result of
efficiency improvements or capacity additions to existing
hydropower facilities made on or after the date of enactment
of this subsection. The term `incremental hydropower' does
not include additional energy generated as a result of
operational changes not directly associated with efficiency
improvements or capacity additions.
``(D) Biogas.--The term `biogas' means a gaseous fuel
derived from landfill, municipal solid waste, food waste,
wastewater or biosolids, or biomass (as defined in section
203(b)(1) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C.
15852(b))).
``(4) Special rules for energy loan tax assessment
financing.--
``(A) In general.--In the case of any renewable recovery
energy resource facility provided from the proceeds of a bond
secured by any tax assessment loan upon real property, the
term `facility' in paragraph (1) includes--
``(i) a prepayment for the principal purpose of purchasing
electricity from renewable energy resource property, and
``(ii) a prepayment of a lease or license of such property,
but only if the prepayment agreement provides that it shall
not be canceled prior to the expiration of the tax assessment
loan.
``(B) Tax assessment loan.--For purposes of subparagraph
(A), the term `tax assessment loan' shall mean a governmental
assessment, special tax, or similar charge upon real
property.''.
(c) Conservation and Efficiency Facility or Project.--
Section 142 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended
by subsection (b), is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(o) Conservation and Efficiency Facilities and
Projects.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of subsection (a)(17), the
term `conservation and efficiency facility or project'
means--
``(A) any facility used for the conservation or the
efficient use of energy, including energy efficient
retrofitting of existing buildings, or for the efficient
storage, transmission, or distribution of energy, including
any facility or project designed to implement smart grid
technologies (as described in title XIII of the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007, or individual
components of such technologies as listed in section 1301 of
such Act),
``(B) any facility used for the conservation of or the
efficient use of water, including--
``(i) any facility or project designed to--
``(I) reduce the demand for water,
``(II) improve efficiency in use and reduce losses and
waste of water, including water reuse, and
``(III) improve land management practices to conserve
water, or
``(ii) any individual component of a facility or project
referred to in clause (i), or
``(C) any facility or project used for the manufacture of
facilities referred to in subparagraphs (A) and (B).
For purposes of subparagraph (B)(i), facility or project does
not include any facility or project that stores water.
``(2) Special rules for energy loan tax assessment
financing.--
``(A) In general.--In the case of any conservation and
efficiency facility or project provided from the proceeds of
a bond secured by any tax assessment loan upon real property,
the term `facility' in paragraph (1)(A) includes--
``(i) a prepayment for the principal purpose of purchasing
electricity from conservation and efficiency property, and
``(ii) a prepayment of a lease or license of such property,
but only if the prepayment agreement provides that it shall
not be canceled prior to the expiration of the tax assessment
loan.
``(B) Tax assessment loan.--For purposes of subparagraph
(A), the term `tax assessment loan' shall mean a governmental
assessment, special tax or similar charge upon real
property.''.
(d) High Efficiency Vehicles and Related Facilities or
Projects.--Section 142 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,
as amended by subsections (b) and (c), is amended by adding
at the end the following new subsection:
``(p) High Efficiency Vehicles and Related Facilities or
Projects.--For purposes of subsection (a)(18)--
``(1) High efficiency vehicles.--The term `high efficiency
vehicle' means any vehicle that will exceed by at least 150
percent the average combined fuel economy for vehicles with
substantially similar attributes in the model year in which
the production of such vehicle is expected to begin at the
facility.
``(2) Facilities related to high efficiency vehicles.--A
facility or project is related to a high efficiency vehicle
if the facility is any real or personal property to be used
in the design, technology transfer, manufacture, production,
assembly, distribution, recharging or refueling, or service
of high efficiency vehicles.''.
(e) National Limitation on Amount of Renewable Energy
Bonds.--Section 142 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended by subsections (b), (c), and (d), is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(q) National Limitation on Amount of Renewable Energy
Bonds.--
``(1) In general.--An issue shall not be treated as an
issue described in paragraph (16), (17), or (18) of
subsection (a) if the aggregate face amount of bonds issued
by the State pursuant thereto (when added to the aggregate
face amount of bonds previously so issued during the calendar
year) exceeds the amount allocated to the State by the
Secretary under paragraph (2) for such calendar year.
``(2) Allocation rules.--
``(A) Allocation among states by population.--The Secretary
shall allocate authority to issue bonds described in
paragraph (16), (17), or (18) of subsection (a) to each State
by population for each calendar year in an aggregate amount
to all States not to exceed $2,500,000,000.
``(B) State allocation.--The State may allocate the amount
allocated to the State under subparagraph (A) for any
calendar year among facilities or projects described in
paragraphs (16), (17), and (18) of subsection (a) in such
manner as the State determines appropriate.
``(C) Unused renewable energy bond carryover to be
allocated among qualified states.--
``(i) In general.--Any unused bond allocation for any State
for any calendar year under subparagraph (A) shall carryover
to the succeeding calendar year and be assigned to the
Secretary for allocation among qualified States for the
succeeding calendar year.
``(ii) Unused bond allocation carryover.--For purposes of
this subparagraph, unused bond allocations are bond
allocations described in subparagraph (A) of any State which
remain unused by November 1 of any calendar year.
``(iii) Formula for allocation of unused bond allocation
carryovers among qualified states.--The amount allocated
under this subparagraph to a qualified State for any calendar
year shall bear the same ratio to all States from the
preceding calendar year under subparagraph (A), excluding
States which are not a qualified State.
``(iv) Timing of allocation.--The Secretary shall allocate
the unused bond allocation carried over from the preceding
year among qualified States not later than March 1 of the
succeeding year.
``(v) Qualified state.--For purposes of this subparagraph,
the term `qualified State' means, with respect to a calendar
year, any State--
``(I) which allocated its entire bond allocation under
subparagraph (A) for the preceding calendar year, and
``(II) for which a request is made (not later than August 1
of the calendar year) to receive an allocation under clause
(iii).
``(vi) Reporting.--States shall report annually to the
Secretary on their use of bonds described in paragraph (16),
(17), and (18) of subsection (a), including description of
projects, amount spent per project, total amount of unused
bonds, and expected greenhouse gas or water savings per
project with a description of how such savings were
calculated. Such reporting shall be submitted not later than
November 1 of any calendar year.''.
(f) Coordination With Section 45.--Paragraph (3) of section
45(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by
adding at the end the following new sentence: ``Clause (ii)
of subparagraph (A) shall not apply with respect to any
facility described in paragraph (16), (17), or (18) of
section 142(a).''.
(g) Coordination With Section 45K.--Subparagraph (A) of
section 45K(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
amended by adding at the end the following flush sentence:
[[Page S3541]]
``Subclause (II) of clause (i) shall not apply with respect
to any facility described in paragraph (16), (17), or (18) of
section 142(a).''.
(h) Coordination With Section 48.--Subparagraph (A) of
section 48(a)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
amended by adding at the end the following flush sentence:
``Clause (ii) shall not apply with respect to any facility
described in paragraph (16), (17), or (18) of section
142(a).''.
(i) Coordination With Section 146(g)(3).--Section 146(g)(3)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking
``or (15)'' and inserting ``(15), (16), (17), or (18)''.
(j) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to obligations issued after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
______
Mr. UDALL of New Mexico:
S. 3340. A bill to create jobs, increase energy efficiency, and
promote technology transfer, and for other purposes; to the Committee
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the
NIST GREEN JOBS Act, to provide NIST Grants for green jobs, improved
energy efficiency, and small business growth.
It has never been easy to be an entrepreneur or small business owner,
and this is especially true since the recession began 2 years ago. Many
small firms in the manufacturing sector, in particular, have struggled
during a time of tight credit markets and reduced consumer demand. In
the last 2 years, the manufacturing sector lost over 2 million jobs.
Twenty years ago, when Americans worried about how our small
companies would compete globally in the face of stiff competition from
Asia, Congress established the Hollings Manufacturing Extension
Partnership, MEP, Program to assist small manufacturers.
The MEP program has since helped thousands of small- and medium-sized
manufacturers across the nation increase their profit-lines and
streamline their business processes through lean manufacturing
techniques. The National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST,
is the Federal steward for the nationwide MEP network, which has MEP
Centers in all 50 States.
The New Mexico Manufacturing Extension Partnership in Albuquerque was
one of the first such centers, and it provides small- and medium-sized
manufacturers with the tools they need to grow, improve productivity
and expand capacity. Since its creation, the New Mexico MEP has helped
create or maintain more than 2,600 jobs in the State and achieve $24
million in annual cost savings for partner companies.
Today, as the U.S. continues to emerge from the worst recession since
the Great Depression, the resources and expertise MEP provides
manufacturers are more valuable than ever. Our MEP Centers do great
work--and I believe they can do even more as companies look for ways to
take advantage of new opportunities in a clean energy economy that
promotes energy efficiency and independence for our country.
Since manufacturing now plays an increasingly important role in the
construction industry, there is an important opportunity for the MEP
program to strengthen its support of small manufacturers while also
promoting green jobs and energy independence.
Builders today already rely on manufactured components and sub-
assemblies. Manufacturing will become even more important to
construction as homes are increasingly ``assembled'' on site from
components made in a factory. Now that lean, high-quality manufacturing
is applicable to construction, it is not a stretch for MEP Centers to
teach the same skills to the construction industry, where small firms
are the norm.
Technologies exist today for green building construction and
retrofitting that can reduce energy use and greenhouse gas emissions.
Yet many small firms, especially in the construction sector, do not
have the skills or expertise to take advantage of new technologies to
improve the energy efficiency. Moreover, NIST researchers at the
Buildings and Fire Research Lab already help develop standards and
technologies to improve buildings. Buildings today consume 73 percent
of electricity and 40 percent of overall energy.
These companies would benefit from the type of training and business
analysis activities that MEP Centers already provide to manufacturers.
The MEP system could thus be a powerful and transformational force to
create green jobs, increase energy efficiency, and promote
technological transfer in the construction industry.
That is why I ask for the support of my Senate colleagues for the
NIST GREEN JOBS Act, to fund MEP Center pilot projects for green jobs
related to energy efficiency. This proposal builds on provisions
already authorized by America COMPETES legislation.
My bill simply broadens this existing competitive grant program for
MEP pilot projects to include activities related to energy efficiency.
It also allows MEP Centers to extend services to companies in the
construction industry working in these areas. Awarded on a competitive
basis, these pilot projects could last up to 3 years and would be
located in each region of the country. The pilot projects would thus
create models for new MEP activities and services that could be
replicated at MEP Centers regionally or nationwide.
The NIST GREEN JOBS Act authorizes $7 million in annual funding for 3
years. This funding would allow at least one MEP Center in each region
to conduct a pilot project. The MEP Centers would not need to provide
local matching funds for these competitively awarded pilot projects.
I believe this modest proposal would be a positive step toward both
helping create and retain jobs in the manufacturing sector and
improving our Nation's energy independence.
I therefore urge the support of all my colleagues for this
legislation.
______
By Mr. DURBIN:
S. 3342. A bill to amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch
Act to establish a demonstration project to promote collaborations to
improve school nutrition; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition,
and Forestry.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, childhood obesity is a growing concern in
the U.S. and I am pleased that the President and First Lady have
decided to tackle this issue with the goal of solving the problem in a
generation. Today, one in three children is overweight or obese, which
means that they are at a greater risk of developing diabetes, heart
disease and cancer over the course of their lives. We are spending
nearly $150 billion a year to treat obesity-related medical conditions,
and this problem will only become worse if we don't do something about
it now.
One way that the Federal Government can play an important role in
addressing this problem is by helping to make schools healthier.
Students spend an average of nearly 7 hours a day at school, and it is
one of the places where kids formally learn and then can practice
healthy habits related to nutrition and physical activity. While
education is primarily funded by the states, the Federal government
plays a significant role in this issue as well because of its funding
of the National School Lunch Program. This year, the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, USDA, will spend $10.2 billion on the school lunch
program, which serves 31 million children across the country every day.
In my home State of Illinois, 1.1 million students in over 4,000
schools participate.
The National School Lunch Program was started after World War II,
because our leaders then understood the importance of investing in good
nutrition to ensure that the country's youth were well nourished and
healthy. When President Harry Truman signed the National School Lunch
Act, he said that ``in the long view, no nation is healthier than its
children.''
Today, we know that the program is making a real difference in
millions of kids' lives, by ensuring they don't go hungry during the
school day and are ready to learn. We also know that there are some
clear nutritional benefits of the program. USDA reports that research
on the school lunches consistently shows that participants consume more
milk and vegetables at lunch; have higher vitamin intakes; and consume
fewer sweets, sweetened beverages, and snack foods than
nonparticipants.
However, much of the difference in vegetable consumption may be due
to a higher consumption of French fries and other potato products, and
many lunches contain a higher percentage of calories from fat than
currently recommended. USDA's current nutrition
[[Page S3542]]
standards for school meals have not been updated since 1995 and are not
in line with the most recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans. I think
we need to take President Truman's words to heart, and make long-term
investments in this program to ensure that kids are eating healthy
meals.
I support the President's goal of increased funding, so that schools
can afford to purchase healthier ingredients to make school lunches.
However I know that the nutritional quality of school meals varies
greatly across the country, and providing every school with adequate
funding to improve their meals will be challenging. Some schools have
already shown that even with limited resources they can make real
improvements in the nutritional quality of their school meals, and make
other changes to make school environments healthier.
I would like to build on that concept, which is why I am pleased
today to introduce the Healthy School Partnerships Act of 2010. This
bill will create a competitive grant program at USDA to allow public
schools to explore innovative, sustainable programs that improve the
nutritional profile of school meals and make other improvements to make
school environments healthier. The bill authorizes $2 million per year
for 5 years to fund collaborations of academic experts, dieticians and
nutrition professionals, community partners, and local schools to
implement and evaluate innovative models to improve food quality,
student choices in food, and healthy school environments. This could
include starting programs to improve the nutritional content of school
meals; providing more nutrition education; changing school policies to
promote greater access to healthier foods and physical activity;
training teachers, school administrators and nurses; or making other
changes to make school environments healthier. We need grass roots
involvement and real-world models to solve the childhood obesity
problem going forward, and this bill provides the funding to develop
those.
Childhood obesity is a complex problem, and to effectively tackle it
we will need the commitment of the public and private sectors. The
Healthy Schools Partnerships Act of is one part of the solution. By
tapping local resources and expertise, we can promote collaborations
and develop sustainable and replicable models for making systemic
changes that promote good nutrition and healthy living among students.
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. 3342
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 ``Healthy Schools Partnerships
Act of 2010''.
SEC. 2. HEALTHY SCHOOLS PARTNERSHIPS DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.
Section 18 of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch
Act (42 U.S.C. 1769) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(j) Healthy Schools Partnerships Demonstration Program.--
``(1) Definition of eligible entity.--In this section, the
term `eligible entity' means a school food authority that
demonstrates that the school food authority has collaborated,
or will collaborate, with 1 or more local partner
organizations (including academic experts, registered
dietitians or other nutrition professionals, community
partners, or non-profit organizations) to achieve the
purposes described in paragraph (2).
``(2) Purposes.--The purposes of the demonstration project
established under this subsection are--
``(A) to assist schools in improving the nutritional
standards of school meals and the overall school environment;
and
``(B) to use local resources and expertise to promote
collaborations and develop sustainable and replicable models
for making systemic changes that promote good nutrition and
healthy living among students.
``(3) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a
demonstration project under which the Secretary shall make
grants to eligible entities to fund collaborations of
academic experts, nonprofit organizations, registered
dietitians or other nutrition professionals, community
partners, and local schools to test and evaluate innovative
models to improve nutrition education, student decision
making, and healthy school environments.
``(4) Application.--
``(A) In general.--An eligible entity shall submit to the
Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and
containing such information as the Secretary may require.
``(B) Contents.--In addition to any other requirements of
the Secretary, each application shall--
``(i) identify the 1 or more problems that the eligible
entity will address;
``(ii) identify the activity that the grant will be used to
fund;
``(iii) describe the means by which the activity will
improve the health and nutrition of the school environment;
``(iv) list the partner organizations that will participate
in the activity funded by the grant; and
``(v) describe the metrics used to measure success in
achieving the stated goals.
``(5) Priority.--In making grants under this subsection,
the Secretary shall give priority to eligible entities that
demonstrate--
``(A) a severe need to improve the school environment, as
demonstrated by high numbers of students receiving free or
reduced price lunches, high levels of obesity or other
indicators of poor health status, and health disparities in
the community served by the school;
``(B) a commitment by community partners to make in-kind or
cash contributions; and
``(C) the ability to measure results.
``(6) Use of funds.--An eligible entity shall use a grant
received under this subsection--
``(A) to assess the problem of childhood obesity and poor
nutrition in the school environment;
``(B) to develop an innovative plan or intervention to
address specific causes of the problem in coordination with
outside partners, including by developing and testing
innovative models to improve student health and nutrition as
measured by--
``(i) changes that result in healthier school environments,
including more nutritious food being served in cafeterias and
available a la carte;
``(ii) increased nutrition education;
``(iii) improved ability of students to identify healthier
choices;
``(iv) changes in attitudes of students towards healthier
food;
``(v) student involvement in making school environments
healthier;
``(vi) increased access to physical activity, physical
education, and recess;
``(vii) professional development and continuing education
opportunities for school administrators, teachers, and school
nurses; and
``(viii) changes in school policies that promote access to
healthier food and physical activity;
``(C) to implement the plan or intervention in partnership
with outside partners;
``(D) to measure and evaluate effectiveness of the
intervention; or
``(E) to assess the sustainability and replicability of
this model.
``(7) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $2,000,000
for each of fiscal years 2011 through 2015.''.
____________________