[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 85 (Tuesday, June 8, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4659-S4660]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Durbin, and Mr. Whitehouse):
  S. 3463. A bill to amend chapter 303 of title 46, United States Code, 
to provide fair treatment for the families of those killed on the high 
seas; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, today I introduce the Survivors Equality 
Act to ensure that everyone is treated equally under the Death on the 
High Seas Act. I thank Senator Whitehouse for joining me in this 
important effort to provide justice for victims. Earlier today, the 
Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing to examine liability issues 
related to the British Petroleum, BP, oil spill disaster in the Gulf of 
Mexico. The testimony received at this hearing made it clear that 
several of our laws need updating.
  As a result of the BP oil spill, countless Americans in the Gulf 
Region have been devastated. Waters, fisheries, wetlands, and 
coastlines, and the wildlife that enriches those environments, have 
been injured profoundly. Their livelihoods and way of life will take 
years of hard work to reclaim.
  Among the victims of the explosion that led to the oil spill are 11 
men who lost their lives on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig. Their 
families, including more than a dozen children, have experienced a 
terrible loss. As Congress responds to the needs of the Gulf Region, 
these men and the families who lost them must have justice. The 
legislation I introduce today is a step toward that goal.
  The Death on the High Seas Act is one of few Federal remedies for the 
survivors of those who were killed on the Deepwater Horizon. The 
families of these men cannot seek justice under the laws of their 
states.
  In 2000, in response to a tragic airline crash, Congress amended the 
Death on the High Seas Act to permit recovery of non-pecuniary losses 
for the surviving family members of air crash victims. While this was 
the right thing to do, it did not go far enough. Though well-
intentioned, this amendment resulted in an inequity based solely on the 
manner in which a victim was killed. Congress made some strides in 
modernizing this law then. Now it must finish the job.
  Current law provides greater protection to a person killed in an 
aircraft disaster over international waters than it does for a person 
killed in a boat or other ocean vessel such as an oil drilling rig. 
Under the Act today, the surviving family members of a person 
wrongfully killed in international waters in a boat or other ocean 
vessel may only recover pecuniary damages. This means they can only 
seek the lost income of their loved one, and what that person provided 
to the family in monetary terms.
  Not only is this law internally inconsistent, it is out of the legal 
mainstream. Families who lose a loved one in a workplace accident on 
land are eligible for more compensation. For example, the families of 
the 15 employees who were killed in a 2005 BP Texas City refinery 
explosion had a full range of legal remedies simply because the 
facility was on dry land. It is unfair that the men on the Deepwater 
Horizon are afforded less protection because that facility was at sea. 
Their jobs were no less dangerous, and their losses no less tragic.
  In the Judiciary Committee this morning, Senators heard testimony 
from Christopher Jones. Mr. Jones' brother, Gordon Jones, was among the 
11 men who perished on the Deepwater Horizon rig. He died while working 
to support his young family. Yet simply because of where he was 
working, his family has less protection under the law than the 
survivors of a person who loses their life in an aircraft. This is 
nonsensical and wrong.
  Where Federal law provides an exclusive remedy to those who lose 
their lives in international waters, it should not be unfair. In the 
law, as in society, great value is placed on the bonds that hold 
together families. The destruction of those bonds through the 
misconduct of another is a loss that is recognized by the law. Today, 
the Death on the High Seas Act fails to recognize universally what it 
means to a child who will no longer have the guidance of a loving 
father or a spouse who will no longer have the care and comfort of a 
devoted wife or husband. It is time for Congress to finish the work 
that was started a decade ago and make this law fair for all to whom it 
applies.

[[Page S4660]]

  As Congress moves forward to address the terrible tragedy that has 
occurred in the Gulf of Mexico, I urge all Senators to join me in 
support of this legislation to help the families of the 11 hardworking 
Americans who were killed during the explosion.
  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. 3463

       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 ``Survivors Equality Act of 
     2010''.

     SEC. 2. FAIR TREATMENT FOR THE FAMILIES OF THOSE KILLED ON 
                   THE HIGH SEAS.

       Chapter 303 of title 46, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking section 30303 and inserting the following:

     ``Sec. 30303. Amount and apportionment of recovery

       ``(a) Definition.--In this section, the term `nonpecuniary 
     loss' means loss of care, comfort, and companionship.
       ``(b) Recovery.--The recovery in an action under this 
     chapter shall be a fair compensation for the pecuniary and 
     nonpecuniary loss sustained by the individuals for whose 
     benefit the action is brought. The individuals for whose 
     benefit the action is brought may also recover damages for 
     the decedent's pre-death pain and suffering.''.

     SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       The amendment made by this Act shall take effect on the 
     date of enactment of this Act and apply to any civil action 
     filed on or after that date.

                          ____________________