[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 98 (Monday, June 28, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5490-S5493]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. WHITEHOUSE (for himself and Mr. Vitter):
  S. 3540. A bill to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to 
reauthorize the National Estuary Program, and for other purposes; to 
the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. 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. 3540

       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 ``Clean Estuaries Act of 
     2010''.

     SEC. 2. NATIONAL ESTUARY PROGRAM AMENDMENTS.

       (a) Purposes of Conference.--
       (1) Development of comprehensive conservation and 
     management plans.--Section 320(b) of the Federal Water 
     Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1330(b)) is amended by 
     striking paragraph (4) and inserting the following:
       ``(4) develop and submit to the Administrator a 
     comprehensive conservation and management plan that--
       ``(A) identifies the estuary and the associated upstream 
     waters of the estuary to be addressed by the plan, with 
     consideration given to hydrological boundaries;
       ``(B) recommends priority corrective actions and compliance 
     schedules addressing--
       ``(i) point and nonpoint sources of pollution; and
       ``(ii) protection and conservation actions--

       ``(I) to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and 
     biological integrity of the estuary, including--

       ``(aa) restoration and maintenance of water quality, 
     wetlands, and natural hydrologic flows;
       ``(bb) a resilient and diverse indigenous population of 
     shellfish, fish, and wildlife; and
       ``(cc) recreational activities in the estuary; and

       ``(II) to ensure that the designated uses of the estuary 
     are protected;

       ``(C) identifies healthy watershed components for 
     protection and conservation by carrying out integrated 
     assessments, where appropriate, of--
       ``(i) aquatic habitat and biological integrity;
       ``(ii) water quality; and
       ``(iii) natural hydrologic flows;
       ``(D) considers current and future sustainable commercial 
     activities in the estuary;
       ``(E) addresses the impacts of climate change on the 
     estuary, including--
       ``(i) the identification and assessment of vulnerabilities 
     in the estuary;
       ``(ii) the development and implementation of adaptation 
     strategies; and
       ``(iii) the impacts of changes in sea level on estuarine 
     water quality, estuarine habitat, and infrastructure located 
     in the estuary;
       ``(F) increases public education and awareness with respect 
     to--
       ``(i) the ecological health of the estuary;
       ``(ii) the water quality conditions of the estuary; and
       ``(iii) ocean, estuarine, land, and atmospheric connections 
     and interactions;
       ``(G)(i) identifies and assesses impairments, including 
     upstream impairments, coming from outside of the area 
     addressed by the plan, and the sources of those impairments; 
     and
       ``(ii) provides the applicable State with any information 
     on such impairments or the sources of such impairments;
       ``(H) includes performance measures and goals to track 
     implementation of the plan; and
       ``(I) includes a coordinated monitoring strategy for 
     Federal, State, and local governments and other entities.''.
       (2) Monitoring and making results available.--Section 
     320(b) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 
     1330(b)) is amended by striking paragraph (6) and inserting 
     the following:
       ``(6) monitor (and make results available to the public 
     regarding)--
       ``(A) water quality conditions in the estuary and the 
     associated upstream waters of the estuary identified under 
     paragraph (4)(A);
       ``(B) healthy watershed and habitat conditions that relate 
     to the ecological health and water quality conditions of the 
     estuary; and
       ``(C) the effectiveness of actions taken pursuant to the 
     comprehensive conservation and management plan developed for 
     the estuary under this subsection;''.
       (3) Information and educational activities.--Section 320(b) 
     of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 
     1330(b)) is amended--
       (A) by redesignating paragraph (7) as paragraph (8); and
       (B) by inserting after paragraph (6) the following:
       ``(7) provide information and educational activities on the 
     ecological health and water quality conditions of the 
     estuary; and''.
       (4) Conforming amendment.--The sentence following section 
     320(b)(8) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (as so 
     redesignated) (33 U.S.C. 1330(b)(8)) is amended by striking 
     ``paragraph (7)'' and inserting ``paragraph (8)''.
       (b) Members of Conference; Collaborative Processes.--
       (1) Members of conference.--Section 320(c)(5) of the 
     Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1330(c)(5)) is 
     amended by inserting ``not-for-profit organizations,'' after 
     ``institutions,''.
       (2) Collaborative processes.--Section 320(d) of the Federal 
     Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1330(d)) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``(d)'' and all that follows through ``In 
     developing'' and inserting the following:
       ``(d) Use of Existing Data and Collaborative Processes.--
       ``(1) Use of existing data.--In developing''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Use of collaborative processes.--In updating a plan 
     under subsection (f)(4) or developing a new plan under 
     subsection (b), a management conference shall make use of 
     collaborative processes--
       ``(A) to ensure equitable inclusion of affected interests;
       ``(B) to engage with members of the management conference, 
     including through--
       ``(i) the use of consensus-based decision rules; and
       ``(ii) assistance from impartial facilitators, as 
     appropriate;
       ``(C) to ensure relevant information, including scientific, 
     technical, and cultural information, is accessible to 
     members;
       ``(D) to promote accountability and transparency by 
     ensuring members are informed in a timely manner of--
       ``(i) the purposes and objectives of the management 
     conference; and
       ``(ii) the results of an evaluation conducted under 
     subsection (f)(3);
       ``(E) to identify the roles and responsibilities of 
     members--
       ``(i) in the management conference proceedings; and
       ``(ii) in the implementation of the plan; and
       ``(F) to seek resolution of conflicts or disputes as 
     necessary.''.
       (c) Administration of Plans.--Section 320 of the Federal 
     Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1330) is amended by 
     striking subsection (f) and inserting the following:
       ``(f) Administration of Plans.--
       ``(1) Approval.--Not later than 120 days after the date on 
     which a management conference submits to the Administrator a 
     comprehensive conservation and management plan under this 
     section, and after providing for public review and comment, 
     the Administrator shall approve the plan, if--
       ``(A) the Administrator determines that the plan meets the 
     requirements of this section; and
       ``(B) each affected Governor concurs.
       ``(2) Implementation.--
       ``(A) In general.--On the approval of a comprehensive 
     conservation and management plan under this section, the plan 
     shall be implemented.
       ``(B) Use of authorized amounts.--Amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated under titles II and VI and section 319 may be 
     used in accordance with the applicable requirements of this 
     Act to assist States with the implementation of a plan 
     approved under paragraph (1).
       ``(3) Evaluation.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not later than 5 years after the date of 
     enactment of this paragraph, and every 5 years thereafter, 
     the Administrator shall carry out--

[[Page S5491]]

       ``(i) an evaluation of the implementation of each 
     comprehensive conservation and management plan developed 
     under this section to determine the degree to which the goals 
     of the plan have been met; and
       ``(ii) a review of the program designed to implement the 
     plan.
       ``(B) Review and comment by management conference.--In 
     completing an evaluation under subparagraph (A), the 
     Administrator shall submit the results of the evaluation to 
     the appropriate management conference for review and comment.
       ``(C) Report.--
       ``(i) In general.--In completing an evaluation under 
     subparagraph (A), and after providing an opportunity for a 
     management conference to submit comments under subparagraph 
     (B), the Administrator shall issue a report on the results of 
     the evaluation, including the findings and recommendations of 
     the Administrator and any comments received from the 
     management conference.
       ``(ii) Availability to public.--The Administrator shall 
     make a report issued under this subparagraph available to the 
     public, including through publication in the Federal Register 
     and on the Internet.
       ``(D) Special rule for new plans.--Notwithstanding 
     subparagraph (A), if a management conference submits a new 
     comprehensive conservation and management plan to the 
     Administrator after the date of enactment of this paragraph, 
     the Administrator shall complete the evaluation of the 
     implementation of the plan required by subparagraph (A) not 
     later than 5 years after the date of such submission and 
     every 5 years thereafter.
       ``(4) Updates.--
       ``(A) Requirement.--Not later than 18 months after the date 
     on which the Administrator makes an evaluation of the 
     implementation of a comprehensive conservation and management 
     plan available to the public under paragraph (3)(C), a 
     management conference convened under this section shall 
     submit to the Administrator an update of the plan that 
     reflects, to the maximum extent practicable, the results of 
     the program evaluation.
       ``(B) Approval of updates.--Not later than 120 days after 
     the date on which a management conference submits to the 
     Administrator an updated comprehensive conservation and 
     management plan under subparagraph (A), and after providing 
     for public review and comment, the Administrator shall 
     approve the updated plan, if the Administrator determines 
     that the updated plan meets the requirements of this section.
       ``(5) Probationary status.--The Administrator may consider 
     a management conference convened under this section to be in 
     probationary status, if the management conference has not 
     received approval for an updated comprehensive conservation 
     and management plan under paragraph (4)(B) on or before the 
     last day of the 3-year period beginning on the date on which 
     the Administrator makes an evaluation of the plan available 
     to the public under paragraph (3)(C).''.
       (d) Federal Agencies.--Section 320 of the Federal Water 
     Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1330) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (g), (h), (i), (j), and 
     (k) as subsections (h), (i), (j), (k), and (m), respectively; 
     and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (f) the following:
       ``(g) Federal Agencies.--
       ``(1) Activities conducted within estuaries with approved 
     plans.--After approval of a comprehensive conservation and 
     management plan by the Administrator, any Federal action or 
     activity affecting the estuary shall be conducted, to the 
     maximum extent practicable, in a manner consistent with the 
     plan.
       ``(2) Coordination and cooperation.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary of the Army (acting 
     through the Chief of Engineers), the Administrator of the 
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Director 
     of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the Secretary 
     of the Department of Agriculture, the Director of the United 
     States Geological Survey, the Secretary of the Department of 
     Transportation, the Secretary of the Department of Housing 
     and Urban Development, and the heads of other appropriate 
     Federal agencies, as determined by the Administrator, shall, 
     to the maximum extent practicable, cooperate and coordinate 
     activities, including monitoring activities, related to the 
     implementation of a comprehensive conservation and management 
     plan approved by the Administrator.
       ``(B) Lead coordinating agency.--The Environmental 
     Protection Agency shall serve as the lead coordinating agency 
     under this paragraph.
       ``(3) Consideration of plans in agency budget requests.--In 
     making an annual budget request for a Federal agency referred 
     to in paragraph (2), the head of such agency shall consider 
     the responsibilities of the agency under this section, 
     including under comprehensive conservation and management 
     plans approved by the Administrator.
       ``(4) Monitoring.--The heads of the Federal agencies 
     referred to in paragraph (2) shall collaborate on the 
     development of tools and methodologies for monitoring the 
     ecological health and water quality conditions of estuaries 
     covered by a management conference convened under this 
     section.''.
       (e) Grants.--
       (1) In general.--Subsection (h) (as redesignated by 
     subsection (d)) of section 320 of the Federal Water Pollution 
     Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1330) is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``other public'' and all 
     that follows before the period at the end and inserting ``and 
     other public or nonprofit private agencies, institutions, and 
     organizations''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Effects of probationary status.--
       ``(A) Reductions in grant amounts.--The Administrator shall 
     reduce, by an amount to be determined by the Administrator, 
     grants for the implementation of a comprehensive conservation 
     and management plan developed by a management conference 
     convened under this section, if the Administrator determines 
     that the management conference is in probationary status 
     under subsection (f)(5).
       ``(B) Termination of management conferences.--The 
     Administrator shall terminate a management conference 
     convened under this section, and cease funding for the 
     implementation of the comprehensive conservation and 
     management plan developed by the management conference, if 
     the Administrator determines that the management conference 
     has been in probationary status for 2 consecutive years.''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--Section 320(i) the Federal Water 
     Pollution Control Act (as redesignated by subsection (d)) is 
     amended by striking ``subsection (g)'' and inserting 
     ``subsection (h)''.
       (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 320 of the 
     Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1330) (as 
     redesignated by subsection (d)) is amended by striking 
     subsection (j) and inserting the following:
       ``(j) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       ``(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated 
     to the Administrator $75,000,000 for each of fiscal years 
     2011 through 2016 for--
       ``(A) expenses relating to the administration of management 
     conferences by the Administrator under this section, except 
     that such expenses shall not exceed 10 percent of the amount 
     appropriated under this subsection;
       ``(B) making grants under subsection (h); and
       ``(C) monitoring the implementation of a conservation and 
     management plan by the management conference, or by the 
     Administrator in any case in which the conference has been 
     terminated.
       ``(2) Allocations.--Of the sums authorized to be 
     appropriated under this subsection, the Administrator shall 
     provide--
       ``(A) at least $1,250,000 per fiscal year, subject to the 
     availability of appropriations, for the development, 
     implementation, and monitoring of each conservation and 
     management plan eligible for grant assistance under 
     subsection (h); and
       ``(B) up to $5,000,000 per fiscal year to carry out 
     subsection (k).''.
       (g) Research.--Section 320(k)(1)(A) of the Federal Water 
     Pollution Control Act (as redesignated by subsection (d)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``paramenters'' and inserting 
     ``parameters''; and
       (2) by inserting ``(including monitoring of both pathways 
     and ecosystems to track the introduction and establishment of 
     nonnative species)'' before ``, to provide the 
     Administrator''.
       (h) National Estuary Program Evaluation.--Section 320 of 
     the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1330) is 
     amended by inserting after subsection (k) (as redesignated by 
     subsection (d)) the following:
       ``(l) National Estuary Program Evaluation.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 5 years after the date of 
     enactment of this paragraph, and every 5 years thereafter, 
     the Administrator shall complete an evaluation of the 
     national estuary program established under this section.
       ``(2) Specific assessments.--In conducting an evaluation 
     under this subsection, the Administrator shall--
       ``(A) assess the effectiveness of the national estuary 
     program in improving water quality, natural resources, and 
     sustainable uses of the estuaries covered by management 
     conferences convened under this section;
       ``(B) identify best practices for improving water quality, 
     natural resources, and sustainable uses of the estuaries 
     covered by management conferences convened under this 
     section, including those practices funded through the use of 
     technical assistance from the Environmental Protection Agency 
     and other Federal agencies;
       ``(C) assess the reasons why the best practices described 
     in subparagraph (B) resulted in the achievement of program 
     goals;
       ``(D) identify any redundant requirements for reporting by 
     recipients of a grant under this section; and
       ``(E) develop and recommend a plan for limiting reporting 
     any redundancies.
       ``(3) Report.--In completing an evaluation under this 
     subsection, the Administrator shall issue a report on the 
     results of the evaluation, including the findings and 
     recommendations of the Administrator.
       ``(4) Availability.--The Administrator shall make a report 
     issued under this subsection available to management 
     conferences convened under this section and the public, 
     including through publication in the Federal Register and on 
     the Internet.''.
       (i) Convening of Conference.--Section 320(a)(2) of the 
     Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1330(a)(2)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``(2) Convening of conference.--'' and all 
     that follows through ``In any case'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(2) Convening of conference.--In any case''; and

[[Page S5492]]

       (2) by striking subparagraph (B).
       (j) Great Lakes Estuaries.--Section 320(m) of the Federal 
     Water Pollution Control Act (as redesignated by subsection 
     (d)) is amended by striking the subsection designation and 
     all that follows through ``and those portions of 
     tributaries'' and inserting the following:
       ``(m) Definitions.--In this section, the terms `estuary' 
     and `estuarine zone' have the meanings given the terms in 
     section 104(n)(4), except that--
       ``(1) the term `estuary' also includes near coastal waters 
     and other bodies of water within the Great Lakes that are 
     similar in form and function to the waters described in the 
     definition of `estuary' in section 104(n)(4); and
       ``(2) the term `estuarine zone' also includes--
       ``(A) waters within the Great Lakes described in paragraph 
     (1) and transitional areas from such waters that are similar 
     in form and function to the transitional areas described in 
     the definition of `estuarine zone' in section 104(n)(4);
       ``(B) associated aquatic ecosystems; and
       ``(C) those portions of tributaries''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
  S. 3541. A bill to prohibit royalty incentives for deepwater 
drilling, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the 
Deepwater Drilling Royalty Prohibition Act.
  The purpose of this bill is to ensure that taxpayer dollars are not 
used to incentivize the dangerous and often dirty business of offshore 
drilling in deep waters.
  Over the past decades, Congress has established a number of royalty-
relief programs to encourage domestic exploration and production in 
deep waters. This may have made sense in times when oil prices were too 
low to provide energy companies with an incentive to drill in difficult 
places, and before we were ready to deploy large-scale renewable energy 
production.
  But that is no longer the case. The events of the last weeks have 
shown that safety and response technologies are not sufficient in deep 
waters. I believe taxpayer-funded incentives should go to clean, 
renewable energy, not deepwater drilling for oil.
  The disastrous impacts of the leak from the Deepwater Horizon have 
shown that offshore drilling has enormous environmental and safety 
risks--particularly in deep waters. Eleven people died and 17 others 
were injured when the Deepwater Horizon caught fire. All these weeks 
later, we continue to watch in horror as the scope of the disaster 
keeps expanding:
  Oil slicks spread inexorably across the Gulf of Mexico;
  Pelicans and other wildlife struggle to free themselves from crude 
oil; tar balls spoil the pristine white sand beaches of Florida; 
Wetlands are coated with toxic sludge; More than 1/3 of Federal waters 
in the Gulf have been closed to fishing; The plumes of oil under water 
may create zones of toxicity or low oxygen for aquatic life; The oil 
may spread into the Atlantic Ocean via the Loop Current; The response 
techniques, such as the use of dispersants, may have their own toxic 
consequences; and
  Upcoming storms may delay or prevent continued containment and 
response efforts.
  The impacts of an oil spill are so dramatic and devastating, it seems 
clear to me that regulation, oversight and prevention technologies 
should be rigorous. But that is clearly not the case.
  Regulators failed to ensure appropriate safety and response 
technologies were in place.
  MMS gave BP a categorical exclusion from an environmental impact 
analysis that in my opinion should never have been allowed.
  MMS allowed BP to run a drilling operation without the demonstrated 
ability to shut off the flow of gas and oil in an emergency.
  MMS allowed BP to operate without remote shutoff capability in case 
the drilling rig became disabled.
  MMS did not have an inspector on the rig to settle the heated 
argument between the BP, Transocean, and Halliburton officials on how 
they would stop drilling and plug the well.
  MMS did not have--and did not require the industry to have--emergency 
equipment stationed in the Gulf of Mexico that could respond 
immediately to an emergency.
  MMS did not have a plan for responding to disasters.
  MMS did not, in fact, have a real inspection and compliance program. 
It relied on the expertise and advice of the industry on how and how 
much they should be inspected.
  This is not how things should be done. We expect more from our 
government.
  Prevention and response technologies show similar unacceptable 
deficits: they are not good enough.
  These have not improved much since the oil spill in 1969 off the 
California coast near Santa Barbara. That too was caused by a natural 
gas blowout when pressure in the drill hole fluctuated. It was 
successfully plugged with mud and cement after 11 and a half days, but 
oil and gas continued to seep for months. The Santa Barbara spill was 
devastating, but it was a tiny fraction of the size of the Deepwater 
Horizon spill.
  The old technology was not good enough, but now it appears that even 
the newest safety technology fails to prevent wellhead blowouts.
  The Deepwater Horizon drill rig was just completed in 2001.
  The drill rig that caused the 2009 spill in the Montara oil and gas 
field in the Timor Sea--one of the worst in Australia's history--was 
designed and built in 2007. That spill continued unchecked for 74 days.
  The New York Times reports that the blind shear rams in the blowout 
preventers--the last line of defense to prevent wellhead leaks are 
``surprisingly vulnerable'' to failure. One study found that blowout 
preventers have a failure rate of 45 percent.
  These technologies are insufficient, and they are particularly 
vulnerable in deep waters.
  Methane hydrate crystals form when methane gas mixes with pressurized 
cold ocean waters--and the likelihood of these crystals forming 
increases dramatically at about 400 meters depth. These crystals 
interfere with response and containment technologies. They formed in 
the cofferdam dome that was lowered onto the gushing oil in the Gulf, 
and prevented it from working. When a remotely operated underwater 
vehicle bumped the valves in the ``top hat'' device, the containment 
cap had to be removed and slowly replaced to prevent formation of these 
crystals again.
  Other risks increase too, as explained by the Wall Street Journal:

       Drilling in deeper water doesn't change the fundamental 
     process, but it makes virtually everything harder. Rigs must 
     be bigger so they can hold more drilling pipe to stretch vast 
     distances. The pipes themselves must be stronger to withstand 
     ocean currents. Equipment on the sea floor must be sturdier 
     to face extreme pressures at depth. Drill bits must be 
     tougher so they don't melt in the 400-degree temperatures 
     they encounter deep in the earth. And it is harder for 
     drillers to exert just the right amount of pressure down the 
     well bore, enough to keep oil and gas from spurting upwards--
     a blowout--but not so much that they crack open the rocks 
     beneath the surface, which could also lead to a blowout.

  It is clear that prevention, containment, and clean-up measures are 
not sufficient to handle oil leaks, particularly in deep waters.
  American taxpayers should not forego revenue to incentivize offshore 
drilling. It is not good environmental policy, and it is not good 
energy policy either.
  We need to move to clearer renewable fuels.
  I believe that global warming is the biggest environmental crisis we 
face--and the biggest culprit of global warming is manmade emissions 
produced by the combustion of fossil fuels, like oil and coal.
  Taxpayer funded incentives should not finance production of fossil 
fuels--particularly in places where the production itself poses 
potential devastation, but rather should be used to develop and deploy 
clean energy technologies like wind and solar. I very much believe 
this.
  That is why I have worked with my colleagues on a number of 
legislative initiatives designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, 
increase energy efficiency and incentivize the use of renewable energy.
  One of our biggest victories was the enactment of the aggressive fuel 
economy law, called the Ten in Ten Fuel Economy Act, which was passed 
by Congress and signed into law by then-President Bush in the 110th 
Congress. This law, which I authored with Senator Snowe, will improve 
fuel economy

[[Page S5493]]

standards for passenger vehicles at the maximum feasible rate. The good 
news is that the administration has taken the framework of this law and 
implemented aggressive standards that require raising fleetwide fuel 
economy to 35.5 mpg in 2016--a 40 percent increase above today's 
standard.
  The other positive development is that the domestic renewable energy 
industry has grown dramatically over the last few years. Last year, the 
United States added more new capacity to produce renewable electricity 
than it did to produce electricity from natural gas, or oil, or coal. A 
great deal of this growth can be attributed to government renewable 
energy incentives. That is where public investment in energy 
development should go.
  It is clear that the clean energy sector is the next frontier in jobs 
creation.
  We need to ensure that developers can access financing to launch 
wind, solar and geothermal projects, so that they can put people to 
work. Programs like The Recovery Act grant program run by the Treasury 
Department have been very successful in encouraging private investment 
in this sector. So far, the program has helped to bring 4,250 megawatts 
of clean power online and is expected to generate more than 143,000 
green jobs by the end of the year, according to the Lawrence Berkeley 
National Laboratory. The program, however, is set to expire at the end 
of year if we don't act. So, I'm working on legislation that will 
extend this successful program for an additional 2 years.
  All told, these types of measures are helping to foster the 
incentives that will push the United States to adopt a cleaner energy 
future, and to move away from fossil fuels.
  Let me make one final point clear, I don't believe the oil companies 
need taxpayer dollars to help them out. They are already reaping record 
profits.
  Last year, the top 10 U.S. oil companies' combined revenues were 
almost $850 billion. Yet we continue to use money that should come to 
the U.S. Treasury, to add to their bottom line. This is unacceptable.
  Oil reserves are a public resource. When a private company profits 
from those public resources, American taxpayers should benefit too.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and ensure that 
royalties owed to the taxpayers are not waived to incentivize risky 
off-shore drilling. In these critical economic times, every cent of the 
people's money should be spent wisely, on clean, efficient and safe 
technologies.
  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. 3541

       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 ``Deepwater Drilling Royalty 
     Prohibition Act''.

     SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON ROYALTY INCENTIVES FOR DEEPWATER 
                   DRILLING.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the Secretary of the Interior shall not issue any oil or 
     gas lease sale under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act 
     (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.) with royalty-based incentives in any 
     tract located in water depths of 400 meters or more on the 
     outer Continental Shelf.
       (b) Royalty Relief for Deep Water Production.--Section 345 
     of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15905) is 
     repealed.
       (c) Royalty Relief.--Section 8(a)(3) of the Outer 
     Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1337(a)(3)) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) Prohibition.--Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A) 
     through (C) or any other provision of law, the Secretary 
     shall not reduce or eliminate any royalty or net profit share 
     for any lease or unit located in water depths of 400 meters 
     or more on the outer Continental Shelf.''.
       (d) Application.--This section and the amendments made by 
     this section--
       (1) apply beginning with the first lease sale held on or 
     after the date of enactment of this Act for which a final 
     notice of sale has not been published as of that date; and
       (2) do not apply to a lease in effect on the date of 
     enactment of this Act.

                          ____________________