[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 37 (Thursday, March 14, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1855-S1863]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. WYDEN (for himself, Mr. Barrasso, and Mr. Merkley):
  S. 562. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
provide for the coverage of marriage and family therapist services and 
mental health counselor services under part B of the Medicare program, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I am honored to join my colleague from 
Wyoming, Senator John Barrasso, in introducing a bill essential to 
enhancing the delivery of mental health services to our senior 
citizens, The Seniors Mental Health Access Improvement Act.
  Currently, there are limitations on the types of mental health 
practitioners who may be reimbursed for services in the Medicare 
program. Our legislation permits mental health counselors and marriage 
and family therapists to bill Medicare for their services, and it pays 
them at the rate of clinical social workers. With this legislation, 
seniors will have more opportunities as part of their Medicare benefit 
to access professional mental health counseling assistance.
  Throughout the United States there are approximately 77 million older 
adults living in 3,000 so-called ``mental health profession shortage 
areas.'' Moreover, 50 percent of rural counties have no practicing 
psychiatrists or psychologists. Seniors living in these areas will be 
the primary beneficiaries of our efforts.
  Mental health counselors and marriage and family therapists are often 
the only mental health providers in some communities, and yet presently 
they are not recognized as covered providers within the Medicare 
program. These therapists have equivalent or greater training, 
education and practice rights as some existing provider groups that can 
bill for their services through Medicare.
  Additionally, other government agencies, including The National 
Health Service Corps, the Veteran's Administration and TRICARE, already 
recognize these mental health professionals and reimburse for their 
services. We need to utilize the skills of these providers and ensure 
that seniors have access to them. These professionals play a critical 
role in the delivery of our Nation's mental health care.
  In Oregon, the passage of this legislation will focus the talents of 
over 2,000 additional qualified providers on the mental health issues 
of one of our most vulnerable populations. This represents a 
commonsense approach to relieving a persistent and chronic healthcare 
workforce shortage.
  Finally, I commend our mental health professionals nationwide, for 
their dedicated work and efforts, and I encourage passage of this 
legislation.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 562

       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 ``Seniors Mental Health Access 
     Improvement Act of 2013''.

     SEC. 2. COVERAGE OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY THERAPIST SERVICES 
                   AND MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELOR SERVICES UNDER PART 
                   B OF THE MEDICARE PROGRAM.

       (a) Coverage of Services.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1861(s)(2) of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(s)(2)) is amended--
       (A) in subparagraph (EE), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon at the end;
       (B) in subparagraph (FF), by inserting ``and'' after the 
     semicolon at the end; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(GG) marriage and family therapist services (as defined 
     in subsection (iii)(1)) and mental health counselor services 
     (as defined in subsection (iii)(3));''.
       (2) Definitions.--Section 1861 of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1395x) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:

     ``Marriage and Family Therapist Services; Marriage and Family 
  Therapist; Mental Health Counselor Services; Mental Health Counselor

       ``(iii)(1) The term `marriage and family therapist 
     services' means services performed by a marriage and family 
     therapist (as defined in paragraph (2)) for the diagnosis and 
     treatment of mental illnesses, which the marriage and family 
     therapist is legally authorized to perform under State law 
     (or the State regulatory mechanism provided by State law) of 
     the State in which such services are performed, as would 
     otherwise be covered if furnished by a physician or as an 
     incident to a physician's professional service, but only if 
     no facility or other provider charges or is paid any amounts 
     with respect to the furnishing of such services.
       ``(2) The term `marriage and family therapist' means an 
     individual who--
       ``(A) possesses a master's or doctoral degree which 
     qualifies for licensure or certification as a marriage and 
     family therapist pursuant to State law;
       ``(B) after obtaining such degree has performed at least 2 
     years of clinical supervised experience in marriage and 
     family therapy; and
       ``(C) in the case of an individual performing services in a 
     State that provides for licensure or certification of 
     marriage and family therapists, is licensed or certified as a 
     marriage and family therapist in such State.
       ``(3) The term `mental health counselor services' means 
     services performed by a mental health counselor (as defined 
     in paragraph (4)) for the diagnosis and treatment of mental 
     illnesses which the mental health counselor is legally 
     authorized to perform under State law (or the State 
     regulatory mechanism provided by the State law) of the State 
     in which such services are performed, as would otherwise be 
     covered if furnished by a physician or as incident to a 
     physician's professional service, but only if no facility or 
     other provider charges or is paid any amounts with respect to 
     the furnishing of such services.
       ``(4) The term `mental health counselor' means an 
     individual who--
       ``(A) possesses a master's or doctor's degree in mental 
     health counseling or a related field;
       ``(B) after obtaining such a degree has performed at least 
     2 years of supervised mental health counselor practice; and
       ``(C) in the case of an individual performing services in a 
     State that provides for licensure or certification of mental 
     health counselors or professional counselors, is licensed or 
     certified as a mental health counselor or professional 
     counselor in such State.''.
       (3) Provision for payment under part b.--Section 
     1832(a)(2)(B) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1395k(a)(2)(B)) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new clause:
       ``(v) marriage and family therapist services (as defined in 
     section 1861(iii)(1)) and mental health counselor services 
     (as defined in section 1861(iii)(3));''.
       (4) Amount of payment.--Section 1833(a)(1) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395l(a)(1)) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``and (Z)'' and inserting ``(Z)''; and
       (B) by inserting before the semicolon at the end the 
     following: ``, and (AA) with respect to marriage and family 
     therapist services and mental health counselor services under 
     section 1861(s)(2)(GG), the amounts paid shall be 80 percent 
     of the lesser of the actual charge for the services or 75 
     percent of the amount determined for payment of a 
     psychologist under subparagraph (L)''.
       (5) Exclusion of marriage and family therapist services and 
     mental health counselor services from skilled nursing 
     facility prospective payment system.--Section 
     1888(e)(2)(A)(ii) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1395yy(e)(2)(A)(ii)) is amended by inserting ``marriage and 
     family therapist services (as defined in section 
     1861(iii)(1)), mental health counselor services (as defined 
     in section 1861(iii)(3)),'' after ``qualified psychologist 
     services,''.
       (6) Inclusion of marriage and family therapists and mental 
     health counselors as practitioners for assignment of 
     claims.--Section 1842(b)(18)(C) of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1395u(b)(18)(C)) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new clauses:
       ``(vii) A marriage and family therapist (as defined in 
     section 1861(iii)(2)).
       ``(viii) A mental health counselor (as defined in section 
     1861(iii)(4)).''.
       (b) Coverage of Certain Mental Health Services Provided in 
     Certain Settings.--
       (1) Rural health clinics and federally qualified health 
     centers.--Section 1861(aa)(1)(B) of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1395x(aa)(1)(B)) is amended by striking ``or by a 
     clinical social worker (as defined in subsection (hh)(1))'' 
     and inserting ``, by a clinical social worker (as defined in 
     subsection (hh)(1)), by a marriage and family therapist (as 
     defined in subsection (iii)(2)), or by a mental health 
     counselor (as defined in subsection (iii)(4))''.
       (2) Hospice programs.--Section 1861(dd)(2)(B)(i)(III) of 
     the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(dd)(2)(B)(i)(III)) 
     is

[[Page S1856]]

     amended by inserting ``, marriage and family therapist, or 
     mental health counselor'' after ``social worker''.
       (c) Authorization of Marriage and Family Therapists and 
     Mental Health Counselors To Develop Discharge Plans for Post-
     Hospital Services.--Section 1861(ee)(2)(G) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(ee)(2)(G)) is amended by 
     inserting ``, including a marriage and family therapist and a 
     mental health counselor who meets qualification standards 
     established by the Secretary'' before the period at the end.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply with respect to services furnished on or after 
     January 1, 2014
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. MURKOWSKI:
  S. 564. A bill to amend the Federal Power Act to remove the authority 
of the Federal Energy Commission to collect land use fees for land that 
has been sold, exchanged, or otherwise transferred from Federal 
ownership but that is subject to a power site reservation; to the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, we often hear refrains of the need to 
make government policies more fair, clear, or simple--especially when 
these policies involve the collection of fees or taxes. Today I rise to 
introduce legislation to fix an inherently unfair policy by prohibiting 
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission from charging land-use fees 
for hydropower projects that are no longer located on Federal land.
  FERC is responsible for licensing private, municipal and state 
hydropower projects. Pursuant to the Federal Power Act, the Commission 
is authorized to collect fees from project owners for those hydro 
projects located on Federal lands. The rationale behind these land-use 
fees is to recompense the United States for the ``use, occupancy, or 
enjoyment'' of its Federal lands. The Federal Government is, in some 
sense, a landlord for these types of projects, and can collect just and 
reasonable rent from its tenants. The current level of these rents is a 
separate issue but today I am focused on how a technicality in Federal 
law allows the government to continue to collect land-use fees even 
when the land at issue has been transferred out of Federal ownership. 
Under current law, if the Federal Government sold the land underneath a 
hydropower project to the operator, or transferred it into state 
ownership, FERC can continue to assess full land use fees against the 
operator. This untenable situation is like a landlord continuing to 
collect rent from a tenant even after the tenant buys the house 
outright.
  While the inherent unfairness of such a scenario is clear, the 
statutory and regulatory web that has created this snare is extremely 
complex. In addition to allowing for the collection of Federal land-use 
fees, the Federal Power Act also contains a section regarding Power 
Site Classifications, or PSCs. A PSC attaches to the land when a 
preliminary hydropower license application is made, and entitles the 
government, or its designees, to enter the associated land and develop 
a hydropower project if some other person or operation is occupying it. 
These classifications are similar to easements, in that they 
permanently attach to the title of the lands. The purpose of PSCs is to 
make sure that hydropower can be developed in the limited number of 
areas on Federal land that are suitable, and furthermore that once such 
an area is identified by a preliminary application, that the site is 
not then diverted to an alternate use.
  However, FERC has interpreted the statutory fee collection provisions 
to give these PSCs another affect that is not in keeping with this 
purpose--to charge land-use fees from existing hydropower operators in 
cases where the Federal Government no longer owns the land. In such a 
case, there is no need for a PSC to preserve the hydropower value of 
land as it is already being used for power production. Nor is the 
Federal Government somehow missing out on other beneficial uses of the 
land, because it no longer owns the land at issue.
  When I first learned of this issue, I asked FERC for a list of the 
hydropower projects for which it was collecting these PSC-based Federal 
land-use fees. I also asked the Department of the Interior, which 
maintains our Federal lands, for assistance. Unfortunately it appears 
that the government has not been diligent in keeping track of which 
projects are located on lands that have since been transferred away 
from Federal ownership as neither agency was able to produce a list of 
impacted projects.
  Consequently, my staff attempted to survey the number of affected 
projects by consulting with both the National Hydropower Association 
and the Alaska Power Association. This search identified 15 possible 
projects subject to these PSC land use fee collections--11 of which are 
located in my home State of Alaska. While some may dismiss these fees 
as being relatively minor, I can tell you that these annual Federal 
fees for land not even owned by the Federal Government can represent a 
significant hardship for my constituents.
  The bill I am introducing today would put a halt to this kind of fee 
collection. It simply says that when FERC is making fee determinations, 
it cannot take PSCs into account. Therefore, the only land that the 
Federal Government will be able to collect ``use, occupancy, and 
enjoyment'' fees for is land that it actually owns. I hope all of my 
colleagues can agree this treatment is a fair resolution of the issue 
and I ask for their support.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DURBIN:
  S. 565. A bill to provide for the safe and reliable navigation of the 
Mississippi River, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss two bills I am 
introducing--one to maintain navigation on the Mississippi River during 
extreme weather and the second, to improve the Nation's water 
infrastructure, including locks and dams on the Mississippi and 
Illinois Rivers.
  For many of us, last year's low water event on the Mississippi River 
is still fresh in our minds. We came close to economic catastrophe when 
ongoing drought conditions in the Midwest led to the lowest water 
levels seen on the Mississippi River since World War II and threatened 
to disrupt the movement of billions of dollars in goods on the river. 
At the height of the crisis at the end of 2012, Waterways Council and 
the American Waterways Operators estimated that up to $7 billion in 
goods could be effected by a river closure from December to January.
  The worst conditions for navigation were near Thebes, IL, in a 
stretch of river referred to as the Middle Mississippi. It begins at 
the confluence of the Missouri River and ends at Cairo, IL where the 
Ohio and Mississippi Rivers merge. The natural bends and twists of the 
river here combined with naturally occurring rock formations on the 
river bed make this stretch particularly difficult to navigate during 
periods of extreme low water. To pass, barges were forced to carry 
lighter loads than normal, reducing efficiency and costing them money.
  Only through better than expected rainfall, Congress pushing the Army 
Corps to expedite removal of rock pinnacles at Thebes, and some 
creative reservoir management was the river able to stay open and the 
worst case scenarios able to be avoided this time. For the Corps' part, 
it was an amazing fete and they should be commended for their 
successful efforts.
  But we know from Hurricane Katrina to Sandy, from severe flooding on 
the Mississippi River in 2011 to the historic low water in 2012, 
extreme weather seems to be the new normal--becoming more frequent and 
more severe.
  The Mississippi River Navigation Sustainment Act seeks to make 
government and commercial navigation users better prepared for the next 
extreme weather event that threatens navigation. I am pleased that 
Representatives Bill Enyart and Rodney Davis are introducing companion 
legislation in the House.
  The bill authorizes the Corps to conduct a study to better coordinate 
management of the entire Mississippi River Basin during periods of 
extreme weather. This will ensure that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
takes into account the effect the entire basin has on navigation and 
flood control efforts on the Mississippi River.
  The Mississippi River Basin is the third largest watershed in the 
world and covers more than 40 percent of the contiguous United States. 
It doesn't take a PhD in hydrology to know that what happens on other 
systems in the

[[Page S1857]]

watershed affects the Mississippi River and activities on it.
  This bill will also improve river forecasting capabilities through 
the increased use of tools like sedimentation ranges and the deployment 
of additional automated river gages on he Mississippi and its 
tributaries. During the latest low water event, many of the manual 
gages--sometimes literally lines painted on bridges--became unusable 
because the water was so low. lmproving the ability to accurately 
forecast and provide information on current river conditions will help 
barge operators and shippers who have to make long term business 
decisions based on this information. Operators leaving Minnesota need 
to know that when they get to Thebes, river conditions will allow them 
to pass.
  The bill will also provide flexibility to the Army Corps to conduct 
certain operations outside of the authorized channel if such action is 
deemed necessary to maintaining commercial navigation. This authority 
would be used to maintain access to loading docks and other critical 
infrastructure during periods of low water. In addition, it will allow 
the Corps to better assist the Coast Guard in managing traffic on the 
river during low water events by providing areas for barge operators to 
moor their vessels farther away from the navigation channel, leading to 
increased safety and greater ability to keep the navigation channel 
clear.
  Finally, recognizing that the Mississippi River is a vital natural 
resource, this bill will create an environmental pilot program in the 
Middle Mississippi River. This will give the Army Corps the authority 
to restore and protect fish and wildlife habitat in this portion of the 
river while conducting activities to maintain navigation.
  Also key to maintaining navigation and commerce on the Mississippi 
and other inland waterways, is continued investment in water 
infrastructure.
  For example, the locks and dams on the upper Mississippi River and 
Illinois Rivers, built in the 30's and 40's, are aging, making the risk 
of failure an ever increasing prospect. In addition, the lock chambers 
are too small to accommodate today's standard barge configuration 
helping lead to an average delay of more than 4 hours for passing 
vessels.
  That is why I worked with my colleagues in Missouri and Iowa in the 
2007 Water Resources and Development Act to authorize the Navigation 
and Ecosystem Sustainability Program which would expand and modernize 
these locks while restoring the ecosystem on the Upper Mississippi.
  Modernizing these locks means safer, more reliable, and drastically 
more efficient navigation. Operators and shippers alike would benefit--
barge companies could maximize efficiency while Illinois farmers and 
others could reliably get their products to market.
  Unfortunately, under current project delivery processes and Federal 
fiscal realities, the first benefits of this modernization are not 
expected to be felt by the navigation industry before 2047. And that 
was before sequestration. Between sequestration and the continuing 
resolution being debates on the Senate floor now, the Corps' 
construction budget for fiscal year 13 would be cut by approximately 
$80 million. Even before all of that, the Corps estimated a project 
backlog of approximately $60 billion.
  It is clear we need a new model--one that speeds up the process of 
planning and constructing these projects in the face of an often slow 
bureaucratic process and brings to the table greater private investment 
while the Federal Government is cutting back.
  That is what Senator Kirk and I are proposing with the Water 
Infrastructure Now Public-Private Partnership Act. I am proud that 
Representatives Bustos and Davis have introduced companion legislation 
in the House.
  The bill will create a pilot program to allow the Army Corps of 
Engineers to enter into agreements with non-federal partners using new 
and creative models to finance and construct up to 15 previously-
authorized flood damage reduction, hurricane and storm damage 
reduction, and navigation projects.
  I am hopeful that this program will provide a way to maintain our 
investments in important water infrastructure projects even as we face 
severe fiscal restraints by creating a greater opportunity for private 
interests to come to the table.
  At the same time, the bill would take care to protect previous 
taxpayer investments by prohibiting any privatization of Federal assets 
and requiring a study to show that any proposed agreement would 
actually provide a public benefit.
  For many of these long-stalled, large scale infrastructure projects, 
like the Locks and Dams on the Mississippi and Illinois Rivers, this 
common sense bill could provide a way forward.
  Together, the Mississippi River Navigation Sustainment Act and the 
Water Infrastructure Now Public-Private Partnership Act, represent 
positive steps forward in the effort to maintain the economic viability 
of the Mississippi River and protect our inland waterway system against 
threats from extreme weather and aging infrastructure. I hope my 
colleagues will join me in cosponsoring these common sense measures.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bills be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bills was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 565

       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 ``Mississippi River Navigation 
     Sustainment Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) the Mississippi River is the largest, most famous river 
     in the United States and a vital natural resource;
       (2) the Mississippi River Basin is the third largest 
     watershed in the world, covering more than 1,000,000 square 
     miles and approximately 40 percent of the continental United 
     States;
       (3) the rivers, tributaries, and reservoirs that make up 
     the Mississippi River Basin operate naturally as a system and 
     any attempt to operate projects within the Mississippi River 
     Basin by mankind should take this fact into consideration;
       (4) the Mississippi River is the backbone of the inland 
     waterway system of the United States and a crucial artery for 
     the movement of goods;
       (5) each year millions of tons of commodities, including 
     grain, coal, petroleum, and chemicals, representing billions 
     of dollars are transported on the Mississippi River by barge;
       (6) the Mississippi River is home to some of the busiest 
     commercial ports in the United States, including the Port of 
     New Orleans and the Port of St. Louis;
       (7) safe and reliable navigation of the Mississippi River 
     is vital to the national economy;
       (8) extreme weather events pose challenges to navigation 
     and life along the Mississippi River and are likely to become 
     more severe and more frequent in the coming years, as 
     evidenced by the devastating floods along the Mississippi 
     River in 2011 and the near historic low water levels seen on 
     the same stretch of the Mississippi River in the winter of 
     2012-2013;
       (9) the American Waterways Operators and the Waterways 
     Council, Incorporated have estimated that a disruption of 
     navigation on the Mississippi River due to low water levels 
     between December 2012 and January 2013 would have negatively 
     impacted 20,000 jobs and $7,000,000,000 in cargo;
       (10) the Regulating Works Program of the St. Louis District 
     of the Corps of Engineers is critical to maintaining 
     navigation on the middle Mississippi River during extreme 
     weather events and should receive continued Federal financial 
     assistance and support; and
       (11) the Federal Government, commercial users, and others 
     have a shared responsibility to take steps to maintain the 
     critical flow of goods on the Mississippi River during 
     extreme weather events.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       (a) Extreme Weather.--The term ``extreme weather'' means--
       (1) severe flooding and drought conditions that lead to 
     above or below average water levels; or
       (2) other severe weather events that threaten personal 
     safety, property, and navigation on the inland waterways of 
     the United States.
       (b) Greater Mississippi River Basin.--The term ``greater 
     Mississippi River Basin'' means the area covered by 
     hydrologic units 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, and 11, as identified by the 
     United States Geological Survey as of the date of enactment 
     of this Act.
       (c) Lower Mississippi River.--The term ``lower Mississippi 
     River'' means the portion of the Mississippi River that 
     begins at the confluence of the Ohio River and flows to the 
     Gulf of Mexico.
       (d) Middle Mississippi River.--The term ``middle 
     Mississippi River'' means the portion of the Mississippi 
     River that begins at the confluence of the Missouri River and 
     flows to the lower Mississippi River.
       (e) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers.

[[Page S1858]]

     SEC. 4. GREATER MISSISSIPPI RIVER BASIN EXTREME WEATHER 
                   MANAGEMENT STUDY.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall carry out a study of 
     the Mississippi River Basin--
       (1) to improve the coordinated and comprehensive management 
     of water resource projects in the greater Mississippi River 
     Basin relating to extreme weather conditions; and
       (2) to evaluate the feasibility of any modifications to 
     those water resource projects and develop new water resource 
     projects to improve the reliability of navigation and more 
     effectively reduce flood risk.
       (b) Contents.--The study shall--
       (1) identify any Federal actions necessary to prevent and 
     mitigate the impacts of extreme weather, including changes to 
     authorized channel dimensions, operational procedures of 
     locks and dams, and reservoir management within the 
     Mississippi River Basin;
       (2) evaluate the effect on navigation and flood risk 
     management to the Mississippi River of all upstream rivers 
     and tributaries, especially the confluence of the Illinois 
     River, Missouri River, and Ohio River;
       (3) identify and make recommendations to remedy challenges 
     to the Corps of Engineers presented by extreme weather, 
     including river access, in carrying out its mission to 
     maintain safe, reliable navigation; and
       (4) identify and locate natural or other potential 
     impediments to maintaining navigation on the middle and lower 
     Mississippi River during periods of low water, including 
     existing industrial pipeline crossings.
       (c) Consultation and Use of Existing Data.--In carrying out 
     the study, the Secretary shall--
       (1) consult with appropriate committees of Congress, 
     Federal, State, tribal, and local agencies, environmental 
     interests, river navigation industry representatives, other 
     shipping and business interests, organized labor, and 
     nongovernmental organizations;
       (2) to the maximum extent practicable, use data in 
     existence on the date of enactment of this Act; and
       (3) incorporate lessons learned and best practices 
     developed as a result of past extreme weather events, 
     including major floods and the successful effort to maintain 
     navigation during the near historic low water levels on the 
     Mississippi River during the winter of 2012-2013.
       (d) Cost-sharing.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     carrying out the study under this section shall be 100 
     percent.
       (e) Report.--Not later than 3 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress 
     a report on the study carried out under this section.

     SEC. 5. MISSISSIPPI RIVER FORECASTING IMPROVEMENTS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary, in consultation with the 
     Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is 
     operating, the Director of the United States Geological 
     Survey, the Administrator of the National Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Administration, and the Director of the National 
     Weather Service, as applicable, shall improve forecasting on 
     the Mississippi River by--
       (1) updating forecasting technology deployed on the 
     Mississippi River and its tributaries through--
       (A) the construction of additional automated river gages;
       (B) the rehabilitation of existing automated and manual 
     river gages; and
       (C) the replacement of manual river gages with automated 
     gages, as the Secretary determines to be necessary;
       (2) constructing additional sedimentation ranges on the 
     Mississippi River and its tributaries; and
       (3) deploying additional automatic identification system 
     base stations at river gage sites.
       (b) Prioritization.--In carrying out this section, the 
     Secretary shall prioritize the sections of the Mississippi 
     River on which additional and more reliable information would 
     have the greatest impact on maintaining navigation on the 
     Mississippi River.
       (c) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress 
     a report on the activities carried out by the Secretary under 
     this section.

     SEC. 6. CORPS OF ENGINEERS FLEXIBILITY IN MAINTAINING 
                   NAVIGATION.

       (a) In General.--If the Secretary determines it to be 
     critical to maintaining safe and reliable navigation, the 
     Secretary--
       (1) in consultation with the department in which the Coast 
     Guard is operating, may construct ingress and egress paths to 
     docks, loading facilities, fleeting areas, and other critical 
     locations outside of the authorized navigation channel on the 
     Mississippi River; and
       (2) operate and maintain, through dredging and construction 
     of river training structures, ingress and egress paths to 
     loading docks and fleeting areas outside of the authorized 
     navigation channel on the Mississippi River.
       (b) Mitigation.--The Secretary may mitigate through 
     dredging any incidental impacts to loading or fleeting areas 
     outside of the authorized navigation channel on the 
     Mississippi River that result from operation and maintenance 
     of the authorized channel.

     SEC. 7. MIDDLE MISSISSIPPI RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL PILOT PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--In accordance with the project for 
     navigation, Mississippi River between the Ohio and Missouri 
     Rivers (Regulating Works), Missouri and Illinois, authorized 
     by the Act of June 25, 1910 (36 Stat. 631, chapter 382) 
     (commonly known as the ``River and Harbor Act of 1910''), the 
     Act of January 1, 1927 (44 Stat. 1010, chapter 47) (commonly 
     known as the ``River and Harbor Act of 1927''), and the Act 
     of July 3, 1930 (46 Stat. 918, chapter 847), the Secretary 
     shall carry out for a period of not less than 10 years, a 
     pilot program to restore and protect fish and wildlife 
     habitat in the middle Mississippi River.
       (b) Authorized Activities.--
       (1) In general.--As part of the pilot program carried out 
     under subsection (a), the Secretary shall conduct any 
     activities that are necessary to improve navigation through 
     the project while restoring and protecting fish and wildlife 
     habitat in the middle Mississippi River.
       (2) Inclusions.--Activities authorized under paragraph (1) 
     shall include--
       (A) the modification of navigation training structures;
       (B) the modification and creation of side channels;
       (C) the modification and creation of islands;
       (D) any studies and analyses necessary to develop adaptive 
     management principles; and
       (E) the acquisition from willing sellers of any land 
     associated with a riparian corridor needed to carry out the 
     goals of the pilot program.
       (c) Cost-sharing Requirement.--The cost-sharing 
     requirements under the provisions of law described in 
     subsection (a) for the project described in that subsection 
     shall apply to any activities carried out under this section.

     SEC. 8. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     Act such sums as are necessary.

                                 S. 566

       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 ``Water Infrastructure Now 
     Public-Private Partnership Act'' or the ``WIN P3 Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) investment in water infrastructure is critical to 
     protecting property and personal safety through flood, 
     hurricane, and storm damage reduction activities;
       (2) investment in infrastructure on the inland waterways of 
     the United States is critical to the economy of the United 
     States through the maintenance of safe, reliable, and 
     efficient navigation for recreation and the movement of 
     billions of dollars in goods each year;
       (3) fiscal challenges facing Federal, State, local, and 
     tribal governments require new and innovative financing 
     structures to continue robust investment in public water 
     infrastructure;
       (4) under existing fiscal restraints and project delivery 
     processes, large-scale water infrastructure projects like the 
     lock and dam modernization on the upper Mississippi River and 
     Illinois River will take decades to complete, with benefits 
     for the lock modernization not expected to be realized until 
     2047;
       (5) the Corps of Engineers has an estimated backlog of more 
     than $60,000,000,000 in outstanding projects; and
       (6) in developing innovative financing options for water 
     infrastructure projects, any prior public investment in 
     projects must be protected.

     SEC. 3. WATER INFRASTRUCTURE NOW PILOT PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Army, acting through 
     the Chief of Engineers, shall establish a pilot program to 
     evaluate the cost-effectiveness and project delivery 
     efficiency of allowing non-Federal interests to carry out 
     authorized flood damage reduction, hurricane and storm damage 
     reduction, and navigation projects.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of the pilot program are--
       (1) to identify project delivery and cost-saving 
     alternatives that reduce the backlog of authorized Corps of 
     Engineers projects;
       (2) to evaluate the technical, financial, and 
     organizational efficiencies of a non-Federal interest 
     carrying out the design, execution, management, and 
     construction of 1 or more projects; and
       (3) to evaluate alternatives for the decentralization of 
     the project planning, management, and operational decision-
     making processes of the Corps of Engineers.
       (c) Administration.--
       (1) In general.--In carrying out the pilot program, the 
     Secretary shall--
       (A) identify a total of not more than 15 flood damage 
     reduction, hurricane and storm damage reduction, and 
     navigation projects, including levees, floodwalls, flood 
     control channels, water control structures, and navigation 
     locks and channels, authorized for construction;
       (B) notify the Committee on Environment and Public Works of 
     the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure of the House of Representatives upon the 
     identification of each project under the pilot program;
       (C) in consultation with the non-Federal interest, develop 
     a detailed project management plan for each identified 
     project that outlines the scope, budget, design, and 
     construction resource requirements necessary for the non-
     Federal interest to execute the

[[Page S1859]]

     project, or a separable element of the project;
       (D) on the request of the non-Federal interest, enter into 
     a project partnership agreement with the non-Federal interest 
     for the non-Federal interest to provide full project 
     management control for construction of the project, or a 
     separable element of the project, in accordance with plans 
     approved by the Secretary;
       (E) following execution of the project partnership 
     agreement, transfer to the non-Federal interest to carry out 
     construction of the project, or a separable element of the 
     project--
       (i) if applicable, the balance of the unobligated amounts 
     appropriated for the project, except that the Secretary shall 
     retain sufficient amounts for the Corps of Engineers to carry 
     out any responsibilities of the Corps of Engineers relating 
     to the project and pilot program; and
       (ii) additional amounts, as determined by the Secretary, 
     from amounts made available under section 5, except that the 
     total amount transferred to the non-Federal interest shall 
     not exceed the estimate of the Federal share of the cost of 
     construction, including any required design; and
       (F) regularly monitor and audit each project being 
     constructed by a non-Federal interest under this section to 
     ensure that the construction activities are carried out in 
     compliance with the plans approved by the Secretary and that 
     the construction costs are reasonable.
       (2) Restrictions.--Of the projects identified by the 
     Secretary--
       (A) not more than 12 projects shall--
       (i) have received Federal funds and experienced delays or 
     missed scheduled deadlines in the 5 fiscal years prior to the 
     date of enactment of this Act; or
       (ii) for more than 2 consecutive fiscal years, have an 
     unobligated funding balance for that project in the Corps of 
     Engineers construction account; and
       (B) not more than 3 projects shall--
       (i) have not received Federal funding for recapitalization 
     and modernization in the period beginning on the date on 
     which the project was authorized and ending on the date of 
     enactment of this Act; and
       (ii) be, in the determination of the Secretary, significant 
     to the national economy as a result of the impact the project 
     would have on the national transportation of goods.
       (3) Technical assistance.--On the request of a non-Federal 
     interest, the Secretary may provide technical assistance to 
     the non-Federal interest, if the non-Federal interest 
     contracts with the Secretary for the technical assistance and 
     compensates the Secretary for the technical assistance, 
     relating to--
       (A) any study, engineering activity, and design activity 
     for construction carried out by the non-Federal interest 
     under this section; and
       (B) obtaining any permits necessary for the project.
       (4) Waivers.--
       (A) In general.--For any project included in the pilot 
     program, the Secretary may waive or modify any applicable 
     Federal regulations for that project if the Secretary 
     determines that such a waiver would provide public and 
     financial benefits, including expediting project delivery and 
     enhancing efficiency while maintaining safety.
       (B) Notification.--The Secretary shall notify the Committee 
     on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House 
     of Representatives each time the Secretary issues a waiver or 
     modification under subparagraph (A).
       (d) Public Benefit Study.--
       (1) In general.--Before entering into a project partnership 
     agreement under this section, the Secretary shall enter into 
     an arrangement with an independent third party to conduct an 
     assessment of whether, and provide justification that, the 
     proposed partnership agreement would represent a better 
     public and financial benefit than a similar transaction using 
     public funding or financing.
       (2) Contents.--The study under paragraph (1) shall--
       (A) be completed by the third party in a timely manner and 
     in a period of not more than 90 days;
       (B) take into consideration any supporting materials and 
     data submitted by the Secretary, the nongovernmental party to 
     the proposed project partnership agreement, and other 
     stakeholders; and
       (C) recommend whether the project partnership agreement 
     will be in the public interest by determining whether the 
     agreement will provide public and financial benefits, 
     including expedited project delivery and savings to 
     taxpayers.
       (e) Cost Share.--Nothing in this Act affects the cost-
     sharing requirement applicable on the day before the date of 
     enactment of this Act to a project carried out under this 
     Act.
       (f) Report.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the 
     Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and 
     the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 
     House of Representatives a report detailing the results of 
     the pilot program carried out under this section, including 
     any recommendations of the Secretary concerning whether the 
     program or any component of the program should be implemented 
     on a national basis.
       (2) Update.--Not later than 5 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the 
     Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and 
     the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 
     House of Representatives an update of the report described in 
     paragraph (1).
       (g) Administration.--All laws (including regulations) that 
     would apply to the Secretary if the Secretary were carrying 
     out the project shall apply to a non-Federal interest 
     carrying out a project under this Act.
       (h) Termination of Authority.--The authority to commence a 
     project under this Act terminates on the date that is 5 years 
     after the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 4. APPLICABILITY.

       Nothing in this Act authorizes or permits the privatization 
     of any Federal asset.

     SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to 
     carry out this Act such sums as are necessary.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KIRK (for himself and Mr. Durbin):
  S. 571. A bill to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to 
establish a deadline for restricting sewage dumping into the Great 
Lakes and to fund programs and activities for improving wastewater 
discharges into the Great Lakes; to the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works.
  Mr. KIRK. Mr. President, today I rise to join with Senator Durbin to 
introduce the Great Lakes Water Protection Act. This bipartisan 
legislation would set a date certain to end sewage dumping in the Great 
Lakes, America's largest source of surface fresh water. The Great Lakes 
are home to more than 3,500 species of plants and animals and are the 
source of drinking water for more than 30 million Americans. It is time 
that we put a stop to the poisoning of our water supply. Cities along 
the Great Lakes must become environmental stewards of our country's 
most precious freshwater ecosystem and take action to reverse the trend 
of discharging sewage into the Great Lakes.
  The Great Lakes Water Protection Act gives cities until 2033 to build 
the necessary infrastructure to prevent sewage dumping in the Great 
Lakes. Those who violate the EPA's sewage dumping regulations after 
this deadline will be subject to fines up to $100,000 for every day 
they are in violation. These fines would be directed into a Great Lakes 
Clean-Up Fund within the Clean Water State Revolving Fund to be used 
for wastewater treatment options, with a special focus on greener 
solutions such as habitat protection and wetland restoration.
  Many cities along the Great Lakes Basin lack the critical 
infrastructure needed to divert sewage overflows during times of heavy 
rainfall. Some reports estimate that as much as 24 billion gallons of 
combined sewage and storm water runoff are dumped into the Great Lakes 
every year. Loaded with a mix of bacteria and other pathogens, 
untreated sewage poses a serious threat to public health and safety and 
is one of the leading causes of beach closings and contamination 
advisories at Great Lakes beaches.
  According to data collected over the past 5 years by the Illinois 
Department of Public Health, it is not uncommon to see the total number 
of beach closures and contamination advisories across the Lake Michigan 
beaches in our State exceed 500 in a single swim season. These events 
threaten the health of our children and families and cost local 
economies millions. A University of Chicago study concluded the 
closings due to high levels of harmful pathogens like E.coli cost the 
local economy about $2.4 million each year in lost revenue.
  Protecting the Great Lakes is one of my top priorities in Congress. 
As an original cosponsor of the Great Lakes Restoration Act, I support 
a broad approach to address some of the greatest challenges to the 
Great Lakes ecosystem and the economic growth of the region. However, 
while we continue to push for comprehensive Great Lakes restoration, we 
must also move forward with tailored approaches to tackle specific 
problems.
  I am proud to introduce this important legislation to end the 
disastrous practice of releasing billions of gallons of untreated 
sewage into our Nation's most abundant source of freshwater. It is my 
hope that my colleagues will work with me to to preserve the Great 
Lakes and ensure this source of safe drinking water is safeguarded for 
future generations.

[[Page S1860]]

  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. 571

       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 ``Great Lakes Water Protection 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON SEWAGE DUMPING INTO THE GREAT LAKES.

       Section 402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 
     U.S.C. 1342) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(s) Prohibition on Sewage Dumping Into the Great Lakes.--
       ``(1) Definitions.--In this subsection:
       ``(A) Bypass.--The term `bypass' means an intentional 
     diversion of waste streams to bypass any portion of a 
     treatment facility which results in a discharge into the 
     Great Lakes.
       ``(B) Discharge.--
       ``(i) In general.--The term `discharge' means a direct or 
     indirect discharge of untreated sewage or partially treated 
     sewage from a treatment works into the Great Lakes.
       ``(ii) Inclusions.--The term `discharge' includes a bypass 
     and a combined sewer overflow.
       ``(C) Great lakes.--The term `Great Lakes' has the meaning 
     given the term in section 118(a)(3).
       ``(D) Partially treated sewage.--The term `partially 
     treated sewage' means any sewage, sewage and storm water, or 
     sewage and wastewater, from domestic or industrial sources 
     that--
       ``(i) is not treated to national secondary treatment 
     standards for wastewater; or
       ``(ii) is treated to a level less than the level required 
     by the applicable national pollutant discharge elimination 
     system permit.
       ``(E) Treatment facility.--The term `treatment facility' 
     includes all wastewater treatment units used by a publicly 
     owned treatment works to meet secondary treatment standards 
     or higher, as required to attain water quality standards, 
     under any operating conditions.
       ``(F) Treatment works.--The term `treatment works' has the 
     meaning given the term in section 212.
       ``(2) Prohibition.--A publicly owned treatment works is 
     prohibited from performing a bypass unless--
       ``(A)(i) the bypass is unavoidable to prevent loss of life, 
     personal injury, or severe property damage;
       ``(ii) there is not a feasible alternative to the bypass, 
     such as the use of auxiliary treatment facilities, retention 
     of untreated wastes, or maintenance during normal periods of 
     equipment downtime; and
       ``(iii) the treatment works provides notice of the bypass 
     in accordance with this subsection; or
       ``(B) the bypass does not cause effluent limitations to be 
     exceeded, and the bypass is for essential maintenance to 
     ensure efficient operation of the treatment facility.
       ``(3) Limitation.--The requirement of paragraph (2)(A)(ii) 
     is not satisfied if--
       ``(A) adequate back-up equipment should have been installed 
     in the exercise of reasonable engineering judgment to prevent 
     the bypass; and
       ``(B) the bypass occurred during normal periods of 
     equipment downtime or preventive maintenance.
       ``(4) Immediate notice requirements.--
       ``(A) In general.--A publicly owned treatment works shall 
     provide to the entities described in subparagraph (B)--
       ``(i) for any anticipated discharge, prior notice of that 
     discharge; and
       ``(ii) for any unanticipated discharge, as soon as 
     practicable, but not later than--

       ``(I) for a treatment works with an automated detection 
     system, 2 hours after the discharge begins; and
       ``(II) for a treatment works without an automated detection 
     system, 12 hours after the discharge begins.

       ``(B) Notice.--The entities referred to in subparagraph (A) 
     are--
       ``(i) the Administrator or, in the case of a State that has 
     a permit program approved under this section, the State;
       ``(ii) each local health department or, if a local health 
     department does not exist, the State health department;
       ``(iii) the municipality in which the discharge occurred 
     and each municipality with jurisdiction over waters that may 
     be affected by the discharge;
       ``(iv) a daily newspaper of general circulation in each 
     county in which a municipality described in clause (iii) is 
     located; and
       ``(v) the general public through a prominent announcement 
     on a publicly accessible Internet site of the treatment 
     works.
       ``(C) Contents.--The notice under subparagraph (A) shall 
     include a description of--
       ``(i) the volume and state of treatment of the discharge;
       ``(ii) the date and time of the discharge;
       ``(iii) the expected duration of the discharge;
       ``(iv) the steps being taken to contain the discharge, 
     except for a discharge that is a wet weather combined sewer 
     overflow discharge;
       ``(v) the location of the discharge, with the maximum level 
     of specificity practicable; and
       ``(vi) the cause for the discharge.
       ``(5) Follow-up notice requirements.--Each publicly owned 
     treatment works that provides notice under paragraph (4)(B) 
     shall provide to the Administrator (or to the State in the 
     case of a State that has a permit program approved under this 
     section), not later than 5 days after the date on which the 
     publicly owned treatment works provides initial notice, a 
     follow-up notice containing--
       ``(A) a more full description of the cause of the 
     discharge;
       ``(B) the reason for the discharge;
       ``(C) the period of discharge, including the exact dates 
     and times;
       ``(D) if the discharge has not been corrected, the 
     anticipated time the discharge is expected to continue;
       ``(E) the volume of the discharge resulting from the 
     bypass;
       ``(F) a description of any public access areas that has or 
     may be impacted by the bypass; and
       ``(G) steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and 
     prevent reoccurrence of the discharge.
       ``(6) Public availability of notices.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not later than 48 hours after providing 
     or receiving a follow-up notice under paragraph (5), as 
     applicable, a publicly owned treatment works and the 
     Administrator (or the State, in the case of a State that has 
     a permit program approved under this section) shall each post 
     the follow-up notice on a publicly accessible, searchable 
     database on the Internet.
       ``(B) Annual publication.--The Administrator (or the State, 
     in the case of a State that has a permit program approved 
     under this section) shall annually publish and make available 
     to the public a list of each of the treatment works from 
     which the Administrator or the State, as applicable, received 
     a follow-up notice under paragraph (5).
       ``(7) Sewage blending.--Bypasses prohibited by this section 
     include bypasses resulting in discharges from a publicly 
     owned treatment works that consist of effluent routed around 
     treatment units and thereafter blended together with effluent 
     from treatment units prior to discharge.
       ``(8) Implementation.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     date of enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall 
     establish procedures to ensure that permits issued under this 
     section (or under a State permit program approved under this 
     section) to a publicly owned treatment works include 
     requirements to implement this subsection.
       ``(9) Increase in maximum civil penalty for violations 
     occurring after january 1, 2033.--Notwithstanding section 
     309, in the case of a violation of this subsection occurring 
     on or after January 1, 2033, or any violation of a permit 
     limitation or condition implementing this subsection 
     occurring after that date, the maximum civil penalty that 
     shall be assessed for the violation shall be $100,000 per day 
     for each day the violation occurs.
       ``(10) Applicability.--This subsection shall apply to a 
     bypass occurring after the last day of the 1-year period 
     beginning on the date of enactment of this subsection.''.

     SEC. 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF GREAT LAKES CLEANUP FUND.

       (a) In General.--Title V of the Federal Water Pollution 
     Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating section 519 (33 U.S.C. 1251 note) as 
     section 520; and
       (2) by inserting after section 518 (33 U.S.C. 1377) the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 519. ESTABLISHMENT OF GREAT LAKES CLEANUP FUND.

       ``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Fund.--The term `Fund' means the Great Lakes Cleanup 
     Fund established by subsection (b).
       ``(2) Great lakes; great lakes states.--The terms `Great 
     Lakes' and `Great Lakes States' have the meanings given the 
     terms in section 118(a)(3).
       ``(b) Establishment of Fund.--There is established in the 
     Treasury of the United States a trust fund to be known as the 
     `Great Lakes Cleanup Fund' (referred to in this section as 
     the `Fund').
       ``(c) Transfers to Fund.--Effective January 1, 2033, there 
     are authorized to be appropriated to the Fund amounts 
     equivalent to the penalties collected for violations of 
     section 402(s).
       ``(d) Administration of Fund.--The Administrator shall 
     administer the Fund.
       ``(e) Use of Funds.--The Administrator shall--
       ``(1) make the amounts in the Fund available to the Great 
     Lakes States for use in carrying out programs and activities 
     for improving wastewater discharges into the Great Lakes, 
     including habitat protection and wetland restoration; and
       ``(2) allocate those amounts among the Great Lakes States 
     based on the proportion that--
       ``(A) the amount attributable to a Great Lakes State for 
     penalties collected for violations of section 402(s); bears 
     to
       ``(B) the total amount of those penalties attributable to 
     all Great Lakes States.
       ``(f) Priority.--In selecting programs and activities to be 
     funded using amounts made available under this section, a 
     Great Lakes State shall give priority consideration to 
     programs and activities that address violations of section 
     402(s) resulting in the collection of penalties.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment to State Revolving Fund Program.--
     Section 607 of the

[[Page S1861]]

     Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1387) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``There is'' and inserting ``(a) In 
     General.--There is''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(b) Treatment of Great Lakes Cleanup Fund.--For purposes 
     of this title, amounts made available from the Great Lakes 
     Cleanup Fund under section 519 shall be treated as funds 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this title and as 
     funds made available under this title, except that the funds 
     shall be made available to the Great Lakes States in 
     accordance with section 519.''.

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, among Chicago's most treasured assets is 
Lake Michigan. The Great Lakes are among this country's most valuable 
natural resources, but the lakes face many natural and man-made 
threats. I'm pleased to join my Illinois colleague, Senator Mark Kirk, 
in introducing today the Great Lakes Water Protection Act to address 
one of those threats--municipal sewage.
  A recent report found that from January 2010 through January 2011, 7 
U.S. cities dumped a combined 18.7 billion gallons of waste water into 
the Great Lakes. Sewage and storm water discharges have been associated 
with elevated levels of bacterial pollutants. For the 40 million people 
who depend on the Great Lakes for their drinking water, that is no 
small matter.
  When bacterial counts go too high, beaches have to be closed. In 
Illinois, we have 52 public beaches along the Lake Michigan shoreline. 
People use these beaches for swimming, boating, fishing and many 
communities generate revenue from the public beaches. Every lost 
visitor to a public beach costs the local economy between $20 and $36 
in revenue.
  Our legislation would quadruple fines for municipalities that dump 
raw sewage in the Great Lakes and direct the revenue from these 
penalties to projects that improve water quality. The bill also 
includes new reporting requirements to provide a more complete 
understanding of the frequency and impact of sewage dumping on this 
critical water system.
  The Great Lakes are a national treasure. Illinoisans know that. They 
want to protect Lake Michigan and they are willing to fight for the 
Lake. Three and a half years ago, when we learned that BP was planning 
to increase the pollutants it puts into Lake Michigan--the people of 
Illinois stood up and said no. Polluting our lake further is not an 
option.
  Senator Kirk and I agree. Protecting the Great Lakes is not a 
partisan issue, and this is not a partisan bill. We will work together 
to ensure that this national treasure is around for generations, 
providing drinking water, recreation and commerce for Illinois and 
other Great Lakes States.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. COLLINS (for herself, Mr. Leahy, and Mr. Carper):
  S. 573. A bill to amend title 40, United States Code, to improve 
veterans service organizations access to Federal surplus personal 
property; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Formerly 
Owned Resources for Veterans to Express Thanks for Service Act of 2013, 
also known as the FOR VETS Act of 2013. I am pleased that Senators 
Leahy and Carper have joined me in cosponsoring this bill. This bill is 
necessary to ensure that veterans' service organizations are provided 
access to federal surplus personal property as the Senate intended when 
it passed the FOR VETS Act of 2010. The FOR VETS Act of 2010 provides 
that veterans' service organizations should be categorized as eligible 
nonprofit, tax-exempt organizations that may acquire surplus personal 
property for the purposes of education or public health.
  Unfortunately, the General Services Administration, or GSA, has 
interpreted this law in the strictest of terms. In its published 
guidelines, veterans' service organizations may acquire the surplus 
property for the purposes of education or public health, but with 
minimal flexibility in what an educational or public health service may 
be. For example, acquiring a van to transport a disabled veteran to a 
doctor's appointment may not be considered an eligible use for a 
veterans' organization under current guidelines.
  The bill that we are introducing today makes the legislative 
modification necessary for GSA to carry out the original intent of the 
FOR VETS Act of 2010.
  The National Association of State Agencies for Surplus Property, 
NASASP, has identified the need for this legislation to ensure that 
veterans' service organizations are able to receive surplus equipment 
to enable them to improve their provision of critical services to our 
nation's veterans. The American Legion has said that this bill would 
enable them to better serve our veterans, their families, and the 
communities in which they live.
  Veterans' groups--whose work enhances the lives of countless veterans 
every day--should benefit from access to these goods just as other 
service organizations do. Many veterans' organizations offer career 
development and job training assistance to our nation's veterans, yet 
often lack the computer equipment needed to assist our veterans in the 
often difficult transition from military service to the civilian work 
force.
  These are just a couple of examples of the needs of veterans' service 
organizations. This bill is one way to say ``thank you'' to those 
Americans who have worn the uniform and to the families that supported 
them. In these challenging fiscal times, the need for excess federal 
property to be used for job training, rehabilitation, and other 
important assistance to our veterans is greater now than ever. I am 
proud to introduce this legislation with Senators Leahy and Carper, and 
I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this bill through 
the Senate and into law.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. GRASSLEY:
  S. 575. A bill to amend title 28, United States Code, to provide an 
Inspector General for the judicial branch, and for other purposes; to 
the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing the Judicial 
Transparency and Ethics Enhancement Act, a bill that would establish 
within the judicial branch an Office of Inspector General to assist the 
Judiciary with its ethical obligations as well as to ensure taxpayer 
dollars are not lost to waste, fraud, or abuse. Representative 
Sensenbrenner is introducing the companion bill in the House. This bill 
will help make sure that our Federal judicial system remains free of 
corruption, bias, and hypocrisy.
  The facts demonstrate that the institution of the Inspector General 
has been crucial in detecting, exposing and deterring problems within 
our government. The job of the Inspector General is to be the first 
line of defense against fraud, waste and abuse. In collaboration with 
whistleblowers, Inspectors General have been extremely effective in 
their efforts to expose and help correct these wrongs.
  That is why, during my 30 years in Congress I have worked hard to 
strengthen the oversight role of Inspectors General throughout the 
Federal Government. I have come to rely on IGs and whistleblowers to 
ensure that our tax dollars are spent according to the letter and 
spirit of the law. When that doesn't happen, we in Congress need to 
know about it and take corrective action.
  During the past fiscal year, Congress appropriated nearly $7 billion 
in taxpayer money to the Federal judiciary. To put this in context, the 
National Science Foundation, the Small Business Administration, and the 
Corporation for National and Community Service each received a similar 
or less amount than the judiciary. Yet all three of these entities have 
an Office of Inspector General. If we in Congress believed that these 
entities could use an Inspector General, I cannot see why the Judiciary 
wouldn't deserve the same assistance.
  But there is an additional reason why the Judiciary needs an 
Inspector General. The fact remains that the current practice of self-
regulation of judges with respect to ethics and the judicial code of 
conduct has time and time again proven inadequate. I would point out to 
my colleagues two recent events here in the Senate that support this 
conclusion.
  In the past 5 years, the Senate received articles of impeachment for 
not one but two Federal judges. In the first case, former Judge Samuel 
B. Kent, although charged with multiple counts of sexual assault, pled 
guilty to obstruction of justice. Who did he obstruct?

[[Page S1862]]

Who did he lie to? He did this to his fellow judges, who were assembled 
to investigate the allegations of his obscene and criminal behavior. 
But it took a criminal investigation by the Department of Justice to 
uncover his false statements to his colleagues as well as substantiate 
the horrendous claims made against him.
  In the second case, the Senate found that former Judge G. Thomas 
Porteous, Jr. was guilty of a number of things, including accepting 
money from attorneys who had a case pending before him in his court and 
committing perjury by falsifying his name on bankruptcy filings. Once 
again, this Judge's misbehavior came to light through a Federal 
criminal investigation, after which another judicial committee had to 
be organized to investigate their fellow judge.
  What's more, in each case the disgraced judge tried to game the 
system in order to retain his $174,000 salary. Rather than resign their 
commissions, each first tried to claim disability status what would 
allow each to continue to receive payment, even if in prison. Then both 
played chicken with Congress daring us to strip them of their pay by 
impeaching and convicting them. I am pleased that we put our foot down 
and said ``No.''
  The judicial misconduct committees are simply inadequate for 
investigating claims of misconduct. These judges are not given the 
resources necessary nor do they have the expertise in conducting a 
complete investigation. They cannot, despite their best intentions, 
remove the inherent biases that develop from working closely with other 
judges. This duty would be better suited to an independent entity 
within the Judiciary.
  The Judicial Transparency and Ethics Enhancement Act is the answer. 
This bill would establish an Office of Inspector General for the 
judicial branch. The IG's responsibilities would include conducting 
investigations of possible judicial misconduct, investigating waste 
fraud and abuse, and recommending changes in laws and regulations 
governing the Federal judiciary. The bill would require the IG to 
provide the Chief Justice and Congress with an annual report on its 
activities, as well as refer matters that may constitute a criminal 
violation to the Department of Justice. In addition, the bill 
establishes whistleblower protections for judicial branch employees.
  Ensuring a fair and independent judiciary is critical to our 
Constitutional system of checks and balances. Judges are supposed to 
maintain impartiality. They are supposed to be free from conflicts of 
interest. An independent watchdog for the Federal judiciary will help 
its members comply with the ethics rules and promote credibility within 
the judicial branch of government. Whistleblower protections for 
judiciary branch employees will help keep the judiciary accountable. 
The Judicial Transparency and Ethics Enhancement Act will not only 
ensure continued public confidence in our Federal courts and keep them 
beyond reproach, it will strengthen our judicial branch.
  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. 575

       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 ``Judicial Transparency and 
     Ethics Enhancement Act of 2013''.

     SEC. 2. INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR THE JUDICIAL BRANCH.

       (a) Establishment and Duties.--Part III of title 28, United 
     States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

        ``CHAPTER 60--INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR THE JUDICIAL BRANCH

``Sec.
``1021. Establishment.
``1022. Appointment, term, and removal of Inspector General.
``1023. Duties.
``1024. Powers.
``1025. Reports.
``1026. Whistleblower protection.

     ``Sec. 1021. Establishment

       ``There is established for the judicial branch of the 
     Government the Office of Inspector General for the Judicial 
     Branch (in this chapter referred to as the `Office').

     ``Sec. 1022. Appointment, term, and removal of Inspector 
       General

       ``(a) Appointment.--The head of the Office shall be the 
     Inspector General, who shall be appointed by the Chief 
     Justice of the United States after consultation with the 
     majority and minority leaders of the Senate and the Speaker 
     and minority leader of the House of Representatives.
       ``(b) Term.--The Inspector General shall serve for a term 
     of 4 years and may be reappointed by the Chief Justice of the 
     United States for any number of additional terms.
       ``(c) Removal.--The Inspector General may be removed from 
     office by the Chief Justice of the United States. The Chief 
     Justice shall communicate the reasons for any such removal to 
     both Houses of Congress.

     ``Sec. 1023. Duties

       ``With respect to the judicial branch, the Office shall--
       ``(1) conduct investigations of alleged misconduct in the 
     judicial branch (other than the United States Supreme Court) 
     under chapter 16 that may require oversight or other action 
     within the judicial branch or by Congress;
       ``(2) conduct investigations of alleged misconduct in the 
     United States Supreme Court that may require oversight or 
     other action within the judicial branch or by Congress;
       ``(3) conduct and supervise audits and investigations;
       ``(4) prevent and detect waste, fraud, and abuse; and
       ``(5) recommend changes in laws or regulations governing 
     the judicial branch.

     ``Sec. 1024. Powers

       ``(a) Powers.--In carrying out the duties of the Office, 
     the Inspector General shall have the power to--
       ``(1) make investigations and reports;
       ``(2) obtain information or assistance from any Federal, 
     State, or local governmental agency, or other entity, or unit 
     thereof, including all information kept in the course of 
     business by the Judicial Conference of the United States, the 
     judicial councils of circuits, the Administrative Office of 
     the United States Courts, and the United States Sentencing 
     Commission;
       ``(3) require, by subpoena or otherwise, the attendance and 
     testimony of such witnesses, and the production of such 
     books, records, correspondence, memoranda, papers, and 
     documents, which subpoena, in the case of contumacy or 
     refusal to obey, shall be enforceable by civil action;
       ``(4) administer to or take from any person an oath, 
     affirmation, or affidavit;
       ``(5) employ such officers and employees, subject to the 
     provisions of title 5, governing appointments in the 
     competitive service, and the provisions of chapter 51 and 
     subchapter III of chapter 53 of such title relating to 
     classification and General Schedule pay rates;
       ``(6) obtain services as authorized by section 3109 of 
     title 5 at daily rates not to exceed the equivalent rate for 
     a position at level IV of the Executive Schedule under 
     section 5315 of such title; and
       ``(7) the extent and in such amounts as may be provided in 
     advance by appropriations Acts, to enter into contracts and 
     other arrangements for audits, studies, analyses, and other 
     services with public agencies and with private persons, and 
     to make such payments as may be necessary to carry out the 
     duties of the Office.
       ``(b) Chapter 16 Matters.--The Inspector General shall not 
     commence an investigation under section 1023(1) until the 
     denial of a petition for review by the judicial council of 
     the circuit under section 352(c) of this title or upon 
     referral or certification to the Judicial Conference of the 
     United States of any matter under section 354(b) of this 
     title.
       ``(c) Limitation.--The Inspector General shall not have the 
     authority to--
       ``(1) investigate or review any matter that is directly 
     related to the merits of a decision or procedural ruling by 
     any judge, justice, or court; or
       ``(2) punish or discipline any judge, justice, or court.

     ``Sec. 1025. Reports

       ``(a) When To Be Made.--The Inspector General shall--
       ``(1) make an annual report to the Chief Justice and to 
     Congress relating to the activities of the Office; and
       ``(2) make prompt reports to the Chief Justice and to 
     Congress on matters that may require action by the Chief 
     Justice or Congress.
       ``(b) Sensitive Matter.--If a report contains sensitive 
     matter, the Inspector General may so indicate and Congress 
     may receive that report in closed session.
       ``(c) Duty To Inform Attorney General.--In carrying out the 
     duties of the Office, the Inspector General shall report 
     expeditiously to the Attorney General whenever the Inspector 
     General has reasonable grounds to believe there has been a 
     violation of Federal criminal law.

     ``Sec. 1026. Whistleblower protection

       ``(a) In General.--No officer, employee, agent, contractor, 
     or subcontractor in the judicial branch may discharge, 
     demote, threaten, suspend, harass, or in any other manner 
     discriminate against an employee in the terms and conditions 
     of employment because of any lawful act done by the employee 
     to provide information, cause information to be provided, or 
     otherwise assist in an investigation regarding any possible 
     violation of Federal law or regulation, or misconduct, by a 
     judge, justice, or any other employee in the judicial branch, 
     which may assist the Inspector General in the performance of 
     duties under this chapter.

[[Page S1863]]

       ``(b) Civil Action.--An employee injured by a violation of 
     subsection (a) may, in a civil action, obtain appropriate 
     relief.''.
       (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of 
     chapters for part III of title 28, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

``60. Inspector General for the judicial branch.............1021''.....



                          ____________________