[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''.....
____________________