[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 182 (Friday, December 20, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9106-S9108]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
  S. 1888. A bill to facilitate a land exchange involving certain 
National Forest System land in the Inyo National Forest, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Inyo 
National Forest Land Exchange Act.
  This legislation will facilitate a land exchange between the 
operators of the Mammoth Mountain Ski Area in the Eastern Sierra Nevada 
region of California and the Inyo National Forest. Enactment of this 
bill will allow the ski resort to redevelop the parcel of land it 
currently leases from Forest Service, while providing the Forest 
Service with a combination of high resource value lands and a cash 
payment equal to the value of the exchanged land.
  Since the Mammoth Mountain Ski Area, LLC, MMSA, began operations in 
1953, Mammoth Mountain has grown to be one of the most popular ski 
areas in the United States, attracting up to two million visitors a 
year.
  However, the Main Lodge area, which is located on approximately 21 
acres of land leased by MMSA, has become outdated and inadequate to 
meet visitor needs. The Main Lodge building and Mammoth Mountain Inn 
are now more than 50 years old and require significant improvements and 
upgrades. Insufficient employee housing, parking and guest amenities 
must be corrected and skier staging and lift line queuing areas must be 
modernized. In order to make the necessary long-term investments, 
resort operators are seeking fee title to the land and have been 
working with the Inyo National Forest since 1998 to complete a land 
exchange.
  Equal-value land exchanges involving Forest Service land are 
permitted under the Exchange Act. However, the typical land exchange 
procedures do not conform well to this particular exchange due to the 
complexity, size and scarcity of large, high resource value parcels in 
the Inyo National Forest. Consequently, this legislation would 
authorize a one-time exception to the Exchange Act to accomplish the 
proposed land exchange. Specifically, the bill would require the 
Secretary of Agriculture to acquire two parcels of private land 
outside, totaling approximately 1,500 acres, the boundary the Inyo 
National Forest in exchange for the conveyance of the 21 acre parcel 
within the forest currently leased to MMSA; accept a cash equalization 
payment in excess of the 25 percent value of the federal lands to fully 
compensate the Forest Service for the exchanged lands; and use the cash 
payment to acquire land or interests in land for additions to the 
National Forest System as such lands become available.
  This bill will provide both economic and environmental benefits. The 
new construction that this bill will help facilitate will not only 
create new construction jobs during renovations, but will also allow 
the Ski Area to expand and improve its operations, creating more 
sustainable and permanent jobs. Additionally, the land MMSA will be 
transferring to the Forest Service includes high resource value lands 
that have long been desired for protection by local environmentalists 
and the Forest Service. This includes lands within the view shed of the 
Mono Basin

[[Page S9107]]

National Scenic Area, the first designated National Scenic Area and a 
place of incredible natural beauty.
  This legislation has bipartisan support. The bill was first 
introduced by Rep. Buck McKeon in June 2011 and passed the House in 
April 2012 by a vote of 376--2. It was reintroduced by Rep. Paul Cook 
earlier this year with the support of both Democratic and Republican 
cosponsors and passed the House a second time on December 3, 2013.
  Local government and community organizations also support this 
legislation, including the Mono County Board of Supervisors, the 
Mammoth Lakes Town Council, the Mammoth Lakes Chamber of Commerce, 
Mammoth Lakes Tourism, the Mono Lake Committee, and the Eastern Sierra 
Land Trust.
  This trade has long been supported by noted environmentalists, 
including the late Andrea Mead Lawrence, after whom Congress earlier 
this year named a mountain in the nearby Sierra Nevada.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. Enactment of this 
bill will ensure the long term success of one of the Nation's top ski 
resorts and benefit the local and regional economy, while allowing the 
Forest Service to acquire high resource value lands that will be 
enjoyed by Americans for generations to come.
  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. 1888

       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 ``Inyo National Forest Land 
     Exchange Act''.

     SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this Act is to modify the use of land 
     exchange authorities available to the Secretary of 
     Agriculture as of the date of enactment of this Act with 
     respect to certain land in the Inyo National Forest, 
     California.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this section:
       (1) Federal land.--The term ``Federal land'' means certain 
     National Forest System land located within the boundaries of 
     the Inyo National Forest, California, as depicted on the map 
     entitled ``Federal Parcel'' and dated June 2011.
       (2) Non-federal land.--The term ``non-Federal land'' means 
     certain non-Federal land in California located outside the 
     boundaries of the Inyo National Forest, California, as 
     depicted on the maps entitled ``DWP Parcel-Interagency 
     Visitor Center Parcel'' and ``DWP Parcel-Town of Bishop 
     Parcel'' and dated June 2011.
       (3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Agriculture.

     SEC. 4. SPECIAL RULES FOR INYO NATIONAL FOREST LAND EXCHANGE.

       (a) Authority to Accept Land Outside Boundaries of Inyo 
     National Forest.--In any land exchange involving the 
     conveyance of the Federal land, the Secretary may accept the 
     conveyance of the non-Federal land in exchange for the 
     conveyance of the Federal land, if the Secretary determines 
     that acquisition of the non-Federal land is desirable for 
     National Forest System purposes.
       (b) Cash Equalization Payment; Use.--
       (1) In general.--In an exchange of land under subsection 
     (a), the Secretary may accept a cash equalization payment in 
     excess of 25 percent of the value of the Federal land.
       (2) Disposition and use of funds.--Any cash equalization 
     payment received by the Secretary under this subsection shall 
     be--
       (A) deposited into the fund established under Public Law 
     90-171 (commonly known as the ``Sisk Act'') (16 U.S.C. 484a); 
     and
       (B) available to the Secretary for the acquisition of land 
     or interests in land for addition to the National Forest 
     System.
       (c) No New Land Exchange Authority.--Nothing in this 
     section grants the Secretary new land exchange authority.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. Hatch):
  S. 1889. A bill to direct the United States Sentencing Commission 
with respect to penalties for the unlawful production of a controlled 
substance on Federal property or intentional trespass on the property 
of another that causes environmental damage; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Protecting 
Lands Against Narcotics Trafficking or PLANT Act of 2013 with my 
colleague and friend, Senator Orrin Hatch.
  This bill, which is similar to House legislation introduced by 
Representative Jared Huffman, will help curb the severe environmental 
damage caused by illegal marijuana grows. I thank my friend and fellow 
Californian, Representative Huffman, for his leadership on this issue.
  Across our Nation, but especially in California, drug traffickers 
cultivate marijuana with zero regard for the environmental destruction 
it causes. Motivated solely by profits, these criminals illegally 
divert streams, poison wildlife, pollute watersheds and destroy the 
natural heritage that we have worked so hard to protect.
  Recognizing the destructive ecological impact of illegal marijuana 
cultivation, this legislation directs the United States Sentencing 
Commission to review and amend Federal sentencing guidelines to account 
for the environmental crimes drug traffickers commit on public and 
trespassed lands.
  Specifically, the bill instructs the Sentencing Commission to put in 
place sentencing guidelines that increase penalties for individuals who 
engage in any of the following activities while cultivating illegal 
drugs on Federal lands or while trespassing on another person's 
property:
  Use of poisons or hazardous chemicals, such as pesticides and 
rodenticides; the diversion, redirection, obstruction, draining or 
impoundment of local aquifers, rivers or bodies of water; or 
significant removal of vegetation or clear cutting of timber.
  In addition to environmental concerns, this legislation addresses the 
safety of our public lands. It directs the Sentencing Commission to 
provide guidelines increasing penalties on drug traffickers who use or 
possess a firearm while producing illegal drugs on federal or 
trespassed lands.
  Last year alone, over 900,000 marijuana plants were eradicated at 471 
sites on National Forest Lands. Sadly, this represents only a fraction 
of the total marijuana illegally grown in our National Parks, Forests 
and other public lands. In California, Operation Pristine, a recent 
effort to combat the environmental damage caused by illegal marijuana 
production, resulted in the removal of over 8,700 tons of trash 
including pesticides, batteries, fertilizers and propane tanks from 
environmentally sensitive lands.
  Drug traffickers often use illegal pesticides smuggled in from 
Mexico, such as carbofuran, which contaminate California's water 
resources. They also use pesticides and rodenticides in an illegal 
manner, often on protected lands. These poisons are having a 
devastating impact on California's wildlife, including the Pacific 
Fisher, a member of the Weasel family being considered for listing as 
an endangered species.
  Taxpayers are also being hit hard by the millions of dollars needed 
to clean up the environmental damage caused by illegal marijuana grows. 
Estimates put the cost of reclaiming land damaged by illicit marijuana 
growth at approximately $15,000 per acre. As you might expect, drug 
traffickers are not setting aside funds for this work, and the cost is 
passed on to the American people.
  Illicit marijuana cultivation also damages the economy and hurts 
legitimate businesses. Timber companies, farmers and ranchers have had 
their operations disrupted by criminals growing marijuana illegally. 
Marijuana growers on agricultural lands, particularly in the Central 
Valley, divert thousands of gallons of scarce water from legitimate 
agriculture. In 2013 alone, California has identified over 1,800 grow 
sites in the Central Valley, including 406 in Tulare County and 537 in 
Fresno as of November.
  As Chairman of the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control 
and also as a Senator who has worked to safeguard our country's natural 
resources, I believe that we cannot allow drug traffickers to destroy 
our public lands, pollute our waters and kill our wildlife with 
impunity. It is time that sentencing guidelines take into account the 
environmental damage that drug traffickers all too often cause. This 
legislation, directing the Sentencing Commission to review and amend 
its guidelines, will do just that.
  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. 1889

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

[[Page S9108]]

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Protecting Lands Against 
     Narcotics Trafficking Act of 2013'' or the ``PLANT Act''.

     SEC. 2. CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT PENALTY AMENDMENTS.

       (a) Cultivating or Manufacturing Controlled Substances on 
     Federal Property.--Section 401(b)(5) of the Controlled 
     Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 841(b)(5)) is amended, in the 
     matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking ``as provided 
     in this subsection'' and inserting ``for not more than 10 
     years, in addition to any other term of imprisonment imposed 
     under this subsection''.
       (b) Use of Hazardous Substances.--Pursuant to its authority 
     under section 994 of title 28, United States Code, the United 
     States Sentencing Commission shall amend and review the 
     Federal Sentencing Guidelines and policy statements to ensure 
     that the guidelines provide for a penalty enhancement of not 
     less than 1 offense level for a violation of section 401(a) 
     of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 841(a)) while on 
     Federal property or intentionally trespassing on the property 
     of another if the offense--
       (1) includes the use of a poison, chemical, or other 
     hazardous substance to cultivate or manufacture controlled 
     substances on Federal property;
       (2) creates a hazard to humans, wildlife, or domestic 
     animals;
       (3) degrades or harms the environment or natural resources; 
     or
       (4) pollutes an aquifer, spring, stream, river, or body of 
     water.
       (c) Stream Diversion or Clear Cutting on Federal 
     Property.--
       (1) Prohibition on stream diversion or clear cutting on 
     federal property.--Section 401(b) of the Controlled 
     Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 841(b)), as amended by subsection 
     (a), is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(8) Destruction of bodies of water.--Any person who 
     violates subsection (a) in a manner that diverts, redirects, 
     obstructs, or drains an aquifer, spring, stream, river, or 
     body of water or clear cuts timber while cultivating or 
     manufacturing a controlled substance on Federal property or 
     while intentionally trespassing on the property of another 
     shall be fined in accordance with title 18, United States 
     Code.''.
       (2) Federal sentencing guidelines enhancement.--Pursuant to 
     its authority under section 994 of title 28, United States 
     Code, the United States Sentencing Commission shall review 
     and amend the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and policy 
     statements to ensure that the guidelines provide for a 
     penalty enhancement of not less than 1 offense level for a 
     violation of section 401(a) of the Controlled Substances Act 
     (21 U.S.C. 841(a)) if the offense involves the diversion, 
     redirection, obstruction, or draining of an aquifer, spring, 
     stream, river, or body of water or the clear cut of timber 
     while cultivating or manufacturing a controlled substance on 
     Federal property or while intentionally trespassing on the 
     property of another.
       (d) Booby Traps on Federal Land.--Section 401(d)(1) of the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 841(d)(1)) is amended by 
     inserting ``cultivated,'' after ``is being''.
       (e) Use or Possession of Firearms in Connection With Drug 
     Offenses on Federal Lands.--Pursuant to its authority under 
     section 994 of title 28, United States Code, the United 
     States Sentencing Commission shall review and amend the 
     Federal Sentencing Guidelines and policy statements to ensure 
     that the guidelines provide for a penalty enhancement of not 
     less than 1 offense level for a violation of section 401(a) 
     of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 841(a)) if the 
     offense involves the possession of a firearm while 
     cultivating or manufacturing controlled substances on Federal 
     lands or intentionally trespassing on the property of 
     another.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. King):
  S. 1892. A bill to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to 
establish a registry of certain veterans who were stationed at or 
underwent training at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown, New Brunswick, 
Canada, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill addressing 
an issue important to Maine veterans who served at Canadian Forces 
Base, CFB, Gagetown. Veterans who served there may have suffered from 
adverse health impacts due to exposure to the herbicide Agent Orange, 
which was used at CFB Gagetown in 1966 and 1967. This bill would 
require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, VA, to establish a registry 
of U.S. veterans who served or trained at CFB Gagetown between 1956 and 
2006 and have subsequently experienced health issues, which may have 
resulted from exposure to these chemicals. It also directs the VA to 
commission an independent study investigating any possible linkage 
between the spraying of Agent Orange at CFB Gagetown and subsequent 
health problems among the American soldiers who served or trained 
there. The legislation I am offering with Senator King is similar to 
another bill that has been introduced by Congressman Mike Michaud in 
the House of Representatives.
  Protecting the health of those who have served our Nation is a solemn 
responsibility. I have heard from veterans in Maine about how they have 
suffered from diabetes, cancers, and respiratory illnesses. Many of 
these veterans fear their illnesses are linked to the use of Agent 
Orange in the 1960s. These veterans, however, have had difficulty in 
persuading the VA that their health problems are related to this 
chemical exposure.
  By requiring the VA to establish a registry of these veterans, we 
recognize these widespread concerns and provide veterans with a way to 
make their claims known to the VA and to identify commonalities among 
their shared experiences. It also provides the VA with the ability to 
reach out to veterans on this issue of critical importance.
  Last month, I personally raised this issue with the Canadian Minister 
of Defence. Many Canadian veterans who served or trained at CFB 
Gagetown voiced similar concerns with their government. He described 
how the Government of Canada found a way to appropriately compensate 
service members affected by the toxic chemicals used at Gagetown. 
Ultimately, the Canadian government approved one-time ex gratia 
payments of $20,000 for qualifying veterans who demonstrated that they 
were at CFB Gagetown during the days when the toxic agents were 
sprayed.
  A crucial provision in this legislation requires the VA to commission 
an independent study that investigates the connection between health 
problems and exposure to Agent Orange at CFB Gagetown. Previously, I 
requested that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the 
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry conduct an 
investigation into whether Maine veterans were exposed to toxic 
chemicals while training at CFB Gagetown. A significant deficiency with 
the CDC report, however, was that it relied solely on existing Canadian 
government studies on this subject rather than conducting interviews of 
those who trained there. Many Maine veterans feel strongly that they 
suffered negative consequences from exposure to Agent Orange while 
training at Gagetown. The United States Government should conduct its 
own independent study with interviews.
  This legislation keeps faith with our veterans by demonstrating that 
our government takes the allegations of exposure to Agent Orange 
seriously. The bill will help identify and bring together the shared 
experience of those who trained at CFB Gagetown. This bill will make it 
easier for the VA to conduct outreach on this issue pending any new 
developments. I look forward to working with Senator King and all of my 
colleagues to pass this important bill.

                          ____________________