[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 121 (Wednesday, July 29, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6138-S6143]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. REED (for himself and Mrs. Capito):
  S. 1883. A bill to maximize discovery, and accelerate development and 
availability, of promising childhood cancer treatments, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. REED. Mr. President, I am pleased to be joined by Senator Capito 
in the introduction of the Childhood Cancer Survivorship, Treatment, 
Access, and Research, STAR, Act of 2015. This legislation is an 
extension of ongoing bipartisan efforts in the Senate over the past 
decade to get us closer to the goal of hopefully one day curing cancers 
in children, adolescents, and young adults. Representatives McCaul, Van 
Hollen, and Speier are introducing the companion legislation in the 
other body.
  I first started working on this issue after meeting the Haight family 
from Warwick, RI, in June of 2004. Nancy and Vincent lost their son, 
Ben, when he was just 9 years old to neuroblastoma, a very aggressive 
tumor in the brain.
  The heart-wrenching story of Ben Haight highlights the importance of 
this legislation. It is my hope that one day Ben's story, and thousands 
of other children like him, will be one of survival. With the strong 
support of families like the Haights for increased research into the 
causes of childhood cancers and improved treatment options, I 
introduced bipartisan legislation that eventually was signed into law 
in 2008 as the Caroline Pryce Walker Conquer Childhood Cancer Act.
  This was an important step. Yet, more work remains. With the STAR 
Act, we would take the next needed steps to advance pediatric cancer 
research and child-focused cancer treatments, while also improving 
childhood cancer surveillance and providing resources for survivors and 
those impacted by childhood cancer.
  If a treatment is working, doctors elsewhere should know immediately. 
The same should happen if a treatment isn't working, or if other major 
medical events occur during the course of a particular treatment. It is 
critical that doctors, nurses, and other providers are able to 
effectively communicate information about the disease, the treatment 
process, and what other health and development impacts children can 
expect to experience.
  As such, the STAR Act reauthorizes the Caroline Pryce Walker Conquer 
Childhood Cancer Act to help create a comprehensive children's cancer 
biorepository for researchers to use in searching for biospecimens to 
study and would improve surveillance of childhood cancer cases.
  Additionally, this legislation includes provisions dealing with 
issues that arise for survivors of childhood cancer. Unfortunately, 
even after beating cancer, as many as two-thirds of childhood cancer 
survivors are likely to experience at least one late effect of 
treatment; as many as one-fourth experience a late effect that is 
serious or life-threatening, including second cancers and organ damage.
  We must do more to ensure that children survive cancer and any late 
effects so they can live a long, healthy, and productive life. This 
legislation would enhance research on the late effects of childhood 
cancers, improve collaboration among providers so that doctors are 
better able to care for this population as they age, and establish a 
new pilot program to begin to explore improved models of care for 
childhood cancer survivors.
  This legislation also provides some clarity for patients and their 
physicians attempting to access new drugs and therapies from 
pharmaceutical companies. When a patient has run out of other options, 
the last thing they and their families need is to spend months being 
given the run-around trying to access a potential treatment.
  Lastly, this bill will ensure more pediatric expertise at the 
National Institutes of Health to better leverage the research 
investment to improve pediatric cancer research by requiring the 
inclusion of at least one pediatric oncologist on the National Cancer 
Advisory Board and improving childhood health reporting requirements to 
include pediatric cancer.
  I am pleased that the Childhood Cancer STAR Act has the support of 
the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, St. Baldrick's 
Foundation, and Children's Oncology Group, among others. I look forward 
to working with these and other stakeholders, as well as Senator Capito 
to urge the rest of our colleagues to join us in supporting this 
crucial legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Reed, Mr. Brown, 
        Ms. Baldwin, Mr. King, and Ms. Hirono):
  S. 1884. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
deliver a meaningful benefit and lower prescription drug prices under 
the Medicare

[[Page S6139]]

program; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. DURBIN. 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. 1884

       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 ``Medicare Prescription Drug 
     Savings and Choice Act of 2015''.

     SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF MEDICARE OPERATED PRESCRIPTION DRUG 
                   PLAN OPTION.

       (a) In General.--Subpart 2 of part D of title XVIII of the 
     Social Security Act is amended by inserting after section 
     1860D-11 (42 U.S.C. 1395w-111) the following new section:


           ``medicare operated prescription drug plan option

       ``Sec. 1860D-11A.  (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of this part, for each year (beginning with 
     2017), in addition to any plans offered under section 1860D-
     11, the Secretary shall offer one or more Medicare operated 
     prescription drug plans (as defined in subsection (c)) with a 
     service area that consists of the entire United States and 
     shall enter into negotiations in accordance with subsection 
     (b) with pharmaceutical manufacturers to reduce the purchase 
     cost of covered part D drugs for eligible part D individuals 
     who enroll in such a plan.
       ``(b) Negotiations.--Notwithstanding section 1860D-11(i), 
     for purposes of offering a Medicare operated prescription 
     drug plan under this section, the Secretary shall negotiate 
     with pharmaceutical manufacturers with respect to the 
     purchase price of covered part D drugs in a Medicare operated 
     prescription drug plan and shall encourage the use of more 
     affordable therapeutic equivalents to the extent such 
     practices do not override medical necessity as determined by 
     the prescribing physician. To the extent practicable and 
     consistent with the previous sentence, the Secretary shall 
     implement strategies similar to those used by other Federal 
     purchasers of prescription drugs, and other strategies, 
     including the use of a formulary and formulary incentives in 
     subsection (e), to reduce the purchase cost of covered part D 
     drugs.
       ``(c) Medicare Operated Prescription Drug Plan Defined.--
     For purposes of this part, the term `Medicare operated 
     prescription drug plan' means a prescription drug plan that 
     offers qualified prescription drug coverage and access to 
     negotiated prices described in section 1860D-2(a)(1)(A). Such 
     a plan may offer supplemental prescription drug coverage in 
     the same manner as other qualified prescription drug coverage 
     offered by other prescription drug plans.
       ``(d) Monthly Beneficiary Premium.--
       ``(1) Qualified prescription drug coverage.--The monthly 
     beneficiary premium for qualified prescription drug coverage 
     and access to negotiated prices described in section 1860D-
     2(a)(1)(A) to be charged under a Medicare operated 
     prescription drug plan shall be uniform nationally. Such 
     premium for months in 2017 and each succeeding year shall be 
     based on the average monthly per capita actuarial cost of 
     offering the Medicare operated prescription drug plan for the 
     year involved, including administrative expenses.
       ``(2) Supplemental prescription drug coverage.--Insofar as 
     a Medicare operated prescription drug plan offers 
     supplemental prescription drug coverage, the Secretary may 
     adjust the amount of the premium charged under paragraph (1).
       ``(e) Use of a Formulary and Formulary Incentives.--
       ``(1) In general.--With respect to the operation of a 
     Medicare operated prescription drug plan, the Secretary shall 
     establish and apply a formulary (and may include formulary 
     incentives described in paragraph (2)(C)(ii)) in accordance 
     with this subsection in order to--
       ``(A) increase patient safety;
       ``(B) increase appropriate use and reduce inappropriate use 
     of drugs; and
       ``(C) reward value.
       ``(2) Development of initial formulary.--
       ``(A) In general.--In selecting covered part D drugs for 
     inclusion in a formulary, the Secretary shall consider 
     clinical benefit and price.
       ``(B) Role of ahrq.--The Director of the Agency for 
     Healthcare Research and Quality shall be responsible for 
     assessing the clinical benefit of covered part D drugs and 
     making recommendations to the Secretary regarding which drugs 
     should be included in the formulary. In conducting such 
     assessments and making such recommendations, the Director 
     shall--
       ``(i) consider safety concerns including those identified 
     by the Food and Drug Administration;
       ``(ii) use available data and evaluations, with priority 
     given to randomized controlled trials, to examine clinical 
     effectiveness, comparative effectiveness, safety, and 
     enhanced compliance with a drug regimen;
       ``(iii) use the same classes of drugs developed by the 
     United States Pharmacopeia for this part;
       ``(iv) consider evaluations made by--

       ``(I) the Director under section 1013 of the Medicare 
     Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 
     2003;
       ``(II) other Federal entities, such as the Secretary of 
     Veterans Affairs; and
       ``(III) other private and public entities, such as the Drug 
     Effectiveness Review Project and State plans under title XIX; 
     and

       ``(v) recommend to the Secretary--

       ``(I) those drugs in a class that provide a greater 
     clinical benefit, including fewer safety concerns or less 
     risk of side-effects, than another drug in the same class 
     that should be included in the formulary;
       ``(II) those drugs in a class that provide less clinical 
     benefit, including greater safety concerns or a greater risk 
     of side-effects, than another drug in the same class that 
     should be excluded from the formulary; and
       ``(III) drugs in a class with same or similar clinical 
     benefit for which it would be appropriate for the Secretary 
     to competitively bid (or negotiate) for placement on the 
     formulary.

       ``(C) Consideration of ahrq recommendations.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Secretary, after taking into 
     consideration the recommendations under subparagraph (B)(v), 
     shall establish a formulary, and formulary incentives, to 
     encourage use of covered part D drugs that--

       ``(I) have a lower cost and provide a greater clinical 
     benefit than other drugs;
       ``(II) have a lower cost than other drugs with the same or 
     similar clinical benefit; and
       ``(III) have the same cost but provide greater clinical 
     benefit than other drugs.

       ``(ii) Formulary incentives.--The formulary incentives 
     under clause (i) may be in the form of one or more of the 
     following:

       ``(I) Tiered copayments.
       ``(II) Reference pricing.
       ``(III) Prior authorization.
       ``(IV) Step therapy.
       ``(V) Medication therapy management.
       ``(VI) Generic drug substitution.

       ``(iii) Flexibility.--In applying such formulary incentives 
     the Secretary may decide not to impose any cost-sharing for a 
     covered part D drug for which--

       ``(I) the elimination of cost sharing would be expected to 
     increase compliance with a drug regimen; and
       ``(II) compliance would be expected to produce savings 
     under part A or B or both.

       ``(3) Limitations on formulary.--In any formulary 
     established under this subsection, the formulary may not be 
     changed during a year, except--
       ``(A) to add a generic version of a covered part D drug 
     that entered the market;
       ``(B) to remove such a drug for which a safety problem is 
     found; and
       ``(C) to add a drug that the Secretary identifies as a drug 
     which treats a condition for which there has not previously 
     been a treatment option or for which a clear and significant 
     benefit has been demonstrated over other covered part D 
     drugs.
       ``(4) Adding drugs to the initial formulary.--
       ``(A) Use of advisory committee.--The Secretary shall 
     establish and appoint an advisory committee (in this 
     paragraph referred to as the `advisory committee')--
       ``(i) to review petitions from drug manufacturers, health 
     care provider organizations, patient groups, and other 
     entities for inclusion of a drug in, or other changes to, 
     such formulary; and
       ``(ii) to recommend any changes to the formulary 
     established under this subsection.
       ``(B) Composition.--The advisory committee shall be 
     composed of 9 members and shall include representatives of 
     physicians, pharmacists, and consumers and others with 
     expertise in evaluating prescription drugs. The Secretary 
     shall select members based on their knowledge of 
     pharmaceuticals and the Medicare population. Members shall be 
     deemed to be special Government employees for purposes of 
     applying the conflict of interest provisions under section 
     208 of title 18, United States Code, and no waiver of such 
     provisions for such a member shall be permitted.
       ``(C) Consultation.--The advisory committee shall consult, 
     as necessary, with physicians who are specialists in treating 
     the disease for which a drug is being considered.
       ``(D) Request for studies.--The advisory committee may 
     request the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality or an 
     academic or research institution to study and make a report 
     on a petition described in subparagraph (A)(i) in order to 
     assess--
       ``(i) clinical effectiveness;
       ``(ii) comparative effectiveness;
       ``(iii) safety; and
       ``(iv) enhanced compliance with a drug regimen.
       ``(E) Recommendations.--The advisory committee shall make 
     recommendations to the Secretary regarding--
       ``(i) whether a covered part D drug is found to provide a 
     greater clinical benefit, including fewer safety concerns or 
     less risk of side-effects, than another drug in the same 
     class that is currently included in the formulary and should 
     be included in the formulary;
       ``(ii) whether a covered part D drug is found to provide 
     less clinical benefit, including greater safety concerns or a 
     greater risk of side-effects, than another drug in the same 
     class that is currently included in the formulary and should 
     not be included in the formulary; and
       ``(iii) whether a covered part D drug has the same or 
     similar clinical benefit to a drug in the same class that is 
     currently included

[[Page S6140]]

     in the formulary and whether the drug should be included in 
     the formulary.
       ``(F) Limitations on review of manufacturer petitions.--The 
     advisory committee shall not review a petition of a drug 
     manufacturer under subparagraph (A)(i) with respect to a 
     covered part D drug unless the petition is accompanied by the 
     following:
       ``(i) Raw data from clinical trials on the safety and 
     effectiveness of the drug.
       ``(ii) Any data from clinical trials conducted using active 
     controls on the drug or drugs that are the current standard 
     of care.
       ``(iii) Any available data on comparative effectiveness of 
     the drug.
       ``(iv) Any other information the Secretary requires for the 
     advisory committee to complete its review.
       ``(G) Response to recommendations.--The Secretary shall 
     review the recommendations of the advisory committee and if 
     the Secretary accepts such recommendations the Secretary 
     shall modify the formulary established under this subsection 
     accordingly. Nothing in this section shall preclude the 
     Secretary from adding to the formulary a drug for which the 
     Director of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality or 
     the advisory committee has not made a recommendation.
       ``(H) Notice of changes.--The Secretary shall provide 
     timely notice to beneficiaries and health professionals about 
     changes to the formulary or formulary incentives.
       ``(f) Informing Beneficiaries.--The Secretary shall take 
     steps to inform beneficiaries about the availability of a 
     Medicare operated drug plan or plans including providing 
     information in the annual handbook distributed to all 
     beneficiaries and adding information to the official public 
     Medicare website related to prescription drug coverage 
     available through this part.
       ``(g) Application of All Other Requirements for 
     Prescription Drug Plans.--Except as specifically provided in 
     this section, any Medicare operated drug plan shall meet the 
     same requirements as apply to any other prescription drug 
     plan, including the requirements of section 1860D-4(b)(1) 
     relating to assuring pharmacy access.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 1860D-3(a) of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1395w-103(a)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(4) Availability of the medicare operated prescription 
     drug plan.--A Medicare operated prescription drug plan (as 
     defined in section 1860D-11A(c)) shall be offered nationally 
     in accordance with section 1860D-11A.''.
       (2)(A) Section 1860D-3 of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1395w-103) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(c) Provisions Only Applicable in 2006 Through 2016.--The 
     provisions of this section shall only apply with respect to 
     2006 through 2016.''.
       (B) Section 1860D-11(g) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-
     111(g)) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(8) No authority for fallback plans after 2016.--A 
     fallback prescription drug plan shall not be available after 
     December 31, 2016.''.
       (3) Section 1860D-13(c)(3) of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1395w-113(c)(3)) is amended--
       (A) in the heading, by inserting ``and medicare operated 
     prescription drug plans'' after ``Fallback plans''; and
       (B) by inserting ``or a Medicare operated prescription drug 
     plan'' after ``a fallback prescription drug plan''.
       (4) Section 1860D-16(b)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1395w-116(b)(1)) is amended--
       (A) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon at the end;
       (B) in subparagraph (D), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(E) payments for expenses incurred with respect to the 
     operation of Medicare operated prescription drug plans under 
     section 1860D-11A.''.
       (5) Section 1860D-41(a) of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1395w-151(a)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(19) Medicare operated prescription drug plan.--The term 
     `Medicare operated prescription drug plan' has the meaning 
     given such term in section 1860D-11A(c).''.

     SEC. 3. IMPROVED APPEALS PROCESS UNDER THE MEDICARE OPERATED 
                   PRESCRIPTION DRUG PLAN.

       Section 1860D-4(h) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1305w-104(h)) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(4) Appeals process for medicare operated prescription 
     drug plan.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall develop a well-
     defined process for appeals for denials of benefits under 
     this part under the Medicare operated prescription drug plan. 
     Such process shall be efficient, impose minimal 
     administrative burdens, and ensure the timely procurement of 
     non-formulary drugs or exemption from formulary incentives 
     when medically necessary. Medical necessity shall be based on 
     professional medical judgment, the medical condition of the 
     beneficiary, and other medical evidence. Such appeals process 
     shall include--
       ``(i) an initial review and determination made by the 
     Secretary; and
       ``(ii) for appeals denied during the initial review and 
     determination, the option of an external review and 
     determination by an independent entity selected by the 
     Secretary.
       ``(B) Consultation in development of process.--In 
     developing the appeals process under subparagraph (A), the 
     Secretary shall consult with consumer and patient groups, as 
     well as other key stakeholders to ensure the goals described 
     in subparagraph (A) are achieved.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. Udall):
  S. 1891. A bill to amend the Mineral Leasing Act to improve coal 
royalties, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today, I am proud to stand up for fairness 
by introducing legislation with my Senate colleague, Senator Tom Udall 
of New Mexico, to ensure American taxpayers receive the full value of 
coal produced on public lands.
  The Coal Royalty Fairness Act would require the Interior Department 
to collect royalties for coal mined on Federal lands based on the 
actual market value of coal. This bill is based on current successful 
practices in Montana--the Nation's second largest Federal coal-
producing State. Currently, some private mining companies sell coal to 
their own affiliated companies at a lower cost than market value, and 
pay Federal royalties based on the cheaper, first point of sale.
  American taxpayers are getting ripped off by coal companies under the 
current, broken coal royalties system. I raised concerns about this 2 
years ago, and today, Senator Udall and I are introducing legislation 
to get the public every penny owed by companies that may be taking 
advantage of a loose system. Instead of subsidizing private coal 
companies, it is time to put this money back where it belongs--into 
rural communities and the pockets of taxpayers.
  Our bill will require the Interior Department to collect royalties 
based on the actual market value of coal, not the below-market price 
they charge their own companies.
  Our bill will also bring some much-needed transparency to the Federal 
coal program by requiring the Interior Department to publish more 
information and calling for Government Accountability Office to review 
the program every 3 years.
  I urge my colleagues to join Senator Udall and me by cosponsoring and 
ultimately passing this important bill.
  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. 1891

       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 ``Coal Royalty Fairness Act of 
     2015''.

     SEC. 2. VALUATION OF COAL ROYALTIES.

       Section 7 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 207) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking the fourth sentence; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) Royalties.--
       ``(1) Definitions.--In this subsection:
       ``(A) Assessment value.--
       ``(i) In general.--The term `assessment value', with 
     respect to Federal coal, means--

       ``(I) the price of Federal coal paid by the purchaser at 
     final sale; or
       ``(II) a price imputed by the Secretary based on the coal 
     price index.

       ``(ii) Exclusions.--The term `assessment value' does not 
     include, as determined and to the extent determined to be 
     appropriate by the Secretary--

       ``(I) transportation costs, as determined in accordance 
     with the transportation cost index; or
       ``(II) the cost of coal washing.

       ``(B) Broker.--The term `broker' means a person that 
     resells Federal coal.
       ``(C) Coal price index.--The term `coal price index' means 
     the schedule of average market prices of Federal coal (in 
     United States dollars) paid by the purchaser at final sale, 
     based on the quality and type of the Federal coal, as 
     determined by the Secretary, in consultation with the 
     Administrator of the Energy Information Administration.
       ``(D) Purchaser.--
       ``(i) In general.--The term `purchaser' means a person 
     that--

       ``(I) purchases or contracts to purchase Federal coal--

       ``(aa) directly from a coal mine operator; or

[[Page S6141]]

       ``(bb) indirectly from a broker; and

       ``(II) uses that Federal coal in any industrial or energy 
     conversion process.

       ``(ii) Exclusion.--The term `purchaser' does not include--

       ``(I) a coal broker; or
       ``(II) any other third-party intermediary.

       ``(E) Quality.--The term `quality', with respect to Federal 
     coal, means the quality of Federal coal measured in British 
     thermal units, sulfur, moisture, and other criteria 
     determined to be appropriate by the Secretary.
       ``(F) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       ``(G) Transportation cost index.--The term `transportation 
     cost index' means the transportation cost index established 
     under paragraph (7).
       ``(H) Type.--The term `type', with respect to Federal coal, 
     means a general category of coal, such as metallurgical coal 
     or steam coal, as determined by the Secretary.
       ``(2) Payment rate.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     a lease shall require payment of a royalty in such amount as 
     the Secretary shall determine of not less than 12.5 percent 
     of the assessment value of Federal coal, as determined under 
     paragraph (3).
       ``(B) Exception.--In lieu of the royalty payment rate 
     described in subparagraph (A), the Secretary may establish 
     such lower royalty payment rate as the Secretary determines 
     to be appropriate in the case of Federal coal recovered by an 
     underground mining operation.
       ``(3) Valuation for royalties.--Not later than 1 year after 
     the date of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall 
     establish, as the valuation for Federal coal royalties, the 
     assessment value of Federal coal.
       ``(4) Administration.--
       ``(A) Reporting.--The purchaser of Federal coal shall 
     annually submit to the Secretary a report containing such 
     information as the Secretary determines to be necessary to 
     carry out this subsection.
       ``(B) Audits.--To carry out this subsection, the Secretary 
     may examine the records of any person engaged in the 
     purchase, sale, transportation, or marketing of Federal coal.
       ``(5) Coal price index.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall compile the 
     assessment values of coal by type and quality of coal in a 
     coal price index.
       ``(B) Publication.--Not less frequently than quarterly, the 
     Secretary shall publish the coal price index, along with a 
     methodological description, including--
       ``(i) the method of calculation;
       ``(ii) the data used to calculate the coal price index in 
     an aggregate manner that does not reveal proprietary 
     information; and
       ``(iii) any other information the Secretary considers 
     appropriate to ensure transparency.
       ``(C) Other information.--If a person believes that the 
     coal price index significantly deviates from the assessment 
     value of the coal produced by the person, the person may 
     petition the Secretary to use information supplied by the 
     person in lieu of the coal price index, including all 
     information the Secretary requires to accurately determine 
     the assessment value and audit the records of the person.
       ``(6) Exports.--
       ``(A) In general.--In assessing royalties for the export of 
     Federal coal under this subsection, the Secretary may obtain 
     from the exporter of the Federal coal such information as the 
     Secretary determines to be necessary to carry out this 
     subsection.
       ``(B) Assessment value of exported coal.--Subject to 
     subparagraph (C), in determining the assessment value of 
     Federal coal that is exported, the Secretary shall--
       ``(i) use the price of coal free on board the marine vessel 
     used to transport the coal overseas at the port of origin; 
     and
       ``(ii) limit any deductions that apply to the assessment 
     value of the Federal coal to costs incurred prior to being 
     free onboard the vessel.
       ``(C) Uncertain export price.--If the Secretary cannot 
     determine the value of exported coal in accordance with 
     subparagraph (B), the Secretary shall--
       ``(i) assess royalties under this subsection based on the 
     coal price index for coal of a similar quantity and type; and
       ``(ii) limit any deductions that apply to the assessment 
     value of the Federal coal to costs incurred within the 
     contiguous United States.
       ``(7) Transportation cost index.--
       ``(A) In general.--Subject to the other provisions of this 
     paragraph, the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary 
     of Energy and the Secretary of Transportation (in 
     consultation with the Surface Transportation Board and 
     others), shall--
       ``(i) compile in a transportation cost index the average 
     costs of transporting coal; and
       ``(ii) determine the amount of any transportation cost 
     deduction under this subsection, on the basis of the 
     transportation cost index.
       ``(B) Unit of measurement.--The transportation cost index 
     shall be based on the average transportation costs per ton of 
     coal or another unit of measurement determined by the 
     Secretary.
       ``(C) Differences in transportation costs.--The 
     transportation cost index shall take into consideration 
     differences in the costs of transportation, as determined by 
     the Secretary, based on--
       ``(i) the mode of transportation;
       ``(ii) the geographic region, and
       ``(iii) other characteristics of the transportation 
     industry that the Secretary considers to be necessary to 
     calculate a fair, transparent, and accurate transportation 
     cost index.
       ``(D) Exclusions.--The transportation cost index shall not 
     include costs associated with, as determined by the 
     Secretary--
       ``(i) take-or-pay contract penalties;
       ``(ii) liquidated damages;
       ``(iii) the speculative aspects of transportation 
     transactions; or
       ``(iv) any other costs that are not directly associated 
     with moving Federal coal from 1 location to another location.
       ``(E) Publication.--Not less than twice annually, the 
     Secretary shall publish the transportation cost index, along 
     with a methodological description, including--
       ``(i) the method of calculation;
       ``(ii) the data used to calculate the transportation cost 
     index, in an aggregate manner that does not reveal 
     proprietary information; and
       ``(iii) any other information the Secretary considers to be 
     appropriate to ensure transparency.
       ``(F) Other information.--If a person believes that the 
     transportation cost index significantly deviates from the 
     transportation costs of the person, the person may petition 
     the Secretary to use information supplied by the person 
     (other than costs descried in subparagraph (D)) in lieu of 
     the transportation cost index, including all information the 
     Secretary requires to accurately determine cost and audit the 
     records of the person.
       ``(8) Reviews.--
       ``(A) In general.--To ensure a transparent, fair, and 
     efficient administration of the Federal coal program, and to 
     ensure that citizens of the United States receive a fair 
     return on Federal coal, not later than 3 years after the date 
     of enactment of this subsection and every 3 years thereafter 
     during the 15-year period beginning on that date of 
     enactment, the Comptroller General of the United States shall 
     submit to Congress a report that describes a review of the 
     Federal coal program, including the administration of this 
     subsection.
       ``(B) Consultation.--In conducting a review under this 
     paragraph, the Comptroller General shall consult with--
       ``(i) the Secretary;
       ``(ii) the Director of the Bureau of Land Management;
       ``(iii) the Secretary of Transportation; and
       ``(iv) the Secretary of Energy.
       ``(C) Inclusions.--A review under this paragraph shall 
     include a review of--
       ``(i) the total volume of coal production from Federal 
     land;
       ``(ii) the total volume of remaining coal reserves on 
     Federal land;
       ``(iii) the total revenues generated from the Federal coal 
     program, itemized by type of revenue, including lease bonus 
     payments and royalties;
       ``(iv) market prices for coal;
       ``(v) market prices for transportation costs and any other 
     deductible costs; and
       ``(vi) the appropriateness of royalty rates.
       ``(D) Format.--The Comptroller General shall report 
     information in a review under this paragraph--
       ``(i) in the aggregate for the United States; and
       ``(ii) categorized by State for at least the top 10 Federal 
     coal-producing States, as determined by the Comptroller 
     General.
       ``(9) Application.--This subsection--
       ``(A) applies to coal mined from Federal land; and
       ``(B) does not apply to coal mined from tribal land.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mrs. Boxer):
  S. 1894. A bill to provide short-term water supplies to drought-
stricken California; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the 
historic drought that is devastating California and much of the West 
and to introduce the California Emergency Drought Relief Act along with 
Senator Boxer.
  The toll on some of our most vulnerable communities is mounting.
  As of July, 2,091 wells are already dry or will soon run out of 
water. This puts more than 10,000 people in jeopardy.
  Rural and disadvantaged communities are some of the hardest hit.
  Just this month, the Washington Post reported that arsenic had been 
found in wells serving St. Anthony's mobile home park in the Coachella 
Valley at twice the safe concentration.
  In Porterville, Californians are bathing themselves with bottled 
water.
  California is also suffering a massive loss of agriculture 
production.
  A study from UC Davis estimates that farmers will fallow 563,000 
acres in 2015, a 35 percent increase from last year when farmers 
fallowed 410,000 acres.
  The State's agriculture sector stands to lose $1.8 billion in direct 
agricultural costs this year, on top of $1.5 billion last year.
  The San Joaquin Valley is at the epicenter of the drought, and the 
possible damage to our nation's food supply is dire.

[[Page S6142]]

  The Valley is home to 90 percent of the country's tomatoes, 74 
percent of our lettuce, and 95 percent of our broccoli. The drought's 
effects on the Valley will extend far beyond California's borders.
  But the devastating consequences of this drought aren't limited to a 
single region.
  UC Davis also reports that California's economy will lose an 
estimated $2.7 billion in 2015, along with 18,600 jobs.
  That is on top of $2.2 billion last year and 17,100 jobs lost.
  Effects on the environment are also destructive.
  Groundwater reserves in underground aquifers are being depleted, 
which is causing the surrounding land to sink.
  Delta smelt are at their lowest levels since surveys first began in 
1959, while Chinook salmon are imperiled by warmer water in the 
Sacramento River.
  Saltwater from the San Francisco Bay threatens to contaminate 
freshwater in the Delta, imperiling an entire ecosystem, not to mention 
the ill effects on drinking water supplies and farmland.
  Finally, we can't ignore the increasing threat of wildfires. Since 
January 1, the U.S. Forest Service reports more than 5,000 fires have 
burned on state and federal lands, a 10 percent increase over last 
year.
  Despite the high likelihood of a strong El Nino this year, one wet 
season won't fix the problems. Experts estimate that California needs 
at least three above-average precipitation years to cover the current 
37 million acre-foot deficit.
  Doing nothing is simply not an option.
  In drafting the bill we're introducing today, we started with the 
bill that unanimously passed the Senate in 2014.
  We then modified that bill, adding significant environmental 
protections and removing controversial provisions.
  We also included a range of provisions to protect and restore 
threatened and endangered species, as well as a number of programs to 
support long-term infrastructure projects like desalination, water 
recycling and storage.
  My staff and I have taken dozens of meetings since January.
  We have met with Congressional Republicans and Democrats, 
environmental groups, water districts, and State and local officials.
  My California staff has visited water projects throughout the State 
to collect ideas, and my staff in Washington has consulted closely with 
Federal agencies to ensure the bill adheres to environmental law.
  By releasing a bill this summer, months before the rainy season, 
Congress and the public will have ample time to review, debate and, 
where necessary, suggest improvements.
  I expect the bill will receive a committee hearing, allowing every 
member of Congress and the public to weigh in.
  Let me briefly discuss how this bill will help.
  Federal policy will be most effective if it is aligned with the 
State's goals and the State water bond.
  This means expanding Federal efforts to include long-term solutions 
such as desalination, recycling and storage. We also must look at ways 
to help communities that are running out of water.
  To help those communities, the bill includes a new program to assist 
areas that have suffered the brunt of the drought, communities like 
Porterville and others in Tulare County.
  Providing emergency supplies like bottled water is a no-brainer, but 
it is a short-term fix.
  We need to look beyond this emergency at ways we can shift these 
communities from vulnerable water sources like wells to more 
sustainable and resilient water systems.
  We also need to take a close look at desalination and water 
recycling. These are two of the most promising technologies that may 
offer long-term solutions.
  The bill identifies 26 desalination projects capable of producing 
more than 330,000 acre-feet of water.
  It also identifies 105 recycling projects with the potential to 
produce about 854,000 acre-feet of water.
  That is a total of 1.2 million acre-feet of clean water per year, 
enough for 2.4 million households.
  But these projects aren't cheap. That is why the bill funds a loan-
guarantee program and other financing mechanisms to help make these 
projects a reality.
  Another area we should focus on is storage. This drought has showed 
that our reservoir capacity is insufficient.
  Given the consensus that droughts will grow more severe, we have to 
increase how much water we can hold from wet to dry years.
  The bill positions the Federal Government as a partner with 
California to build new reservoirs and expand existing reservoirs.
  Conservation and groundwater recharge are two more promising areas. 
While cities and towns are doing their part, the bill also identifies 
areas where the Federal, state and local governments and the ag sector 
can do more.
  Finally, the Federal Government can play a significant role in 
supporting research on promising technologies, from recapturing energy 
and improving membranes used in desalination to developing strategies 
to minimize environmental effects of smart-water strategies.
  The bill also includes a number of short-term, low-cost proposals to 
protect and assist in the recovery of fish populations, including 
salmon and smelt.
  This includes authorizations to implement the Endangered Species Act 
recovery plan for salmon; trap-and-barge fish and address predator 
species, two ways to reduce mortality rates; create additional spawning 
habitat for endangered and threatened species; and improving how water 
systems are managed using the latest science and technology.
  The bill's short-term provisions build on legislation that 
unanimously passed the Senate in 2014, with added protections for 
environmental and water rights and the removal of several provisions to 
address environmental concerns.
  The bill's short-term provisions will help move water efficiently to 
those areas where it is most needed.
  Let me be clear--this language was carefully drafted to remain 
consistent with environmental laws, including the Endangered Species 
Act and the Clean Water Act, as well as all biological opinions.
  Here are some examples of how the short-term section works.
  First, by operating the water systems with more precision, we will be 
able to monitor for endangered species like the Delta Smelt and adjust 
pumping levels to avoid harming fish. By doing this, more water can be 
moved to the communities that need it while protecting endangered and 
threatened species.
  The bill also directs agencies to open the Cross-Channel Gates on the 
Sacramento River during times when salmon are not migrating. This would 
allow thousands of acre feet of water to be moved without harming fish 
or water quality.
  For water transfers in the Delta--where water sellers and buyers can 
help get water where it's needed--we included many additional 
protections. Every transfer will be reviewed to ensure it is consistent 
with environmental laws. The transfers, which can only occur in April 
and May, must include only additional water pumped into the Delta on 
top of the regular river flow.
  Moving water more efficiently will help supply water to millions of 
Californians in urban areas, from Silicon Valley to Southern 
California.
  It will also increase water allocations for family farms in the San 
Joaquin Valley. More than 15,000 small farms served by the Friant Water 
Authority--with an average size of just 83 acres--would benefit.
  I have introduced many bills during my years in the Senate, and this 
may be the most difficult.
  Nevertheless, the goal has remained constant: a bill that can get 
signed into law that benefits all regions of the State.
  Congress worked together after Hurricanes Katrina ravaged the Gulf 
Coast and Hurricane Sandy devastated the East Coast.
  I think we now have a bill that will help the West survive this 
historic drought.
  I look forward to a committee hearing on this bill and to public 
input to make it even better.

[[Page S6143]]

                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. McCAIN:
  S. 1895. A bill to amend the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act for 
purposes of making claims under such Act based on exposure to 
atmospheric nuclear testing; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce legislation that 
would amend the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, RECA, by adding 
Mohave County, AZ, to the list of counties eligible for downwinder 
compensation. A similar proposal was introduced today by Congress Paul 
Gosar. I am hopeful this bill will help close a painful chapter for 
those Arizonans who were arguably the most affected by nuclear weapons 
testing during the Cold War.
  In 1990, Congress enacted the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act to 
compensate victims or their survivors who suffered certain illnesses 
caused by fallout exposure ``down wind'' of atmospheric nuclear weapons 
testing during the 1950's and 1960's. Among other requirements, 
eligibility is limited to individuals who can prove their physical 
presence in one of several affected counties. Astonishingly, despite 
its close proximity to the Nevada Test Site, the original RECA law and 
its subsequent amendments never listed Mohave County proper as an 
affected area. I believe the people of Mohave County deserve to see 
righted this unjust policy which has obstructed their ability to 
qualify for compensation.
  I understand that several of my colleagues have proposed similar RECA 
amendments in previous years. I would hope that these various RECA 
proposals give additional consideration to an April 2005 report by the 
National Academy of Sciences, NAS, that assessed, among other things, 
whether additional geographic areas should be added to the RECA 
program. The NAS study revealed a much wider area of radioactive 
fallout then originally identified when the RECA law was first written. 
The report also recommended replacing the geographic area criteria with 
a new science-based process for determining compensation eligibility, a 
method similar to what's used in the Radiation Exposed-Veterans 
Compensation Act and the Energy Employees Occupational Illness 
Compensation Program Act. I believe it is worthwhile for policy makers 
to consider the recommendations of the NAS report.
  This bill is an expansion of the RECA program and thus I will be 
working with my colleagues to find funding offsets to ensure there is 
no net increase in government spending if this legislation were 
enacted. I encourage my colleagues to support this bill.

                          ____________________