[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 14]
[Senate]
[Pages 19165-19175]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Ms. LANDRIEU (for herself and Mr. Bayh):
  S. 3057. A bill to support the establishment or expansion and 
operation of programs using a network of public and private community 
entities to provide mentoring for children in foster care; to the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, in 1999, several of us, including the 
late John Chafee and former First Lady, Hillary Clinton, took a long 
hard look at our Nation's foster care system and in particular those 
whom the system failed. Each year 25,000 young people leave our foster 
care system without ever finding a permanent family. Too many of these 
young people have been in this system for the majority of their lives, 
moved from home to home to home, school to school, with no one to count 
on or turn to for guidance and no where to call ``home.''
  Studies show that within two to four years of leaving foster care, 
only half have completed high school, fewer than half are employed, 
one-fourth have been homeless for at least one night, 30 percent did 
not have access to needed health care, 60 percent of the young women 
have given birth, and less than one-in-five are completely self-
supporting. In addition, many States report that the overwhelming 
majority of youth offenders housed in their State prisons were once a 
part of our Nation's foster care system.
  While these statistics are, in and of themselves. disturbing, as 
author, Ruth Sidel, once said, ``statistics are people with the tears 
wiped away.'' It is easier for us to think of the almost 600,000 
children making their way through our foster care system as numbers, 
but they are not. They are children. And like every child, they are 
born with a need to belong, to be loved, to feel protected and 
sheltered. When we were working on the John Chafee Foster Care 
Independence Act of 1999, a young woman named Lisa, who had spent her 
life in foster care explained this concept better than I ever could. 
She said, ``even at 21, I dream about having someone to call when I am 
not sure whether you wash whites in warm or cold water, someone to tell 
me that they are proud that I got an A on my Biology test, and most 
importantly someone who will love me no matter what. Other kids have 
that and they are lucky.''
  One of my goals as United States Senator is to change our foster care 
system so children like Lisa do not fall through it's cracks. When you 
stop and think about it, there is no such thing as a foster care 
``system'', its just people, and these children do not fall through 
``cracks'', they fall through our fingers. I, for one, intend to do 
what I can to ensure that each and every child in the world goes to bed 
at night blanketed with the security that only a family of their own 
can provide. The legislation that I am here to introduce today by no 
means solves the many problems facing our kids in care, but it will go 
a long way toward ensuring that they do not fall through our fingers.
  The Foster Care Mentoring Act of 2002 authorizes $15 million a year 
to be used by States to create a statewide foster care mentor program 
that aims to match a trained, responsible adult with each and every 
child in care. Last week, I had the chance to sit down with an 
organization, Children Uniting Nations and the First Lady of 
California, Sharon Davis, and they shared with me the enormous success 
they have had in California with a program like this. The mentors 
provide friendship, guidance, academic tutoring and most importantly 
consistency to children who are in desperate need of such things. In 
addition, this legislation provides Federal student loan forgiveness 
for each mentor that contributes at least 200 hours a year to a child 
in need.
  Although a mentor can never take the place of a permanent family, 
they can make sure these children do not get lost in a system designed 
to protect them. Mentors can give these children the tools they need to 
survive and help guide and protect them as they wait for the permanent 
home they need and deserve. I hope that my colleagues will join me in 
support of this legislation.
  Mr. BAYH. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in support of 
legislation I have been working on with Senator Landrieu to ensure our 
foster care youth are provided every opportunity to develop into 
bright, capable adults and become productive and valuable members of 
our society. The Foster Care Mentoring Act will help provide a foster 
care child with a role model, tutor and friend.
  Although there are several concerns with the administration of our 
child welfare system, this bill is one way we can immediately provide 
necessary relief and guidance to children who have been the victims of 
abuse and neglect. This legislation takes a necessary step toward 
providing these children with a healthy stable environment. There are 
over half a million children in the nation's foster care system, 7,482 
children in Indiana alone. As the guardian of these children, the 
government should take all possible steps to help them overcome their 
barriers.
  As a result of the abuse foster care children have experienced, they 
are less likely to trust adults, create healthy relationships, and 
perform academically. Mentors will help them establish trusting 
relationships, assist them with their school work, and develop 
emotionally. Mentors will remind foster care youth that they are wanted 
members of our society who deserve every opportunity to achieve their 
dreams.
  Mentors have proven to have positive impacts on the youth they 
mentor. Children that have mentors have better relationships with 
adults, fewer disciplinary referrals, and more confidence to achieve 
their goals. Research shows that caring adults can make a difference in 
children's lives: 46 percent of mentored teens are less likely to use 
drugs; 59 percent of mentored teens have better academic performance; 
73 percent of mentored teens achieve higher goals generally.
  The Foster Care Mentoring Act authorizes $15 million a year to ensure 
that each mentor receives the appropriate training, makes a long-term 
commitment to the program, and fulfills educational requirements to 
mentor foster care youth. Mentoring foster care youth is another way 
young citizens can serve their country. This bill would reward those 
who take time to assist those in need. Each college-bound individual 
will have $2,000 forgiven from their student loans for every 200 hours 
they serve as a mentor to a foster care child. States will have the 
flexibility to coordinate with already existing programs to create 
mentor-child partnerships. In addition, the legislation would provide 
$4 million a year for the creation and administration of a national 
hotline and website to coordinate mentoring efforts.
  Although we should work together to ensure each child in the foster 
care system is placed in a loving, stable, safe, and permanent home, in 
the meantime

[[Page 19166]]

we can at least provide them with a guiding friend. I look forward to 
working with my colleagues to implement this important legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Harkin, Mr. 
        Allard, Mr. Reid, and Mrs. Clinton):
  S. 3058. A bill to amend the Energy Employees Occupational Illness 
Compensation Program Act of 2000 to provide benefits for contractor 
employees of the Department of Energy who were exposed to toxic 
substances at Department of Energy facilities, to provide coverage 
under subtitle B of that Act for certain additional individuals, to 
establish an ombudsman and otherwise reform the assistance provided to 
claimants under that Act, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, two years ago we enacted the Energy 
Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act, EEOICPA. This 
important legislation was intended to give timely, uniform and 
reasonable compensation to Department of Energy employees suffering 
injury and disease resulting from working in the nuclear weapons 
program.
  The program has two parts: a Federal component for certain diseases, 
and, for all others, an assistance program for the filing of State 
workers' compensation claims. The Federal component, for workers made 
ill by exposure to substances unique to DOE facilities, gives a one-
time $150,000 payment and covers medical payments for illnesses like 
beryllium disease, certain cancers and silicosis.
  Since the passage of the original act in October 2000 a number of 
additional issues, complicating factors and implementation barriers 
have emerged. Recently I held a public meeting in Espanola, New Mexico 
with Representative Tom Udall, to review the performance of the 
program. The gathering, attending by over 300 present and former 
workers, focused on three broad issues: delays in processing claims, 
missing radiation exposure records and difficulty gaining compensation 
for exposure to toxic substances, like mercury.
  Upon my return I continued to investigate the implementation barriers 
facing the program. Meetings with Department of Energy, Labor and HHS 
officials as well as experts in occupational health and workers 
compensation revealed further flaws. Let me describe some of the 
problems this legislation is intended to address based on what I have 
recently learned.
  First, with regard to subtitle D, the program relies on an 
amalgamation of private insurance, state workers compensation programs 
and DOE contractor self-insurance for the timely and fair payment of 
medical costs and lost wages. Unfortunately, Department of Energy 
officials recently stated that up to 50 percent of all eligible 
beneficiaries would not have access to a willing payor. Assistant 
Secretary of Energy Beverly Cook in a June 7, 2002 letter noted DOE 
cannot give directives to ``persons who are not DOE contractors, such 
as insurers or lessees of DOE facilities.'' In short, workers found to 
have a meritorious claim under the program may not have a payor. The 
legislation introduced today would address this problem by making DOE 
the defacto for all claims.
  Further, the Department of Energy failed, for nearly two years 
following the passage of the legislation, to publish a rule crucial for 
the submission of subtitle D claims. The physician panel rule is a 
critical component allowing injury claims to be adjudicated by a panel 
of physicians specializing in occupational medicine. Since the 
inception of the program and because of delays like the one described 
above, only four claims have been sent to the physician panel for 
review. Clearly, we must do better. My legislation simplifies the 
process to allow the expeditious handling of claims.
  The dangers faced by these workers is only now being fully 
understood. In addition to certain cancers, silicosis and beryllium 
disease, increased risk for other maladies are now being discovered. In 
my own State of New Mexico I have workers suffering from mercury 
poisoning, once known as ``Mad Hatters'' disease. Mr. Alex Smith of 
Espanola operated a mercury still for many years at the Los Alamos 
National Laboratory. At one point Mr. Smith displayed all the signs of 
both acute and chronic mercury poisoning. He approached LANL's medical 
clinic seeking treatment only to be told he was not suffering from 
mercury poisoning. Documentation later revealed a different story. In 
fact, the physician did suspect Mr. Smith suffered from mercury 
toxicity but, for reasons we can only speculate on now, failed to act. 
According to the Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance, during the 
1950's a majority of the world's mercury was used in the production of 
nuclear weapons. Although mercury usage is not unique to DOE 
facilities, the volumes utilized in these facilities, at one point 70 
percent of the world's supply, set mercury toxicity in this setting 
apart from other exposures.
  Recent data has revealed an increased risk of chronic renal disease 
and lung cancer from exposure to uranium and beryllium, respectively. 
Although lung cancer can arise from many causes, clear scientific data 
points to beryllium disease as a precursor for this devastating 
illness. As well, chronic renal disease has many etiologies with 
uranium among them. Like mercury, these exposures and the consequent 
illnesses are unique to the environment workers found themselves in and 
should be recognized.
  The legislation I am introducing today, along with Senators Bunning, 
Harkin, Allard and Reid, entitled the Energy Workers Compensation Act 
of 2002 is intended to fulfill the original legislative objectives of 
Congress, address unforeseen obstacles and assure just compensation for 
our Nation's energy workers.
  The Energy Workers Compensation Act of 2002 addresses and improves 
the shortcomings of the original legislation by: Establishing the 
Department of Labor as the willing payor of benefits for claimants 
approved by the Department of Energy under Subtitle D. Benefit payments 
are authorized from the previously established EEOICPA fund. Setting 
time limits for DOE to make determinations regarding claimant's 
employment records. Setting at 150 days the time limit for the 
reconstruction of worker's radiation dosages. Adding lung cancer to a 
list of covered beryllium related diseases. Adding chronic renal 
disease as a covered illness for uranium workers. Adding mercury 
disease as a covered illness for workers employed at facilities 
utilizing more than 100 kilograms of mercury. Establishing an ombudsman 
to help claimants with administration of claims. Allowing individuals 
otherwise eligible for compensation under EEOICPA, but who previously 
received Radiation Exposure Compensation Act awards, to be compensated 
at levels equal to EEOICPA.
  It is imperative we protect those who helped America win the cold 
war. Members of the House of Representatives have come to similar 
conclusion. Representatives Whitfield and Strickland have recently 
introduced legislation similar to ours. They too realize that promises 
made to cold war era workers and families must be kept. A debt of 
gratitude to these workers, who became sick through no fault of their 
own, must be paid.
  I request unanimous consent that the bill and selected testimony be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 3058

       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 ``Energy Workers Compensation 
     Act of 2002''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS; PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation 
     Program Act of 2000 (the ``Act'') was intended to ensure 
     timely, uniform, and adequate compensation of covered 
     employees (and, where applicable, survivors of such 
     employees) suffering from illnesses incurred by such 
     employees in the

[[Page 19167]]

     performance of duty for the Department of Energy and certain 
     of its contractors, subcontractors, and vendors, and to 
     provide parity for uranium miners under the Radiation 
     Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note).
       (2) Four Federal agencies, the Departments of Labor, Health 
     and Human Services, Energy, and Justice, have been assigned 
     responsibilities under the Act pursuant to Executive Order 
     No. 13179, dated December 7, 2000 (42 U.S.C. 7384 note).
       (3) The Department of Labor began accepting claims July 31, 
     2001, and the Department of Health and Human Services, 
     through the National Institute for Occupational Safety and 
     Health, will perform radiation dose reconstruction for cancer 
     claims and evaluate petitions for Special Exposure Cohorts.
       (4) The Department of Energy finalized its regulations 
     governing claims under Subtitle D of the Act on August 14, 
     2002. Those regulations require claimants to use a State 
     workers' compensation system to secure benefits after 
     receiving a positive findings from a Department of Energy 
     physicians panel. The Department of Energy has conceded, 
     however, that it will not have a willing payor for as many as 
     50 percent of the claims that are meritorious. As a 
     consequence, many deserving claimants with a positive 
     determination from a Department of Energy physicians panel 
     will nonetheless be denied benefits.
       (5) The Department of Energy's regulations (at 10 C.F.R. 
     Part 852) direct contractors of the Department to adopt a 
     non-adversarial posture in state workers' compensation 
     proceedings, which are structured as an adversarial forum. 
     The policy of inserting a non-adversarial respondent in an 
     adversarial system should be remedied by utilizing a non-
     adversarial dispute resolution system. Taxpayers would also 
     benefit from placing claimants in a non-adversarial system, 
     such as the type of systems administered by the Department of 
     Labor under subtitle B of the Act or under chapter 81 of 
     title 5, United States Code (known as the Federal Employees 
     Compensation Act), as doing so would assure that disabilities 
     related to occupational illnesses would be compensated 
     proportional to the degree of injury.
       (6) In order to assure that congressional intent is honored 
     with respect to the Department of Energy's program of worker 
     assistance with state worker compensation for occupational 
     illnesses that arose out of the course of employment from 
     exposure to toxic substances at Department of Energy 
     facilities, the Department of Energy's implementation of 
     subtitle D of the Act requires reform, refinement, and 
     clarification.
       (7) Certain renal diseases related to uranium exposure and 
     cancers related to employment by beryllium vendors should be 
     added to coverage under subtitle B.
       (8) Congress intended that follow-up implementing 
     legislation would be required when it passed the Act and, in 
     section 3613 of the Act, directed the administration to 
     provide such legislation. Although such legislation was 
     forwarded on January 15, 2001, and Congress adopted technical 
     amendments to the Act in 2001, significant shortcomings in 
     the Act have been identified as the Act has been implemented.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to amend the 
     Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program 
     Act of 2000 to--
       (1) ensure that meritorious claims for exposure to toxic 
     substances at Department of Energy facilities are compensated 
     under subtitle D of the Act;
       (2) enhance assistance to claimants at the Department of 
     Labor;
       (3) ensure that there is parity in treatment of chronic 
     renal disease between uranium-exposed Department of Energy 
     employees (including employees of contractors, 
     subcontractors, and atomic weapons employer facilities) and 
     the uranium-exposed workers under the Radiation Exposure 
     Compensation Act;
       (4) provide coverage of lung cancer for covered beryllium 
     workers; and
       (5) make administrative improvements and technical 
     corrections.

 TITLE I--WORKERS' COMPENSATION BENEFITS FOR DOE CONTRACTOR EMPLOYEES 
                      EXPOSED TO TOXIC SUBSTANCES

     SEC. 101. BENEFITS.

       Subtitle D of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness 
     Compensation Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 7385o) is amended 
     to read as follows:

    ``Subtitle D--Workers' Compensation Benefits for DOE Contractor 
                 Employees Exposed to Toxic Substances

     ``SEC. 3661. DEFINITIONS.

       ``In this subtitle:
       ``(1) The term `DOE contractor' means any of the following:
       ``(A) A contractor (or subcontractor at any tier) of the 
     Department of Energy.
       ``(B) A contractor (or subcontractor at any tier) of USEC, 
     a Government-owned corporation, during the period beginning 
     on July 1, 1993, and ending on July 28, 1998.
       ``(2) The term `DOE contractor employee' means any of the 
     following:
       ``(A) An employee of a contractor (or subcontractor at any 
     tier) of the Department of Energy.
       ``(B) An employee of a contractor (or subcontractor at any 
     tier) of USEC, a Government-owned corporation, during the 
     period beginning on July 1, 1993, and ending on July 28, 
     1998.
       ``(3) The term `covered DOE contractor employee' means a 
     DOE contractor employee, if a claim relating to that employee 
     is forwarded by the Secretary of Energy under section 
     3662(d)(3)(A) to the Secretary of Labor for payment under 
     section 3663.
       ``(4) The term `specified illness' means, with respect to a 
     covered DOE contractor employee, the illness by reason of 
     which the claim relating to that employee was forwarded by 
     the Secretary of Energy under section 3662(d)(3)(A) to the 
     Secretary of Labor for payment under section 3663.

     ``SEC. 3662. DETERMINATIONS OF CAUSATION BY DEPARTMENT OF 
                   ENERGY.

       ``(a) Procedure for Submitting Claims.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary of Energy shall establish, 
     by regulation, procedures under which an individual may 
     submit a claim for benefits under this subtitle due to 
     occupational illness from exposure to toxic substances.
       ``(2) Notice to claimant.--Not later than 10 days after the 
     receipt of a claim under paragraph (1), the Secretary of 
     Energy shall notify the claimant of the receipt of the claim 
     and provide the name, address, and phone number of a person 
     capable of answering questions and providing additional 
     information with respect to the procedures and benefits under 
     this subtitle.
       ``(b) Initial Review by DOE.--
       ``(1) Evidence required.--The Secretary of Energy shall 
     review each claim submitted under this section and, for each 
     such claim, determine not later than 30 days after receipt of 
     the claim whether the claimant submitted reasonable evidence 
     of both of the following:
       ``(A) The claim was filed by or on behalf of a DOE 
     contractor employee or such employee's estate.
       ``(B) The illness or death of the DOE contractor employee 
     may have been related to employment at a Department of Energy 
     facility.
       ``(2) Determinations.--
       ``(A) If the Secretary determines that the claimant did not 
     submit reasonable evidence under either paragraph (1)(A) or 
     (1)(B), or both, the Secretary shall, not later than 10 days 
     after making such determination, notify the claimant of such 
     determination and include the claimant's options for appeal 
     or for submitting additional evidence.
       ``(B) If the Secretary determines that the claimant did 
     submit reasonable evidence under both paragraphs (1)(A) and 
     (1)(B), the Secretary shall--
       ``(i) not later than 10 days after making such 
     determination, notify the claimant of such determination;
       ``(ii) ensure that the claimant is afforded the opportunity 
     to review the entire record, and to supplement the record 
     within 30 days after the date on which information is 
     provided by the DOE contractor, before the claim is submitted 
     to a physicians panel;
       ``(iii) not later than 10 days after the end of the 30-day 
     period referred to in clause (ii) or the date on which the 
     claimant completes the supplement of the record under that 
     clause, whichever is later, submit the claim to a physicians 
     panel for review under subsection (c); and
       ``(iv) not later than 10 days after submitting the claim to 
     a physicians panel, notify the claimant of such submission.
       ``(c) Review by Physicians Panels.--
       ``(1) Composition.--
       ``(A) The Secretary of Energy shall inform the Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services of the number of physicians panels 
     the Secretary of Energy has determined to be appropriate to 
     administer this section, the number of physicians needed for 
     each panel, and the area of jurisdiction of each panel.
       ``(B) The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall 
     appoint panel members with experience and competency in 
     diagnosing occupational illnesses under section 3109 of title 
     5, United States Code. Each member of a panel shall be paid 
     at the rate of pay payable for level III of the Executive 
     Schedule for each day (including travel time) the member is 
     engaged in the work of a panel.
       ``(C) A panel established under this subsection shall not 
     be subject to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. 
     App.).
       ``(2) Operation.--
       ``(A) The Secretary of Energy shall assist the claimant in 
     obtaining additional evidence within the control of the 
     Department of Energy or a DOE contractor who employed a DOE 
     contractor employee and relevant to the panel's 
     deliberations.
       ``(B) At the request of a panel, the Secretary of Energy 
     and a DOE contractor who employed a DOE contractor employee 
     shall provide additional information relevant to the panel's 
     deliberations. A panel may consult specialists in relevant 
     fields as it determines necessary.
       ``(C) In any case in which the panel finds that additional 
     diagnostic testing or an exposure assessment is necessary to 
     the panel's deliberations--
       ``(i) the panel shall so notify the Secretary of Energy and 
     the claimant;
       ``(ii) the claimant may obtain such diagnostic testing or 
     exposure assessment using a qualified physician chosen by the 
     claimant or a qualified occupational health expert (as

[[Page 19168]]

     applicable) or, if the claimant so desires, may obtain such 
     diagnostic testing or exposure assessment using the program 
     carried out under section 3162 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (42 U.S.C. 7274i) to 
     monitor Department of Energy workers exposed to hazardous and 
     radioactive substances; and
       ``(iii) any costs of such diagnostic testing or exposure 
     assessment shall be paid for from the Fund established under 
     section 3612 and shall be provided by the Secretary of Energy 
     through a method under which the claimant is not required to 
     advance any amount toward payment of such costs.
       ``(D) The Secretary of Energy is authorized to enter into 
     or modify cooperative agreements with providers who are 
     implementing the program carried out under section 3162 of 
     the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 
     (42 U.S.C. 7274i) to provide assessments of exposures to 
     toxic substances at Department of Energy facilities to 
     claimants under circumstances covered by subparagraph (C).
       ``(3) Determination of causation.--A panel shall review a 
     claim submitted to it under this subsection and shall 
     determine, under guidelines established by the Secretary of 
     Energy, by regulation, whether the illness or death that is 
     the subject of the claim arose out of and in the course of 
     employment by the Department of Energy and exposure to a 
     toxic substance at a Department of Energy facility. For 
     purposes of the preceding sentence, illness or death shall be 
     deemed to arise out of and in the course of employment by the 
     Department of Energy and exposure to a toxic substance at a 
     Department of Energy facility if exposure to the toxic 
     substance (or substances, as the case may be) was a 
     significant factor which aggravated, contributed to, or 
     caused the illness or death.
       ``(4) Majority vote.--A determination under paragraph (3) 
     shall be made by majority vote.
       ``(5) Report to secretary.--Once a panel has made a 
     determination under paragraph (3), it shall report to the 
     Secretary of Energy its determination and the basis for the 
     determination.
       ``(d) Review of Panel Determinations.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary of Energy shall review a 
     panel's determination under subsection (c)(3), information 
     the panel considered in reaching its determination, any 
     relevant new information not reasonably available at the time 
     of the panel's deliberations, and the basis for the panel's 
     determination.
       ``(2) Acceptance of panel determination.--As a result of 
     the review under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall accept 
     the panel's determination in the absence of a preponderance 
     of evidence to the contrary.
       ``(3) Action upon accepted claims.--If the panel has made a 
     positive determination under subsection (c)(3) and the 
     Secretary accepts the determination under paragraph (2), or 
     the panel has made a negative determination under subsection 
     (c)(3) and the Secretary finds significant evidence to the 
     contrary--
       ``(A) the Secretary of Energy shall within 10 days forward 
     the claim to the Secretary of Labor for payment under section 
     3663, together with information relating to--
       ``(i) the DOE contractor employee to whom the claim 
     relates;
       ``(ii) the illness to which the claim relates;
       ``(iii) the determination of the panel and the basis for 
     the determination;
       ``(iv)(I) the acceptance of the Secretary and the basis for 
     the acceptance; or
       ``(II) the reversal of the negative determination by the 
     panel and the basis for the reversal;
       ``(v) the employment to which the claim relates, including 
     available wage or salary information; and
       ``(vi) any other matter that the Secretary of Labor 
     considers necessary;
       ``(B) the Secretary of Energy thereafter--
       ``(i) shall not contest the claim;
       ``(ii) shall not contest an award made regarding the claim; 
     and
       ``(iii) shall direct the DOE contractor who employed the 
     DOE contractor employee to which the claim relates not to 
     contest the claim or such award in any administrative or 
     judicial forum, and such obligation in no case shall be 
     considered discretionary; and
       ``(C) any costs of contesting a claim or an award regarding 
     the claim incurred by the DOE contractor who employed the DOE 
     contractor employee who is the subject of the claim shall not 
     be an allowable cost under a Department of Energy contract.
       ``(e) Access to Information.--
       ``(1) duty to provide information.--At the request of the 
     Secretary of Energy, a DOE contractor who employed a DOE 
     contractor employee and any other entity possessing 
     information related to such employee relevant to 
     deliberations under this section shall make such information 
     available to the Secretary.
       ``(2) Copies to claimant.--The Secretary of Energy shall 
     require that a DOE contractor who provides any information to 
     the Secretary or a panel under this section shall 
     simultaneously provide such information to the claimant.
       ``(f) Outreach.--The Secretary of Energy, in cooperation 
     with the Secretary of Labor, shall carry out a program of 
     outreach and education about the availability of benefits 
     under this subtitle. The Secretary shall make available in 
     paper and electronic format forms and information available 
     for potential claimants. As part of the program of outreach, 
     the Secretary shall conduct notification by mail and use the 
     former worker medical screening programs to notify, educate, 
     and assist claimants.
       ``(g) Administrative and Judicial Review.--The Secretary of 
     Energy shall establish a process under which a claimant may 
     obtain prompt and independent administrative review of any 
     adverse determination by the Secretary under subsection (b) 
     or (d) or by a panel under subsection (c). The results of any 
     such administrative review shall be deemed to be a final 
     agency action subject to judicial review.
       ``(h) Report to Congress.--Not later than February 1 of 
     each year, the Secretary of Energy shall submit to Congress a 
     report on the implementation and operation of this section. 
     The report shall include, for the preceding calendar year--
       ``(1) the number of claims received under this subtitle;
       ``(2) the size of the backlog in processing such claims;
       ``(3) the number of such claims submitted to a physicians 
     panel;
       ``(4) the number of such claims for which a panel made a 
     determination, including the number of determinations that 
     were positive and the number that were negative;
       ``(5) the number of determinations accepted, reversed, and 
     denied by the Secretary;
       ``(6) the number of claims denied under subsection (b) for 
     failure to submit reasonable evidence;
       ``(7) the number and type of diagnostic tests and exposure 
     assessments requested by a panel, and the number and type of 
     such tests and assessments that were carried out;
       ``(8) the number and type of claims appealed, and the 
     dispositions of such appeals; and
       ``(9) the expenditures made, and staff and contractors 
     employed, in carrying out the Department of Energy's 
     responsibilities under this section.
       ``(i) Applicability of Existing Regulations.--In 
     implementing the Energy Workers Compensation Act of 2002 and 
     the amendments to this title made by that Act, regulations 
     prescribed by the Secretary of Energy before the date of the 
     enactment of that Act may, to the extent not inconsistent 
     with this title (as so amended), continue to apply to this 
     title.

     ``SEC. 3663. PAYMENT OF BENEFITS BY DEPARTMENT OF LABOR.

       ``(a) In General.--
       ``(1) Payments.--Payments shall be made with respect to a 
     covered DOE contractor employee in accordance with this 
     section for the disability or death of that employee 
     resulting from that employee's specified illness.
       ``(2) Medical benefits.--A covered DOE contractor employee 
     shall receive medical benefits under section 3629 for that 
     employee's specified illness.
       ``(3) Payment from fund.--The compensation provided under 
     this section shall be paid from the Fund established under 
     section 3612.
       ``(b) Duty of Secretary of Labor.--The Secretary of Labor 
     shall have the duty to carry out this section.
       ``(c) Nature and Amount of Payments.--
       ``(1) In general.--The following provisions of subchapter I 
     of chapter 81 of title 5, United States Code, apply to a 
     covered DOE contractor employee (including the regulations 
     prescribed with respect to those provisions, adapted as 
     appropriate), and the Secretary of Labor shall provide, with 
     respect to that employee and that employee's specified 
     illness, payments determined in accordance with those 
     provisions: Sections 8102(a), 8105, 8106, 8107, 8108, 8109, 
     8110, 8111(a), 8112, 8114, 8115, 8116, 8117, 8133, 8134, and 
     8146a.
       ``(2) Organs and physiological systems.--For purposes of 
     carrying out this subtitle, the Secretary of Labor shall 
     prescribe additional regulations for resolving claims under 
     this subtitle of partial or total loss of use of function of 
     organs or physiological systems that are not already covered 
     by existing regulations. Such additional regulations shall 
     cover the liver, brain, stomach, heart, esophagus, bladder, 
     thyroid, pancreas, and nervous system, and such additional 
     organs and physiological systems as the Secretary considers 
     appropriate. The Secretary shall issue such regulations not 
     later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of the 
     Energy Workers Compensation Act of 2002.
       ``(d) Administrative and Judicial Review.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary of Labor shall establish a 
     process under which a claimant may obtain administrative 
     review of any adverse determination by the Secretary of Labor 
     under this section. Such process shall not apply to any 
     adverse determination by the Secretary of Energy.
       ``(2) Judicial review.--The results of any such 
     administrative review shall be deemed to be a final agency 
     action subject to judicial review in the United States 
     district court for the district in which the claimant 
     resides.
       ``(3) Attorney fees.--In any proceeding pursuant to this 
     subsection, attorney fees

[[Page 19169]]

     shall be available on the same basis as such fees are 
     available under section 28 of the Longshore and Harbor 
     Workers' Compensation Act (33 U.S.C. 928).

     ``SEC. 3664. GENERAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO RESOLUTION OF 
                   CLAIMS.

       ``(a) Nonadversarial.--The Secretary of Energy and the 
     Secretary of Labor shall each ensure that claims under this 
     subtitle are resolved in a nonadversarial manner.
       ``(b) No Statute of Limitations.--A claim under this 
     subtitle shall not be barred by any statute of limitations.

     ``SEC. 3665. OFFSET FOR CERTAIN PAYMENTS.

       ``A claimant awarded benefits under this subtitle as a 
     result of a specified illness or death of a DOE contractor 
     employee who receives benefits because of the same illness or 
     death from any State workers' compensation system shall 
     receive the benefits specified in this subtitle for such 
     illness or death, reduced by the amount of any workers' 
     compensation benefits that the claimant receives or will 
     receive on account of such illness or death under any State 
     workers' compensation system during the period that awarded 
     benefits are provided under this subtitle, after deducting 
     the reasonable costs, as determined by the Secretary of Labor 
     by regulation, of obtaining such benefits.

     ``SEC. 3666. SUBROGATION OF THE UNITED STATES NOT APPLICABLE.

       ``Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the United 
     States has no right of subrogation against any person by 
     reason of payments or other benefits provided under this 
     subtitle.

     ``SEC. 3667. CERTIFICATION OF TREATMENT OF PAYMENTS UNDER 
                   OTHER LAWS.

       ``Compensation or benefits provided to an individual under 
     this subtitle--
       ``(1) shall be treated for purposes of the internal revenue 
     laws of the United States as damages for human suffering; and
       ``(2) shall not be included as income or resources for 
     purposes of determining eligibility to receive benefits 
     described in section 3803(c)(2)(C) of title 31, United States 
     Code, or the amount of such benefits.

     ``SEC. 3668. CERTAIN CLAIMS NOT AFFECTED BY AWARDS OF 
                   DAMAGES.

       ``A payment under this subtitle shall not be considered as 
     any form of compensation or reimbursement for a loss for 
     purposes of imposing liability on any individual receiving 
     such payment, on the basis of such receipt, to repay any 
     insurance carrier for insurance payments; and a payment under 
     this subtitle shall not affect any claim against an insurance 
     carrier with respect to insurance.

     ``SEC. 3669. FORFEITURE OF BENEFITS BY CONVICTED FELONS.

       ``(a) Forfeiture of Compensation.--Any individual convicted 
     of a violation of section 1920 of title 18, United States 
     Code, or any other Federal or State criminal statute relating 
     to fraud in the application for or receipt of any benefit 
     under this title or under any other Federal or State workers' 
     compensation law, shall forfeit (as of the date of such 
     conviction) any entitlement to any compensation or benefit 
     under this subtitle such individual would otherwise be 
     awarded for any injury, illness, or death covered by this 
     subtitle for which the time of injury was on or before the 
     date of the conviction.
       ``(b) Information.--Notwithstanding section 552a of title 
     5, United States Code, or any other Federal or State law, an 
     agency of the United States, a State, or a political 
     subdivision of a State shall make available to the President, 
     upon written request from the President and if the President 
     requires the information to carry out this section, the names 
     and Social Security account numbers of individuals confined, 
     for conviction of a felony, in a jail, prison, or other penal 
     institution or correctional facility under the jurisdiction 
     of that agency.

     ``SEC. 3670. EXCLUSIVITY OF REMEDY.

       ``The liability of the United States or a DOE contractor in 
     its capacity as an employer of a DOE contractor employee 
     under this subtitle with respect to the specified illness or 
     death of a DOE contractor employee for which compensation is 
     made under this subtitle is exclusive and instead of all 
     other liability of the United States or DOE contractor in 
     such capacity to the employee, his legal representative, 
     spouse, dependents, next of kin, and any other person 
     otherwise entitled to recover damages from the United States 
     or DOE contractor in such capacity because of the specified 
     illness or death in a direct judicial proceeding, in a civil 
     action, or in admiralty, except for a State workers' 
     compensation proceeding or a State intentional tort liability 
     proceeding. However, this section shall not apply to illness 
     or death for which compensation under this subtitle is not 
     made.

     ``SEC. 3671. COORDINATION WITH BENEFITS UNDER SUBTITLE B.

       ``(a) Receipt of Subtitle B Benefits No Bar to Application 
     Under This Subtitle.--An individual may apply for benefits 
     under this subtitle without regard to whether the individual 
     received a lump sum payment under subtitle B.
       ``(b) Offset for Benefits Paid on Same Illness of Same 
     Person.--If a lump sum payment is made under subtitle B by 
     reason of a specified illness of a person, any payment 
     (excluding medical costs) made under this subtitle by reason 
     of the same specified illness of the same person shall be 
     offset by the amount of such lump sum payment. In no case 
     shall a claimant obtain double indemnity wage replacement 
     benefits for specified illness under this subtitle.

     ``SEC. 3672. ASSIGNMENT OF CLAIM.

       ``An assignment of a claim for compensation under this 
     subtitle is void. Compensation and claims for compensation 
     are exempt from claims of creditors.''.

     SEC. 102. GAO REPORT.

       Not later than February 1, 2004, the Comptroller General 
     shall submit to Congress a report on the implementation by 
     the Department of Energy of subtitle D of the Energy 
     Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 
     2000 (42 U.S.C. 7385o et seq.), as amended by section 101, 
     and of the effectiveness of such subtitle in assisting DOE 
     contractor employees in obtaining compensation for exposure 
     to a toxic substance at a Department of Energy facility.

         TITLE II--AMENDMENTS RELATING TO SUBTITLE B OF PROGRAM

     SEC. 201. COVERAGE FOR CHRONIC RENAL DISEASE.

       (a) Definitions for Program Administration.--Section 3621 
     of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation 
     Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 7384l) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by adding at the end the following 
     new subparagraph:
       ``(D) A covered employee with chronic renal disease.'';
       (2) in paragraph (15), by striking ``or chronic silicosis'' 
     and inserting ``chronic silicosis, chronic renal disease,''; 
     and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
       ``(19) The term `chronic renal disease' includes nephritis 
     and kidney tubal tissue injury and related illnesses of the 
     urogenitoury tract.
       ``(20) The term `covered employee with chronic renal 
     disease' means an individual determined to have sustained 
     chronic renal disease in the performance of duty in 
     accordance with section 3623(f).''.
       (b) Exposure in the Performance of Duty.--Section 3623 of 
     such Act (42 U.S.C. 7384n) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(f) Chronic Renal Disease.--(1) An individual with 
     chronic renal disease shall, in the absence of substantial 
     evidence to the contrary, be determined to have sustained 
     chronic renal disease in the performance of duty for purposes 
     of the compensation program if the individual--
       ``(A) was employed in a Department of Energy facility (in 
     the case of a Department of Energy employee or a Department 
     of Energy contractor employee) or an atomic weapons employer 
     facility (in the case of an atomic weapons employee) that 
     conducted uranium processing, converting, refining, 
     enriching, extruding, calcining, machining, or rolling, or 
     that operated as a uranium foundry;
       ``(B) carried out job functions while so employed that 
     resulted in the potential for exposure, inhalation, or uptake 
     of uranium or uranium compounds for at least 250 days; and
       ``(C) submits medical evidence that the individual, after 
     commencing the employment specified in subparagraph (A), 
     contracted chronic renal disease.
       ``(2) Not later than 60 days after the date of the 
     enactment of the Energy Workers Compensation Act of 2002, the 
     Secretary of Energy shall designate a list of Department of 
     Energy facilities and atomic weapons employer facilities that 
     were engaged in uranium processing, converting, refining, 
     enriching, extruding, calcining, machining, or rolling, or 
     that operated as a uranium foundry, including the dates such 
     activities were performed. The list of facilities shall not 
     include facilities for which uranium millers and transporters 
     are already covered under the Radiation Exposure Compensation 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note).
       ``(3) Not later than 90 days after the date of the 
     enactment of the Energy Workers Compensation Act of 2002, the 
     Secretary of Labor, in consultation with the Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services, shall establish, by regulation, 
     procedures to be followed and medical evidence to be 
     submitted by claimants for chronic renal disease claims.''.
       (c) Offset for Certain Payments.--Section 3641 of such Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 7385) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``or covered uranium employee (as defined 
     in section 3630),'' and inserting ``covered uranium employee 
     (as defined in section 3630), covered employee with chronic 
     renal disease,''; and
       (2) by striking ``or radiation,'' and inserting 
     ``radiation, uranium,''.
       (d) Conforming Amendments.--The following provisions of 
     such Act are amended by inserting ``chronic renal disease,'' 
     after ``chronic silicosis,'' each place such term appears:
       (1) Subsections (a)(1) and (b)(2)(A) of section 3631 (42 
     U.S.C. 7384v).
       (2) Section 3644(a) (42 U.S.C. 7385c(a))--
       (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1);
       (B) in paragraph (2)(C); and
       (C) in the matter following paragraph (2)(C).

     SEC. 202. COVERAGE FOR MERCURY POISONING.

       (a) Definitions for Program Administration.--Section 3621 
     of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation 
     Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 7384l), as amended by

[[Page 19170]]

     section 201(a) of this Act, is further amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by adding at the end the following 
     new subparagraph:
       ``(E) A covered employee with mercury poisoning.'';
       (2) in paragraph (15), by inserting ``or mercury 
     poisoning'' after ``chronic renal disease,''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(21) The term `covered employee with mercury poisoning' 
     means an individual determined to have sustained mercury 
     poisoning in the performance of duty in accordance with 
     section 3627A.''.
       (b) Participation in Compensation Program.--Subtitle B of 
     that Act (42 U.S.C. 7384l et seq.) is further amended by 
     inserting after section 3627 the following new section:

     ``SEC. 3627A. MERCURY POISONING.

       ``(a) In General.--A Department of Energy employee or 
     Department of Energy contractor employee who was exposed to 
     mercury in the performance of duty and who experiences 
     mercury poisoning shall be treated as a covered employee for 
     purposes of the compensation program.
       ``(b) Exposure to Mercury in Performance of Duty.--A 
     Department of Energy employee or Department of Energy 
     contractor employee shall, in the absence of substantial 
     evidence to the contrary, be treated as having been exposed 
     to mercury in the performance of duty for purposes of 
     subsection (a) if while employed in activities associated 
     with the design, production, or testing of atomic weapons, or 
     clean-up related thereto, such employee was present in a 
     Department of Energy facility that--
       ``(1) contained more than 100 kilograms of mercury; and
       ``(2) did not confine mercury operations to work spaces 
     with dedicated ventilation systems for the removal of 
     airborne toxic substances.
       ``(c) Mercury Poisoning.--A Department of Energy employee 
     or Department of Energy contractor employee shall be treated 
     as experiencing mercury poisoning for purposes of subsection 
     (a) if such employee manifests a physical, psychological, or 
     neurological illness consistent with mercury poisoning.
       ``(d) Determinations of Mercury Poisoning.--The Secretary 
     of Labor shall utilize evaluations, tests, or other medical 
     information obtained pursuant to section 3162 of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (42 U.S.C. 
     7274i), and may utilize any other evaluations, tests, 
     information, or other means that the Secretary considers 
     appropriate, to determine whether a Department of Energy 
     employee or Department of Energy contractor employee 
     manifests a physical, psychological, or neurological illness 
     consistent with mercury poisoning for purposes of subsection 
     (a).''.
       (c) Offset for Certain Payments.--Section 3641 of such Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 7385), as amended by section 201(c) of this Act, 
     is further amended--
       (1) by inserting ``or covered employee with mercury 
     poisoning'' after ``covered employee with chronic renal 
     disease,''; and
       (2) by inserting ``or mercury'' after ``uranium,''.
       (d) Conforming Amendments.--The following provisions of 
     such Act, as amended by section 201(d) of this Act, are 
     further amended by inserting ``mercury poisoning,'' after 
     ``chronic renal disease,'' each place such term appears:
       (1) Subsections (a)(1) and (b)(2)(A) of section 3631 (42 
     U.S.C. 7384v).
       (2) Section 3644(a) (42 U.S.C. 7385c(a))--
       (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1);
       (B) in paragraph (2)(C); and
       (C) in the matter following paragraph (2)(C).

     SEC. 203. COVERAGE FOR LUNG CANCER IN COVERED BERYLLIUM 
                   EMPLOYEES.

       Section 3621(8) of the Energy Employees Occupational 
     Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 7384l(8)) 
     is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D) 
     and, in that subparagraph, by striking ``or (B)'' and 
     inserting ``(B), or (C)''; and
       (2) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(C) Lung cancer, if such cancer occurs within 5 years 
     after the date on which the employee is determined to have 
     been first exposed to beryllium in the performance of duty in 
     accordance with section 3623(a).''.

     SEC. 204. CLARIFICATION OF SPECIAL EXPOSURE COHORT EXPANSION 
                   PROCEDURE.

       (a) Automatic Designation by Lapse of Time.--Section 3626 
     of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation 
     Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 7384q) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(c) Automatic Designation by Lapse of Time.--
     Notwithstanding subsection (b), if a class of employees 
     described in subsection (a)(1) petitions to be treated as 
     members of the Special Exposure Cohort under subsection 
     (a)(3), the members of that class shall, as of the expiration 
     of the 180-day period beginning with the date on which the 
     petition was received, be deemed to be members of the Special 
     Exposure Cohort for purposes of the compensation program, 
     unless before the expiration of that period the petition is 
     denied.''.
       (b) Individual Presumption by Lapse of Time.--Section 3623 
     of that Act (42 U.S.C. 7384n) is amended by adding at the end 
     of subsection (d) the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) An estimate referred to in paragraph (1) shall be 
     completed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
     within 150 days after the date on which the Department of 
     Labor submits to the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
     the claim for which the estimate is required. If such 
     estimate cannot be completed before the expiration of such 
     period, it shall be deemed, for purposes of section 
     3626(b)(1), that it is not feasible to estimate with 
     sufficient accuracy the radiation dose received by the 
     individual to which the claim relates.''.

     SEC. 205. CORRECTING PROBLEMS IN THE RADIOEPIDEMIOLOGIC MODEL 
                   FOR DETERMINING COMPENSATION.

       Section 3623(c)(3) of the Energy Employees Occupational 
     Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 
     7384n(c)(3)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in subparagraph (C)--
       (A) by striking ``past health-related activities (such as 
     smoking),''; and
       (B) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; 
     and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(D) provide the benefit of the doubt to the claimant 
     wherever there is reasonable scientific evidence to justify 
     compensation, including such factors as dose rate 
     effectiveness of low dose radiation, bias due to selection 
     effects, and increasing risks from radiation with increasing 
     age at exposure.''.

     SEC. 206. ADDITIONAL SPECIFIED CANCERS.

       (a) Report.--The National Institute for Occupational Safety 
     and Health shall prepare a report that identifies each type 
     of cancer (other than specified cancers, as already defined 
     in section 3621(17) of the Energy Employees Occupational 
     Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 
     7384l(17))) that the Institute has determined from 
     epidemiology studies of workers or atomic bomb survivors to 
     be radiosensitive and, for each cancer so identified, 
     provides a basis for that determination. Not later than 90 
     days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Institute shall submit the report to Congress, the Secretary 
     of Labor, and the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 
     Health, and shall publish the report in the Federal Register, 
     for public review and comment.
       (b) Final Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the Institute shall submit to 
     Congress, the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Health and 
     Human Services, and the Advisory Board on Radiation and 
     Worker Health a final report, taking into account comments 
     received in response to the report under subsection (a), that 
     identifies each type of cancer that is appropriate to be 
     deemed an additional specified cancer for purposes of the 
     Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program 
     Act of 2000.

     SEC. 207. COVERAGE FOR INDIVIDUALS EMPLOYED BY ATOMIC WEAPONS 
                   EMPLOYERS OR BERYLLIUM EMPLOYEES DURING PERIOD 
                   OF RESIDUAL CONTAMINATION.

       Paragraphs (3) and (7)(C) of section 3621 of the Energy 
     Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 
     2000 (42 U.S.C. 7384l) are each amended by inserting before 
     the period at the end the following: ``, or during a period 
     when, as specified by the National Institute for Occupational 
     Safety and Health in the reports required by section 
     3151(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 2002 (42 U.S.C. 7384 note) or any subsequent 
     report, significant contamination remained in a facility of 
     the employer after such facility discontinued activities 
     relating to the production of nuclear weapons and such 
     contamination could have caused or substantially contributed 
     to the cancer of a covered employee with cancer or a covered 
     beryllium illness, as the case may be''.

     SEC. 208. COORDINATION OF COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS FOR 
                   CANCER WITH COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS UNDER 
                   OTHER RADIATION COMPENSATION LAWS.

       (a) Coordination.--Section 3651 of the Energy Employees 
     Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (42 
     U.S.C. 7385j) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 3651. COORDINATION WITH OTHER RADIATION COMPENSATION 
                   LAWS.

       ``(a) In General.--Except in accordance with section 3630 
     and except as provided in subsection (b), an individual may 
     not receive compensation or benefits under the compensation 
     program for cancer and also receive compensation under either 
     of the following:
       ``(1) The Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 
     2210 note).
       ``(2) Section 112(c) of title 38, United States Code.
       ``(b) Offset.--A payment of compensation may be made to an 
     individual, or the survivor of an individual, under subtitle 
     B for cancer for which payment has been made under the 
     Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, but the amount of such 
     payment shall

[[Page 19171]]

     be offset by the amount of any payment made pursuant to 
     section 4(a)(1)(A)(i)(III) or 4(a)(2)(C) of that Act on 
     account of such cancer.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 209. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.

       (a) Findings.--Section 3602(a)(6) of the Energy Employees 
     Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (42 
     U.S.C. 7384(a)(6)) is amended by striking the second sentence 
     and inserting the following: ``Furthermore, studies indicate 
     that 98 percent of radiation-induced cancers within the 
     Department of Energy nuclear weapons complex occur at dose 
     levels below the existing thresholds for establishing proof 
     of causation. Those studies further indicate that workers at 
     Department of Energy sites were exposed to levels of silica, 
     heavy metals, and toxic substances that will lead, contribute 
     to, or aggravate illnesses or diseases.''.
       (b) Payments in the Case of Deceased Persons.--Section 
     3628(e)(3)(A) (42 U.S.C. 7384s(e)(3)(A)) of such Act is 
     amended by inserting before the semicolon the following: ``, 
     or a wife or husband of that individual who was married to 
     that individual immediately before the death of that 
     individual and filed, on or before December 28, 2001, a claim 
     in that capacity under this subtitle''.

    TITLE III--ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANCE FOR CLAIMANTS UNDER EITHER 
                            SUBTITLE OF ACT

     SEC. 301. PROVIDING ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF IN CASES WHERE 
                   MEDICAL RECORDS ARE NOT AVAILABLE.

       Subtitle C of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness 
     Compensation Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 7385 et seq.) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 3652. PROOF WHEN MEDICAL RECORDS NOT AVAILABLE.

       ``For any claim under any subtitle of this title, if the 
     Department of Energy, a contractor of the Department of 
     Energy (including a DOE contractor, as defined in section 
     3661), an atomic energy weapons employer, or a beryllium 
     vendor is unable to locate medical records necessary for the 
     processing of that claim that it possessed or was required to 
     possess within 120 days after receiving a written request 
     from the claimant to locate such records, an affidavit of the 
     employee as to the contents of those records, together with 
     any medical records possessed by the claimant or otherwise 
     made available, shall be considered in determining the 
     medical evidence relating to the claim.''.

     SEC. 302. RESOURCE CENTERS AND OUTREACH PROGRAMS.

       Subtitle C of such Act is further amended by adding after 
     section 3652 (as added by section 301) the following new 
     section:

     ``SEC. 3653. RESOURCE CENTERS AND OUTREACH PROGRAMS.

       ``(a) Requirement.--The Secretary of Labor and the 
     Secretary of Energy shall maintain resource centers and 
     outreach programs relating to the availability of benefits 
     under any subtitle of this title. Such centers shall be 
     staffed and maintained proportional to the demand for 
     assistance and follow-up.
       ``(b) Underserved Areas.--The resource centers required by 
     subsection (a) shall include one or more resource centers in 
     each underserved area near a Department of Energy facility.
       ``(c) Duration.--(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     such centers and programs shall be maintained through 
     September 30, 2004.
       ``(2) In the case of a resource center in an underserved 
     area referred to in subsection (b), such center shall be 
     maintained until demand is exhausted.''.

     SEC. 303. OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN.

       (a) In General.--Subtitle C of such Act is further amended 
     by adding after section 3653 (as added by section 302) the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 3654. OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN.

       ``(a) Establishment.--There is established within the 
     Office of the Secretary of Labor an office, to be known as 
     the Office of the Ombudsman for Occupational Illness 
     Compensation (in this section referred to as the `Office'), 
     to assist claimants under this title.
       ``(b) Ombudsman.--
       ``(1) Appointment.--The head of the Office shall be the 
     Ombudsman. The Ombudsman shall be appointed by the Secretary 
     of Labor, after consultation with claimants or claimant 
     advocates, worker compensation experts, and members of the 
     advisory committees to Federal agencies implementing this 
     title, from among individuals with at least one of the 
     following qualifications:
       ``(A) Experience or training as an advocate.
       ``(B) Training as a health care provider with knowledge of 
     occupational illness and disease.
       ``(C) Experience in assisting claimants with worker 
     compensation claims.
       ``(2) Removal.--The Secretary of Labor may remove the 
     Ombudsman for just cause and shall, in such a case, 
     communicate to Congress the circumstances forming the basis 
     of such just cause.
       ``(c) Duties.--The duties of the Ombudsman are as follows:
       ``(1) To direct the operations of the Office.
       ``(2) To report to the Secretary of Labor with respect to 
     the activities of the Office.
       ``(3) To assist claimants under this title with claims 
     filed with the Department of Labor or the Department of 
     Energy.
       ``(4) To receive and investigate complaints or inquiries 
     regarding the status of a claim under this title.
       ``(5) To provide claimants under this title with contacts 
     at agencies with responsibilities under this title.
       ``(6) To offer informal advice on options available to 
     claimants under this title.
       ``(7) To identify whether claimants under this title are 
     encountering systematic difficulties or delays with respect 
     to claims under this title, and to make recommendations for 
     improvement, with respect to such claims, in speed, equity, 
     fairness, or compliance with statutes and regulations.
       ``(8) With respect to individuals filing complaints or 
     requests for information under this title--
       ``(A) to respond within 30 days after receiving such a 
     complaint or request;
       ``(B) to maintain reasonable communication with the 
     individual until the matter is resolved; and
       ``(C) to maintain, as confidential and privileged, the 
     identity of the individual, unless such confidentiality or 
     privilege is otherwise waived.
       ``(9) To maintain and publish a telephone number, facsimile 
     number, electronic mail address, and post office address for 
     the Office.
       ``(d) Limitation.--The Ombudsman may not reverse or make 
     decisions regarding any claim under this title.
       ``(e) Authority.--The Ombudsman is authorized to carry out 
     the following activities:
       ``(1) Investigate questions regarding a claim under this 
     title, or procedures or systems for processing such claims, 
     with the offices of the Department of Energy, Department of 
     Labor, and Department of Health and Human Services (including 
     the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health), 
     and any contractor of any such department, that has 
     responsibility under this title.
       ``(2) Contract for expert advice with respect to the 
     Ombudsman's responsibilities under this title.
       ``(3) Access any material relating to a matter under 
     investigation under paragraph (1).
       ``(4) Request explanations from any Federal agency with 
     responsibilities under this title about the activities of 
     that agency under this title.
       ``(5) Enter and inspect places in order to carry out an 
     investigation under paragraph (1).
       ``(6) Refer any matter within the responsibility of the 
     Ombudsman to an appropriate inspector general.
       ``(f) Cooperation With Federal Agencies.--Federal agencies 
     and the officials responsible for the implementation of this 
     title shall assist the Ombudsman in carrying out this section 
     and shall promptly make available to the Ombudsman all 
     information requested by the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman shall 
     cooperate with such agencies and officials.
       ``(g) Coordination.--The Ombudsman shall coordinate the 
     activities of the Office with the activities of the 
     Secretaries of Energy, Health and Human Services, and Labor 
     in carrying out this title. Such coordination shall be 
     carried out pursuant to memoranda of agreement entered into 
     among and between the Ombudsman and such Secretaries.
       ``(h) Annual Report.--Not later than January 1 of each 
     year, the Ombudsman shall submit a report on this title to 
     the President, Congress, and the Secretaries of Energy, 
     Health and Human Services, and Labor. No official outside the 
     Office may require such outside official's approval before 
     submitting the report. The report shall contain the 
     following:
       ``(1) The number and types of complaints, grievances, and 
     requests for assistance received by the Ombudsman in the 
     previous year.
       ``(2) Identification of the most common difficulties 
     encountered by claimants under this title.
       ``(3) Recommended changes to the administrative practices 
     of the Federal agencies with responsibility under this title.
       ``(4) Recommended legislative changes that may be 
     appropriate to mitigate problems with the implementation of 
     this title.
       ``(i) Publication.--The Secretaries of Energy, Health and 
     Human Services, and Labor shall publicize the availability of 
     the services of the Office.
       ``(j) Separate Line Item.--The budget of the President 
     under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, shall 
     include funding for the Office as a separate line item.
       ``(k) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 
     $800,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007.''.
       (b) Initial Appointment.--Not later than 60 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor 
     shall appoint the Ombudsman required by section 3654 of the 
     Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program 
     Act of 2000 (as added by subsection (a)).
       (c) Memoranda of Agreement.--Not later than 90 days after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act, the Ombudsman shall 
     enter into

[[Page 19172]]

     the memoranda of agreement required by such section 3654 (as 
     added by subsection (a)).
                                  ____


   Meeting on the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation 
         Program, May 11, 2002, 3:00 p.m., Espanola, New Mexico

       You know, these people are all good people. And after 9/11, 
     when there's been so much talk about patriotism and doing the 
     right thing by people who helped their country, on behalf of 
     Levi and others similarly situated, I would just ask the 
     Congress and the Administration to remember those words and 
     not let them be hollow, empty phrases. Thank you very much. 
     (Applause.)
       Mr. Smith: My name is Alex Smith. I'm a 33-year employee 
     with the Lab. I testified before Tom and Senator Bingaman and 
     David Michaels the last time. I went to work for the Lab in 
     1947 in the chemical warehouse. Tom and Bingaman already know 
     and I've been doing this for your benefit.
       I went to work for the chemical warehouse there at the Lab 
     in the old TA 1. My duties were clerk and to issue laboratory 
     chemicals and laboratory glassware, and when we had time, I'd 
     run a mercury, still, me and another fellow named Lewis 
     Devetima.
       In 1948, early in 1948, I started having trouble. My face 
     would swell up, and my gums were bleeding. And I would go 
     down to Q Building to see Dr. Whipple, and he would send me 
     home. He said, ``You're allergic to something,'' and that was 
     it.
       And when my face went back down, I'd come back to work and 
     it would happen all over again. About the fourth time, I got 
     to see Dr. Harriet Harding, who was a consultant there, and 
     she interviewed me. Luckily, I got to see her. And she asked 
     me where I worked, and I told her. She asked me what my 
     duties were, and I told her that I run a mercury still when I 
     didn't issue chemicals.
       She said, ``You're operating what?''
       I said, ``I operate a mercury still.''
       She said, ``Take me up there and show it to me.''
       So I did. She shut it down. And so we were full, me and 
     Lewis Devetima were full of mercury. We used to heat it, and 
     it had a still, like it was made out of glassware. It would 
     go through this, heat it, and form a gas, go through that, 
     come out condensed on that end, pure mercury. And we would 
     breathe in vapors, and it was in a small 10 x 10. The old 
     warehouse there in TA 1 was a shed. It was formerly the 
     stable for the school that was there before the Lab took 
     over, and they converted it into a chemical shop.
       Anyway, when I retired in 1982--prior to 1982, I suffered 
     from depression, bleeding gums, and so I went to the doctor 
     there at the Lab. I was in very bad shape, and she sent me to 
     a sanitarium in Albuquerque, and I spent some time there, 
     about two or three weeks. I then was on an outpatient to Dr. 
     Kenneth Poole there in Albuquerque for about three years.
       And then I came back and was under the tutelage of Dr. 
     William Oakes who worked for the H Division, and then he 
     retired. And I saw Dr. Charles Shafer, and then he retired. 
     And then I saw Dr. Ralph Greer. And anyway, when I retired, I 
     noticed that there was no record of this sickness on my 
     medical records.
       And I asked Dr. Greer why. And he said they searched and 
     they searched and they searched and they even went back into 
     the microfilms, and they could find no evidence of anything 
     to do with a mercury still or anything. So I retired thinking 
     that.
       When I testified before Mr. Bingaman and Mr. Udall and Mr. 
     Michaels, I didn't have any evidence. It was my story against 
     theirs. And I have met a fellow named Ken Silver. He found 
     these letters from Dr. Harding telling the whole story in six 
     letters, and the DOE database of historical documents, it 
     tells the whole story about me and Devetima's sickness, about 
     the mercury still, their shutting it down.
       These are all H Division letters to our division leader, 
     Van Gammer, Assistant Property Division leader. Yet they 
     couldn't find them. There was no evidence. They're here, 
     right here. Everything I have reverts back to those six 
     letters. In one of them, she refers to a fellow name Carl 
     Butler. I happen to know Carl Butler, so I wrote him a letter 
     telling him what was happening. He wrote me back a five-page 
     handwritten letter confirming everything that I said when I 
     testified, everything, even to closing down and admitted that 
     nobody in 1947 and 1948 in H Division knew anything about 
     mercury until an industrial engineer named Harold Sheeton--
     Harry Sheeton--came on board, and this was months later.
       And after I got that letter from Butler, I wrote a letter 
     to Mr. Udall and Mr. Bingaman, asking him--I sent them a copy 
     of those six letters. I didn't give them a copy of this, but 
     I did take it to Mr. Udall's office, everything I had, when 
     you were in Federal Place over there, and I gave it to Raul 
     and he made copies of it. He said he would forward it on to 
     you, your office.
       And this is my letter to Senator Bingaman asking that you 
     amend that Act to include mercury. I don't know what happened 
     there. I got a letter from Mr. Udall there, and he asked that 
     I get documentation. So I've got it. Don't you think I have 
     it? And you asked for names and addresses of people that are 
     working. I can give you names, Mr. Udall, but they all got 
     one address: Cemetery. There's no--me and Mr. Butler are the 
     only ones alive that I know that knew about that mercury 
     still, and why I'm still around, I don't know.
       After that, Mr. Silver came up with a couple more 
     publications by Dr. Harriet Potter on mercury poisoning. 
     Anybody that knows anything about mercury should read it. She 
     even enlightened me. I guess she really dug in to her 
     research. And in this--the other one is Challenging Manmade 
     Decisions by Harriet Potter. I'll read you just one paragraph 
     here.
       On page 54 it tells about the year 1948 in Los Alamos, 
     nonradioactive acting hazard material in use in Los Alamos. 
     ``An example will make this clear. Very soon after I began 
     active duty, a worker came to the nurse in H-2 complaining 
     with bleeding gums and skin rash.'' That's me. ``In taking 
     his job history, I found he and three other men were engaged 
     in cleaning dirty mercury, an element widely used.
       ``Next, I visited the job site. And even though I had no 
     engineering skill, I knew from my Massachusetts Department of 
     Occupational Hygiene experience that the mercury hazard was 
     great in this dirty, shed-like building.''
       I could go on, but I haven't got time, but you get the 
     drift. And I don't know where to go from here. I know mercury 
     is not covered in the Act. Like I say, I'm asking you to 
     amend it to include mercury. Thank you very much for 
     listening to me. I'm probably out of time. (Applause.)
       Mr. Leyba: The next person will be Phil Schofield.
       Mr. Schofield: Thank you for coming, Beverly Cook and 
     Congressman Udall, Senator Bingaman, Mr. Turcic, Mr. Elliot. 
     I'll try to keep my time short here.
       I worked for Los Alamos National Lab for 2 years. I suffer 
     from several severe health problems, multiple chemical 
     sensitivities, HO cervical syndrome, respiratory problems, 
     severe dermatology problems, swelling of my extremities. I 
     have short-term memory and concentration deficits, and plus I 
     lost almost half my hearing.
       Mainly what I would like to address is some problems with 
     the reconstruction of people's dosages. I can give you two 
     quick examples where personnel worked in the same room. One 
     was a--it depended on your job. You * * *
                                  ____

  Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I rise today as a cosponsor of the Energy 
Workers Compensation Act of 2002, EWCA.
  During the Cold War, workers employed at the Department of Energy 
sites across the country served our country by helping to make nuclear 
weapons. But, for over 50 years of manufacturing these weapons, we now 
know that the Department of Energy consistently sacrificed health and 
safety of the workers and placed them in harm's way without their 
knowledge. Many of these workers subsequently became ill due to their 
work with radioactive and toxic substances at the sites.
  In 2000, Congress passed legislation, the Energy Employees 
Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act, EEOICPA, to establish 
compensation programs for Department of Energy workers who became sick 
as a result of their work. The bill addressed compensation for 
illnesses caused by the workers' exposure to radiation, beryllium, and 
numerous toxic substances. EEOICPA created two separate programs: 
Subtitle B of the law provided a program administered by the Department 
of Labor that would give a lump sum $150,000 payment to workers exposed 
to radiation and beryllium; and, subtitle D of the law provided a 
program administered by the Department of Energy that relied on State 
worker compensation programs to make compensation payments to workers 
exposed to toxic substances. Subtitle D is what the EWCA legislation 
addresses.
  Currently, under subtitle D the Department of Energy uses a 
physician's panel to review workers' claims and determine whether a 
worker's illness is related to work at a Department of Energy site. 
Upon a positive finding, the panel relies upon individual State worker 
compensation programs to make payments for wage loss and medical 
benefits. The Department of Energy, however, has admitted that nearly 
half of the claimants will not be able to pinpoint a responsible payor 
who will be able to honor the Department of Energy Physician Panel 
finding because many contractors no longer are associated with DoE.
  Congress intended a uniform and equitable Federal compensation 
program

[[Page 19173]]

for these employees who worked to serve our country. The Government 
should not sit idly by and let this problem fester knowing that so many 
claimants will not receive any compensation.
  Introduction of the Energy Workers Compensation Act of 2002 will 
fulfill the original legislative objectives of Congress to assure 
compensation to all of our country's energy workers who were made ill 
due to their work with toxic substances. The legislation would correct 
subtitle D by making the Department of Labor responsible for paying 
those sick workers who are determined eligible to receive compensation.
  We are only now beginning to realize the dangers that the energy 
workers faced. These workers thought they were serving our country and 
were unaware of the risks they took to win the Cold War. We must do all 
we can to protect the energy workers to make sure they receive just 
compensation for the illnesses and disabilities they incurred from 
their jobs at the Department of Energy nuclear weapons sites.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BAUCUS:
  S. 3059. A bill to provide for the distribution of judgment funds to 
the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation; to the 
Committee on Indian Affairs.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill to 
provide for the use and distribution of judgment funds awarded to the 
Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation in northeast 
Montana.
  In 1987, the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck 
Reservation brought suit against the United States to recover interest 
earned on their trust funds while those funds were in Special Deposit 
and IMPL-Agency accounts. The case was filed in the United States 
Claims court, and docketed as No. 773-87-L.
  After the Court ruled that the United States was liable to the Fort 
Peck Tribes and individual Indians for interest on those funds, the 
Tribes and the United States reached an agreement for settling claims 
in the case, for the sum of $4,522,551.84. The court approved the 
settlement agreement.
  The settlement agreement further provided that the judgment be 
divided between the Fort Peck Tribes and those individual Indians who 
are found to be eligible to share in the judgment. On January 31, 2001, 
the court approved a stipulation between the parties that defined the 
procedures by which the Fort Peck Tribes' and individual Indians' 
respective shares in the judgment would be determined and distributed 
to them.
  Pursuant to the Court-approved stipulation in the case, on February 
14, 2001, a portion of the Tribe's share of the judgment was deposited 
into an account in Treasury for the use of the Fort Peck Tribes. As 
provided by the Court-approved stipulation, those funds are to be 
available for immediate use by the Tribe pursuant to a plan adopted 
under the Indian Tribal Judgment Funds Use or Distribution Act, 25 
U.S.C. 1401 et seq. The Court-approved stipulation further recognized 
that the Tribe will most likely receive additional payments from this 
settlement once the work identifying all individuals eligible to share 
in the judgment is completed and the pro rata shares are finally 
computed. Those funds, too, are to be available for use by the Tribe in 
accord with a plan adopted under the Tribal Judgment Funds Use or 
Distribution Act.
  As required by the stipulation and the Tribal Judgment Funds Use or 
Distribution Act, the Tribe developed a plan for the use of the Tribe's 
share of the settlement. Under the plan, the Tribe's share of the 
judgment will be used for tribal health, education, housing and social 
services program.
  The Tribe submitted its plan to the Department of the Interior for 
review and approval. Public hearings were held during which the views 
and recommendations of Tribal members were heard regarding the plan. 
The Tribe has been advised that the Department of Interior has no 
objection to the Tribe's plan and can approve it. However, although the 
plan was developed and public hearing held during 2001, the Interior 
Department did not complete its review of the plan, nor submit the 
approved plan to Congress within the one-year deadline imposed by the 
Tribal Judgment Funds Use or Distribution Act. As a result, in order 
for the Fort Peck Tribe to make use of the judgment awarded to the 
Tribe, it is necessary for Congress to formally adopt legislation 
approving the Tribe's plan. The proposed bill language, would serve 
this purpose.
  This judgment is based on money that rightfully belongs to the Fort 
Peck tribes and should be moved expeditiously through Congress. I look 
forward to working with the Committee on Indian Affairs to move this 
legislation forward.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KENNEDY:
  S. 3060. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide 
protections for human participants in research; to the Committee on 
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to 
achieve reforms in our system of oversight for protecting the safety of 
human subjects in research. As the Institute of Medicine report 
released today again demonstrates, reforms are long overdue. The moment 
has come to take action to restore the trust and confidence of those 
who serve as subjects in clinical trials and other forms of research.
  We passed the National Research Act over twenty years ago as an 
important step toward protecting against inhuman research experiments 
and conditions. We have developed guidelines to ensure that people 
participating in medical research have clearly agreed to be a part of 
the study and will be treated humanely during the study.
  These protections benefit the people participating as subjects in 
medical research, but they also help those conducting the research. If 
patients fear that they will not be protected or that the researchers 
do not have their best interests in mind, patients will not volunteer 
to take part in these needed tests.
  As we all know, a revolution is taking place in medicine today. 
Scientists have mapped the human genome. They have made incredible 
breakthroughs in treatments for cancer and AIDS. It is not unreasonable 
to expect that we will see cancer cured, a quadriplegic stand up and 
walk, new drugs that prevent Alzheimer's and AIDS, and other advances 
we cannot even begin to imagine. But for all these advances to take 
place, new treatments will first have to be tested on human subjects. 
For these studies to succeed, patients must have confidence in our 
system and must be willing to participate in medical research. We must 
protect patients when they volunteer for these tests. To do otherwise 
would jeopardize this very hopeful future.
  Many of those who participate in these studies are the most 
vulnerable members of our society and are the most in need of our 
protection. We are now benefiting from drugs that have been developed 
and tested outside the United States. Our country is based on the 
premise that all people are created equal. Basic protections that are 
good enough for research subjects in the United States should be good 
enough for research subjects in other nations who volunteer for tests 
that will benefit all of us.
  We also must face the fact that medical research is constantly 
changing. Protections that were put in place 20 years ago no longer 
cover all human research projects. New studies in areas such as gene 
therapy have raised safety and ethical concerns requiring special 
scrutiny.
  Institutional Review Boards, which review the safety and ethical 
acceptability of research involving human subjects, are overworked and 
underfunded. Loopholes in the system allow researchers who have had 
proposals rejected by one Board to reapply to a second Board in the 
hope of obtaining a more lenient review--all without notifying the 
second Board of the decision of the first. We do little to train 
researchers about methods for protecting human subjects. Many 
researchers with the best intentions are not knowledgeable of the 
latest changes to regulations.

[[Page 19174]]

  These shortcomings cry out for a response, especially at this moment 
in history that holds so much promise for future medical research. The 
legislation I am introducing addresses these issues by expanding 
research subject protections and strengthening the review and oversight 
mechanisms to ensure that all human subjects are properly protected.
  The legislation will, for the first time, ensure that all 
participants in such research are protected by a comprehensive and 
strong set of safeguards. The legislation provides clear statutory 
authorization for these protections and establishes a central office to 
review and amend current rules for the protections.
  The legislation will improve Institutional Review Boards by 
strengthening firewalls against conflicts of interest and enhancing 
training for Board members. The bill will provide the Boards with the 
funding they need to be effective, by allowing human subject protection 
costs to be charged as direct costs on federal grants. The bill will 
end ``IRB shopping'', the practice in which a proposal rejected by one 
Board for ethical reasons is submitted to a second Board in the hope of 
obtaining a more lenient review. The legislation will require that 
every Board receives accreditation to assure that it is carrying out 
its duties effectively and rigorously.
  The legislation will assist researchers in learning more about the 
best practices for protecting human subjects, by creating programs to 
improve training for researchers in good research practices. The bill 
strengthens the firewalls against financial conflicts of interest for 
researchers, and will require the establishment of regulations to 
govern payment of research subjects.
  The legislation will also enhance the ethical review of clinical 
trials conducted overseas with federal funding or submitted to FDA for 
review, by requiring that research conducted overseas that falls within 
U.S. regulatory jurisdiction must be reviewed and approved by a U.S. 
Institutional Review Board. The bill enhances the review of areas of 
research that raise special safety concerns, such as gene therapy and 
xenotransplantation.
  We must act now to improve our protections for human research 
subjects, so that patients will feel confident enough to volunteer for 
the many vital research projects that will be developed in coming 
years. These reforms will have a significant role in improving medical 
care. But even more important, these safeguards will protect our fellow 
human beings. The people this bill protects are not numbers of 
statistics. They are someone's mother, daughter, or spouse. Mistakes 
and abuses that hurt them affect their families, friends, and 
communities.
  We are a great people and a great nation. We are a moral people and 
an ethical nation. We must do all we can to see that our great medical 
advances of the future do not come at an unnecessary cost of death and 
suffering by patients who first volunteered to test these new medical 
treatments. I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact these 
needed reforms as soon as possible.
  I ask unanimous consent that a section-by-section analysis of the 
bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the analysis was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                    The Research Revitalization Act

       The current oversight system for protecting human subjects 
     is overdue for reform. Rules for research subject protection 
     do not cover all research. Protections for research subjects 
     are largely based on regulation rather than statute. There is 
     no Federal lead agency charged with amending and issuing 
     guidance on the rules for research subject protections, 
     resulting in an often confusing set of divergent regulations 
     across different Federal research agencies. In addition, 
     since no single agency can amend the research rules, the 
     rules themselves have not been updated in years and have not 
     kept pace with the changing nature of research. To address 
     these problems, the bill will: 1. Ensure that all human 
     subjects in all research are covered by strong protections. 
     2. Provide a clear statutory authorization for research 
     subject protections. 3. Establish a central office to amend 
     the rules for research subject protection.
       Institutional Review Boards, IRBs are committees at 
     universities and hospitals that review the safety and ethical 
     acceptability of research involving human subjects. The IRB 
     system is under severe strain for several reasons. First, 
     IRBs are overworked and underfunded. Second, IRBs vary widely 
     in their training and effectiveness. Third, conflicts of 
     interest threaten the integrity or research. Fourth, 
     investigators can engage in ``IRB shopping'' whereby a 
     proposal rejected by one IRB for ethical reasons can be 
     submitted to a second board in the hope of a more lenient 
     review all without notifying the second IRB of the decision 
     of the first. To address these problems the bill will: 1. 
     Require accreditation of all IRBs to ensure that they do 
     their jobs adequately. To be accredited, IRBs would not only 
     have to review proposals to conduct research, but also 
     monitor such research once it is initiated. 2. End ``IRB 
     shopping'' by requiring notification of previous proposal 
     rejection. 3. Establish rules for financial conflict of 
     interest for IRB members. 4. Allow IRB expenses to be charged 
     as direct costs on Federal grants, so that universities can 
     give IRBs the resources they need to do their job. 5. Allow, 
     on a voluntary basis, a central IRB to review projects 
     conducted a multiple local research sites to provide for more 
     effective and efficient review.
       Investigators conducting human subject research are often 
     poorly trained in protecting human subjects. As revealed by 
     the controversies surrounding gene therapy, financial 
     conflicts of interest can often compromise the objectivity or 
     researchers. Finally, payment of research subjects is 
     becoming common, but few standards have been established to 
     govern when and how a subject can or should be compensated. 
     To address these problems, the bill will: 1. Require HHS to 
     establish a model program to train researchers in good 
     research practices and then provide grants to allow 
     universities to establish similar programs. 2. Strengthen 
     current rules on financial conflict of interest for 
     researchers. Numerous studies have shown that the existing 
     system does a poor job in protecting against conflict of 
     interest. The proposal follows recent recommendations by the 
     AAMC. 3. Establish standards to govern payments to research 
     subjects.
       Research projects involving human subjects that use federal 
     funds or support a submission to the FDA are subject to US 
     regulations even when conducted overseas. When conducted on 
     poorly educated and/or impoverished populations in nations 
     with weak local oversight, such research raises special 
     ethical concerns. First, subjects may not be adequately 
     protected when an ethical review is conduced in a country 
     without a strong infrastructure for research subject 
     protection. Second, there are significant ethical concerns 
     about conducting high-risk research on local populations who 
     will never receive the benefits of the products being tested 
     on them. Third, some subjects receive placebos or non-
     treatment, even when effective treatments are available and 
     could be given to patients. The bill will: 1. Require review 
     by a US-accredited IRB of all human subject research 
     conducted overseas that falls within US regulatory 
     jurisdiction. This requirement would be waived where 
     standards of review are equivalent to those in the US, e.g. 
     EU, Australia, Canada. 2. Require rules governing the use of 
     placebos or non-treatment when effective therapies could be 
     administered to research subjects.
       Certain areas of research, such as gene therapy or 
     xenotransplantation, raise unusual safety concerns. NBAC has 
     recommended special scrutiny for such areas, beyond simple 
     IRB review. The bill will require special monitoring of 
     adverse events in clinical trials of such research so that 
     threats to patient safety can be identified.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LOTT:
  S. 3061. A bill to impose greater accountability on the Tennessee 
Valley Authority with respect to capital investment decisions and 
financing operations by increasing Congressional and Executive Branch 
oversight; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, the Tennessee Valley Authority has long 
served as an engine for economic development in my part of the country 
and has enjoyed widespread support for its efforts to provide power 
that is needed to fuel the economy and enhance the quality of life of 
those it serves. It is my desire to assist the TVA in continuing its 
legacy and carrying out its mission. To provide that assistance, the 
Congress, the Administration, and the TVA itself must determine whether 
TVA's policies, practices, and long-term strategies are consistent with 
the realities of today's marketplace.
  The TVA is at a crossroads in its illustrious history. The United 
States taxpayer and the power consumers in the TVA service area have 
provided the capital necessary to develop, finance, and operate one of 
the largest, if not the largest, public power systems in

[[Page 19175]]

history. The TVA is now facing a number of challenges with respect to 
its existing generating system in the form of environmental compliance, 
aging and obsolete plants, and the urgent need to provide additional 
generating capacity to meet the demands of the future. It is my belief 
that the United States taxpayer is unwilling and unable to continue to 
bear the financial burden and risks associated with addressing these 
challenges.
  The reality of the marketplace for energy and the political 
imperatives with which we are confronted mandate that any new financing 
strategies and supplemental sources of capital be considered and 
utilized by the TVA. Likewise, we need to review and analyze the short-
term and long-term financing and risk management strategies employed by 
the TVA with respect to its almost $26 billion of debt.
  During 2002, we have witnessed the results of risky and sometimes 
corrupt corporate financing and management practices. Although I have 
no reason to believe that TVA has been involved in any such practices, 
I believe we have a responsibility to the taxpayers to examine the 
financing and disclosure practices of the TVA to ensure that their 
investment is being protected. I note that TVA has utilized short-term 
financing facilities and derivative securities as hedging and interest 
rate management techniques. We need to better understand the risks and 
rewards associated with these strategies.
  The legislation that I am introducing today would require that the 
TVA provide the Congress and the Administration with a 10-year business 
outlook and strategic plan with respect to its development and 
financing needs, as well as an analysis of its ongoing financing and 
risk management strategies. During the period in which the TVA is 
responding to this Congressional mandate, the TVA would be required to 
cease and desist from incurring new obligations or entering into any 
arrangements for the development or financing of new, additional, or 
replacement plant, equipment, or capacity. Likewise, during this period 
the TVA would be required to gain the concurrence of the Director of 
the Office of Management and Budget and the appropriate Senate and 
House Committee leaders before undertaking any additional financing or 
refinancing activities. The legislation specifically provides for the 
necessary flexibility for the TVA to continue normal operations and 
fund necessary maintenance activities while complying with this 
Congressional mandate.
  I strongly support the TVA and I recognize its importance to the 
economic health of several states in the southeastern United States, 
including my own. Indeed, the TVA is a critical component of the 
infrastructure that supports the economy of the entire United States. 
It is my desire in introducing this legislation that the TVA be 
positioned to meet the challenges of the 21st Century. Introduction of 
this legislation is the first step to help the TVA achieve that goal.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CRAIG
  S. 3062. A bill to direct the Secretary of agriculture to conduct a 
study of the effectiveness of silver-based biocides as an alternative 
treatment to preserve wood; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, 
and Forestry.
  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Wood 
Preservation Safety Act of 2002. If enacted, this legislation would 
authorize the Forest Products Laboratory of the U.S. Forest Service to 
study the effectiveness of silver-based biocides as a wood preservative 
treatment.
  According to silver experts and academics, silver biocides could 
serve as a viable, safe and cost effective alternative wood 
preservative. Given silver's long-standing role as an effective 
biocide, testing should be undertaken to determine silver's suitability 
as a wood preservative. Thus, I feel it is important to study and fully 
explore the potential of silver as a wood preservative.
  Mining has been an important part of Idaho's history since the late 
1800s. It became Idaho's first industry and remains a critical part of 
Idaho and the nation's economy. Mining in Idaho has supplied the nation 
with minerals necessary for today's modern lifestyle which many of us 
take for granted. In 1985, the mines of Idaho's Coeur d'Alene mining 
district produced their one billionth ounce of silver. The Sunshine 
Mine was America's richest silver mine, producing over 300 million 
ounces of silver, more than the entire output of Nevada's famous 
Comstock Lode. Silver contributes to our quality of life in many ways, 
and its use as a biocide in wood products is an important application 
that must be explored.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass legislation that 
would create a comprehensive research program to test the viability of 
silver-based biocides for the treatment of wood products.

                          ____________________