[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3059-3064]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  NATIONAL LABORATORIES PARTNERSHIP IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2001--Continued

  Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, let me take a moment while there is a 
lull in the proceedings to reiterate a request that I believe has been 
made by both Democratic and Republican cloakrooms last night, to 
Senators on both sides of the aisle, and it is my hope, as floor 
manager, along with Senator Murkowski, that we can, at some stage later 
this week, seek a finite list of amendments that would be in order on 
the bill.
  As all Members know, we have been on this bill now for all of last 
week; and so far this week, we have addressed some significant issues. 
There are some other amendments that are being negotiated and 
finalized, and we have been working with some Members on those. There 
are others that we just hear about. There are rumors of amendments 
which we hear about.
  I think the majority leader is trying to get as much done as possible 
before we move to the issue of campaign finance reform, which he is 
committed to move to later.
  I think our chances of completing action on this energy bill would be 
dramatically improved if we could get a finite list of amendments to 
work through.
  So I once again encourage all Members to cooperate with the two 
cloakrooms and give copies of their amendments to those cloakrooms so 
that we can see them and can talk to Senators about how to move ahead 
with those amendments or with votes on those amendments, if those are 
necessary.
  I know there will be an amendment at some stage fairly soon by my 
friend Senator Thomas. If he is ready, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.


   Amendments Nos. 3000 Through 3006, En Bloc, to Amendment No. 2917

  Mr. THOMAS. Madam President, I rise to send a series of amendments to 
the desk and ask for their immediate consideration en bloc.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk 
will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Wyoming [Mr. Thomas] for himself and 
     others, proposes amendments numbered 3000 through 3006, en 
     bloc.

  Mr. THOMAS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendments be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendments are as follows:


                           AMENDMENT NO. 3000

    (Purpose: To clarify FERC merger, market-based rate, and refund 
  authority, and to strike the transmission interconnection provision)

       On page 14, strike line 3 and all that follows through page 
     21, line 15, and insert the following:

[[Page 3060]]



     SEC. 202. ELECTRIC UTILITY MERGERS.

       Section 203(a) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824b) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(a)(1) No public utility shall, without first having 
     secured an order of the Commission authorizing it to do so--
       ``(A) sell, lease, or otherwise dispose of the whole of its 
     facilities subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission, or 
     any part thereof of a value in excess of $10,000,000,
       ``(B) merge or consolidate, directly or indirectly, such 
     facilities or any part thereof with the facilities of any 
     other person, by any means whatsoever,
       ``(C) purchase, acquire, or take any security of any other 
     public utility, or
       ``(D) purchase, lease, or otherwise acquire existing 
     facilities for the generation of electric energy unless such 
     facilities will be used exclusively for the sale of electric 
     energy at retail.
       ``(2) No holding company in a holding company system that 
     includes a transmitting utility or an electric utility 
     company shall purchase, acquire, or take any security of, or, 
     by any means whatsoever, directly or indirectly, merge or 
     consolidate with a transmitting utility, an electric utility 
     company, a gas utility company, or a holding company in a 
     holding company system that includes a transmitting utility, 
     an electric utility company, or a gas utility company, 
     without first having secured an order of the Commission 
     authorizing it to do so.
       ``(3) Upon application for such approval the Commission 
     shall give reasonable notice in writing to the Governor and 
     State commission of each of the States in which the physical 
     property affected, or any part thereof, is situated, and to 
     such other persons as it may deem advisable.
       ``(4) After notice and opportunity for hearing, the 
     Commission shall approve the proposed disposition, 
     consolidation, acquisition, or control, if it finds that the 
     proposed transaction--
       ``(A) will be consistent with the public interest;
       ``(B) will not adversely affect the interests of consumers 
     of electric energy of any public utility that is a party to 
     the transaction or is an associate company of any part to the 
     transaction;
       ``(C) will not impair the ability of the Commission or any 
     State commission having jurisdiction over any public utility 
     that is a party to the transaction or an associate company of 
     any party to the transaction to protect the interests of 
     consumers or the public; and
       ``(D) will not lead to cross-subsidization of associate 
     companies or encumber any utility assets for the benefit of 
     an associate company.
       ``(5) The Commission shall, by rule, adopt procedures for 
     the expeditious consideration of applications for the 
     approval of dispositions, consolidations, or acquisitions 
     under this section. Such rules shall identify classes of 
     transactions, or specify criteria for transactions, that 
     normally meet the standards established in paragraph (4), and 
     shall require the Commission to grant or deny an application 
     for approval of a transaction of such type within 90 days 
     after the conclusion of the hearing or opportunity to comment 
     under paragraph (4). If the Commission does not act within 90 
     days, such application shall be deemed granted unless the 
     Commission finds that further consideration is required to 
     determine whether the proposed transaction meets the 
     standards of paragraph (4) and issues one or more orders 
     tolling the time for acting on the application for an 
     additional 90 days.
       ``(6) For purposes of this subsection, the terms `associate 
     company', `electric utility company', `gas utility company', 
     `holding company', and `holding company system' have the 
     meaning given those terms in the Public Utility Holding 
     Company Act of 2002.''.

     SEC. 203. MARKET-BASED RATES.

       (a) Approval of Market-Based Rates.--Section 205 of the 
     Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824d) is amended by adding at 
     the end of the following:
       ``(h) The Commission may determine whether a market-based 
     rate for the sale of electric energy subject to the 
     jurisdiction of the Commission is just and reasonable and not 
     unduly discriminatory or preferential. In making such 
     determination, the Commission shall consider such factors as 
     the Commission may deem to be appropriate and in the public 
     interest, including to the extent the Commission considers 
     relevant to the wholesale power market--
       ``(1) market power;
       ``(2) the nature of the market and its response mechanisms; 
     and
       ``(3) reserve margins.''.
       (b) Revocation of Market-Based Rates.--Section 206 of the 
     Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824e) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:
       ``(f) Whenever the Commission, after a hearing had upon its 
     own motion or upon complaint, finds that a rate charged by a 
     public utility authorized to charge a market-based rate under 
     section 205 is unjust, unreasonable, unduly discriminatory or 
     preferential, the Commission shall determine the just and 
     reasonable rate and fix the same by order.''.

     SEC. 204. REFUND EFFECTIVE DATE.

       Section 206(b) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824e(b)) 
     is amended by--
       (1) striking ``the date 60 days after the filing of such 
     complaint nor later than 5 months after the expiration of 
     such 60-day period'' in the second sentence and inserting 
     ``the date of the filing of such complaint nor later than 5 
     months after the filing of such complaint'';
       (2) striking ``60 days after'' in the third sentence and 
     inserting ``of''; and
       (3) striking ``expiration of such 60-day period'' in the 
     third sentence and inserting ``publication date''.

     SEC. 205. OPEN ACCESS TRANSMISSION BY CERTAIN UTILITIES.

       Part II of the Federal Power Act is further amended by 
     inserting after section 211 the following:


          ``open access by unregulated transmitting utilities

       ``Sec. 211A. (1) Subject to section 212(h), the Commission 
     may, by rule or order, require an unregulated transmitting 
     utility to provide transmission services--
       ``(A) at rates that are comparable to those that the 
     unregulated transmitting utility charges itself, and
       ``(B) on terms and conditions (not relating to rates) that 
     are comparable to those under Commission rules that require 
     public utilities to offer open access transmission services 
     and that are not unduly discriminatory or preferential.
       ``(2) The Commission shall exempt from any rule or order 
     under this subsection any unregulated transmitting utility 
     that--
       ``(A) sells no more than 4,000,000 megawatt hours of 
     electricity per year;
       ``(B) does not own or operate any transmission facilities 
     that are necessary for operating an interconnected 
     transmission system (or any portion thereof), or
       ``(C) meets other criteria the Commission determines to be 
     in the public interest.
       ``(3) The rate changing procedures applicable to public 
     utilities under subsections (c) and (d) of section 205 are 
     applicable to unregulated transmitting utilities for purposes 
     of this section.
       ``(4) In exercising its authority under paragraph (1), the 
     Commission may remand transmission rates to an unregulated 
     transmitting utility for review and revision where necessary 
     to meet the requirements of paragraph (1).
       ``(5) The provision of transmission services under 
     paragraph (1) does not preclude a request for transmission 
     services under section 211.
       ``(6) The Commission may not require a State or 
     municipality to take action under this section that 
     constitutes a private business use for purposes of section 
     141 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 141).
       ``(7) For purposes of this subsection, the term 
     `unregulated transmitting utility' means an entity that--
       ``(A) owns or operates facilities used for the transmission 
     of electric energy in interstate commerce, and
       ``(B) is either an entity described in section 201(f) or a 
     rural electric cooperative.''.

     SEC. 206. ELECTRIC RELIABILITY STANDARDS.
                                  ____



                           AMENDMENT NO. 3001

     (Purpose: To clarify provisions on access to transmission by 
          intermittent generators and make conforming changes)

       On page 24, strike line 1 and all that follows through page 
     27, line 20 and insert the following:

     SEC. 207. MARKET TRANSPARENCY RULES.

       Part II of the Federal Power Act is further amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 216. MARKET TRANSPARENCY RULES.

       ``(a) Commission Rules.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     date of enactment of this section, the Commission shall issue 
     rules establishing an electronic information system to 
     provide information about the availability and price of 
     wholesale electric energy and transmission services to the 
     Commission, state commissions, buyers and sellers of 
     wholesale electric energy, users of transmission services, 
     and the public on a timely basis.
       ``(b) Information Required.--The Commission shall require--
       ``(1) each regional transmission organization to provide 
     statistical information about the available capacity and 
     capacity of transmission facilities operated by the 
     organization; and
       ``(2) each broker, exchange, or other market-making entity 
     that matches offers to sell and offers to buy wholesale 
     electric energy in interstate commerce to provide statistical 
     information about the amount and sale price of sales of 
     electric energy at wholesale in interstate commerce it 
     transacts.
       ``(c) Timely Basis.--The Commission shall require the 
     information required under subsection (b) to be posted on the 
     Internet as soon as practicable and updated as frequently as 
     practicable.
       ``(d) Protection of Sensitive Information.--The Commission 
     shall exempt from disclosure commercial or financial 
     information that the Commission, by rule or order, determines 
     to be privileged, confidential, or otherwise sensitive.''.

     SEC. 208. ACCESS TO TRANSMISSION BY INTERMITTENT GENERATORS.

       Part II of the Federal Power Act is further amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

[[Page 3061]]



     ``SEC. 217. ACCESS TO TRANSMISSION BY INTERMITTENT 
                   GENERATORS.

       ``(a) Fair Treatment of Intermittent Generators.--The 
     Commission shall ensure that all transmitting utilities 
     provide transmission service to intermittent generators in a 
     manner that does not unduly prejudice or disadvantage such 
     generators for characteristics that are--
       ``(1) inherent to intermittent energy resources; and
       ``(2) are beyond the control of such generators.
       ``(b) Policies.--The Commission shall ensure that the 
     requirement in subsection (a) is met by adopting such 
     policies as it deems appropriate which shall include the 
     following:
       ``(1) Subject to the sole exception set forth in paragraph 
     (2), the Commission shall ensure that the rates transmitting 
     utilities charge intermittent generator customers for 
     transmission services do not unduly prejudice or disadvantage 
     intermittent generator customers for scheduling deviations.
       ``(2) The Commission may exempt a transmitting utility from 
     the requirement set forth in paragraph (1) if the 
     transmitting utility demonstrates that scheduling deviations 
     by its intermittent generator customers are likely to have an 
     adverse impact on the reliability of the transmitting 
     utility's system.
       ``(3) The Commission shall ensure that to the extent any 
     transmission charges recovering the transmitting utility's 
     embedded costs are assessed to such intermittent generators, 
     they are assessed to such generators on the basis of 
     kilowatt-hours generated or some other method to ensure that 
     they are fully recovered by the transmitting utility.
       ``(4) The Commission shall require transmitting utilities 
     to offer to intermittent generators, and may require 
     transmitting utilities to offer to all transmission 
     customers, access to nonfirm transmission service.
       ``(c) Definitions.--As used in this section:
       ``(1) The term `intermittent generator' means a facility 
     that generates electricity using wind or solar energy and no 
     other energy source.
       ``(2) The term `nonfirm transmission service' means 
     transmission service provided on an `as available' basis.
       ``(3) The term `scheduling deviation' means delivery of 
     more or less energy than has previously been forecast in a 
     schedule submitted by an intermittent generator to a control 
     area operator or transmitting utility.''.

     SEC. 209. ENFORCEMENT.
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 3002

(Purpose: To require states to consider requiring time-of-use metering)

       On page 44, strike line 3 and all that follows through page 
     45, line 12 and insert the following:

     SEC. 241. REAL-TIME PRICING AND TIME-OF-USE METERING 
                   STANDARDS.

       (a) Adoption of Standards.--Section 111(d) of the Public 
     Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2621(d)) 
     is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(11) Real-time pricing.--(A) Each electric utility shall, 
     at the request of an electric consumer, provide electric 
     service under a real-time schedule, under which the rate 
     charged by the electric utility varies by the hour (or 
     smaller time interval) according to changes in the electric 
     utility's wholesale power cost. The real-time pricing service 
     shall enable the electric consumer to manage energy use and 
     cost through real-time metering and communications 
     technology.
       ``(B) For purposes of implementing this paragraph, any 
     reference contained in this section to the date of enactment 
     of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 shall 
     be deemed to be a reference to the date of enactment of this 
     paragraph.
       ``(C) Notwithstanding subsections (b) and (c) of section 
     112, each State regulatory authority shall consider and make 
     a determination concerning whether it is appropriate to 
     implement the standard set out in subparagraph (A) not later 
     than one year after the date of enactment of this paragraph.
       ``(12) Time-of-use.--(A) Each electric utility shall, at 
     the request of an electric consumer, provide electric service 
     under a time-of-use rate schedule which enables the electric 
     consumer to manage every use and cost through time-of-use 
     metering and technology.
       ``(B) For purposes of implementing this paragraph, any 
     reference contained in this section to the date of enactment 
     of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 shall 
     be deemed to be a reference to the date of enactment of this 
     paragraph.
       ``(C) Notwithstanding subsections (b) and (c) of section 
     112, each State regulatory authority shall consider and make 
     a determination concerning whether it is appropriate to 
     implement the standards set out in subparagraph (A) not later 
     than one year after the date of enactment of this 
     paragraph.''.
       (b) Special Rules.--Section 115 of the Public Utility 
     Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2625) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(i) Real-Time Pricing.--In a state that permits third-
     party marketers to sell electric energy to retail electric 
     consumers, the electric consumer shall be entitled to receive 
     the same real-time metering and communication service as a 
     direct retail electric consumer of the electric utility.
       ``(j) Time-of-Use Metering.--In a state that permits third-
     party marketers to sell electric energy to retail electric 
     consumers, the electric consumer shall be entitled to receive 
     the same time-of-use metering and communication service as a 
     direct retail electric consumer of the electric utility.''.
                                  ____



                           AMENDMENT NO. 3003

 (Purpose: To require states to consider adopting federal net metering 
                               standard)

       On page 50, strike line 10 and all that follows through 
     page 54, line 10, and insert the following:

     SEC. 245. NET METERING.

       (a) Adoption of Standard.--Section 111(d) of the Public 
     Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2621(d)) 
     is further amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(13) Net metering.--(A) Each electric utility shall make 
     available upon request net metering service to any electric 
     consumer that the electric utility serves.
       ``(B) For purposes of implementing this paragraph, any 
     reference contained in this section to the date of enactment 
     of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 shall 
     be deemed to be a reference to the date of enactment of this 
     paragraph.
       ``(C) Notwithstanding subsections (b) and (c) of section 
     112, each State regulatory authority shall consider and make 
     a determination concerning whether it is appropriate to 
     implement the standard set out in subparagraph (A) not later 
     than one year after the date of enactment of this paragraph.
       (b) Special Rules for Net Metering.--Section 115 of the 
     Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 
     2625) is further amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(k) Net Metering.--
       ``(1) Rates and charges.--An electric utility--
       ``(A) shall charge the owner or operator of an on-site 
     generating facility rates and charges that are identical to 
     those that would be charged other electric consumers of the 
     electric utility in the same rate class; and
       ``(B) shall not charge the owner or operator of an on-site 
     generating facility any additional standby, capacity, 
     interconnection, or other rate or charge.
       ``(2) Measurement.--An electric utility that sells electric 
     energy to the owner or operator of an on-site generating 
     facility shall measure the quantity of electric energy 
     produced by the on-site facility and the quantity of electric 
     energy consumed by the owner or operator of an on-site 
     generating facility during a billing period in accordance 
     with normal metering practices.
       ``(3) Electric energy supplied exceeding electric energy 
     generated.--If the quantity of electric energy sold by the 
     electric utility to an on-site generating facility exceeds 
     the quantity of electric energy supplied by the on-site 
     generating facility to the electric utility during the 
     billing period, the electric utility may bill the owner or 
     operator for the net quantity of electric energy sold, in 
     accordance with normal metering practices.
       ``(4) Electric energy generated exceeding electric energy 
     supplied.--If the quantity of electric energy supplied by the 
     on-site generating facility to the electric utility exceeds 
     the quantity of electric energy sold by the electric utility 
     to the on-site generating facility during the billing 
     period--
       ``(A) the electric utility may bill the owner or operator 
     of the on-site generating facility for the appropriate 
     charges for the billing period in accordance with paragraph 
     (2); and
       ``(B) the owner or operator of the on-site generating 
     facility shall be credited for the excess kilowatt-hours 
     generated during the billing period, with the kilowatt-hour 
     credit appearing on the bill for the following billing 
     period.
       ``(5) Safety and performance standards.--An eligible on-
     site generating facility and net metering system used by an 
     electric consumer shall meet all applicable safety, 
     performance, reliability, and interconnection standards 
     established by the National Electrical Code, the Institute of 
     Electrical and Electronics Engineers, and Underwriters 
     Laboratories.
       ``(6) Additional control and testing requirements.--The 
     Commission, after consultation with State regulatory 
     authorities and nonregulated electric utilities and after 
     notice and opportunity for comment, may adopt, by rule, 
     additional control and testing requirements for on-site 
     generating facilities and net metering systems that the 
     Commission determines are necessary to protect public safety 
     and system reliability.
       ``(7) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection:
       ``(1) The term `eligible on-site generating facility' 
     means--
       ``(A) a facility on the site of a residential electric 
     consumer with a maximum generating capacity of 10 kilowatts 
     or less that is fueled by solar energy, wind energy, or fuel 
     cells; or

[[Page 3062]]

       ``(B) a facility on the site of a commercial electric 
     consumer with a maximum generating capacity of 500 kilowatts 
     or less that is fueled solely by a renewable energy resource, 
     landfill gas, or a high efficiency system.
       ``(2) The term `renewable energy resource' means solar, 
     wind, biomass, or geothermal energy.
       ``(3) The term `high efficiency system' means fuel cells or 
     combined heat and power.
       ``(4) The term `net metering service' means service to an 
     electric consumer under which electric energy generated by 
     that electric consumer from an eligible on-site generating 
     facility and delivered to the local distribution facilities 
     may be used to offset electric energy provided by the 
     electric utility to the electric consumer during the 
     applicable billing period.''.
                                  ____



                           AMENDMENT NO. 3004

  (Purpose: To clarify state authority to protect electric consumers)

       On page 58, strike line 16 and all that follows through 
     line 23 and insert the following:

     SEC. 256. STATE AUTHORITY.

       Nothing in this subtitle shall be construed to preclude a 
     State or State regulatory authority from prescribing and 
     enforcing laws, rules, or procedures regarding the practices 
     which are the subject of this section.
                                  ____



                           AMENDMENT NO. 3005

  (Purpose: To clarify the requirement for the federal government to 
                       purchase renewable fuels)

       On page 64, strike line 8 and all that follows through page 
     65, line 17, and insert the following:

     SEC. 263. FEDERAL PURCHASE REQUIREMENT.

       (a) Requirement.--the President shall seek to ensure that, 
     to the extent economically feasible and technically 
     practicable, of the total amount of electric energy the 
     federal government consumes during any fiscal year--
       (1) not less than 3 percent in fiscal years 2003 through 
     2004,
       (2) not less than 5 percent in fiscal years 2005 through 
     2009, and
       (3) not less than 7.5 percent in fiscal year 2010 and each 
     fiscal year thereafter--

     shall be renewable energy. The President shall encourage the 
     use of innovative purchasing practices by federal agencies.
       (2) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term 
     ``renewable energy'' means electric energy generated from 
     solar, wind, biomass, geothermal, fuel cells, municipal solid 
     waste, or additional hydroelectric generation capacity 
     achieved from increased efficiency or additions of new 
     capacity.
       (c) Tribal Power Generation.--The President shall seek to 
     ensure that, to the extent economically feasible and 
     technically practicable, not less than one-tenth of the 
     amount specified in subsection (a) shall be renewable energy 
     that is generated by an Indian tribe or by a corporation, 
     partnership, or business association which is wholly or 
     majority owned, directly or indirectly, by an Indian tribe. 
     For purposes of this subsection, the term ``Indian tribe'' 
     means any Indian tribe, band, nation, or other organized 
     group or community, including any Alaska Native village or 
     regional or village corporation as defined in or established 
     pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 
     U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), which is recognized as eligible for the 
     special programs and services provided by the United States 
     to Indians because of their status as Indians.
       (d) Biennial Report.--In 2004 and every 2 years thereafter, 
     the Secretary of Energy shall report to the Committee on 
     Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the 
     appropriate committees of the House of Representatives on the 
     progress of the federal government in meeting the goals 
     established by this section.
                                  ____



                           AMENDMENT NO. 3006

     (Purpose: To make conforming changes in the table of contents)

       On page 2, strike the items relating to sections 205 
     through 210 and insert the following:

Sec. 205. Open access transmission by certain utilities.
Sec. 206. Electric reliability standards.
Sec. 207. Market transparency rules.
Sec. 208. Access to transmission by intermittent generators.
Sec. 209. Enforcement.

  Mr. THOMAS. Madam President, these amendments are from Senator Thomas 
of Wyoming and Senator Bingaman of New Mexico. They have been cleared 
on both sides.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I do support the amendments. We have 
worked jointly with Senator Thomas and his staff to perfect these 
amendments. I think they are acceptable on this side. As far as I know, 
there is no objection to their adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate?
  If not, without objection, the amendments are agreed to en bloc.
  The amendments (Nos. 3000 through 3006) were agreed to en bloc.
  Mr. THOMAS. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. THOMAS. Madam President, I thank the chairman for his cooperation 
in finding some areas on which we are in agreement and on which we can 
move forward. This electric title of the energy bill is a very 
important one. Probably nothing affects more people than the electric 
aspect of energy. We are very pleased.
  We do have several more amendments in this area, some of which will 
come up for a vote. Certainly being able to agree on these and move 
them forward is a great advantage. I appreciate the cooperation of the 
Senator from New Mexico.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I thank the Senator from Wyoming for 
his leadership on this issue. He has been very focused on trying to get 
these provisions right. We have worked hard with him and his staff to 
be sure that that is what has happened. This package of amendments we 
have now adopted moves us substantially toward a consensus on what 
ought to be included in this bill in the way of electricity 
restructuring.
  There are going to be a couple of issues that probably will require 
individual votes. We are still in the process of defining the areas of 
disagreement that exist there. I see this as a substantial step 
forward. I thank the Senator from Wyoming.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
pending amendment be temporarily set aside.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                Amendment No. 3007 to Amendment No. 2917

  Mr. CAMPBELL. Madam President, I send an amendment to the desk on 
behalf of myself, Senator Gramm of Texas, Senator Enzi of Wyoming, and 
Senator Brownback of Kansas, and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follow:

       The Senator from Colorado [Mr. Campbell], for himself, Mr. 
     Gramm, Mr. Enzi, and Mr. Brownback, proposes an amendment 
     numbered 3007.

  Mr. CAMPBELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that further 
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

   (Purpose: To strike the section establishing a program to provide 
    assistance for State programs to retire fuel-inefficient motor 
                               vehicles)

       Strike section 822.

  Mr. CAMPBELL. Madam President, the bill we are considering is an 
extremely large and expansive bill dealing with many important and 
controversial topics. Although the bill was stripped from its committee 
of jurisdiction pretty much completely behind closed doors, we have an 
idea of the issues with which we have been dealing. CAFE, ANWR, and 
renewables are all topics we are familiar with and which have been 
debated for some days now.
  I am here to discuss a very small provision that many of my friends 
may not have noticed because it is buried pretty deeply. That 
provision, unlike several others that have been discussed and studied, 
will be discussed for the first time, I believe, now.
  Before getting into my comments, I wish to state that a comprehensive 
energy bill is no place to put this new and untested idea; such an 
action is, at best, poor policy. In particular, I wish to discuss 
section 822 of the current bill.
  Section 822 sounds as if it is not very offensive in a big bill such 
as this, but

[[Page 3063]]

it lies within the CAFE title. In short, section 822 provides grants 
for States to establish scrappage programs for cars that are 15 years 
old or older. Car owners who choose to turn in their car for scrap 
receive a ``minimum payment.'' Section 822 does not tell us what the 
``minimum payment'' might be, but they pay now about $1,000 to $1,200 
for scrapping cars.
  Further, section 822 would have the Department of Energy pay the 
former car owner a ``credit'' toward the purchase of a new vehicle. 
Like the ``minimum payment'' language failing to state how much that 
would be, this provision fails to tell us the value of the taxpayer-
subsidized ``credit.'' However, unlike the minimum payment, we have no 
guidance what that ``credit'' might be because, as with so much of this 
little section, this is the first time we have heard of it.
  Since no hearings were held on section 822, we don't know how much it 
would cost U.S. taxpayers. We do know, however, that the cost would be 
enormous since there are approximately 38 million cars at least 15 
years old or older currently on the roads. If we estimate that just 
one-quarter of those car owners choose to scrap their automobile and 
receive the $1,000 and get another $1,000 to purchase a DOE-approved 
vehicle, the cost to the U.S. taxpayer would be about $19 billion--
deficit dollars that could go to much better uses as we approach 
deficits next year.
  When I first heard of section 822, I wondered: Why should we do this? 
Why should States be burdened with establishing a voluntary program to 
scrap old cars? Why should U.S. taxpayers be subsidizing some people to 
buy new cars? I am a big supporter of the auto industry, but I don't 
support Government subsidizing their sales.
  Section 822 simply states its purpose: To retire fuel-inefficient 
vehicles, the assumption being that any car 15 years old or older would 
be inefficient.
  This is a brandnew approach to address fuel efficiency and gasoline 
consumption, an approach that has not been discussed at any level and 
that has not been studied. In principle, I oppose the making of rash 
decisions without adequate knowledge or public hearings, or input from 
the public at large, particularly when the results could hurt the 
American people, since section 822 was included in this bill without 
any study whatsoever.
  Beyond principle, I also oppose section 822 on its merits as it is 
fundamentally flawed, expensive, and potentially a harmful policy. Some 
States have elected to establish scrappage programs to get vehicles 
with poor emissions off the road. Again, section 822's purpose is to 
get fuel-inefficient cars off the road--the first of its kind.
  States that choose to enact scrappage programs are not in compliance 
with clean air regulations. Those States choose scrappage programs as a 
tool, among others, because they believe they are effective in meeting 
health concerns.
  Section 822 creates incentives not to further public health but to 
further unfounded prejudices against older vehicles.
  Under State scrappage programs, the State is able to means-test a 
polluting vehicle so that only those affecting public health would be 
scrapped. Yet this federally promoted, State-run scrappage program does 
not provide any means testing to ensure that only fuel-inefficient 
vehicles are scrapped. Therefore, a 1986 Ford Escort getting 41 miles 
to the gallon would be treated the same as a Cadillac Seville of the 
same year that only gets 17 miles per gallon.
  The only criteria would be that they are both 1986 automobiles. I 
give that example to show simply that section 822 is fundamentally 
flawed: that older cars are all inefficient and, therefore, should be 
treated the same.
  Since this is the first time the Senate has heard about this 
provision, we should review who is benefited and who is injured and 
what are the costs and benefits of section 822.
  First of all, section 822 would have a disproportionate impact on 
low- and fixed-income individuals. It is more cost effective for people 
of low means to maintain older vehicles than to buy new ones. However, 
the scrappage program in section 822 would reduce the supply of car 
parts, thereby increasing the cost to citizens with lower incomes.
  The reduction of car parts would detrimentally affect the aftermarket 
parts industry, 98 percent of which are made up of registered small 
businesses.
  I think it is safe to assume the authors did not intend to hurt low-
income individuals and small businesses during a recession. Yet that is 
the unintended consequence that most surely would happen.
  Who would benefit? Just as this provision hurts the most vulnerable, 
section 822 unjustly enriches people of better wealth. In short, 
section 822 is tantamount to corporate welfare for automotive companies 
and upper classes.
  I submit the Federal Government should not be in the advertising 
business to sell cars. The Department of Energy credit to purchase new 
cars is akin to a mail-in rebate as advertised on television, a 
wasteful expense that cheapens important energy issues and the work of 
this body.
  Further, I do not believe the Federal Government should have any role 
in pushing certain vehicles on consumers. The private market is 
described as an ``invisible hand.'' However, section 822 would 
certainly strengthen that hand. By paying people to choose certain cars 
over others, the Federal Government would inappropriately insert itself 
into private decisions.
  I mentioned this provision would reward those people who do not want 
to put money out for repairs. In addition to establishing a scrappage 
program, section 822 also requires States to establish repair programs. 
As provided in that section, a car owner paying 20 percent of the cost 
would have the State fix his vehicle, normally through a tuneup, to 
increase fuel efficiency.
  The Federal Government and States should not be turned into tuneup 
stations to have people properly maintain their vehicles, something 
which they should do out of their own pockets.
  The majority correctly states that section 822 is a voluntary 
program, but it is not voluntary for the Federal Government which is 
compelled to establish a carrot-and-stick approach to entice States to 
engage in potentially disastrous and certainly burdensome actions.
  The participating State must create two new programs just in case 
someone might decide to volunteer to scrap their car or have the 
Federal Government pay 80 percent of their repair costs. The burden on 
States could be enormous.
  My friends, the authors, might say the State would not be hurt 
because the Federal Government provides funds through grants for those 
programs, but we have no idea how much that will cost. We do not know 
because we have had no hearings and no studies on this section.
  We all know the Federal Government never provides enough money to 
States to enact programs and, in uncertain times such as these, I do 
not think we should approve ill-conceived and uncertain measures when 
we do not know the bottom line pricetag.
  How is the State going to administer the public notification and 
salvage of parts? Who may participate in the parts salvage? Will that 
be open to individuals or restricted to businesses? And how will a 
State value and sell the parts of the cars? We simply do not know.
  In closing, those of us who are cosponsoring this amendment have had 
only a brief time to look at this section. We believe it is the wrong 
approach. Our amendment will strike section 822 from the bill.
  Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays on this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, first, I am disappointed that the 
Senator from Colorado has chosen to propose striking this provision 
entirely. The provision is clearly written in a

[[Page 3064]]

way that provides absolute maximum flexibility to States to participate 
or not participate.
  The Senator starts out with the argument that we do not know how much 
this will cost. That is right because this is strictly an 
authorization. It will cost whatever we decide to appropriate for this 
program. Congress will still have to make a judgment as to whether to 
appropriate anything for this program.
  This is a grant program to States that want to participate. We will 
either put some money in to fund this grant program or we will not, and 
we will specify each year the amount of funds we think should be made 
available to the Department of Transportation to fund this program.
  It is clear it is a purely voluntary program on the part of States. 
There are some States that have vehicle scrappage programs in place 
today. There may be other States that would want to consider that. The 
purpose of the provision is obvious. The purpose of the provision is to 
try to assist with getting extremely fuel-inefficient vehicles, high-
emission vehicles off the road where there is a desire on the part of 
the owner of the vehicle to either improve the efficiency of that 
vehicle or to trade that vehicle in and get something else. That is the 
clear intent of these programs that some States have adopted.
  What we are saying is that the Federal Government would be authorized 
through the Department of Transportation to assist States in these 
programs to the extent that we appropriate money to support them.
  The argument by the Senator from Colorado is that this is a terrible 
burden on people with low incomes. There is obviously a 
misunderstanding about what this provision says. This is purely a 
voluntary provision. Nobody is required to do anything under the 
language of this section 822. If an individual wants to continue 
driving a 30-year-old vehicle, that is their option. There is no 
penalty; there is no requirement they do anything. They clearly would 
not even have the opportunity to do anything if they were in a State 
that did not have one of these vehicle scrappage programs.
  If they were in a State that did have a vehicle scrappage program, 
then at least if that program was receiving Federal funds, the State 
could use some of those Federal funds under the program that is 
designed by the State. The individual could use some of those funds to 
compensate for having the vehicle scrapped or to repair the vehicle so 
that it is more efficient, so that it has fewer emissions. That is 
clearly the purpose of it.
  As to the argument that this will cause a problem with the salvage of 
valuable parts for vehicles, there is a specific provision in the bill 
that the Secretary cannot provide any funds to a State under this 
program. The Secretary could not provide funds unless the State's plan 
allows for giving public notification before any parts are scrapped so 
that those parts could be purchased or auctioned or otherwise salvaged.
  And as to the objections that the Senator has cited, we heard similar 
objections to an earlier version of this section. Frankly, we thought 
we had accommodated the concerns that were brought to us and modified 
the amendment in order to do that.
  Now, of course, after making the modifications, we are faced with an 
amendment to strike the section entirely. I think it is good public 
policy for the Federal Government to assist States that want to have 
these programs. I do not see why it is in the public interest to strike 
a provision that enables the Secretary of Transportation to pursue 
this, to the extent the Appropriations Committee puts in funds to 
support the program.
  So I very much hope we will not adopt the Senator's amendment and 
have this provision stricken from the bill. To my mind, it is a good 
provision. It provides an opportunity for States to move ahead with 
these programs where they would like to do that and where Federal funds 
are made available.
  As I see it, it is not onerous in any respect as to either what 
States are required to do or what individuals are required to do. The 
entire effort is purely voluntary.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.

                          ____________________