[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Pages 15612-15617]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      Mr. CORZINE:
  S. 1381. A bill to require the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to 
consider certain criteria in relicensing nuclear facilities, and to 
provide for an independent assessment of the Oyster Creek Nuclear 
Generating Station by the National Academy of Sciences before any 
relicensing of that facility; to the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works.
  Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to 
help ensure the safety of the Nation's oldest nuclear power plants 
before they receive a renewed license to operate.
  The Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station in Lacey, NJ, has 
operated for 35 years and is the oldest nuclear facility in the 
country. It provides approximately ten percent of New Jersey's 
electricity, powering 600,000 homes. Oyster Creek also provides high 
paying jobs for 450 New Jerseyans. While the plant is an important 
source of energy and jobs for New Jerseyans, serious environmental, 
health, and safety concerns must be taken into account before the plant 
is relicensed. Three and a half million Americans live within a fifty-
mile radius of this plant. Congress must recognize that it is 
imperative that the safety, performance and reliability of this plant 
be assessed by an independent entity before it is relicensed.
  I have been very clear about my support for an independent review of 
Oyster Creek's safety and security as part of the relicensure process. 
Such an assessment would have to go beyond what is currently studied by 
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) when it reviews a license 
renewal. Unfortunately, when the NRC decides whether to renew a plant's 
license, it does not subject that application to the same thorough 
analysis that would be applied to a new power plant's application.
  In particular, a plant's emergency plan is not evaluated by the NRC 
when it considers a license renewal. This is surely unacceptable.
  The legislation I am introducing would require the NRC to withhold 
relicensing of the Oyster Creek Station until the National Academy of 
Sciences provides an independent assessment of safety performance, 
along with recommendations for relicensing and relicensing conditions. 
The assessment must identify health risks, vulnerability to terrorist 
attacks, evacuation plans, population increases, ability to store 
nuclear waste, safety and security records, and the impact of a nuclear 
accident. The NRC would not be allowed to grant the license until it 
gives appropriate consideration to the recommendations in the report. 
This is important not just for New Jersey as it applies to Oyster 
Creek, but for all nuclear plants across the country.
  In addition, the bill requires NAS to review and recommend what the 
life expectancy of nuclear plants should be that are designed like 
Oyster Creek.
  Most public officials do not have the training or knowledge base 
needed to make an independent assessment regarding the safety and 
security of a nuclear power plant. This is why it is so critical that 
policymakers solicit the independent and unbiased opinion of experts 
who are able to thoroughly assess whether the Oyster Creek nuclear 
power plant would be able to operate without fail throughout the 
duration of a new license.
  This Nation needs a plan for a sound energy future. Such a plan must 
address the increasing role for clean, renewable energy. The plan, 
however, must ensure that nuclear power plants such as Oyster Creek 
operate safely and only as long as they are needed.
  If New Jersey's energy future is left up to chance, it could leave my 
State more reliant on coal-fired energy imported from other States over 
a regional grid that is unable to handle bulk power transfers of such a 
magnitude. The obvious end result of such reliance on distantly 
generated and transported energy is more air pollution and more 
blackouts.
  Considering that New Jersey already suffers from the health effects 
of out-of-State air pollution and is still smarting from the 2003 
blackout, we should know better than to let this happen.
  A mistake in this matter has devastating potential consequences for 
New Jersey. An independent assessment of the safety of Oyster Creek is 
a significant step to ensure the safety of the 3.5 million residents 
who live in the vicinity of the plant. This additional layer of safety 
will help ensure that if Oyster Creek is relicensed, it will have 
passed a stringent, independent assessment of its safety. New Jersey 
should not expect anything less when it comes to the safety of its 
citizens.
  I urge my colleagues to support this crucial piece of legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1381

       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 ``Oyster Creek Nuclear 
     Generating Station Relicensing Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, which has 
     been in operation for more than 35 years, is the oldest 
     nuclear facility in the United States;
       (2) as of the date of enactment of this Act, more than 
     3,500,000 people reside within a 50-mile radius of the 
     Station;
       (3) nuclear power facilities have been identified as 
     targets for terrorist attacks;
       (4) it is necessary to assess the safety, performance, and 
     reliability of the oldest operating reactor in the United 
     States; and
       (5) an independent assessment of the Station will help in 
     determining whether the Station can continue to maintain 
     adequate levels of safety.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Commission.--The term ``Commission'' means the Nuclear 
     Regulatory Commission.
       (2) Station.--The term ``Station'' means the Oyster Creek 
     Nuclear Generating Station.

     SEC. 4. RELICENSING CRITERIA FOR NUCLEAR FACILITIES.

       Section 182 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 
     2232) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``e. In determining whether to approve an application for 
     relicensing, the Commission shall evaluate the facility with 
     respect to--
       ``(1) the health risks, vulnerability to terrorist attack, 
     evacuation plans, surrounding population increases, ability 
     to store nuclear waste, and safety and security record of the 
     facility; and
       ``(2) the impact of a nuclear accident at the facility.''.

     SEC. 5. INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT OF STATION.

       (a) In General.--The Commission shall not relicense the 
     Station until--
       (1) a date that is not earlier than 90 days after the date 
     on which the Commission receives the report described in 
     subsection (b); and
       (2) the Commission has given appropriate consideration to 
     the recommendations in the report.
       (b) Assessment by National Academy of Sciences.--The 
     Commission shall enter into an agreement with the National 
     Academy of Sciences to submit to the Commission a report that 
     includes, with respect to the Station--
       (1) an independent assessment of safety performance; and
       (2) recommendations with respect to--
       (A) whether the Station should be relicensed by the 
     Commission; and
       (B) conditions for relicensing the Station.
       (c) Inclusions.--In preparing the report under subsection 
     (b), the National Academy of Sciences, in accordance with any 
     applicable regulations issued by the Commission, shall--
       (1) provide an independent assessment of whether the 
     Station conforms to the design and licensing bases of the 
     Station, including appropriate reviews at the site and 
     corporate offices of the Station;
       (2) provide an independent assessment of the operational 
     safety performance of the Station, including an 
     identification of risk factors, as the National Academy of 
     Sciences determines to be appropriate;
       (3) provide an independent assessment of--
       (A) the health risks, vulnerability to terrorist attack, 
     evacuation plans, surrounding population increases, ability 
     to store nuclear waste, and safety and security record of the 
     Station; and
       (B) the impact of a nuclear accident at the Station;

[[Page 15613]]

       (4) evaluate the effectiveness of licensee self-
     assessments, corrective actions, and improvement plans at the 
     Station;
       (5) determine any cause of a safety problem at the Station;
       (6) assess the overall performance of the Station; and
       (7) assess, and provide recommendations regarding, the 
     optimal life expectancy of--
       (A) the Station; and
       (B) nuclear facilities that are similar in design to the 
     Station, as determined by the National Academy of Sciences.
       (d) Access.--The Chairperson of the Commission shall issue 
     such regulations as are necessary to ensure appropriate 
     access to the National Academy of Sciences to carry out this 
     section, as determined by the Chairperson.
       (e) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Commission shall submit to 
     Congress the report of the National Academy of Sciences 
     described in subsection (b).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. COLEMAN (for himself and Mr. Lugar):
  S. 1383. A bill to seek urgent and essential institutional reform at 
the United Nations; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
  Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise to join Senator Norm Coleman in 
introducing the United Nations Management, Personnel, and Policy Reform 
Act of 2005.
  United Nations reform is not a new issue. The structure and role of 
the United Nations have been debated in our country almost continuously 
since the U.N. was established in 1945. But in 2005, we may have a 
unique opportunity to improve the operations of the UN. The revelations 
of the Oil-For-Food scandal and the urgency of strengthening global 
cooperation to address terrorism, the AIDS crisis, nuclear 
proliferation, and many other international problems have created 
momentum in favor of constructive reforms at the UN.
  We have ample evidence that the United Nations is in need of reform. 
The Foreign Relations Committee held the first Congressional hearing on 
the UN's Oil-for-Food scandal a year ago last April. Since that time, 
through the work of Paul Volcker, Senator Coleman, and many others, we 
have learned much more about the extent of the corruption and 
mismanagement involved.
  Senator Coleman's hard work as a Member of the Senate Foreign 
Relations Committee and as the Chairman of the Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations has 
provided the Senate with extensive knowledge of what went wrong in the 
Oil-for-Food Program. We have combined efforts to offer the Senate a 
top-down/bottom-up comprehensive look at what needs to be reformed if 
the United Nations is going to be a highly effective institution in 
this century. I would like to thank staff on the Foreign Relations 
Committee and the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations who have 
collaborated for many hours during the past several weeks as we have 
finalized this bill.
  We know that billions of dollars that should have been spent on 
humanitarian needs in Iraq were siphoned off by Saddam Hussein's regime 
through a system of surcharges, bribes, and kickbacks. This corruption 
depended upon members of the UN Security Council who were willing to be 
complicit in these activities. It also depended on UN officials and 
contractors who were dishonest, inattentive, or willing to make 
damaging compromises in pursuit of a compassionate mission.
  The diminishment of UN credibility from corruption in the Oil-for-
Food Program and other scandals is harmful to U.S. foreign policy and 
to efforts aimed at coordinating a stronger global response to 
terrorism. The capabilities possessed by the United Nations depend 
heavily on maintaining the credibility associated with countries acting 
together in a well-established forum with well-established rules. 
Profiteering, mismanagement, and bureaucratic stonewalling squander 
this precious resource. At a time when the United States is appealing 
for greater international help in Iraq, Afghanistan, and in trouble 
spots around the world, a diminishment of UN credibility reduces U.S. 
options and increases our own burdens.
  The UN's ability to organize burden sharing and take over missions 
best handled by the international community is critical to the long-
term success of U.S. foreign policy. As such, the United States must 
help achieve effective reform at the UN.
  Our legislation contains a comprehensive list of reforms that the 
United States must pursue at the United Nations. Some were espoused in 
the Gingrich-Mitchell UN reform study. Others have been proposed by our 
colleague on the House side, Henry Hyde, and have already been adopted 
by the House of Representatives. Others have emerged from the Senate 
Foreign Relations Committee's and the Permanent Subcommittee of 
Investigation's examination of sound management, personnel and 
oversight practices that can prevent past failures from reoccurring.
  The legislation includes a new UN procurement system that embodies 
the high standards required in modern governments and private sector 
companies, including relevant standards contained in the Foreign 
Corrupt Practices Act. It calls for a new Management Performance Board 
to hold senior UN officials accountable and a Sanctions Management 
Office to assist the Security Council in managing, monitoring, and 
overseeing UN sanctions programs. It calls for strengthened financial 
disclosure requirements for UN personnel and the creation of an Office 
of Ethics to monitor the disclosure policy and enforce a code of 
ethics. On the UN budget, it supports sunset provisions for all new 
programs mandated by the General Assembly and cost-cutting measures 
such as greater use of the internet for public information, expanding 
outsourcing of translation, and reducing the frequency of conferences 
and international meetings. It promotes whistle-blower protections for 
UN employees and strengthens the UN inspector general function carried 
out by the Office of International Oversight Services (OIOS). And it 
calls for the creation of a new Independent Oversight Board to ensure 
the integrity and fiscal independence of the OIOS.
  The legislation also calls for reforms in the two functions, 
peacekeeping and humans rights protection, where the United Nations 
will need to be stronger and more effective over the next several 
decades if it is to make a major contribution to international peace 
and security.
  This legislation would provide President Bush with Congressional 
support and flexibility as he moves to generate reforms at the UN. The 
bill establishes a comprehensive agenda for creating the kind of United 
Nations the American people can support. It does not impose an 
artificial formula or rigid checklist of items that narrows our 
definition of success. Nor does it require mandated cuts in UN dues. 
Instead, the underlying premise of this legislation is that we want to 
give a President who knows how to achieve reform and is firmly 
committed to doing so the tools he needs to achieve our national 
objectives.
  We see President Bush's pledge to seek reform reinforced by his 
deeds, including his nomination of a reform-minded expert on UN affairs 
to be our ambassador at the United Nations and now his subsequent 
nomination of a trusted White House aide to be the Assistant Secretary 
for International Organizations at the State Department.
  The drive for reform at the UN is not going to occur in a national 
security vacuum. We will continue to have national security interests 
that are affected by UN agencies and UN deliberations. Without 
narrowing the President's options, this legislation gives him the 
leverage he needs. If he believes that, despite our best efforts, the 
other member states of the UN do not share our views on the urgency for 
reform, this bill grants the President full authority to withhold 50 
percent of our UN dues until reforms are implemented. But it allows the 
President to make tactical judgments in the national security interest 
about how to apply leverage and about what methods to use in pursuing 
reform.
  Secretary General Kofi Annan has proposed a substantial reform plan 
that will provide a platform for further

[[Page 15614]]

reform initiatives and discussions. Other member nations have ideas for 
reform as well. The United States must be a leader in the effort to 
improve the United Nations, particularly its accountability. And this 
legislation provides the right balance, outlining the kinds of reforms 
that will make the United Nations an accountable, transparent, and 
well-managed international organization, while giving the President the 
authority to withhold contributions if reform efforts fall short.
  I thank Senator Coleman for the expertise and leadership he has 
provided in crafting this legislation, and I ask my colleagues to give 
it their full support.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, and Ms. Landrieu):
  S. 1385. A bill to amend part A of title IV of the Social Security 
Act to ensure fair treatment and due process protections under the 
temporary assistance to needy families program, to facilitate enhanced 
data collection and reporting requirements under that program, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, later this year the Senate may again 
consider reauthorization of the 1996 Personal Opportunity and Work 
Responsibility Reconciliation Act. This law ended the Aid to Families 
with Dependent Children program and created our current Federal welfare 
program, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program.
  I supported the legislation that created TANF because I believed that 
the welfare system was failing recipients and their families and that 
we needed to do better. Now, almost nine years later, poverty levels 
are again on the rise and it is clear that improvements need to be made 
to the TANF program in order to achieve the goal of breaking the cycle 
of poverty and moving recipients into well-paying, sustainable jobs.
  As we all know, each State's welfare program is different, and the 
implementation of these programs often varies from provider to provider 
and from county to county. While we encouraged State-level innovation 
with the 1996 law and should continue to encourage it with our 
reauthorization legislation, we should also ensure that all State plans 
conform to uniform Federal fair treatment and due process protections 
for all applicants and clients.
  I am deeply concerned that a client who applies for or receives 
benefits in one part of Wisconsin may not be getting the same treatment 
as another applicant or client in a different part of my State.
  The bill that I introduce today, the Fair Treatment and Due Process 
Protection Act, would improve Federal fair treatment and due process 
protections for applicants to and clients of State TANF programs by 
addressing gaps in current law in three areas: access to translation 
services and English as a Second Language education programs, sanction 
notification and due process protections, and data collection and 
analysis. I am pleased to be joined in this effort by the Senator from 
Massachusetts, Mr. Kennedy and the Senator from Louisiana, Ms. 
Landrieu.
  In order for low-income parents whose primary language is not English 
to understand their rights with respect to availability of benefits, to 
comply with Federal and State TANF program rules, and to move from 
welfare to work, we should ensure that translation services and English 
as a Second Language classes are available.
  My bill would require States to provide interpretation and 
translation services to low-income parents who do not speak English, 
and provides that the standards currently used in the food stamp 
program would be used to determine when the requirement to provide such 
services would be triggered for TANF-funded programs.
  States would also be required to advise adults who lack English 
proficiency of available programs in the community to help them learn 
English, and to allow individuals who elect to enroll in such programs 
to participate in them. Individuals who participate in such activities 
on a satisfactory basis would be considered to be engaged in work 
activities and these activities would be counted towards the work 
participation rates.
  If we are not only to reduce the welfare rolls but to reduce poverty 
and to ensure that low-income parents find sustainable jobs, we must 
ensure that these parents have access to education and training, 
including ESL classes, and that this training counts toward the work 
requirement. I support efforts to expand the number of activities that 
TANF clients are permitted to count as work, and my bill would add ESL 
classes to that list.
  In addition, I am concerned about reports of unfair sanctioning and 
case closures across the country. We should make every effort to 
minimize discrimination in the application of sanctions and the 
termination of benefits. My bill would require that, prior to imposing 
a sanction, States inform individuals of the reasons for the sanction 
and what individuals may do to come into compliance with program rules 
to avoid the sanction. It also would stipulate that sanctions may not 
continue after individuals have come into compliance with program 
rules, and that individuals be informed of all other services and 
benefits for which they may be eligible during the period of the 
sanction, and of their rights under applicable State and Federal laws.
  Finally, this bill would require States to perform enhanced data 
collection and analysis so that we can get a better picture of the 
people who apply for and receive TANF benefits and those who leave the 
welfare rolls.
  I share the concern that has been expressed by a number of my 
constituents regarding the lack of comprehensive, uniform data about 
State welfare programs, including information on those who apply for 
benefits and those who have left the welfare rolls. My bill would 
require States to collect and manage data in a uniform way; to 
disaggregate the data based on a larger number of subgroups, including 
race, ethnicity/national origin, gender, primary language, and 
educational level of recipient; to include information on work 
participation and about applicants who are diverted to other programs; 
and to track clients whose cases are closed.
  In addition, the Federal Department of Health and Human Services 
would be required to include a comprehensive analysis broken down by 
these same data groups in its annual report on the TANF program. The 
Department would also be required to perform a longitudinal study of 
program outcomes that includes data on applicants for assistance, 
families that receive assistance, and families that leave assistance 
during the period of the study. The Secretary of Health and Human 
Services would be required to protect the privacy of individuals and 
families applying for or receiving assistance under State TANF programs 
when data on such individuals and families is publicly disclosed by the 
Secretary.
  These enhanced requirements are not meant to impose an additional 
burden on the States. Rather, they are intended to measure the success 
of the program in a more comprehensive and transparent manner.
  This legislation is supported by the Leadership Conference on Civil 
Rights, the Nation's oldest and most diverse civil rights coalition. I 
ask unanimous consent that the text of this legislation be printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1385

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS; REFERENCES.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Fair 
     Treatment and Due Process Protection Act of 2005''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents; references.

TITLE I--ACCESS TO TRANSLATION SERVICES AND LANGUAGE EDUCATION PROGRAMS

Sec. 101. Provision of interpretation and translation services.
Sec. 102. Assisting families with limited English proficiency.

[[Page 15615]]

            TITLE II--SANCTIONS AND DUE PROCESS PROTECTIONS

Sec. 201. Sanctions and due process protections.

         TITLE III--DATA COLLECTION AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

Sec. 301. Data collection and reporting requirements.
Sec. 302. Enhancement of understanding of the reasons individuals leave 
              State TANF programs.
Sec. 303. Longitudinal studies of TANF applicants and recipients.
Sec. 304. Protection of individual privacy.

                        TITLE IV--EFFECTIVE DATE

Sec. 401. Effective date.
       (c) References.--Except as otherwise expressly provided, 
     wherever in this Act an amendment or repeal is expressed in 
     terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a section or other 
     provision, the amendment or repeal shall be considered to be 
     made to a section or other provision of the Social Security 
     Act.

TITLE I--ACCESS TO TRANSLATION SERVICES AND LANGUAGE EDUCATION PROGRAMS

     SEC. 101. PROVISION OF INTERPRETATION AND TRANSLATION 
                   SERVICES.

       (a) In General.--Section 408(a) (42 U.S.C. 608(a) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(12) Provision of interpretation and translation 
     services.--A State to which a grant is made under section 
     403(a) for a fiscal year shall, with respect to the State 
     program funded under this part and all programs funded with 
     qualified State expenditures (as defined in section 
     409(a)(7)(B)(i)), provide appropriate interpretation and 
     translation services to individuals who lack English 
     proficiency if the number or percentage of persons lacking 
     English proficiency meets the standards established under 
     section 272.4(b) of title 7 of the Code of Federal 
     Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this 
     paragraph).''.
       (b) Penalty.--Section 409(a) (42 U.S.C. 609(a)) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(15) Penalty for failure to provide interpretation and 
     translation services.--
       ``(A) In general.--If the Secretary determines that a State 
     to which a grant is made under section 403 in a fiscal year 
     has violated section 408(a)(12) during the fiscal year, the 
     Secretary shall reduce the grant payable to the State under 
     section 403(a)(1) for the immediately succeeding fiscal year 
     by an amount equal to up to 5 percent of the State family 
     assistance grant.
       ``(B) Penalty based on severity of failure.--The Secretary 
     shall impose reductions under subparagraph (A) with respect 
     to a fiscal year based on the degree of noncompliance.''.

     SEC. 102. ASSISTING FAMILIES WITH LIMITED ENGLISH 
                   PROFICIENCY.

       (a) In General.--Section 407(c)(2) (42 U.S.C. 607(c)(2)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(E) Individuals with limited english proficiency.--In the 
     case of an adult recipient who lacks English language 
     proficiency, as defined by the State, the State shall--
       ``(i) advise the adult recipient of available programs or 
     activities in the community to address the recipient's 
     education needs;
       ``(ii) if the adult recipient elects to participate in such 
     a program or activity, allow the recipient to participate in 
     such a program or activity; and
       ``(iii) consider an adult recipient who participates in 
     such a program or activity on a satisfactory basis as being 
     engaged in work for purposes of determining monthly 
     participation rates under this section, except that the 
     State--

       ``(I) may elect to require additional hours of 
     participation or activity if necessary to ensure that the 
     recipient is participating in work-related activities for a 
     sufficient number of hours to count as being engaged in work 
     under this section; and
       ``(II) shall attempt to ensure that any additional hours of 
     participation or activity do not unreasonably interfere with 
     the education activity of the recipient.''.

       (b) Penalty.--Section 409(a) (42 U.S.C. 609(a)), as amended 
     by section 101(b), is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(16) Penalty for failure to provide interpretation and 
     translation services.--
       ``(A) In general.--If the Secretary determines that a State 
     to which a grant is made under section 403 in a fiscal year 
     has violated section 407(c)(2)(E) during the fiscal year, the 
     Secretary shall reduce the grant payable to the State under 
     section 403(a)(1) for the immediately succeeding fiscal year 
     by an amount equal to up to 5 percent of the State family 
     assistance grant.
       ``(B) Penalty based on severity of failure.--The Secretary 
     shall impose reductions under subparagraph (A) with respect 
     to a fiscal year based on the degree of noncompliance.''.

            TITLE II--SANCTIONS AND DUE PROCESS PROTECTIONS

     SEC. 201. SANCTIONS AND DUE PROCESS PROTECTIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 408(a) (42 U.S.C. 608(a)), as 
     amended by section 101(a), is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(13) Sanction procedures.--
       ``(A) Pre-sanction review process.--Prior to the imposition 
     of a sanction against an individual or family receiving 
     assistance under the State program funded under this part or 
     under a program funded with qualified State expenditures (as 
     defined in section 409(a)(7)(B)(i)) for failure to comply 
     with program requirements, the State shall take the following 
     steps:
       ``(i) Provide or send notice to the individual or family, 
     and, if the recipient's native language is not English, 
     through a culturally competent translation, of the following 
     information:

       ``(I) The specific reason for the proposed sanction.
       ``(II) The amount of the proposed sanction.
       ``(III) The length of time during which the proposed 
     sanction would be in effect.
       ``(IV) The steps required to come into compliance or to 
     show good cause for noncompliance.
       ``(V) That the agency will provide assistance to the 
     individual in determining if good cause for noncompliance 
     exists, or in coming into compliance with program 
     requirements.
       ``(VI) That the individual may appeal the determination to 
     impose a sanction, and the steps that the individual must 
     take to pursue an appeal.

       ``(ii)(I) Ensure that, subject to clause (iii)--

       ``(aa) an individual other than the individual who 
     determined that a sanction be imposed shall review the 
     determination and have the authority to take the actions 
     described in subclause (II); and
       ``(bb) the individual or family against whom the sanction 
     is to be imposed shall be afforded the opportunity to meet 
     with the individual who, as provided for in item (aa), is 
     reviewing the determination with respect to the sanction.

       ``(II) An individual to which this subclause applies may--

       ``(aa) modify the determination to impose a sanction;
       ``(bb) determine that there was good cause for the 
     individual or family's failure to comply;
       ``(cc) recommend modifications to the individual's 
     individual responsibility or employment plan; and
       ``(dd) make such other determinations and take such other 
     actions as may be appropriate under the circumstances.

       ``(iii) The review required under clause (ii) shall include 
     consideration of the following:

       ``(I) To the extent applicable, whether barriers to 
     compliance exist, such as a physical or mental impairment, 
     including mental illness, substance abuse, mental 
     retardation, a learning disability, domestic or sexual 
     violence, limited proficiency in English, limited literacy, 
     homelessness, or the need to care for a child with a 
     disability or health condition, that contributed to the 
     noncompliance of the person.
       ``(II) Whether the individual or family's failure to comply 
     resulted from failure to receive or have access to services 
     previously identified as necessary in an individual 
     responsibility or employment plan.
       ``(III) Whether changes to the individual responsibility or 
     employment plan should be made in order for the individual to 
     comply with program requirements.
       ``(IV) Whether the individual or family has good cause for 
     any noncompliance.
       ``(V) Whether the State's sanction policies have been 
     applied properly.

       ``(B) Sanction follow-up requirements.--If a State imposes 
     a sanction on a family or individual for failing to comply 
     with program requirements, the State shall--
       ``(i) provide or send notice to the individual or family, 
     in language calculated to be understood by the individual or 
     family, and, if the individual's or family's native language 
     is not English, through a culturally competent translation, 
     of the reason for the sanction and the steps the individual 
     or family must take to end the sanction;
       ``(ii) resume the individual's or family's full assistance, 
     services, or benefits provided under this program (provided 
     that the individual or family is otherwise eligible for such 
     assistance, services, or benefits) once the individual who 
     failed to meet program requirements that led to the sanction 
     complies with program requirements for a reasonable period of 
     time, as determined by the State and subject to State 
     discretion to reduce such period;
       ``(iii) if assistance, services, or benefits have not 
     resumed, as of the period that begins on the date that is 60 
     days after the date on which the sanction was imposed, and 
     end on the date that is 120 days after such date, provide 
     notice to the individual or family, in language calculated to 
     be understood by the individual or family, of the steps the 
     individual or family must take to end the sanction, and of 
     the availability of assistance to come into compliance or 
     demonstrate good cause for noncompliance with program 
     requirements.''.
       (b) Penalty.--Section 409(a) (42 U.S.C. 609(a)), as amended 
     by section 102(b), is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(17) Penalty for failure to follow sanction procedures.--
       ``(A) In general.--If the Secretary determines that a State 
     to which a grant is made under section 403 in a fiscal year 
     has violated section 408(a)(13) during the fiscal year, the 
     Secretary shall reduce the grant payable to

[[Page 15616]]

     the State under section 403(a)(1) for the immediately 
     succeeding fiscal year by an amount equal to up to 5 percent 
     of the State family assistance grant.
       ``(B) Penalty based on severity of failure.--The Secretary 
     shall impose reductions under subparagraph (A) with respect 
     to a fiscal year based on the degree of noncompliance.''.
       (c) State Plan Requirement To Describe How States Will 
     Notify Applicants and Recipients of Their Rights Under the 
     Program and of Potential Benefits and Services Available 
     Under the Program.--Section 402(a)(1)(B)(iii) (42 U.S.C. 
     602(a)(1)(B)(iii)) is amended by inserting ``, and will 
     notify applicants and recipients of assistance under the 
     program of the rights of individuals under all laws 
     applicable to program activities and of all potential 
     benefits and services available under the program'' before 
     the period.
       (d) Requirement To Provide Notice to Applicants and 
     Recipients of Rights and of Potential Program Benefits and 
     Services, and To Train Program Personnel To Respect Such 
     Rights.--
       (1) In general.--Section 408(a) (42 U.S.C. 608(a)), as 
     amended by subsection (a), is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(14) Requirement to provide notice to applicants and 
     recipients of rights and of potential program benefits and 
     services, and to train program personnel to respect such 
     rights.--A State to which a grant is made under section 403 
     shall--
       ``(A) notify each applicant for, and each recipient of, 
     assistance under the State program funded under this part or 
     under a program funded with qualified State expenditures (as 
     defined in section 409(a)(7)(B)(i)) of the rights of 
     applicants and recipients under all laws applicable to the 
     activities of such program (including the right to claim good 
     cause exceptions to program requirements), and shall provide 
     the notice--
       ``(i) to a recipient when the recipient first receives 
     assistance, benefits, or services under the program;
       ``(ii) to all such recipients on a semiannual basis; and
       ``(iii) orally and in writing, in the native language of 
     the recipient and at not higher than a 6th grade level, and, 
     if the recipient's native language is not English, through a 
     culturally competent translation; and
       ``(B) train all program personnel on a regular basis 
     regarding how to carry out the program consistent with such 
     rights.''.
       (2) Penalty.--Section 409(a) (42 U.S.C. 609(a)), as amended 
     by subsection (b), is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(18) Penalty for failure to provide notice to applicants 
     and recipients of rights and of potential program benefits 
     and services, and to train program personnel to respect such 
     rights.--
       ``(A) In general.--If the Secretary determines that a State 
     to which a grant is made under section 403 in a fiscal year 
     has violated section 408(a)(14) during the fiscal year, the 
     Secretary shall reduce the grant payable to the State under 
     section 403(a)(1) for the immediately succeeding fiscal year 
     by an amount equal to up to 5 percent of the State family 
     assistance grant.
       ``(B) Penalty based on severity of failure.--The Secretary 
     shall impose reductions under subparagraph (A) with respect 
     to a fiscal year based on the degree of noncompliance.''.

         TITLE III--DATA COLLECTION AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

     SEC. 301. DATA COLLECTION AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

       Section 411(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 611(a)(1)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A)--
       (A) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking 
     ``(except for information relating to activities carried out 
     under section 403(a)(5))'' and inserting ``, and, in 
     complying with this requirement, shall ensure that such 
     information is reported in a manner that permits analysis of 
     the information by race, ethnicity or national origin, 
     primary language, gender, and educational level, including 
     analysis using a combination of these factors, and that all 
     data, including Federal, State, and local data (whether 
     collected by public or private local agencies or entities 
     that administer or operate the State program funded under 
     this part) is made public and easily accessible'';
       (B) by striking clause (v) and inserting the following:
       ``(v) The employment status, occupation (as defined by the 
     most current Federal Standard Occupational Classification 
     system, as of the date of the collection of the data), and 
     earnings of each employed adult in the family.'';
       (C) in clause (vii), by striking ``and educational level'' 
     and inserting ``, educational level, and primary language'';
       (D) in clause (viii), by striking ``and educational level'' 
     and inserting ``, educational level, and primary language''; 
     and
       (E) in clause (xi), in the matter preceding subclause (I), 
     by inserting ``, including, to the extent such information is 
     available, information on the specific type of job, or 
     education or training program'' before the semicolon;
       (2) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C); 
     and
       (3) by inserting after subparagraph (A), the following:
       ``(B) Information regarding applicants.--
       ``(i) In general.--Each eligible State shall collect on a 
     monthly basis, and report to the Secretary on a quarterly 
     basis, disaggre-
     gated case record information on the number of individuals 
     who apply for but do not receive assistance under the State 
     program funded under this part, the reason such assistance 
     were not provided, and the overall percentage of applications 
     for assistance that are approved compared to those that are 
     disapproved with respect to such month.
       ``(ii) Requirement.--In complying with clause (i), each 
     eligible State shall ensure that the information required 
     under that clause is reported in a manner that permits 
     analysis of such information by race, ethnicity or national 
     origin, primary language, gender, and educational level, 
     including analysis using a combination of these factors.''.

     SEC. 302. ENHANCEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING OF THE REASONS 
                   INDIVIDUALS LEAVE STATE TANF PROGRAMS.

       (a) Case Closure Reasons.--Section 411(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 
     611(a)(1)), as amended by section 301, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subparagraph (C) (as redesignated by 
     such section 301) as subparagraph (D); and
       (2) by inserting after subparagraph (B) (as added by such 
     section 301) the following:
       ``(C) Development of comprehensive list of case closure 
     reasons.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall develop, in 
     consultation with States and individuals or organizations 
     with expertise related to the provision of assistance under 
     the State program funded under this part, a comprehensive 
     list of reasons why individuals leave State programs funded 
     under this part. In developing such list, the Secretary shall 
     consider the full range of reasons for case closures, 
     including the following:

       ``(I) Lack of access to specific programs or services, such 
     as child care, transportation, or English as a second 
     language classes for individuals with limited English 
     proficiency.
       ``(II) The medical or health problems of a recipient.

       ``(III) The family responsibilities of a recipient, such as 
     caring for a family member with a disability.
       ``(IV) Changes in eligibility status.
       ``(V) Other administrative reasons.

       ``(ii) Other requirements.--The list required under clause 
     (i) shall be developed with the goal of substantially 
     reducing the number of case closures under the State programs 
     funded under this part for which a reason is not known.
       ``(iii) Public comment.--The Secretary shall promulgate for 
     public comment regulations that--

       ``(I) list the case closure reasons developed under clause 
     (i);
       ``(II) require States, not later than October 1, 2006, to 
     use such reasons in accordance with subparagraph (A)(xvi); 
     and
       ``(III) require States to report on efforts to improve 
     State tracking of reasons for case closures, including the 
     identification of additional reasons for case closures not 
     included on the list developed under clause (i).

       ``(iv) Review and modification.--The Secretary, through 
     consultation and analysis of quarterly State reports 
     submitted under this paragraph, shall review on an annual 
     basis whether the list of case closure reasons developed 
     under clause (i) requires modification and, to the extent the 
     Secretary determines that modification of the list is 
     necessary, shall publish proposed modifications for notice 
     and comment, prior to the modifications taking effect.''.
       (b) Inclusion in Quarterly State Reports.--Section 411 
     (a)(1)(A) (42 U.S.C. 611(a)(1)(A)) is amended--
       (1) in clause (xvi)--
       (A) in subclause (IV), by striking ``or'' at the end;
       (B) in subclause (V), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; or''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:

       ``(VI) a reason specified in the list developed under 
     subparagraph (C), including any modifications of such 
     list.'';

       (2) by redesignating clause (xvii) as clause (xviii); and
       (3) by inserting after clause (xvi), the following:
       ``(xvii) The efforts the State is undertaking, and the 
     progress with respect to such efforts, to improve the 
     tracking of reasons for case closures.''.

     SEC. 303. LONGITUDINAL STUDIES OF TANF APPLICANTS AND 
                   RECIPIENTS.

       (a) In General.--Section 413 (42 U.S.C. 613) is amended by 
     striking subsection (d) and inserting the following:
       ``(d) Longitudinal Studies of Applicants and Recipients To 
     Determine the Factors That Contribute to Positive Employment 
     and Family Outcomes.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary, directly or through 
     grants, contracts, or interagency agreements, shall conduct 
     longitudinal studies in at least 5, and not more than 10, 
     States (or sub-State areas, except that no such area shall be 
     located in a State in which a Statewide study is being 
     conducted under this

[[Page 15617]]

     paragraph) of a representative sample of families that 
     receive, and applicants for, assistance under a State program 
     funded under this part or under a program funded with 
     qualified State expenditures (as defined in section 
     409(a)(7)(B)(i)).
       ``(2) Requirements.--The studies conducted under this 
     subsection shall--
       ``(A) follow families that cease to receive assistance, 
     families that receive assistance throughout the study period, 
     and families diverted from assistance programs; and
       ``(B) collect information on--
       ``(i) family and adult demographics (including race, 
     ethnicity or national origin, primary language, gender, 
     barriers to employment, educational status of adults, prior 
     work history, prior history of welfare receipt);
       ``(ii) family income (including earnings, unemployment 
     compensation, and child support);
       ``(iii) receipt of assistance, benefits, or services under 
     other needs-based assistance programs (including the food 
     stamp program, the medicaid program under title XIX, earned 
     income tax credits, housing assistance, and the type and 
     amount of any child care);
       ``(iv) the reasons for leaving or returning to needs-based 
     assistance programs;
       ``(v) work participation status and activities (including 
     the scope and duration of work activities and the types of 
     industries and occupations for which training is provided);
       ``(vi) sanction status (including reasons for sanction);
       ``(vii) time limit for receipt of assistance status 
     (including months remaining with respect to such time limit);
       ``(viii) recipient views regarding program participation; 
     and
       ``(ix) measures of income change, poverty, extreme poverty, 
     food security and use of food pantries and soup kitchens, 
     homelessness and the use of shelters, and other measures of 
     family well-being and hardship over a 5-year period.
       ``(3) Comparability of results.--The Secretary shall, to 
     the extent possible, ensure that the studies conducted under 
     this subsection produce comparable results and information.
       ``(4) Reports.--
       ``(A) Interim reports.--Not later than October 1, 2008, the 
     Secretary shall publish interim findings from at least 12 
     months of longitudinal data collected under the studies 
     conducted under this subsection.
       ``(B) Subsequent reports.--Not later than October 1, 2010, 
     the Secretary shall publish findings from at least 36 months 
     of longitudinal data collected under the studies conducted 
     under this subsection.''.
       (b) Annual Report to Congress.--
       (1) In general.--Section 411(b) (42 U.S.C. 611(b)) is 
     amended--
       (A) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) by inserting ``(including types of sanctions or other 
     grant reductions)'' after ``financial characteristics''; and
       (ii) by inserting ``, disaggregated by race, ethnicity or 
     national origin, primary language, gender, education level, 
     and, with respect to closed cases, the reason the case was 
     closed'' before the semicolon;
       (B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (C) in paragraph (4), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and
       (D) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) the economic well-being of children and families 
     receiving assistance under the State programs funded under 
     this part and of children and families that have ceased to 
     receive such assistance, using longitudinal matched data 
     gathered from federally supported programs, and including 
     State-by-State data that details the distribution of earnings 
     and stability of employment of such families and (to the 
     extent feasible) describes, with respect to such families, 
     the distribution of income from known sources (including 
     employer-reported wages, assistance under the State program 
     funded under this part, and benefits under the food stamp 
     program), the ratio of such families' income to the poverty 
     line, and the extent to which such families receive or 
     received noncash benefits and child care assistance, 
     disaggregated by race, ethnicity or national origin, primary 
     language, gender, education level, whether the case remains 
     open, and, with respect to closed cases, the reason the case 
     was closed.''.
       (2) Conforming amendments.--Section 411(a) (42 U.S.C. 
     611(a)) is amended--
       (A) by redesignating paragraph (7) as paragraph (8); and
       (B) by inserting after paragraph (6), the following:
       ``(7) Report on economic well-being of current and former 
     recipients.--The report required by paragraph (1) for a 
     fiscal quarter shall include for that quarter such 
     information as the Secretary may specify in order for the 
     Secretary to include in the annual reports to Congress 
     required under subsection (b) the information described in 
     paragraph (5) of that subsection.''.

     SEC. 304. PROTECTION OF INDIVIDUAL PRIVACY.

       Section 411 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 611) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Protection of Individual Privacy.--With respect to 
     any information concerning individuals or families receiving 
     assistance, or applying for assistance, under the State 
     programs funded under this part that is publicly disclosed by 
     the Secretary, the Secretary shall ensure that such 
     disclosure is made in a manner that protects the privacy of 
     such individuals and families.''.

                        TITLE IV--EFFECTIVE DATE

     SEC. 401. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       The amendments made by this Act take effect on October 1, 
     2005.

                          ____________________