[House Report 104-356]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                                                                       
104th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 1st Session                                                    104-356
_______________________________________________________________________


 
           BOATING AND AVIATION OPERATION SAFETY ACT OF 1995

_______________________________________________________________________


 November 20, 1995.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______


Mr. Gekas, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 234]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the 
bill (H.R. 234) to amend title 11 of the United States Code to 
make nondischargeable a debt for death or injury caused by the 
debtor's operation of watercraft or aircraft while intoxicated, 
having considered the same, report favorably thereon with a 
technical amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do 
pass.
    The amendment (stated in terms of the page and line number 
of the introduced bill) is as follows:
    Page 1, line 5, strike ``1994'' and insert ``1995''.

                          Purpose and Summary

    The purpose of H.R. 234, the ``Boating and Aviation 
Operation Safety Act of 1995,'' is to make nondischargeable in 
bankruptcy a debt for death or personal injury caused by the 
debtor's operation of a watercraft or aircraft if such 
operation was unlawful because the debtor was intoxicated from 
using alcohol, a drug, or another substance.
    Debts arising from the debtor's operation of a ``motor 
vehicle'' while intoxicated are already nondischargeable under 
Sec. 523(a)(9) of 11 U.S.C., the Bankruptcy Code. The need for 
legislation arises from the fact that Congress has not 
explicitly addressed the issue of whether Sec. 523(a)(9) 
applies to watercraft and aircraft--and courts in three 
different jurisdictions have been divided on the question of 
whether Congress originally intended to include watercraft and 
aircraft within the term ``motor vehicle.'' H.R. 234 simply 
amends 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(9) by inserting ``watercraft, or 
aircraft'' after ``motor vehicle'' to give clear expression to 
an important public policy and make Congressional intent more 
explicit.

                Background and Need for the Legislation

    Sec. 523(a) of the Bankruptcy Code provides a list of debts 
that will be nondischargeable at the conclusion of the 
bankruptcy process. It includes those arising from ``death or 
personal injury caused by the debtor's operation of a motor 
vehicle if such operation was unlawful because the debtor was 
intoxicated from using alcohol, a drug, or another substance.'' 
(Sec. 523(a)(9)) This provision is made applicable to personal 
bankruptcies filed under various Bankruptcy Code chapters--
including both Chapter 7 (liquidation) and Chapter 13 
(adjustment of debts of an individual with regular income).
    In the three reported cases interpreting Sec. 523(a)(9), 
the courts are divided. A Florida case, Radivoj v. Williams (In 
re Williams), 101 B.R. 356 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1989) holds that 
``the intent of Congress was to protect the public from drunken 
drivers. In this context the Court finds little distinction 
between a highway, an airway, and a waterway, or between an 
automobile, an airplane, and a boat.'' Accordingly, ``[a] 
motorboat is a motor vehicle within the meaning of section 
523(a)(9).'' The District Court affirmed the bankruptcy court's 
judgment, observing that ``Congress intended to give effect to 
a national public policy against drunk driving.'' Williams v. 
Radivoj, 111 B.R. 361 at 362 (S.D. Fla. 1989).
    In a later case--Willison v. Race (In re Race), 159 B.R. 
857 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. 1993)--from Missouri, however, the 
bankruptcy court held that a motorboat or watercraft could not 
fall within the meaning of ``motor vehicle'' as that term 
presently exists within Sec. 523. The court found support for 
its position in the legislative history, where ``[t]he entire 
discussion is framed within the context of drunken automobile 
drivers.'' It also relied upon the settled doctrine that the 
exceptions to discharge found in Sec. 523 must be narrowly 
construed against an objecting creditor and liberally in favor 
of the debtor, and on recent Supreme Court pronouncements that 
the plain meaning rule must be the first applied in the 
statutory construction of the Bankruptcy Code.
    In a third case, Boyce v. Greenway (In re Greenway), 180 
B.R. 179 (W.D. Texas 1995), a United States District Court in 
Texas held that a motorboat was indeed a motor vehicle within 
the meaning of the bankruptcy statute; the debtor's obligation 
for wrongful death and personal injuries arising from its 
operation while intoxicated was accordingly nondischargeable. 
The court observed, ``Although both sides present statutory 
construction arguments to support their position, the Court 
finds that neither is more persuasive than the other.'' Unable 
to see any reason ``why Congress would have been concerned with 
drunk driving in one context and not the other'', the federal 
district court in Texas agreed with the federal district court 
in Florida that ``Congress was concerned with the consequences 
of drunk driving, and not the means.''
    Having previously made the policy judgment that the 
equities of persons injured by drunk drivers outweigh the 
responsible debtor's interest in a fresh start, it is incumbent 
upon Congress at this time to clarify that the policy applies 
not only on land but also on the water and in the air--thus 
bringing to an end the conflicting opinions in such cases.
    The same considerations that lead us to bar intoxicated 
drivers of land vehicles from avoiding liability by filing for 
bankruptcy protection also fully justify requiring operators of 
watercraft and aircraft to bear continued responsibility for 
the injuries and deaths that they cause. Although we recognize 
that affording honest debtors the opportunity for a fresh start 
is an important bankruptcy law objective, the equities of those 
whose unlawful conduct poses major risks for society must be 
viewed as subordinate to the equities of their victims. Those 
who suffer injuries or lose loved ones as a result of 
intoxicated driving, boating, and flying have a moral claim to 
compensation that bankruptcy law must not extinguish.
    An exception to discharge clearly embracing debts that 
result from intoxicated operation of watercraft and aircraft--
in addition to land vehicles--has both practical and symbolic 
significance. Viewed from a practical standpoint, we close a 
loophole that (1) gives intoxicated watercraft and aircraft 
operators preferred treatment over intoxicated drivers, and (2) 
denies victims of alcohol and drug related boat and plane 
accidents rights accorded automobile accident victims. Viewed 
from a symbolic standpoint, we make an important statement 
about the culpability of those who combine alcohol or drugs 
with boating or flying.
    The intoxicated operator of watercraft and aircraft--like 
the intoxicated driver--greatly endangers innocent individuals. 
A Bankruptcy Code amendment can contribute, in a modest way, to 
the national movement against such conduct. By denying the 
protections of the discharge to those who clearly do not 
deserve it, we add our voice to those of others who seek to 
discourage such dangerous, antisocial behavior.

                                Hearing

    The Committee's Subcommittee on Commercial and 
Administrative Law held a hearing on H.R. 234 on July 13, 1995. 
Testimony was received from Representative Vernon J. Ehlers of 
Michigan, the sponsor of H.R. 234, Stephen H. Case, Vice Chair 
of the Legislative Committee of the National Bankruptcy 
Conference, Gerald M. O'Donnell, President of the National 
Association of Chapter 13 Trustees, and Bruce A. Gilmore, 
Director of Boating Administration, Maryland Department of 
Natural Resources.

                        Committee Consideration

    On September 14, 1995, the Subcommittee on Commercial and 
Administrative Law met in open session and ordered reported the 
bill H.R. 234, without amendment, by voice vote, a quorum being 
present. On October 31, 1995, the Committee met in open session 
and ordered reported the bill H.R. 234, without amendment, by 
voice vote, a quorum being present. Staff was directed to make 
any technical and conforming changes and, accordingly, ``1994'' 
was stricken in the title of the bill and ``1995'' was inserted 
in lieu thereof.

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    In compliance with clause 2(l)(3)(A) of rule XI of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee reports 
that the findings and recommendations of the Committee, based 
on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the 
descriptive portions of this report.

         Committee on Government Reform and Oversight Findings

    No findings or recommendations of the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight were received as referred to in 
clause 2(l)(3)(D) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives.

               New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures

    Clause 2(l)(3)(B) of House rule XI is inapplicable because 
this legislation does not provide new budgetary authority or 
increased tax expenditures.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    In compliance with clause 2(l)(C)(3) of rule XI of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee sets 
forth, with respect to the bill, H.R. 234, the following 
estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the 
Congressional Budget Office under section 403 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                                Congressional Budget Office
                                  Washington, DC, November 3, 1995.
Hon. Henry J. Hyde,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
reviewed H.R. 234, the Boating and Aviation Operation Safety 
Act of 1995, as ordered reported by the House Committee on the 
Judiciary on October 31, 1995. CBO estimates that enacting this 
legislation would result in no costs to the federal government 
or to state or local governments. Enacting H.R. 234 would not 
affect direct spending or receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go 
procedures would not apply to the bill.
    Under current law, if a person causes death or injury by 
operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated and incurs debt as 
a result of that negligence, such debt cannot be discharged in 
bankruptcy. H.R. 234 would amend section 523 of the bankruptcy 
code to clarify that watercraft and aircraft would generally be 
treated as motor vehicles in such cases. CBO estimates that 
enacting the bill would result in no budgetary costs because 
the bill's provisions would affect only the private parties 
involved in those legal actions.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark 
Grabowicz.
            Sincerely,
                                              James L. Blum
                                   (For June E. O'Neill, Director).

                     Inflationary Impact Statement

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee estimates that H.R. 234 
will have no significant inflationary impact on prices and 
costs in the national economy.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

    The bill would amend Section 523(a)(9) of the Bankruptcy 
Code, to make nondischargeable a debt for death or personal 
injury caused by the debtor's operation of a watercraft or 
aircraft if such operation was unlawful because the debtor was 
intoxicated from using alcohol, a drug, or another substance.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the 
bill, as reported, are shown as follows (new matter is printed 
in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is shown 
in roman):

              SECTION 523 OF TITLE 11, UNITED STATES CODE

Sec. 523. Exceptions to discharge

  (a) A discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228(a), 1228(b), or 
1328(b) of this title does not discharge an individual debtor 
from any debt--
          (1) * * *
          * * * * * * *
          (9) for death or personal injury caused by the 
        debtor's operation of a motor vehicle, watercraft, or 
        aircraft if such operation was unlawful because the 
        debtor was intoxicated from using alcohol, a drug, or 
        another substance;
          * * * * * * *