[House Report 107-802]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                                                 Union Calendar No. 503
107th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     107-802

======================================================================



 
REPORT ON THE ACTIVITY OF THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE FOR THE 
                             107TH CONGRESS

                                _______
                                

January 2, 2003.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

 Mr. Tauzin, from the Committee on Energy and Commerce, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

    The jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 
as prescribed by Clause 1(f) of Rule X of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, is as follows:
(1) Biomedical research and development.
(2) Consumer affairs and consumer protection.
(3) Health and health facilities (except health care supported 
        by payroll deductions).
(4) Interstate energy compacts.
(5) Interstate and foreign commerce generally.
(6) Exploration, production, storage, supply, marketing, 
        pricing, and regulation of energy resources, including 
        all fossil fuels, solar energy, and other 
        unconventional or renewable energy resources.
(7) Conservation of energy resources.
(8) Energy information generally.
(9) The generation and marketing of power (except by federally 
        chartered or Federal regional power marketing 
        authorities); reliability and interstate transmission 
        of, and ratemaking for, all power; and siting of 
        generation facilities (except the installation of 
        interconnections between Government waterpower 
        projects).
(10) General management of the Department of Energy and 
        management and all functions of the Federal Energy 
        Regulatory Commission.
(11) National energy policy generally.
(12) Public health and quarantine.
(13) Regulation of the domestic nuclear energy industry, 
        including regulation of research and development 
        reactors and nuclear regulatory research.
(14) Regulation of interstate and foreign communications.
(15) Travel and tourism.

    The committee shall have the same jurisdiction with respect 
to regulation of nuclear facilities and of use of nuclear 
energy as it has with respect to regulation of nonnuclear 
facilities and of use of nonnuclear energy. In addition, clause 
3(c) of Rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives 
provides that the Committee on Energy and Commerce shall review 
and study on a continuing basis laws, programs, and Government 
activities relating to nuclear and other energy and nonmilitary 
nuclear energy research and development including the disposal 
of nuclear waste.

     Rules for the Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of 
                    Representatives, 107th Congress

Rule 1. General Provisions.
    (a) Rules of the Committee. The Rules of the House are the 
rules of the Committee on Energy and Commerce (hereinafter the 
``Committee'') and its subcommittees so far as is applicable, 
except that a motion to recess from day to day, and a motion to 
dispense with the first reading (in full) of a bill or 
resolution, if printed copies are available, are nondebatable 
and privileged in the Committee and its subcommittees.
    (b) Rules of the Subcommittees. Each subcommittee of the 
Committee is part of the Committee and is subject to the 
authority and direction of the Committee and to its rules so 
far as applicable. Written rules adopted by the Committee, not 
inconsistent with the Rules of the House, shall be binding on 
each subcommittee of the Committee.

Rule 2. Time and Place of Meetings.
    (a) Regular Meeting Days. The Committee shall meet on the 
fourth Tuesday of each month at 10 a.m., for the consideration 
of bills, resolutions, and other business, if the House is in 
session on that day. If the House is not in session on that day 
and the Committee has not met during such month, the Committee 
shall meet at the earliest practicable opportunity when the 
House is again in session. The chairman of the Committee may, 
at his discretion, cancel, delay, or defer any meeting required 
under this section, after consultation with the ranking 
minority member.
    (b) Additional Meetings. The chairman may call and convene, 
as he considers necessary, additional meetings of the Committee 
for the consideration of any bill or resolution pending before 
the Committee or for the conduct of other Committee business. 
The Committee shall meet for such purposes pursuant to that 
call of the chairman.
    (c) Vice Chairmen; Presiding Member. The chairman shall 
designate a member of the majority party to serve as vice 
chairman of the Committee, and shall designate a majority 
member of each subcommittee to serve as vice chairman of each 
subcommittee. The vice chairman of the Committee or 
subcommittee, as the case may be, shall preside at any meeting 
or hearing during the temporary absence of the chairman. If the 
chairman and vice chairman of the Committee or subcommittee are 
not present at any meeting or hearing, the ranking member of 
the majority party who is present shall preside at the meeting 
or hearing.
    (d) Open Meetings and Hearings. Except as provided by the 
Rules of the House, each meeting of the Committee or any of its 
subcommittees for the transaction of business, including the 
markup of legislation, and each hearing, shall be open to the 
public including to radio, television and still photography 
coverage, consistent with the provisions of Rule XI of the 
Rules of the House.

Rule 3. Agenda.
    The agenda for each Committee or subcommittee meeting 
(other than a hearing), setting out the date, time, place, and 
all items of business to be considered, shall be provided to 
each member of the Committee at least 36 hours in advance of 
such meeting.

Rule 4. Procedure.
    (a)(1) Hearings. The date, time, place, and subject matter 
of any hearing of the Committee or any of its subcommittees 
shall be announced at least one week in advance of the 
commencement of such hearing, unless the Committee or 
subcommittee determines in accordance with clause 2(g)(3) of 
Rule XI of the Rules of the House that there is good cause to 
begin the hearing sooner.
    (2)(A) Meetings. The date, time, place, and subject matter 
of any meeting (other than a hearing) scheduled on a Tuesday, 
Wednesday, or Thursday when the House will be in session, shall 
be announced at least 36 hours (exclusive of Saturdays, 
Sundays, and legal holidays except when the House is in session 
on such days) in advance of the commencement of such meeting.
    (B) Other Meetings. The date, time, place, and subject 
matter of a meeting (other than a hearing or a meeting to which 
subparagraph (A) applies) shall be announced at least 72 hours 
in advance of the commencement of such meeting.
    (b)(1) Requirements for Testimony. Each witness who is to 
appear before the Committee or a subcommittee shall file with 
the clerk of the Committee, at least two working days in 
advance of his or her appearance, sufficient copies, as 
determined by the chairman of the Committee or a subcommittee, 
of a written statement of his or her proposed testimony to 
provide to members and staff of the Committee or subcommittee, 
the news media, and the general public. Each witness shall, to 
the greatest extent practicable, also provide a copy of such 
written testimony in an electronic format prescribed by the 
chairman. Each witness shall limit his or her oral presentation 
to a brief summary of the argument. The chairman of the 
Committee or of a subcommittee, or the presiding member, may 
waive the requirements of this paragraph or any part thereof.
    (2) Additional Requirements for Testimony. To the greatest 
extent practicable, the written testimony of each witness 
appearing in a nongovernmental capacity shall include a 
curriculum vitae and a disclosure of the amount and source (by 
agency and program) of any federal grant (or subgrant thereof) 
or contract (or subcontract thereof) received during the 
current fiscal year or either of the two preceding fiscal years 
by the witness or by an entity represented by the witness.
    (c) Questioning Witnesses. The right to interrogate the 
witnesses before the Committee or any of its subcommittees 
shall alternate between majority and minority members. Each 
member shall be limited to 5 minutes in the interrogation of 
witnesses until such time as each member who so desires has had 
an opportunity to question witnesses. No member shall be 
recognized for a second period of 5 minutes to interrogate a 
witness until each member of the Committee present has been 
recognized once for that purpose. While the Committee or 
subcommittee is operating under the 5minute rule for the 
interrogation of witnesses, the chairman shall recognize in 
order of appearance members who were not present when the 
meeting was called to order after all members who were present 
when the meeting was called to order have been recognized in 
the order of seniority on the Committee or subcommittee, as the 
case may be.
    (d) Explanation of Subcommittee Action. No bill, 
recommendation, or other matter reported by a subcommittee 
shall be considered by the full Committee unless the text of 
the matter reported, together with an explanation, has been 
available to members of the Committee for at least 36 hours. 
Such explanation shall include a summary of the major 
provisions of the legislation, an explanation of the 
relationship of the matter to present law, and a summary of the 
need for the legislation. All subcommittee actions shall be 
reported promptly by the clerk of the Committee to all members 
of the Committee.
    (e) Opening Statements. Opening statements by members at 
the beginning of any hearing or markup of the Committee or any 
of its subcommittees shall be limited to 5 minutes each for the 
chairman and ranking minority member (or their respective 
designee) of the Committee or subcommittee, as applicable, and 
3 minutes each for all other members.

Rule 5. Waiver of Agenda, Notice, and Layover Requirements.
    Requirements of rules 3, 4(a)(2), and 4(d) may be waived by 
a majority of those present and voting (a majority being 
present) of the Committee or subcommittee, as the case may be.

Rule 6. Quorum.
    Testimony may be taken and evidence received at any hearing 
at which there are present not fewer than two members of the 
Committee or subcommittee in question. A majority of the 
members of the Committee shall constitute a quorum for the 
purposes of reporting any measure or matter, of authorizing a 
subpoena, or of closing a meeting or hearing pursuant to clause 
2(g) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House (except as provided 
in clause 2(g)(2)(A) and (B)). For the purposes of taking any 
action other than those specified in the preceding sentence, 
onethird of the members of the Committee or subcommittee shall 
constitute a quorum.

Rule 7. Official Committee Records.
    (a)(1) Journal. The proceedings of the Committee shall be 
recorded in a journal which shall, among other things, show 
those present at each meeting, and include a record of the vote 
on any question on which a record vote is demanded and a 
description of the amendment, motion, order, or other 
proposition voted. A copy of the journal shall be furnished to 
the ranking minority member.
    (2) Record Votes. A record vote may be demanded by onefifth 
of the members present or, in the apparent absence of a quorum, 
by any one member. No demand for a record vote shall be made or 
obtained except for the purpose of procuring a record vote or 
in the apparent absence of a quorum. The result of each record 
vote in any meeting of the Committee shall be made available in 
the Committee office for inspection by the public, as provided 
in Rule XI, clause 2(e) of the Rules of the House.
    (b) Archived Records. The records of the Committee at the 
National Archives and Records Administration shall be made 
available for public use in accordance with Rule VII of the 
Rules of the House. The chairman shall notify the ranking 
minority member of any decision, pursuant to clause 3 (b)(3) or 
clause 4 (b) of the Rule, to withhold a record otherwise 
available, and the matter shall be presented to the Committee 
for a determination on the written request of any member of the 
Committee. The chairman shall consult with the ranking minority 
member on any communication from the Archivist of the United 
States or the Clerk of the House concerning the disposition of 
noncurrent records pursuant to clause 3(b) of the Rule.

Rule 8. Subcommittees.
    There shall be such standing subcommittees with such 
jurisdiction and size as determined by the majority party 
caucus of the Committee. The jurisdiction, number, and size of 
the subcommittees shall be determined by the majority party 
caucus prior to the start of the process for establishing 
subcommittee chairmanships and assignments.

Rule 9. Powers and Duties of Subcommittees.
    Each subcommittee is authorized to meet, hold hearings, 
receive testimony, mark up legislation, and report to the 
Committee on all matters referred to it. Subcommittee chairmen 
shall set hearing and meeting dates only with the approval of 
the chairman of the Committee with a view toward assuring the 
availability of meeting rooms and avoiding simultaneous 
scheduling of Committee and subcommittee meetings or hearings 
whenever possible.

Rule 10. Reference of Legislation and Other Matters.
    All legislation and other matters referred to the Committee 
shall be referred to the subcommittee of appropriate 
jurisdiction within two weeks of the date of receipt by the 
Committee unless action is taken by the full committee within 
those two weeks, or by majority vote of the members of the 
Committee, consideration is to be by the full Committee. In the 
case of legislation or other matter within the jurisdiction of 
more than one subcommittee, the chairman of the Committee may, 
in his discretion, refer the matter simultaneously to two or 
more subcommittees for concurrent consideration, or may 
designate a subcommittee of primary jurisdiction and also refer 
the matter to one or more additional subcommittees for 
consideration in sequence (subject to appropriate time 
limitations), either on its initial referral or after the 
matter has been reported by the subcommittee of primary 
jurisdiction. Such authority shall include the authority to 
refer such legislation or matter to an ad hoc subcommittee 
appointed by the chairman, with the approval of the Committee, 
from the members of the subcommittee having legislative or 
oversight jurisdiction.

Rule 11. Ratio of Subcommittees.
    The majority caucus of the Committee shall determine an 
appropriate ratio of majority to minority party members for 
each subcommittee and the chairman shall negotiate that ratio 
with the minority party, provided that the ratio of party 
members on each subcommittee shall be no less favorable to the 
majority than that of the full Committee, nor shall such ratio 
provide for a majority of less than two majority members.

Rule 12. Subcommittee Membership.
    (a) Selection of Subcommittee Members. Prior to any 
organizational meeting held by the Committee, the majority and 
minority caucuses shall select their respective members of the 
standing subcommittees.
    (b) Ex Officio Members. The chairman and ranking minority 
member of the Committee shall be ex officio members with voting 
privileges of each subcommittee of which they are not assigned 
as members and may be counted for purposes of establishing a 
quorum in such subcommittees.

Rule 13. Managing Legislation on the House Floor.
    The chairman, in his discretion, shall designate which 
member shall manage legislation reported by the Committee to 
the House. Rule 14. Committee Professional and Clerical Staff 
Appointments.
    (a) Delegation of Staff. Whenever the chairman of the 
Committee determines that any professional staff member 
appointed pursuant to the provisions of clause 9 of Rule X of 
the House of Representatives, who is assigned to such chairman 
and not to the ranking minority member, by reason of such 
professional staff member's expertise or qualifications will be 
of assistance to one or more subcommittees in carrying out 
their assigned responsibilities, he may delegate such member to 
such subcommittees for such purpose. A delegation of a member 
of the professional staff pursuant to this subsection shall be 
made after consultation with subcommittee chairmen and with the 
approval of the subcommittee chairman or chairmen involved.
    (b) Minority Professional Staff. Professional staff members 
appointed pursuant to clause 9 of Rule X of the House of 
Representatives, who are assigned to the ranking minority 
member of the Committee and not to the chairman of the 
Committee, shall be assigned to such Committee business as the 
minority party members of the Committee consider advisable.
    (c) Additional Staff Appointments. In addition to the 
professional staff appointed pursuant to clause 9 of Rule X of 
the House of Representatives, the chairman of the Committee 
shall be entitled to make such appointments to the professional 
and clerical staff of the Committee as may be provided within 
the budget approved for such purposes by the Committee. Such 
appointee shall be assigned to such business of the full 
Committee as the chairman of the Committee considers advisable.
    (d) Sufficient Staff. The chairman shall ensure that 
sufficient staff is made available to each subcommittee to 
carry out its responsibilities under the rules of the 
Committee.
    (e) Fair Treatment of Minority Members in Appointment of 
Committee Staff. The chairman shall ensure that the minority 
members of the Committee are treated fairly in appointment of 
Committee staff.
    (f) Contracts for Temporary or Intermittent Services. Any 
contract for the temporary services or intermittent service of 
individual consultants or organizations to make studies or 
advise the Committee or its subcommittees with respect to any 
matter within their jurisdiction shall be deemed to have been 
approved by a majority of the members of the Committee if 
approved by the chairman and ranking minority member of the 
Committee. Such approval shall not be deemed to have been given 
if at least onethird of the members of the Committee request in 
writing that the Committee formally act on such a contract, if 
the request is made within 10 days after the latest date on 
which such chairman or chairmen, and such ranking minority 
member or members, approve such contract.

Rule 15. Supervision, Duties of Staff.
    (a) Supervision of Majority Staff. The professional and 
clerical staff of the Committee not assigned to the minority 
shall be under the supervision and direction of the chairman 
who, in consultation with the chairmen of the subcommittees, 
shall establish and assign the duties and responsibilities of 
such staff members and delegate such authority as he determines 
appropriate.
    (b) Supervision of Minority Staff. The professional and 
clerical staff assigned to the minority shall be under the 
supervision and direction of the minority members of the 
Committee, who may delegate such authority as they determine 
appropriate.

Rule 16. Committee Budget.
    (a) Preparation of Committee Budget. The chairman of the 
Committee, after consultation with the ranking minority member 
of the Committee and the chairmen of the subcommittees, shall 
for the 107th Congress prepare a preliminary budget for the 
Committee, with such budget including necessary amounts for 
professional and clerical staff, travel, investigations, 
equipment and miscellaneous expenses of the Committee and the 
subcommittees, and which shall be adequate to fully discharge 
the Committee's responsibilities for legislation and oversight. 
Such budget shall be presented by the chairman to the majority 
party caucus of the Committee and thereafter to the full 
Committee for its approval.
    (b) Approval of the Committee Budget. The chairman shall 
take whatever action is necessary to have the budget as finally 
approved by the Committee duly authorized by the House. No 
proposed Committee budget may be submitted to the Committee on 
House Administration unless it has been presented to and 
approved by the majority party caucus and thereafter by the 
full Committee. The chairman of the Committee may authorize all 
necessary expenses in accordance with these rules and within 
the limits of the Committee's budget as approved by the House.
    (c) Monthly Expenditures Report. Committee members shall be 
furnished a copy of each monthly report, prepared by the 
chairman for the Committee on House Administration, which shows 
expenditures made during the reporting period and cumulative 
for the year by the Committee and subcommittees, anticipated 
expenditures for the projected Committee program, and detailed 
information on travel.

Rule 17. Broadcasting of Committee Hearings.
    Any meeting or hearing that is open to the public may be 
covered in whole or in part by radio or television or still 
photography, subject to the requirements of clause 4 of Rule XI 
of the Rules of the House. The coverage of any hearing or other 
proceeding of the Committee or any subcommittee thereof by 
television, radio, or still photography shall be under the 
direct supervision of the chairman of the Committee, the 
subcommittee chairman, or other member of the Committee 
presiding at such hearing or other proceeding and may be 
terminated by such member in accordance with the Rules of the 
House.

Rule 18. Comptroller General Audits.
    The chairman of the Committee is authorized to request 
verification examinations by the Comptroller General of the 
United States pursuant to Title V, Part A of the Energy Policy 
and Conservation Act (Public Law 94163), after consultation 
with the members of the Committee.

Rule 19. Subpoenas.
    The Committee, or any subcommittee, may authorize and issue 
a subpoena under clause 2(m)(2)(A) of Rule XI of the House, if 
authorized by a majority of the members of the Committee or 
subcommittee (as the case may be) voting, a quorum being 
present. Authorized subpoenas may be issued over the signature 
of the chairman of the Committee or any member designated by 
the Committee, and may be served by any person designated by 
such chairman or member. The chairman of the Committee may 
authorize and issue subpoenas under such clause during any 
period for which the House has adjourned for a period in excess 
of 3 days when, in the opinion of the chairman, authorization 
and issuance of the subpoena is necessary to obtain the 
material set forth in the subpoena. The chairman shall report 
to the members of the Committee on the authorization and 
issuance of a subpoena during the recess period as soon as 
practicable but in no event later than one week after service 
of such subpoena.

Rule 20. Travel of Members and Staff.
    (a) Approval of Travel. Consistent with the primary expense 
resolution and such additional expense resolutions as may have 
been approved, travel to be reimbursed from funds set aside for 
the Committee for any member or any staff member shall be paid 
only upon the prior authorization of the chairman. Travel may 
be authorized by the chairman for any member and any staff 
member in connection with the attendance of hearings conducted 
by the Committee or any subcommittee thereof and meetings, 
conferences, and investigations which involve activities or 
subject matter under the general jurisdiction of the Committee. 
Before such authorization is given there shall be submitted to 
the chairman in writing the following: (1) the purpose of the 
travel; (2) the dates during which the travel is to be made and 
the date or dates of the event for which the travel is being 
made; (3) the location of the event for which the travel is to 
be made; and (4) the names of members and staff seeking 
authorization.
    (b) Approval of Travel by Minority Members and Staff. In 
the case of travel by minority party members and minority party 
professional staff for the purpose set out in (a), the prior 
approval, not only of the chairman but also of the ranking 
minority member, shall be required. Such prior authorization 
shall be given by the chairman only upon the representation by 
the ranking minority member in writing setting forth those 
items enumerated in (1), (2), (3), and (4) of paragraph (a).

  Clauses 2 and 4 or Rule XI and Clauses 2 and 3 of Rule XIII of the 
      Rules of the House of Representatives for the 107th Congress

                            January 3, 2001

       RULE XI: PROCEDURES OF COMMITTEES AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS

                       Clause 2: Committee Rules

Adoption of written rules
    2. (a)(1) Each standing committee shall adopt written rules 
governing its procedure. Such rules--
          (A) shall be adopted in a meeting that is open to the 
        public unless the committee, in open session and with a 
        quorum present, determines by record vote that all or 
        part of the meeting on that day shall be closed to the 
        public;
          (B) may not be inconsistent with the Rules of the 
        House or with those provisions of law having the force 
        and effect of Rules of the House; and
          (C) shall in any event incorporate all of the 
        succeeding provisions of this clause to the extent 
        applicable.
    (2) Each committee shall submit its rules for publication 
in the Congressional Record not later than 30 days after the 
committee is elected in each odd-numbered year.
Regular meeting days
    (b) Each standing committee shall establish regular meeting 
days for the conduct of its business, which shall be not less 
frequent than monthly. Each such committee shall meet for the 
consideration of a bill or resolution pending before the 
committee or the transaction of other committee business on all 
regular meeting days fixed by the committee unless otherwise 
provided by written rule adopted by the committee.
Additional and special meetings
    (c)(1) The chairman of each standing committee may call and 
convene, as he considers necessary, additional and special 
meetings of the committee for the consideration of a bill or 
resolution pending before the committee or for the conduct of 
other committee business, subject to such rules as the 
committee may adopt. The committee shall meet for such purpose 
under that call of the chairman.
    (2) Three or more members of a standing committee may file 
in the offices of the committee a written request that the 
chairman call a special meeting of the committee. Such request 
shall specify the measure or matter to be considered. 
Immediately upon the filing of the request, the clerk of the 
committee shall notify the chairman of the filing of the 
request. If the chairman does not call the requested special 
meeting within three calendar days after the filing of the 
request (to be held within seven calendar days after the filing 
of the request) a majority of the members of the committee may 
file in the offices of the committee their written notice that 
a special meeting of the committee will be held. The written 
notice shall specify the date and hour of the special meeting 
and the measure or matter to be considered. The committee shall 
meet on that date and hour. Immediately upon the filing of the 
notice, the clerk of the committee shall notify all members of 
the committee that such special meeting will be held and inform 
them of its date and hour and the measure or matter to be 
considered. Only the measure or matter specified in that notice 
may be considered at that special meeting.
Temporary absence of chairman
    (d) A member of the majority party on each standing 
committee or subcommittee thereof shall be designated by the 
chairman of the full committee as the vice chairman of the 
committee or subcommittee, as the case may be, and shall 
preside during the absence of the chairman from any meeting. If 
the chairman and vice chairman of a committee or subcommittee 
are not present at any meeting of the committee or 
subcommittee, the ranking majority member who is present shall 
preside at that meeting.
Committee records
    (e)(1)(A) Each committee shall keep a complete record of 
all committee action which shall include--
          (i) in the case of a meeting or hearing transcript, a 
        substantially verbatim account of remarks actually made 
        during the proceedings, subject only to technical, 
        grammatical, and typographical corrections authorized 
        by the person making the remarks involved; and
          (ii) a record of the votes on any question on which a 
        record vote is demanded.
    (B)(i) Except as provided in subdivision (B)(ii) and 
subject to paragraph (k)(7), the result of each such record 
vote shall be made available by the committee for inspection by 
the public at reasonable times in its offices. Information so 
available for public inspection shall include a description of 
the amendment, motion, order, or other proposition, the name of 
each member voting for and each member voting against such 
amendment, motion, order, or proposition, and the names of 
those members of the committee present but not voting.
    (ii) The result of any record vote taken in executive 
session in the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct may 
not be made available for inspection by the public without an 
affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the committee.
    (2)(A) Except as provided in subdivision (B), all committee 
hearings, records, data, charts, and files shall be kept 
separate and distinct from the congressional office records of 
the member serving as its chairman. Such records shall be the 
property of the House, and each Member, Delegate, and the 
Resident Commissioner shall have access thereto.
    (B) A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner, other 
than members of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, 
may not have access to the records of that committee respecting 
the conduct of a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, 
officer, or employee of the House without the specific prior 
permission of that committee.
    (3) Each committee shall include in its rules standards for 
availability of records of the committee delivered to the 
Archivist of the United States under rule VII. Such standards 
shall specify procedures for orders of the committee under 
clause 3(b)(3) and clause 4(b) of rule VII, including a 
requirement that nonavailability of a record for a period 
longer than the period otherwise applicable under that rule 
shall be approved by vote of the committee.
    (4) Each committee shall make its publications available in 
electronic form to the maximum extent feasible.
Prohibition against proxy voting
    (f) A vote by a member of a committee or subcommittee with 
respect to any measure or matter may not be cast by proxy.
Open meetings and hearings
    (g)(1) Each meeting for the transaction of business, 
including the markup of legislation, by a standing committee or 
subcommittee thereof (other than the Committee on Standards of 
Official Conduct or its subcommittees) shall be open to the 
public, including to radio, television, and still photography 
coverage, except when the committee or subcommittee, in open 
session and with a majority present, determines by record vote 
that all or part of the remainder of the meeting on that day 
shall be in executive session because disclosure of matters to 
be considered would endanger national security, would 
compromise sensitive law enforcement information, would tend to 
defame, degrade, or incriminate any person, or otherwise would 
violate a law or rule of the House. Persons, other than members 
of the committee and such noncommittee Members, Delegates, 
Resident Commissioner, congressional staff, or departmental 
representatives as the committee may authorize, may not be 
present at a business or markup session that is held in 
executive session. This subparagraph does not apply to open 
committee hearings, which are governed by clause 4(a)(1) of 
rule X or by subparagraph (2).
    (2)(A) Each hearing conducted by a committee or 
subcommittee (other than the Committee on Standards of Official 
Conduct or its subcommittees) shall be open to the public, 
including to radio, television, and still photography coverage, 
except when the committee or subcommittee, in open session and 
with a majority present, determines by record vote that all or 
part of the remainder of that hearing on that day shall be 
closed to the public because disclosure of testimony, evidence, 
or other matters to be considered would endanger national 
security, would compromise sensitive law enforcement 
information, or would violate a law or rule of the House.
    (B) Notwithstanding the requirements of subdivision (A), in 
the presence of the number of members required under the rules 
of the committee for the purpose of taking testimony, a 
majority of those present may--
          (i) agree to close the hearing for the sole purpose 
        of discussing whether testimony or evidence to be 
        received would endanger national security, would 
        compromise sensitive law enforcement information, or 
        would violate clause 2(k)(5); or
          (ii) agree to close the hearing as provided in clause 
        2(k)(5).
    (C) A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not be 
excluded from nonparticipatory attendance at a hearing of a 
committee or subcommittee (other than the Committee on 
Standards of Official Conduct or its subcommittees) unless the 
House by majority vote authorizes a particular committee or 
subcommittee, for purposes of a particular series of hearings 
on a particular article of legislation or on a particular 
subject of investigation, to close its hearings to Members, 
Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner by the same procedures 
specified in this subparagraph for closing hearings to the 
public.
    (D) The committee or subcommittee may vote by the same 
procedure described in this subparagraph to close one 
subsequent day of hearing, except that the Committee on 
Appropriations, the Committee on Armed Services, and the 
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and the 
subcommittees thereof, may vote by the same procedure to close 
up to five additional, consecutive days of hearings.
    (3) The chairman of each committee (other than the 
Committee on Rules) shall make public announcement of the date, 
place, and subject matter of a committee hearing at least one 
week before the commencement of the hearing. If the chairman of 
the committee, with the concurrence of the ranking minority 
member, determines that there is good cause to begin a hearing 
sooner, or if the committee so determines by majority vote in 
the presence of the number of members required under the rules 
of the committee for the transaction of business, the chairman 
shall make the announcement at the earliest possible date. An 
announcement made under this subparagraph shall be published 
promptly in the Daily Digest and made available in electronic 
form.
    (4) Each committee shall, to the greatest extent 
practicable, require witnesses who appear before it to submit 
in advance written statements of proposed testimony and to 
limit their initial presentations to the committee to brief 
summaries thereof. In the case of a witness appearing in a 
nongovernmental capacity, a written statement of proposed 
testimony shall include a curriculum vitae and a disclosure of 
the amount and source (by agency and program) of each Federal 
grant (or subgrant thereof) or contract (or subcontract 
thereof) received during the current fiscal year or either of 
the two previous fiscal years by the witness or by an entity 
represented by the witness.
    (5)(A) Except as provided in subdivision (B), a point of 
order does not lie with respect to a measure reported by a 
committee on the ground that hearings on such measure were not 
conducted in accordance with this clause.
    (B) A point of order on the ground described in subdivision 
(A) may be made by a member of the committee that reported the 
measure if such point of order was timely made and improperly 
disposed of in the committee.
    (6) This paragraph does not apply to hearings of the 
Committee on Appropriations under clause 4(a)(1) of rule X.
Quorum requirements
    (h)(1) A measure or recommendation may not be reported by a 
committee unless a majority of the committee is actually 
present.
    (2) Each committee may fix the number of its members to 
constitute a quorum for taking testimony and receiving 
evidence, which may not be less than two.
    (3) Each committee (other than the Committee on 
Appropriations, the Committee on the Budget, and the Committee 
on Ways and Means) may fix the number of its members to 
constitute a quorum for taking any action other than one for 
which the presence of a majority of the committee is otherwise 
required, which may not be less than one-third of the members.
Limitation on committee sittings
    (i) A committee may not sit during a joint session of the 
House and Senate or during a recess when a joint meeting of the 
House and Senate is in progress.
Calling and questioning of witnesses
    (j)(1) Whenever a hearing is conducted by a committee on a 
measure or matter, the minority members of the committee shall 
be entitled, upon request to the chairman by a majority of them 
before the completion of the hearing, to call witnesses 
selected by the minority to testify with respect to that 
measure or matter during at least one day of hearing thereon.
    (2)(A) Subject to subdivisions (B) and (C), each committee 
shall apply the five-minute rule during the questioning of 
witnesses in a hearing until such time as each member of the 
committee who so desires has had an opportunity to question 
each witness.
    (B) A committee may adopt a rule or motion permitting a 
specified number of its members to question a witness for 
longer than five minutes. The time for extended questioning of 
a witness under this subdivision shall be equal for the 
majority party and the minority party and may not exceed one 
hour in the aggregate.
    (C) A committee may adopt a rule or motion permitting 
committee staff for its majority and minority party members to 
question a witness for equal specified periods. The time for 
extended questioning of a witness under this subdivision shall 
be equal for the majority party and the minority party and may 
not exceed one hour in the aggregate.
Hearing procedures
    (k)(1) The chairman at a hearing shall announce in an 
opening statement the subject of the hearing.
    (2) A copy of the committee rules and of this clause shall 
be made available to each witness on request.
    (3) Witnesses at hearings may be accompanied by their own 
counsel for the purpose of advising them concerning their 
constitutional rights.
    (4) The chairman may punish breaches of order and decorum, 
and of professional ethics on the part of counsel, by censure 
and exclusion from the hearings; and the committee may cite the 
offender to the House for contempt.
    (5) Whenever it is asserted by a member of the committee 
that the evidence or testimony at a hearing may tend to defame, 
degrade, or incriminate any person, or it is asserted by a 
witness that the evidence or testimony that the witness would 
give at a hearing may tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate 
the witness--
          (A) notwithstanding paragraph (g)(2), such testimony 
        or evidence shall be presented in executive session if, 
        in the presence of the number of members required under 
        the rules of the committee for the purpose of taking 
        testimony, the committee determines by vote of a 
        majority of those present that such evidence or 
        testimony may tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate 
        any person; and
          (B) the committee shall proceed to receive such 
        testimony in open session only if the committee, a 
        majority being present, determines that such evidence 
        or testimony will not tend to defame, degrade, or 
        incriminate any person.
    In either case the committee shall afford such person an 
opportunity voluntarily to appear as a witness, and receive and 
dispose of requests from such person to subpoena additional 
witnesses.
    (6) Except as provided in subparagraph (5), the chairman 
shall receive and the committee shall dispose of requests to 
subpoena additional witnesses.
    (7) Evidence or testimony taken in executive session, and 
proceedings conducted in executive session, may be released or 
used in public sessions only when authorized by the committee, 
a majority being present.
    (8) In the discretion of the committee, witnesses may 
submit brief and pertinent sworn statements in writing for 
inclusion in the record. The committee is the sole judge of the 
pertinence of testimony and evidence adduced at its hearing.
    (9) A witness may obtain a transcript copy of his testimony 
given at a public session or, if given at an executive session, 
when authorized by the committee.
Supplemental, minority, or additional views
    (l) If at the time of approval of a measure or matter by a 
committee (other than the Committee on Rules) a member of the 
committee gives notice of intention to file supplemental, 
minority, or additional views for inclusion in the report to 
the House thereon, that member shall be entitled to not less 
than two additional calendar days after the day of such notice 
(excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays except when 
the House is in session on such a day) to file such views, in 
writing and signed by that member, with the clerk of the 
committee.
Power to sit and act; subpoena power
    (m)(1) For the purpose of carrying out any of its functions 
and duties under this rule and rule X (including any matters 
referred to it under clause 2 of rule XII), a committee or 
subcommittee is authorized (subject to subparagraph (3)(A))--
          (A) to sit and act at such times and places within 
        the United States, whether the House is in session, has 
        recessed, or has adjourned, and to hold such hearings 
        as it considers necessary; and
          (B) to require, by subpoena or otherwise, the 
        attendance and testimony of such witnesses and the 
        production of such books, records, correspondence, 
        memoranda, papers, and documents as it considers 
        necessary.
    (2) The chairman of the committee, or a member designated 
by the chairman, may administer oaths to witnesses.
    (3)(A)(i) Except as provided in subdivision (A)(ii), a 
subpoena may be authorized and issued by a committee or 
subcommittee under subparagraph (1)(B) in the conduct of an 
investigation or series of investigations or activities only 
when authorized by the committee or subcommittee, a majority 
being present. The power to authorize and issue subpoenas under 
subparagraph (1)(B) may be delegated to the chairman of the 
committee under such rules and under such limitations as the 
committee may prescribe. Authorized subpoenas shall be signed 
by the chairman of the committee or by a member designated by 
the committee.
    (ii) In the case of a subcommittee of the Committee on 
Standards of Official Conduct, a subpoena may be authorized and 
issued only by an affirmative vote of a majority of its 
members.
    (B) A subpoena duces tecum may specify terms of return 
other than at a meeting or hearing of the committee or 
subcommittee authorizing the subpoena.
    (C) Compliance with a subpoena issued by a committee or 
subcommittee under subparagraph (1)(B) may be enforced only as 
authorized or directed by the House.

      Clause 4: Audio and Visual Coverage of Committee Proceedings

Audio and visual coverage of committee proceedings
    4. (a) The purpose of this clause is to provide a means, in 
conformity with acceptable standards of dignity, propriety, and 
decorum, by which committee hearings or committee meetings that 
are open to the public may be covered by audio and visual 
means--
          (1) for the education, enlightenment, and information 
        of the general public, on the basis of accurate and 
        impartial news coverage, regarding the operations, 
        procedures, and practices of the House as a legislative 
        and representative body, and regarding the measures, 
        public issues, and other matters before the House and 
        its committees, the consideration thereof, and the 
        action taken thereon; and
          (2) for the development of the perspective and 
        understanding of the general public with respect to the 
        role and function of the House under the Constitution 
        as an institution of the Federal Government.
    (b) In addition, it is the intent of this clause that radio 
and television tapes and television film of any coverage under 
this clause may not be used, or made available for use, as 
partisan political campaign material to promote or oppose the 
candidacy of any person for elective public office.
    (c) It is, further, the intent of this clause that the 
general conduct of each meeting (whether of a hearing or 
otherwise) covered under authority of this clause by audio or 
visual means, and the personal behavior of the committee 
members and staff, other Government officials and personnel, 
witnesses, television, radio, and press media personnel, and 
the general public at the hearing or other meeting, shall be in 
strict conformity with and observance of the acceptable 
standards of dignity, propriety, courtesy, and decorum 
traditionally observed by the House in its operations, and may 
not be such as to--
          (1) distort the objects and purposes of the hearing 
        or other meeting or the activities of committee members 
        in connection with that hearing or meeting or in 
        connection with the general work of the committee or of 
        the House; or
          (2) cast discredit or dishonor on the House, the 
        committee, or a Member, Delegate, or Resident 
        Commissioner or bring the House, the committee, or a 
        Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner into 
        disrepute.
    (d) The coverage of committee hearings and meetings by 
audio and visual means shall be permitted and conducted only in 
strict conformity with the purposes, provisions, and 
requirements of this clause.
    (e) Whenever a hearing or meeting conducted by a committee 
or subcommittee is open to the public, those proceedings shall 
be open to coverage by audio and visual means. A committee or 
subcommittee chairman may not limit the number of television or 
still cameras to fewer than two representatives from each 
medium (except for legitimate space or safety considerations, 
in which case pool coverage shall be authorized).
    (f) Each committee shall adopt written rules to govern its 
implementation of this clause. Such rules shall contain 
provisions to the following effect:
          (1) If audio or visual coverage of the hearing or 
        meeting is to be presented to the public as live 
        coverage, that coverage shall be conducted and 
        presented without commercial sponsorship.
          (2) The allocation among the television media of the 
        positions or the number of television cameras permitted 
        by a committee or subcommittee chairman in a hearing or 
        meeting room shall be in accordance with fair and 
        equitable procedures devised by the Executive Committee 
        of the Radio and Television Correspondents' Galleries.
          (3) Television cameras shall be placed so as not to 
        obstruct in any way the space between a witness giving 
        evidence or testimony and any member of the committee 
        or the visibility of that witness and that member to 
        each other.
          (4) Television cameras shall operate from fixed 
        positions but may not be placed in positions that 
        obstruct unnecessarily the coverage of the hearing or 
        meeting by the other media.
          (5) Equipment necessary for coverage by the 
        television and radio media may not be installed in, or 
        removed from, the hearing or meeting room while the 
        committee is in session.
          (6)(A) Except as provided in subdivision (B), 
        floodlights, spotlights, strobelights, and flashguns 
        may not be used in providing any method of coverage of 
        the hearing or meeting.
          (B) The television media may install additional 
        lighting in a hearing or meeting room, without cost to 
        the Government, in order to raise the ambient lighting 
        level in a hearing or meeting room to the lowest level 
        necessary to provide adequate television coverage of a 
        hearing or meeting at the current state of the art of 
        television coverage.
          (7) In the allocation of the number of still 
        photographers permitted by a committee or subcommittee 
        chairman in a hearing or meeting room, preference shall 
        be given to photographers from Associated Press Photos 
        and United Press International Newspictures. If 
        requests are made by more of the media than will be 
        permitted by a committee or subcommittee chairman for 
        coverage of a hearing or meeting by still photography, 
        that coverage shall be permitted on the basis of a fair 
        and equitable pool arrangement devised by the Standing 
        Committee of Press Photographers.
          (8) Photographers may not position themselves between 
        the witness table and the members of the committee at 
        any time during the course of a hearing or meeting.
          (9) Photographers may not place themselves in 
        positions that obstruct unnecessarily the coverage of 
        the hearing by the other media.
          (10) Personnel providing coverage by the television 
        and radio media shall be currently accredited to the 
        Radio and Television Correspondents' Galleries.
          (11) Personnel providing coverage by still 
        photography shall be currently accredited to the Press 
        Photographers' Gallery.
          (12) Personnel providing coverage by the television 
        and radio media and by still photography shall conduct 
        themselves and their coverage activities in an orderly 
        and unobtrusive manner.

               RULE XIII: CALENDARS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

                Clause 2: Filing and Printing of Reports

    2. (a)(1) Except as provided in subparagraph (2), all 
reports of committees (other than those filed from the floor as 
privileged) shall be delivered to the Clerk for printing and 
reference to the proper calendar under the direction of the 
Speaker in accordance with clause 1. The title or subject of 
each report shall be entered on the Journal and printed in the 
Congressional Record.
    (2) A bill or resolution reported adversely shall be laid 
on the table unless a committee to which the bill or resolution 
was referred requests at the time of the report its referral to 
an appropriate calendar under clause 1 or unless, within three 
days thereafter, a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner 
makes such a request.
    (b)(1) It shall be the duty of the chairman of each 
committee to report or cause to be reported promptly to the 
House a measure or matter approved by the committee and to take 
or cause to be taken steps necessary to bring the measure or 
matter to a vote.
    (2) In any event, the report of a committee on a measure 
that has been approved by the committee shall be filed within 
seven calendar days (exclusive of days on which the House is 
not in session) after the day on which a written request for 
the filing of the report, signed by a majority of the members 
of the committee, has been filed with the clerk of the 
committee. The clerk of the committee shall immediately notify 
the chairman of the filing of such a request. This subparagraph 
does not apply to a report of the Committee on Rules with 
respect to a rule, joint rule, or order of business of the 
House, or to the reporting of a resolution of inquiry addressed 
to the head of an executive department.
    (c) All supplemental, minority, or additional views filed 
under clause 2(l) of rule XI by one or more members of a 
committee shall be included in, and shall be a part of, the 
report filed by the committee with respect to a measure or 
matter. When time guaranteed by clause 2(l) of rule XI has 
expired (or, if sooner, when all separate views have been 
received), the committee may arrange to file its report with 
the Clerk not later than one hour after the expiration of such 
time. This clause and provisions of clause 2(l) of rule XI do 
not preclude the immediate filing or printing of a committee 
report in the absence of a timely request for the opportunity 
to file supplemental, minority, or additional views as provided 
in clause 2(l) of rule XI.

                     Clause 3: Contents of Reports

Content of reports
    3. (a)(1) Except as provided in subparagraph (2), the 
report of a committee on a measure or matter shall be printed 
in a single volume that--
          (A) shall include all supplemental, minority, or 
        additional views that have been submitted by the time 
        of the filing of the report; and
          (B) shall bear on its cover a recital that any such 
        supplemental, minority, or additional views (and any 
        material submitted under paragraph (c)(3) or (4)) are 
        included as part of the report.
    (2) A committee may file a supplemental report for the 
correction of a technical error in its previous report on a 
measure or matter. A supplemental report only correcting errors 
in the depiction of record votes under paragraph (b) may be 
filed under this subparagraph and shall not be subject to the 
requirement in clause 4 concerning the availability of reports.
    (b) With respect to each record vote on a motion to report 
a measure or matter of a public nature, and on any amendment 
offered to the measure or matter, the total number of votes 
cast for and against, and the names of members voting for and 
against, shall be included in the committee report. The 
preceding sentence does not apply to votes taken in executive 
session by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.
    (c) The report of a committee on a measure that has been 
approved by the committee shall include, separately set out and 
clearly identified, the following:
          (1) Oversight findings and recommendations under 
        clause 2(b)(1) of rule X.
          (2) The statement required by section 308(a) of the 
        Congressional Budget Act of 1974, except that an 
        estimate of new budget authority shall include, when 
        practicable, a comparison of the total estimated 
        funding level for the relevant programs to the 
        appropriate levels under current law.
          (3) An estimate and comparison prepared by the 
        Director of the Congressional Budget Office under 
        section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 if 
        timely submitted to the committee before the filing of 
        the report.
          (4) A statement of general performance goals and 
        objectives, including outcome- related goals and 
        objectives, for which the measure authorizes funding.
    (d) Each report of a committee on a public bill or public 
joint resolution shall contain the following:
          (1) A statement citing the specific powers granted to 
        Congress in the Constitution to enact the law proposed 
        by the bill or joint resolution.
          (2)(A) An estimate by the committee of the costs that 
        would be incurred in carrying out the bill or joint 
        resolution in the fiscal year in which it is reported 
        and in each of the five fiscal years following that 
        fiscal year (or for the authorized duration of any 
        program authorized by the bill or joint resolution if 
        less than five years);
          (B) a comparison of the estimate of costs described 
        in subdivision (A) made by the committee with any 
        estimate of such costs made by a Government agency and 
        submitted to such committee; and
          (C) when practicable, a comparison of the total 
        estimated funding level for the relevant programs with 
        the appropriate levels under current law.
          (3)(A) In subparagraph (2) the term ``Government 
        agency'' includes any department, agency, 
        establishment, wholly owned Government corporation, or 
        instrumentality of the Federal Government or the 
        government of the District of Columbia.
          (B) Subparagraph (2) does not apply to the Committee 
        on Appropriations, the Committee on House 
        Administration, the Committee on Rules, or the 
        Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, and does 
        not apply when a cost estimate and comparison prepared 
        by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 
        under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
        1974 has been included in the report under paragraph 
        (c)(3).
    (e)(1) Whenever a committee reports a bill or joint 
resolution proposing to repeal or amend a statute or part 
thereof, it shall include in its report or in an accompanying 
document--
          (A) the text of a statute or part thereof that is 
        proposed to be repealed; and
          (B) a comparative print of any part of the bill or 
        joint resolution proposing to amend the statute and of 
        the statute or part thereof proposed to be amended, 
        showing by appropriate typographical devices the 
        omissions and insertions proposed.
    (2) If a committee reports a bill or joint resolution 
proposing to repeal or amend a statute or part thereof with a 
recommendation that the bill or joint resolution be amended, 
the comparative print required by subparagraph (1) shall 
reflect the changes in existing law proposed to be made by the 
bill or joint resolution as proposed to be amended.


  MEMBERSHIP AND ORGANIZATION OF THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

                      ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

                             (Ratio 31-26)

                    COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

               W.J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana, Chairman

MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida           JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan
JOE BARTON, Texas                    HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
FRED UPTON, Michigan                 EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
CLIFF STEARNS, Florida               RALPH M. HALL, Texas
PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio                RICK BOUCHER, Virginia
  Vice Chairman                      EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania     FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
CHRISTOPHER COX, California          SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
NATHAN DEAL, Georgia                 BART GORDON, Tennessee
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina         PETER DEUTSCH, Florida
ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky               BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois
GREG GANSKE, Iowa                    ANNA G. ESHOO, California
CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia             BART STUPAK, Michigan
BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming               ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois               TOM SAWYER, Ohio
HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico           ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland
JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona             GENE GREEN, Texas
CHARLES ``CHIP'' PICKERING,          KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri
Mississippi                          TED STRICKLAND, Ohio
VITO FOSSELLA, New York              DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado
ROY BLUNT, Missouri                  THOMAS M. BARRETT, Wisconsin
TOM DAVIS, Virginia                  BILL LUTHER, Minnesota
ED BRYANT, Tennessee                 LOIS CAPPS, California
ROBERT L. EHRLICH, Jr., Maryland     MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania
STEVE BUYER, Indiana                 CHRISTOPHER JOHN, Louisiana
GEORGE RADANOVICH, California        JANE HARMAN, California
CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire
JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania
MARY BONO, California
GREG WALDEN, Oregon
LEE TERRY, Nebraska
ERNIE FLETCHER, Kentucky \1\
                               __________
*Representative Steve Largent (R-OK) resigned as a Member of the House 
of Representatives on February 15, 2002.
\1\ Representative Ernie Fletcher (R-KY) was elected to the Committee 
on Energy and Commerce for the 107th Congress on March 20, 2002, 
pursuant to H. Res. 375, which passed the House on March 20, 2002.

               SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERSHIPS AND JURISDICTION

        Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection

                             (Ratio 16-13)

                    CLIFF STEARNS, Florida, Chairman

FRED UPTON, Michigan                 EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
NATHAN DEAL, Georgia                 DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado
  Vice Chairman                      LOIS CAPPS, California
ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky               MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania
BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming               CHRISTOPHER JOHN, Louisiana
JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois               JANE HARMAN, California
JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona             HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
ED BRYANT, Tennessee                 EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
GEORGE RADANOVICH, California        BART GORDON, Tennessee
CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire       PETER DEUTSCH, Florida
JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania        BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois
MARY BONO, California                ANNA G. ESHOO, California
GREG WALDEN, Oregon                  JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan,
LEE TERRY, Nebraska                    (Ex Officio)
ERNIE FLETCHER, Kentucky\1\
W.J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana
  (Ex Officio)

Jurisdiction: Interstate and foreign commerce, including all trade 
matters within the jurisdiction of the full committee; regulation of 
commercial practices (the FTC), including sports-related matters; 
consumer affairs and consumer protection, including privacy matters 
generally; consumer product safety (the CPSC); and product liability; 
and motor vehicle safety; and, regulation of travel, tourism, and time.

                 Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality

                             (Ratio 18-15)

                      JOE BARTON, Texas, Chairman

CHRISTOPHER COX, California          RICK BOUCHER, Virginia
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina         RALPH M. HALL, Texas
ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky               TOM SAWYER, Ohio
GREG GANSKE, Iowa                    ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland
CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia             MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania
JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois               CHRISTOPHER JOHN, Louisiana
  Vice Chairman                      HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico           EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
JOHN SHADEGG, Arizona                BART GORDON, Tennessee
CHARLES ``CHIP'' PICKERING,          BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois
Mississippi                          KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri
VITO FOSSELLA, New York              TED STRICKLAND, Ohio
ROY BLUNT, Missouri                  THOMAS M. BARRETT, Wisconsin
ED BRYANT, Tennessee                 BILL LUTHER, Minnesota
STEVE BUYER, Indiana                 JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan
GEORGE RADANOVICH, California          (Ex Officio)
MARY BONO, California
GREG WALDEN, Oregon
W.J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana
  (Ex Officio)

Jurisdiction: National energy policy generally; fossil energy, 
renewable energy resources and synthetic fuels; energy conservation; 
energy information; energy regulation and utilization; utility issues 
and regulation of nuclear facilities; interstate energy compacts; 
nuclear energy and waste; the Clean Air Act; and, all laws, programs, 
and government activities affecting such matters.

          Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials

                             (Ratio 16-13)

                    PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio, Chairman

JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania     FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
GREG GANSKE, Iowa                    EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois               SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico           GENE GREEN, Texas
VITO FOSSELLA, New York              KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri
  (Vice Chairman)                    THOMAS M. BARRETT, Wisconsin
ROBERT L. EHRLICH, Jr., Maryland     BILL LUTHER, Minnesota
STEVE BUYER, Indiana                 LOIS CAPPS, California
GEORGE RADANOVICH, California        MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania
CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire       JANE HARMAN, California
JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania        HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
MARY BONO, California                PETER DEUTSCH, Florida
GREG WALDEN, Oregon                  JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan,
LEE TERRY, Nebraska                    (Ex Officio)
ERNIE FLETCHER, Kentucky\1\
W.J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana
  (Ex Officio)

Jurisdiction: Environmental protection in general, including the Safe 
Drinking Water Act and risk assessment matters; solid waste, hazardous 
waste and toxic substances, including Superfund and RCRA; mining, oil, 
gas, and coal combustion wastes; and, noise pollution control.

                         Subcommittee on Health

                             (Ratio 18-15)

                  MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida, Chairman

JOE BARTON, Texas                    SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
FRED UPTON, Michigan                 HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania     TED STRICKLAND, Ohio
NATHAN DEAL, Georgia                 THOMAS M. BARRETT, Wisconsin
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina         LOIS CAPPS, California
ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky               RALPH M. HALL, Texas
GREG GANSKE, Iowa                    EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia             FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
  Vice Chairman                      PETER DEUTSCH, Florida
BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming               ANNA G. ESHOO, California
HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico           BART STUPAK, Michigan
JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona             ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
CHARLES ``CHIP'' PICKERING,          ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland
Mississippi                          GENE GREEN, Texas
ED BRYANT, Tennessee                 JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan,
ROBERT L. EHRLICH, Jr., Maryland       (Ex Officio)
STEVE BUYER, Indiana
JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania
W.J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana
  (Ex Officio)

Jurisdiction: Public health and quarantine; hospital construction; 
mental health and research; biomedical programs and health protection 
in general, including Medicaid and national health insurance; food and 
drugs; and, drug abuse.

          Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet

                             (Ratio 18-15)

                     FRED UPTON, Michigan, Chairman

MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida           EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
JOE BARTON, Texas                    BART GORDON, Tennessee
CLIFF STEARNS, Florida               BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois
  Vice Chairman                      ANNA G. ESHOO, California
PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio                ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
CHRISTOPHER COX, California          GENE GREEN, Texas
NATHAN DEAL, Georgia                 KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri
BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming               BILL LUTHER, Minnesota
JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois               BART STUPAK, Michigan
HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico           DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado
CHARLES ``CHIP'' PICKERING,          JANE HARMAN, California
Mississippi                          RICK BOUCHER, Virginia
VITO FOSSELLA, New York              SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
ROY BLUNT, Missouri                  TOM SAWYER, Ohio
TOM DAVIS, Virginia                  JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan,
CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire         (Ex Officio)
LEE TERRY, Nebraska
GREG WALDEN, Oregon
W.J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana
  (Ex Officio)

Jurisdiction: Interstate and foreign telecommunications including, but 
not limited to all telecommunication and information transmission by 
broadcast, radio, wire, microwave, satellite, or other mode.

              Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations

                              (Ratio 9-7)

               JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania, Chairman

MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida           PETER DEUTSCH, Florida
CLIFF STEARNS, Florida               BART STUPAK, Michigan
PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio                TED STRICKLAND, Ohio
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina         DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado
ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky               CHRISTOPHER JOHN, Louisiana
  Vice Chairman                      BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois
CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire       JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan,
ERNIE FLETCHER, Kentucky               (Ex Officio)
W.J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana
  (Ex Officio)

Jurisdiction: Responsibility for oversight of agencies, departments, 
and programs within the jurisdiction of the full committee, and for 
conducting investigations within such jurisdiction.

                            Committee Staff

                  David V. Marventano, Chief of Staff

                   James D. Barnette, General Counsel

                  Nydia Bonnin, Deputy Staff Director

                Patrick Morrisey, Deputy Staff Director

    Mark A. Paoletta, Chief Counsel for Oversight and Investigations

                Ken Johnson, Director of Communications

                    Michael Abraham, Staff Assistant

                         Kelli Andrews, Counsel

                     Seth Benhard, Staff Assistant

                         Jason Bentley, Counsel

                  Ramsen Betfarhad, Policy Coordinator

                     Andy Black, Policy Coordinator

                       Linda Bloss-Baum, Counsel

                    William Carty, Legislative Clerk

                Dwight Cates, Professional Staff Member

                       David L. Cavicke, Counsel

                      Yong Choe, Legislative Clerk

                      Charles M. Clapton, Counsel

                  John Clocker, Systems Administrator

                 Jaylyn Connaughton, Special Assistant

                          Brad Conway, Counsel

                         Anthony Cooke, Counsel

                        William Cooper, Counsel

                    Gerald Couri, Policy Coordinator

                        Sean Cunningham, Counsel

                      Brent A. Del Monte, Counsel

                     Thomas DiLenge, Senior Counsel

                   Eugenia Edwards, Legislative Clerk

                        Michael Geffroy, Counsel

            Mary Ellen Grant, Deputy Communications Director

                     Billy Harvard, Staff Assistant

                        Rebecca Hemard, Counsel

                Cheryl Jaeger, Professional Staff Member

                   Nandan Kenkeremath, Senior Counsel

                     Hollyn Kidd, Legislative Clerk

                   Peter E. Kielty, Legislative Clerk

                      Jill Latham, Staff Assistant

              Brian McCullough, Professional Staff Member

                       Robert J. Meyers, Counsel

      Audrey Murdoch, Assistant to the Administrative Coordinator

                   Will Nordwind, Policy Coordinator

              Michael O'Rielly, Professional Staff Member

                   Joseph P. Patterson, Jr., Printer

                     Kelly Ponder, Staff Assistant

              Vikki Riley, Deputy Communications Director

                       Jennifer Safavian, Counsel

                         Ray Shepherd, Counsel

                       Jerome Sikorski, Archivist

              Arturo Silva, Deputy Communications Director

              Robert E. Simison, Professional Staff Member

                 Alan Michael Slobodin, Senior Counsel

                Peter Spencer, Professional Staff Member

                     Joseph C. Stanko, Jr., Counsel

                    Anthony M. Sullivan, Comptroller

                    Steve Tilton, Policy Coordinator

               Jon Tripp, Deputy Communications Director

                      Shannon Vildostegui, Counsel

      Linda Walker, Administrative and Human Resources Coordinator

                        Jessica Wallace, Counsel

                        Howard Waltzman, Counsel

               Ann Washington, Professional Staff Member

                  Brendan Williams, Legislative Clerk

                         Kelly Zerzan, Counsel

                             Minority Staff

      Reid P. F. Stuntz, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel

 David R. Schooler, Minority Deputy Staff Director and General Counsel

                 Sharon E. Davis, Chief Minority Clerk

     Candace E. Butler, Assistant Minority Clerk/LAN Administrator

                 Jonathan J. Cordone, Minority Counsel

           Karen E. Folk, Minority Professional Staff Member

                     John P. Ford, Minority Counsel

              Richard A. Frandsen, Senior Minority Counsel

                    Michael L. Goo, Minority Counsel

             Ashley R. Groesbeck, Minority Staff Assistant

           M. Bruce Gwinn, Minority Professional Staff Member

            Amy B. Hall, Minority Professional Staff Member

                Robert T. Hall, Minority Staff Assistant

            Voncille Trotter Hines, Minority Staff Assistant

                    Edith Holleman, Minority Counsel

     Carla R.V. Hultberg, Minority Senior Secretary/Assistant LAN 
                             Administrator

            Courtney L. Johnson, Minority Research Assistant

         Brendan C. Kelsay, Minority Professional Staff Member

             Nicole B. Kenner, Minority Research Assistant

           Raymond R. Kent, Jr., Minority Financial Assistant

            Rick Kessler, Minority Professional Staff Member

               Christopher Knauer, Minority Investigator

                   Andrew W. Levin, Minority Counsel

              Jessica A. McNiece, Minority Staff Assistant

           David W. Nelson, Minority Investigator / Economist

             Laura A.T. Sheehan., Minority Press Secretary

              D. Elaine Sheets, Minority Senior Secretary

                   Sue D. Sheridan, Minority Counsel

         Bridgett E. Taylor, Minority Professional Staff Member

            Counsuela M. Washington, Senior Minority Counsel
          Legislative and Oversight Activity of the Committee

    During the 107th Congress, 1131 bills and resolutions were 
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. The Full 
Committee reported 52 measures to the House (not including 
conference reports). Forty-one measures regarding issues within 
the Committee's jurisdiction were enacted into law.
    In areas as diverse as health, telecommunications, energy, 
and the environment, the Committee made great strides towards 
the goal of creating a more effective, les expensive, and more 
accountable government that better serves all Americans.
    The following is a summary of the legislative and oversight 
activities of the Committee on Energy and Commerce during the 
107th Congress. This report includes a summary of the 
activities taken by the Committee to implement its Oversight 
Plan for the 107th Congress, which was submitted by the 
Committee under clause 2(d) of rule X. In addition, pursuant to 
clause 1(d)(3) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives, this reports contains a summary of any 
additional oversight activities undertaken by the Committee and 
the recommendations made or actions taken thereon.
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

                             FULL COMMITTEE

                             (Ratio 31-26)

              W. J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana, Chairman

MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida           JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan
JOE BARTON, Texas                    HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
FRED UPTON, Michigan                 EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
CLIFF STEARNS, Florida               RALPH M. HALL, Texas
PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio                RICK BOUCHER, Virginia
JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania     EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
CHRISTOPHER COX, California          FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
NATHAN DEAL, Georgia                 SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina         BART GORDON, Tennessee
  Vice Chairman                      PETER DEUTSCH, Florida
ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky               BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois
GREG GANSKE, Iowa                    ANNA G. ESHOO, California
CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia             BART STUPAK, Michigan
BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming               ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois               TOM SAWYER, Ohio
HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico           ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland
JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona             GENE GREEN, Texas
CHARLES ``CHIP'' PICKERING,          KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri
Mississippi                          TED STRICKLAND, Ohio
VITO FOSSELLA, New York              DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado
ROY BLUNT, Missouri                  THOMAS M. BARRETT, Wisconsin
TOM DAVIS, Virginia                  BILL LUTHER, Minnesota
ED BRYANT, Tennessee                 LOIS CAPPS, California
ROBERT L. EHRLICH, Jr., Maryland     MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania
STEVE BUYER, Indiana                 CHRISTOPHER JOHN, Louisiana
GEORGE RADANOVICH, California        JANE HARMAN, California
CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire
JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania
MARY BONO, California
GREG WALDEN, Oregon
LEE TERRY, Nebraska
ERNIE FLETCHER, Kentucky

                         Legislative Activities


            CREATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY


                     Public Law 107-296 (H.R. 5005)

    To create a Department of Homeland Security and for other 
purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 5005 consolidates a number of Federal agencies, 
offices, programs, and functions in a new Department of 
Homeland Security in an effort to streamline and enhance 
homeland security efforts, and to apply increased direction, 
coordination, and focus to homeland security issues. The 
Committee on Energy and Commerce exercises direct jurisdiction 
over much of H.R. 5005, including issues contained in Title II 
on cybersecurity, information analysis, and critical 
infrastructure protection; Title III on research and 
development programs within the Department of Energy (DOE) and 
the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and on the 
selection, safety and security of dangerous biological agents; 
Title V on emergency preparedness and response; and related 
provisions elsewhere in the bill. Accordingly, the Committee 
developed, on a bipartisan basis, a Committee Print containing 
the Committee's formal recommendations to the Select Committee 
on Homeland Security with respect to those areas of H.R. 5005 
within the Committee's jurisdiction.
    In the area of critical infrastructure protection 
(including cyber security) the Committee made a series of 
recommendations based on its extensive expertise as the 
Committee responsible for policy and oversight of the country's 
key critical infrastructures, including the energy and 
telecommunications systems, chemical, oil and gas, and nuclear 
facilities, and food and drinking water supplies. As 
introduced, Title II of H.R. 5005 established an Undersecretary 
for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection, whose 
responsibilities included: receiving and analyzing law 
enforcement, intelligence, and other information regarding 
terrorist threats; comprehensively assessing the 
vulnerabilities of key resources and critical infrastructures 
in the United States; integrating relevant information, 
intelligence analyses, and vulnerability assessments; 
developing a comprehensive national plan for securing key 
resources and critical infrastructures in the United States; 
taking or seeking to effect necessary measures to protect key 
resources and critical infrastructures in the United States; 
administering the Homeland Security Advisory System; and, 
making recommendations for improvements in the policies and 
procedures for sharing of law enforcement, intelligence and 
other information. Title II also transferred to the Department 
the following functions or programs of other executive 
agencies: the National Infrastructure Protection Center of the 
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) (other than the Computer 
Investigations and Operations Section); the National 
Communications System at the Department of Defense (DOD); the 
Critical Infrastructure Assurance Office of the Department of 
Commerce (DOC); the Computer Security Division of the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST); the National 
Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center (NISAC) of the 
DOE; and the Federal Computer Incident Response Center of the 
General Services Administration (GSA).
    The Committee's key recommendations in this area focused on 
clarifying that these critical infrastructure protection 
authorities did not grant the Department new regulatory 
authority over the affected industries, and did not alter or 
diminish any existing regulatory authority of any other 
executive agency unless such authority was expressly 
transferred to the new Department from such executive agency. 
These recommendations were, in essence, adopted by the Select 
Committee and the Congress in the version of H.R. 5005 
ultimately signed into law by the President. The Committee also 
recommended the inclusion of an additional section in Title II, 
directing the Secretary to establish and manage a program to 
improve the security of Federal critical information and 
computer systems. While adopted by the Select Committee, this 
recommendation was not included in the legislation upon final 
passage.
    The Committee also made a series of recommendations to 
Title III of H.R. 5005 addressing matters relating to research 
and development of terrorism-related countermeasures and 
technologies. As introduced, Title III created an Under 
Secretary for Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear 
Countermeasures, whose principal responsibilities included: 
conducting a national research and development program to 
support the mission of the Department; coordinating Federal 
civilian efforts to identify, develop, and demonstrate 
countermeasures and technologies to protect against chemical, 
biological, radiological, and nuclear terrorist threats; and, 
establishing guidelines for state and local government efforts 
to implement such countermeasures. Title III also transferred 
particular functions and programs from other executive agencies 
to the new Department, specifically (1) the select agent 
program of HHS for the possession and transfer of dangerous 
biological agents and toxins; (2) various DOE research, 
development, and assessment programs relating to chemical, 
biological, radiological and nuclear agents; and, (3) two other 
research centers from DOD and the Department of Agriculture 
(USDA). This title also provided that the new Secretary shall 
carry out his responsibilities for civilian, human health-
related biological, biomedical, and infectious disease defense 
research and development through HHS, under agreements with the 
HHS Secretary; may transfer funds to the HHS Secretary for 
carrying out such research; and has the authority to establish 
the research and development program and set its priorities, in 
consultation with the HHS Secretary.
    The Committee's key recommendations in this area focused on 
clarifying that the new Department will not conduct human 
health-related research and development activities, but will 
nonetheless play an important role in identifying priorities 
and developing national policy and a strategic plan for such 
research as it pertains to the threats of biological, chemical, 
radiological, and nuclear terrorism. The Committee Print also 
recommended an additional provision that would direct the new 
Secretary to establish, acting through the Under Secretary, a 
central Federal repository to receive and, as appropriate, 
review solicited and unsolicited submissions relating to 
homeland security-relevant technologies and systems developed 
by the Department, universities and other academic 
institutions, other governmental agencies, and the private 
sector. The Committee Print also amended the transfer of the 
HHS select agent program by making it conditional upon the 
transfer of the overlapping select agent program of USDA to the 
new Department, as well as upon a continuing consultation role 
for the Secretary of HHS in all aspects of the program. These 
recommendations were, in essence, adopted by the Select 
Committee and the Congress in the version of H.R. 5005 
ultimately signed into law by the President, except that 
neither the HHS select agent program nor the USDA companion 
program was transferred to the new Department.
    Title V of H.R. 5005, as introduced, created an Under 
Secretary for Emergency Preparedness and Response, whose 
principal responsibilities included: enhancing the preparedness 
of emergency response providers at the Federal, state, and 
local levels for terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other 
emergencies; managing the Federal government's response to 
terrorist attacks and major disasters, including directing 
certain response assets under the Department's control and 
coordinating other Federal response resources; assisting in the 
recovery from such attacks or disasters; establishing standards 
and conducting joint and other exercises and training for the 
Federal nuclear incident response teams; and developing and 
promoting acquisition of interoperable communications 
technology for emergency response providers. Title V 
transferred specific functions and programs from other 
executive agencies to the new Department, including the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and other emergency 
preparedness and response functions from the Departments of 
Justice and Health and Human Services. The latter category 
includes, from HHS, the Office of the Assistant Secretary for 
Public Health Emergency Preparedness, the Office of Emergency 
Preparedness, the National Disaster Medical System, the 
National Strategic Stockpile, and the Metropolitan Medical 
Response System. Title V also provided that the new Secretary 
could call into action certain nuclear incident response 
elements of DOE and EPA, in response to a terrorist attack, 
major disaster, or other emergency. Finally, Title V provided 
that the new Secretary shall carry out certain responsibilities 
through HHS, under agreements with the HHS Secretary, including 
(1) preparedness-related construction, renovation and 
enhancement of security for research and development or other 
facilities owned or occupied by HHS; and (2) public health-
related activities carried out by HHS to assist state and local 
governments and other non-Federal public and private health 
care and educational entities to plan or prepare for chemical, 
biological, radiological, and nuclear events and other public 
health emergencies.
    The Committee's key recommendations in this area were (1) 
to provide for a more limited transfer of authorities from HHS, 
by retaining at HHS the coordination, liaison, and other 
functions of the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public 
Health Emergency Preparedness, while transferring the functions 
of the Office of Emergency Preparedness, the National Disaster 
Medical System, and the Metropolitan Medical Response System; 
and (2) to delete the provision relating to the new Secretary's 
authority over public health-related and preparedness-related 
activities currently carried out by HHS. The Select Committee 
adopted the first Committee recommendation, and modified the 
second recommendation with the bipartisan agreement of the 
Energy and Commerce Committee leadership and the 
Administration. The modification grants the new Secretary a 
collaborative role in establishing the goals and priorities of 
the HHS preparedness programs, but maintains HHS legal and 
programmatic authority over such programs. The Select 
Committee's incorporation of these two provisions was adopted 
by the Congress in the version of H.R. 5005 ultimately signed 
by the President.
    The Committee Print also recommended the addition of new 
section to provide a rule of construction regarding the 
transfers of authority made by this Act. The rule of 
construction ensured that the Act does not establish new 
regulatory authority for the Secretary, except to the extent 
that a function transferred to the Secretary by designated 
sections includes such authority. This rule of construction 
also ensured that the Act does not alter or diminish the 
regulatory authority of any other executive agency, except to 
the extent that a function of such agency that includes such 
authority is transferred to the Secretary by one of the 
designated sections. A similar rule of construction was adopted 
by the Select Committee and the Congress in the version of H.R. 
5005 ultimately signed by the President.
    The Committee Print also recommended a new section to 
clarify how the transfers of authority from DOE to the new 
Department will occur with respect to the activities being 
carried out for DOE by its national laboratories. In such 
circumstances, the two Secretaries shall ensure that the 
contracts between the Department of Homeland Security and the 
operators of the national laboratories are separate from the 
general management contracts between DOE and the operators of 
the national laboratories. Because the national laboratories 
performing work for the Department of Homeland Security will 
continue to utilize DOE facilities, the Committee's 
recommendation further provided that the new Department shall 
reimburse DOE for costs relating to such activities. However, 
the new Department shall not be required to pay administrative 
or personnel costs of DOE or its contractors in excess of the 
amount that the Secretary of Energy normally pays for an 
activity carried out by such a contractor. A similar provision 
relating to DOE transfers was adopted by the Select Committee 
and the Congress in the version of H.R. 5005 ultimately signed 
by the President.

Legislative History

    On June 18, 2002, President Bush sent to Congress a 
proposed bill to establish a Department of Homeland Security as 
a new Cabinet-level agency within the Executive Branch of the 
Federal government. Mr. Armey introduced the President's bill 
on June 24, 2002, as H.R. 5005, the Homeland Security Act of 
2002. Pursuant to House Resolution 449, the bill was referred 
to the specially-created Select Committee on Homeland Security 
for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, and 
in addition to the Committees on Agriculture, Appropriations, 
Armed Services, Energy and Commerce, Financial Services, 
Government Reform, Intelligence (Permanent Select), 
International Relations, the Judiciary, Science, Transportation 
and Infrastructure, and Ways and Means for a period ending not 
later than July 12, 2002, for consideration of such matters as 
fell within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On June 25, 2002, the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations held a hearing on creating the Department of 
Homeland Security that focused on the emergency preparedness 
and response functions proposed for transfer to the new 
Department as part of Title V of H.R. 5005. The Subcommittee 
received testimony from a representative of The White House; a 
Deputy Secretary of the Department of Health and Human 
Services; the Administrator of the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) of DOE; and representatives from the 
General Accounting Office (GAO), various DOE/NNSA national 
laboratories, the North Carolina Division of Emergency 
Management, and the Washington Area National Medical Response 
Team.
    On July 9, 2002, the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations continued its hearing, focusing on the research 
and development and critical infrastructure activities proposed 
for transfer to the new Department as part of Title II and III 
of H.R. 5005. The Subcommittee received testimony from 
representatives of HHS, GAO, CIAO, DOE and its national 
laboratories, and other critical infrastructure industry 
sectors.
    On July 11, 2002, the Full Committee met in open markup 
session for the consideration of a Committee Print to provide 
recommendations to the Select Committee on Homeland Security 
with respect to H.R. 5005, and approved the Committee Print, 
without amendment, by voice vote.
    On July 12, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
forwarded a report to the Select Committee on Homeland Security 
containing the Committee's legislative recommendations to H.R. 
5005. Pursuant to House Resolution 449, all Committee's were 
discharged from further consideration of H.R. 5005 on July 12, 
2002.
    The key recommendations contained in the Committee Print 
were largely adopted by the Select Committee on Homeland 
Security on July 19, 2002, as part of its reporting of H.R. 
5005, by a 5-4 vote, to the floor for consideration by the 
House. The Select Committee on Homeland Security reported H.R. 
5005 to the House, as amended, on July 24, 2002 (H. Rpt. 107-
609, Part I), pursuant to a special order.
    The House considered H.R. 5005 on July 25 and 26, 2002, 
pursuant to H. Res. 502. The House passed H.R. 5005, as 
amended, on July 26, 2002, by a roll call vote of 295 yeas and 
132 nays.
    H.R. 5005 was received in the Senate, read twice, and 
placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders 
on July 30, 2002. The Senate began consideration of H.R. 5005 
on September 4, 2002, and on November 19, 2002, the Senate 
passed H.R. 5005 with an amendment by a record vote of 90 yeas 
and 9 nays.
    On November 22, 2002, the message on Senate action was sent 
to the House, and the House agreed to the Senate amendment by 
unanimous consent. That same day, H.R. 5005 was cleared for the 
White House and presented to the President. On November 25, 
2002, H.R. 5005 was signed by the President (Public Law No: 
107-296).

                          Oversight Activities


               THE NETWORKS' ELECTION NIGHT 2000 COVERAGE

    Shortly after the November 2000 Presidential election, the 
Committee began a critical review of the media's coverage of 
Election Night 2000, concerned about a series of incorrect 
projections made by the major television and cable networks 
during the evening and potential bias in polling and reporting 
practices. The Committee sent information requests to CBS, NBC, 
ABC, Fox, CNN, the Associated Press (AP), and the Voter News 
Service (VNS)--the exit polling and vote-gathering conglomerate 
owned by all the major networks and the AP--requesting 
documentation on their polling and reporting systems, including 
how and why they ``called'' certain states for a Presidential 
candidate and the role that exit polls and incorrect and 
incomplete VNS data played in their projections. Committee 
staff met with representatives of the networks and VNS to 
discuss the problems and their plans to avoid similar ones in 
the future.
    On February 14, 2001, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
held an oversight hearing on the problems that arose on 
election night in November 2000. Witnesses at the hearing 
included the heads of all the major networks, as well as top 
officials from the AP and VNS. Also testifying at the hearing 
were several experts who performed independent reviews of the 
problems that occurred on election night. At the hearing, the 
networks made a variety of pledges to the Committee regarding 
how they intended to report on future elections, including 
promises not to call any state for a particular candidate until 
all of the polls within that state were closed, to use a 
secondary source of voting and polling data to serve as a check 
on VNS, and to either reform VNS' operations or refrain from 
using its data. Recently, Committee majority staff contacted 
the networks prior to the November 2002 elections to discuss 
the status of these corrective actions.

                        COMBATTING BIOTERRORISM

    On November 15, 2001, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
held an oversight hearing on bioterrorism and the proposals to 
combat bioterrorism. The hearing was held in response to the 
anthrax attacks in October 2001, and was based on more than 
three years of previous Committee oversight activity in areas 
relating to the efforts of the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention (CDC) to counter bioterrorism. Those efforts 
included reviewing: regulatory controls on dangerous biological 
agents; Federal, state and local disease surveillance and 
outbreak response, including as related to anthrax; health-
related information and communication systems; and CDC 
laboratory security. The purpose of the hearing was to evaluate 
the effectiveness and direction of CDC's overall public health 
strategies and capabilities directly relevant to bioterrorism 
preparedness and response, and to provide background 
information for the Committee as it considered legislation to 
improve these activities at the Federal and state levels. The 
Committee heard testimony from the Secretary of the Department 
of Health and Human Services (HHS), who was accompanied by the 
Director of CDC, and the head of the HHS Office of Public 
Health Preparedness. Subsequent to the hearing, the Committee 
developed and the Congress passed bipartisan legislation to 
address matters relating to bioterrorism, entitled ``The Public 
Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act 
of 2002.'' For a full description of this legislation, refer to 
the Full Committee Legislation section of the Committee's 
Activity Report for the 107th Congress.

LESSONS LEARNED FROM ENRON'S COLLAPSE: AUDITING THE ACCOUNTING INDUSTRY

    On February 6, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
held an oversight hearing entitled ``Developments Relating to 
Enron Corp., Including Its Relationship with Andersen LLP.'' 
The hearing focused on the adequacy of current Generally 
Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and corporate disclosure 
as well as corporate governance and accounting governance. 
Witnesses included accounting experts, securities law experts, 
representatives from the securities industry, and corporate 
governance associations.

                             Hearings Held

    Election Night 2000 Coverage by the Networks.--Oversight 
hearing on the Election Night 2000 Coverage by the Networks. 
Hearing held on February 14, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-
25.
    Internet Freedom and Broadband Deployment Act of 2001.--
Hearing on H.R. 1542, the Internet Freedom and Broadband 
Deployment Act of 2001. Hearing held on April 25, 2001. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-24.
    Bioterrorism and Proposals to Combat Bioterrorism.--
Oversight hearing on Bioterrorism and Proposals to Combat 
Bioterrorism. Hearing held on November 15, 2001. PRINTED, 
Serial Number 107-72.
    Developments Relating to Enron Corp., Including its 
Relationship with Andersen LLP.--Oversight hearing on 
Developments Relating to Enron Corp., Including its 
Relationship with Andersen LLP. Hearing held on February 6, 
2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-83.
      

        Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection

                             (Ratio 16-13)

                    CLIFF STEARNS, Florida, Chairman

FRED UPTON, Michigan                 EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
NATHAN DEAL, Georgia                 DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado
  Vice Chairman                      LOIS CAPPS, California
ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky               MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania
BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming               CHRISTOPHER JOHN, Louisiana
JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois               JANE HARMAN, California
JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona             HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
ED BRYANT, Tennessee                 EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
GEORGE RADANOVICH, California        BART GORDON, Tennessee
CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire       PETER DEUTSCH, Florida
JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania        BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois
MARY BONO, California                ANNA G. ESHOO, California
GREG WALDEN, Oregon                  JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan,
LEE TERRY, Nebraska                    (Ex Officio)
ERNIE FLETCHER, Kentucky
W.J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana
  (Ex Officio)

Jurisdiction: Interstate and foreign commerce, including all trade 
matters within the jurisdiction of the full committee; regulation of 
commercial practices (the FTC), including sports-related matters; 
consumer affairs and consumer protection, including privacy matters 
generally; consumer product safety (the CPSC); and product liability; 
and motor vehicle safety; and, regulation of travel, tourism, and time.

                         Legislative Activities


                       sarbanes-oxley act of 2002


                Public Law 107-204 (H.R. 3763, S. 2673)


                        (Accounting Provisions)

    To protect investors by improving the accuracy and 
reliability of corporate disclosures made pursuant to the 
securities laws, and for other purposes.

Summary

    Title I of Public Law 107-204 contains two provisions that 
fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce. First, section 108 permits the Securities and 
Exchange Commission to recognize accounting standards set by 
private sector organizations as authoritative for the purpose 
of compliance with the Federal securities laws. The private 
sector organizations must meet the criteria set forth in 
section 108, including that the organizations be private and 
funded by public companies in the manner set forth in section 
109. Additionally, the standard setting body must have proven 
the ability to improve the accuracy and effectiveness of 
financial reporting, as determined by the Commission.
    Section 109 establishes a funding mechanism for private 
standard setting organizations that are recognized by the 
Commission for purposes of compliance with the Federal 
securities laws. The funding is derived from a fee imposed on 
publicly traded companies.

Legislative History

    H.R. 3763 was introduced in the House on February 14, 2002 
by Mr. Oxley and referred to the Committee on Financial 
Services. On April 22, 2002, H.R. 3763 was reported, as 
amended, by the Committee on Financial Services (H. Rept. 107-
414). On April 23, the Rules Committee granted a rule providing 
for the consideration of H.R. 3763. The rule was filed in the 
House as H. Res. 395. On April 24, 2002, the House passed H. 
Res. 395.
    Pursuant to H. Res. 395, the House considered H.R. 3763 on 
April 24, 2002 and passed by a recorded vote 334 yeas and 90 
nays.
    On April 25, 2002, H.R. 3763 was received in the Senate and 
referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban 
Affairs. On July 15, 2002, the Senate Committee on Banking, 
Housing, and Urban Affairs was discharged of H.R. 3763 and the 
measure was laid before the Senate. The Senate struck all after 
the enacting clause and substituted the language of S. 2673, 
amended. H.R. 3763 passed the Senate with an amendment by voice 
vote on July 15, 2002.
    The Senate insisted on its amendment and requested a 
conference on July 15, 2002 and on July 17, 2002 the Senate 
appointed conferees.
    On July 17, 2002, the House disagreed to the Senate 
amendment and the Speaker appointed conferees from the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce for consideration of sections 
of the Senate amendment, and modifications committed to 
conference, within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy 
and Commerce.
    On July 19, 2002, a conference was held. On July 24, 2002, 
the conferees agreed to file conference report (H. Rept. 107-
610).
    On July 25, 2002 Mr. Oxley brought up conference report H. 
Rept. 107-610 by previously agreed to special order. The House 
agreed to the report by a roll call vote of 423 yeas and 3 
nays. On July 25, 2002, the Senate agreed to the conference 
report record vote of 99 yeas and 0 nays.
    On July 26, 2002 the legislation was cleared for the White 
House and presented to the President. The President signed it 
into law on July 30, 2002 (Public Law 107-204).

                      LOW-SPEED ELECTRIC BICYCLES


                     Public Law 107-319 (H.R. 727)

    To amend the Consumer Product Safety Act to provide that 
low-speed electric bicycles are consumer products subject to 
such Act.

Summary

    H.R. 727 amends the Consumer Product Safety Act to provide 
that low-speed electric bicycles are consumer products subject 
to that Act. The bill removes low-speed electric bicycles from 
the definition of ``motor vehicle'' within the jurisdiction of 
the Department of Transportation, where such bicycles are 
required to be regulated in the same manner as motorcycles. 
H.R. 727 then amends the Consumer Product Safety Act to 
transfer jurisdiction over low-speed electric bicycles to the 
Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), where those bicycles 
would be regulated similarly to human-powered bicycles.

Legislative History

    H.R. 727 was introduced in the House by Mr. Stearns and six 
cosponsors on February 27, 2001. The bill was referred solely 
to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On March 5, 2001, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met 
in open markup session to consider H.R. 727, and ordered 
reported, by a voice vote, a quorum being present. The 
Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 727 to the House 
(H. Rpt. 107-5). The House considered H.R. 727 under suspension 
of the rules on March 6, 2001, and passed H.R. 727 by a roll 
call vote of 401 yeas to 1 nay.
    On March 7, 2001, H.R. 727 was received in the Senate and 
read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation.
    On November 18, 2002, the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation discharged H.R. 727 by unanimous consent, 
and the bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent.
    H.R. 727 was cleared for the White House on November 18, 
2002, and was presented to the President on November 22, 2002. 
The President signed H.R. 727 on December 4, 2002 (Public Law 
107-319).

                              ANTON'S LAW


                 Public Law 107-318 (H.R. 5504, s. 980)

    To provide for the improvement of the safety of child 
restraints in passenger motor vehicles, and for other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 5504 requires the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration (NHTSA) to initiate a rulemaking to establish 
performance requirements for child restraints, including 
booster seats, for the restraint of children over 50 pounds. 
The rulemaking should consider: (1) whether to include injury 
performance criteria for child restraints; (2) whether to 
establish performance requirements for seatbelt fit when used 
with booster seats; (3) whether to address situations when 
children weighing over 50 pounds only have access to seats with 
lap belts; and, (4) whether to review the definition of 
``booster seat.'' This rulemaking must be completed within 30 
months after enactment. H.R. 5504 also requires NHTSA to 
develop and evaluate an anthropomorphic testing device to 
simulate a 10-year old child within 24 months of enactment. A 
rulemaking to adopt such a testing device must be completed 
within one year after the device is developed and evaluated. 
The bill also requires auto manufacturers to install three-
point shoulder and lap belts in the rear seats, unless NHTSA 
determines that such belts are not ``practicable.'' These 
three-point seatbelts must be installed in all vehicles over a 
three-year implementation schedule. The bill directs NHTSA to 
evaluate the use of integrated or built-in child restraints and 
booster seats. This report must be completed within 180 days of 
enactment and transmitted to Congress. Finally, the bill 
authorizes $5 million to the Department of Transportation to 
complete the evaluation of integrated child safety restraints 
and for research into the nature and causes of injury to 
children in auto collisions.

Legislative History

    H.R. 5504 was introduced by Mr. Shimkus on October 1, 2002 
and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce ordered H.R. 5504 
reported to the House, as amended, by a voice vote on October 
2, 2002. On October 7, 2002, the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce reported H.R. 5504 to the House (H. Rpt. 107-726).
    On October 15, 2002, H.R. 5504 passed the House by 
unanimous consent.
    The Senate received H.R. 5504 and read it twice on October 
15, 2002. On October 18, 2002, the bill passed the Senate by 
unanimous consent.
    H.R. 5504 was presented to the President on November 26, 
2002, and was signed by the President on December 4, 2002 
(Public Law 107-319).

               REAL INTERSTATE DRIVER EQUITY ACT OF 2001


                     Public Law 107-298 (H.R. 2546)

    To amend title 49, United States Code, to prohibit States 
from requiring a license or fee on account of the fact that a 
motor vehicle is providing interstate pre-arranged ground 
transportation service, and for other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 2546 amends Federal transportation law to prohibit a 
state or political subdivision or an Interstate agency of two 
or more states from enacting or enforcing any law, rule, or 
regulation requiring a license or fee on account of the fact 
that a motor vehicle is providing pre-arranged ground 
transportation service, if the motor carrier providing such 
service meets all applicable registration and vehicle and 
Intrastate passenger licensing requirements, and is providing 
such service, including intermediate stops in another state 
without taking on new passengers, pursuant to a contract for 
Interstate and Intrastate passenger travel.

Legislative History

    H.R. 2546 was introduced in the House by Mr. Blunt and 18 
cosponsors on July 18, 2001, and was referred to the Committee 
on Transportation and Infrastructure.
    On November 7, 2001, the Transportation and Infrastructure 
Committee met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 2546 
reported to the House, as amended, by voice vote. The Committee 
on Transportation and Infrastructure reported H.R. 2546 to the 
House on November 13, 2001 (H. Rpt. 107-282).
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure exchanged correspondence on 
November 13, 2001 concerning each Committee's jurisdiction over 
H.R. 2546.
    On November 13, 2001, the House considered H.R. 2546 under 
suspension of the rules and approved the bill by voice vote.
    On November 14, 2001, H.R. 2546 was received in the Senate, 
read twice, and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation. The Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation ordered H.R. 2546 to be reported with amendments 
favorably on April 18, 2002. On August 1, 2002, Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation reported to the Senate 
with amendments, and with a written report (S. Rpt. 107-237).
    On October 17, 2002, the Senate passed H.R. 2546, as 
amended, by unanimous consent. A message on the Senate action 
was sent to the House on October 21, 2002.
    On November 12, 2002, the House passed H.R. 2546, as 
amended by the Senate, under suspension of the rules, by voice 
vote clearing the measure for the White House.
    H.R. 2546 was presented to the President on November 15, 
2002, and the President signed the bill on November 26, 2002 
(Public Law 107-298).

                    MADE IN AMERICA INFORMATION ACT


                               (H.R. 725)

    Directs the Secretary of Commerce to provide for the 
establishment of a toll-free telephone number to assist 
consumers in determining whether products are American-made.

Summary

    H.R. 727 directs the Secretary of Commerce, upon a 
determination that there is sufficient manufacturer interest 
and that manufacturers will provide fees so the program will 
operate without Federal Government cost, to establish a three-
year toll-free telephone number pilot program solely to help 
inform consumers whether a product with a retail value of at 
least $250 is made in America. The bill requires the Secretary 
to contract for the establishment and operation of such pilot 
program. In addition, H.R. 727 directs the Secretary to propose 
regulations to: (1) establish a voluntary product registration 
procedure; (2) establish and collect a fee to cover 
registration costs; (3) establish the pilot program; and, (4) 
assess manufacturer interest in the program. The bill also 
imposes civil monetary and Federal procurement penalties for 
knowingly registering a product that is not American made.

Legislative History

    H.R. 725 was introduced by Mr. Traficant on February 26, 
2001, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On March 13, 2001, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met 
in open markup session and ordered H.R. 725 reported to the 
House, by a voice vote, a quorum being present. The Committee 
on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 725 to the House (H. Rpt. 
107-21).
    The House considered H.R. 725 under Suspension of the Rules 
on March 14, 2001 and passed H.R. 725, as amended, by a roll 
call vote of 407 yeas and 3 nays.
    On March 15, 2001, H.R. 725 was received in the Senate, 
read twice, and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 725 in the 107th 
Congress.

               PROTECTION OF LAWFUL COMMERCE IN ARMS ACT


                              (H.R. 2037)

    To amend the Act establishing the Department of Commerce to 
protect manufacturers and sellers in the firearms and 
ammunition industry from restrictions on interstate or foreign 
commerce

Summary

    H.R. 2037 directs the Secretary of Commerce to establish 
and maintain a list of each person that notifies the Secretary 
that it is a manufacturer or seller that is licensed to engage 
in interstate or foreign commerce of a firearm or ammunition 
product; or is a trade association representing such 
manufacturers or sellers. H.R. 2037 also declares that any 
lawful conduct carried out by a manufacturer or seller in 
interstate or foreign commerce of a firearm or ammunition 
product, or lawful conduct carried out by a trade association 
in the course of representing such manufacturers or sellers, 
shall not be the basis for imposing a restriction on such 
commerce (the award of civil damages, equitable relief, or any 
other specified limitation) as a result of harm caused by the 
criminal or other unlawful misuse of such firearm or ammunition 
product by any other person.

Legislative History

    H.R. 2037 was introduced in the House by Mr. Stearns and 
100 cosponsors on May 25, 2001. The bill was referred to the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
    On April 18, 2002, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 
Consumer Protection held a hearing on H.R. 2037. The 
Subcommittee received testimony from representatives of the 
firearms manufacturing industry and anti-gun violence advocacy 
groups. On May 9, 2002, the Subcommittee met in open markup 
session and approved H.R. 2037 for Full Committee 
consideration, without amendment, by a voice vote, a quorum 
being present.
    On October 2, 1002, the Committee on the Judiciary met in 
open markup session and reported H.R. 2037, as amended, by a 
roll call vote of 18 yeas to 7 nays.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 2037 in the 107th 
Congress.

              AMERICAN SPIRIT FRAUD PROTECTION ACT OF 2001


                              (H.R. 2985)

    To amend the Federal Trade Commission Act to increase civil 
penalties for violations involving certain prescribed acts or 
practices that exploit popular reaction to an emergency or 
major disaster declared by the President, and to authorize the 
Federal Trade Commission to seek civil penalties for such 
violations in actions brought under section 13 of that Act.

Summary

    H.R. 2985 amends the Federal Trade Commission Act to double 
civil penalties imposed for committing unfair or deceptive acts 
or practices if such acts or practices exploit popular reaction 
during a presidentially-declared emergency or disaster period, 
and directs the courts to impose a monetary civil penalty on a 
person found to have committed such a violation during such a 
presidentially-declared emergency or disaster period.

Legislative History

    H.R. 2985 was introduced in the House by Mr. Bass and 
fifteen cosponsors on October 2, 2001. The bill was referred 
solely to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On October 3, 2001, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 
and Consumer Protection met in open markup session and approved 
H.R. 2985 for Full Committee consideration, without amendment, 
by a voice vote, a quorum being present. On October 11, 2001, 
the Full Committee met in open markup session and ordered 
reported H.R. 2985, without amendment, by a voice vote, a 
quorum being present. The Committee on Energy and Commerce 
reported H.R. 2985 to the House (H. Rpt. 107-276). The House 
considered H.R. 2985 under suspension of the rules on November 
13, 2001, and passed H.R. 2985 by a voice vote.
    On November 14, 2001, H.R. 2985 was received in the Senate 
and read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 2985 in the 107th 
Congress.

                     AMERICAN TRAVEL PROMOTION ACT


                              (H.R. 3321)

    To authorize the Secretary of Commerce to make grants to 
States for advertising that stimulates economic activity by 
promoting travel and tourism.

Summary

    H.R. 3321 directs the Secretary of Commerce to provide 
grants, based on a specified formula, to qualified State 
agencies for advertising to promote travel and tourism. The 
federal share of costs of travel and tourism promotion 
activities is capped at 50 percent.

Legislative History

    H.R. 3321 was introduced in the House by Mr. Foley and six 
cosponsors on November 16, 2001. H.R. 3321 was referred solely 
to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On May 23, 2002, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 
Consumer Protection held a hearing on H.R. 3321. The 
Subcommittee received testimony from two Members of Congress, 
and representatives from the travel and tourism industry.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 3321 in the 107th 
Congress.

              THE STEEL INDUSTRY LEGACY RELIEF ACT OF 2002


                              (H.R. 4646)

    For the federal government to create and support a health 
insurance program for steel industry retirees whose employers 
were or are in danger of being driven out of business by 
imports.

Summary

    H.R. 4646 directs the federal government to create and 
support a program of health insurance for the retirees of 
steel, iron ore, and coke companies. These firms have either 
been driven out of business or severely threatened by the 
recent steel import crisis. Once enrolled in the program, 
retirees and their beneficiaries will receive major medical and 
prescription drug coverage. The primary aim of the bill is to 
secure health insurance for several hundred thousand retirees 
who have or soon will lose all retiree benefits. This 
legislation gives existing American steel companies a right of 
first refusal to acquire failing American steel companies.

Legislative History

    H.R. 4646 was introduced in the House by Mr. Dingell on May 
2, 2002, and 98 cosponsors. The bill was referred to the 
Committee on Energy & Commerce and the Committee on Education 
and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by 
the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions 
as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On September 10, 2002, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade 
and Consumer Protection held a legislative hearing on H.R. 
4646. The Subcommittee received testimony from organization 
representing active and retired steelworkers, a health benefits 
manager for an American integrated steel company, and an 
organization representing ``mini-mill'' steel manufacturers.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 4646 in the 107th 
Congress.

              THE CONSUMER PRIVACY PROTECTION ACT OF 2002


                              (H.R. 4678)

    To protect and enhance consumer privacy, cybersecurity and 
for other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 4678, the Consumer Privacy Protection Act of 2002, 
requires that any organization, excluding government agencies, 
not-for-profits and small businesses, that collects, sells, 
discloses for consideration, or uses a consumer's personally 
identifiable information (PII) for a purpose unrelated to the 
consumer transaction shall provide to that consumer a notice of 
such activity upon the first instance of collection of that 
consumer's PII. The organization must also establish a privacy 
policy which has elements that must be accessible at the time 
the organization first collects a consumer's PII and 
subsequently. In addition, the organization must provide the 
consumer the opportunity to preclude the sale or disclosure for 
consideration of his/her PII to any other organization that is 
not an information-sharing partner of the organization. 
Enforcement, under the bill, is the exclusive domain of the 
Federal Trade Commission. The bill also creates a structure for 
the approval of self-regulatory programs, preempts state 
action, forecloses private right of action, applies to both 
online and offline data collection activities, has an 
information security obligation, and addresses international 
privacy regimes.

Legislative History

    On May 8, 2002, Mr. Stearns introduced H.R. 4678, and the 
bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and, 
in addition, to the Committee on International Relations, for a 
period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each 
case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer 
Protection held a legislative hearing on H.R. 4678 on September 
24, 2002. The Subcommittee received testimony from six 
representatives of the large private sector collectors, sellers 
and users of consumer data, and one consumer privacy advocate.
    No further action occurred on H.R. 4678 in the 107th 
Congress.

                SPORTS AGENT RESPONSIBILTY AND TRUST ACT


                              (H.R. 4701)

    To designate certain conduct by sports agents relating to 
the signing of contracts with student athletes as unfair or 
deceptive acts or practices to be regulated by the Federal 
Trade Commission.

Summary

    H.R. 4701 amends section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission 
Act to provide that certain acts by sports agents or their 
associates are unfair or deceptive acts or practices. First, 
the legislation creates new disclosure requirements for sports 
agents prior to entering into an agency agreement with a 
student athlete. Second, it defines certain activities 
regarding the conduct of sports agents as unfair or deceptive 
acts under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. 
Third, the legislation authorizes the FTC and state attorneys 
general to enforce violations of the Act and creates a private 
right of action for educational institutions against sports 
agents for certain violations of the Act.

Legislative History

    The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer 
Protection held an oversight hearing on various issues 
affecting amateur athletics on February 13, 2002. The 
Subcommittee received testimony from Members of Congress, 
collegiate associations, and the gaming association.
    On May 9, 2002, H.R. 4701 was introduced by Congressman 
Bart Gordon and was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce. The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer 
Protection held a legislative hearing on June 5, 2002. The 
Subcommittee received testimony from a Member of Congress, a 
collegiate athletic director, the Federal Trade Commission, and 
the National Collegiate Athletic Association.
    The Subcommittee met in open markup session on July 17, 
2002 to consider H.R. 4701, and approved H.R. 4701, as amended, 
for Full Committee consideration by voice vote. On September 
25, 2002, the Full Committee met in open markup session and 
ordered H.R. 4701 favorably reported to the House, as amended, 
by voice vote, a quorum being present. The Committee on Energy 
and Commerce reported H.R. 4701 to the House (H. Rpt. 107-725) 
on October 7, 2002.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 4701 in the 107th 
Congress.

                FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD ACT


                              (H.R. 5058)

    To preserve the integrity of the establishment of 
accounting standards by the Financial Accounting Standards 
Board (FASB).

Summary

    H.R. 5058 recognizes FASB standards as authoritative for 
federal regulatory programs and articulates FASB's duty to 
establish and improve accounting and reporting standards. H.R. 
5058 requires FASB to promulgate and revise standards based on 
fundamental principles of usefulness, transparency and 
comprehensibility. It requires FASB to promulgate a primary 
standard prohibiting the application of any other standard in a 
manner that fails to comply with principles of usefulness, 
transparency and comprehensibility. H.R. 5058 also directs FASB 
to promulgate or revise standards in areas in which current 
standards are unresolved or deficient. Those areas include 
accounting for off-balance sheet transactions and special 
purpose entities, mark-to-market accounting, fair value 
accounting and revenue recognition.

Legislative History

    On June 26, 2002, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and 
Consumer Protection held a hearing on a Committee print of the 
FASB Act. The Subcommittee received testimony from the Chairman 
of the FASB, accounting professors, a law professor, and a 
former state comptroller.
    H.R. 5058 was introduced in the House by Mr. Stearns and 
eight cosponsors on June 27, 2002. The bill was referred to the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On July 10, 2002, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and 
Consumer Protection met in open markup session and approved 
H.R. 5058, as amended, for Full Committee Consideration by a 
voice vote.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 5058 in the 107th 
Congress.

  RECOGNIZING THE IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE HISPANIC CHAMBER OF 
                                COMMERCE


                           (H. Con. Res. 277)

    Recognizing the important contributions of the Hispanic 
Chamber of Commerce.

Summary

    H. Con. Res. 277 expresses the sense of Congress that it is 
important to the promotion of the free market process of the 
United States, to the future success of Hispanic Americans, and 
to society at large that the special role of the Hispanic 
Chamber of Commerce of the United States be recognized and 
further cultivated to the benefit of all Americans.

Legislative History

    On November 19, 2001, Mr. Paul introduced H. Con. Res. 277, 
which was referred to the House Committee on Energy and 
Commerce.
    The House considered H. Con. Res. 277 under suspension of 
the rules on December 4, 2001 and passed the bill by voice 
vote.
    On December 5, 2001, H. Con. Res. 277 was received in the 
Senate and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.
    No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 277 in the 
107th Congress.

                          Oversight Activities


                      CONSUMER INFORMATION PRIVACY

    The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer 
Protection held a series of oversight hearings on March 1, 
2001, March 8, 2001, April 3, 2001, May 8, 2001, June 21, 2001, 
and July 26, 2001, examining a large array of issues relating 
to consumer information privacy in the commercial context. The 
Subcommittee took extensive testimony on: (1) the limitations 
imposed by the U.S. Constitution to regulating free speech; (2) 
the implications of the EU Directive on data protection on U.S. 
law and private sector activity; (3) existing Federal laws in 
the area of privacy; (4) the value and results of opinion 
surveys on the subject of privacy; (5) the best practices of 
companies and new technological solutions to protecting 
consumer privacy; and, (6) the real uses of consumer 
information by companies. Witnesses included constitutional 
scholars, representatives from a variety of industries, 
consumer groups and representatives from foreign governments. 
The hearings highlighted a number of information privacy issues 
as related to commercial activities and the need for additional 
legislation to protect American consumers' privacy in the 
commercial context.

                            AIRLINE MERGERS

    On March 21, 2001, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 
Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing on pending 
airline mergers. The hearing focused on the potential for 
consolidation in the airline industry and the consequences for 
consumers. Testimony was received from Members of Congress, 
representatives of the airline industry, travel agents, and 
consumer protection groups.

                          ELECTRONIC COMMERCE

    The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection 
held a series of oversight hearings on challenges facing 
electronic commerce. In addition to discussions of online 
privacy, six other hearings were held on electronic commerce, 
or e-commerce, matters. The hearings examined issues such as 
cyber security, cyber fraud, state and international regulatory 
impediments to e-commerce, and online travel sites.
    The Subcommittee's first oversight hearing on e-commerce 
examined the impediments to digital trade and took place on May 
22, 2001. The subcommittee received testimony highlighting the 
growing significance of digital trade or international e-
commerce and on legal and regulatory impediments confronting 
international e-commerce. The Subcommittee received testimony 
from the chief American negotiator at the Hague Convention on 
Private International Law, industry representatives from the 
telecommunications industry, an association, and an 
international law expert.
    The Subcommittee's second oversight hearing on e-commerce 
held on May 23, 2001 was an examination of online fraud and 
crime, and whether or not consumers were safe. The Subcommittee 
received testimony on the nature and extent of fraud and crime 
perpetrated against the American consumer online from 
representatives of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), 
the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the Secret Service, the 
Department of Justice, a consumers group, and a financial 
services company.
    The third oversight hearing held by the Subcommittee on 
Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection in its series on e-
commerce was held on November 15, 2001. The hearing focused on 
assessing threats to cyber security and measures undertaken by 
private industry to secure online commerce. The witnesses 
included cyber security experts from a financial company, a 
research and engineering firm, a telecommunications company, an 
Internet security company, a software company, an information 
technology company and an association.
    The fourth in the Subcommittee's oversight hearings on e-
commerce was held on July 18,2002. The hearing examined 
supplier-owned online travel sites and if these sites were good 
for the consumer. The subcommittee received testimony as to 
whether supplier-owned online travel sites, such as sites owned 
by airlines and national hotel chains, advance consumer 
interests. The witnesses included representatives from a 
consumer association, online travel sites, a travel agent 
organization, and a technology association.
    The Subcommittee completed its oversight hearings on e-
commerce on September 26, 2002, with a hearing examining 
whether state legal and/or regulatory consumer protections 
restrict e-commerce, and if, in some cases, they are used to 
protect local competitors. The Subcommittee received testimony 
from a policy institute, an online auction company, a wine 
association, an eye contact company, and the Federal Trade 
Commission.

                          INDUSTRY TIRE RECALL

    On June 19, 2001, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 
Consumer Protection held a joint oversight hearing with the 
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation on the industry 
recall of certain Firestone tires. The hearing focused on Ford 
Motor Company's decision to voluntarily recall all Firestone 
Wilderness AT tires on all of its vehicles, and the safety 
implications of such an action. Testimony was received from the 
industry participants and the Department of Transportation.

           HEALTH INSURANCE DISCRIMINATION AND GENETIC TESTS

    On July 11, 2001, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 
Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing on the potential 
for discrimination in health insurance based on predictive 
genetic tests. The hearing addressed current law, programs and 
practices concerning eligibility criteria and rate setting in 
health insurance and their relationship to new predictive 
genetic tests. The Subcommittee heard testimony from Members of 
Congress, a health insurance association, an organization 
examining genetics, a genetics company, and a law professor.

                  FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD

    On July 31, 2001, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and 
Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing on current issues 
before the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). The 
hearing focused on FASB's final standards for the business 
combinations projects and the efforts of FASB and the 
International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) to work towards 
harmonization of international accounting standards. Witnesses 
included the Chairman of the FASB, a Member of the Board of the 
IASB and a representative from the American Business 
Conference.

                       THE U.S. TOURISM INDUSTRY

    On October 17, 2001, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 
and Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing on the state 
of the U.S. travel and tourism industry. The hearing focused on 
the effects of the September 11th terrorist attacks on the 
different segments of the industry, particularly the impact on 
industries and destinations dependent upon air travel. 
Witnesses included Members of Congress, the Department of 
Commerce, and industry representatives.

                      THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

    The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection 
held an oversight hearing on November 7, 2001. The hearing 
focused on the challenges facing the Federal Trade Commission 
under the new Chairman, and outlined the Commission's agenda 
under his leadership, specifically the Commission's enforcement 
and programmatic priorities. The subcommittee received 
testimony from the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission.

    ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS IN THE WAKE OF SEPTEMBER 11TH

    On December 19, 2001, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade 
and Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing on Electronic 
Communications Networks (ECNs) in the wake of September 11th. 
The hearing focused on the state of the financial markets after 
September 11th and regulatory barriers to market continuity in 
emergency circumstances. Witnesses included representatives 
from several ECNs and exchanges

                  CHALLENGES FACING AMATEUR ATHLETICS

    On February 13, 2002, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 
and Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing on the 
challenges facing amateur athletics. The hearing focused on the 
issues of the commercialization of amateur athletics, the 
effect of gambling on amateur athletics, and student athlete 
welfare. Testimony was received from Members of Congress, 
collegiate athletic association, current student athletes, 
private industry associations, and private foundations.

                          ACCOUNTING STANDARDS

    On February 14, 2002, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade 
and Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing that focused 
on whether Generally Accepted Accounting Principals (GAAP) 
provided transparency in financial statements and specifically 
examined off balance sheet and mark-to-market accounting. 
Witnesses included the Chief Accountant of the Securities and 
Exchange Commission (SEC), the Chairman of the Financial 
Accounting Standards Board (FASB), a representative of a public 
accounting organization, a representative from a professional 
organization for senior financial executives, a representative 
from an organization of large pensions, and an accounting 
professor.

                               TREAD ACT

    On February 28, 2002, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 
and Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing of the 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the 
Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and 
Documentation (TREAD) Act. The hearing focused on the 
implementation of the TREAD Act and the progress one year 
following enactment. Testimony was received from a 
representative from the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, the Office of Management and Budget, and 
Department of Transportation, Office of the Inspector General.

                        THE FTC'S FRANCHISE RULE

    The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection 
held an oversight hearing on June 25, 2002 concerning the FTC's 
Franchise Rule twenty-three years after its promulgation. The 
hearing examined whether the FTC's franchise rule needed to be 
revisited in light of changes in franchising that had occurred 
in the past quarter of century since promulgation of the rule. 
The Subcommittee received testimony from the Federal Trade 
Commission, a state attorney general's office, franchise 
associations, a franchise operators association, and a 
corporation.

                        CORPORATE RESPONSIBLITY

    On July 26, 2002, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and 
Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing on oath taking, 
truth telling and remedies in the business world. The hearing 
focused on corporate responsibility, legal ethics and 
accounting ethics. Witnesses included a privately held company, 
an accounting ethics professor, and two legal ethics 
professors.

                   CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

    On September 4, 2002, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 
and Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing on the 
Consumer Product Safety Commission. The hearing focused on the 
issues facing the Commission and specifically, the priorities 
and agenda of the new Consumer Product Safety Commission 
Chairman. The Subcommittee received testimony from the Chairman 
of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

           TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVISIONS IN TRADE AGREEMENTS

    On October 9, 2002, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 
and Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing that focused 
on the inclusion of market access provisions for 
telecommunications services in bilateral and multilateral trade 
agreements. Witnesses included the Assistant United States 
Trade Representative for Industry and Telecommunications, a 
public policy research group, a lawyer, and an economics 
professor.

                       ECNS AND MARKET STRUCTURE

    On October 17, 2002, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade 
and Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing on ECNs and 
market structure and ensuring the best prices for consumers. 
The hearing focused on a variety of market structure issues 
including the impact of NASDAQ's SuperMontage on investors; 
market data revenue and rebates; ECN access fees; and the 
Intermarket Trading System. Witnesses included representatives 
from several ECNs and an exchange.

                             Hearings Held

    Privacy in the Commercial World.--Oversight hearing on 
Privacy in the Commercial World. Hearing held on March 1, 2001. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-16.
    The EU Data Protection Directive: Implications for the U.S. 
Privacy Debate.--Oversight hearing on the EU Data Protection 
Directive: Implications for the U.S. Privacy Debate. Hearing 
held on March 8, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-19.
    Airline Mergers and their Effect on American Consumers.--
Oversight hearing on Airline Mergers and their Effect on 
American Consumers. Hearing held on March 21, 2001. PRINTED, 
Serial Number 107-3.
    An Examination of Existing Federal Statutes Addressing 
Information Privacy.--Oversight hearing on an Examination of 
Existing Federal Statutes Addressing Information Privacy. 
Hearing held on April 3, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-22.
    Opinion Surveys: What Consumers Have To Say About 
Information Privacy.--Oversight hearing on Opinion Surveys: 
What Consumers Have To Say About Information Privacy. Hearing 
held May 8, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-35.
    Impediments to Digital Trade.--Oversight hearing on 
Impediments to Digital Trade. Hearing held on May 22, 2001. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-36.
    On-line Fraud and Crime: Are Consumers Safe?--Oversight 
hearing on On-line Fraud and Crime: Are Consumers Safe? Hearing 
held on May 23, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-37.
    Ford Motor Company's Recall of Certain Firestone Tires.--
Joint oversight hearing with the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations on Ford Motor Company's Recall of Certain 
Firestone Tires. Hearing held on June 19, 2001. PRINTED, Serial 
Number 107-45.
    Information Privacy: Industry Best Practices and 
Technological Solutions.--Oversight hearing on Information 
Privacy: Industry Best Practices and Technological Solutions. 
Hearing held on June 21, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-38.
    The Potential for Discrimination in Health Insurance Based 
on Predictive Genetic Tests.--Oversight hearing on the 
Potential for Discrimination in Health Insurance Based on 
Predictive Genetic Tests. Hearing held on July 11, 2001. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-46.
    How Do Businesses Use Customer Information: Is the 
Customer's Privacy Protected?--Oversight hearing on How Do 
Businesses Use Customer Information: Is the Customer's Privacy 
Protected? Hearing held on July 25, 2001. PRINTED, Serial 
Number 107-49.
    Current Issues Before the Financial Accounting Standards 
Board.--Oversight hearing on Current Issues Before the 
Financial Accounting Standards Board. Hearing held on July 31, 
2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-48.
    The State of the U.S. Tourism Industry.--Oversight hearing 
on the State of the U.S. Tourism Industry. Hearing held on 
October 17, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-66.
    Challenges Facing the Federal Trade Commission.--Oversight 
hearing on Challenges Facing the Federal Trade Commission. 
Hearing held on November 7, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-
68.
    Cyber Security: Private-Sector Efforts Addressing Cyber 
Threats.--Oversight hearing on Cyber Security: Private-Sector 
Efforts Addressing Cyber Threats. Hearing held on November 15, 
2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-74.
    Electronic Communications Networks in the Wake of September 
11th.--Oversight hearing on Electronic Communications Networks 
in the Wake of September 11th. Hearing held on December 19, 
2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-79.
    Challenges Facing Amateur Athletics.--Oversight hearing on 
Challenges Facing Amateur Athletics. Hearing held on February 
13, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-85.
    Are Current Financial Accounting Standards Protecting 
Investors?--Oversight hearing on Are Current Financial 
Accounting Standards Protecting Investors? Hearing held on 
February 14, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-84.
    Implementation of the TREAD Act: One Year Later.--Oversight 
hearing on Implementation of the TREAD Act: One Year Later. 
Hearing held on February 28, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-
92.
    Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.--Hearing on H.R. 
2037, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. Hearing 
held on April 18, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-94.
    American Travel Promotion Act.--Hearing on H.R. 3321, the 
American Travel Promotion Act. Hearing held on May 23, 2002. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-103.
    Sports Agent Responsibility and Trust Act.--Hearing on H.R. 
4701, the Sports Agent Responsibility and Trust Act. Hearing 
held on June 5, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-125.
    The FTC's Franchise Rule: Twenty-Three Years After Its 
Promulgation.--Oversight hearing on the FTC's Franchise Rule: 
Twenty-Three Years After Its Promulgation. Hearing held on June 
25, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-116.
    Financial Accounting Standards Board Act.--Hearing on H.R. 
5058, the Financial Accounting Standards Board Act. Hearing 
held on June 26, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-109.
    Are All Online Travel Sites Good for the Consumer: An 
Examination of Supplier-Owned Online Travel Sites.--Oversight 
hearing on Are All Online Travel Sites Good for the Consumer: 
An Examination of Supplier-Owned Online Travel Sites. Hearing 
held on July 18, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-120.
    Oath Taking, Truth Telling, and Remedies in the Business 
World.--Oversight hearing on Oath Taking, Truth Telling, and 
Remedies in the Business World. Hearing held on July 26, 2002. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-121.
    The Consumer Product Safety Commission: The New Chairman's 
Agenda.--Oversight hearing on the Consumer Product Safety 
Commission: The New Chairman's Agenda. Hearing held on 
September 4, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-128.
    Steel Industry Legacy Relief Act of 2002.--Hearing on H.R. 
4646, the Steel Industry Legacy Relief Act of 2002. Hearing 
held on September 10, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-136.
    Consumer Privacy Protection Act of 2002.--Hearing on H.R. 
4678, the Consumer Privacy Protection Act of 2002. Hearing held 
on September 24, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-131.
    State Impediments to E-Commerce: Consumer Protection or 
Veiled Protectionism?--Oversight hearing on State Impediments 
to E-Commerce: Consumer Protection or Veiled Protectionism? 
Hearing held on September 26, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-
130.
    Telecommunications and Trade Promotion Authority: 
Meaningful Market Access Goals for Telecommunications Services 
in International Trade Agreements.--Oversight hearing on 
Telecommunications and Trade Promotion Authority: Meaningful 
Market Access Goals for Telecommunications Services in 
International Trade Agreements. Hearing held on October 9, 
2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-138.
    ECNs and Market Structure: Ensuring Best Prices for 
Consumers.--Oversight hearing on ECNs and Market Structure: 
Ensuring Best Prices for Consumers. Hearing held on October 17, 
2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-134.
      

                 Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality

                             (Ratio 18-15)

                      JOE BARTON, Texas, Chairman

CHRISTOPHER COX, California          RICK BOUCHER, Virginia
  Vice Chairman                      RALPH M. HALL, Texas
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina         TOM SAWYER, Ohio
ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky               ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland
GREG GANSKE, Iowa                    MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania
CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia             CHRISTOPHER JOHN, Louisiana
JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois               HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico           EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
JOHN SHADEGG, Arizona                BART GORDON, Tennessee
CHARLES ``CHIP'' PICKERING,          BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois
Mississippi                          KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri
VITO FOSSELLA, New York              TED STRICKLAND, Ohio
ROY BLUNT, Missouri                  THOMAS M. BARRETT, Wisconsin
ED BRYANT, Tennessee                 BILL LUTHER, Minnesota
STEVE BUYER, Indiana                 JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan
GEORGE RADANOVICH, California          (Ex Officio)
MARY BONO, California
GREG WALDEN, Oregon
W.J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana
  (Ex Officio)

Jurisdiction: National energy policy generally; fossil energy, 
renewable energy resources and synthetic fuels; energy conservation; 
energy information; energy regulation and utilization; utility issues 
and regulation of nuclear facilities; interstate energy compacts; 
nuclear energy and waste; the Clean Air Act; and, all laws, programs, 
and government activities affecting such matters.

                         Legislative Activities


                       farm security act of 2001


                Public Law 107-171 (H.R. 2646, S. 1731)


                      (Energy Related Provisions)

    To provide for the continuation of agricultural programs 
through fiscal year 2007, and for other purposes.

Summary

    Title IX of the Farm Security Act of 2001 amends the 
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act by adding a clean 
energy subtitle to provide for biobased product development, 
biorefinery development grants, biodiesel fuel education 
grants, renewable energy and energy efficiency loans and grants 
for farmers and ranchers, hydrogen and fuel cell technology 
programs, technical assistance for farmers and ranchers to 
develop renewable energy resources, and carbon sequestration 
research, development, and demonstration programs. Title IX 
also amends the Biomass Research and Development Act of 2000 to 
authorize funding for biomass research and development. In 
addition, Title IX amends the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 
to provide for financial and technical assistance for renewable 
energy projects. Finally, Title IX amends the Agricultural 
Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998 to 
provide for a carbon sequestration demonstration program.

Legislative History

    H.R. 2646 was introduced by Mr. Combest on July 26, 2001, 
and the Committee on Agriculture favorably ordered the bill 
reported to the House, as amended, on July 27, 2001. On August 
2, 2001, the Committee on Agriculture reported H.R. 2646 to the 
House (H. Rpt. 107-191, Part I). On August 31, 2001, the 
Committee on Agriculture filed a supplemental report to the 
House (H. Rpt. 107-191, Part II).
    On August 2, 2001, H.R. 2646 was referred sequentially to 
the House Committee on International Relations for a period 
ending not later than September 7, 2001 for consideration of 
such provisions of the bill and amendment as fall within the 
jurisdiction of that committee pursuant to clause 1(j), rule X.
    The Committee on International Relations ordered the bill 
reported to the House, as amended on September 6, 2001, and was 
granted an extension for further consideration ending not later 
than September 10, 2001. On September 10, 2001, the Committee 
on International Relations reported H.R. 2646 to the House (H. 
Rpt. 107-191, Part III).
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 
Agriculture exchanged correspondence on September 28, 2001 
concerning each Committee's jurisdiction on H.R. 2646.
    On October 3, 4, and 5, 2001, the House considered H.R. 
2646 pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 248. The House 
passed the bill, as amended, by a roll call vote of 291 yeas 
and 120 nays.
    On February 13, 2002, H.R. 2646 was considered in the 
Senate by unanimous consent. The Senate struck all after the 
Enacting Clause, and substituted the language of S. 1731, as 
amended. The Senate then passed H.R. 2646, as amended, by a 
record vote of 58 yeas and 40 nays. The Senate insisted on its 
amendment and requested a conference on February 13, 2002.
    On February 28, 2002, the House disagreed to the Senate 
amendment, and agreed to a conference requested by the Senate. 
The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on Energy 
and Commerce for consideration of matters contained in the 
Senate amendment and modifications committed to conference 
falling within the Committee's jurisdiction.
    The Committee on Conference met on April 9 and 10, 2002, 
and on May 1, 2002 the conference report was filed. The House 
considered and agreed to the conference report, pursuant to H. 
Res. 403, on May 1, 2001 by a roll call vote of 280 yeas and 
141 nays.
    The Senate considered the conference report on May 7 and 8, 
2002, and agreed to the conference report by a record vote of 
64 yeas and 35 nays on May 8, 2002.
    On May 10, 2002, H.R. 2646 was cleared for the White House 
and presented to the President. On May 13, 2002, the President 
signed H.R. 2646 (Public Law No: 107-171).

      DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002


                Public Law 107-107 (H.R. 2586, S. 1438)


                  (Energy and Air Quality Provisions)

    To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2002 for 
military activities of the Department of Defense, for military 
construction, and for defense activities of the Department of 
Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year 
for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.

Summary

    The Energy and Commerce Committee had jurisdiction over 
numerous areas of S. 1438, the FY 2002 Department of Defense 
Authorization Act and the House companion measure (H.R. 2586). 
Section 316 of S. 1438 authorized the continuation of a pilot 
program under which the Secretary of Defense may sell air 
emission reduction credits generated by military facilities 
under programs designed to meet the air quality requirements of 
the Clean Air Act. S. 1438 provided that this program be 
extended from September 30, 2001 to September 30, 2003, but 
also required that a report be filed with the Energy and 
Commerce Committee and the Armed Services Committee concerning 
transactions that have been completed under the pilot program, 
the extent to which proceeds from the program have provided 
incentives, the extent of any loss to the United States 
Treasury, and the environmental impact of the pilot program.

Legislative History

    H.R. 2586 was introduced by Mr. Stump on July 23, 2001 and 
referred to the Committee on Armed Services. On August 1, 2002, 
the Committee on Armed Services met in open markup session and 
ordered H.R. 2586 reported, as amended.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 
Armed Services exchanged correspondence on September 4, 2001 
concerning each Committee's jurisdictional prerogatives of H.R. 
2586.
    Pursuant to a unanimous consent request, on September 4, 
2001, the House Armed Services Committee reported H.R. 2586 to 
the House (H. Rpt 107-194).
    H.R. 2586 was considered in the House pursuant to H. Res. 
246, and on September 25, 2001, the House passed the bill by a 
vote of 398 yeas and 17 nays.
    H.R. 2586 was received in the Senate on September 26, 2002, 
read twice, and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under 
General Orders. On June 18, 2002, the Senate indefinitely 
postponed consideration of H.R. 2586 by unanimous consent.
    The Senate passed S. 1438, which was introduced on 
September 19, 2001, by Senator Levin, on October 2, 2001 by a 
record vote of 99 yeas and 0 nays. The bill was received in the 
House on October 4, 2001 and held at the desk.
    On October 17, 2001, the House struck all after the 
enacting clause of S. 1438 and inserted in lieu thereof the 
provisions of H.R. 2586, and passed the bill without objection. 
The House insisted on its amendment and requested a conference 
with the Senate on October 17, 2001. A motion by Mr. Stump was 
agreed to by a roll call vote of 420 yeas and 0 nays to close 
portions of the conference.
    The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce for consideration of matters contained in 
the Senate bill and the House amendment and modifications 
committed to conference falling within the Committee's 
jurisdiction.
    The Senate disagreed to the House amendment and agreed to 
the House's request to go to conference on October 17, 2001 and 
appointed conferees.
    The Conference Committee met on October 31, 2001 and 
November 1, 2001. The conference report (H. Rpt. 107-333) was 
filed on December 12, 2001.
    Pursuant to H. Res. 316, on December 13, 2001, the House 
agreed to the conference report by a roll call vote of 382 yeas 
and 40 nays. The Senate agreed to the conference report as well 
on December 13, 2001 by a record vote of 96 yeas and 2 nays.
    H. Con. Res. 288 passed the House and the Senate on 
December 13, 2001, by unanimous consent to correct the 
enrollment of S. 1438.
    On December 13, 2001, S. 1438 was cleared for the White 
House. The bill was presented to the President on December 20, 
2001, and on December 28, 2001, the bill was signed by the 
President (Public Law 107-107).

                       YUCCA MOUNTAIN RESOLUTION


                   Public Law 107-200 (H. J. Res. 87)

    Approving the site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, for the 
development of a repository for the disposal of high-level 
radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel, pursuant to the 
Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982.

Summary

    H. J. Res. 87 approves the site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, 
for the development of a repository for the disposal of high-
level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel, in accordance 
with procedures under section 115 of the Nuclear Waste Policy 
Act of 1982 (NWPA).

Legislative History

    H. J. Res. 87 was introduced in the House by Mr. Barton and 
11 cosponsors on April 11, 2002. The text of the resolution is 
the exact wording as required pursuant to section 115 of the 
NWPA of 1982.
    On April 18, 2002, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 
Quality held a hearing to review the President's approval and 
recommendation to Congress that the Yucca Mountain site in 
Nevada be developed as the nation's long-term repository for 
the disposal of radioactive waste. The Subcommittee received 
testimony from the Secretary of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Nuclear 
Waste Technical Review Board, the General Accounting Office, as 
well as representatives of the nuclear industry, a labor union, 
and an environmental group.
    On April 23, 2002, the Subcommittee considered H. J. Res. 
87 in open markup session, and forwarded the bill, without 
amendment, to the Full Committee on a recorded vote of 24 yeas 
and 2 nays. On April 25, 2002, the Full Committee met in open 
markup session to consider the resolution, and ordered H. J. 
Res. 87 reported to the House, without amendment, by a recorded 
vote of 41 yeas and 6 nays. On May 1, 2002, the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce reported H .J. Res. 87 to the House (H. 
Rpt. 107-425).
    On May 8, 2002, the resolution was considered by the House 
pursuant to 115(e)(4) of the NWPA. H. J. Res. 87 passed the 
House, without amendment, by a roll call vote of 306 yeas and 
117 nays.
    On May 9, 2002, H. J. Res. 87 was received in the Senate, 
read twice, and pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 10135(d)(5)(A), placed on 
Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders.
    On July 7, 2002, the Senate passed H. J. Res. 87 in lieu of 
S. J. Res. 34, without amendment, by voice vote.
    The resolution was cleared for the White House on July 9, 
2002, and presented to the President on July 10, 2002. The 
President signed the bill on July 23, 2002 (Public Law 107-
200).

                         THORIUM REIMBURSEMENT


                     Public Law 107-222 (H.R. 3343)

    To amend title X of the Energy Policy Act of 1992, and for 
other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 3343 will increase by $225 million the authorization 
level for the thorium reimbursement program established 
pursuant to Title X of the Energy Policy Act of 1992. The bill 
also increases deposits to the Uranium Enrichment 
Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund by the same amount, 
after adjustments for inflation. In addition, the bill 
authorizes appropriations for the Secretary of Energy to 
maintain the uranium enrichment facility at Portsmouth, Ohio on 
cold standby. Finally, the bill requires the Comptroller 
General to conduct an audit of the Uranium Enrichment 
Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund and the programs paid 
for by the fund, with regard to future costs and needs.

Legislative History

    H.R. 3343 was introduced in the House by Mr. Shimkus and 
three cosponsors on November 19, 2001. The bill was referred 
solely to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    The Committee did not hold oversight or legislative 
hearings on this legislation, and on December 12, 2001, the 
Full Committee met in open markup session and ordered H.R.3343 
reported to the House, as amended, by voice vote. The Committee 
on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 3343 to the House on 
December 18, 2001 (H. Rpt. 107-341).
    The bill was considered in the House under a suspension of 
the rules on December 18, 2001, and passed the House, as 
amended, by voice vote.
    On December 19, 2001, H.R. 3343 was received in the Senate, 
read the first time, and placed on the Senate Legislative 
Calendar under Read the First Time. On January 23, 2002, the 
bill was read the second time and placed on the Senate 
Legislative Calendar under General Orders.
    H.R. 3343 passed the Senate without amendment by unanimous 
consent on August 1, 2002 and was cleared for the White House. 
The bill was presented to the President on August 13, 2002, and 
was signed by the President on August 21, 2002 (Public Law 107-
222).

TEMPORARY WAIVER OF TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW YORK 
                                  CITY


                     Public Law 107-230 (H.R. 3880)

    Providing a temporary waiver from certain transportation 
conformity requirements and metropolitan transportation 
planning requirements under the Clean Air Act and under other 
laws for certain areas in New York where the planning offices 
and resources have been destroyed by acts of terrorism, and for 
other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 3880 provides the state of New York a temporary waiver 
from certain Clean Air Act transportation conformity 
requirements and related metropolitan planning requirements of 
the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century until 
September 30, 2005, so that New York can implement adjustments 
necessary after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the 
World Trade Center. Additionally, New York must file an Interim 
Progress Report no later than January 1, 2004, detailing the 
manner in which the State will achieve compliance with the 
transportation conformity requirements no later than the 
expiration of the temporary waiver.

Legislative History

    On March 6, 2002, Mr. Fossella introduced H.R. 3880, which 
was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce and to the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to 
be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On July 24, 2002, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 
Quality met in open markup session and approved H.R. 3880 for 
Full Committee consideration, without amendment, by a voice 
vote. On September 5, 2002, the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce met in open markup session and favorably ordered H.R. 
3880 reported to the House, as amended, by a voice vote.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure exchanged correspondence on 
September 5, 2002 concerning each Committee's jurisdictional 
prerogatives regarding H.R. 3880.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 3880 to 
the House on September 9, 2002 (H. Rpt. 107-649, Part I). The 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure was granted an 
extension for further consideration ending not later than 
September 9, 2002.
    On September 10, 2002, the House considered H.R. 3880 under 
suspension of the rules and passed the bill, as amended, by a 
roll call vote of 377 yeas to 0 nays.
    H.R. 3880 was received in the Senate on September 11, 2002, 
and read twice. On September 12, 2002, the Senate passed H.R. 
3880 without amendment by unanimous consent and was cleared for 
the White House.
    H.R. 3880 was presented to the President on September 20, 
2002. On October 1, 2002, the President signed H.R. 3880 
(Public Law 107-230).

      DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003


                Public Law 107-314 (H.R. 4546, S. 2514)


                  (Energy and Air Quality Provisions)

    To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2003 for 
military activities of the Department of Defense, for military 
construction, and for defense activities of the Department of 
Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year 
for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 4546 as enacted contained provisions under the 
jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 4546 
extends Price Anderson indemnification authorities until 
December 31, 2004 for Department of Energy (DOE) contractors. 
The bill also requires DOE to promulgate regulations for 
industrial and construction health and safety at DOE facilities 
operated by contractors covered by Price Anderson indemnity 
agreements. The regulations are to be substantially equivalent 
to the level of protection currently provided to workers at 
these facilities. In addition, the bill authorizes a 
cooperative program on research, development, and demonstration 
of technology regarding nuclear or radiological terrorism. H.R. 
4546 also authorizes $19 million for the Defense Nuclear 
Facilities Safety Board.

Legislative History

    Mr. Stump introduced H.R. 4546 on April 23, 2002, and the 
bill was referred to the Committee on Armed Services. On May 1, 
2002, the Committee on Armed Services met in open markup 
session and ordered H.R. 4546 reported to the House, as 
amended, by a roll call vote of 57 yeas and 1 nay.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 
Armed Services exchanged correspondence on May 2, 2002 
concerning each Committee's jurisdictional prerogatives of H.R. 
4546.
    On May 3, 2002, the Committee on Armed Services reported 
the bill to the House (H. Rpt. 107-436), and on May 6, 2002 the 
Committee filed a supplemental report (H. Rpt. 107-436, Part 
II).
    Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 415, the House 
considered H.R. 4546 on May 9 and 10, 2002. On May 10, 2002, 
the House passed the bill by a roll call vote of 359 yeas and 
58 nays.
    On May 14, 2002, H.R. 4546 was received in the Senate, an 
on May 16, 2002 the bill was read twice and placed on the 
Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders.
    On June 27, 2002, the Senate called up H.R. 4546, struck 
all after the enacting clause, inserting its own version of 
this legislation, S. 2514, and passed it on June 27, 2002 by 
unanimous consent. In addition, the Senate insisted upon its 
amendment, requested a conference with the House, and appointed 
conferees.
    Pursuant to H. Res. 500, on July 25, 2002, the House agreed 
to an amendment to the Senate passed version of H.R. 4546 
without objection. The House insisted upon its amendment to the 
Senate amendment, and agreed to go to conference without 
objection. A motion to close portions of the conference was 
agreed to without objection.
    The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce for consideration of matters contained in 
the Senate bill and the House amendment and modifications 
committed to conference falling within the Committee's 
jurisdiction.
    On July 26, 2002, the Senate disagreed to the House 
amendment to the Senate amendment by unanimous consent, agreed 
to a conference, and appointed conferees.
    The Conference Committee met on September 5, 10, 11, and 
12, 2002. The conference report (H. Rpt. 107-172) was filed on 
November 12, 2002.
    The House agreed to the conference report by voice vote on 
November 12, 2002, and the Senate agreed to the conference 
report on November 13, 2002 by voice vote.
    On November 13, 2002, H.R. 4546 was cleared for the White 
House. The bill was presented to the President on November 26, 
2002, and on December 2, 2002, the bill was signed by the 
President (Public Law 107-314).

     TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE FOR COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION OF A 
          HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT IN THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA


                      Public Law 107-322 (S. 1010)

    To extend the deadline for commencement of construction of 
a hydroelectric project in the State of North Carolina.

Summary

    S. 1010 extends the statutory deadline for the commencement 
of construction of a hydroelectric project in the State of 
North Carolina. Section 13 of the Federal Power Act establishes 
time limits for the commencement of construction of 
hydroelectric projects once the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission (FERC) has issued a license. The licensee must begin 
construction not more than two years from the date of the 
license is issued, unless FERC extends the deadline. Section 13 
permits FERC to grant only one two-year extension of that 
deadline. Therefore, a license is subject to termination if a 
licensee fails to begin construction within four years. S. 1010 
authorizes FERC to extend the deadline for the commencement of 
construction of a project in North Carolina for up to three 
consecutive two-year periods, if the licensee meets the good 
faith, due diligence, and public interest requirements of 
section 13 of the Federal Power Act.

Legislative History

    S. 1010 was introduced in the Senate by Senator Helms on 
June 11, 2001, where it was referred to the Committee on Energy 
and Natural Resources.
    The Committee ordered S. 1010 reported without amendment on 
June 5, 2002. On June 28, 2002, the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources reported S. 1010 to the Senate with a written 
report (Senate Rpt. 107-192). The bill was placed on the Senate 
Legislative Calendar under General Orders.
    S. 101 passed the Senate without amendment by unanimous 
consent on August 1, 2002.
    On September 4, 2002, S. 1010 was received in the House and 
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. The Committee 
on Energy and Commerce discharged S. 1010 on November 15, 2002, 
and bill was considered by unanimous consent and passed the 
House without objection on November 15, 2002.
    S. 1010 was cleared for the White House on November 15, 
2002. The bill was presented to the President on November 22, 
2002, and on December 4, 2002, the bill was signed by the 
President (Public Law 107-322).

 PIPELINE INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION TO ENHANCE SECURITY AND SAFETY ACT


                     Public Law 107-355 (H.R. 3609)

    To amend title 49, United States Code, to enhance the 
security and safety of pipelines.

Summary

    H.R. 3609 reauthorizes the natural gas and hazardous liquid 
pipeline safety programs set forth in 49 U.S.C. section 60101, 
et seq., through fiscal year 2006. In addition, H.R. 3609 
imposes additional Congressional requirements on the Office of 
Pipeline Safety such as requiring the Secretary of 
Transportation to conduct rule-makings in (1) the certification 
of pipeline qualification programs; (2) integrity management 
programs; (3) security of pipeline facilities; and, (4) 
inspections by direct assessment. H.R. 3609 also gives the 
Secretary of Transportation more latitude in the areas of 
safety orders and penalties so that the Secretary does not have 
to wait until a pipeline facility is hazardous before requiring 
corrective action by the pipeline facility operator. The 
amounts of money authorized for appropriations have been 
increased because of the additional requirements imposed upon 
the Office of Pipeline Safety.
    H.R. 3609 provides for the coordination of environmental 
reviews for pipeline repairs, the establishment of a legal 
framework to protect employees providing pipeline safety 
information, and for the establishment of a nationwide 3-digit 
toll free number for state one-call programs. This bill also 
includes studies on population encroachment and establishes a 
research and development program to ensure the integrity of 
pipelines. Furthermore, this bill allows the Secretary of 
Transportation to make grants for technical assistance to local 
communities and groups of individuals relating to pipeline 
safety in local communities.

Legislative History

    H.R. 3609 was introduced in the House on December 20, 2001 
by Mr. Young of Alaska and 43 cosponsors. The bill was referred 
to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, in 
addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On March 19, 2002, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 
Quality held a hearing on H.R. 3609. The Subcommittee received 
testimony from the National Transportation Safety Board, the 
U.S. General Accounting Office, industry, non-profit and 
environmental organizations.
    On May 23, 2002, the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure ordered H.R. 3609 reported, as amended.
    On June 11, 2002, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 
Quality met in open markup session and approved the bill H.R. 
3609 for Full Committee consideration, as amended, by a voice 
vote, a quorum being present.
    On June 13, 2002, the Full Committee met in open markup 
session and ordered H.R 3609 favorably reported to the House, 
without amendment, by voice vote, a quorum being present. On 
July 23, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported 
H.R. 3609 to the House (H. Rpt. 107-65, Part II). On July 23, 
2002, the Committee on Transportation and the Infrastructure 
reported to the House (H. Rpt. 107-65, Part I).
    The House considered H.R. 3609 under suspension of the 
rules on July 23, 2002 and passed the bill, as amended, by a 
roll call vote of 423 yeas to 4 nays.
    On July 24, 2002, H.R. 3609 was received in the Senate and 
read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation. On November 13, 2002, the Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation discharged H.R. 3609 by 
unanimous consent, and the bill passed the Senate, as amended, 
on November 14, 2002 by unanimous consent.
    H.R. 3609 passed the House by unanimous consent on November 
15, 2002 and was cleared for the White House.
    On December 9, 2002, H.R. 3609 was presented to the 
President and was signed on December 17, 2002 (Public Law 107-
355).

     TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE FOR COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION OF A 
              HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT IN THE STATE OF OREGON


                     Public Law 107-376 (H.R. 5436)

    To extend the deadline for commencement of construction of 
a hydroelectric project in the State of Oregon.

Summary

    H.R. 5436 extends the statutory deadline for the 
commencement of construction of a hydroelectric project in the 
State of Oregon. Section 13 of the Federal Power Act 
establishes time limits for the commencement of construction of 
hydroelectric projects once the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission (FERC) has issued a license. The licensee must begin 
construction not more than two years from the date of the 
license is issued, unless FERC extends the deadline. Section 13 
permits FERC to grant only one two-year extension of that 
deadline. Therefore, a license is subject to termination if a 
licensee fails to begin construction within four years. H.R. 
5436 authorizes FERC to extend the deadline for the 
commencement of construction of a project in Oregon for up to 
three consecutive two-year periods, if the licensee meets the 
good faith, due diligence, and public interest requirements of 
section 13 of the Federal Power Act. The bill also authorizes 
FERC to reinstate the license if the original deadline to 
commence construction has expired.

Legislative History

    H.R. 5436 was introduced in the House by Mr. DeFazio on 
September 24, 2002, and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce.
    The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality requested 
executive comment from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 
(FERC) on S. 2927, a bill identical to H.R. 5436, on October 
11, 2002, and received such comment on the same day.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce discharged H.R. 5436 
on November 15, 2002. The bill was considered by unanimous 
consent and passed the House without objection on November 15, 
2002.
    H.R. 5436 was received by the Senate and read twice on 
November 15, 2002, and passed by the Senate without amendment 
by unanimous consent on November 20, 2002.
    H.R. 5436 was cleared for the White House on November 20, 
2002. The bill was presented to the President on December 10, 
2002, and on December 19, 2002, the bill was signed by the 
President (Public Law 107-376).

                  SECURING AMERICA'S FUTURE ENERGY ACT


           (H.R. 4, H.R. 2436, H.R. 2460, H.R. 2587, S. 900)

    To enhance energy conservation, research and development 
and to provide for security and diversity in the energy supply 
for the American people, and for other purposes.

Summary

    In the 107th Congress, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
considered legislation to enhance, conserve, and diversify the 
energy needs of the United States. In doing this, the Committee 
worked on a range of bills. The bills included H.R. 2587, the 
Energy Advancement and Conservation Act of 2001, H.R. 2436, the 
Energy Security Act, and H.R. 2460, the Comprehensive Energy 
Research and Technology Act. These three bills were eventually 
merged into one bill introduced as H.R. 4, the Securing 
America's Future Energy Act.
    H.R. 4 is a comprehensive bill that addressed many of 
America's energy needs. As passed by the House, H.R. 4 was 
comprised of seven Divisions addressing energy policy matters. 
Division A addressed energy conservation and other energy 
policy matters including the following: energy efficiency and 
energy assistance programs, automobile fuel economy, nuclear 
energy, hydroelectric energy, fuels, and renewable energy. 
Division B provided for research and development matters 
relating to energy efficiency, renewable energy, nuclear 
energy, fossil energy, and Department of Energy science 
programs. Division C amended the Internal Revenue Code to 
provide for credits, deductions, and other tax matters relating 
to energy conservation, reliability, and production. Division D 
amended Federal housing statutes and the National Energy 
Conservation Policy Act to incorporate energy conservation and 
efficiency activities and incentives into Federal housing 
programs. Division E provided for the formation of clean coal 
centers of excellence. Division F provided for the development 
of energy resources on public lands, including matters relating 
to energy supply and security, oil and gas development, 
improvements to federal oil and gas management, geothermal 
energy development, hydropower, Arctic coastal plain 
development, Department of the Interior energy conservation, 
coal production, and insular areas energy security. Division G 
prohibited the availability of funds authorized under this Act 
to any convicted violator of the Buy American Act.

Legislative History

    H.R. 2436 was introduced by Mr. Hansen on July 10, 2001, 
and was referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition 
to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On July 17, 2001, the Committee on Resources ordered H.R. 
2436 reported, as amended, to the House by a vote of 26 yeas 
and 17 nays.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 
Resources exchanged correspondence on July 23, 2001 concerning 
each Committee's jurisdictional prerogatives of H.R. 4546.
    On July 25, 2001, the Committee on Resources reported H.R. 
2436 to the House (H. Rpt. 107-160, Part I).
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce was granted an 
extension for further consideration ending not later than July 
25, 2001. On July 25, 2001, the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce was discharged from further consideration of the bill.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 2436 in the 107th 
Congress.
    H.R. 2460 was introduced by Mr. Boehlert on July 11, 2001, 
and was referred to the Committee on Science. On July 18, 2001, 
the Committee on Science ordered H.R. 2460 reported, as 
amended, to the House by a voice vote.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 
Science exchanged correspondence on July 25, 2001 concerning 
each Committee's jurisdictional prerogatives of H.R. 2460.
    On July 31, 2001, the Committee on Science reported H.R. 
2460 to the House (H. Rpt. 107-177).
    No further action was taken on H.R. 2460 in the 107th 
Congress.
    The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality met in open 
markup session on July 10 and 11, 2001, and approved a 
Committee Print, as amended, for Full Committee consideration 
by a roll call vote of 29 yeas and 1 nay. On July 17, 18, and 
19, 2001, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met in open 
markup session. On July 19, 2001, the Committee ordered 
reported the Committee Print, as amended by a roll call vote of 
50 yeas and 5 nays. The Committee agreed to introduce the 
Committee Print as a clean bill and agreed to file a report on 
that bill.
    On July 23, 2001, Mr. Tauzin introduced H.R. 2587 which was 
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in 
addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, Science, 
Transportation and Infrastructure, the Budget, and Education 
and the Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined 
by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 
provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 
concerned.
    On July 25, 2001, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
reported H.R. 2587 to the House (H. Rpt. 107-162, Part I).
    The Committees on Ways and Means, Science, Transportation 
and Infrastructure, the Budget, and Education and the Workforce 
were granted an extension for further consideration ending not 
later than July 25, 2001. Following an exchange of 
correspondence on July 25, 2001 concerning each Committee's 
jurisdictional prerogatives of H.R. 2587, all Committee were 
discharged from further consideration of H.R. 2587.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce filed a supplemental 
report on H.R. 2587 to the House on August 1, 2001 (H. Rpt. 
107-162, Part I).
    No further action as taken on H.R. 2587 in the 107th 
Congress.
    However on July 27, 2001, Mr. Tauzin introduced H.R. 4, 
which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and 
in addition to the Committees on Science, Ways and Means, 
Resources, Education and the Workforce, Transportation and 
Infrastructure, the Budget, and Financial Services, for a 
period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each 
case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned. As introduced, H.R. 4 
contained provisions that were substantially similar to 
provisions in H.R. 2587, H.R. 2460, and H.R. 2436.
    On August 1, 2001, H.R. 4 was considered in the House 
pursuant to H. Res. 216. The bill passed the House, as amended, 
by a roll call vote of 240 yeas and 189 nays.
    H.R. 4 was received in the Senate on August 2, 1001. On 
August 3, 2001, the bill was read the first time and placed on 
the Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time. H.R. 
4 was read the second time and placed on the Senate Legislative 
Calendar under General Orders on September 4, 2001.
    On April 25, 2002, H.R. 4 passed the Senate with an 
amendment by a record vote of 88 yeas and 11 nays. In addition, 
the Senate insisted upon its amendment, requested a conference 
with the House, and appointed conferees.
    On June 12, 2001, the House disagreed to the Senate 
amendment and agreed to go to conference. The Speaker appointed 
conferees from the Committee on Energy and Commerce for 
consideration of the House bill and Senate amendment, and 
modifications committed to conference.
    The Conference Committee met on June 27, July 25, September 
12, September 19, September 25, September 26, October 2, and 
October 3, 2002.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 4 in the 107th 
Congress.

    BANKRUPTCY ABUSE PREVENTION AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT OF 2001


                           (H.R. 333, S. 420)


        (Emergency Energy Assistance and Conservation Measures)

    To amend Title 11, United States Code, and for other 
purposes.

Summary

    Title XIV of H.R. 333, Emergency Energy Assistance and 
Conservation Measures, amended Acts within the jurisdiction of 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Title XIV increased the 
authorization levels through 2005 for certain energy programs, 
including the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Act of 1981 
(direct energy assistance programs), the Energy Conservation 
and Production Act (weatherization assistance programs); and 
the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (State energy 
conservation grants). In addition, Title XIV amended portions 
of the National Energy Conservation Policy Act regarding the 
Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) and Energy Savings 
Performance Contracts (ESPCs).

Legislative History

    Mr. Gekas introduced H.R. 333 on January 31, 2001, and the 
bill was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in 
addition to the Committee on Financial Services, for a period 
to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On February 14, 2001 the Committee on the Judiciary met in 
open markup session and ordered H.R. 333 reported to the House, 
as amended, by a roll call vote of 19 yeas and 8 nays. On 
February 26, 2001 the Committee on Financial Services was 
granted an extension for further consideration ending not later 
than February 26, 2001, at which time the Committee on 
Financial Services discharged the bill.
    On February 26, 2001, the Committee on the Judiciary 
reported the bill to the House (H. Rpt. 107-3, Part I).
    Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 71, the House 
considered H.R. 333 on March 1, 2001, and the House passed the 
bill by recorded vote of 306 yeas and 108 nays.
    On March 5, 2001, H.R. 333 was received in the Senate, read 
twice and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under 
General Orders. The Senate passed H.R. 333 with an amendment by 
a roll call vote of 82 yeas and 16 nays on July 17, 2001. In 
addition, the Senate insisted upon its amendment, requested a 
conference with the House, and appointed conferees.
    On July 31, 2001, the House, by unanimous consent, 
disagreed to the Senate amendment, and agreed to go to a 
conference without objection.
    The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on 
Energy and Conference for consideration of matters contained 
within the House bill and the Senate amendment, and 
modifications committed to conference falling within the 
Committee's jurisdiction.
    The conference met on May 22, 2002, and the conference 
report (H. Rept. 107-617) was filed on July 26, 2002.
    On November 14, 2002, H. Res. 606 providing for the 
consideration of the conference report failed by a roll call 
vote of 173 yeas and 243 nays. On November 15, 2002, the House 
agreed with an amendment to the Senate amendment by a roll call 
vote 244 yeas and 116 nays.
    A message on House action was received in Senate and at 
desk on the House amendment to Senate amendment on November 15, 
2002.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 333 in the 107th 
Congress.

                  STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE FUNDING


                               (H.R. 724)

    To authorize appropriations to carry out part B of title I 
of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, relating to the 
Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

Summary

    H.R. 724 amends the Energy Policy and Conservation Act to 
repeal the March 31, 2000 termination date for the 
authorization of appropriations for the Strategic Petroleum 
Reserve and to extend the authorization of appropriations 
indefinitely.

Legislative History

    H.R. 724 was introduced on February 26, 2001 by Mr. Bass 
and was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On February 28, 2001, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
ordered H.R. 724 reported to the House, without amendment, by 
voice vote. On March 6, 2001, the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce reported H.R. 724 to the House (H. Rpt. 107-6).
    H.R. 724 was considered under suspension of the rules on 
March 6, 2001, and passed the House by a roll call vote of 400 
yeas and 2 nays.
    H.R. 724 was received in the Senate on March 7, 2002, read 
twice, and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 724 in the 107th 
Congress.

                    ELECTRICITY EMERGENCY RELIEF ACT


                              (H.R. 1647)

    To provide for electricity emergencies.

Summary

    H.R. 1647 provides for a variety of federal actions to 
address supply and demand disruptions in wholesale electricity 
markets. The bill provides for reductions in electricity demand 
during periods of peak usage through region-wide conservation 
incentives, conservation at Federal facilities, and emergency 
conservation education. Other provisions to reduce electricity 
demand include establishment of a regional ``clearinghouse'' 
for demand reductions at market prices, and allowing Western 
governors temporarily to adjust Daylight Savings Time. To 
increase electricity supplies during state-declared 
emergencies, H.R. 1647 gives generators and regulatory agencies 
temporary flexibility to maximize available generation 
resources. To address transmission issues, the bill authorizes 
the federal government to take certain steps to identify and 
relieve transmission constraints. The bill establishes an 
Office of Tribal Energy at the Department of Energy (DOE) and 
directs the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to form 
a West-wide regional transmission organization (RTO) upon 
request by 10 of the 14 Western governors. Finally, H.R. 1647 
provides for federal emergency-response measures to prepare for 
blackouts.

Legislative History

    Mr. Barton introduced H.R. 1647 on May 1, 2001, and the 
bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and 
in addition to the Committee on Resources, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held a 
legislative hearing on May 1 and 3, 2001. At the hearing on May 
1, 2001, the Subcommittee received testimony from three FERC 
Commissioners, a state consumer advocate, and several market 
participants. At the May 3, 2001 hearing, witnesses included 
representatives from the Federal Power Marketing Agencies, the 
Bonneville Power Administration, energy and air regulators from 
California, a senior energy advisor to the Governor of 
California, industry and environmental groups, and a state air 
pollution regulator association.
    The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality met in open 
markup session to consider H.R. 1647 on May 3, 2001. The bill 
was approved for Full Committee consideration, as amended, by a 
vote of 17 yeas and 13 nays, a quorum being present.
    The Full Committee met in open markup session to consider 
H.R. 1647 on May 24, 2001, and subsequently recessed pursuant 
to the call of the Chair.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 1647 in the 107th 
Congress.

               PRICE-ANDERSON REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2001


                              (H.R. 2983)

    To extend indemnification authority under section 170 of 
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, and for other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 2983 amends the Atomic Energy Act to extend the 
authorization period for Price-Anderson Act indemnification 
authorities for an additional 15 years from August 1, 2002, to 
August 1, 2017, for NRC licensees, and Department of Energy 
(DOE) contractors. H.R. 2983 also increased the annual 
retrospective premium from $10 million to $15 million and 
adjusted for inflation in the future. Additionally, the Atomic 
Energy Act is amended to provide for equitable treatment of 
modular reactors, allowing 2 or more small reactors at a single 
site to be assessed one full retrospective premium in the event 
of a nuclear accident.
    H.R. 2983 also requires the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
(NRC) to enhance security requirements at nuclear power plants 
by developing a new design basis threat to protect against 
increased threats from terrorist organizations. Other 
provisions in H.R. 2983 include a repeal of the automatic 
remission of nuclear safety fines assessed on DOE non-profit 
contractors, and a contractor accountability provision that 
would allow the government to recover amounts paid under an 
indemnification agreement from DOE contractors that engage in 
intentional misconduct.

Legislative History

    H.R. 2983 was introduced in the House by Mrs. Wilson and 
eight cosponsors on October 2, 2001 and referred to the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality had previously 
held hearings on the status of the Price-Anderson Act on June 
27, 2001, and September 6, 2001. These hearings addressed the 
outlook for the construction of new nuclear plants, including 
any changes in law that may be necessary to help facilitate new 
plants; and issues related to reauthorization of the Price-
Anderson Act. Witnesses included representatives from the DOE, 
the NRC, the commercial nuclear industry, the DOE contractor 
community, and the environmental community.
    On October 3, 2001, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 
Quality met in open markup session and forwarded H.R. 2983 to 
the Full Committee, as amended, by voice vote. On October 31, 
2001, the Full Committee met in open markup session and ordered 
H.R. 2983 reported to the House, as amended, by voice vote.
    On November 19, 2001, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
reported H.R. 2983 to the House (H. Rpt. 107-299, Part I). The 
bill was referred sequentially to the Science Committee on 
November 19, 2001, for a period ending not later than Nov. 20, 
2001 for consideration of such provisions of the bill and 
amendment as fall within the jurisdiction of that committee 
pursuant to clause 1(n), rule X.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 
Armed Services exchanged correspondence on November 19, 2001, 
concerning each Committee's jurisdictional prerogatives of H.R. 
2983
    The Committee on Science was discharged from further 
consideration of H.R. 2983 on November 20, 2001.
    On November 27, 2001, H.R.2983 was considered under 
suspension of the rules and passed by the House on voice vote.
    The Senate received H.R. 2983 on November 28, 2001, read it 
the first time, and placed it on the Senate Legislative 
Calendar under Read the First Time. On November 29, 2001, the 
bill was read the second time and placed on the Senate 
Legislative Calendar under General Orders.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 2983 in the 107th 
Congress.

   AMENDING THE ANTITERRORISM AND EFFECTIVE DEATH PENALTY ACT OF 1996


                              (H.R. 3016)

    To amend the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act 
of 1996 with respect to the responsibilities of the Secretary 
of Health and Human Services regarding biological agents and 
toxins, and to amend title 18, United States Code, with respect 
to such agents and toxins, to clarify the application of cable 
television system privacy requirements to new cable services, 
to strengthen security at certain nuclear facilities, and for 
other purposes.

Summary

    Title III of H.R. 3016 includes several provisions to 
improve security at commercial nuclear power plants regulated 
by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The bill authorizes 
guards to carry and use weapons to protect nuclear facilities 
and prevent theft of nuclear materials. In addition, the bill 
provides NRC the authority to restrict the introduction of 
dangerous weapons onto any facility regulated by the NRC. The 
bill also expands current law that prevents sabotage of nuclear 
facilities to include nuclear waste treatment and disposal 
facilities, as well as nuclear fuel fabrication facilities, 
including facilities under construction. The bill requires the 
NRC to study and assess vulnerabilities of nuclear facilities 
to terrorist attack, and directs NRC to revise its design basis 
threat for these facilities in a new regulation within one 
year. Finally the bill requires security at these facilities to 
be tested at least once every two years.

Legislative History

    On October 3, 2001, the Full Committee on Energy and 
Commerce met in open markup session and favorably ordered 
reported a Committee Print to strengthen security at certain 
nuclear facilities, and for other purposes, as amended, by 
voice vote, a quorum being present. The Committee also agreed 
to a unanimous consent request by Chairman Tauzin to 
incorporate the Committee Print, along with two other Committee 
Prints, into a bill to be introduced, H.R. 3016, and to allow 
for the Committee to file a report on the introduced bill.
    On October 3, 2001, Mr. Tauzin introduced H.R. 3016, which 
was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in 
addition to the Committee on the Judiciary for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 3016 to 
the House on October 9, 2001 (H. Rpt. 107-231, Part I).
    The Committee on the Judiciary was granted an extension for 
further consideration of the bill for a period ending not later 
than Oct. 16, 2001. Following an exchange of letters between 
the Chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the 
Chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary with respect to its 
jurisdictional prerogatives on this or similar legislation, the 
Committee on the Judiciary was discharged from further 
consideration of H.R. 3016 on October 16, 2001.
    On November 6, 2001, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
filed a supplemental report to the House on H.R. 3016 (H. Rpt. 
107-231, Part I).
    No further action was taken on H.R. 3016 in the 107th 
Congress.

                  ELECTRIC SUPPLY AND TRANSMISSION ACT


                              (H.R. 3406)

    To benefit consumers and enhance the Nation's energy 
security by removing barriers to the development of competitive 
markets for electric power, providing fro the reliability and 
increased capacity of the Nation's electric transmission 
networks, promoting the use of renewable and alternative 
sources of electric power generation, and for other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 3406 would amend the Federal Power Act by adding new 
provisions establishing requirements pertaining to 
interconnection, net metering, price-responsive demand 
programs, open access transmission, regional transmission 
organizations, electric reliability, transmission siting and 
rate reform, investigations, refunds, and penalties. The bill 
would repeal the Public Utility Holding Company Act and would 
repeal the mandatory purchase provisions of the Public Utility 
Regulatory Policies Act. The bill would eliminate the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission's merger review authority under 
the Federal Power Act. It includes provisions pertaining to 
Federal utilities and consumer protection.

Legislative History

    H.R. 3406 was introduced on December 5, 2001 referred to 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the 
Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure, and Resources, 
for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in 
each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within 
the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held legislative 
hearings on the bill on December 12 and 13, 2001. At the 
December 12, hearing, the Subcommittee heard testimony from the 
DOE, FERC, and the Tennessee Valley Authority on the need for 
comprehensive electricity legislation and specific provisions 
of the bill, including on the need for investment in 
transmission infrastructure and increased supply of 
electricity. On December 13 the Subcommittee heard testimony 
from the Securities and Exchange Commission, state utility 
commissions, public power, rural cooperatives, industrial and 
other consumers, reliability councils, investor-owned 
utilities, independent generators, the investment community, 
and energy efficiency advocates. Witnesses testified on the 
bill and on the issues relating to transmission infrastructure, 
energy supply, and reliability, energy efficiency, and consumer 
interests.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 3406 in the 107th 
Congress.

     TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE FOR COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION OF A 
              HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT IN THE STATE OF ALASKA


                               (S. 1843)

    To extend the deadline for commencement of construction of 
a hydroelectric project in the State of Alaska.

Summary

    S. 1843 postpones the statutory deadline for the 
commencement of construction of a hydroelectric project in the 
State of Alaska pending completion of a transmission line. Once 
the transmission line is completed, S. 1843 as introduced 
provided for up to three additional two-year extension of the 
deadline to commence construction. Section 13 of the Federal 
Power Act establishes time limits for the commencement of 
construction of hydroelectric projects once the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission (FERC) has issued a license. The licensee 
must begin construction not more than two years from the date 
of the license is issued, unless FERC extends the deadline. 
Section 13 permits FERC to grant only one two-year extension of 
that deadline. Therefore, a license is subject to termination 
if a licensee fails to begin construction within four years. S. 
1843 temporarily suspends the deadline for the commencement of 
construction of a project in the State of Alaska until a 
transmission line is built, then extends the deadline for up to 
two-years, if the licensee meets the good faith, due diligence, 
and public interest requirements of section 13 of the Federal 
Power Act. The bill also authorizes FERC to reinstate the 
license if the original deadline to commence construction has 
expired.

Legislative History

    S. 1843 was introduced by Senator Stevens on December 18, 
2001, read twice, and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources.
    S. 1843 was ordered to be reported without amendment 
favorably on June 5, 2002. On June 28, 2002, the Senate 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources reported the bill to 
the Senate without amendment. The Senate passed S. 1843 on 
August 1, 2002, without amendment by unanimous consent.
    S. 1843 was received in the House on September 4, 2002, and 
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. The 
Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality requested executive 
comment on S. 1843 from Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 
(FERC) on October 11, 2002, and received executive comment that 
same day.
    On November 15, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
discharged S. 1843. S. 1843 was amended and passed the House 
without objection by unanimous consent.
    While the bill was amended by the House, the official 
papers that were delivered to the Senate did not contain the 
amendment that passed the House. Summarily, the Speaker did not 
find himself obligated to sign the bill to clear it for the 
White House since the official papers did not accurately 
reflect the will of the House.
    In an attempt to rectify the problem the Senate passed S. 
Con. Res. 159 by unanimous consent on November 20, 2002 to 
correct the enrollment of S. 1843. The House received S. Con. 
Res. 159 and held it at the desk on November 22, 2002, but took 
no action on the bill
    No further action was taken on S. 1843 in the 107th 
Congress.

                           FUEL PRICE GOUGING


                             (H. Res. 238)

    Condemning any price gouging with respect to motor fuels 
during the hours and days after the terrorist acts of September 
11, 2001.

Summary

    H. Res. 238 declares that the House of Representatives 
condemns any price gouging with respect to motor fuels during 
the hours and days after the terrorist acts of September 11, 
2001. The resolution also urges the appropriate Federal and 
state agencies to investigate any incidents of such price 
gouging, and prosecute any violations of law discovered as a 
result of the investigations.

Legislative History

    H. Res. 238 was introduced on September 14, 2001 by Mr. 
Tauzin and 41 co-sponsors, and referred to the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce discharged H. Res. 238 
on September 14, 2001, and the bill was considered in the House 
by unanimous consent was agreed to without objection
    No further action was taken on H. Res. 238 in the 107th 
Congress..

                      STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE


                             (H. Res. 250)

    Urging the Secretary of Energy to fill the Strategic 
Petroleum Reserve.

Summary

    H. Res. 250 urges the Secretary of Energy to increase the 
capacity of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to 1 billion 
barrels of crude oil, to fill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve 
to its capacity as soon as practicable, and to consider 
purchasing from marginal wells that would otherwise cease 
production, consistent with current law.

Legislative History

    H. Res. 250 was introduced by Mr. Barton on October 2, 
2001, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On October 3, 2001, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 
Quality met in open markup session and approved the bill for 
Full Committee consideration by a voice vote, a quorum being 
present.
    The House considered H. Res. 250 under suspension of the 
rules on October 9, 2001, and passed H. Res. 250, as amended, 
by a roll call vote of 409 yeas and 3 nays.
    No further action was taken on H. Res. 250 in the 107th 
Congress.

                          Oversight Activities


          ELECTRICITY MARKETS: LESSONS LEARNED FROM CALIFORNIA

    On February 15, 2001, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 
Quality held an oversight hearing on competition in electricity 
markets. The hearing examined the electric supply and pricing 
problems experienced in California and the West, and whether 
those problems were unique to that state. The hearing also 
examined other, more successful State restructuring programs. 
Witnesses included state regulators, government representatives 
and consumer advocates from California, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and 
Maryland, along with industry representatives and analysts.

                  NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY: NATURAL GAS

    The Subcommittee held the first in a series of oversight 
hearings on national energy policy on February 28, 2001. The 
hearing focused on the role of natural gas in a comprehensive 
national energy policy that addresses all forms of energy. The 
hearing addressed topics such as the current and future status 
of markets for natural gas, the causes of recent price 
increases, and ways to generally increase the supply and 
deliverability of natural gas to ensure that adequate supplies 
reach consumers in a timely and safe fashion. Witnesses 
included the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Energy 
Information Administration, and representatives from the 
production, transportation, and distribution sectors of the 
industry, as well as consumer and environmental advocates.

             ELECTRICITY MARKETS IN CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST

    On March 6, 2001, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 
Quality held a two-part Members' oversight hearing regarding 
the status of electricity markets in California and the West, 
and the need for a comprehensive national energy policy. With 
respect to electricity markets in California and the West, the 
hearing addressed the effects of high prices and supply 
shortages on consumers, potential causes and solutions, and 
ways to prevent future problems. The second part of the hearing 
addressed the need for a balanced, comprehensive national 
energy policy to ensure affordable, abundant, environmentally 
sound energy supplies. Witnesses at the hearing consisted of 
Members of Congress.
    The Subcommittee continued with its oversight of California 
electricity markets with two days of hearings on March 20 and 
22, 2001. The hearing focused on the causes of the electric 
supply and pricing problems in California, the state and 
Federal governments' responses, and potential short- and long-
term solutions. Witnesses the first day consisted of the 
Chairman and two Commissioners of the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission. Witnesses the second day consisted of 
representatives from the California state government, industry 
representatives, consumer groups, and market analysts.

                      NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY: COAL

    On March 14, 2001, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 
Quality continued its series of oversight hearings on national 
energy policy with a hearing that focused on the role of coal 
in a comprehensive national energy policy. The hearing 
addressed the current and future role of coal as a fuel for the 
generation of electricity, impacts on the supply of coal, and 
the use of new technologies to reduce emissions of pollutants 
from coal-fired electric power plants. The Subcommittee 
received testimony from representatives of an electric utility, 
an environmental group, a State public service commission, a 
State environmental protection agency, a coal production 
company, the Department of Energy's Energy Information Agency, 
a university center for coal and minerals processing, and the 
United Mine Workers.

                 NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY: NUCLEAR ENERGY

    On Tuesday, March 27, 2001, the Subcommittee on Energy and 
Air Quality held a hearing on the national energy policy 
concerning nuclear energy. The hearing addressed the current 
utilization of nuclear energy for electric generation, 
regulatory and licensing issues facing the nuclear industry, 
the prospects for nuclear energy to meet future generation 
needs, including the use of new technologies, and the role of 
nuclear energy in a comprehensive national energy policy. The 
Subcommittee received testimony from representatives from the 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Department of Energy, the 
Energy Information Agency, the nuclear industry, and an 
environmental group.

        NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY: CRUDE OIL AND REFINED PETROLEUM

    On March 30, 2001, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 
Quality continued the series of oversight hearings on a 
national energy policy with a hearing on crude oil and refined 
petroleum. The hearing addressed the role of crude oil and 
refined petroleum in a comprehensive national energy policy 
that addresses all forms of energy. Topics included current and 
future status of markets for crude oil and refined petroleum 
products, U.S. dependence on foreign sources of oil, the 
outlook for gasoline prices, and ways to ensure a sufficient, 
affordable supply of crude oil and refined petroleum products 
for consumers. Witnesses included the Energy Information 
Administration; representatives from the production, refining 
and distribution segments of the industry; an oil market 
analyst; and a representative of an environmental group.

                 CONSUMER PERSPECTIVES ON ENERGY POLICY

    The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held an 
oversight hearing on national energy policy focusing on 
consumer perspectives on May 15, 2001. The hearing focused on 
the effect of high prices and supply shortages of energy on 
American consumers and the economy. Witnesses discussed the 
impacts of energy price and supply on their lives and 
businesses, and identified potential statutory and regulatory 
reforms. Witnesses included representatives from the Energy 
Information Administration, business and trade associations, 
local government, the American Association of Retired Persons, 
a school administrator, the American Automobile Association, 
and consumer groups.

    THE NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY REPORT OF THE NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY 
                           DEVELOPMENT GROUP

    On June 13, 2001, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 
Quality held an oversight hearing on the President's National 
Energy Policy Report. The hearing focused on the report by the 
National Energy Policy Development Group, which included 
regulatory and legislative proposals necessary to provide for 
our Nation's long-term energy needs. The sole witness was the 
Secretary of the Department of Energy.

       NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY: CONSERVATION AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY

    The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality continued the 
series of oversight hearings on a national energy policy with a 
hearing on June 22, 2001 focusing on conservation and energy 
efficiency. The hearing addressed the role of energy efficiency 
and conservation in helping manage our Nation's long-term 
energy needs. The hearing also examined ways to promote 
continued increases in energy efficiency and conservation 
through such means as energy efficiency technologies, metering 
technologies, electricity demand management, and vehicle fuels 
conservation. The Subcommittee received testimony from 
representatives of state and Federal government, several energy 
efficiency advocacy groups, the automobile industry, an energy 
services company, an environmental protection group, electrical 
manufacturers, a utility, a smart metering company, and a 
national homeowners association.

              HYDROELECTRIC RELICENSING AND NUCLEAR ENERGY

    On June 27, 2001 the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality 
held an oversight hearing on hydroelectric relicensing and 
nuclear energy. The hearing focused on the effects of the 
hydroelectric licensing process on our nation's hydroelectric 
power supplies, the outlook for construction new nuclear 
reactors, and the need for Price-Anderson reauthorization. 
Witnesses included representatives from the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, the Department of Energy, the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, the General Accounting Office, a State 
government representative, utilities, the commercial nuclear 
industry, Department of Energy contractors, and environmental 
groups.

    NATIONAL ELECTRICITY POLICY: BARRIERS TO COMPETITIVE GENERATION

    The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held an 
oversight hearing on July 27, 2001 on national electricity 
policy. The hearing focused on the development of competitive 
wholesale markets for electric power; barriers to competitive 
generation, including current laws and regulations; and the 
impact of wholesale markets on retail electric rates and the 
states' transition to retail electric choice. The Subcommittee 
heard testimony from state utility regulators, investor-owned 
utilities, public power, independent power producers, advocates 
for large and small consumers, distributed generation 
companies, retail electricity providers, net metering 
providers, and the investment community.

               REAUTHORIZATION OF THE PRICE-ANDERSON ACT

    The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held an 
oversight hearing on the status of the Price Anderson Act on 
September 6, 2001. The hearing addressed the outlook for the 
construction of new nuclear plants, including any changes in 
law that may be necessary to help facilitate new plants; and 
issues related to reauthorization of the Price Anderson Act. 
Witnesses included a representative from the Department of 
Energy.

      NATIONAL ELECTRICITY POLICY: FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PERSPECTIVES

    The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality continued its 
series of oversight hearings on a national electricity policy 
on September 20, 2001 with a hearing on Federal government 
perspectives. The hearing focused on the status of the electric 
power industry and competitive markets for wholesale electric 
energy, the effect of current laws and regulations, the need 
for expanded transmission capacity and siting of new 
transmission and generation, and the role of the Federal 
government in investigating and overseeing competitive 
wholesale electricity markets. Additionally, in light of the 
events of September 11, 2001, the hearing also addressed the 
security of our nation's electric power supplies and 
infrastructure from future terrorist attack, and steps the 
Federal government is taking to protect such supplies and 
infrastructure. Witnesses included the Department of Energy and 
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

                      ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION POLICY

    On October 10, 2001, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 
Quality held an oversight hearing on electricity transmission 
policy. The hearing addressed matters relating to the capacity 
and efficient use of the nation's electric transmission 
infrastructure, including the need for transmission pricing 
reform to encourage new investment in transmission and the 
formation of regional transmission organizations to promote the 
development of wholesale power markets. The witnesses at the 
hearing included representatives of investor owned utilities, 
public power utilities, rural electric cooperatives, power 
marketers, a non-profit electric organization, consumer 
advocates, and investment analysts.

                ENRON BANKRUPTCY AND THE ENERGY MARKETS

    On February 13, 2002, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 
Quality held an oversight hearing on the effects of one of the 
largest bankruptcy in our Nation's history. Enron was a large 
energy marketer and proponent of competitive markets. Starting 
as a natural gas pipeline company, Enron evolved into, among 
other things, a commodity trader, a futures contract trader and 
a market maker dealing in everything from natural gas, oil and 
electricity to interest rates, foreign currency and equity. 
Enron also attempted and failed to create markets in broadband 
capacity, steel, coal, and wood pulp. The hearing focused on 
competitive energy markets and the collapse of one of the 
largest energy marketers in the world, and addressed whether 
Enron's demise harmed or disrupted competitive energy markets, 
and the short and long-term effects on energy prices and 
supplies. The Subcommittee heard testimony from the Chairman of 
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Chairman of the 
Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Chairman of the 
Securities and Exchange Commission, the Department of Energy, 
and a state utility commission, investor-owned utilities, 
independent power producers, an independent oil and gas 
exploration and development company, a consumer perspective, 
and a private energy and economic consultant.

    REAUTHORIZATION OF THE NATURAL GAS PIPELINE SAFETY ACT AND THE 
                  HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY ACT

    The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held an 
oversight hearing on March 19, 2002 to address the 
reauthorization of the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act and the 
Hazardous Liquids Pipeline Safety Act. The hearing examined the 
issue of pipeline safety for both natural gas and liquids 
pipelines from the perspective of both government and the 
private sector. Witnesses include representatives of the 
Department of Transportation, the National Transportation 
Safety Board, the General Accounting Office, pipeline 
inspectors, pipeline owners, labor groups, consumer 
perspectives, environmental advocates, and the oil and gas 
industries.

           NUCLEAR WASTE REPOSITORY AT YUCCA MOUNTAIN, NEVADA

    On April 18, 2002, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 
Quality held an oversight hearing to review the President's 
approval and recommendation to Congress that the Yucca Mountain 
site in Nevada be developed as the nation's long-term 
repository for the disposal of radioactive waste. The 
Subcommittee received testimony from the Secretary of the 
Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the 
Environmental Protection Agency, the Nuclear Waste Technical 
Review Board, the General Accounting Office, the nuclear 
industry, a labor union, and an environmental group.

                             CLEAN AIR ACT

    On May 1, 2002, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality 
held an oversight hearing regarding the accomplishments of the 
Clean Air Act, as amended by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 
1990. The hearing addressed the policy achievements 
accomplished to date under the Clean Air Act, with an emphasis 
on programs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has 
implemented under the authority granted EPA by the 1990 
Amendments. Witnesses included the Environmental Protection 
Agency, a college of law, a graduate school of public health, a 
center for atmospheric processes and modeling, an environmental 
group, and a public policy analysis center.
    On June 5, 2002, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality 
held an oversight hearing regarding the experience of state and 
local environmental regulators in implementing the Clean Air 
Act. The hearing addressed specific past experiences of state 
and local regulators in dealing with Clean Air Act 
requirements, and observations regarding increasing the 
effectiveness of future implementation schemes. Witnesses 
included representatives of state and local environmental 
agencies responsible for implementation of certain Clean Air 
Act requirements.

                             Hearings Held

    Electricity Markets: Lessons Learned from California.--
Oversight hearing on Electricity Markets: Lessons Learned from 
California. Hearing held on February 15, 2001. PRINTED, Serial 
Number 107-7.
    National Energy Policy: Natural Gas.--Oversight hearing on 
National Energy Policy: Natural Gas. Hearing held on February 
28, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-11.
    Congressional Perspectives on Electricity Markets in 
California and the West and National Energy Policy.--Oversight 
hearing on Congressional Perspectives on Electricity Markets in 
California and the West and National Energy Policy. Hearing 
held on March 6, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-8.
    National Energy Policy: Coal.--Oversight hearing on 
National Energy Policy: Coal. Hearing held on March 14, 2001. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-2.
    Electricity Markets: California.--Oversight hearing on 
Electricity Markets: California. Hearings held on March 20 and 
March 22, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-6.
    National Energy Policy: Nuclear Energy.--Oversight hearing 
on National Energy Policy: Nuclear Energy. Hearing held on 
March 27, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-10.
    National Energy Policy: Crude Oil and Refined Petroleum 
Products.--Oversight hearing on National Energy Policy: Crude 
Oil and Refined Petroleum Products. Hearing held on March 30, 
2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-12.
    Electricity Emergency Relief Act of 2001.--Hearing on H.R. 
1647, the Electricity Emergency Relief Act of 2001. Hearings 
held on May 1 and May 3, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-26.
    Consumer Perspectives on Energy Policy.--Oversight hearing 
on Consumer Perspectives on Energy Policy. Hearing held on May 
15, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-14.
    National Energy Policy Report of the National Energy Policy 
Development Group.--Oversight hearing on National Energy Policy 
Report of the National Energy Policy Development Group. Hearing 
held on June 13, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-47.
    National Energy Policy: Conservation and Energy 
Efficiency.--Oversight hearing on National Energy Policy: 
Conservation and Energy Efficiency. Hearing held on June 22, 
2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-50.
    Hydroelectric Relicensing and Nuclear Energy.--Oversight 
hearing on Hydroelectric Relicensing and Nuclear Energy. 
Hearing held on June 27, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-55.
    National Electricity Policy: Barriers to Competitive 
Generation.--Oversight hearing on National Electricity Policy: 
Barriers to Competitive Generation. Hearing held on July 27, 
2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-62.
    Reauthorization of the Price-Anderson Act.--Oversight 
hearing on Reauthorization of the Price-Anderson Act. Hearing 
held on September 6, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-69.
    National Electricity Policy: Federal Government 
Perspectives.--Oversight hearing on National Electricity 
Policy: Federal Government Perspectives. Hearing held on 
September 20, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-76.
    Electricity Transmission Policy.--Oversight hearing on 
Electricity Transmission Policy. Hearing held on October 10, 
2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-64.
    Electric Supply and Transmission Act of 2001.--Hearing on 
H.R. 3406, the Electric Supply and Transmission Act of 2001. 
Hearings held on December 12 and December 13, 2001. PRINTED, 
Serial Number 107-81.
    The Effect of the Bankruptcy of Enron on the Functioning of 
Energy Markets.--Oversight hearing on the Effect of the 
Bankruptcy of Enron on the Functioning of Energy Markets. 
Hearing held on February 13, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-
82.
    Reauthorization of the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act and 
the Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Act.--Oversight hearing on 
Reauthorization of the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act and the 
Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Act. Hearing held on March 19, 
2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-87.
    A Review of the President's Recommendation to Develop a 
Nuclear Waste Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.--Oversight 
hearing on a Review of the President's Recommendation to 
Develop a Nuclear Waste Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. 
Hearing held on April 18, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-99.
    Accomplishments of the Clean Air Act, as amended by the 
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.--Oversight hearing on 
Accomplishments of the Clean Air Act, as amended by the Clean 
Air Act Amendments of 1990. Hearing held on May 1, 2002. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-106.
    Clean Air Act Implementation: Experience of State and Local 
Regulators.--Oversight hearing on Clean Air Act Implementation: 
Experience of State and Local Regulators. Hearing held on June 
5, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-119.
      

          Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials

                             (Ratio 16-13)

                    PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio, Chairman

JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania     FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
GREG GANSKE, Iowa                    EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois               SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico           GENE GREEN, Texas
VITO FOSSELLA, New York              KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri
  (Vice Chairman)                    THOMAS M. BARRETT, Wisconsin
ROBERT L. EHRLICH, Jr., Maryland     BILL LUTHER, Minnesota
STEVE BUYER, Indiana                 LOIS CAPPS, California
GEORGE RADANOVICH, California        MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania
CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire       JANE HARMAN, California
JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania        HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
MARY BONO, California                PETER DEUTSCH, Florida
GREG WALDEN, Oregon                  JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan,
LEE TERRY, Nebraska                    (Ex Officio)
ERNIE FLETCHER, Kentucky
W.J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana
  (Ex Officio)

Jurisdiction: Environmental protection in general, including the Safe 
Drinking Water Act and risk assessment matters; solid waste, hazardous 
waste and toxic substances, including Superfund and RCRA; mining, oil, 
gas, and coal combustion wastes; and, noise pollution control.

                         Legislative Activities


      DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002


                Public Law 107-107 (H.R. 2586, S. 1438)


                       (Environmental Provisions)

    To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2002 for 
military activities of the Department of Defense, for military 
construction, and for defense activities of the Department of 
Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year 
for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.

Summary

    Both H.R. 2586 and S. 1438 contained a number of provisions 
which related to environmental protection and public health 
statutes under the jurisdiction of the Energy and Commerce 
Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials. In 
particular, the Department of Defense (DOD) is directed to 
develop and maintain an inventory of sites suspected to contain 
unexploded ordnance, abandoned military munitions, or munitions 
constituents; and requires the DOD to assign a relative 
priority for response and review. Both bills also require the 
DOD to reimburse the Environmental Protection Agency for costs 
connected to cleanups at the Hooper Sands site, South Berwick, 
Maine, and addressed reporting requirements under the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA).
    H.R. 2586 and S. 1438 also contained provisions 
transferring land between the DOD and other Federal and state 
agencies, but required that requirements of Federal and state 
environmental laws and regulations must be met in doing so. 
Fort Irwin, in San Bernardino County, California, was one 
location where the DOD and the Department of Interior (DOI) 
transferred administrative jurisdiction over a land tract and 
retained their liability under CERCLA and the Resource 
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).
    Finally, H.R. 2586 and S. 1438 contained provisions 
regarding the Federal and state environmental responsibilities 
of various Federal agencies in the transfer of administrative 
jurisdiction over Rocky Flats from the Department of Energy 
(DOE) to the DOI in order to create the Rocky Flats National 
Wildlife Refuge. In addition, the bills excluded the transfer 
of certain property and facilities that required environmental 
response actions, directed completion of cleanup and closure at 
Rocky Flats, and requested a joint report from the DOE and DOI 
for each fiscal year from 2003 through 2007 on the costs of 
implementation of these activities.

Legislative History

    H.R. 2586 was introduced by Mr. Stump on July 23, 2001 and 
referred to the Committee on Armed Services. On August 1, 2002, 
the Committee on Armed Services met in open markup session and 
ordered H.R. 2586 reported, as amended.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 
Armed Services exchanged correspondence on September 4, 2001 
concerning each Committee's jurisdictional prerogatives of H.R. 
2586.
    Pursuant to a unanimous consent request, on September 4, 
2001, the House Armed Services Committee reported H.R. 2586 to 
the House (H. Rpt 107-194).
    H.R. 2586 was considered in the House pursuant to H. Res. 
246, and on September 25, 2001, the House passed the bill by a 
vote of 398 yeas and 17 nays.
    H.R. 2586 was received in the Senate on September 26, 2002, 
read twice, and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under 
General Orders. On June 18, 2002, the Senate indefinitely 
postponed consideration of H.R. 2586 by unanimous consent.
    The Senate passed S. 1438, which was introduced on 
September 19, 2001, by Senator Levin, on October 2, 2001 by a 
record vote of 99 yeas and 0 nays. The bill was received in the 
House on October 4, 2001 and held at the desk.
    On October 17, 2001, the House struck all after the 
enacting clause of S. 1438 and inserted in lieu thereof the 
provisions of H.R. 2586, and passed the bill without objection. 
The House insisted on its amendment and requested a conference 
with the Senate on October 17, 2001. A motion by Mr. Stump was 
agreed to by a roll call vote of 420 yeas and 0 nays to close 
portions of the conference.
    The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce for consideration of matters contained in 
the Senate bill and the House amendment and modifications 
committed to conference falling within the Committee's 
jurisdiction.
    The Senate disagreed to the House amendment and agreed to 
the House's request to go to conference on October 17, 2001 and 
appointed conferees.
    The Conference Committee met on October 31, 2001 and 
November 1, 2001. The conference report (H. Rpt. 107-333) was 
filed on December 12, 2001.
    Pursuant to H. Res. 316, on December 13, 2001, the House 
agreed to the conference report by a roll call vote of 382 yeas 
and 40 nays. The Senate agreed to the conference report as well 
on December 13, 2001 by a record vote of 96 yeas and 2 nays.
    H. Con. Res. 288 passed the House and the Senate on 
December 13, 2001, by unanimous consent to correct the 
enrollment of S. 1438.
    On December 13, 2001, S. 1438 was cleared for the White 
House. The bill was presented to the President on December 20, 
2001, and on December 28, 2001, the bill was signed by the 
President (Public Law 107-107).

   SMALL BUSINESS LIABILITY RELIEF AND BROWNFIELDS REVITALIZATION ACT


 Public Law 107-118 (H.R. 2869, H.R. 1831, S. 350, Gillmor Discussion 
                  Draft, Democratic Discussion Draft)

    To provide certain relief for small businesses from 
liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, and to amend such Act 
to promote the cleanup and reuse of brownfields, to provide 
financial assistance for brownfields revitalization, to enhance 
State response programs, and for other purposes.

Summary

    Title I of H.R. 2869, also known as The Small Business 
Liability Protection Act (SBLPA), amends the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 
(CERCLA) to provide, with exceptions, Superfund liability 
relief to certain parties. The legislation provides that a 
person is not responsible for the costs associated with cleanup 
at a Superfund National Priorities List site if they disposed, 
or arranged for the disposal of, less than 110 gallons of 
liquid materials or less than 200 pounds of solid materials 
before April 1, 2001. Such a party could nevertheless still be 
held liable if its waste has contributed or could contribute 
significantly to cleanup costs, if it did not cooperate with 
information requests, or if it has not been convicted of an 
environmental crime relating to the material. SBLPA also 
exempts a business from Superfund liability if it only disposes 
of municipal solid waste (MSW), generated all the MSW on-site, 
and employs no more than 100 workers. Second, MSW, as defined 
by the bill, includes items and quantities of waste that are 
essentially the same as household garbage and are collected and 
disposed of as part of normal municipal solid waste collection 
services. The MSW liability exemption is subject to re-openers 
similar to those for de-micromis generators. Third, SBLRA 
requires that any party suing a non-liable party must pay 
attorney's fees and court costs. Finally, SBLRA allows the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to settle a cleanup claim 
with a small business for a lesser amount if the business can 
show a financial inability to pay for the cleanup and otherwise 
fully cooperates with the government in its cleanup efforts. In 
addition, the Federal government is given the ability to weigh 
alternative payment options when calculating a party's cleanup 
responsibilities.
    Title II of H.R. 2869, also known as the Brownfields 
Revitalization and Environmental Restoration (BRERA) of 2001, 
authorizes $200 million per year for fiscal years 2002-2006 for 
brownfield assessment grants and cleanup grants, of which $50 
million per year or 25 percent of the amount made available, 
shall be used to clean up ``relatively low-risk'' brownfield 
sites contaminated by petroleum. BRERA also sets out ranking 
criteria to be used in awarding the assessment grants and 
cleanup grants and defines the entities that are eligible to 
receive grants. It also provides $50 million annually to 
enhance state and tribal voluntary cleanup programs, and places 
certain limitations on EPA enforcement at sites being cleaned 
up under a state program. BRERA also provides liability 
protection for contiguous property owners, prospective 
purchasers, and innocent landowners. In addition, the bill 
requires EPA to defer listing a site on the National Priorities 
List if the President determines the site is being cleaned up 
under a state program that will result in long-term protection 
of human health and the environment, or negotiations are 
underway to perform a response action.

Legislative History

    On February 15, 2001, Senator Chafee and a bipartisan group 
of Senators introduced S. 350 and the bill was referred to the 
Committee on Environment and Public Works. On March 12, 2001, 
the Committee on Environment and Public Works reported S. 350 
to the Senate, amended (S. Rpt. 107-2). The bill was placed on 
the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders, Calendar 
No. 19.
    On April 25, 2001, S. 350 passed the Senate with an 
amendment by a record vote of 99 yeas and 0 nays. A message on 
Senate action was sent to the House on April 26, 2001.
    On April 26, 2001, S. 350 was received in the House and 
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in 
addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in 
each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within 
the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    The Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials 
held a legislative hearing on S. 350, the Gillmor Discussion 
Draft, and the Democratic Discussion draft on June 8, 2001 
(Printed, Serial No. 107-43). The hearing looked at potential 
changes to the Senate passed legislation as espoused by the 
Chairman and Democrat Members of the Subcommittee. The 
Subcommittee received testimony from the Environmental 
Protection Agency, state, county, and local officials, and 
interested business, financial, and environmental advocacy 
representatives. While no further legislative action was taken 
on S. 350, the Gillmor Discussion Draft, or the Democratic 
Discussion draft in the 107th Congress; S. 350 eventually was 
rolled into H.R. 2869.
    On May 15, 2001, Mr. Gillmor introduced H.R. 1831 along 
with 63 cosponsors. The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On May 16, the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous 
Materials met in open markup session and reported H.R. 1831 to 
the Full Committee by voice vote, a quorum being present.
    The Full Committee met in open markup session on May 17, 
2001 and ordered H.R. 1831 reported to the House by voice vote, 
a quorum being present. The Committee on Energy and Commerce 
reported H.R. 1831 to the House on May 21, 2001 (H Rpt. 107-70, 
Part I), and on the same day the Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure reported H.R. 1831 to the House (H. Rpt. 
107-70, Part II).
    On May 21, 2001, H.R. 1831 was considered in the House 
under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a roll 
call vote of 419 yeas and 0 nays.
    H.R. 1831 was received in the Senate, read twice, and 
referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works on 
June 13, 2001. While no further action was taken on H.R. 1831 
in the 107th Congress, its provisions were included in H.R. 
2869.
    H.R. 2869 was introduced by Mr. Gillmor and seven 
cosponsors on September 10, 2001 and referred to the Committee 
on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    As introduced H.R. 2869 incorporated H.R. 1831, the Small 
Business Protection Liability Act as Title I of the bill, and 
S. 350, the Brownfields Revitalization and Environmental 
Restoration Act, as Title II of the bill with technical 
changes.
    On December 20, 2001, H.R. 2869, with modifications, was 
considered in the House under suspension of the rules, and 
passed the House, as amended, by voice vote.
    On December 20, 2001, H.R. 2869 passed the Senate by 
unanimous consent without amendment and was cleared for the 
White House.
    H.R. 2869 was presented to the President on January 7, 
2001, and was signed by the President on January 11, 2002 
(Public Law 107-118).

                       FARM SECURITY ACT OF 2001


                Public Law 107-171 (H.R. 2646, S. 1731)


                       (Environmental Provisions)

    To provide for the continuation of agricultural programs 
through fiscal year 2007, and for other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 2636 and S. 1731 contained environmental provisions 
under the jurisdiction of the Energy and Commerce Committee. 
Section 648 of S. 1731, established SEARCH grants for rural 
communities. These grants, administered by USDA, in cooperation 
with EPA, would provide $1 million to each state, $51 million 
total, for grants to assist communities with less than 2,500 
people comply with environmental regulations.
    In addition, section 213 of S. 1731 amended and expanded 
the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQUIP). This 
program authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to provide 
technical assistance, cost-share payments, incentive payments 
and education to agriculture producers for several purposes 
related to compliance with Federal environmental statutes.

Legislative History

    Mr. Combest introduced H.R. 2646 on July 26, 2001, and the 
Committee on Agriculture favorably ordered the bill reported to 
the House, as amended, on July 27, 2001. On August 2, 2001, the 
Committee on Agriculture reported H.R. 2646 to the House (H. 
Rpt. 107-191, Part I). On August 31, 2001, the Committee on 
Agriculture filed a supplemental report to the House (H. Rpt. 
107-191, Part II).
    On August 2, 2001, H.R. 2646 was referred sequentially to 
the House Committee on International Relations for a period 
ending not later than September 7, 2001 for consideration of 
such provisions of the bill and amendment as fall within the 
jurisdiction of that committee pursuant to clause 1(j), rule X.
    The Committee on International Relations ordered the bill 
reported to the House, as amended on September 6, 2001, and was 
granted an extension for further consideration ending not later 
than September 10, 2001. On September 10, 2001, the Committee 
on International Relations reported H.R. 2646 to the House (H. 
Rpt. 107-191, Part III).
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 
Agriculture exchanged correspondence on September 28, 2001 
concerning each Committee's jurisdictional prerogatives on 
section 762 of H.R. 2646.
    On October 3, 4, and 5, 2001, the House considered H.R. 
2646 pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 248. The House 
passed the bill, as amended, by a roll call vote of 291 yeas 
and 120 nays.
    On February 13, 2002, H.R. 2646 was considered in the 
Senate by unanimous consent, struck all after the Enacting 
Clause, and substituted the language of S. 1731, as amended. 
The Senate then passed H.R. 2646, as amended, by a record vote 
of 58 yeas and 40 nays. The Senate insisted on its amendment 
and requested a conference on February 13, 2002.
    On February 28, 2002, the House disagreed to the Senate 
amendment, and agreed to a conference requested by the Senate. 
The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on Energy 
and Commerce for consideration of matters contained in the 
Senate amendment and modifications committed to conference 
falling within the Committee's jurisdiction.
    The Committee on Conference met on April 9 and 10, 2002, 
and on May 1, 2002 the conference report was filed. The House 
considered and agreed to the conference report, pursuant to H. 
Res. 403, on May 1, 2001 by a roll call vote of 280 yeas and 
141 nays.
    The Senate considered the conference report on May 7 and 8, 
2002, and agreed to the conference report by a record vote of 
64 yeas and 35 nays on May 8, 2002.
    On May 10, 2002, H.R. 2646 was cleared for the White House 
and presented to the President. On May 13, 2002, the President 
signed H.R. 2646 (Public Law No: 107-171).

 NOTIFICATION AND FEDERAL EMPLOYEE ANTIDISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION 
                                  ACT


                 Public Law 107-174 (H.R. 169, S. 201)

    To require that Federal agencies be accountable for 
violations of anti-discrimination and whistleblower protection 
laws, and for other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 169 expresses the sense of Congress that Federal 
agencies: (1) should not retaliate for court judgments or 
settlements relating to discrimination and whistle blower laws 
by targeting the claimant or other employees with reductions in 
compensation, benefits, or workforce; (2) should not use a 
reduction in force or furloughs as means of funding a 
reimbursement under this Act; (3) should ensure that managers 
have adequate training in the management of a diverse workforce 
and in dispute resolution; (4) are expected to reimburse the 
General Fund of the Treasury within a reasonable time under 
this Act; and (5) may need to extend reimbursement over several 
years in order to avoid reductions in force, furloughs, 
reductions in compensation or benefits, or an adverse effect on 
the mission of the agency. In addition, H.R. 169 declares that: 
(1) the agency's mission and the security of employees who are 
blameless in a whistle blower incident should not be 
compromised; and (2) accountability in the enforcement of 
employee rights is not furthered by terminating the employment 
or benefits of other employees or if Federal agencies react by 
taking unfounded disciplinary actions against, or by violating 
the procedural rights of, managers who have been accused of 
discrimination.

Legislative History

    Mr. Sensenbrenner introduced H.R. 169 on January 3, 2001, 
and the bill was referred to the Committee on Government 
Reform, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and 
Commerce, Transportation and Infrastructure, and the Judiciary, 
for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in 
each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within 
the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On May 23, 2001, the Committee on the Judiciary ordered 
H.R. 169 reported to the House, as amended.
    The Committee on Judiciary reported the bill to the House, 
as amended, on June 14, 2001 (H. Rpt. 107-101, Part I).
    H.R. 169 was considered in the House under suspension of 
the rules on October 2, 2001, and passed the House by a roll 
call vote of 420 yeas and 0 nays.
    On October 3, 2001, H.R. 169 was received in the Senate, 
read twice, and referred to the Committee on Governmental 
Affairs. The Committee on Governmental Affairs reported H.R. 
169 to the Senate with a written report (107-143), as amended. 
The bill was placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under 
General Orders
    H.R. 169 passed the Senate, as amended, by unanimous 
consent on April 24, 2002, and a message on Senate action was 
sent to the House.
    On April 30, 2002, H.R. 169, as amended by the Senate, was 
considered in the House under suspension of the rules. The 
House passed H.R. 169 by a roll call vote of 412 yeas and 0 
nays. The bill was cleared for the White House.
    On May 7, 2002, H.R. 169 was presented to the President, 
and on May 15, 2002, the President signed the bill (Public Law 
107-174).

      PUBLIC HEALTH SECURITY AND BIOTERRORISM RESPONSE ACT OF 2001


                     Public Law 107-188 (H.R. 3448)


                       (Environmental Provisions)

    To improve the ability of the United States to prevent, 
prepare for, and respond to bioterrorism and other public 
health emergencies.

Summary

    Title IV of H.R. 3448 requires certain community water 
systems to conduct vulnerability assessments, submit such 
assessments to the EPA, and to prepare or revise emergency 
response plans. The Title authorizes $160 million in fiscal 
year 2002 and such sums as necessary in fiscal years 2003 
through 2005 for this purpose, and to address basic security 
enhancements of critical importance and significant threats to 
public health as well as other purposes. In addition, Title IV 
provides for a review of current and future methods to prevent, 
detect and respond to the intentional introduction of chemical, 
biological and radiological contaminants into community water 
systems and source water for community water systems. This 
review is to encompass methods and means to detect 
contaminants, to provide sufficient notice of contamination, to 
prevent the flow of contaminated drinking water, to negate or 
mitigate deleterious effects on public health, and to conduct 
biomedical research. The Title additionally provides for a 
review of methods and means by which terrorists or other 
individuals or groups could disrupt the supply of safe drinking 
water or render a public water system significantly less safe 
for human consumption. Finally, Title IV requires that reviews 
include methods and means by which information systems, 
including process controls, supervisory control and data 
acquisition and cyber systems could be disrupted by terrorists 
or other groups and that reviews reflect the needs of various 
community water system sizes and geographical locations, the 
vulnerability of regions or service areas, including the 
National Capitol area, and that the Administrator of EPA 
disseminate certain information through the Information Sharing 
and Analysis Center. For these efforts, the Title provides 
authorization for $15 million in fiscal year 2002 and such sums 
as may be necessary in fiscal years 2003 through 2005. The 
Title also increases the criminal and civil penalties for 
tampering with a public water system and authorizes $35 million 
in fiscal year 2002--and such sums as may be necessary 
thereafter--to assist publicly owned water systems' efforts to 
respond to or alleviate emergencies.

Legislative History

    H.R. 3448 was introduced on December 11, 2001 by Mr. Tauzin 
and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On December 12, 2001, H.R. 3448 was considered in the House 
under suspension of the Rules and passed the House by a roll 
call vote of 418 yeas and 2 nays.
    H.R. 3448 was received in the Senate and read twice on 
December 18, 2001. The bill passed the Senate, amended, by 
unanimous consent on December 20, 2001. The Senate insisted 
upon its amendment, asked for a conference, and appointed 
conferees.
    On February 28, 2002, the House disagreed to the Senate 
amendment, agreed to go to conference, and appointed conferees
    The conference report was filed on May 21, 2002 (H. Rpt. 
107-481), and pursuant to H. Res. 427, the conference report 
was considered in the House on May 22, 2002. The conference 
report passed the House by a roll call vote of 425 yeas and 1 
nay.
    On May 23, 2002, the conference report was considered in 
the Senate and agreed to by a record vote of 98 yeas and 0 
nays, and cleared for the White House.
    S. Con. Res. 117 passed the Senate on May 23, 2002 by 
unanimous consent. The bill was received in the House and held 
at the desk on May 23, 2002. On June 4, 2002, S. Con. Res. 117 
passed the House by unanimous consent. S. Con. Res. 117 
provided for corrections in the enrolled version of H.R. 3448.
    H.R. 3448 was presented to the President on June 7, 2002, 
and was signed by the President on June 12, 2002 (Public Law 
107-188).

      DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003


                Public Law 107-314 (H.R. 4546, S. 2514)


                       (Environmental Provisions)

    To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2003 for 
military activities of the Department of Defense, for military 
construction, and for defense activities of the Department of 
Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year 
for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 4546 and S. 2514 contained provisions related to the 
Department of Defense (DOD) response actions and 
responsibilities under the Comprehensive Environmental 
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980. In 
particular, H.R. 4546 and S. 2514 streamlined the environmental 
response reporting requirements, in section 2701 of Title 10 of 
the United States Code, for the Defense environmental 
restoration program for DOD facilities. In addition, an 
environmental restoration projects manager was installed as the 
single point of contact in the DOD for policy and budgeting 
issues involving the characterization, remediation, and 
management of explosive and related risks with respect to 
unexploded ordnance, discarded military munitions, and 
munitions constituents at defense sites that pose a threat to 
human health or safety.
    Contained in neither H.R. 4546 nor S. 2514, but inserted in 
conference, was the establishment of Mountain Longleaf National 
Wildlife Refuge in the State of Alabama due to the transfer of 
property at Fort McClellan, Alabama, to the Department of the 
Interior. The transfer maintained all existing obligations 
under Superfund and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 
(RCRA).

Legislative History

    Mr. Stump introduced H.R. 4546 on April 23, 2002, and the 
bill was referred to the Committee on Armed Services. On May 1, 
2002, the Committee on Armed Services met in open markup 
session and ordered H.R. 4546 reported to the House, as 
amended, by a roll call vote of 57 yeas and 1 nay.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 
Armed Services exchanged correspondence on May 2, 2002 
concerning each Committee's jurisdictional prerogatives of H.R. 
4546.
    On May 3, 2002, the Committee on Armed Services reported 
the bill to the House (H. Rpt. 107-436), and on May 6, 2002 the 
Committee filed a supplemental report (H. Rpt. 107-436, Part 
II).
    Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 415, the House 
considered H.R. 4546 on May 9 and 10, 2002. On May 10, 2002, 
the House passed the bill by a roll call vote of 359 yeas and 
58 nays.
    On May 14, 2002, H.R. 4546 was received in the Senate, an 
on May 16, 2002 the bill was read twice and placed on the 
Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders.
    On June 27, 2002, the Senate called up H.R. 4546, struck 
all after the enacting clause, inserting its own version of 
this legislation, S. 2514, and passed it on June 27, 2002 by 
unanimous consent. In addition, the Senate insisted upon its 
amendment, requested a conference with the House, and appointed 
conferees.
    Pursuant to H. Res. 500, on July 25, 2002, the House agreed 
to an amendment to the Senate passed version of H.R. 4546 
without objection. The House insisted upon its amendment to the 
Senate amendment, and agreed to go to conference without 
objection. A motion to close portions of the conference was 
agreed to without objection.
    The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce for consideration of matters contained in 
the Senate bill and the House amendment and modifications 
committed to conference falling within the Committee's 
jurisdiction.
    On July 26, 2002, the Senate disagreed to the House 
amendment to the Senate amendment by unanimous consent, agreed 
to a conference, and appointed conferees.
    The Conference Committee met on September 5, 10, 11, and 
12, 2002. The conference report (H. Rpt. 107-172) was filed on 
November 12, 2002.
    The House agreed to the conference report by voice vote on 
November 12, 2002, and the Senate agreed to the conference 
report on November 13, 2002 by voice vote.
    On November 13, 2002, H.R. 4546 was cleared for the White 
House. The bill was presented to the President on November 13, 
2002, and on December 2, 2002, the bill was signed by the 
President (Public Law 107-314).

     MINERAL LEASING ACTIVITIES ON CERTAIN NAVAL OIL SHALE RESERVES


                     Public Law 107-345 (H.R. 2187)

    To amend title 10, United States Code, to make receipts 
collected from mineral leasing activities on certain naval oil 
shale reserves available to cover environmental restoration, 
waste management, and environmental compliance costs incurred 
by the United States with respect to the reserves.

Summary

    H.R. 2187 would amend current law to allow the Secretary of 
the Interior to spend certain mineral receipts from two naval 
oil shale reserves in Colorado to study the environmental 
cleanup costs at an oil shale retorting facility that was 
formerly operated by the federal government within one of those 
reserves. The bill would direct the Secretary to report the 
results of the study to the Congress, outline a preferred 
alternative for addressing environmental contamination at the 
site, and estimate the cost of that preferred alternative. 
Under H.R. 2187, if the estimated cost of the cleanup project 
is less than the mineral receipts available under the bill, the 
Secretary could spend the mineral receipts, without further 
appropriation, to implement the preferred alternative.

Legislative History

    H.R. 2187 was introduced on June 14, 2001, by Mr. Hefley 
and referred to the Committee on Resources and, in addition, to 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On June 26, 2001, the Resources Subcommittee on Energy and 
Mineral Resources held a hearing on the bill, and on June 27, 
2001, the Full Resources Committee ordered the bill reported, 
as amended.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 
Resources exchanged correspondence on July 26, 2001 concerning 
each Committee's jurisdictional prerogatives on H.R. 2187.
    On September 9, 2001, the Committee on Resources reported 
H.R. 2187 to the House (H. Rpt. 107-202, Part I). In addition, 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce was granted an extension 
for further consideration ending not later than September 10, 
2001, and was discharged from further consideration of the bill 
on September 10, 2001.
    H.R. 2187 was considered in the House under suspension of 
the rules on December 18, 2001, and passed the House, as 
amended by voice vote.
    On December 19, 2001, H.R. 2187 was received in the Senate, 
read twice, and referred to the Committee on Armed Services. On 
November 20, 2002, the Committee on Armed Services discharged 
by unanimous consent.
    H.R. 2187 passed the Senate by unanimous consent on 
November 20, 2002, and was cleared for the White House.
    H.R. 2187 was cleared for presentation to the President on 
November 20, 2002, and on December 17, 2002, the bill was 
signed by the President (Public Law 107-345).

       WATER INFRASTRUCTURE SECURITY AND RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT ACT


                              (H.R. 3178)

    To authorize the Environmental Protection Agency to provide 
funding to support research and development projects for the 
security of water infrastructure.

Summary

    H.R. 3178 would provide authorization for the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) to provide grants to organizations to 
review short-term and long-term technologies and related 
processes for the security of water supply systems.

Legislative History

    H.R. 3178 was introduced by Mr. Boehlert on October 13, 
2001, and was reported by the Full Science Committee on 
November 15, 2002, as amended, by voice vote.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 
Science exchanged correspondence on December 14, 2001 
concerning each Committee's jurisdictional prerogatives on H.R. 
3178.
    On December 18, 2001, H.R. 3178 was considered in the House 
under suspension of the rules, as amended, by voice vote.
    On December 19, 2002, the bill was received in the Senate, 
read twice, and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under 
General Orders.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 3178 in the 107th 
Congress.

                          Oversight Activities


               REMOVING BARRIERS TO BROWNFIELDS CLEANUPS

    On March 7, 2001, the Subcommittee on Environment and 
Hazardous Materials held an oversight hearing on the 
brownfields cleanup programs run through the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) and the state environmental protection 
agencies. The hearing focused on the roles, coordination, and 
needs of the EPA, states, and private groups to more swiftly 
and safely redevelop brownfield sites. Witnesses included the 
Administrator of the EPA, a representative for the National 
Governors' Association, state environmental officials, and an 
environmental advocacy group.

                DRINKING WATER NEEDS AND INFRASTRUCTURE

    On March 28, 2001, the Subcommittee on Environment and 
Hazardous Material held a hearing concerning current and future 
needs for investment in drinking water infrastructure. This 
hearing focused on the operation of the Drinking Water State 
Revolving Fund (DWSRF), established by the 1996 Safe Drinking 
Water Act Amendments. The hearing examined how grants made by 
the Environmental Protection Agency to states in order to 
capitalize their state revolving funds had been utilized by the 
states and disbursed to drinking water systems. The hearing 
also examined the findings of the February 2001 Drinking Water 
Infrastructure Needs Survey, which compiled a national estimate 
of the infrastructure, needed to meet the public health goals 
of the Safe Drinking Water Act. This report indicated that 
$102.5 billion is needed now to ensure the continued provision 
of safe drinking water and that there are $48.4 billion in 
future needs for a total of $150.9 billion over 20 years. The 
Subcommittee received testimony from the United States 
Environmental Protection Agency, the Congressional Budget 
Office and a panel of witnesses representing state officials, 
public and private drinking water providers and an 
environmental advocacy group. In addition to issues involving 
drinking water delivery systems, some members of the 
Subcommittee also posed questions to the witnesses concerning 
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's decision to review 
the drinking water standard for arsenic that was promulgated in 
the Federal Register on January 22, 2001.
    On April 11, 2002, the Subcommittee on Environment and 
Hazardous Material held a hearing to further examine issues 
concerning current and future needs for investment in drinking 
water infrastructure. This hearing examined estimates made by 
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding drinking 
water infrastructure need as well as an independent analysis of 
this need conducted by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). 
The CBO analysis was performed as part of a joint request by 
members of the Energy and Commerce and House Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee and covered both drinking water and 
wastewater infrastructure requirements. In addition, the 
Subcommittee received testimony from the General Accounting 
Office (GAO) concerning the precision of EPA drinking water 
estimates, states' use of drinking water revolving funds to aid 
disadvantaged communities, and the amount and type of drinking 
water infrastructure funding that EPA, other federal agencies 
and the states have made available to drinking water systems. 
The Subcommittee also received further testimony from a panel 
of witnesses representing state officials, public and private 
drinking water providers and an environmental advocacy group.

    INTERSTATE AND INTERNATIONAL SHIPMENTS OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE

    On August 1, 2001, the Subcommittee on Environment and 
Hazardous Materials held an oversight hearing on the status of 
state disposal programs for municipal solid waste and whether 
Federal law should be amended to give states and local 
governments new authorities to place limits on disposal of 
waste generated outside a states' borders. Witnesses included 
Members of Congress, the state environmental directors of 
several Midwestern states, the Deputy Mayor of New York City, 
local waste officials, and representatives of the waste hauling 
industry.

       IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FOOD QUALITY PROTECTION ACT OF 1996

    On March 25, 2002, the Subcommittee on Environment and 
Hazardous Materials held a field hearing to conduct oversight 
of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's implementation of 
the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996. The hearing focused on 
the efforts of the EPA to meet statutory deadlines in the Act, 
any cooperative efforts it was engaging in with the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture (USDA), and practical concerns from 
growers and environmental advocacy groups affected by the law. 
Witnesses included representatives from USDA, EPA, farmer and 
grower groups, and an environmental advocacy group.

                   MTBE CONTAMINATION IN GROUNDWATER

    On May 21, 2002, the Subcommittee on Environment and 
Hazardous Materials held an oversight hearing into the 
contamination of drinking water sources by methyl tertiary 
butyl ether (MTBE) and public responses to it. The hearing 
focused on the primary role of leaking underground storage 
tanks in contributing to MTBE contamination and states' 
financial needs to address the large problem. Witnesses 
included a representative from the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Association, General Accounting Office, and the U.S. 
Geological Survey. A second panel included a state hydrologist, 
MTBE scientists, and representatives from communities facing 
MTBE contamination of their drinking water sources.

                    THE EPA OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN

    On July 16, 2002, the Subcommittee on Environment and 
Hazardous Materials conducted a joint oversight hearing with 
the Subcommittee on Health. The focus on this hearing was the 
legality and effectiveness of moving the EPA Hazardous Waste 
Ombudsman from the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of 
Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) to its Office of 
Inspector General (OIG). The Subcommittee on Environment and 
Hazardous Materials had requested a study from the General 
Accounting Office on this matter. Witnesses included EPA's OIG 
and its Office of General Counsel. In addition, witnesses from 
the GAO testified on its report and the former Ombudsman and a 
citizen advocate spoke as well.

                             Hearings Held

    A Smarter Partnership: Removing Barriers to Brownfields 
Cleanups.--Oversight hearing on a Smarter Partnership: Removing 
Barriers to Brownfields Cleanups. Hearing held on March 7, 
2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-17.
    Drinking Water Needs and Infrastructure.--Oversight hearing 
on Drinking Water Needs and Infrastructure.--Hearing held on 
March 28, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-59.
    Brownfields Revitalization and Environmental Restoration.--
Hearing on S. 350, the Brownfields Revitalization and 
Environmental Restoration Act, H.R. --------, the Gillmor 
Discussion Draft, and H.R. --------, the Democratic Discussion 
Draft. Hearing held on June 28, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 
107-43.
    Perspectives on Interstate and International Shipments of 
Municipal Solid Waste.--Oversight hearing on Perspectives on 
Interstate and International Shipments of Municipal Solid 
Waste. Hearing held on August 1, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 
107-61.
    The Status of Implementation of the Food Quality Protection 
Act of 1996.--Oversight hearing on The Status of Implementation 
of the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996. Hearing held on 
March 25, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-97.
    Drinking Water Needs and Infrastructure.--Oversight hearing 
on Drinking Water Needs and Infrastructure. Hearing held on 
April 11, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-107.
    MTBE Contamination in Groundwater: Identifying and 
Addressing the Problem.--Oversight hearing on MTBE 
Contamination in Groundwater: Identifying and Addressing the 
Problem. Hearing held on May 21, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 
107-108.
    Recent Developments in the EPA Office of the Ombudsman.--
Joint oversight hearing with the Subcommittee on Health on 
Recent Developments in the EPA Office of the Ombudsman. Hearing 
on July 16, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-123.
      

                         Subcommittee on Health

                             (Ratio 18-15)

                  MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida, Chairman

JOE BARTON, Texas                    SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
FRED UPTON, Michigan                 HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania     TED STRICKLAND, Ohio
NATHAN DEAL, Georgia                 THOMAS M. BARRETT, Wisconsin
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina         LOIS CAPPS, California
ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky               RALPH M. HALL, Texas
GREG GANSKE, Iowa                    EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia             FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
  Vice Chairman                      PETER DEUTSCH, Florida
BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming               ANNA G. ESHOO, California
HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico           BART STUPAK, Michigan
JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona             ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
CHARLES ``CHIP'' PICKERING,          ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland
Mississippi                          GENE GREEN, Texas
ED BRYANT, Tennessee                 JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan,
ROBERT L. EHRLICH, Jr., Maryland       (Ex Officio)
STEVE BUYER, Indiana
JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania
W.J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana
  (Ex Officio)

Jurisdiction: Public health and quarantine; hospital construction; 
mental health and research; biomedical programs and health protection 
in general, including Medicaid and national health insurance; food and 
drugs; and, drug abuse.

                         Legislative Activities


      ANIMAL DISEASE RISK ASSESSMENT, PREVENTION, AND CONTROL ACT


                       Public Law 107-9 (S. 700)

    A bill to establish a Federal interagency task force for 
the purpose of coordinating actions to prevent the outbreak of 
bovine spongiform encephalopathy (commonly known as ``mad cow 
disease'') and foot-and-mouth disease in the United States.

Summary

    This legislation requires the Secretary of Agriculture to 
prepare and submit to the Committee on Agriculture of the House 
of Representatives and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, 
and Forestry of the Senate a preliminary report, followed by a 
final report, describing: (1) the economic impact associated 
with the potential introduction of bovine spongiform 
encephalopathy (BSE, or Mad-Cow Disease) and foot-and-mouth 
disease into the United States; (2) the potential risks to the 
public and animals of these two diseases; and (3) 
recommendations to protect the health of animal herds and 
individuals in the United States. Further, the report shall 
contain an assessment of risks and recommendations to reduce 
such risks, among other things. In preparing the preliminary 
and final reports required under the Act, the Secretary of 
Agriculture is to consult with the Secretary of Health and 
Human Services, among others.

Legislative History

    S. 700 was introduced in the Senate on April 4, 2001, by 
Senator Campbell, read the first time, and placed on the Senate 
Legislative Calendar under Read the First Tim. On April 5, 
2001, the bill was read the second time, placed on the Senate 
Legislative Calendar under General Orders, and passed the 
Senate with an amendment by unanimous consent.
    The bill was received in the House and held at the desk on 
April 24, 2001. The bill passed the House by unanimous consent 
on May 9, 2001, and was cleared for the White House.
    On May 17, 2001, S. 700 was presented to the President, and 
on May 24, 2001 was signed by the President (Public Law 107-9).

                         DRUG FREE COMMUNITIES


                     Public Law 107-82 (H.R. 2291)

    To extend the authorization of the Drug-Free Communities 
Support Program for an additional 5 years, to authorize a 
National Community Anti-drug Coalition Institute, and for other 
purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 2291 establishes a program to support and encourage 
local communities that first demonstrate a comprehensive, long-
term commitment to reduce substance abuse among youth. The 
Drug-Free Communities Act of 1997 (DFCA) did this primarily by 
authorizing grants of up to $100,000 to local community 
coalitions to assist them in their anti-drug efforts. H.R. 2291 
would expand that program and reauthorize it for an additional 
five years, through fiscal year 2007. The reauthorizing 
legislation includes provisions that would (1) annually 
increase the total funds authorized for the program from 
$50,600,000 in fiscal year 2002 to $99,000,000 in fiscal year 
2007; (2) increase the percentage of the total funds authorized 
available for administrative costs from the 3 percent allowed 
under current law to 6 percent; (3) instruct the Director of 
the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) to take 
steps to ensure that there is no bureaucratic duplication of 
effort among the various entities charged with administering 
the program and assisting coalitions; (4) allow coalitions to 
re-apply for grants even after five years, but only with an 
increased matching requirement; (5) create a new class of 
grants that help mature coalitions ``mentor'' newly-formed 
coalitions; (6) instruct the Director to give priority for all 
grants to coalitions that propose to assist economically 
disadvantaged communities; (7) help coalitions serving Native 
American communities to meet their private fundraising 
``matching requirement'' under existing law by allowing them to 
count Federal funds allocated to tribal government agencies as 
non-Federal funds raised; and, (8) establish a National 
Community Anti-drug Coalition Institute.

Legislative History

    H.R. 2291 was introduced by Mr. Portman on June 21, 2001, 
and was referred to the Committee on Government Reform, and in 
addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period 
to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On July 25, 2001, the Committee on Government Reform met in 
open markup session to consider H.R. 2291 and ordered the bill 
favorably reported, as amended. The Committee on Government 
Reform ordered H.R. 2291 reported to the House on July 30, 2001 
(H. Rpt. 107-175, Part I).
    On July 30, 2001, the Committee on Energy and Commerce was 
granted an extension for further consideration. That same day, 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce discharged the bill.
    On September 5, 2001, H.R. 2291, as amended, passed the 
House by a roll call vote of 402 yeas and 1 nay.
    H.R. 2291 was received by the Senate on September 6, 2001. 
On September 13, 2001, the bill was read the first time and 
placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First 
Time. The bill was read the second time and placed on the 
Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders on September 
14, 2001.
    The Senate approved the bill by unanimous consent on 
November 29, 2001, clearing the bill for the White House.
    H.R. 2291 was presented to the President on December 6, 
2001 and was signed by the President on December 14, 2001 
(Public Law 107-82).

    DUCHENNE MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY CHILDHOOD ASSISTANCE, RESEARCH AND 
                      EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 2001


                  Public Law 107-84 (H.R. 717, S. 805)

    To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for 
research with respect to various forms of muscular dystrophy, 
including Duchenne, Becker, limb girdle, congenital, 
facioscapulohumeral, myotonic, oculopharyngeal, distal, and 
Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophies.

Summary

    H.R. 717 allows the Director of the National Institutes of 
Health (NIH), in coordination with the Directors of the 
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, the 
National Institute of Arthritis, and the National Institute of 
Child Health and Human Development to expand programs with 
respect to activities concerning Duchenne. The legislation also 
creates Centers of Excellence for Duchenne, which shall conduct 
basic and clinical research into Duchenne and various other 
muscular dystrophies.

Legislative History

    H.R. 717 was introduced in the House by Mr. Wicker and 90 
cosponsors on February 14, 2001, and referred to the Committee 
on Energy and Commerce
    The Subcommittee on Health held a legislative hearing on 
June 27, 2001 on H.R. 717. The hearing examined ways to advance 
the health of the American people. The Subcommittee heard 
testimony on the bill from an association dealing with muscular 
dystrophy and a parent of a child with muscular dystrophy.
    On July 11, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health met in open 
markup session and approved H.R. 717 for Full Committee 
consideration, as amended, by voice vote. The Full Committee 
met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 717 favorably 
reported to the House, as amended, by unanimous consent, on 
July 18, 2001. The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported 
H.R. 717 to the House on September 5, 2001 (H. Rpt. 107-195).
    The House considered H.R. 717 under suspension of the rules 
on September 24, 2001, and passed the bill by a roll call vote 
of 383 yeas and 0 nays. F
    On September 25, 2001, the bill was received in the Senate, 
read twice, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, 
Labor, and Pensions.
    The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 
ordered H.R. 717 to be favorably reported with an amendment on 
October 16, 2001. The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 
and Pensions reported H.R. 717 with an amendment to the Senate, 
without written report.
    On November 15, 2002, the Senate passed H.R. 717 with an 
amendment by unanimous consent.
    On November 29, 2001, the House agreed to the Senate 
amendment by unanimous consent and the bill was cleared for the 
White House.
    H.R. 717 was presented to the President on December 6, 
2001, and was signed by the President on December 18, 2001 
(Public Law 107-84).

              ADMINISTRATIVE SIMPLIFICATION COMPLIANCE ACT


                     Public Law 107-105 (H.R. 3323)

    To ensure that covered entities comply with the standards 
for electronic health care transactions and code sets adopted 
under part C of title XI of the Social Security Act, and for 
other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 3323 extends by one year the deadlines for compliance 
by health care providers, health plans other than small health 
plans, and health care clearinghouses with the standards for 
electronic health care transactions and code sets if, before 
the current deadline, such entities submit to the Secretary of 
Health and Human Services a plan for compliance with such 
standards. In addition the bill directs the Secretary to 
furnish the National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics 
with a sample of such plans for analysis for reports containing 
effective solutions to compliance problems identified in the 
plans; provides for excluding covered entities from 
participation in Medicare for noncompliance. The bill also 
requires the electronic submission of Medicare claims except in 
certain circumstances; and clarifies administrative 
simplification requirements for Medicare+Choice organizations.

Legislative History

    H.R. 3323 was introduced in the House by Mr. Hobson on 
November 16, 2001, and was Referred to the Committee on Energy 
and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and 
Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as 
fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On December 4, 2001, the bill was considered under 
suspension of the rules, and was passed by the House on a vote 
of 410 yeas and 0 nays.
    On December 5, 2001, H.R. 3323 was received in the Senate, 
read twice, and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under 
General Orders. The bill passed the Senate on December 12, 2001 
without amendment by unanimous consent and was cleared for the 
White House.
    H.R. 3323 was presented to the President on December 18, 
2001, and was signed by the President on December 27, 2001 
(Public Law 107-105).

                 BEST PHARMACEUTICALS FOR CHILDREN ACT


                Public Law 107-109 (H.R. 2887, S. 1789)

    To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to 
improve the safety and efficacy of pharmaceuticals for 
children.

Summary

    P.L. 107-109 reauthorizes the ``pediatric exclusivity'' 
provision of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act for an 
additional five years for drugs that are frequently used in 
children, but for which no pediatric studies have been 
conducted, for an additional six months of Food and Drug 
Administration (FDA)-granted exclusivity when the FDA requests 
that the drug's manufacturer conduct such testing, and the 
manufacturer performs such tests. The law also establishes a 
public fund to pay for pediatric testing of off-patent drugs 
and on-patent drugs for which the manufacturer decides not to 
conduct the pediatric testing requested by FDA. Further, the 
law creates a private fund to conduct pediatric testing within 
the already-existing National Institutes of Health Foundation.

Legislative History

    H.R. 2887 was introduced by Mr. Greenwood and 22 cosponsors 
on September 13, 2001, and was referred to the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce.
    The Subcommittee on Health approved H.R. 2887, as amended, 
for Full Committee Consideration by a vote of 24 yeas and 5 
nays on October 5, 2001. The Full Committee met in open markup 
session on October 11, 2001, and ordered H.R. 2887 reported to 
the House, as amended, by a roll call vote of 41 yeas and 6 
nays. The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 2887 
to the House on November 9, 2001 (H. Rpt. 107-277).
    H.R. 2887 passed the House under suspension of the rules on 
November 15, 2001 by a roll call vote of 338 yeas and 86 nays. 
The bill was received in the Senate, read twice, and placed on 
the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders on 
November 16, 2001.
    Upon conclusion of negotiations with the Senate, a new bill 
S. 1789 was introduced by Senator Dodd on December 8, 2001. 
Upon introduction, the bill was read the first time and 
referred to the Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the 
First Time. On December 10, 2001, the bill was read the second 
time and referred to the Senate Legislative Calendar under 
General Orders. S. 1789 passed by the Senate by unanimous 
consent on December 12, 2001.
    The bill was received in the House and held at the desk on 
December 12, 2001. S. 1789 passed the House under suspension by 
voice vote of the rules on December 18, 2001, clearing the bill 
for the White House.
    S. 1789 was presented to the President on January 3, 2002, 
and was signed by the President on January 4, 2002 (Public Law 
107-109).

    NATIVE AMERICAN BREAST AND CERVICAL CANCER TREATMENT TECHNICAL 
                             AMENDMENT ACT


                Public Law 107-121 (H.R. 1383, S. 1741)

    To amend the Social Security Act to clarify that Indian 
women with breast or cervical cancer are included in the 
optional Medicaid eligibility category.

Summary

    This legislation amends title XIX of the Social Security 
Act to clarify that Indian women with breast or cervical cancer 
who are eligible for health services under an Indian Health 
Service or tribal organization medical care program, are 
included in the optional Medicaid eligibility category of 
breast or cervical cancer patients added by the Breast and 
Cervical Cancer Prevention and Treatment Act of 2000.

Legislative History

    On April 4, 2001, Mr. Udall of New Mexico introduced H.R. 
1383. On November 28, 2001, the companion bill, S. 1741 was 
introduced in the Senate by Senator Bingaman. The bill was read 
twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without 
amendment by unanimous consent on the same day.
    The bill was received in the House and held at the desk on 
November 29, 2001.
    On December 20, 2001, S. 1741 passed the House under 
suspension of the rules by a voice vote, clearing the measure 
for the White House.
    The bill was presented to the President on January 3, 2002, 
and on January 15, 2002, S. 1741 was signed by the President 
(Public Law 107-121).

                 FARM SECURITY AND RURAL INVESTMENT ACT


                Public Law 107-171 (H.R. 2646, S. 1731)


                          (Health Provisions)

    To provide for the continuation of agricultural programs 
through fiscal year 2007, and for other purposes.

Summary

    The Act establishes labeling requirements for the terms 
``catfish'' and ``ginseng'', and provides that failure to 
comply with the labeling requirements is considered misbranding 
under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. In addition, 
the Act amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to 
allow foods that have been subjected to a safe process or 
treatment which is reasonably certain to achieve the same level 
of destruction or elimination of the most resistant 
microorganisms as pasteurization, to be labeled as 
``pasteurized.'' Further, the law requires the Secretary of 
Health and Human Services to publish a final rule to revise the 
current regulation governing the labeling of foods that have 
been treated to reduce pest infestation or pathogens by 
treatment by irradiation using radioactive isotope, electronic 
beam, or x-ray.

Legislative History

    H.R. 2646 was introduced by Mr. Combest on July 26, 2001, 
and the Committee on Agriculture favorably ordered the bill 
reported to the House, as amended, on July 27, 2001. On August 
2, 2001, the Committee on Agriculture reported H.R. 2646 to the 
House (H. Rpt. 107-191, Part I). On August 31, 2001, the 
Committee on Agriculture filed a supplemental report to the 
House (H. Rpt. 107-191, Part II).
    On August 2, 2001, H.R. 2646 was referred sequentially to 
the House Committee on International Relations for a period 
ending not later than September 7, 2001 for consideration of 
such provisions of the bill and amendment as fall within the 
jurisdiction of that committee pursuant to clause 1(j), rule X.
    The Committee on International Relations ordered the bill 
reported to the House, as amended on September 6, 2001, and was 
granted an extension for further consideration ending not later 
than September 10, 2001. On September 10, 2001, the Committee 
on International Relations reported H.R. 2646 to the House (H. 
Rpt. 107-191, Part III).
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 
Agriculture exchanged correspondence on September 28, 2001 
concerning each Committee's jurisdictional prerogatives on H.R. 
2646.
    On October 3, 4, and 5, 2001, the House considered H.R. 
2646 pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 248. The House 
passed the bill, as amended, by a roll call vote of 291 yeas 
and 120 nays.
    On February 13, 2002, H.R. 2646 was considered in the 
Senate by unanimous consent, struck all after the Enacting 
Clause, and substituted the language of S. 1731, as amended. 
The Senate then passed H.R. 2646, as amended, by a record vote 
of 58 yeas and 40 nays. The Senate insisted on its amendment 
and requested a conference on February 13, 2002.
    On February 28, 2002, the House disagreed to the Senate 
amendment, and agreed to a conference requested by the Senate. 
The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on Energy 
and Commerce for consideration of matters contained in the 
Senate amendment and modifications committed to conference 
falling within the Committee's jurisdiction.
    The Committee on Conference met on April 9 and 10, 2002, 
and on May 1, 2002 the conference report was filed. The House 
considered and agreed to the conference report, pursuant to H. 
Res. 403, on May 1, 2001 by a roll call vote of 280 yeas and 
141 nays.
    The Senate considered the conference report on May 7 and 8, 
2002, and agreed to the conference report by a record vote of 
64 yeas and 35 nays on May 8, 2002.
    On May 10, 2002, H.R. 2646 was cleared for the White House 
and presented to the President. On May 13, 2002, the President 
signed H.R. 2646 (Public Law No: 107-171).

   HEMATOLOGICAL CANCER RESEARCH INVESTMENT AND EDUCATION ACT OF 2001


                Public Law 107-172 (H.R. 2629, S. 1094)

    To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for 
research, information, and education with respect to blood 
cancer.

Summary

    S. 1094 amends Part C of title IV of the Public Health 
Service Act to create the Joe Moakley Research Excellence 
Program and the Geraldine Ferraro Cancer Education Program. 
Under the Joe Moakley Research Excellence Program, the Director 
of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is directed to 
expand and intensify programs to support and conduct research 
with respect to blood cancer. Under the Geraldine Ferraro 
Cancer Education program the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services and the Director of NIH are directed to establish a 
program to provide information and education to patients and 
the public about blood cancer.

Legislative History

    S. 1094 was introduced in the Senate by Senator Hutchison 
and six cosponsors on June 22, 2001. The bill was read twice 
and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and 
Pensions.
    On November 1, 2001, the Committee on Health, Education, 
Labor and Pensions ordered S. 1094 to be favorably reported 
with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. The Committee 
on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions reported to the 
Senate with an amendment in the nature of a substitute, without 
a written report on November 8, 2001. S. 1094 was placed on the 
Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders.
    On November 16, 2001, the Committee substitute of S. 1094 
was agreed to by unanimous consent.
    On November 19, 2001, S. 1094 was received in the House and 
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On April 30, 2002, the House passed S. 1094 under 
suspension of the rules, by a voice vote, clearing the measure 
for the White House.
    S. 1094 was presented to President to the President on May 
6. 2002, and on May 14, 2002, the President signed S. 1094 
(Public Law 107-172).

      PUBLIC HEALTH SECURITY AND BIOTERRORISM RESPONSE ACT OF 2001


          Public Law 107-188 (H.R. 3016, H.R. 3160, H.R. 3448)


                          (Health Provisions)

    To improve the ability of the United States to prevent, 
prepare for, and respond to bioterrorism and other public 
health emergencies.

Summary

    This comprehensive legislation amends the Public Health 
Service Act and directs the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services to further develop and implement a coordinated 
strategy--building upon core public health capabilities--to 
carry out health-related activities to prepare for and respond 
effectively to bioterrorism and other public health 
emergencies.
    P.L. 107-188 also amends the Antiterrorism and Effective 
Death Penalty Act with respect to the regulation of dangerous 
biological agents and toxins, known as ``select agents.'' The 
new provisions require that all possessors of select agents 
(unless specifically exempt) register with the Secretary of 
Health and Human Services, and be subject to enhanced security 
requirements to reduce the threat of misuse of such agents by 
terrorists or other criminals. The new law also requires that 
the Secretary establish a national database to track the 
location of all such agents, and imposes enhanced criminal and 
civil penalties for any violations of these provisions. The law 
creates a similar regulatory regime under the auspices of the 
Department of Agriculture for agents or toxins that pose a 
severe threat to animal or plant safety.
    In addition, P.L. 107-188 provides the Secretary of Health 
and Human Services additional resources and authorities to 
protect the American people from unsafe food and drugs. The 
bill authorizes $100 million in fiscal year 2002, and such sums 
as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2006 
to increase inspections for the detection of adulterated 
imported foods; to improve information management systems used 
to track imported foods; and to develop tests to rapidly detect 
the intentional adulteration of food. The law further provides 
for a reauthorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act 
through 2007. In fiscal year 2007, the Secretary is authorized 
to collect $259 million in user fees from drug and biologic 
manufacturers, thus ensuring sound financial footing at the 
FDA.

Legislative History

    On October 3, 2001, the Full Committee on Energy and 
Commerce met in open markup session and favorably ordered 
reported a Committee Print to amend the Antiterrorism and 
Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 with respect to the 
responsibilities of the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
regarding biological agents and toxins, and to amend title 18, 
United States Code, with respect to such agents and toxins, as 
amended, by voice vote, a quorum being present. The Committee 
also agreed to a unanimous consent request by Chairman Tauzin 
to incorporate the Committee Print, along with two other 
Committee Prints, into a bill to be introduced, H.R. 3016, and 
to allow for the Committee to file a report on the introduced 
bill.
    On October 3, 2001, Mr. Tauzin introduced H.R. 3016, which 
was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in 
addition to the Committee on the Judiciary for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 3016 to 
the House on October 9, 2001 (H. Rpt. 107-231, Part I).
    The Committee on the Judiciary was granted an extension for 
further consideration of the bill for a period ending not later 
than Oct. 16, 2001. Following an exchange of letters between 
the Chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the 
Chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary with respect to its 
jurisdictional prerogatives on this or similar legislation, the 
Committee on the Judiciary was discharged from further 
consideration of H.R. 3016 on October 16, 2001.
    On November 6, 2001, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
filed a supplemental report to the House on H.R. 3016 (H. Rpt. 
107-231, Part I).
    No further action was taken on H.R. 3016 in the 107th 
Congress, but on October 23, 2001, Mr. Tauzin introduced H.R. 
3160 which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 
for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in 
each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within 
the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. H.R. 3160 
contained provisions similar to those in H.R. 3016.
    H.R. 3160 passed the House under suspension of the rules on 
October 23, 2001 by a roll call vote of 419 yeas and 0 nays.
    On October 24, 2001, H.R. 3160 was received in the Senate 
and on December 20, 2001 the bill was referred to the Committee 
on the Judiciary.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 3160 in the 107th 
Congress, but H.R. 3448 was introduced on December 11, 2001 by 
Mr. Tauzin and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce. H.R. 3448 contained provisions similar to H.R. 3160.
    On December 12, 2001, H.R. 3448 was considered in the House 
under suspension of the Rules and passed the House by a roll 
call vote of 418 yeas and 2 nays.
    H.R. 3448 was received in the Senate and read twice on 
December 18, 2001. The bill passed the Senate, amended, by 
unanimous consent on December 20, 2001. The Senate insisted 
upon its amendment, asked for a conference, and appointed 
conferees.
    On February 28, 2002, the House disagreed to the Senate 
amendment, agreed to go to conference, and appointed conferees
    The conference report was filed on May 21, 2002 (H. Rpt. 
107-481), and pursuant to H. Res. 427, the conference report 
was considered in the House on May 22, 2002. The conference 
report passed the House by a roll call vote of 425 yeas and 1 
nay.
    On May 23, 2002, the conference report was considered in 
the Senate and agreed to by a record vote of 98 yeas and 0 
nays, and cleared for the White House.
    S. Con. Res. 117 passed the Senate on May 23, 2002 by 
unanimous consent. The bill was received in the House and held 
at the desk on May 23, 2002. On June 4, 2002, S. Con. Res. 117 
passed the House by unanimous consent. S. Con. Res. 117 
provided for corrections in the enrolled version of H.R. 3448.
    H.R. 3448 was presented to the President on June 7, 2002, 
and was signed by the President on June 12, 2002 (Public Law 
107-188).

      DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002


                Public Law 107-107 (H.R. 2586, S. 1438)


                          (Health Provisions)

    To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2002 for 
military activities of the Department of Defense, for military 
construction, and for defense activities of the Department of 
Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year 
for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.

Summary

    The Health Care Provisions of the legislation are outlined 
in Title VII and includes TRICARE Program improvements. The 
bill also amends Federal provisions establishing the Department 
of Defense Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund and 
orders further studies and reports on various issues relating 
to DOD health care programs.

Legislative History

    H.R. 2586 was introduced by Mr. Stump on July 23, 2001 and 
referred to the Committee on Armed Services. On August 1, 2002, 
the Committee on Armed Services met in open markup session and 
ordered H.R. 2586 reported, as amended.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 
Armed Services exchanged correspondence on September 4, 2001 
concerning each Committee's jurisdictional prerogatives of H.R. 
2586.
    Pursuant to a unanimous consent request, on September 4, 
2001, the House Armed Services Committee reported H.R. 2586 to 
the House (H. Rpt 107-194).
    H.R. 2586 was considered in the House pursuant to H. Res. 
246, and on September 25, 2001, the House passed the bill by a 
vote of 398 yeas and 17 nays.
    H.R. 2586 was received in the Senate on September 26, 2002, 
read twice, and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under 
General Orders. On June 18, 2002, the Senate indefinitely 
postponed consideration of H.R. 2586 by unanimous consent.
    The Senate passed S. 1438, which was introduced on 
September 19, 2001, by Senator Levin, on October 2, 2001 by a 
record vote of 99 yeas and 0 nays. The bill was received in the 
House on October 4, 2001 and held at the desk.
    On October 17, 2001, the House struck all after the 
enacting clause of S. 1438 and inserted in lieu thereof the 
provisions of H.R. 2586, and passed the bill without objection. 
The House insisted on its amendment and requested a conference 
with the Senate on October 17, 2001. A motion by Mr. Stump was 
agreed to by a roll call vote of 420 yeas and 0 nays to close 
portions of the conference.
    The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce for consideration of matters contained in 
the Senate bill and the House amendment and modifications 
committed to conference falling within the Committee's 
jurisdiction.
    The Senate disagreed to the House amendment and agreed to 
the House's request to go to conference on October 17, 2001 and 
appointed conferees.
    The Conference Committee met on October 31, 2001 and 
November 1, 2001. The conference report (H. Rpt. 107-333) was 
filed on December 12, 2001.
    Pursuant to H. Res. 316, on December 13, 2001, the House 
agreed to the conference report by a roll call vote of 382 yeas 
and 40 nays. The Senate agreed to the conference report as well 
on December 13, 2001 by a record vote of 96 yeas and 2 nays.
    H. Con. Res. 288 passed the House and the Senate on 
December 13, 2001, by unanimous consent to correct the 
enrollment of S. 1438.
    On December 13, 2001, S. 1438 was cleared for the White 
House. The bill was presented to the President on December 20, 
2001, and on December 28, 2001, the bill was signed by the 
President (Public Law 107-107).

                         NURSE REINVESTMENT ACT


                     Public Law 107-205 (H.R. 3487)

    To amend the Public Health Service Act with respect to 
health professions programs regarding the field of nursing.

Summary

    Title I amends the Public Health Service Act to direct the 
Secretary of Health and Human Services to promote the nursing 
profession through public service announcements. It also 
expands eligibility for the nursing loan repayment program to 
include service at any health care facility with a critical 
shortage of nurses, but restricts service to nonprofits after 
fiscal year 2007. It directs the Secretary to provide nursing 
scholarships in exchange for at least two years of nursing 
services at facilities with a critical shortage. It also 
requires detailed, annual reports to Congress on the loan and 
scholarship programs, including numbers, demographics, and 
default rates.
    Title II authorizes the Secretary to award grants or 
contracts to schools of nursing or health care facilities to 
expand nursing opportunities in education, through increased 
enrollment in four-year degree programs, internship and 
residency programs, or new technologies such as distance 
learning, and in practice, through care to underserved 
populations, care in non-institutional settings or organized 
health care systems, and through developing cultural 
competencies. Title II also makes career ladder programs and 
activities that enhance professional collaboration, 
communication, and decision-making eligible for a grant award. 
In addition, the title requires the Comptroller General to 
study and report to Congress within four years on: (1) national 
variations in nursing shortages; (2) any differences in nurse 
hiring practices between profit and nonprofit private entities 
because of the inclusion of for-profit private entities in the 
loan repayment program; and, (3) whether the scholarship 
program increased applications to nursing schools.

Legislative History

    H.R. 3487 was introduced in the House by Mr. Bilirakis and 
27 cosponsors on December 13, 2001. The bill was referred to 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On December 19, 2001, the bill was considered in the House 
under suspension of the rules. On December 20, 2001, the House 
passed H.R. 3487 by a voice vote.
    H.R. 3487 was received in the Senate, read the first time, 
and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First 
Time on December 20, 2001. The bill was read the second time 
and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders 
on January 23, 2002.
    On July 22, 2002, the Senate amended and passed H.R. 3487 
by unanimous consent. On July 22, 2002, the House considered 
H.R. 3487, as amended by the Senate, under suspension of the 
rules, and passed the bill by a voice vote.
    On July 22, 2002, H.R. 3487 was cleared for the White 
House. The bill was presented to the President on July 30, 
2002, and on August 1, 2002, the bill was signed by the 
President (Public Law 107-205).

                           TRADE ACT OF 2002


               Public Law 107-210 (H.R. 3005, H.R. 3009)


                          (Health Provisions)

    To extend trade authorities procedures with respect to 
reciprocal trade agreements.

Summary

    The Trade Act of 2002 sets forth the overall trade 
negotiating objectives for trade agreements. In addition, the 
legislation provides temporary assistance with health insurance 
for workers who lose their jobs due to new trade agreements. 
Section 201 of the Act provides a tax credit equal to 65 
percent of the cost of health insurance. The credit may be used 
to purchase qualified health insurance. Workers who have three 
months of prior creditable coverage must be offered coverage 
and may not be excluded from coverage based upon pre-existing 
conditions and must be offered premiums and coverage comparable 
to those similarly situated. Payment of the credit may also be 
provided in advance.
    Additionally, the Act establishes a program of grants for 
high-risk pools to qualifying States. It also authorizes States 
to use national emergency grants to help eligible individuals 
enroll in qualified health insurance coverage.

Legislative History

    Mr. Thomas introduced H.R. 3005 on October 3, 2001, and the 
bill was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in 
addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker.
    On October 9, 2001 the Committee on Ways and Means met in 
open mark-up session and ordered H.R. 3005 reported to the 
House, as amended, by a roll call vote of 26 yeas and 13 nays. 
On October 16, 2001, the Committee on Ways and Means reported 
the bill to the House (H. Rpt. 107-249, Part I).
    On October 16, 2001, the Committee on Rules was granted an 
extension for further consideration ending not later than 
October 17, 2001, and on October 17, 2001, the Committee on 
Rules was discharged from further consideration of H.R. 3005.
    Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 306, the House 
considered H.R. 3005 on December 6, 2001. The House passed the 
bill by a roll call vote of 215 yeas and 214 nays.
    On December 6, 2001, H.R. 3005 was received in the Senate, 
read twice, and referred to the Committee on Finance.
    On December 12, 2001, the Committee on Finance met in open 
mark-up session, and on December 18, 2001, ordered H.R. 3005 
favorably reported, as amended. On February 28, 2002, H.R. 3005 
was reported to the Senate by the Committee on Finance (No. 
107-139), and was placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar 
under General Orders.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 3005 in the 107th 
Congress.
    Mr. Crane introduced H.R. 3009 on October 3, 2001, and the 
bill was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means. On 
October 5, 2001, the Committee on Ways and Means met in open 
mark-up session and ordered H.R. 3009 reported to the House, as 
amended, by a voice vote.
    On November 14, 2001, the Committee on Ways and Means 
reported the bill to the House (H. Rpt. 107-290).
    Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 289, the House 
considered H.R. 3009 on November 16, 2001, and the bill passed 
by voice vote.
    On November 16, 2001, H.R. 3009 was received by the Senate, 
read twice, and referred to the Committee on Finance. On 
November 29, 2001, the Committee on Finance ordered H.R. 3009 
be favorably reported, as amended. The Committee on Finance 
reported H.R. 3009 to the Senate on December 14, 2001, with a 
written report (Senate Rpt. 107-139). H.R. 3009 was placed on 
the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders.
    The Senate began consideration of H.R. 3009 on May 2, 2002 
and concluded on May 23, 2002. The bill passed the Senate, as 
amended, by a recorded vote of 66 yeas and 30 nays.
    Pursuant to H. Res. 450, on June 26, 2002, the House agreed 
to Senate amendment with an amendment. The House agreed, 
without objection, to insist upon its amendment to the Senate 
amendment, and request a conference. The Speaker appointed 
conferees from the Committee on Energy and Commerce for 
consideration of sec. 603 of the Senate amendment, and 
modifications committed to conference.
    On July 12, 2002, the Senate disagreed to the House 
amendment to the Senate amendment, agreed to the request for a 
conference by Unanimous Consent, and appointed conferees.
    The conference report (H. Rpt. 107-624) was filed on July 
26, 2002.
    Pursuant to H. Res. 509, on July 27, 2002, the House passed 
the conference report by a roll call vote of 215 yeas and 212 
nays.
    On August 1, 2002, the Senate agreed to the conference 
report by a recorded vote of 64 yeas and 34 nays, and the bill 
was cleared for the White House.
    H.R. 3009 was presented to the President on August 2, 2002, 
and on August 6, 2002, the bill was signed by the President 
(Public Law 107-210).

               NATIONAL HANSEN'S DISEASE PROGRAMS CENTER


                     Public Law 107-220 (H.R. 2441)

    To rename the Gillis W. Long Hansen's Disease Center.

Summary

    H.R. 2441 changes the name of the Gillis W. Long Hansen's 
Disease Center to the National Hansen's Disease Programs 
Center.

Legislative History

    H.R. 2441 was introduced by Mr. Baker on July 10, 2001, and 
was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On July 11, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health met in open 
markup session and approved H.R. 2441 for Full Committee 
consideration by voice vote. The Full Committee ordered H.R. 
2441 reported to the House on July 19, 2001, by unanimous 
consent. The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 
2441 to the House (H. Rpt. 107-174) on July 30, 2001.
    H.R. 2441 was considered in the House under suspension of 
the rules on December 4, 2001, and passed the House by voice 
vote.
    The bill was received in the Senate on December 5, 2001, 
read twice, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, 
Labor, and Pensions. The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 
and Pensions discharged H.R. 2441 by unanimous consent on 
August 1, 2002.
    H.R. 2441 was approved by the Senate by unanimous consent 
on August 1, 2002.
    On August 1, 2002, H.R. 2441 was cleared for the White 
House. The bill was presented to the President on August 13, 
2002, and on August 21, 2002, the bill was signed by the 
President (Public Law 107-220).

             MEDICAL DEVICE USER FEE AND MODERNIZATION ACT


               Public Law 107-250 (H.R. 3580, H.R. 5651)

    To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to: (1) 
create a medical device user fee program: (2) enact needed 
regulatory reforms; and (3) revise the regulation of 
reprocessed medical devices.

Summary

    Title I of this legislation creates a user fee program for 
the review of medical devices. Under this user fee program, 
medical device manufacturers will pay a fee for every premarket 
application (PMA), PMA supplement, premarket report, or 
premarket notification submission (510(k)) submitted. With 
these fees, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will hire 
new reviewers and upgrade information technology in order to 
speed the review of medical devices.
    Because small device manufacturers may not be able to 
afford the full rate of the fees, the program establishes two 
fee rates. For manufacturers with revenues below $30 million, a 
lower tier of fees is established, and such manufacturers are 
exempted from paying a fee for their first PMA.
    Title II of the legislation enacts needed regulatory 
reforms, including the establishment of third-party 
inspections. Under the third-party inspection piece, 
manufacturers with good histories of compliance with good 
manufacturing practices will be eligible to select an FDA-
accredited third party to conduct the FDA biennial inspection 
for quality systems regulation. This will enable global device 
manufacturers to harmonize their different international 
inspectional requirements by hiring one third-party to conduct 
their multiple inspections.
    Further included in Title II is the creation of the Office 
of Combination Products within the FDA. This Office of 
Combination Products will oversee and coordinate the review of 
products with device, drug, and biological elements. Such 
combination products presently do not receive appropriate 
attention within the FDA. Also included in Title II are a one-
year extension of the third-party review program; electronic 
labeling reforms; elimination of the ``intended use'' sunset; 
and modular review.
    Title III of the legislation constructs a new regulatory 
regime for reprocessed single-use medical devices. This 
provision ensures that all devices, both new and reprocessed, 
conspicuously bear the name of the device manufacturer on the 
device itself when practicable. Further, the legislation 
ensures that all reprocessed single-use devices contain 
labeling indicating that the device has been reprocessed.
    Also, the legislation empowers the FDA to ask for 
validation data proving that a reprocessed single-use device 
subject to a 510(k) can be sterilized without affecting 
functionality, and it empowers FDA to consider which currently 
510(k)-exempt reprocessed devices should be subject to 510(k) 
requirements, including proof of sterility and functionality. 
Last, the legislation creates a regulatory pathway for approval 
of reprocessed class III devices, through the creation of a 
``Premarket Report,'' which largely tracks a PMA.

Legislative History

    H.R. 3580 was introduced by Representatives Greenwood and 
Eshoo on December 20, 2001. On October 2, 2002, the Committee 
on Energy and Commerce ordered H.R. 3580 reported to the House, 
as amended, by voice vote. The Committee on Energy and Commerce 
reported H.R. 3580 to the House on October 7, 2002 (H. Rpt. 
107-728).
    H.R. 3580 passed the House under suspension of the rules by 
a roll call vote of 406 yeas and 3 nays on October 9, 2002. On 
October 15, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce filed a 
supplemental report to H.R. 3580 (H. Rpt. 107-728, Part II).
    No further action was taken on H.R. 3580, but H.R. 5651 was 
introduced by Representatives Greenwood and Eshoo on October 
16, 2002. H.R. 5651 resulted from House/Senate negotiations on 
H.R. 3580.
    H.R. 5651 was considered in the House by unanimous consent 
on October 16, 2002, and passed the House without objection.
    On October 16, 2002, H.R. 5651 was received in the Senate 
and read twice. The bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent 
on October 17, 2002, clearing it for the White House. H.R. 5651 
was presented to and signed by the President on October 26, 
2002 (Public Law 107-250).

               HEALTH CARE SAFETY NET AMENDMENTS OF 2001


                Public Law 107-251 (H.R. 3450, S. 1533)

    An original bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to 
reauthorize and strengthen the health centers program and the 
National Health Service Corps, and to establish the Healthy 
Communities Access Program, which will help coordinate services 
for the uninsured and underinsured, and for other purposes.

Summary

    This legislation streamlines and consolidates the community 
health centers program to maximize efficiency and delivery of 
health care services. It authorizes the appropriation of $1.34 
billion for fiscal year 2002 and such sums as may be necessary 
for fiscal years 2003 through 2006 for Community Health 
Centers.
    Under this legislation, the Secretary will be authorized to 
make grants to a new category of networks (practice management 
networks) to help health centers to reduce costs, improve 
access to health care services, enhance the quality and 
coordination of health care services, or improve the health 
status of communities. This law also reauthorizes and 
streamlines the National Health Service Corps Program (NHSC) to 
provide for greater patient access to high quality health care 
in health professional shortage areas, where NHSC personnel are 
assigned. It authorizes the appropriations of $146 million for 
scholarship and loan forgiveness for fiscal year 2002 and $12 
million for grants to the states for loan repayment programs 
for fiscal year 2002 and such sums for fiscal years 2003 
through 2006.
    Finally, the law provides for a five-year authorization of 
the Community Access Program (CAP). CAP is designed to provide 
assistance to communities and consortia of health care 
providers to develop or strengthen health care delivery systems 
that coordinate health care services for individuals who are 
uninsured or underinsured. Both public and private entities are 
eligible grant recipients.

Legislative History

    H.R. 3450 was introduced by Mr. Bilirakis along with 27 
cosponsors on December 11, 2001. The bill was referred to the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On October 1, 2002, H.R. 3450 was considered in the House 
under suspension of the rules. H.R. 3450 passed the House by 
voice vote.
    The bill was received in the Senate, read twice, and placed 
on the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 3450 in the 107th 
Congress, but companion legislation, S. 1533, was introduced in 
the Senate by Senator Kennedy on October 11, 2001, following 
the markup of an original measure. The measure was reported 
from the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 
with a written report (Senate Rpt. 107-83).
    On April 16, 2002, S. 1533 passed the Senate, with an 
amendment, by unanimous consent.
    The bill was received in the House and held at the desk on 
April 18, 2002. On October 16, 2002, the S. 1533 was considered 
in the House under suspension of the rules. The bill passed the 
House, as amended by a roll call vote of 392 yeas and 5 nays.
    On October 17, 2002, the Senate received S. 1533, as 
amended by the House. The Senate agreed to the bill as amended 
by the House by unanimous consent.
    S. 1533 was cleared for the White House on October 17, 
2002. The bill was presented to the President on October 23, 
2002, and on October 26, 2002, S. 1533 was signed by the 
President (Public Law 107-251).

           BENIGN BRAIN TUMOR CANCER REGISTRIES AMENDMENT ACT


                 Public Law 107-260 (H.R. 239, S. 2558)

    To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for the 
collection of data on benign brain-related tumors through the 
national program of cancer registries.

Summary

    H.R. 239 amends section 399B of the Public Health Service 
Act to ensure that data regarding benign brain-related tumors 
are collected in state cancer registries through the national 
program of cancer registries. Brain-related tumors are primary 
tumors listed in the International Classification of Diseases 
for Oncology (ICD-O) that occur in the brain, meninges, spinal 
cord, cauda equina, a cranial nerve or nerves, any other part 
of the central nervous system, pituitary gland, pineal gland or 
craniopharyngeal duct.

Legislative History

    H.R. 239 was introduced in the House by Representative Lee 
and seven cosponsors on January 20, 2001. The bill was referred 
to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On November 15, 2001, 
the Subcommittee on Health held a hearing on H.R. 239. The 
Subcommittee received testimony from a Board Member of the 
Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States and the North 
American Brain Tumor Coalition.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 239 in the 107th 
Congress, but on May 23, 2002, S. 2558 was introduced in the 
Senate by Senator Reed and the bill was referred to the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
    On June 19, 2002, the Committee on Health, Education, Labor 
and Pensions ordered S. 2558 to be favorably reported, with an 
amendment in the nature of a substitute. On August 1, 2002, the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions discharged 
S. 2558 by unanimous consent. S. 2558 passed the Senate without 
amendment by unanimous consent that same day.
    On September 4, 2002, S. 2558 was received by the House and 
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On October 
10, 2002, the Committee discharged S. 2558 and, without 
objection, the House passed S. 2558 by unanimous consent.
    S. 2558 was cleared for the White House on October 10, 
2002. The bill was presented to the President on October 17, 
2002, and on October 29, 2002, S. 2558 was signed by the 
President (Public Law 107-260).

  21ST CENTURY DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE APPROPRIATIONS AUTHORIZATION ACT


                Public Law 107-273 (H.R. 2215, S. 1094)


                          (Health Provisions)

    To authorize the Department of Justice, and other programs.

Summary

    H.R. 2215 reauthorizes the Department of Justice. Included 
in this legislation are provisions to address substance abuse 
programs and research. The legislation instructs the President, 
in consultation with the Attorney General, the Secretary of 
Health and Human Services, the Secretary of Education, and 
other appropriate Federal officers, to review all federal drug 
treatment, prevention, education, and research programs and 
recommend to Congress ways in which those programs could be 
streamlined. The legislation also authorizes the expansion of 
current and ongoing interdisciplinary research and clinical 
trials with treatment centers of the National Drug Abuse 
Treatment Clinical Trials Network relating to drug abuse and 
addiction.

Legislative History

    Mr. Sensenbrenner introduced H.R. 2215 on June 19, 2001, 
and the bill was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. On 
June 20, 2001 the Committee on the Judiciary met in open markup 
session and ordered H.R. 2215 reported to the House, as 
amended, by voice vote. On July 10, 2001, the Committee on the 
Judiciary reported the bill to the House (H. Rpt. 107-125).
    H.R. 2215 was considered in the House under suspension of 
the rules on July 23, 2001, and passed by voice vote.
    On July 24, 2001, H.R. 2215 was received in the Senate and 
read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. The 
Committee on the Judiciary ordered the bill to be reported with 
an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably and placed 
on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders on October 
18, 2001
    On December 20, 2001, the Senate called up H.R. 2215, and 
passed it with amendment by unanimous consent. In addition, the 
Senate insisted upon its amendments, requested a conference 
with the House, and appointed conferees.
    On February 6, 2002, the House, by unanimous consent, 
disagreed to the Senate amendment, and without objection, 
agreed to go to a conference.
    The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on 
Energy and Conference for consideration of matters contained 
within the House bill and the Senate amendment, and 
modifications committed to conference falling within the 
Committee's jurisdiction.
    The conference report (H. Rpt. 107-685) was filed on 
September 25, 2002.
    On September 26, 2002, the House agreed to the conference 
report by a recorded vote of 400 yeas and 4 Nays. The Senate 
agreed to conference report by unanimous consent on October 3, 
2002, clearing the bill for the White House.
    H.R. 2215 was presented to the President on October 23, 
2002 and was signed by the President on November 2, 2002 
(Public Law No: 107-273).

                       RARE DISEASES ACT OF 2002


                Public Law 107-280 (H.R. 4013, S. 1379)

    To amend the Public Health Service Act to establish an 
Office of Rare Diseases at the national Institutes of Health, 
and for other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 4013 establishes within the Office of the Director of 
the National Institutes of Health an office to be known as the 
Office of Rare Diseases, to be headed by a Director appointed 
by the Director of NIH. The Director of the Office of Rare 
Diseases will recommend an agenda for conducing and supporting 
research on rare diseases, and coordinate cooperation among the 
national research institutes. For fiscal years 2003 through 
2006, $4 million per year is authorized for this office.
    Further, the legislation allows the Director of the Office 
of Rare Diseases to enter into cooperative agreements with 
public or private nonprofit entities to establish Rare Disease 
Regional Centers of Excellence. H.R. 4013 authorizes $20 
million for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2006 to support 
such Rare Disease Regional Centers of Excellence.

Legislative History

    H.R. 4013 was introduced by Mr. Shimkus on March 20, 2002, 
and was referred solely to the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce.
    On June 19, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met 
in open markup session and ordered H.R. 4013 reported to the 
House by voice vote. The Committee reported H.R. 4013 to the 
House on June 26, 2002 (H. Rpt. 107-543).
    The bill passed the House under suspension of the rules on 
October 1, 2002, by voice vote.
    On October 2, 2002, H.R. 4013 was received in the Senate 
and read twice. On October 17, 2002, the bill passed the Senate 
by unanimous consent and was cleared for the White House.
    H.R. 4013 was presented to the President on October 26, 
2002 and was signed by the President on November 6, 2002 
(Public Law 107-280).

          RARE DISEASES ORPHAN PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2002


                Public Law 107-281 (H.R. 4014, S. 1379)

    To amend the Public Health Service Act to establish an 
Office of Rare Diseases at the national Institutes of Health, 
and for other purposes.

Summary

    This bill reauthorizes the Orphan Products Research Grant 
Program established under the Orphan Drug Act of 1983. The 
grant program supports clinical trials on drugs being developed 
to treat diseases affecting fewer than 200,000 patients in 
America. H.R. 4014 reauthorizes the grant program at $25 
million for each of the Fiscal Years 2003 through 2006.

Legislative History

    H.R. 4013 was introduced by Mr. Foley on March 20, 2002, 
and was referred solely to the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce.
    On September 5, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 4013 reported to 
the House by unanimous consent. The Committee reported H.R. 
4014 to the House on October 1, 2002 (H. Rpt. 107-702).
    The bill passed the House under suspension of the rules on 
October 1, 2002, by voice vote.
    On October 2, 2002, H.R. 4014 was received in the Senate 
and read twice. On October 17, 2002, the bill passed the Senate 
by unanimous consent and was cleared for the White House.
    H.R. 4013 was presented to the President on October 28, 
2002 and was signed by the President on November 6, 2002 
(Public Law 107-281).

                        MENTAL HEALTH EXTENSION


                     Public Law 107-313 (H.R. 5716)

    To amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 
1974 and the Public Health Service Act to extend the mental 
health benefits parity provisions for an additional year.

Summary

    H.R. 5716 amends the Employee Retirement Income Security 
Act of 1974 and the Public Health Service Act to extend the 
mental health benefits parity provisions for an additional 
year, through December 31, 2003. The original mental health 
parity provisions were part of the Health Insurance Portability 
and Accountability Act of 1996.

Legislative History

    H.R. 5716 was introduced by Mr. Boehner, and additionally, 
by Mr. Miller, on November 13, 2002. The bill was referred to 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the 
Committee on Education and the Workforce, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 
Education and the Workforce were discharged from further 
consideration of H.R. 5716 on November 15, 2002. On that same 
day, H.R. 5716 was considered by unanimous consent in the 
House, and passed the House without objection.
    The Senate received H.R. 5716 on November 15, 2002, and the 
bill was read twice considered, read the third time, and passed 
without amendment by unanimous consent.
    H.R. 5716 was cleared for the White House on November 15, 
2002. The bill was presented to the President on November 21, 
2002, and on December 2, 2002, H.R. 5716 was signed by the 
President (Public Law 107-313).

      DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003


                Public Law 107-314 (H.R. 4546, S. 2514)


                          (Health Provisions)

    To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2003 for 
military activities of the Department of Defense, for military 
construction, and for defense activities of the Department of 
Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year 
for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.

Summary

    Title VII of H.R. 4546 amends the Civilian Health and 
Medical Program of the Uniformed Services to make the 
requirement of TRICARE preauthorization of inpatient mental 
health care inapplicable to Medicare-eligible beneficiaries. 
The legislation also implements the Department of Defense-
Department of Veterans Affairs Health Resources Sharing and 
Performance Improvement Act of 2002, which urges the 
Secretaries of Defense and Veterans Affairs (VA) to: (1) commit 
their departments to significantly improve mutually beneficial 
sharing and coordination of health care resources and services; 
(2) build supportive organizational cultures; and (3) establish 
and achieve measurable goals to facilitate increased sharing 
and coordination.

Legislative History

    Mr. Stump introduced H.R. 4546 on April 23, 2002, and the 
bill was referred to the Committee on Armed Services. On May 1, 
2002, the Committee on Armed Services met in open markup 
session and ordered H.R. 4546 reported to the House, as 
amended, by a roll call vote of 57 yeas and 1 nay.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 
Armed Services exchanged correspondence on May 2, 2002 
concerning each Committee's jurisdictional prerogatives of H.R. 
4546.
    On May 3, 2002, the Committee on Armed Services reported 
the bill to the House (H. Rpt. 107-436), and on May 6, 2002 the 
Committee filed a supplemental report (H. Rpt. 107-436, Part 
II).
    Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 415, the House 
considered H.R. 4546 on May 9 and 10, 2002. On May 10, 2002, 
the House passed the bill by a roll call vote of 359 yeas and 
58 nays.
    On May 14, 2002, H.R. 4546 was received in the Senate, an 
on May 16, 2002 the bill was read twice and placed on the 
Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders.
    On June 27, 2002, the Senate called up H.R. 4546, struck 
all after the enacting clause, inserting its own version of 
this legislation, S. 2514, and passed it on June 27, 2002 by 
unanimous consent. In addition, the Senate insisted upon its 
amendment, requested a conference with the House, and appointed 
conferees.
    Pursuant to H. Res. 500, on July 25, 2002, the House agreed 
to an amendment to the Senate passed version of H.R. 4546 
without objection. The House insisted upon its amendment to the 
Senate amendment, and agreed to go to conference without 
objection. A motion to close portions of the conference was 
agreed to without objection.
    The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce for consideration of matters contained in 
the Senate bill and the House amendment and modifications 
committed to conference falling within the Committee's 
jurisdiction.
    On July 26, 2002, the Senate disagreed to the House 
amendment to the Senate amendment by unanimous consent, agreed 
to a conference, and appointed conferees.
    The Conference Committee met on September 5, 10, 11, and 
12, 2002. The conference report (H. Rpt. 107-172) was filed on 
November 12, 2002.
    The House agreed to the conference report by voice vote on 
November 12, 2002, and the Senate agreed to the conference 
report on November 13, 2002 by voice vote.
    On November 13, 2002, H.R. 4546 was cleared for the White 
House. The bill was presented to the President on November 26, 
2002, and on December 2, 2002, the bill was signed by the 
President (Public Law 107-314).

                AMENDMENTS TO SPECIAL DIABETES PROGRAMS


                     Public Law 107-360 (H.R. 5738)

    To amend the Public Health Service Act with respect to 
special diabetes programs for Type I diabetes and Indians.

Summary

    H.R. 5738 extends diabetes programs for juvenile onset 
diabetes and for Alaska Natives and American Indians by 
specifying that $150,000,000 be appropriated for fiscal years 
2004 through 2008. It also extends the date for a final report 
on the grant programs from 2003 to 2007.

Legislative History

    H.R. 5738 was introduced by Mr. Shimkus with four 
cosponsors on November 14, 2002. The bill was referred to the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce was discharged from 
further consideration of H.R. 5738 on November 15, 2002. On 
that same day, H.R. 5738 was considered by unanimous consent in 
the House, and passed the House without objection.
    The Senate received H.R. 5738 on November 15, 2002, and the 
bill was read twice. On November 20, 2002, the Senate passed 
the bill by unanimous consent.
    H.R. 5738 was cleared for the White House on November 20, 
2002. The bill was presented to the President on December 10, 
2002, and on December 17, 2002, H.R. 5738 was signed by the 
President (Public Law 107-360).

                 DIRECTOR OF THE INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE


                               (H.R. 239)

    To elevate the position of Director of the Indian Health 
Service within the Department of Health and Human Services to 
Assistant Secretary for Indian Health, and for other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 293 establishes within the Department of Health and 
Human Services the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Indian 
Health to facilitate advocacy for the development of 
appropriate Indian health policy, and to promote consultation 
on matters related to Indian health, in a manner consistent 
with the government-to-government relationship between the 
United States and Indian tribes. The position of Director of 
the Indian Health Service is changed to an Assistant Secretary 
position.

Legislative History

    On January 30, 2001, H.R. 293 was introduced by 
Representative Nethercutt and referred to the Committee on 
Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as 
fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On June 27, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held a 
legislative hearing on the bill. At the hearing, the 
Subcommittee received testimony from the Chickasaw Nation 
Ambassador to the United States of America concerning the 
creation of an office of the Assistant Secretary for Indian 
Health.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 293 in the 107th 
Congress.

               ORGAN DONATION AND IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2001


                               (H.R. 624)

    To amend the Public Health Service Act to promote organ 
donation.

Summary

    H.R. 624 creates new incentives for people to become organ 
donors and provides for studies and demonstration projects to 
encourage organ donation education efforts across the country. 
The bill permits the Secretary of Health and Human Services to 
make awards of grants or contracts to states, transplant 
centers, qualified organ procurement organizations, or other 
public or private entities for the purpose of providing for the 
payment of travel and subsistence expenses incurred by 
individuals toward making living donations of their organs. In 
addition, the bill directs the Secretary to carry out studies 
and demonstration projects for the purpose of educating the 
public with respect to organ donation.

Legislative History

    H.R. 624 was introduced by Mr. Bilirakis on February 14, 
2001, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 
On February 28, 2001, the Full Committee met in open markup 
session and ordered H.R. 624 reported to the House by voice 
vote.
    On March 6, 2001, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
reported H.R. 624 to the House (H. Rpt. 107-11).
    H.R. 624 was considered in the House under suspension of 
the rules on March 7, 2001. The bill passed the House by a roll 
call vote of 404 yeas and 0 nays.
    On March 8, 2002, H.R. 624 was received in the Senate, read 
twice, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, 
Labor, and Pensions.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 624 in the 107th 
Congress.

                            MEN'S HEALTH ACT


                               (H.R. 632)

    To amend the Public Health Service Act to establish an 
Office of Men's Health.

Summary

    H.R. 632 requires the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services to establish within the Department of Health and Human 
Services an office to be known as the Office of Men's Health. 
The Secretary has the authority to appoint a director of the 
office who must coordinate and promote the status of men's 
health in the United States. The Secretary must submit to 
Congress within two years a report describing the activities of 
the Office.

Legislative History

    H.R. 632 was introduced by Mr. Cunningham on February 14, 
2001, and referred solely to the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce.
    On June 27, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held a 
legislative hearing on the bill. At the hearing, the 
Subcommittee received testimony from a doctor advocating for 
the creation of an Office of Men's Health.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 624 in the 107th 
Congress.

                  FLU VACCINE AVAILABILITY ACT OF 2001


                               (H.R. 943)

    To amend the Public Health Service Act with respect to the 
availability of influenza vaccine through the program under 
section 317 of such Act.

Summary

    H.R. 943 amends section 317 of the Public Health Service 
Act to permit the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to 
conduct activities to enhance influenza vaccination efforts by 
state and local governments. The legislation authorizes, under 
the Public Health Service Act, such sums as may be necessary 
for improved state and local infrastructure for influenza 
immunizations with a particular focus on (1) increasing 
influenza immunization rates for high risk populations; (2) 
providing for continued vaccinations late in the flu season; 
and (3) encouraging states to develop contingency plans for 
influenza immunizations for high risk populations in the event 
of a delay or shortage of influenza vaccine. This legislation 
also expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that 
oversight hearings should be convened immediately to determine: 
(1) the course of action followed by distributors of influenza 
vaccine during this influenza season; (2) whether or not such 
distributors put profit ahead of the health and well-being of 
the American people; and (3) whether it is necessary to take 
additional measures to ensure the safe, adequate, and timely 
supply of influenza vaccines in the future.

Legislative History

    H.R. 943 was introduced in the House by Mr. Condit and two 
cosponsors on March 8, 2001, and was referred to the Committee 
on Energy and Commerce.
    On July 11, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health met in open 
markup session and approved H.R. 943 for Full Committee 
consideration, as amended, by a voice vote. On July 18, 2001, 
the Full Committee met in open markup session to consider H.R. 
943 and favorably ordered H.R. 943 reported to the House, as 
amended, by a voice vote.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 943 to 
the House on July 26, 2001 (H. Rpt. 107-168).
    No further action was taken on H.R. 624 in the 107th 
Congress.

          BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH ASSISTANCE VOLUNTARY OPTION ACT


                              (H.R. 1340)

    To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow 
taxpayers to designate that part or all of any income tax 
refund be paid over for use in biomedical research conducted 
through the National Institutes of Health.

Summary

    The legislation amends the Internal Revenue Code to allow a 
taxpayer to designate any income tax overpayment to be used for 
biomedical research conducted through the National Institutes 
of Health.

Legislative History

    H.R. 1340 was introduced by Chairman Bilirakis on April 3, 
2001 and was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and 
in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a 
period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each 
case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On July 11, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health met in open 
markup session and forwarded H.R. 1340 to the Full Committee by 
voice vote.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 624 in the 107th 
Congress.

                     HUMAN CLONING PROHIBITION ACT


                         (H.R. 1644, H.R. 2505)

    To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit human 
cloning.

Summary

    H.R. 2505 amends title 18 of the United States Code, 
establishing a comprehensive ban on human cloning and 
prohibiting the importation of a cloned embryo, or any product 
derived from such embryo. Any person or entity that is 
convicted of violating this prohibition is subject to a fine or 
imprisonment of not more than 10 years, or both. In addition, 
H.R. 2505 provides a civil penalty of not less than $1,000,000 
for any person who receives a monetary gain from cloning 
humans. However, H.R. 2505 does not prohibit the use of cloning 
technology to produce molecules, DNA, cells, tissues, organs, 
plants, or animals.

Legislative History

    H.R. 1644 was introduced by Mr. Weldon of Florida on April 
26, 2001, and was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary in 
addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period 
to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    The Subcommittee on Health held a legislative hearing on 
June 20, 2001 on H.R. 1644 an unnumbered piece of legislation 
entitled the Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001. Witnesses 
included Deputy Secretary of the Health and Human Services, 
biotechnology industry representatives, professors, 
researchers, research organizations, and a religious 
organization.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 1644 in the 107th 
Congress, but on July 16, 2001, Mr. Weldon of Florida 
introduced H.R. 2505 which was referred to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
    The Committee on the Judiciary met in open markup session 
and ordered H.R. 2505 reported to the House on July 26, 2001, 
as amended, by a roll call vote of 18 yeas and 11 nays. On July 
27, 2001 the Committee on Judiciary was given permission by 
unanimous consent to have until 5:00 p.m. on July 28 to file a 
report on H.R 2505. On July 27, 2001, the Committee on the 
Judiciary reported H.R. 2505 to the House (H. Rpt. 107-170).
    Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 214, H.R. 2505 was 
considered in the House on July 31, 2001. H.R. 2505 passed the 
House by a roll call vote of 265 yeas and 162 nays on July 31, 
2001.
    On August 1, 2001, H.R. 2505 was received in the Senate. On 
August 2, 2001, the bill was read for the first time, and 
placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First 
Time. The bill was read the second time, and placed on Senate 
Legislative Calendar under General Orders on August 3, 2001.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 2505 in the 107th 
Congress.

                   WOMEN'S HEALTH OFFICE ACT OF 2001


                          (H.R. 1784, S. 946)

    To establish an Office on Women's Health within the 
Department of Health and Human Services, and for other 
purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 1784 formally establishes an Office on Women's Health 
at the Department of Health and Human Services, the Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug 
Administration, and the Health Resources and Services 
Administration, and coordinates women's health activities at 
the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality through its 
Office of Priority Populations.

Legislative History

    H.R. 1784 was introduced by Mrs. Morella on May 9, 2001, 
and was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On June 11, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health met in open 
markup session and approved H.R. 1784 for Full Committee 
consideration, as amended, by voice vote. On June 13, 2002, the 
Full Committee met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 1784 
reported to the House, as amended, by voice vote. On July 25, 
2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported the bill to 
the House (H. Rpt. 107-616).
    H.R. 1784 was considered in the House under suspension of 
the rules on September 17, 2002, and passed the House, as 
amended, by voice vote.
    On September 18, 2002, H.R. 1784 was received in the 
Senate, read twice, and referred to the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 1784 in the 107th 
Congress.

              BREAST IMPLANT RESEARCH AND INFORMATION ACT


                              (H.R. 1961)

    To promote research to identify and evaluate the health 
effects of breast implants and to ensure that women receive 
accurate information about breast implants.

Summary

    H.R. 1961 requires the Director of National Institutes of 
Health (NIH) to coordinate breast implant research within the 
NIH and to conduct and support research to expand the 
understanding of health implications of saline and silicone 
breast implants. H.R. 1961 also requires the Commissioner of 
the Food and Drug Administration to ensure post-market 
surveillance is conducted on silicone breast implants and that 
women receive accurate and complete information about the 
safety of silicone breast implants.

Legislative History

    H.R. 1961 was introduced in the House by Representative 
Blunt and 17 cosponsors on May 23, 2001, and was referred to 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On November 15, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held a 
hearing on H.R. 1961. The Subcommittee received testimony from 
the National Center for Policy Research for Women and Families 
and a breast cancer survivor.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 1961 in the 107th 
Congress.

                   BIPARTISAN PATIENT PROTECTION ACT


                          (H.R. 2563, S. 1052)

    To amend the Public Health Service Act, the Employee 
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, and the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 to protect consumers in managed care plans 
and other health coverage.

Summary

    The Bipartisan Patient Protection Act establishes minimum 
standards for group health plans and health insurance issuers 
with respect to patient care and coverage, including 
utilization review activities and internal and external appeals 
procedures. The Patient Protection Act also provides for 
patient access to certain health care benefits, such as a point 
of service option, emergency health services without prior 
authorization, access to specialists and other services. 
Furthermore, it establishes specific standards for holding a 
health plan liable for damages related to injuries caused as a 
result of services provided or withheld for patients.

Legislative History

    On March 15, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held a 
hearing to address some of the main issues in the managed care 
debate: (1) Federal and state roles in regulation of managed 
care and (2) liability for wrongful denial of benefits. The 
Subcommittee heard testimony from two panels. The first panel 
included a state insurance commissioner, a state senator, and a 
national organization for health care consumers. The second 
panel included a non-profit HMO, an employer, a physicians 
group, and a health policy group.
    H.R. 2563 was introduced by Mr. Ganske, and additionally by 
Mr. Dingell, on July 19, 2001, and was referred to the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the 
Committees on Education and the Workforce, and Ways and Means, 
for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in 
each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within 
the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On August 2, 2001, H.R. 2563 was considered in the House 
pursuant to H. Res. 219. H.R. 2563, as amended, passed the 
House by a roll call vote of 226 yeas and 203 nays.
    H.R. 2563 was received in the Senate on September 5, 2001, 
read the first time, and placed on the Senate Legislative 
Calendar under Read the First Time. On September 6, 2001, the 
bill was read the second time, and placed on the Senate 
Legislative Calendar under General Orders.
    On June 14, 2002, Senator McCain introduced S. 1052. The 
bill was read once and placed on the legislative calendar. The 
motion to proceed was agreed to unanimously on June 21, 2001 
and the legislation was considered by the Senate on June 22, 
25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 2001. The legislation passed the Senate 
with amendments on June 29, 2001 with 59 yeas and 36 nays. A 
message on Senate action was sent to the House and received on 
November 19, 2003.

                   EXPORT ADMINISTRATION ACT OF 2001


                          (H.R. 2581, S. 149)

    To provide authority to control exports, and for other 
purposes.

Summary

    Title III (Foreign Policy Export Controls) of H.R. 2581 
includes a section concerning measures to protect the public 
health. This section defines the criteria and methods for 
clinical investigations of test articles, and export licensing.

Legislative History

    H.R. 2581 was introduced by Representative Gilman on July 
20, 2001, and was referred to the Committee on International 
Relations, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a 
period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each 
case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On August 1, 2001, H.R. 2581 was ordered reported, as 
amended, by the Committee on International Relations by a roll 
call vote of 26 yeas and 7 nays. The Committee on International 
Relations reported H.R. 2581 to the House on November 16, 2001 
(H. Rpt. 107-297, Part I).
    On November 16, the Committee on Rules was granted an 
extension for further consideration ending not later than 
December 7, 2001. In addition, the bill was referred jointly 
and sequentially to the House Committee's on Agriculture, Armed 
Services, Energy and Commerce, Judiciary, Ways and Means, and 
Intelligence (Permanent Select), for a period ending not later 
than December 7, 2001 for consideration of such provisions of 
the bill and amendment as fall within the jurisdiction of that 
committee pursuant to clauses 1 and 11 of rule X. On December 
7, 2001 all of the Committees were granted an extension for 
further consideration ending not later than December 15, 2001. 
On December 14, 2001, all of the Committees were granted an 
extension for further consideration ending not later than 
February 28, 2002. On February 28, 2002, all of the Committees 
were granted an extension for further consideration ending not 
later than March 8, 2002.
    On March 6, 2002, the Committee on Armed Services met in 
open markup session and ordered H.R. 2581 reported to the 
House, as amended, by a roll call vote of 44 yeas and 6 nays. 
The Committee on Armed Services reported H.R. 2581 to the House 
on March 8, 2002 (H. Rpt. 107-297, Part II).
    On March 8, 2002, all of the Committees were discharged 
from further consideration of H.R. 2581.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 2581 in the 107th 
Congress.

                    ORGAN PROCUREMENT ORGANIZATIONS


                          (H.R. 3504, S. 1833)

    To amend the Public Health Service Act with respect to 
qualified organ procurement organizations.

Summary

    H.R. 3504 clarifies that a qualified organ procurement 
organization's certification or recertification in effect as of 
January 1, 2000, remains in effect at least through July 31, 
2004, and is subject to subsequent recertification not more 
frequently than every four years.

Legislative History

    H.R. 3504 was introduced by Mr. Burr on December 17, 2001, 
and was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On December 19, 2001, H.R. 3504 was considered in the House 
under suspension of the Rules. The bill passed the House by 
voice vote on December 20, 2001.
    On December 20, 2001, H.R. 3504 was received in the Senate, 
read the first time, and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar 
under Read the First Time. On January 23, 2002, the bill was 
read the second time and placed on the Senate Legislative 
Calendar under General Orders.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 3504 in the 107th 
Congress.

          ECONOMIC SECURITY AND WORKER ASSISTANCE ACT OF 2001


                              (H.R. 3529)

    To provide tax incentives for economic recovery and 
assistance to displaced workers.

Summary

    H.R. 3529 primarily amends the Internal Revenue Code for a 
variety of purposes. Among provisions related to public health 
and health care, Title III extends provisions in the Internal 
Revenue Code concerning parity in the application of certain 
limits to mental health benefits and extends the availability 
of medical savings accounts.
    Title VIII amends the Internal Revenue Code to establish a 
displaced worker health insurance credit and establishes a 
program to make advance payments to providers of health 
insurance on behalf of individuals eligible for the displaced 
worker health insurance credit.
    Title IX amends the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 to 
authorize the Secretary of Labor to award national emergency 
grants to applicant Governors of States or outlying areas to 
provide employment and training assistance and temporary health 
care coverage assistance to workers affected by major economic 
dislocations, including those caused by the terrorist attacks 
of September 11, 2001.
    Title X amends Title XXI (the State Children's Health 
Insurance)(SCHIP) of the Social Security Act to make 
appropriations for temporary State health care assistance. It 
requires such funds to be allotted in specified amounts to 
States and available for expenditure through the end of 2002. 
It also directs States to use such funds only to provide health 
care items and services, other than those for which Federal 
assistance is prohibited under SCHIP or Medicaid.

Legislative History

    H.R. 3529 was introduced by Mr. Thomas on December 19, 
2001, and was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and 
in addition to the Committees on Education and the Workforce, 
Energy and Commerce, and the Budget, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On December 20, 2001, H.R. 3529 was considered in the House 
pursuant to H. Res. 320. The bill passed the House by a roll 
call vote of 224 yeas and 193 nays.
    On December 20, 2001, H.R. 3529 was received in the Senate, 
read the first time, and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar 
under Read the First Time. On January 23, 2002, the bill was 
read the second time and placed on the Senate Legislative 
Calendar under General Orders.
    H.R. 3529 passed the Senate, with an amendment, by 
unanimous consent on November 14, 2002.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 3529 in the 107th 
Congress.

 HELP EFFICIENT, ACCESSIBLE, LOW COST, TIMELY HEALTH CARE (HEALTH) ACT 
                                OF 2002


                              (H.R. 4600)

    To establish minimum federal standards to reform the 
medical liability system.

Summary

    H.R. 4600 establishes minimum federal standards and 
restrictions on the medical liability system. The provisions of 
H.R. 4600 apply to any health care lawsuit brought in a federal 
or state court, or subject to an alternative dispute resolution 
system, that is initiated on or after the date of enactment, 
with the exception that any health care lawsuit arising from an 
injury occurring prior to the date of the enactment will be 
governed by the applicable statute of limitations provisions in 
effect at the time the injury occurred. In general, any issue 
that is not governed by any provision of law established by or 
under H.R. 4600 is governed by otherwise applicable state or 
federal law.

Legislative History

    On July 17, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health held a hearing 
to review issues pertaining to the evolving medical liability 
crisis in several states and its effect on patient access to 
care, and whether there is a need to enact medical liability 
reform. The Subcommittee heard testimony from two panels of 
witnesses. The first panel focused on how medical malpractice 
insurance is affecting patient access to care and provider 
availability. The panel consisted of representatives from a 
Pennsylvania hospital, a public university health science 
center, a family physician and clinical professor, a consumer 
rights group, and a patients' group. The second panel provided 
different perspectives on the causes of recent increases in 
medical malpractice premiums and the effect of tort reform on 
providers and injured patients. Witnesses included 
representatives from a national physician-owned medical 
liability insurer providing coverage for health care providers 
in all fifty states, consumer rights groups, an actuaries 
group, and the co-author of a tort law case book and advocate 
of tort reform.
    Representative Greenwood introduced H.R. 4600 on April 25, 
2002, which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and 
in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a 
period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each 
case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On September 10, 2002, the Committee on Judiciary ordered 
H.R. 4600 reported to the House, without amendment, by voice 
vote.
    On September 18, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met 
in open markup session and ordered H.R. 4600 reported to the 
House, as amended, by a roll call vote of 27 yeas and 22 nays.
    The Committee on the Judiciary and the Committee on Energy 
and Commerce reported H.R. 4600 to the House on September 25, 
2002 (H. Rpt. 107-693, Parts I and II).
    On September 26, 2002, pursuant to H. Res. 553, H.R. 4600 
was considered in the House, and passed the House by a roll 
call vote of 217 yeas and 203 nays.
    H.R. 4600 was received in the Senate, read twice, and 
referred to the Committee on the Judiciary on September 26, 
2002.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 4600 in the 107th 
Congress.

                ABORTION NON-DISCRIMINATION ACT OF 2002


                          (H.R. 4691, S. 2008)

    To prohibit certain abortion-related discrimination in 
governmental activities.

Summary

    H.R. 4691 amends the Public Health Service Act to prohibit 
the federal government, and any state or local government that 
receives federal financial assistance, from discriminating 
against any health care entity because the entity refuses to 
train, provide coverage of, or pay for, induced abortions. The 
bill clarifies the definition of ``health care entity'' to 
include health professionals, a hospital, a provider sponsored 
organization, a health maintenance organization, a health 
insurance plan, and any other kind of health care facility, 
organization, or plan.

Legislative History

    Mr. Bilirakis introduced H.R. 4691 on May 9, 2002, which 
was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On July 11, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health held a hearing 
to focus on two health care ethics issues. The Subcommittee 
heard testimony from two panels of witnesses from both the 
public and private sector. Witnesses on the first panel 
discussed whether health care providers should be forced to 
provide services that they consider morally objectionable.
    H.R. 4691 was considered in the House pursuant to H. Res. 
546 on September 25, 2002. The bill passed the House by a roll 
call vote of 229 yeas, 189 nays, and 2 present.
    On September 26, 2002, H.R. 4691 was received in the 
Senate, read the first time, and placed on the Senate 
Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time. The bill was 
read the second time and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar 
under General Orders on September 30, 2002.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 4691 in the 107th 
Congress.

    PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, WORK, AND FAMILY PROMOTION ACT OF 2002


        (H.R. 4737, H.R. 4735, H.R. 4700, H.R. 4584, H.R. 4585)

    To reauthorize and improve the program of block grants to 
States for temporary assistance for needy families, improve 
access to quality childcare, and for other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 4737 reauthorizes the Temporary Assistance for Needy 
Families (TANF) program, which expired on September 30, 2002. 
H.R. 4737 amends the Social Security Act to reauthorize 
transitional medical assistance for one year, extending the 
sunset date to September 30, 2003 (incorporating the provisions 
of H.R. 4584). In addition, the bill extends funding for 
abstinence-only education, maintaining the current funding 
level of $50 million for each of the fiscal years 2003 through 
2007 for abstinence-only education programs under title V of 
the Social Security Act (incorporating the provisions of H.R. 
4585).

Legislative History

    On April 23, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health held a 
hearing to focus on two welfare reform issues that are within 
the Committee's jurisdiction--abstinence education and 
transitional medical assistance. The Subcommittee heard 
testimony from the U.S. General Accounting Office and private 
sector witnesses.
    On April 24, 2002, the Full Committee met in open markup 
session and favorably ordered reported a Committee Print to 
amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to extend the 
authorization of transitional medical assistance for 1 year, 
without amendment, by voice vote. The Committee also agreed by 
unanimous consent that the Committee Print would be introduced 
as a bill, H.R. 4584, and to allow for a report to be filed on 
the bill. At the same markup, and Committee favorably ordered 
reported a Committee Print to amend title V of the Social 
Security Act to extend abstinence education funding under 
maternal and child health program through fiscal year 2007, 
without amendment, by a roll call vote of 35 yeas and 17 nays. 
The Committee also agreed to a unanimous consent request that 
the Committee Print would be introduced as a bill, H.R. 4585, 
and to allow for a report to be filed on the bill.
    Mr. Upton introduced H.R. 4584 on April 24, 2002, which was 
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On May 14, 
2001, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 4584 
to the House (H. Rpt. 107-461). In addition, Mr. Upton also 
introduced H.R. 4585 on April 24, 2002, which was referred to 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On May 14, 2001, the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 4585 to the 
House (H. Rpt. 107-462).
    No further action was taken on H.R. 4584 or H.R. 4585 in 
the 107th Congress.
    On May 15, 2002, Mrs. Pryce introduced H.R. 4737, which was 
referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to 
the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Education and the 
Workforce, Agriculture, and Financial Services, for a period to 
be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On May 16, 2002, H.R. 4737 was considered in the House 
pursuant to H. Res. 422, and passed the House by a roll call 
vote of 229 yeas and 197 nays. The Clerk was authorized to 
correct section numbers, punctuation, and cross references, and 
to make other necessary technical and conforming corrections in 
the engrossment of the bill.
    On May 16, 2002, H.R. 4737 was received in the Senate, read 
twice, and referred to the Committee on Finance.
    The Committee on Finance ordered H.R. 4737 to be reported 
with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably on 
June 26, 2002. The Committee on Finance reported H.R. 4737 to 
the Senate, with an amendment, and a written report (Senate 
Rpt. 107-221). H.R. 4737 was placed on Senate Legislative 
Calendar under General Orders.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 4737 in the 107th 
Congress.

              MOSQUITO ABATEMENT FOR SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT


                              (H.R. 4793)

    To authorize temporary grants through the Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention for mosquito control programs to 
prevent mosquito-borne diseases.

Summary

    H.R. 4793 authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services, acting through the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention, to make temporary grants to political subdivisions 
of states for the operation of mosquito control programs to 
prevent and control mosquito-borne disease. The Secretary may 
also make grants to political subdivisions of states to conduct 
assessments, including entomological surveys of potential 
mosquito breeding areas, and to develop mosquito control plans. 
In addition to the grants to political subdivisions, states are 
eligible for grants for the purpose of coordinating mosquito 
control programs. The legislation also directs the National 
Institute of Environmental Health Sciences to conduct or 
support research to identify or develop methods of controlling 
the population of insects that transmit diseases that have 
significant adverse health consequences for humans.

Legislative History

    Mr. John introduced H.R. 4793 on May 22, 2002, which was 
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On September 5, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 4793 reported to 
the House, as amended, by a voice vote. The Committee on Energy 
and Commerce reported H.R. 4793 to the House on September 13, 
2002 (H. Rpt. 107-657).
    H.R. 4793 was considered in the House under suspension of 
the rules on October 1, 2002, and passed the House by voice 
vote.
    On October 2, 2002, H.R. 4793 was received in the Senate, 
read the first time, and placed on the Senate Legislative 
Calendar under Read the First Time. The bill was read the 
second time and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under 
General Orders on October 3, 2002.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 4793 in the 107th 
Congress.

       MAMMOGRAPHY QUALITY STANDARDS REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2002


                          (H.R. 4888, S. 2591)

    To reauthorize the Mammography Quality Standards Act, and 
for other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 4888 reauthorizes the Mammography Quality Standards 
Act (``MQSA'') for an additional five years, through fiscal 
year 2007. Further, the legislation makes technical changes to 
the underlying statute, including allowing the Secretary to 
issue temporary renewal certificates (not to exceed 45 days) to 
certain facilities seeking reaccreditation in certain limited 
circumstances. The legislation also requires the General 
Accounting Office and Institute of Medicine to conduct studies 
evaluating the effectiveness and impact of MQSA.

Legislative History

    H.R. 4888 was introduced by Mr. Dingell on June 6, 2002, 
which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On June 13, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met 
in open markup session and ordered H.R. 4888 reported to the 
House, as amended, by a voice vote. The Committee on Energy and 
Commerce reported H.R. 4888 to the House on July 22, 2002 (H. 
Rpt. 107-601).
    No further action was taken on H.R. 4793 in the 107th 
Congress.

        MEDICARE MODERNIZATION AND PRESCRIPTION DRUG ACT OF 2002


(H.R. 4954, H.R. 2768, H.R. 3046, H.R. 3391, H.R. 4961, H.R. 4962, H.R. 
           4984, H.R. 4985, H.R. 4986, H.R. 4987, H.R. 4991)

    To amend Title XVIII and Title XIX of the Social Security 
Act to provide for a voluntary program for prescription drug 
coverage under the Medicare Program, to modernize and reform 
payments and the regulatory structure of the Medicare Program, 
and for other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 4954 amends the Social Security Act to establish a 
new, voluntary prescription drug benefit as an entitlement for 
all Medicare beneficiaries. The new benefit provides coverage 
of Medicare beneficiaries' prescription drug costs, including a 
protection against catastrophic expenses. The bill also 
provides additional assistance to beneficiaries with incomes 
below 175 percent of the Federal Poverty Level.
    H.R. 4954 also addresses physician payment formula 
problems, increases reimbursements for rural hospitals, 
stabilizes the Medicare+Choice program, repeals the pending 15 
percent reduction in home health reimbursements, improves 
payments for skilled nursing facilities and dialysis centers, 
provides Medicare coverage for several new preventative 
benefits, eases administrative burdens and reforms Medicare's 
regulatory, contracting and appeals processes.

Legislative History

    On June 18, 2002, H.R. 4954 was introduced by Mrs. Johnson, 
and additionally, by Mr. Bilirakis. Pursuant to the order of 
the House of June 18, 2002, H.R. 4954 was referred jointly to 
the Committees on Energy and Commerce and Ways and Means.
    On June 19, 20, and 21, 2002, the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce met in open markup session and ordered reported 
Committee Prints that were originally introduced as part of 
H.R. 4954. The Committee Prints were ordered reported as 
followed: on June 19, 2002, a Committee Print on Medicaid, 
Public Health, and Other Health Provisions by a roll call vote 
of 29 yeas and 20 nays, without amendment, and introduced as 
H.R. 4961; on June 19, 2002, a Committee Print on Rural Health 
Care Improvements by voice vote, and introduced as H.R. 4962; 
on June 21, 2002, a Committee Print on a Medicare Prescription 
Drug Benefit by a roll call vote of 30 yeas and 23 nays, as 
amended, and introduced as H.R. 4984; on June 21, 2002, a 
Committee Print on Medicare+Choice Revitalization and 
Competition Program and Provisions Relating to Part A, without 
amendment, by a roll call vote of 26 yeas and 15 nays; and 
introduces as H.R. 4985; on June 21, 2002, a Committee Print on 
Provisions Relating to Part B by voice vote, as amended, and 
introduced as H.R. 4986; on June 21, 2002, a Committee Print on 
Provisions Relating to Parts A and B by voice vote, as amended, 
and introduced as H.R. 4987; and, on June 21, 2002, a Committee 
Print on Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) payments by 
voice vote, without amendment, and introduced as H.R. 4991.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported the following 
bills to the House on June 26, 2002: H.R. 4961 (H. Rpt. 107-
544); H.R. 4962 (H. Rpt. 107-540, Part I); H.R. 4984 (H. Rpt. 
107-551, Part I); H.R. 4985 (H. Rpt. 107-550, Part I); H.R. 
4986 (H. Rpt. 107-549, Part I); H.R. 4987 (H. Rpt. 107-541, 
Part I); and, H.R. 4991 (H. Rpt. 107-547).
    No further action was taken on any of the bills in the 
107th Congress, but these bills were all subsequently modified 
and incorporated into H.R. 4954 as considered by the House. The 
Committee on Ways and Means reported H.R. 4954 to the House on 
June 26, 2002 (H. Rpt. 107-539, Part I).
    On June 27, 2002, H.R. 4954 was considered in the House 
pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 465. The bill passed the 
House by a roll call vote of 221 yeas and 208 nays.
    The bill was received in the Senate, read the first time, 
and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First 
Time on July 10, 2002. On July 15, 2002, it was read the second 
time, and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under 
General Orders
    No further action was taken on H.R. 4954 in the 107th 
Congress.

                   MEDICARE BENEFITS ADMNINISTRATION


                              (H.R. 4988)

    To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
establish the Medicare Benefits Administration within the 
Department of Health and Human Services, and for other 
purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 4988 amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social 
Security Act to establish within the Department of Health and 
Human Services the Medicare Benefits Administration, headed by 
a Medicare Benefits Administrator who shall carry out Medicare 
parts C (Medicare+Choice) and D (Prescription Drug Benefit) and 
provisions relating to the Medicare prescription drug discount 
card endorsement program. The bill directs the Secretary of 
Health and Human Services to establish within the Medicare 
Benefits Administration an Office of Beneficiary Assistance to 
coordinate functions relating to outreach and education of 
Medicare beneficiaries. It also establishes within the Medicare 
Benefits Administration the Medicare Policy Advisory Board to 
advise, consult with, and make recommendations to the 
Administrator with respect to the administration of Medicare 
parts C and D. The bill also establishes a grant program to 
assist pharmacies in implementing the new prescription drug 
benefit under Medicare part D.

Legislative History

    On June 21, 2002, the Full Committee met in open markup 
session and favorably ordered reported a Committee Print on 
Medicare Benefits Administration by a roll call vote of 27 yeas 
and 15 nays, as amended. The Committee Print was introduced as 
an original measure, H.R. 4988, to reflect the Committee's 
action.
    H.R. 4988 was introduced by Mr. Tauzin on June 21, 2002, 
and was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in 
addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period 
to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 4988 to 
the House on June 26, 2002 (H. Rpt. 107-542, Part I).
    No further action was taken on H.R. 4988 in the 107th 
Congress.

                 ELECTRONIC PRESCRIPTION DRUG PROGRAMS


                              (H.R. 4989)

    To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for 
grants to health care providers to implement electronic 
prescription drug programs.

Summary

    H.R. 4989 authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services to make grants for the purpose of assisting health 
care professionals who prescribe drugs and biologics in 
implementing electronic prescription programs. Grants may only 
be made pursuant to a grant application submitted in a time, 
manner, and form approved by the Secretary.

Legislative History

    On June 20, 2002, the Full Committee met in open markup 
session and favorably ordered reported a Committee Print on 
Promotion of Electronic Prescription by voice vote. The 
Committee Print was introduced as an original measure, H.R. 
4989, to reflect the Committee's action.
    H.R. 4989 was introduced by Mr. Tauzin on June 21, 2002, 
and was referred to the Committee Energy and Commerce. The 
Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 4989 to the 
House on June 26, 2002 (H. Rpt. 107-545).
    No further action was taken on H.R. 4989 in the 107th 
Congress.

                          INTERNET PHARMACIES


                              (H.R. 4990)

    To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to 
establish requirements with respect to the sale of, or the 
offer to sell, prescription drugs through the Internet, and for 
other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 4990 amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 
to require each interstate Internet seller to comply with 
requirements of this Act with respect to the sale or offer of 
prescription drugs. It requires the seller to: (1) post visibly 
on its web site home page its street address, the States in 
which it is authorized as a pharmacy, certain prescriber 
information, and a statement it will dispense prescription 
drugs only upon a valid prescription; and (2) disclose such 
information to State licensing boards.
    The bill further directs the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services to: (1) engage in activities to educate the public 
about the dangers of purchasing prescription drugs from 
unlawful Internet sources; and (2) recommend to Congress the 
coordination of activities of Federal agencies regarding 
Internet sellers that operate from foreign countries with the 
activities of such foreign governments.

Legislative History

    On June 21, 2002, the Full Committee met in open markup 
session and favorably ordered reported a Committee Print on 
Internet Pharmacies by voice vote. The Committee Print was 
introduced as an original measure, H.R. 4990, to reflect the 
Committee's action.
    H.R. 4990 was introduced by Mr. Tauzin on June 21, 2002, 
and was referred to the Committee Energy and Commerce. The 
Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 4990 to the 
House on June 26, 2002 (H. Rpt. 107-546).
    No further action was taken on H.R. 4990 in the 107th 
Congress.

                          PRACTICE OF PHARMACY


                          (H.R. 4992, S. 1806)

    To amend the Public Health Service Act to establish health 
professions programs regarding the practice of pharmacy.

Summary

    H.R. 4992 amends the Public Health Service Act to establish 
health professions programs regarding the practice of pharmacy 
and grants the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
additional authority to respond to the pending pharmacist 
shortage. H.R. 4992 includes three provisions to generate 
interest in the pharmacy profession and improve pharmacy 
education. Public service announcements are designed to inform 
the public about the essential role pharmacists play in the 
delivery of health care services and encourage individuals to 
join the pharmacist profession. A demonstration project is 
included to expand the participation level of pharmacists in 
the National Health Service Corps loan repayment program. 
Finally, new information technology grants are permitted for 
schools of pharmacy to enhance computer-based systems for 
pharmaceutical education and encourage the development of 
distance education programs for schools of pharmacy.

Legislative History

    On June 20, 2002, the Full Committee met in open markup 
session and favorably ordered reported a Committee Print on 
Certain Health Professions Programs Regarding Practice of 
Pharmacy, as amended, by voice vote. The Committee Print was 
introduced as an original measure, H.R. 4992, to reflect the 
Committee's action.
    H.R. 4992 was introduced by Mr. Tauzin on June 21, 2002, 
and was referred to the Committee Energy and Commerce. The 
Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 4992 to the 
House on June 26, 2002 (H. Rpt. 107-548).
    No further action was taken on H.R. 4992 in the 107th 
Congress.

                           TUBEROUS SCLEROSIS


                           (H. Con. Res. 25)

    To express the sense of Congress that the federal 
government should increase public awareness of tuberous 
sclerosis.

Summary

    H. Con. Res. 25 expresses the sense of Congress that all 
Americans should take an active role in the fight against 
tuberous sclerosis; the efforts of national and community 
organizations and health care providers should be applauded for 
promoting awareness; the Federal government has a 
responsibility to raise awareness, increase funding for 
research and consider ways to improve access for detection and 
treatment of tuberous sclerosis; and the Director of the 
National Institutes of Health should take a leadership role in 
the fight against tuberous sclerosis and provide Congress a 
five-year research plan.

Legislative History

    H. Con. Res. 25 was introduced in the House by Mrs. Kelly 
on February 8, 2001, and was referred to the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce.
    On June 27, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held a hearing 
on H. Con. Res. 25. The Subcommittee received testimony from an 
organization concerning tuberous sclerosis.
    On July 11, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health met in open 
markup session and forwarded H. Con. Res. 25, as amended, to 
the Full Committee by voice vote. The Full Committee met in 
open markup session on July 19, 2001 and ordered H. Con. Res. 
25 reported to the House, as amended, by unanimous consent. The 
Committee on Energy and Commerce reported the bill to the House 
on August 1, 2001 (H. Rpt. 107-181).
    The House considered H. Con. Res. 25 on December 4, 2001 
under suspension of the rules, and passed the bill by voice 
vote.
    On December 5, 2001, H. Con. Res. 25 was received in the 
Senate and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, 
Labor and Pensions. On December 12, 2001, the Committee on 
Health, Education, Labor and Pensions ordered H. Con. Res. 25 
to be discharged by unanimous consent, and the bill was agreed 
to by the Senate without amendment and with a preamble, by 
unanimous consent, on December 12, 2001.

                           NATIONAL DONOR DAY


                           (H. Con. Res. 31)

    Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the 
importance of organ, tissue, bone marrow, and blood donation 
and supporting National Donor Day.

Summary

    H. Con. Res. 31 confirms congressional support of the goals 
and ideas of National Donor Day. It also encourages all 
Americans to learn about the importance of organ, tissue, bone 
marrow, and blood donation and requests that the President 
issue a proclamation calling on the people of the United States 
to conduct appropriate activities to demonstrate support for 
organ, tissue, bone marrow, and blood donation.

Legislative History

    H. Con. Res. 31 was introduced by Mrs. Thurman on February 
13, 2001, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce.
    On February 28, 2001, the Full Committee met in open markup 
session and ordered H. Con. Res. 31 reported to the House by 
voice vote. The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported the 
bill to the House on March 6, 2001 (H Rpt. 107-10).
    The House considered H. Con. Res. 36 on March 7, 2001 under 
suspension of the rules, and passed the bill by a roll call 
vote of 418 yeas and 0 nays.
    On March 8, 2001, H. Con. Res. 31 was received in the 
Senate and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
    No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 31 in the 107th 
Congress.

                       JUVENILE DIABETES RESEARCH


                           (H. Con. Res. 36)

    To express the sense of Congress that Federal funding for 
diabetes research should be increased so that a cure for 
juvenile (type 1) diabetes can be found.

Summary

    H. Con. Res. 36 expresses the sense of Congress that 
Federal funding for diabetes research should be increased 
annually as recommended by the Diabetes Research Working group 
so that a cure for juvenile (type 1) diabetes can be found.

Legislative History

    H. Con. Res. 36 was introduced in House by Mr. Green of 
Texas and 41 cosponsors on February 14, 2001, and was referred 
to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On June 27, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held a hearing 
on H. Con. Res. 36. The Subcommittee received testimony from 
the father of a boy with juvenile (type 1) diabetes.
    On July 11, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health met in open 
markup session and forwarded H. Con. Res. 36, as amended, to 
the Full Committee by voice vote. The Full Committee met in 
open markup session on July 19, 2001 and ordered H. Con. Res. 
36 reported to the House, as amended, by unanimous consent. The 
Committee on Energy and Commerce reported the bill to the House 
on August 1, 2001 (H Rpt. 107-182).
    The House considered H. Con. Res. 36 on June 4, 2002 by 
unanimous consent, and passed the bill without objection.
    On June 5, 2002, H. Con. Res. 36 was received in the Senate 
and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and 
Pensions.
    No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 36 in the 107th 
Congress.

         NATIONAL REFLEX SYMPATHETIC DYSTROPHY AWARENESS MONTH


                           (H. Con. Res. 61)

    Expressing support for a National Reflex Sympathetic 
Dystrophy (RSD) Awareness Month.

Summary

    H. Con. Res. 61 expresses the sense of Congress that all 
Americans should take an active role in combating reflex 
sympathetic dystrophy (RSD), national and community 
organizations should be recognized for their work in promoting 
awareness about RSD, and health care providers should continue 
to increase their efforts to diagnose the disease in its 
earliest possible stages to increase the likelihood of 
remission. The resolution states that Federal Government has a 
responsibility to endeavor to raise awareness about the 
importance of the early detection and proper treatment of RSD; 
work to increase research funding so that the causes of, and 
improved treatment and cure for, RSD may be discovered; and 
consider ways to improve access to and delivery of health care 
services for RSD.

Legislative History

    H. Con. Res. 61 was introduced by Mr. Barrett on March 13, 
2001, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On July 11, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health met in open 
markup session and forwarded H. Con. Res. 61 to the Full 
Committee by voice vote. The Full Committee met in open markup 
session on July 19, 2001 and ordered H. Con. Res. 61 reported 
to the House by voice vote. The Committee on Energy and 
Commerce reported the bill to the House on August 1, 2001 (H 
Rpt. 107-183).
    No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 61 in the 107th 
Congress.

                            RED RIBBON WEEK


                           (H. Con. Res. 84)

    Supporting the goals of Red Ribbon Week in promoting drug-
free communities.

Summary

    H. Con. Res. 84 expresses the sense of Congress that the 
goals of Red Ribbon Week should be supported. The resolution 
encourages all Americans to promote drug-free communities and 
to participate in drug prevention activities to show support 
for healthy, productive, drug-free lifestyles.

Legislative History

    H. Con. Res. 84 was introduced by Mr. Baca on March 27, 
2001, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On July 11, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health met in open 
markup session and forwarded H. Con. Res. 84 to the Full 
Committee by voice vote. The Full Committee met in open markup 
session on July 19, 2001, and ordered H. Con. Res. 84 reported 
to the House by voice vote. The Committee on Energy and 
Commerce reported the bill to the House on September 5, 2001 (H 
Rpt. 107-197).
    H. Con. Res. 84 was considered in the House by unanimous 
consent on September 24, 2002, and passed the House without 
objection.
    The bill was received in the Senate on September 25, 2002, 
and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions.
    On November 18, 2002, Senate agreed to the bill without 
amendment and with a preamble by unanimous consent.

                                 AUTISM


                           (H. Con. Res. 91)

    Recognizing the importance of increasing awareness of the 
autism spectrum disorder, and supporting programs for greater 
research and improved treatment of autism and improved training 
and support for individuals with autism and those who care for 
them.

Summary

    H. Con. Res. 91 confirms that the Congress supports the 
Autism Awareness Day and Month and increased Federal funding 
for research on autism. The bill also urges the Department of 
Health and Human Services to continue to implement the 
Children's Health Act of 2000. In addition, the bill stresses 
the need to begin early intervention services soon after a 
child has been diagnosed with autism; supports the goal of 
federally funding 40 percent of the costs of the Individuals 
with Disabilities Education Act to States and local school 
districts. H. Con. Res. 91 urges Federal, state, and local 
governments to allocate sufficient resources to teacher 
training initiatives. Finally, the bill recognizes the 
importance of worker training programs that are tailored to the 
needs of developmentally disabled persons, including those with 
autism.

Legislative History

    H. Con. Res. 91 was introduced by Mr. Smith of New Jersey 
on March 29, 2001, and was referred to the Committee on Energy 
and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Education and 
the Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by 
the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions 
as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On May 1, 2001, H. Con. Res. 91 was considered in the House 
under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a roll 
call vote of 418 yeas and 1 nay.
    The bill was received in the Senate on May 2, 2001, and 
referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions.
    No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 91 in the 107th 
Congress.

                             FIBROID TUMORS


                           (H. Con. Res. 165)

    Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding fibroid 
tumors.

Summary

    H. Con. Res. 165 expresses the sense of Congress that the 
medical community should explore alternatives to eliminating 
recurring fibroids by hysterectomy. The resolution also 
encourages women to make regular obstetrician and gynecological 
visits and encourages better communication so that women and 
physicians know of all safe options available for the 
prevention and cure of fibroids.

Legislative History

    H. Con. Res. 165 was introduced by Mrs. Millender-McDonald 
on June 19, 2001, and was referred to the Committee on Energy 
and Commerce.
    On April 24, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met 
in open markup session and ordered H. Con. Res. 165 reported to 
the House by unanimous consent.
    H. Con. Res. 165 was considered in the House under 
suspension of the rules on May 20, 2002, and passed the House 
by a roll call vote of 363 yeas and 0 nays. The title of the 
measure was amended, removing the word ``cancer,'' and agreed 
to without objection.
    The bill was received in the Senate on May 21, 2002, and 
referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions.
    No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 165 in the 
107th Congress.

               CONTRIBUTIONS TO FAITH BASED ORGANIZATIONS


                           (H. Con. Res. 170)

    Encouraging corporations to contribute to faith-based 
organizations.

Summary

    H. Con. Res. 170 calls for U.S. corporations to make 
greater contributions to faith-based organizations battling 
societal challenges. It expresses the sense of Congress that 
such corporations are important partners with government in 
efforts to overcome social problems, and they should not adopt 
policies that prohibit contributions to faith-based 
organizations that are successfully advancing philanthropic 
causes.

Legislative History

    H. Con. Res. 170 was introduced by Mr. Green of Wisconsin 
on June 20, 2001, and was referred to the Committee on Energy 
and Commerce.
    H. Con. Res. 170 was considered in the House under 
suspension of the rules on July 10, 2001, and passed the House 
by a roll call vote of 391 yeas, 17 nays, and 3 present.
    The bill was received in the Senate on July 11, 2002, and 
referred to the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
    No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 170 in the 
107th Congress.

                          HEALTH CARE COVERAGE


                           (H. Con. Res. 271)

    Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the 
importance of health care coverage.

Summary

    H. Con. Res. 271expresses the sense of Congress that a 
National Importance of Health Care Coverage Month should be 
established to promote a multifaceted educational effort about 
the importance of health care coverage, to increase awareness 
of available health care coverage options, and to include 
efforts to inform eligible persons on how to access public 
insurance programs.

Legislative History

    H. Con. Res. 271 was introduced by Mrs. Wilson on November 
15, 2001, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce.
    On September 5, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
met in open markup session and ordered H. Con. Res. 271 
reported to the House by unanimous consent.
    H. Con. Res. 271 was considered in the House under 
suspension of the rules on May 7, 2002, and passed the House by 
a roll call vote of 402 yeas, 1 nay, and 1 present.
    The bill was received in the Senate on May 8, 2002, and 
referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions.
    No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 271 in the 
107th Congress.

                             ENDOMETRIOSIS


                           (H. Con. Res. 291)

    Expressing the sense of the Congress with respect to the 
disease endometriosis.

Summary

    H. Con. Res. 291 expresses that Congress strongly supports 
efforts to raise public awareness of endometriosis throughout 
the medical and lay communities, and it recognizes the need for 
better support of patients with endometriosis, the need for 
physicians to better understand the disease, the need for more 
effective treatments, and ultimately, the need for a cure.

Legislative History

    H. Con. Res. 291 was introduced by Mr. McKeon on December 
18, 2001, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce.
    On September 5, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
met in open markup session and ordered H. Con. Res. 291 
reported to the House by unanimous consent.
    H. Con. Res. 291 was considered in the House under 
suspension of the rules on October 1, 2002, and passed the 
House by a voice vote.
    The bill was received in the Senate on October 2, 2002.
    No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 291 in the 
107th Congress.

                            CERVICAL CANCER


                           (H. Con. Res. 309)

    Expressing the sense of Congress regarding cervical cancer.

Summary

    H. Con. Res. 309 recognizes the importance of good cervical 
health and early cervical cancer detection and the courage of 
cervical cancer survivors. The resolution urges medical 
institutions to continue to raise public awareness about 
cervical cancer and early detection.

Legislative History

    H. Con. Res. 309 was introduced by Mrs. Millender-McDonald 
on January 29, 2002, and was referred to the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce.
    On April 24, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met 
in open markup session and ordered H. Con. Res. 309 reported to 
the House by unanimous consent.
    H. Con. Res. 309 was considered in the House under 
suspension of the rules on May 20, 2002, and passed the House 
by a roll call vote of 361 yeas and 0 nays.
    The bill was received in the Senate and referred to the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions on May 21, 
2002.
    No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 309 in the 
107th Congress.

                              SCLERODERMA


                           (H. Con. Res. 320)

    Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding scleroderma.

Summary

    H. Con. Res. 320 expresses the sense of the Congress for: 
(1) recognition of private organizations and health care 
providers for promoting awareness and research on scleroderma; 
(2) greater awareness of the symptoms of scleroderma and 
contributions to the fight against it; (3) the National 
Institutes of Health to continue to take a leadership role in 
research efforts regarding the fight against scleroderma and to 
allow for broad dissemination of the information learned from 
such research; and (4) the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention to consider additional methods to improve disease 
surveillance of scleroderma.

Legislative History

    H. Con. Res. 320 was introduced by Mr. Gutierrez on 
February 7, 2002, and was referred to the Committee on Energy 
and Commerce.
    On September 5, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
met in open markup session and ordered H. Con. Res. 320 
reported to the House, as amended, by voice vote.
    H. Con. Res. 320 was considered in the House under 
suspension of the rules on September 10, 2002, and passed the 
House by a roll call vote of 369 yeas and 2 nays.
    The bill was received in the Senate and referred to the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions on 
September 11, 2002.
    No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 320 in the 
107th Congress.

                    BETTER HEARING AND SPEECH MONTH


                           (H. Con. Res. 358)

    Supporting the goals and ideals of National Better Hearing 
and Speech Month.

Summary

    H. Con. Res. 358 supports the goals and ideals of National 
Better Hearing and Speech Month. The resolution commends the 41 
states that have implemented routine hearing screenings for 
every newborn before they leave the hospital. The resolution 
also commends the efforts of speech and hearing professionals 
in their efforts to improve the speech and hearing development 
of children. Finally, the resolution encourages Americans to 
have their hearing checked regularly and to avoid environmental 
noise that can lead to hearing loss.

Legislative History

    H. Con. Res. 358 was introduced by Mr. Ryun on March 19, 
2002, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On April 24, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met 
in open markup session and ordered H. Con. Res. 358 reported to 
the House by unanimous consent.
    H. Con. Res. 358 was considered in the House under 
suspension of the rules on April 30, 2002, and passed the House 
by voice vote.
    The bill was received in the Senate and referred to the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions on May 1, 
2002.
    No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 358 in the 
107th Congress.

                             OVARIAN CANCER


                           (H. Con. Res. 385)

    Expressing the sense of Congress regarding ovarian cancer 
screening techniques.

Summary

    H. Con. Res. 385 expresses the sense of Congress that the 
Secretary of Health and Human Services, acting through the 
Director of the National Institutes of Health, should conduct 
or support research on the effectiveness of medical screening 
techniques for ovarian cancer, including the use of proteomic 
patterns in blood serum in combination with other techniques. 
The resolution also requires a report to Congress and the 
inclusion of such technique in Federal health care programs and 
group and individual health plans if it proves effective.

Legislative History

    H. Con. Res. 385 was introduced by Mr. Israel on April 23, 
2002, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On July 11, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met 
in open markup session and ordered H. Con. Res. 385 reported to 
the House by voice vote.
    H. Con. Res. 385 was considered in the House under 
suspension of the rules on July 22, 2002, and passed the House 
by voice vote.
    The bill was received in the Senate and referred to the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions on July 23, 
2002.
    No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 385 in the 
107th Congress.

                           HEALTH DISPARITIES


                           (H. Con. Res. 388)

    Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding health 
disparities.

Summary

    H. Con. Res. 388 encourages the establishment of a 
``National Minority Health and Health Disparities Month'' to 
promote educational efforts on the health problems currently 
facing minorities and other health disparity populations. The 
resolution asks the Secretary of Health and Human Services, as 
authorized by the Minority Health and Health Disparities 
Research and Education Act of 2000, to present public service 
announcements on health promotion and disease prevention among 
minorities and other health disparity populations educate 
health care professionals about health disparities. It requests 
that the President issue a proclamation recognizing the 
immediate need to reduce health disparities in the United 
States and encouraging all health organizations and Americans 
to conduct appropriate programs to promote healthfulness in 
minority and other health disparity communities. The resolution 
encourages federal, state, and local governments to work in 
concert with the private and nonprofit sector to emphasize the 
recruitment and retention of qualified individuals from racial, 
ethnic, and gender groups that are currently underrepresented 
in health care professions. Finally, the resolution calls on 
the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality to continue to 
collect and report data on health disparities and share this 
information with all health care professionals so that they may 
better communicate with all patients, regardless of race or 
ethnicity, without bias or prejudice.

Legislative History

    On April 24, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met 
in open markup session to consider a Committee Print to express 
the sense of the Congress regarding health disparities. This 
committee print was ordered to be reported to the House by 
unanimous consent.
    On April 25, 2002, Mrs. Christensen introduced the 
Committee Print which was given the number H. Con. Res. 388. H. 
Con. Res. 388 was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce.
    On April 30, 2002, H. Con. Res. 388 was considered in the 
House under suspension of the rules and passed the House by 
voice vote.
    On May 1, 2002, the resolution was received in the Senate 
and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. On October 3, 
2002, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary discharged the 
resolution by unanimous consent.
    The Senate agreed to the resolution without amendment and 
with a preamble by unanimous consent on October 3, 2002.
    A message on Senate action was received by the House on 
October 4, 2002.

                  CANDACE NEWMAKER RESOLUTION OF 2002


                           (H. Con. Res. 435)

    Expressing the sense of the Congress that the therapeutic 
technique known as rebirthing is a dangerous and harmful 
practice and should be prohibited.

Summary

    H. Con. Res. 435 expresses the sense of Congress that the 
therapeutic technique known as rebirthing, an attachment 
therapy used to try to forge new bonds between adoptive parents 
and their adopted children, is dangerous and harmful and that 
each state should enact a law that prohibits such technique. 
The resolution defines ``rebirthing'' as a therapy to reenact 
the birthing process that includes restraint and the practice 
of which may cause physical harm to or kill a patient.

Legislative History

    H. Con. Res. 435 was introduced by Mrs. Myrick on July 8, 
2002, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On September 5, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
met in open markup session and ordered H. Con. Res. 435 
reported to the House by unanimous consent.
    September 17, 2002, H. Con. Res. 435 was considered in the 
House under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a 
roll call vote of 397 yeas and 0 nays.
    The bill was received in the Senate on September 18, 2002, 
and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions.
    No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 435 in the 
107th Congress.

                              TUBERCULOSIS


                              (H. Res. 67)

    Recognizing the importance of combating tuberculosis on a 
worldwide basis, and acknowledging the severe impact that TB 
has on minority populations in the United States.

Summary

    H. Res. 67 expresses the sense of Congress regarding the 
importance of increasing U.S. investment in international 
tuberculosis control within the foreign aid budget for fiscal 
year 2002. It also calls for expanding domestic efforts to 
eliminate tuberculosis in the United States.

Legislative History

    H. Res. 67 was introduced by Mr. Reyes on February 27, 
2001, and was referred to the Committee on International 
Relations, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as 
fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On March 20, 2001, H. Res. 67 was considered in the House 
under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a roll 
call vote of 405 yeas and 2 nays.

                               FRAGILE X


                             (H. Res. 398)

    Recognizing the devastating impact of fragile X, urging 
increased funding for research on fragile X, and commending the 
goals of National Fragile X Research Day, and for other 
purposes.

Summary

    H. Res. 398 recognizes the devastating impact of fragile X, 
and calls for increased funding for research on fragile X. The 
resolution also commends the goals of National Fragile X 
Research Day.

Legislative History

    H. Res. 398 was introduced by Mr. Watkins on April 25, 
2002, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On September 25, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
met in open markup session and ordered H. Res. 398 reported to 
the House by unanimous consent.
    On October 2, 2002, H. Res. 398 was considered in the House 
under suspension of the rules and passed the House by voice 
vote.

                        MENS HEALTH AND OBESITY


                             (H. Res. 438)

    Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 
improving men's health through fitness and the reduction of 
obesity should be a priority.

Summary

    H. Res. 438 recognizes that being overweight or obese is a 
major health concern in the United States. The resolution 
commends and supports the work of all organizations that are 
taking steps to combat this health problem, and urges all 
governmental, state, and private organizations to do everything 
in their power to promote a healthy lifestyle.

Legislative History

    H. Res. 438 was introduced by Mr. Toomey on June 6, 2002, 
and was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On June 11, 2002, was considered in the House under 
suspension of the rules and passed the House by a roll call 
vote of 400 yeas and 2 nays.

             MANDATORY STEROID TESTING OF BASEBALL PLAYERS


                             (H. Res. 496)

    Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 
Major League Baseball and the Major League Baseball Players 
Association should implement a mandatory steroid testing 
program.

Summary

    H. Res. 496 expresses the sense of the House of 
Representatives that Major League Baseball and the Major League 
Baseball Players Association should implement a mandatory 
steroid testing program; and that such a program would send a 
clear message to our Nation's children that steroids are 
dangerous, illegal, and morally offensive to our country's 
competitive spirit and one of our most cherished sports.

Legislative History

    H. Res. 496 was introduced by Mrs. Johnson of Connecticut 
on July 22, 2002, and it was referred to the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce. That same day, the bill was considered in 
the House under suspension of the rules, and passed by voice 
vote.

             STRENGTHENING SUCCESSFUL 1996 WELFARE REFORMS


                             (H. Res. 525)

    Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 
the 107th Congress should complete action on and present to the 
President, before September 30, 2002, legislation extending and 
strengthening the successful 1996 welfare reforms.

Summary

    H. Res. 525 refers back to the welfare reform law (P.L. 
104-193), which was responsible for promoting record increases 
in work and earnings among current and former welfare 
recipients, reducing the number of children in poverty by 
nearly 3,000,000 and achieving record low rates of child 
poverty among African-American children and children raised by 
single mothers, and lifting 3,000,000 families from welfare 
dependence as part of a decline in national welfare rolls of 
more than 50 percent. Despite these unprecedented gains, 
2,000,000 low-income families remain dependent on welfare, 
challenging the Congress to build upon that success by putting 
even more Americans on the path to self-reliance. H. Res. 525 
states that changes to the welfare reform law are needed to 
better promote the creation and maintenance of strong two-
parent families and to improve the quality and availability of 
childcare.

Legislative History

    H. Res. 525 was introduced by Ms. Northup on September 17, 
2002, and was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and 
in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Education 
and the Workforce, Agriculture, and Financial Services, for a 
period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each 
case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On September 19, 2002, H. Res. 569 was considered in the 
House pursuant to H. Res. 527. H. Res. 569 passed the House by 
a roll call vote of 283 yeas and 123 nays.

                         NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL


                             (H. Res. 569)

    Expressing support for the President's 2002 National Drug 
Control Strategy to reduce illegal drug use in the United 
States.

Summary

    H. Res. 569 expresses the support of the House of 
Representatives for the President and the Office of National 
Drug Control Policy in the goal to reduce drug use in America 
by 10 percent during the next two years and 25 percent during 
the next five years. The resolution calls on Americans to 
reduce illegal drug use by talking to children about the 
dangers and consequences of using illegal drugs. It also urges 
the President and other specified officials to effectively 
implement the 2002 National Drug Control Strategy and to work 
to improve coordination among various actors, including the 
different levels of government, to reduce the demand in the 
United States for the international supply of drugs. Further, 
H. Res. 569 expresses the sense of the House of Representatives 
that narcotics control is an integral part of homeland security 
and should be a priority mission for any new Department of 
Homeland Security. Finally, the resolution reaffirms the 
importance of upholding the Controlled Substances Act.

Legislative History

    H. Res. 569 was introduced by Mr. Souder on October 2, 
2002, and was referred to the Committee on Government Reform, 
and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce for a 
period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each 
case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On October 7, 2002, H. Res. 569 was considered under 
suspension of the rules and agreed to by voice vote.

                        HONORING MAUREEN REAGAN


                            (H. J. Res. 60)

    To honor Maureen Reagan on the occasion of her death.

Summary

    H. J. Res. 60 honors Maureen Reagan on the occasion of her 
death, recognizes her as a forceful champion for action to cure 
Alzheimer's disease and expresses condolences to her family.

Legislative History

    H. J. Res. 60 was introduced in the House by Mr. Markey on 
September 6, 2001, and was referred to the Committee on Energy 
and Commerce.
    On December 4, 2001, H. J. Res. 60 was considered under 
suspension of the rules and agreed to, as amended, by voice 
vote.
    On December 5, 2001, H. J. Res. 60 was received in the 
Senate, read twice and referred to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
    No further action was taken on H. J. Res. 60 in the 107th 
Congress.

                          Oversight Activities


                           PRESCRIPTION DRUGS

    On February 15, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held the 
first in a series of hearings on Medicare Reform. The purpose 
of this hearing was to allow the Subcommittee to gain a better 
understanding of the delivery methods seniors currently utilize 
to obtain prescription drugs, and to gain information and 
suggestions regarding models that could be used to craft a 
federal benefit within the Medicare program. The Subcommittee 
heard testimony from several representatives of delivery 
systems through which seniors currently receive prescription 
drugs, an Assembly representative from the state of Nevada, a 
representative of a public policy organization and a 
representative from a seniors organization.
    On May 16, 2001, the Subcommittee held the second hearing 
in the series. The Subcommittee heard testimony from the 
Director of the Congressional Budget Office, from a patients' 
group, a professor of health management and policy, and a 
biotechnology association.
    On April 17, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health held a 
hearing on creating a Medicare prescription drug benefit. The 
purpose of this hearing was to focus specifically on 
initiatives currently being pursued by the Administration, 
states and the private sector to provide assistance to low 
income seniors with their drug costs, and how these proposals 
might be incorporated into a comprehensive reform package as 
well as offer interim relief until a comprehensive benefit can 
be implemented. The Subcommittee heard testimony from the 
Council of Economic Advisors, and representatives from a 
healthcare services company, the Office of the Governor of 
Nevada, chain drug companies, an independent philanthropy 
focusing on health care issues, a patients' group, and a 
professor.

                     CMS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS

    On March 1, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held a joint 
hearing with the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. 
This was the first in a series of hearings on affordable health 
coverage. The purpose of the series was to learn about the 
current complexities in the Medicare Program, the extent to 
which such complexities are affecting patient care, and what 
role Congress can play in addressing these concerns. 
Specifically, this first hearing examined the current processes 
the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has in 
place to determine how it pays for medical devices and new 
technologies. The Subcommittees heard testimony from two 
panels. The first panel included representatives from a 
nationwide grassroots senior advocacy group, a professor and 
doctor of diagnostic radiology, and a cardiologist. The second 
panel included the Director of the Office of Clinical Standards 
and Quality at HCFA, a senior scientist from a health care 
consulting group, and the executive director of the Medicare 
Payment Advisory Commission.
    On April 4, 2001, the Subcommittees held the second hearing 
in the series. The purpose of this hearing was to examine how 
providers currently receive information from CMS and its 
contractors concerning Medicare policies, and how the provider 
education process can be improved. The Subcommittees heard 
testimony from CMS, the Office of the Inspector General within 
the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), a doctor, 
and representatives from a health care organization 
administrator, a non-profit health insurance corporation, and a 
health care provider.
    On May 10, 2001, the Subcommittees held the third hearing 
in the series. The Subcommittees heard testimony from four 
former administrators of CMS, then know as the Health Care 
Financing Administration. Their testimony focused on ways to 
bring more efficiencies to CMS to help keep pace with the 
evolving 21st century health care marketplace.
    On June 28, 2001, the Subcommittees held the last hearing 
in the series. The purpose of this hearing was to learn more 
about the current contracting complexities unique to the 
Medicare program, the extent to which such complexities are 
affecting the efficiency and integrity of the Medicare system, 
and what role Congress can play in addressing these concerns. 
The Subcommittees heard testimony from two panels, the first 
including CMS, HHS, and the General Accounting Office. The 
second panel included a health care provider, a Medicare 
intermediary, and a Seniors group.

                              MANAGED CARE

    On March 15, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing to address some of the main issues in the 
managed care debate: (1) Federal and state roles in regulation 
of managed care and (2) liability for wrongful denial of 
benefits. The Subcommittee heard testimony from two panels. The 
first panel included a state insurance commissioner, a state 
senator, and a national organization for health care consumers. 
The second panel included a non-profit HMO, a representative 
from Honeywell, a physicians group, and a health policy group.

        THE HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

    On March 22, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing to assess the Health Insurance Portability 
and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and how the Federal medical 
record privacy regulations could be improved. The purpose of 
this hearing was to focus on the benefits and unintended 
consequences of the Clinton Administration's regulations to 
implement HIPAA medical record privacy provisions. The 
Subcommittee received testimony from representatives from an 
Ohio clinic and a Wisconsin clinic, a nurses' group, a public 
medical university, a pharmacy, a private university, and a 
health care insurer.

                DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

    On April 26, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing on the priorities of the Department of Health 
and Human Services (HHS) as reflected in the fiscal year 2002 
Budget. The Subcommittee received testimony from the Secretary 
of Health and Human Services.
    On March 13, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing on the 2003 Budget. The Subcommittee received 
testimony from the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

                  THE FOOD AND DRUG MODERNIZATION ACT

    On May 3, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing to consider whether the reforms contained in 
the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 
(``FDAMA'') have improved the regulation of drugs, devices and 
food, among other things, and specifically whether the 
pediatric exclusivity provision of Title I has resulted in 
better pharmaceutical dosing information for the benefit of 
children. The Subcommittee heard testimony from two panels. The 
first panel included the Senior Associate Commissioner of the 
FDA, and representatives from the medical device industry and 
the food processing industry. The second panel included 
representatives from a children's clinic, a laboratory, 
patient's groups, and a research-based pharmaceutical and 
biotechnology company.

                      FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION

    On June 13, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing on the recent developments which may impact 
consumer access to, and demand for, pharmaceuticals. The 
purpose of this hearing was to provide the Subcommittee with 
the opportunity to consider three Food and Drug Administration 
(FDA) matters which have received considerable attention of 
late: direct-to-consumer (DTC) broadcast advertising; the 
process whereby prescription drugs can be switched to over-the-
counter (OTC) status over the objection of drug manufacturers; 
and the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act 
of 1984, otherwise known as the Hatch-Waxman, or Waxman-Hatch, 
Act. The Subcommittee heard testimony from the Director of 
FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, a physician, an 
attorney, a representative from the generic pharmaceutical 
industry, a Hispanic health and human service provider, and 
representatives from the private sector.

                            MEDICARE REFORM

    On June 14, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing on Medicare reform. The purpose of this 
hearing was to address some of the fundamental issues in the 
Medicare reform debate, specifically how merging Parts A and B 
of the Medicare program may affect (1) the financial 
sustainability of the program, (2) the cost-sharing liability 
of Medicare beneficiaries, and (3) the management and delivery 
of high quality services to beneficiaries. This hearing was 
intended to help to improve the quality of any final 
legislative reform of the Medicare program through thoughtful 
evaluation of the challenging issues inherent in any reform 
proposal. The Subcommittee heard testimony from the General 
Accounting Office, representatives from a health insurers 
group, a Seniors group, a nonprofit nonpartisan policy research 
and educational organization, and a private sector health care 
representative.
    On July 26, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing on Medicare modernization. The purpose of 
this hearing was to learn more about the President's recently 
announced principles for the modernization of the Medicare 
program, the administrative changes that will be occurring at 
the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and what 
role Congress should play in the establishment of a 
prescription drug benefit and the modernization of the Medicare 
program. The Subcommittee received testimony from the Secretary 
of Health and Human Services.
    On March 20, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing on Medicare modernization. The purpose of 
this hearing was to examine how the Federal Employees Health 
Benefit Program (``FEHBP'') currently works and whether FEHB 
should serve as a model for reforming the Medicare Program. The 
Subcommittee heard testimony from HHS, and representatives from 
a non-profit, nonpartisan policy research group, a non-profit 
HMO, a research and educational institute, and a seniors' grass 
roots education and advocacy organization.

                   SAFETY NET PUBLIC HEALTH PROGRAMS

    On August 1, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing on authorizing safety net public health 
programs. The purpose of this hearing was to focus on issues 
related to authorizing Community Health Centers, the National 
Health Service Corps, and whether it is feasible and necessary 
to address health care worker shortages through Federal 
remedies. The Subcommittee heard testimony from two panels of 
witnesses. The first panel included the Acting Director of the 
Health Resources and Services Administration (HRS, and 
representatives from clinics and community health centers, and 
a state senator. The second panel included a witness from 
General Accounting Office (GAO), representatives from a 
patient's group, a health care provider, a private hospital, a 
pharmacist, and a registered nurse.

             MEDICARE AND MEDICAID WASTE, FRAUD, AND ABUSE

    On September 21, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held a 
joint oversight hearing with the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations on Medicare drug reimbursements. The 
Subcommittees received testimony from three panels. The first 
panel included the General Accounting Office, the Deputy 
Inspector General for Health and Human Services (HHS), and a 
pharmacy representative. On the second panel, the Subcommittees 
heard testimony from the Administrator of the Centers for 
Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). The third panel included 
representatives from a physicians' group, a pharmacy and home 
health care provider, a homecare association, and the National 
Institutes of Health (NIH).

                             PUBLIC HEALTH

    On November 15, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing raising health awareness by examining the 
issues of benign brain tumors, alpha one, and breast implant 
issues. The purpose of this hearing was to consider various 
legislative proposals pertaining to the public health. The 
Subcommittee heard testimony from public and private sector 
witnesses including, two breast implant recipients, and 
representatives from a women's health policy research group, 
and other patients' groups.

                        MEDICARE PAYMENT POLICY

    On February 14, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing on Medicare payment policy. The purpose of 
this hearing was to focus on the formula used to update payment 
rates for individual physician services under Medicare's 
physician fee schedule. In 2002, health care professionals paid 
under this fee schedule experienced the largest across-the-
board payment cut since the fee schedule was first put in place 
a decade ago. The Subcommittee investigated the concern that 
the current update formula is flawed and may, at times, put at 
risk beneficiaries' access to critical health care services. 
The Subcommittee received testimony from the Administrator of 
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the General 
Accounting Office, and representatives from several physicians' 
and nurses' groups, a seniors' grass roots education and 
advocacy organization, and a clinic.

                             THE UNINSURED

    On February 28, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing on the uninsured and affordable health care 
coverage. The purpose of this hearing was to address the 
problems of access to affordable health coverage, various 
individual state initiatives, and some of the legislative 
proposals to help more Americans get insurance. The 
Subcommittee heard testimony from various public and private 
sector witnesses, including a doctor, a bi-partisan health 
policy institute, a not-for-profit research and educational 
organization that focuses on health policy, a patients' group, 
a patients advocacy group, a dean of public policy, and a 
research institute.

                   THE PRESCRIPTION DRUG USER FEE ACT

    On March 6, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing of the reauthorization of the Prescription 
Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA). The purpose of this hearing was to 
consider whether the Act has met its purpose of speeding the 
review of drugs and biologics without compromising patient 
safety. Further, the hearing allowed the Subcommittee to learn 
more about the recent agreement between Food and Drug 
Administration (FDA) and industry on the performance goals they 
have developed which they hope will accompany PDUFA III. The 
Subcommittee heard testimony from the Deputy Commissioner of 
FDA, a research laboratory, a pharmaceutical company, and 
school of medicine.

                             WELFARE REFORM

    On April 23, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing on welfare reform to review abstinence 
education and transitional medical assistance. The purpose of 
this hearing was to focus on two welfare reform issues that are 
within the Committee's jurisdiction. The Subcommittee heard 
testimony from the General Accounting Office and private sector 
witnesses.

                             PATIENT SAFETY

    On May 8, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing to focus on efforts that the private sector 
has employed to reduce the number of medical errors. The 
Subcommittee heard testimony from representatives of a health 
care provider, a provider of diagnostic testing and 
information, a private sector accrediting body, a standards and 
information group, and a nurses' group.

                   THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH

    On June 6, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing to examine how the National Institutes of 
Health is investing additional taxpayer dollars to improve and 
expand research activities. This hearing reviewed the 
activities of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and 
the National Institutes of Neurological Disorders of Stroke, 
with an emphasis on heart, blood, and stroke research. The 
Subcommittee heard testimony from the National Heart, Lung, and 
Blood Institute, the National Institute of Neurological 
Disorders and Stroke, and representatives from the private and 
public sector.

                           HEALTH CARE ETHICS

    On July 11, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing to focus on two health care ethics issues. 
The Subcommittee heard testimony from two panels of witnesses 
from both the public and private sector. Witnesses on the first 
panel discussed whether health care providers should be forced 
to provide services that they consider morally objectionable. 
Witnesses serving on the second panel discussed whether a 
parent should be denied information when a minor they are 
legally responsible for is permitted access to contraceptives.

                    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

    On July 16, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health conducted a 
joint oversight hearing with the Subcommittee on Environment 
and Hazardous Materials. The focus on this hearing was the 
legality and effectiveness of moving the EPA Hazardous Waste 
Ombudsman from the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of 
Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) to its Office of 
Inspector General (OIG). The Subcommittee on Environment and 
Hazardous Materials had requested a study from the General 
Accounting Office on this matter. Witnesses included EPA's OIG 
and its Office of General Counsel. In addition, witnesses from 
the GAO testified on its report and the former Ombudsman and a 
citizen advocate spoke as well.

                           MEDICAL LIABILITY

    On July 17, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing to review issues pertaining to the evolving 
medical liability crisis in several states, its effect on 
patient access to care, and whether there is a need to enact 
medical liability reform. The Subcommittee heard testimony from 
two panels of witnesses. The first panel focused on how medical 
malpractice insurance is affecting patient access to care and 
provider availability. The panel consisted of representatives 
from a Pennsylvania hospital, a public university health 
science center, a family physician and clinical professor, a 
consumer rights group, and a patients' group. The second panel 
provided different perspectives on the causes of recent 
increases in medical malpractice premiums and the effect of 
tort reform on providers and injured patients. Witnesses 
included representatives from a national physician-owned 
medical liability insurer providing coverage for health care 
providers in all fifty states, consumer rights groups, an 
actuaries group, and the co-author of a tort law casebook and 
advocate of tort reform.

                             MENTAL HEALTH

    On July 23, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing to focus on recent proposals to provide 
mental health benefits on a ``parity'' basis with medical and 
surgical benefits. The Subcommittee heard testimony from a 
single panel consisting of the representatives from HMO's, a 
manufacturers group, a doctor's group, an independent oil and 
gas exploration and production company, and a behavioral health 
nurse.

                           DRUG REIMPORTATION

    On July 25, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing examining prescription drug reimportation to 
review a proposal to allow third arties to reimport 
prescription drugs. The hearing examined a proposal by 
Representative Jack Kingston intended to allow: (1) personal 
importation of drugs which appear to be approved by the Food 
and Drug Administration (FDA) and (2) third parties to reimport 
FDA-approved drugs into the United States. The Subcommittee 
heard testimony from FDA, a representative from a public 
university's college of pharmacy, a nonprofit physician health 
system organization, a pharmacies' group, and a food and drug 
law attorney.

             GENERIC DRUG ENTRY PRIOR TO PATENT EXPIRATION

    On October 9, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health held an 
oversight hearing to consider whether there exists adequate 
competition amongst brand and generic drugs, and whether 
improvements allowing for greater competition in the drug 
marketplace are necessary. Further, this hearing allowed the 
Subcommittee to learn more about how generic manufacturers seek 
access to the market prior to the expiration of brand drug 
patent protection. The Subcommittee heard testimony from the 
Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Federal Trade 
Commission (FTC), a representative from a generic 
pharmaceuticals group, a physician and attorney of FDA 
regulatory law, a pediatrician, and a patient.

                             Hearings Held

    Medicare Reform: Providing Prescription Drug Coverage for 
Seniors.--Oversight hearing on Medicare Reform: Providing 
Prescription Drug Coverage for Seniors. Hearing held on 
February 15, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-1.
    Patients First: A 21st Century Promise to Ensure Quality 
and Affordable Health Coverage.--Joint oversight hearing with 
the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on Patients 
First: A 21st Century Promise to Ensure Quality and Affordable 
Health Coverage. Hearings held on March 1, April 4, and May 10, 
2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-23.
    A Smarter Health Care Partnership for American Families: 
Making Federal and State Roles in Managed Care Regulation and 
Liability Work for Accountable and Affordable Health Care 
Coverage.--Oversight hearing on a Smarter Health Care 
Partnership for American Families: Making Federal and State 
Roles in Managed Care Regulation and Liability Work for 
Accountable and Affordable Health Care Coverage. Hearing held 
on March 15, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-9.
    Assessing HIPAA: How Federal Medical Record Privacy 
Regulations Cab Be Improved.--Oversight hearing on Assessing 
HIPAA: How Federal Medical Record Privacy Regulations Cab Be 
Improved. Hearing held on March 22, 2001. PRINTED, Serial 
Number 107-15.
    Priorities of the U.S. Department of Health and Human 
Services Reflected in the Fiscal Year 2002 Budget.--Oversight 
hearing on Priorities of the U.S. Department of Health and 
Human Services Reflected in the Fiscal Year 2002 Budget. 
Hearing held on April 26, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-44.
    Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Food and Drug 
Administration Modernization Act.--Oversight hearing on 
Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Food and Drug 
Administration Modernization Act. Hearing held on May 3, 2001. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-51.
    Medicare Reform: Providing Prescription Drug Coverage for 
Seniors.--Oversight hearing on Medicare Reform: Providing 
Prescription Drug Coverage for Seniors. Hearing held on May 16, 
2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-28.
    Recent Developments Which May Impact Consumer Access to, 
and Demand for, Pharmaceuticals.--Oversight hearing on Recent 
Developments Which May Impact Consumer Access to, and Demand 
for, Pharmaceuticals. Hearings held on June 13, 2001. PRINTED, 
Serial Number 107-34.
    Medicare Reform: Modernizing Medicare and Merging Parts A 
and B.--Oversight hearing on Medicare Reform: Modernizing 
Medicare and Merging Parts A and B. Hearings held on June 14, 
2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-40.
    Human Cloning Prohibition Act and Cloning Prohibition 
Act.--Hearing on H.R. 1644, the Human Cloning Prohibition Act 
and H.R. --------, the Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001. Hearing 
held on June 20, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-41.
    Advancing the Health of the American People: Addressing 
Various Public Health Needs.--Hearing on H.R. 293, to elevate 
the position of Director of the Indian Health Service within 
the Department of Health and Human Services to Assistant 
Secretary for Indian Health, and for other purposes; H.R. 632, 
the Men's Health Act of 2001; H.R. 717, the Duchenne Muscular 
Dystrophy Childhood Assistance, Research and Education 
Amendments of 2001; H.R. 1340, the Biomedical Research 
Assistance Voluntary Option Act; H. Con. Res. 25, Expressing 
the sense of the Congress regarding tuberous sclerosis; H. Con 
Res. 36, Urging increased Federal funding for juvenile (type I) 
diabetes research; H. Con. Res. 61, Expressing support for a 
National Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy (RSD) Awareness Month; 
and H. Con. Res. 84, Supporting the goals of Red Ribbon Week in 
promoting drug-free communities. Hearing held on June 27, 2001. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-32.
    Patients First: A 21st Century Promise to Ensure Quality 
and Affordable Health Coverage.--Joint oversight hearing with 
the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on Patients 
First: A 21st Century Promise to Ensure Quality and Affordable 
Health Coverage. Hearings held on June 28, 2001. PRINTED, 
Serial Number 107-52.
    Medicare Modernization: Examining the President's Framework 
for Strengthening the Program.--Oversight hearing on Medicare 
Modernization: Examining the President's Framework for 
Strengthening the Program. Hearing held on July 26, 2001. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-53.
    Authorizing Safety Net Public Health Programs.--Oversight 
hearing on Authorizing Safety Net Public Health Programs. 
Hearing held on August 1, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-57.
    Medicare Drug Reimbursements: A Broken System for Patients 
and Taxpayers.--Joint oversight hearing with the Subcommittee 
on Oversight and Investigations on Medicare Drug 
Reimbursements: A Broken System for Patients and Taxpayers. 
Hearing held on September 21, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-
65.
    Raising Health Awareness Through Examining Benign Brain 
Tumor Cancer, Alpha One and Breast Implant Issues.--Oversight 
hearing on Raising Health Awareness Through Examining Benign 
Brain Tumor Cancer, Alpha One and Breast Implant Issues. 
Hearing held on November 15, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-
75.
    Medicare Payment Policy: Ensuring Stability and Access 
Through Physician Payments.--Oversight hearing on Medicare 
Payment Policy: Ensuring Stability and Access Through Physician 
Payments. Hearing held on February 14, 2002. PRINTED, Serial 
Number 107-91.
    The Uninsured and Affordable Health Care Coverage.--
Oversight hearing on the Uninsured and Affordable Health Care 
Coverage. Hearing held on February 28, 2002. PRINTED, Serial 
Number 107-98.
    Reauthorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act.--
Oversight hearing on Reauthorization of the Prescription Drug 
User Fee Act. Hearing held on March 6, 2002. PRINTED, Serial 
Number 107-93.
    The 2003 Budget: A Review of the HHS Health Care 
Priorities.--Oversight hearing on The 2003 Budget: A Review of 
the HHS Health Care Priorities. Hearing held on March 13, 2002. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-100.
    Medicare Modernization: Examining the Federal Employees 
Health Benefit Program as a Model for Seniors.--Oversight 
hearing on Medicare Modernization: Examining the Federal 
Employees Health Benefit Program as a Model for Seniors. 
Hearing held on March 20, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-105.
    Creating a Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit: Assessing 
Efforts to Help America's Low-Income Seniors.--Oversight 
hearing on Creating a Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit: 
Assessing Efforts to Help America's Low-Income Seniors. Hearing 
held on April 17, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-101.
    Welfare Reform: A Review of Abstinence Education and 
Transitional Medical Assistance.--Oversight hearing on Welfare 
Reform: A Review of Abstinence Education and Transitional 
Medical Assistance. Hearing held on April 23, 2002. PRINTED, 
Serial Number 107-104.
    Reducing Medical Errors: A Review of Innovative Strategies 
to Improve Patient Safety.--Oversight hearing on Reducing 
Medical Errors: A Review of Innovative Strategies to Improve 
Patient Safety. Hearing held on May 8, 2002. PRINTED, Serial 
Number 107-112.
    The National Institutes of Health: Investing in Research to 
Prevent and Cure Disease.--Oversight hearing on the National 
Institutes of Health: Investing in Research to Prevent and Cure 
Disease. Hearing held on June 6, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 
107-122.
    Protecting the Rights of Conscience of Health Care 
Providers and a Parent's Right to Know.--Oversight hearing on 
Protecting the Rights of Conscience of Health Care Providers 
and a Parent's Right to Know. Hearing held on July 11, 2002. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-126.
    Recent Developments in the EPA Office of the Ombudsman.--
Joint oversight hearing with the Subcommittee on Environment 
and Hazardous Materials on Recent Developments in the EPA 
Office of the Ombudsman. Hearing held on July 16, 2002. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-123.
    Harming Patient Access to Care: The Impact of Excessive 
Litigation.--Oversight hearing on Harming Patient Access to 
Care: The Impact of Excessive Litigation. Hearing held on July 
17, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-127.
    Insurance Coverage of Mental Health Benefits.--Oversight 
hearing on Insurance Coverage of Mental Health Benefits. 
Hearing held on July 23, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-118.
    Examining Prescription Drug Reimportation: a Review of a 
Proposal to Allow Third Parties to Reimport Prescription 
Drugs.--Oversight hearing on Examining Prescription Drug 
Reimportation: a Review of a Proposal to Allow Third Parties to 
Reimport Prescription Drugs. Hearing held on July 25, 2002. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-135.
    Examining Issues Related to Competition in the 
Pharmaceutical Marketplace: A Review of the FTC Report, 
``Generic Drug Entry Prior to Patent Expiration''.--Oversight 
hearing on Examining Issues Related to Competition in the 
Pharmaceutical Marketplace: A Review of the FTC Report, 
``Generic Drug Entry Prior to Patent Expiration''. Hearing held 
on October 9, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-140.
      

          Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet

                             (Ratio 18-15)

                     FRED UPTON, Michigan, Chairman

MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida           EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
JOE BARTON, Texas                    BART GORDON, Tennessee
CLIFF STEARNS, Florida               BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois
  Vice Chairman                      ANNA G. ESHOO, California
PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio                ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
CHRISTOPHER COX, California          GENE GREEN, Texas
NATHAN DEAL, Georgia                 KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri
BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming               BILL LUTHER, Minnesota
JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois               BART STUPAK, Michigan
HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico           DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado
CHARLES ``CHIP'' PICKERING,          JANE HARMAN, California
Mississippi                          RICK BOUCHER, Virginia
VITO FOSSELLA, New York              SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
ROY BLUNT, Missouri                  TOM SAWYER, Ohio
TOM DAVIS, Virginia                  JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan,
CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire         (Ex Officio)
LEE TERRY, Nebraska
GREG WALDEN, Oregon
W.J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana
  (Ex Officio)

Jurisdiction: Interstate and foreign telecommunications including, but 
not limited to all telecommunication and information transmission by 
broadcast, radio, wire, microwave, satellite, or other mode.

                         Legislative Activities


   UNITING AND STRENGTHENING AMERICA BY PROVIDING APPROPRIATE TOOLS 
 REQUIRED TO INTERCEPT AND OBSTRUCT TERRORISM (USA PATRIOT ACT) ACT OF 
                                  2001


           Public Law 107-56 (H.R. 3162, H.R. 3016, S. 1510)


                    (Telecommunications Provisions)

    To deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and 
around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory 
tools, and for other purposes.

Summary

    Section 211 of H.R. 3162 amends section 631 of the 
Communications Act of 1934 to clarify that a governmental 
entity's access to information collected and maintained by a 
cable operator, relating to the selection of video programming 
is governed exclusively by the provisions of section 631(h) of 
the Communications Act of 1934. This will ensure that there is 
continued heightened protection for consumer's passive video 
programming activities. However, when a cable operator acts as 
a telephone company or an Internet service provider, it must 
comply with the same laws, found in Title 18 of the United 
States Code governing the interception and disclosure of wire 
and electronic communications that apply to any other telephone 
company or Internet service provider. Under Title 18, providers 
of wire and electronic communications are not required to 
provide notice to their subscribers when disclosing information 
to a governmental entity, and in certain cases may disclose 
information without a court order. However, law enforcement's 
ability to obtain information related to a subscriber's 
selection of video programming is still governed exclusively by 
the Communications Act.
    Section 211 of H.R. 3162 also clarifies that a government 
entity may obtain information collected and maintained by a 
cable operator concerning the selection of video programming by 
a subscriber pursuant to a court order only if, in the court 
proceeding relevant to such court order, such entity offers 
clear and convincing evidence that the subject of the 
information is reasonably suspected of engaging in criminal 
activity and that the information sought would be material 
evidence in the case; the subject of the information is 
afforded the opportunity to appear and contest such entity's 
claim; and the subscriber is notified of such order by the 
person to whom the order is directed.

Legislative History

    On October 3, 2001, the Full Committee on Energy and 
Commerce met in open markup session and favorably ordered 
reported a Committee Print to clarify the application of cable 
television system privacy requirements to new cable services, 
as amended, by voice vote, a quorum being present. The 
Committee also agreed to a unanimous consent request by 
Chairman Tauzin to incorporate the Committee Print, along with 
two other Committee Prints, into a bill to be introduced, H.R. 
3016, and to allow for the Committee to file a report on the 
introduced bill.
    On October 3, 2001, Mr. Tauzin introduced H.R. 3016, which 
was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in 
addition to the Committee on the Judiciary for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 3016 to 
the House on October 9, 2001 (H. Rpt. 107-231, Part I).
    The Committee on the Judiciary was granted an extension for 
further consideration of the bill for a period ending not later 
than Oct. 16, 2001. Following an exchange of letters between 
the Chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the 
Chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary with respect to its 
jurisdictional prerogatives on this or similar legislation, the 
Committee on the Judiciary was discharged from further 
consideration of H.R. 3016 on October 16, 2001.
    On November 6, 2001, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
filed a supplemental report to the House on H.R. 3016 (H. Rpt. 
107-231, Part I).
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce took no further action 
on H.R. 3016, but worked with other committees to include the 
telecommunication provisions, as modified, from H.R. 3016 into 
the bill H.R. 3162.
    On October 23, 2001, H.R. 3162 was introduced by Mr. 
Sensenbrenner and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, 
and in addition to the Committees on Intelligence (Permanent 
Select), Financial Services, International Relations, Energy 
and Commerce, Education and the Workforce, Transportation and 
Infrastructure, and Armed Services, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On October 23, 2001, H.R. 3162 was considered under 
suspension of the rules and passed the House by a roll call 
vote of 357 yeas and 66 nays.
    H.R. 3162 was received in the Senate on October 24, 2001 
and read twice.
    On October 25, 2001, the Senate passed H.R. 3162 by a vote 
of 98 yeas and 1 nay, clearing it for the White House and the 
bill was presented to the President. On October 25, 2001, the 
President signed H.R. 3162 into law (Public Law 107-56).

                 BIPARTISAN CAMPAIGN REFORM ACT OF 2001


                 Public Law 107-155 (H.R. 2356, S. 27)


                    (Telecommunications Provisions)

    To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to 
provide bipartisan campaign reform.

Summary

    Section 315(b) of the Communications Act of 1934 (the 
``Act'') requires television broadcast stations, radio 
broadcast stations, cable systems, and DBS providers to charge 
``legally qualified candidates'' for public office, during the 
45 days before a primary and 60 days before a general election, 
no more than the lowest unit charge (LUC) of the station for 
the same class and amount of time for the same period. The LUC 
allows a candidate the benefit from all discounts offered to 
the most favored commercial advertiser for the same class and 
amount of time for the same period, without regard to the 
frequency of use by the candidate, thus giving the politician 
the advantages of a ``bulk discount'' price without having to 
purchase the bulk. As introduced, section 305 of H.R. 2356 
amended Section 315 (b) of the Act by changing the LUC to ``the 
lowest charge of the station (at any time during the 180-day 
period preceding the date of the use) for the same amount of 
time for the same period.'' However, section 305 of H.R. 2356 
ultimately was struck from the bill on the House floor (see 
infra). Section 306 of H.R. 2356 amends section 315(b) of the 
Act by requiring affirmative obligations of candidates for 
political office in order to receive the LUC for television and 
radio broadcasts.

Legislative History

    On June 20, 2001, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet held an oversight hearing entitled, Campaign 
Finance: Proposals Impacting Broadcasters, Cable Operators and 
Satellite Providers.
    H.R. 2356 was introduced by Mr. Shays on June 28, 2001 and 
referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in 
addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and the 
Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as 
fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On July 10, 2001 the Committee on House Administration 
reported H.R. 2356 adversely to the House (H. Rpt. 107-131, 
Part I), and the Committees on Energy and Commerce and the 
Judiciary were granted an extension for a period ending not 
later than July 10, 2001. On July 10, 2001, the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce and the Committee on the Judiciary were 
discharged from further consideration of H.R. 2356.
    On July 12, 2001, the Committee on Rules reported a 
resolution, H. Res. 188, providing for the consideration of 
H.R. 2356. H. Res. 188 failed by a roll call vote of 203 yeas 
and 228 nays.
    On July 19, 2001, a discharge petition was filed providing 
for the consideration of H.R. 2356. On February 7, 2002, 
pursuant to H. Res. 203, the Committee on Rules reported a 
resolution, H. Res. 344, providing for the consideration of 
H.R. 2356. H. Res. 344 passed the House by a voice vote on 
February 12, 2002.
    On February 13, 2002, the House considered H. Amdt. 419 
offered by Mr. Green of Texas, to amend the bill by striking 
section 305 and modifying section 306. The amendment was agreed 
to by a roll call vote of 327 yeas and 101 nays.
    On February 14, 2002, the House passed H.R. 2356 by a roll 
call vote of 240 yeas and 189 nays.
    On February 26, 2002 H.R. 2356 was received in the Senate, 
read the first time, and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar 
under Read the First Time. On February 27, 2002 it was read the 
second time and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under 
General Orders, Calendar No. 318.
    On March 19, 2002, H.R. 2356 was considered by Senate, and 
on March 20, 2002, H.R, 2356 passed the Senate without 
amendment by a record vote of 60 yeas and 40 nays.
    On March 20, 2002 a message on Senate action sent to the 
House, and H.R. 2356 was cleared for the White House. On March 
22, 2002, pursuant to the provisions of H. Con. Res. 361, 
enrollment corrections on H.R. 2356 were made.
    On March 26, 2002, H.R. 2356 was presented to President, 
and on March 27, 2002, H.R. 2356 was signed by President 
(Public Law 107-155).

                 FARM SECURITY AND RURAL INVESTMENT ACT


                Public Law 107-171 (H.R. 2646, S. 1731)


                    (Telecommunications Provisions)

    To provide for the continuation of agricultural programs 
through fiscal year 2007, and for other purposes.

Summary

    Section 6103 of the Conference report to accompany H.R. 
2646 contains provisions dealing with telecommunications 
matters within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce relating to the creation of a loan and loan guarantee 
program to assist in the deployment of broadband facilities and 
services in rural communities with a population less than 
20,000 people. Section 6103 of restricts the availability of 
the program in a manner that excludes large telephone companies 
from eligibility, and that only permits a state or local 
governmental entity to participate in the program if no private 
entity is offering, or has committed to offer, broadband 
service in a qualifying community.

Legislative History

    H.R. 2646 was introduced by Mr. Combest on July 26, 2001, 
and the Committee on Agriculture favorably ordered the bill 
reported to the House, as amended, on July 27, 2001. On August 
2, 2001, the Committee on Agriculture reported H.R. 2646 to the 
House (H. Rpt. 107-191, Part I). On August 31, 2001, the 
Committee on Agriculture filed a supplemental report to the 
House (H. Rpt. 107-191, Part II).
    On August 2, 2001, H.R. 2646 was referred sequentially to 
the House Committee on International Relations for a period 
ending not later than September 7, 2001 for consideration of 
such provisions of the bill and amendment as fall within the 
jurisdiction of that committee pursuant to clause 1(j), rule X.
    The Committee on International Relations ordered the bill 
reported to the House, as amended on September 6, 2001, and was 
granted an extension for further consideration ending not later 
than September 10, 2001. On September 10, 2001, the Committee 
on International Relations reported H.R. 2646 to the House (H. 
Rpt. 107-191, Part III).
    The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 
Agriculture exchanged correspondence on September 28, 2001 
concerning each Committee's jurisdictional prerogatives on H.R. 
2646.
    On October 3, 4, and 5, 2001, the House considered H.R. 
2646 pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 248. The House 
passed the bill, as amended, by a roll call vote of 291 yeas 
and 120 nays.
    On February 13, 2002, H.R. 2646 was considered in the 
Senate by unanimous consent, struck all after the Enacting 
Clause, and substituted the language of S. 1731, as amended. 
The Senate then passed H.R. 2646, as amended, by a record vote 
of 58 yeas and 40 nays. The Senate insisted on its amendment 
and requested a conference on February 13, 2002.
    On February 28, 2002, the House disagreed to the Senate 
amendment, and agreed to a conference requested by the Senate. 
The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on Energy 
and Commerce for consideration of matters contained in the 
Senate amendment and modifications committed to conference 
falling within the Committee's jurisdiction.
    The Committee on Conference met on April 9 and 10, 2002, 
and on May 1, 2002 the conference report was filed. The House 
considered and agreed to the conference report, pursuant to H. 
Res. 403, on May 1, 2001 by a roll call vote of 280 yeas and 
141 nays.
    The Senate considered the conference report on May 7 and 8, 
2002, and agreed to the conference report by a record vote of 
64 yeas and 35 nays on May 8, 2002.
    On May 10, 2002, H.R. 2646 was cleared for the White House 
and presented to the President. On May 13, 2002, the President 
signed H.R. 2646 (Public Law No: 107-171).

      PUBLIC HEALTH SECURITY AND BIOTERRORISM RESPONSE ACT OF 2001


                     Public Law 107-188 (H.R. 3448)


                    (Telecommunications Provisions)

    To improve the ability of the United States to prevent, 
prepare for, and respond to bioterrorism and other public 
health emergencies.

Summary

    In an effort to further promote the orderly transition to 
digital television, and to promote the equitable allocation and 
use of digital channels by television broadcast permittees and 
licensees, section 531 of H.R. 3448 directs the Federal 
Communications Commission (FCC), at the request of an eligible 
licensee or permittee, to, within 90 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act, allot, if necessary, and assign a 
requested and identified paired digital television channel to 
that licensee or permittee. The FCC shall only do this if such 
channel can be allotted and assigned without further 
modification of the tables of allotments as set forth in 
sections 73.606 and 73.622 of the Commission's regulations (47 
CFR 73.606, 73.622) and such allotment and assignment is 
consistent with the Commission's technical rules (47 CFR part 
73). The only licensees or permitees eligible for this digital 
allotment are those that are full power television broadcast 
licensee or permittee (or its successor in interest) that had 
an application pending for an analog television station 
construction permit as of October 24, 1991, which application 
was granted after April 3, 1997; and as of the date of 
enactment of this Act, is the permittee or licensee of that 
station. This provision enables such licensees or permittees an 
opportunity to realize their expectations created by prior FCC 
action to foster a digital audience during the transition 
period to digital television without having to terminate 
abruptly analog service now enjoyed by their viewers. Section 
531 of H.R. 3448 also imposes a hard 18-month deadline for the 
construction of the digital facility from the time of the FCC's 
issuance of the construction permit for the new digital 
channel. In this regard, eligible licensees are absolutely 
prohibited from obtaining or receiving an extension of time 
from the Commission pursuant to 47 C.F.R. 73.624(d)(3). In 
addition, section 531 prohibits eligible licensees from using 
the newly granted ``in-core'' digital channel allotment and 
assignment to provide analog television service.

Legislative History

    H.R. 3448 was introduced on December 11, 2001 by Mr. Tauzin 
and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On December 12, 2001, H.R. 3448 was considered in the House 
under suspension of the Rules and passed the House by a roll 
call vote of 418 yeas and 2 nays.
    H.R. 3448 was received in the Senate and read twice on 
December 18, 2001. The bill passed the Senate, amended, by 
unanimous consent on December 20, 2001. The Senate insisted 
upon its amendment, asked for a conference, and appointed 
conferees.
    On February 28, 2002, the House disagreed to the Senate 
amendment, agreed to go to conference, and appointed conferees
    The conference report was filed on May 21, 2002 (H. Rpt. 
107-481), and pursuant to H. Res. 427, the conference report 
was considered in the House on May 22, 2002. The conference 
report passed the House by a roll call vote of 425 yeas and 1 
nay.
    On May 23, 2002, the conference report was considered in 
the Senate and agreed to by a record vote of 98 yeas and 0 
nays, and cleared for the White House.
    S. Con. Res. 117 passed the Senate on May 23, 2002 by 
unanimous consent. The bill was received in the House and held 
at the desk on May 23, 2002. On June 4, 2002, S. Con. Res. 117 
passed the House by unanimous consent. S. Con. Res. 117 
provided for corrections in the enrolled version of H.R. 3448.
    H.R. 3448 was presented to the President on June 7, 2002, 
and was signed by the President on June 12, 2002 (Public Law 
107-188).

                         THE AUCTION REFORM ACT


                     Public Law 107-195 (H.R. 4560)

    To eliminate the deadlines for spectrum auctions of 
spectrum previously allocated to television broadcasting.

Summary

    H.R. 4560 removes the statutory deadlines for the receipt 
of revenues derived from the auctioning of the 700 MHz band. 
Second, the bill prohibits the Federal Communications 
Commission (the Commission) from commencing or conducting 
Auctions #31 and #44 on June 19, 2002. Third, H.R. 4560 
requires the Commission to report to Congress one year after 
the date of enactment regarding when the Commission intends to 
conduct Auctions #31 and #44 as well as the progress that has 
been made in the digital television transition and the 
assignment and allocation of spectrum for advanced mobile 
communications services.

Legislative History

    H.R. 4560 was introduced on April 24, 2002 by Mr. Tauzin 
and fifty-one cosponsors. The bill was referred to the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On May 2, 2002, the Full Committee met in open markup 
session and ordered H.R 4560 favorably reported to the House, 
without amendment, by voice vote, a quorum being present. On 
May 7, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 
4560 to the House (H. Rpt. 107-443).
    On May 7, 2002, the House suspended the rules and passed 
H.R. 4560 by voice vote.
    On May 8, 2002, H.R. 4560 was received in the Senate. On 
May 9, 2002, H.R. 4560 was read for the first time and placed 
on the Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time. 
On May 17, 2002, H.R. 4560 was read the second time and placed 
on the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders, 
Calendar No.380. .
    On June 18, 2002, H.R. 4560 was laid before Senate by 
unanimous consent. Senator Daschle, on behalf of Senator 
Ensign, proposed an amendment that was agreed to by unanimous 
consent. The Senate then passed H.R. 4560 with an amendment by 
unanimous consent.
    On June 18, 2002, Chairman Tauzin asked unanimous consent 
that the House agree to the Senate amendment to H.R. 4560. The 
motion was agreed to by unanimous consent.
    On June 18, 2002, H.R. 4560 was cleared for the White House 
and presented to the President. The President signed H.R. 4560 
into law on June 19, 2002 (Public Law No. 107-195).

                                INTELSAT


                      Public Law 107-233 (S. 2810)

    A bill to amend the Communications Satellite Act of 1962 to 
extend the deadline for the INTELSAT initial public offering.

Summary

    Under the ``Open-Market Reorganization for the Betterment 
of International Telecommunications (ORBIT) Act'', INTELSAT is 
required to privatize. As part of that effort, INTELSAT is to 
conduct an initial public offering (IPO) by December 31, 2002. 
As detailed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), 
INTELSAT has made significant progress in its privatization 
efforts. Moreover, INTELSAT has made substantial preparations 
to conduct its statutorially-mandated IPO. However, volatility 
in the financial markets in general, and the telecommunications 
sector specifically, make this statutory deadline unrealistic. 
Equally important, such an ill-timed IPO runs counter to one of 
the central policy objectives of ORBIT--dilution of foreign 
government ownership. S. 2810 would give INTELSAT an additional 
year in which to conduct its IPO, and provides the FCC 
authority to allow an additional extension of time if warranted 
by market conditions.

Legislative History

    On July 26, 2002 S. 2810 was introduced in the Senate by 
Senator Hollings, read twice, considered, read the third time, 
and passed without amendment by unanimous consent. On September 
4, 2002, a message on Senate action sent to the House, and S. 
2810 was received in the House and held at the desk.
    On September 10, 2002, S. 2810 was considered in the House 
under suspension of the rules and was agreed to by voice vote 
and cleared for White House.
    S. 2810 was presented to the President on September 19, 
2002, and on October 1, 2002 the bill was signed by the 
President (Public Law 107-233).

           DOT KIDS IMPLEMENTATION AND EFFICIENCY ACT OF 2002


                Public Law 107-317 (H.R. 3833, S. 2537)

    To facilitate the creation of a new, second-level Internet 
domain within the United States country code domain that will 
be a haven for material that promotes positive experiences for 
children and families using the Internet, provides a safe 
online environment for children, and helps to prevent children 
from being exposed to harmful material on the Internet, and for 
other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 3833 amends the National Telecommunications and 
Information Administration Organization Act to direct the 
Secretary of Commerce to assign to the National 
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) 
responsibility for providing for the establishment, and 
overseeing operation, of a second-level Internet domain within 
the U.S. country-code domain that provides access only to 
materials suitable for, and not harmful to, minors. H.R. 3833 
requires NTIA to publicize the availability of the new domain 
and to educate parents of minors to utilize the domain in 
coordination with filtering or blocking technologies. H.R. 3833 
authorizes NTIA to suspend the operation of the new domain if 
the registry is found not to be serving its intended purpose.

Legislative History

    H.R. 3833 was introduced in the House by Mr. Shimkus and 
seven cosponsors on March 4, 2002. The bill was referred solely 
to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On March 7, 2002, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet met in open markup session and approved H.R. 
3833 for Full Committee consideration, as amended, by a voice 
vote, a quorum being present. On May 8, 2002, the Full 
Committee met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 3833 
reported to the House, as amended, by a voice vote, a quorum 
being present. On May 8, 2002, The Committee on Energy and 
Commerce reported H.R. 3833 to the House (H. Rpt. 107-449). The 
House considered H.R. 3833 under suspension of the rules on May 
21, 2002, and passed H.R. 3833 by a roll call vote of 406 yeas 
to 2 nays.
    On May 22, 2002, H.R. 3833 was received in the Senate and 
read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation. The Committee held a hearing on the 
legislation on September 12, 2002.
    The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 
discharged H.R. 3833 by unanimous consent, and the Senate 
passed H.R. 3833, with an amendment by unanimous consent on 
November 13, 2002.
    On November 15, 2002, H.R. 3883 passed the House by 
unanimous consent and was cleared for the White House. On 
November 15, 2002, the bill was presented to the President, and 
on December 4, 2002, H.R. 3833 was signed by the President 
(Public Law 107-317).

                      KNOW YOUR CALLER ACT OF 2001


                               (H.R. 90)

    To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit 
telemarketers from interfering with the caller identification 
service of any person to whom a telephone solicitation is made, 
and for other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 90 amends the Communications Act of 1934 to make it 
unlawful for any person making a telephone solicitation to: (1) 
interfere with or circumvent a caller identification service 
from accessing or providing the call recipient with identifying 
information about the call; or (2) fail to provide caller 
identification information that is accessible by a caller 
identification service, if such person has the capability to 
provide such information. H.R. 90 also provides a cause of 
action for a person or entity, or a State attorney general on 
behalf of its residents, for violations of such prohibition or 
regulations and requires the Federal Communications Commission 
to study and report to Congress with respect to the 
transmission capabilities of caller identification information.

Legislative History

    H.R. 90 was introduced in the House by Mr. Frelinghuysen on 
January 3, 2001. H.R. 90 was referred solely to the Committee 
on Energy and Commerce.
    On February 28, 2001, the Full Committee on Energy and 
Commerce met in open markup session to and ordered H.R. 90 
favorably reported to the House, by a voice vote, a quorum 
being present. The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported 
H.R. 90 to the House (H. Rpt. 107-13) on March 12, 2001. The 
House considered H.R. 90 under suspension of the rules on 
December 4, 2001 and passed the bill by a voice vote.
    On December 5, 2001, H.R. 90 was received in the Senate and 
read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 90 in the 107th 
Congress.

    INDEPENDENT TELECOMMUNICATIONS CONSUMER ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 2001


                               (H.R. 496)

    To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to promote 
deployment of advanced services and foster the development of 
competition for the benefit of consumers in all regions of the 
Nation by relieving unnecessary burdens on the Nation's two 
percent local exchange telecommunications carriers, and for 
other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 496 reduces or eliminates regulations imposed upon 
mid-sized local exchange carriers by the Federal Communications 
Commission (the Commission). H.R. 496 also requires the 
Commission to approve or disapprove a merger involving mid-
sized local exchange carriers within sixty days from the date 
on which a merger application is filed.

Legislative History

    H.R. 496 was introduced by Mrs. Cubin and four cosponsors 
on February 7, 2001. H.R. 496 was referred to the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce.
    On February 28, 2001, the Full Committee met in open markup 
session and ordered H.R. 496 favorably reported to the House, 
as amended, by a voice vote, a quorum being present. The 
Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 496 to the House 
(H. Rpt. 107-20) on March 13, 2001.
    The House considered H.R. 496 under suspension of the rules 
on March 21, 2001, and passed H.R. 496, as amended, by voice 
vote.
    On March 22, 2001, H.R. 496 was received in the Senate, 
read twice, and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 496 in the 107th 
Congress.

         THE UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL ACT OF 2001


                               (H.R. 718)

    To protect individuals, families, and Internet service 
providers from unsolicited and unwanted electronic mail, having 
considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment 
and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.

Summary

    H.R. 718, the Unsolicited Commercial Electronic Mail Act of 
2001, is to prohibit the initiation and transmission of 
unsolicited commercial electronic mail messages unless the 
initiator of such message provides a valid electronic mail 
return address and provides the recipient of such messages the 
opportunity not to receive future mailings. In addition, the 
bill allows Internet access service providers (ISP) to decline 
further unsolicited commercial electronic mail (UCE) messages, 
if the ISP has a policy of no UCE or the ISP has received a 
significant number of complaints from its customers. Under H.R. 
718, the Federal Trade Commission is authorized to enforce the 
Act. Further, state or local laws that are inconsistent with 
the Act are preempted, except in the case of any civil remedy 
under state trespass or contract law, any state or local law 
relating to acts of computer fraud and abuse arising from the 
unauthorized transmission of unsolicited commercial electronic 
mail messages, or any state criminal law regarding obscenity or 
risk of injury to children. H.R. 718 is narrowly drawn to 
protect freedom of speech on the Internet and legitimate 
commercial uses of electronic mail messages.

Legislative History

    H.R. 718 was introduced by Mrs. Wilson on February 14, 
2001, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
and the Committee on the Judiciary.
    On March 21, 2001, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet met in open markup session and approved H.R. 
718 for Full Committee consideration, as amended, by a voice 
vote. On March 28, 2001, the Full Energy and Commerce Committee 
met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 718 reported to the 
House with a favorable recommendation, as amended, by a voice 
vote, a quorum being present. The Committee on Energy and 
Commerce reported H.R. 718 to the House (H. Rpt. 107-41, Part 
I) on March 13, 2001.
    On April 4, 2001, the Committee on the Judiciary was 
granted an extension for consideration of the bill ending not 
later than June 5, 2001. On June 5, 2001, the Committee on the 
Judiciary reported the bill to the House (H. Rpt. 107-41, Part 
II).
    No further action was taken on H.R. 718 in the 107th 
Congress.

             INTERNET FREEDOM AND BROADBAND DEPLOYMENT ACT


                              (H.R. 1542)

    To deregulate the Internet and high-speed data services, 
and for other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 1542 preempts, with certain narrow exceptions, State 
and federal regulation of high-speed data services, Internet 
backbone services, and Internet access services. Second, the 
bill clarifies that Internet backbone and high-speed data 
services are not subject to the interLATA restriction in 
section 271 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Third, the 
bill ensures freedom of choice to Internet users by requiring 
each incumbent local exchange carrier (ILEC) to allow Internet 
service providers to interconnect with the ILEC's high-speed 
data service for the provision of Internet access service.

Legislative History

    H.R. 1542 was introduced by Chairman Tauzin and 74 
cosponsors on April 24, 2002. The bill was referred to the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    The Full Committee held a legislative hearing on H.R. 1542 
on April 25, 2001. The Committee received testimony from the 
telecommunications industry, the financial services industry, 
and a nonprofit Community Action Agency.
    On Thursday, April 26, 2001, the Subcommittee on 
Telecommunications and the Internet met in open markup session 
and approved H.R. 1542, as amended, by a roll call vote of 19 
yeas and 14 nays for Full Committee consideration, a quorum 
being present. On Wednesday May 9, 2001, the Full Committee met 
in open markup session and ordered H.R. 1542 favorably reported 
to the House, as amended, by a roll call vote of 32 to 23, a 
quorum being present. H.R. 1542 was reported to the House (H. 
Rpt. 107-83, Part I) on May 24, 2001.
    The bill was referred sequentially to the Committee on 
Judiciary for consideration of such provisions of the bill and 
amendment recommended by the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
as propose to narrow the purview of the Attorney General under 
section 271 of the Communications Act of 1934 on May 24, 2001. 
The Committee on Judiciary held a hearing on H.R. 1542 on June 
5, 2001. The Committee on Judiciary met in open markup session 
and ordered H.R. 1542 reported unfavorably on June 13, 2001. 
The Committee on Judiciary reported H.R. 1542 adversely on June 
18, 2001 (H. Rpt. 107-83, Part II).
    The Committee on Rules met on February 26, 2002 and granted 
a rule providing for the consideration of H.R 1542. The rule 
was filed in the House as H. Res. 350. On February 27, 2002, 
the House passed H. Res. 350 by a roll call vote of 282 yeas to 
142 nays.
    The House considered H.R. 1542 on February 27, 2002 and 
passed the bill, amended, by a roll call vote of 273 yeas to 
157 nays.
    On February 28, 2002, H.R. 1542 was received in the Senate, 
read twice, and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 1542 in the 107th 
Congress.

   FCC ENHANCED ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY WITH RESPECT TO COMMON CARRIERS


                              (H.R. 1765)

    To increase penalties for common carrier violations of the 
Communications Act of 1934, and for other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 1765 amends the Communications Act of 1934 (the 
``Act''), to enhance the Federal Communications Commission's 
(``Commission'') enforcement authority in several ways with 
respect to common carriers. The bill enhances the forfeiture 
penalties which the Commission can assess under Section 
503(b)(2)(B) of the Act against a common carrier for 
``willfully or repeatedly fail[ing] to comply with any of the 
provisions of the Act or of any rule, regulation, or order 
issued by the Commission under [the] Act . . .''. H.R. 1765 
enhances forfeiture penalties to up to $1,000,000 for each 
violation or each day of a continuing series of violations and 
to up to $10,000,000 for any continuing violation. The bill 
also increases these enhanced penalties to up to $2,000,000 for 
each violation or each day of a continuing violation and to up 
to $20,000,000.
    In addition, H.R. 1765 provides the Commission with ``cease 
and desist'' authority as an additional enforcement tool; 
extends the statute of limitations for the Commission to bring 
a forfeiture proceeding from one year to two years under 
Section 503(b)(6)(B) of the Act; streamlines state public 
utility commission (``PUC'') procedures for resolution of 
disputes regarding interconnection agreements; clarifies that 
state PUCs have the authority to ensure timely and effective 
compliance with any interconnection agreement, including the 
imposition of service quality performance requirements; and 
requires the Commission to evaluate the affect of the increased 
remedies on common carrier compliance with the Commissions 
rules, regulations, and orders.

Legislative History

    H.R. 1765 was introduced in the House by Mr. Upton and 
thirteen cosponsors on May 8, 2001. The bill was referred to 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On Thursday, May 17, 2001, the Subcommittee on 
Telecommunications and the Internet held a hearing on H.R. 
1765. The Subcommittee received testimony from the FCC, the 
president of a state PUC, several representatives of 
telecommunications companies, and an expert on the FCC's 
enforcement authority.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 1765 in the 107th 
Congress, but the provisions contained in the bill were 
incorporated as an amendment that was offered and withdrawn by 
Mr. Upton at both the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and 
Internet (April 26, 2001) and the full Committee (May 9, 2001) 
mark-ups of H.R. 1542. Certain provisions of H.R. 1765 were 
offered by Mr. Upton and Mr. Green as an amendment (H. Amdt. 
433) to H.R. 1542 during House consideration of the bill on 
February 27, 2002. The amendment was adopted by a roll call 
vote of 421 yeas to 7 nays.

            NATIONAL MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE PARTNERSHIP ACT


                              (H.R. 1858)

    To make improvements in mathematics and science education, 
and for other purposes.

Summary

    Section 704 of H.R. 1858 requires the Director of the 
National Science Foundation, in consultation with appropriate 
federal agencies and educational entities, to study and report 
to Congress about the status of broadband network access in 
schools and libraries, including, among other things, 
consideration of the effect that specific or regional 
circumstances may have on the ability of such institutions to 
acquire such access in order to achieve universal connectivity 
as an effective tool in the educational process and options and 
recommendations to address challenges and issues identified 
within the report. As such, the study and report under section 
704 would create a substantive foundation which could affect 
changes in existing federal policies that promote and enable 
broadband access in schools and libraries.

Legislative History

    H.R. 1858 was introduced by Mr. Boehlert on May 16, 2001 
and was referred to the Committee on Science, and in addition 
to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, for a period 
to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
    On June 13, 2001, the Committee on Science met in open 
markup session and ordered H.R. 1858 reported to the House, as 
amended. During the markup, the bill was amended to include 
section 704. The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the 
Committee on Science exchanged correspondence on July 9, 2001 
concerning each Committee's jurisdictional prerogatives on 
section 704 of H.R. 1858.
    The Committee on Science reported the bill to the House on 
July 11, 2001 (H. Rpt. 107-134, Part I), and the Committee on 
Education and the Workforce Granted an extension for further 
consideration ending not later than July 11, 2001. On the same 
day, the Committee on Education and the Workforce was 
discharged from further consideration of H.R. 1858.
    The bill was considered in the House under suspension of 
the rules on July 30, 2001, and passed the House by voice vote.
    On July 31, 2001, the bill was received in the Senate, read 
twice, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, 
Labor, and Pensions.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 1858 in the 107th 
Congress.

                       DOT KIDS NAME ACT OF 2001


                              (H.R. 2417)

    To facilitate the creation of a new global top-level 
Internet domain that will be a haven for material that will 
promote positive experiences of children and families using the 
Internet, to provide a safe online environment for children, 
and to help prevent children from being exposed to harmful 
material on the Internet, and for other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 2417 directs the Secretary of Commerce to jointly with 
the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers 
(ICANN), develop a plan for ICANN to establish a kids-friendly 
top-level Internet domain, make such plan publicly available, 
and enter into an appropriate agreement with ICANN to carry out 
the plan. The domain must be available for voluntary use as a 
location of material only suitable for minors. H.R. 2417 also 
requires the full operation of the new domain within six months 
after contract award, new domain approval by ICANN, and 
provides liability protections for any operation and 
maintenance of the domain. Under H.R. 2417, the Secretary is 
required to carry out a program to publicize the availability 
of the new domain and to educate parents of minors regarding 
the process for utilizing the domain in combination with 
hardware and software technologies that filter or block 
unsuitable materials.

Legislative History

    H.R. 2417 was introduced in the House by Mr. Shimkus and 
one cosponsor on June 28, 2001. The bill was referred solely to 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
    On November 1, 2001, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet held a hearing on H.R. 2417. The Subcommittee 
received testimony from representatives from National 
Telecommunications and Information Administration, children's 
Internet providers, and children's advocacy groups.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 2417 in the 107th 
Congress.

        COMBATING ILLEGAL GAMBLING REFORM AND MODERNIZATION ACT


                              (H.R. 3215)

    To amend title 18, United States Code, to expand and 
modernize the prohibition against interstate gambling, and for 
other purposes.

Summary

    H.R. 3215 amends the Federal criminal code to revise 
provisions regarding interstate gambling by prohibiting (with 
exceptions) any person engaged in a gambling business from 
knowingly using a communication facility for the transmission: 
(1) of bets or wagers, or betting information, in interstate or 
foreign commerce, within the special maritime and territorial 
jurisdiction of the United States, or to or from any place 
outside the jurisdiction of any nation regarding any 
transmission to or from the United States, or (2) of a 
communication in such interstate or foreign commerce which 
entitles the recipient to receive money or credit as a result 
of bets or for information assisting in the placing of bets. 
The bill prohibits, with exceptions, any person engaged in a 
gambling business from knowingly accepting credit, an 
electronic fund transfer, a check, or the proceeds of certain 
other forms of financial transaction as the Secretary may 
prescribe in connection with the transmission of such a 
communication of information assisting the placing of bets. 
H.R. 3215 includes exceptions, including certain: (1) 
transmissions of information assisting in the placing of bets, 
and (2) uses of communication facilities for the transmission 
of bets. In addition H.R. 3215 bars imposition of damages, 
penalties, or forfeiture against any person or entity for an 
act done in compliance with notice received from a law 
enforcement agency.

Legislative History

    H.R. 3215 was introduced in the House by Mr. Goodlatte and 
twenty-seven cosponsors on November 1, 2001. The bill was 
referred to the Committee on Judiciary and the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce.
    On November 29, 2001, the Subcommittee on Crime of the 
Committee on Judiciary held a hearing on H.R. 3833. On March 
12, 2002, the Subcommittee on Crime met in open markup to 
consider H.R. 3833 and approved the bill, without amendment, by 
a voice vote, a quorum being present. On May 8, June 13, and 
June 18, 2002, the Full Judiciary Committee met in open markup 
to consider H.R. 3833. The bill was approved, as amended, by a 
roll call vote of 18 yeas to 12 nays. On July 18, 2002, H.R. 
3215 was reported to the House (107-591, Part I).
    On July 18, 2002, H.R. 3215 was referred sequentially to 
the House Committee on Energy and Commerce for a period ending 
not later than July 19, 2002 for consideration of such 
provisions of the bill and amendment as fall within the 
jurisdiction of that committee pursuant to clause 1(f), rule X. 
On July 19, 2002, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
discharged H.R. 3215.
    No further action was taken on H.R. 3215 in the 107th 
Congress.

                          Oversight Activities


                                 ICANN

    On February 8, 2001, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet held an oversight on whether or not the 
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) new 
generation of Internet domain name selection process was 
thwarting competition. The hearing focused on the process by 
which ICANN, in November 2000, approved seven new top level 
domain (TLD) names (i.e., ``.aero'', ``.coop'', ``.info'', 
``.museum'', ``.name'', ``.pro.'', and ``.biz''), and examined 
whether ICANN's selection process was open, fair, and one which 
adequately promoted competition in the TLD name marketplace. 
The Subcommittee received testimony from ICANN, companies whose 
TLD applications were accepted and rejected by ICANN, a company 
which chose not to apply at all because it considered ICANN's 
application process to be flawed, and a law professor who 
specializes in Internet governance.

                   TECHNOLOGY AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS

    On March 8, 2001, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet held an oversight hearing on technology and 
education: a review of Federal, state, and private sector 
programs. The hearing focused on Federal, state/local, and 
private sector investments in programs which promote the use of 
technology to improve education and examined what the programs 
are, how the programs work, who benefits from the programs, and 
what levels of funding are associated with such programs. 
Witnesses included representatives from Federal, state and 
local governments, as well as representatives of several 
notable private sector programs.

                     DIGITAL TELEVISION TRANSITION

    On March 15, 2001, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet held an oversight hearing on digital 
television: a private sector perspective on the transition. The 
hearing focused on the progress that the various involved 
industries were making in the transition from analog to digital 
television and the obstacles slowing the transition. The 
Subcommittee heard testimony from representatives of broadcast 
networks, commercial broadcasters, public broadcasters, 
consumer electronics manufacturers, consumer electronics 
retailers, small and large cable operators, and major 
television studios.

                FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION REFORM

    On March 29, 2001, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet held an oversight on Federal Communications 
Commission Chairman Michael K. Powell's agenda and plans for 
reform of the FCC. The hearing focused on Chairman Powell's 
plans for structural reform of the FCC and addressed a wide 
range of issues raised by the Subcommittee members related to 
matters within the FCC's jurisdiction. Chairman Powell was the 
sole witness.

                          E-RATE AND FILTERING

    On April 4, 2001, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet held an oversight hearing on E-Rate and 
filtering: a review of the Children's Internet Protection Act 
(CHIPA). The hearing focused on the implementation and 
effectiveness of provisions in CHIPA that require public 
libraries which receive federal subsidies (e.g., through the E-
Rate program) to implement filtering/blocking technologies in 
its Internet-enabled computers in order to protect children 
from inappropriate content on the Internet. The Subcommittee 
received testimony from representatives of family groups, 
public libraries, civil liberties groups, a librarian, and 
Internet filtering technology companies.

                 ENHANCED 911 EMERGENCY CALLING SYSTEMS

    On June 14, 2001, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet held an oversight hearing on the progress of 
ensuring compatibility with enhanced 911 emergency calling 
systems. The hearing focused on the progress that wireless 
carriers and public safety answering points (PSAPs) are making 
in their efforts to deploy Enhanced 911 Emergency Calling 
Systems (which will provide a wireless phone user's location 
information to a PSAP when 911 is dialed), within the deadlines 
and parameters established by the FCC. The Subcommittee 
received testimony from the FCC's Wireless Telecommunications 
Bureau Chief, representatives of location technology 
manufacturers, wireless telecommunications companies, and a 
representative of the public safety community.

   CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM: PROPOSALS IMPACTING BROADCASTERS, CABLE 
                   OPERATORS, AND SATELLITE PROVIDERS

    On June 20, 2001, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet held an oversight hearing on campaign finance 
reform: proposals impacting broadcasters, cable operators and 
satellite providers. The hearing focused on various campaign 
finance reform proposals to provide federal candidates with 
additional financial assistance for the purchase of television 
advertising spots and how such proposals would impact various 
providers of television broadcasts, not to mention non-federal 
candidates and commercial entities seeking to purchase 
television advertising spots. In addition, the 
constitutionality of such proposals was examined. Witnesses 
included industry representatives of broadcasters, cable 
operators, and satellite television providers, a law professor 
who specializes in First Amendment law, and a campaign finance 
reform advocacy group representative.

ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY'S EFFORTS TO CURB CHILDREN'S EXPOSURE TO VIOLENT 
                                CONTENT

    On July 20, 2001, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet held an oversight hearing examining the 
entertainment industry's efforts to curb children's exposure to 
violent content. The hearing focused on the Federal Trade 
Commission's examination of the extent to which various 
entertainment media industries (i.e., recording, video game, 
and motion picture) and retailers were marketing violent 
content to children and what, if any, actions such industries 
were taking to prevent such marketing. The Subcommittee 
received testimony from a representative of the Federal Trade 
Commission, representatives of the motion picture, video game, 
and recording industries, a major retail chain, and a parents' 
advocacy group representative.
    On October 1, 2002, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet held an oversight hearing on the recording 
industry marketing practices: a check-up. This hearing was a 
follow-up to the July 20th, 2001 hearing and focused on FTC's 
examination of the extent to which the recording industry 
marketed violent content to children and what, if any, actions 
the recording industry was taking to prevent such marketing. 
Witnesses testifying before the Subcommittee included the FTC, 
a pediatrics association, a representative of the recording 
industry; a representative of the hip-hop community, and music 
retailer representatives.

         U.S. DEPLOYMENT OF THIRD GENERATION WIRELESS SERVICES

    On July 24, 2001, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet held an oversight hearing on when and where 
the U.S. deployment of third generation wireless services will 
take place. The hearing focused on the progress being made by 
the Bush Administration and the FCC with respect to allocation 
and assignments of additional spectrum for the deployment of 3G 
wireless services. Witnesses testifying at the hearing included 
the Department of Defense, the Department of Commerce, the 
Federal Communications Commission, a representative of the 
Instructional Television Fixed Service (ITFS) community, and 
representatives of the commercial wireless telecommunications 
industry.

              MULTI-CHANNEL VIDEO PROGRAMMING DISTRIBUTION

    On December 4, 2001, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet held an oversight hearing on the status of 
competition in the multi-channel video programming distribution 
(MVPD) marketplace. The hearing focused on potential changes in 
the MVPD marketplace occasioned by proposed corporate mergers 
therein. The Subcommittee heard testimony from two Direct 
Broadcast Satellite (DBS) providers seeking to merge (EchoStar 
and DirecTV), representatives of: big and small cable 
television operators, broadcasters, and resellers of DBS 
services in rural areas.

                           SPECTRUM LICENSES

    On December 11, 2001, the Subcommittee on 
Telecommunications and the Internet held an oversight hearing 
on the settlement agreement between the U.S. Government and 
Nextwave, Inc. to resolve disputed spectrum licenses. The 
hearing focused on the specific provisions of the settlement 
seeking to resolve conflicting claims to certain spectrum 
licenses. The licenses at issue were won by Nextwave in the 
Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) so-called ``C-Block'' 
auction in 1996, which were subsequently reauctioned by the FCC 
(due to Nextwave's filing for bankruptcy protection and 
subsequent failure to make requisite installment payments for 
the licenses) and won by various other carriers in the FCC's 
so-called ``Auction 35'' in 2000. The dispute over the licenses 
was subject of then-pending, protracted litigation. Witnesses 
testifying at the hearing included the FCC, the Department of 
Justice, Nextwave, a wireless carrier which won licenses in 
``Auction 35,'' and a wireless carrier in similar situation as 
Nextwave seeking a similar settlement with the government.

                 CONTENT PROTECTION IN THE DIGITAL ERA

    On April 25 2002, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet held an oversight hearing on ensuring content 
protection in the digital era. The hearing focused on the 
transition from analog to digital television and the unique 
challenges this transition presented with respect to protecting 
digital content from Internet piracy. In addition, the hearing 
examined what, if any, content protection technologies were 
appropriate to implement to ensure the release of digital 
content (for the sake of advancing the transition to digital 
television) while balancing consumer expectations with respect 
to the functionality of their consumer electronics equipment. 
Witnesses included content providers, consumer electronics 
manufacturers, a digital consumer rights group, and digital 
rights management software manufactures.

         CHATTING ON-LINE: A DANGEROUS PROPOSITION FOR CHILDREN

    On May 13, 2002, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and 
the Internet conducted an oversight field hearing in Kalamazoo, 
Michigan on the dangers to children when chatting on-line. The 
focus of the hearing was on the dangers, such as sexual 
predation, involved with children using two-way interactive 
services (``chatting'') on-line and ways to protect children 
from such dangers. Witnesses giving testimony at the hearing 
included an adult who, as a minor, was the victim of an adult 
sexual predator whom she met on-line; the National Center for 
Missing and Exploited Children; an Internet Service Provider 
which offers parental controls and child-friendly spaces; a 
non-profit foundation whose mission is to empower individuals 
to fight cyber predators; and a father from Kalamazoo, 
Michigan, whose daughter was preyed-upon by an adult on-line.

                 THE FCC'S SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT PROCESS

    On June 5, 2002, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and 
the Internet conducted an oversight hearing on the Federal 
Communications Commission's (FCC) ultra-wideband (UWB) 
proceeding: an examination of the government's spectrum 
management process. The hearing focused on the FCC's February 
14, 2002 final rule which permitted, with certain restrictions, 
the operation of UWB devices under the FCC's Part 15 
regulations. In particular, the hearing focused on the 
appropriateness of the restrictions placed by the FCC on the 
operation of UWB devices under the final rule, whether the 
growth of the nascent UWB industry would be impeded by those 
restrictions, and the general statutory delineation between the 
spectrum management responsibilities of the FCC and the 
National Telecommunications and Information Administration 
(NTIA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce. The Subcommittee 
heard testimony from the U.S. Department of Defense, the NTIA, 
the FCC, and several UWB technology companies.

                          AREA CODE EXHAUSTION

    On June 26, 2002, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet held an oversight hearing on what are the 
solutions to area code exhaustion. The hearing focused on the 
burdens to consumers and businesses caused by area code changes 
and efforts by Federal and state governments and 
telecommunications service providers to conserve 
telecommunications numbering resources. Witnesses testifying at 
the hearing included the Federal Communications Commission, the 
California State Public Utility Commission, the North America 
Numbering Plan Administrator, a local chamber of commerce, and 
telecommunications service providers.

                  CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING

    On July 10, 2002, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet held an oversight hearing on the Corporation 
for Public Broadcasting and a look into public broadcasting in 
the digital era. The hearing focused on numerous aspects of the 
Committee's jurisdiction with respect to the Corporation for 
Public Broadcasting (CPB), which funds both the Public 
Broadcasting System (PBS) and National Public Radio (NPR). 
Topics included the digital television conversion, ancillary 
commercial use of spectrum, and alleged bias at NPR. The 
Subcommittee heard testimony from the CPB, PBS, NPR, a 
coalition dealing with traditional values, and a public 
television association

                             Hearings Held

    Is ICANN's New Generation of Internet Domain Name Selection 
Process Thwarting Competition?--Oversight hearing on is ICANN's 
New Generation of Internet Domain Name Selection Process 
Thwarting Competition? Hearing held on February 8, 2001. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-4.
    Technology and Education: A Review of Federal, State, and 
Private Sector Programs.--Oversight hearing on Technology and 
Education: A Review of Federal, State, and Private Sector 
Programs. Hearing held on March 8, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 
107-18.
    Digital Television: A Private Sector Perspective on the 
Transition.--Oversight hearing on Digital Television: A Private 
Sector Perspective on the Transition. Hearing held on March 15, 
2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-20.
    FCC Chairman Michael K. Powell: Agenda and Plans for Reform 
of the FCC.--Oversight hearing on FCC Chairman Michael K. 
Powell: Agenda and Plans for Reform of the FCC. Hearing held on 
March 29, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-21.
    E-Rate and Filtering: a Review of the Children's Internet 
Protection Act.--Oversight hearing on E-Rate and Filtering: a 
Review of the Children's Internet Protection Act. Hearing held 
on April 4, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-33.
    A Bill to increase penalties for common carrier violations 
of the Communications Act of 1934, and for other purposes.--
Hearing on H.R. 1765, a bill to increase penalties for common 
carrier violations of the Communications Act of 1934, and for 
other purposes. Hearing held on May 17, 2001. PRINTED, Serial 
Number 107-27.
    Ensuring Compatibility with Enhanced 911 Emergency Calling 
Systems: A Progress Report.--Oversight hearing on Ensuring 
Compatibility with Enhanced 911 Emergency Calling Systems: A 
Progress Report. Hearing held on June 14, 2001. PRINTED, Serial 
Number 107-31.
    Campaign Finance Reform: Proposals Impacting Broadcasters, 
Cable Operators and Satellite Providers.--Oversight hearing on 
Campaign Finance Reform: Proposals Impacting Broadcasters, 
Cable Operators and Satellite Providers. Hearing held on June 
20, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-42.
    An Examination of the Entertainment Industry's Efforts to 
Curb Children's Exposure to Violent Content.--Oversight hearing 
on an Examination of the Entertainment Industry's Efforts to 
Curb Children's Exposure to Violent Content. Hearing held on 
July 20, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-60.
    U.S. Deployment of Third Generation Wireless Services: When 
Will It Happen and Where Will It Happen?--Oversight hearing on 
U.S. Deployment of Third Generation Wireless Services: When 
Will It Happen and Where Will It Happen? Hearing held on July 
24, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-58.
    Dot Kids Name Act.--Hearing on H.R. 2417, the Dot Kids Name 
Act. Hearing held on November 1, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 
107-63.
    The Status of Competition in the Multi-Channel Video 
Programming Distribution Marketplace.--Oversight hearing on the 
Status of Competition in the Multi-Channel Video Programming 
Distribution Marketplace. Hearing held on December 4, 2001. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-77.
    The Settlement Between the U.S. Government and Nextwave, 
Inc. to Resolve Disputed Spectrum Licenses.--Oversight hearing 
on the Settlement Between the U.S. Government and Nextwave, 
Inc. to Resolve Disputed Spectrum Licenses. Hearing held on 
December 11, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-78.
    Ensuring Content Protection in the Digital Age.--Oversight 
hearing on Ensuring Content Protection in the Digital Age. 
Hearing held on April 25, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-95.
    Chatting On-Line: A Dangerous Proposition for Children.--
Oversight hearing on Chatting On-Line: A Dangerous Proposition 
for Children. Hearing held on May 13, 2002. PRINTED, Serial 
Number 107-102.
    The FCC's UWB Proceeding: An Examination of the 
Government's Spectrum Management Process.--Oversight hearing on 
the FCC's UWB Proceeding: An Examination of the Government's 
Spectrum Management Process. Hearing held on June 5, 2002. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-114.
    Area Code Exhaustion: What are the Solutions?--Oversight 
hearing on Area Code Exhaustion: What are the Solutions? 
Hearing held on June 26, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-115.
    Corporation for Public Broadcasting Oversight and a Look 
Into Public Broadcasting in the Digital Era.--Oversight hearing 
on Corporation for Public Broadcasting Oversight and a Look 
Into Public Broadcasting in the Digital Era. Hearing held on 
July 10, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-133.
    Transition to Digital Television.--Hearing on H.R. --------
, Transition to Digital Television. Hearing held on September 
25, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-141.
    Recording Industry Marketing Practices: A Check-Up.--
Oversight hearing on Recording Industry Marketing Practices: A 
Check-Up. Hearing held on October 1, 2002. PRINTED, Serial 
Number 107-132.
      

              Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations

                              (Ratio 9-7)

               JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania, Chairman

MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida           PETER DEUTSCH, Florida
CLIFF STEARNS, Florida               BART STUPAK, Michigan
PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio                TED STRICKLAND, Ohio
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina         DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado
ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky               CHRISTOPHER JOHN, Louisiana
  Vice Chairman                      BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois
CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire       JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan,
ERNIE FLETCHER, Kentucky               (Ex Officio)
W.J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana
  (Ex Officio)
Jurisdiction: Responsibility for oversight of agencies, departments, 
and programs within the jurisdiction of the full committee, and for 
conducting investigations within such jurisdiction.

                              Introduction

    During the 107th Congress, the Subcommittee on Oversight 
and Investigations conducted major inquiries with respect to 
virtually all Federal agencies within the Committee's 
jurisdiction, including the Department of Health and Human 
Services, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug 
Administration, the Department of Energy, the Department of 
Commerce, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 
the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and 
the Environmental Protection Agency. The Subcommittee's 
oversight has exposed improper and illegal governmental and 
corporate activities, uncovered waste, fraud and abuse of 
taxpayer dollars, strengthened our national security and our 
defenses against terrorist attacks, improved health care and 
environmental protection, and enhanced protection of American 
consumers and investors. These investigations have provided the 
basis for enactment of corrective legislation in the 107th 
Congress and will provide the foundation for legislative action 
in the 108th Congress. In addition, the Subcommittee's 
inquiries have resulted in meaningful changes in the Executive 
Branch's implementation and enforcement of current law and the 
establishment of cost-saving measures in the operations of the 
various departments and agencies.

                          Oversight Activities


 HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO HEALTH AND HEALTH 
                                  CARE


                                Hearings


                         HUMAN CLONING RESEARCH

    On March 28, 2001, the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations held a hearing on issues raised by human cloning 
research. The purposes of the hearing were to: (1) assess the 
status of cutting-edge science relevant to human cloning 
research; (2) examine scientific, medical, ethical, and moral 
issues raised by human cloning research; and (3) determine 
whether Federal legislation was needed to regulate or ban human 
cloning research. The first panel of witnesses consisted of 
scientists involved in cloning research, including 
representatives from two scientific teams that have expressed 
an intention to clone a human being. The second panel featured 
witnesses from the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research 
of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Director of 
the Hastings Center testifying for the National Bioethics 
Advisory Commission. The third panel featured witnesses who 
discussed the ethical, religious, and policy issues in the area 
of human cloning research.
    The hearing highlighted the moral and scientific concerns 
over human cloning research and spurred consideration of 
different types of legislation limiting or banning cloning 
research. Ultimately, the House passed H.R. 2505 in July 2001 
banning all forms of human cloning research.

                SECURITY OF PRIVATE MEDICAL INFORMATION

    On May 23, 2001, the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations held a hearing on the security of private 
medical information. The hearing reviewed the Committee's 
oversight of cyber security practices at the Health Care 
Financing Administration, now known as the Centers for Medicare 
and Medicaid Services (CMS), and featured testimony from CMS 
computer security officials and private cyber experts who had 
examined the CMS Medicare computer network. As a result of the 
hearing, CMS officials altered the agency's network 
configuration to eliminate a significant vulnerability 
uncovered by the Committee that could have exposed private 
Medicare information to unauthorized users or hackers, and 
pledged to take a series of additional actions to address the 
Committee's other findings.

             MEDICARE+CHOICE PREMIUM AND BENEFIT VARIATIONS

    On May 31, 2001, the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations held a hearing in Levittown, Pennsylvania on 
Medicare+Choice plan payment methodology. The hearing was held 
in response to the Committee's concern over drastically 
different premiums offered by Medicare+Choice in adjacent 
geographical areas--a situation exemplified in the Levittown 
area. The hearing focused on the statutory mechanisms of 
Medicare+Choice that can lead to variations in reimbursement 
methodology, which in turn can lead to differing levels of 
benefits and premiums from county to county. The hearing also 
highlighted possible structural flaws in the Medicare+Choice 
program's reimbursement procedures.
    The first panel of witnesses included several 
Medicare+Choice program beneficiaries and a resident insurance 
manager at a local continuing care facility. The second panel's 
witnesses included representatives from the Centers for 
Medicare and Medicaid Services, Independence Blue Cross, Aetna 
U.S. Healthcare, and the Medicare+Choice research director on 
the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission.

                        IMPORTED PHARMACEUTICALS

    The Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held a 
hearing on June 7, 2001, to examine continuing concerns over 
imported pharmaceuticals, including through Internet-based 
pharmacies--a subject of inquiry during the 106th Congress as 
well. This hearing examined four areas of interest: (1) 
personal imports of controlled substances; (2) overseas mail 
deliveries of prescription drugs; (3) counterfeit bulk-drug 
imports; and (4) the global counterfeiting and diversion threat 
in the pharmaceutical market. The purposes of the hearing were 
to highlight the safety concerns with imported prescription 
drugs, and to examine actions taken in response to the 
Committee's previous oversight on this topic. The first panel 
of witnesses featured parents of a young man who apparently had 
died from an overdose or interaction involving prescription 
drugs he ordered without a prescription from a foreign-based 
Internet pharmacy. The second panel featured governmental 
witnesses from the Office of National Drug Control Policy, the 
Drug Enforcement Administration, the U.S. Customs Service, the 
Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Institute on 
Drug Abuse, and the Virginia State Police. The third panel 
featured witnesses from the University of Texas College of 
Pharmacy; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company; Novartis 
Pharmaceuticals; GlaxoSmithKline; a consultant on controlled 
drugs and chemical law, policy, administration and enforcement; 
and an international trade lawyer who had closely studied 
counterfeiting and diversion in the pharmaceutical trade.
    Testimony during the hearing focused on the danger to the 
public health from FDA's use of enforcement discretion that 
resulted in personal imports of drugs of unknown origin into 
the United States at the rate of two million per year and 
increasing. While these imports entered primarily through the 
mails and contract carriers of overnight parcels, there also 
was extensive testimony regarding personal imports, 
particularly of controlled substances over the Mexican border. 
The FDA witness testified that the Department of Health and 
Human Services was considering proposals to address this issue, 
which may require Congressional action.
    The Committee's oversight in this area was highlighted in 
House floor debate of an Agriculture Appropriation amendment 
that would have allowed for commercial re-importation of 
prescription drugs from foreign countries. That amendment was 
defeated.

                       USE AND ABUSE OF OXYCONTIN

    In early 2001, the Committee began investigating abuse of 
the prescription drug OxyContin. The drug is a form of the 
narcotic oxycodone, a morphine-like pain killer, and is used 
primarily to treat cancer patients. However, the drug can be 
easily compromised and transformed into a potent narcotic 
producing heroin-type effects on users. Concern over the drug's 
misuse has been rising due to the increasing number of 
oxycodone-related deaths since 1996, and reports of OxyContin 
becoming more prevalent on the black market. In response to 
these concerns, the Subcommittee held a field hearing on 
OxyContin on August 28, 2001, in Bensalem Township, 
Pennsylvania--where a local pharmacist was arrested and 
indicted for illegally selling Oxycontin prescriptions to 
anyone with $60. At the hearing, Federal, state and local law 
enforcement officers, as well as representatives from the 
medical community and Purdue Pharma, the manufacturer of 
Oxycontin, addressed both the palliative and pernicious effects 
of Oxycontin. Witnesses included representatives from the Drug 
Enforcement Administration; the Office of the Pennsylvania 
Attorney General, Drug Strike Force Legal Service Section; the 
Delaware County District Attorney's Office; the Bucks County 
District Attorney's Office; the Philadelphia Police Department 
Narcotics Intelligence Unit; Purdue Pharma, L.P.; the Foxchase 
Cancer Center; and the Office of Drug Evaluation of the Food 
and Drug Administration. In addition, the Subcommittee received 
testimony from a registered psychiatric nurse who treats young 
adults with OxyContin addiction.
    Subsequent to this hearing, the Subcommittee Chairman 
requested that the General Accounting Office (GAO) study 
prescription drug monitoring programs in states across the 
country to determine their effectiveness. The GAO report was 
completed in May 2002, and found that States with such programs 
benefited by reducing doctor-shopping and improving state 
investigations into drug diversions.

                      MEDICARE DRUG REIMBURSEMENTS

    During the 107th Congress, the Committee continued its 
focus on oversight of reimbursement practices for drugs 
currently covered by the Medicare program, particularly how 
such practices may permit medical providers and drug 
manufacturers to profit at the expense of beneficiaries and 
taxpayers. Medicare currently provides a very limited 
prescription drug benefit, under which coverage is restricted 
primarily to those drugs either administered by a physician or 
provided in conjunction with durable medical equipment. Under 
Federal law, Medicare reimburses the providers of these drugs 
at 95 percent of the drug's Average Wholesale Price (AWP). On 
September 21, 2001, the Subcommittees on Health and Oversight 
and Investigations conducted a joint hearing that examined 
abuses prevalent in the current Medicare drug benefit. The 
hearing featured the testimony of several witnesses, including 
a plaintiff in an ongoing qui tam lawsuit against several drug 
manufacturers, and the Administrator of the Centers for 
Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Also testifying were the 
director of health care issues for the General Accounting 
Office (GAO), a deputy Inspector General of the Department of 
Health and Human Services, the Chief of the Bioethics 
Department at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and 
representatives from three health care provider groups that 
administer Medicare-covered drugs.
    The hearing testimony, along with information uncovered in 
the course of the Committee's two-year investigation into this 
issue, demonstrated how some drug manufacturers caused inflated 
AWPs to be reported and used to set Medicare's reimbursement 
rates, and then marketed their drugs to providers based on the 
``spread'' between the reported AWP--upon which provider 
reimbursement and beneficiary co-payments are calculated--and 
the price at which the drug company actually sold the drug to 
the providers, which generally was significantly lower. These 
inflated AWPs have caused the Medicare program and its 
beneficiaries to pay each year billions of extra dollars in 
reimbursements and co-payments to providers who administer 
Medicare-covered drugs. Based on the information revealed in 
the hearing, the Committee worked to develop legislation that 
would reform the Medicare drug benefit and eliminate the 
overpayments. In addition, on December 3, 2002, CMS sent a 
program memorandum to its Medicare carriers announcing that, as 
of January 1, 2003, it would use a single drug pricer to 
determine the AWPs that Medicare pays for covered drugs. Each 
carrier currently calculates its own AWPs from published data, 
which has led to discrepancies in reimbursements for the same 
drugs among multiple carriers. This new policy will implement a 
change first requested by the Committee during the 106th 
Congress as part of its oversight of the AWP issue, and is a 
first step towards reform of the AWP reimbursement process.

               MEDICARE'S PREVENTIVE HEALTH CARE BENEFITS

    On May 23, 2002, the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations held a hearing to examine how well Medicare's 
clinical preventive benefits serve seniors and how the next 
generation of preventive medical treatment will be incorporated 
and promoted in the health care system. The hearing focused on 
a General Accounting Office (GAO) report, which was requested 
by Subcommittee Chairman James Greenwood in July 2001 and 
publicly released at the hearing. The GAO report examined the 
extent to which Medicare beneficiaries use covered preventive 
services and what actions the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid 
Services (CMS) had taken to increase use of such services among 
the Medicare population. GAO found that, while use of 
preventive services offered under Medicare has increased over 
time, use of these services varied widely by type of service 
and state, and also by ethnic group, income, and education. The 
report identified a number of actions taken by CMS to expand 
the program, and identified limitations to increasing usage of 
preventive services. The Subcommittee heard from two panels of 
witnesses on the role of preventive medicine, its potential to 
control costs, and the findings of the GAO report. The 
witnesses represented GAO, CMS, the Agency for Healthcare 
Research and Quality, and the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention, as well as various academic and advocacy groups.
    As a result of the hearing testimony, on September 25, 
2002, the Subcommittee Chairman requested that GAO perform a 
follow-up inquiry to examine in greater depth the issues 
surrounding beneficiary use and cost-effectiveness of Medicare 
preventive services. The GAO study is scheduled for completion 
in the 108th Congress.

                    THE IMCLONE CANCER DRUG INQUIRY

    The Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held 
hearings on June 13 and September 10, 2002, as part of the 
Committee's inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the 
surprise rejection of ImClone Systems' highly-touted cancer 
drug, Erbitux, by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). These 
events attracted national attention because of the pre-market 
publicity about the drug, ImClone's record-setting $2 billion 
alliance with Bristol-Myers Squibb to market Erbitux, the 
controversy over the accuracy of ImClone's public descriptions 
of FDA's concerns in a non-public letter to the company, and 
multi-million dollar stock trades by ImClone insiders and 
others in the weeks and days before FDA's negative decision. 
Some of these activities subsequently became the subject of 
investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) 
and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New 
York. The Committee undertook an examination of the ImClone 
matter as a case study of how drugs are developed and approved 
on an expedited basis by FDA and potential flaws in that 
process.
    The initial hearing opened with testimony from two 
individuals that had been enlisted to assist the Committee in 
investigating this matter, including the preparation of a 
preliminary Committee staff report. These individuals had 
reviewed the clinical research issues that surrounded the 
Erbitux application and its subsequent rejection, and provided 
the Subcommittee with background information and key facts 
uncovered in the Committee's investigation. The witnesses 
described issues of flawed study design as well as failed 
execution, the questionable ImClone communications to the 
investing public and desperate patients about the promise of 
the drug and its progress toward FDA expedited approval, and 
ImClone stock trades by ImClone officers and directors and 
potentially others with inside information just prior to the 
FDA rejection. The hearing's second panel featured Dr. Samuel 
Waksal (the former Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of ImClone), 
who appeared pursuant to subpoena and exercised his Fifth 
Amendment right not to testify. The third panel featured the 
current CEO of ImClone, who is the brother of Samuel Waksal, 
and an executive from Bristol-Myers Squibb, both of whom 
testified regarding the Erbitux application and the due 
diligence done by the companies prior to FDA submission. 
Finally, the Subcommittee heard testimony from five FDA 
witnesses, four of whom were involved in the review of Erbitux 
and worked at FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and 
Research.
    There was no dispute at the hearing among these FDA 
witnesses regarding the unacceptability of the application; 
however, the decision to permit expedited review was the 
subject of considerable controversy. The Committee learned that 
in August 2000 the FDA medical reviewer was overruled by her 
supervisor and ImClone was given permission to go forward with 
the filing for expedited consideration based on a study that 
was unlikely to meet the criteria for such accelerated 
approval. The head of the Oncology Division in the FDA Center 
for Drugs advised the Committee that he would not have 
permitted the study to be submitted to his Center as the basis 
for expedited approval, and instead would have worked with the 
company to develop a more acceptable methodology to support an 
expedited application. In September 2002, FDA announced that it 
would consolidate the review and approval of most drugs in the 
Center for Drugs in order to improve consistency and 
efficiency.
    The Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held a 
second hearing on October 10, 2002, to review the Committee's 
continuing inquiry into the ImClone matter, and, in particular, 
the failure of ImClone's officers and board of directors to 
adequately oversee both the recent insider stock sales and the 
questionable conduct of Samuel Waksal. Six witnesses associated 
with ImClone--three members of the Board and three company 
officers--testified with respect to the actions ultimately 
taken by ImClone to improve its ethics and accountability 
rules. The Subcommittee also heard from the Deputy Commissioner 
of FDA regarding ways to improve the drug development and 
approval process.
    In addition, on September 10, 2002, the Committee's 
bipartisan leadership sent a criminal referral to the 
Department of Justice regarding possible false statements made 
by Ms. Martha Stewart--a close friend of Samuel Waksal--to the 
Committee, through her counsel, concerning her sale of ImClone 
stock the day before the FDA rejection of ImClone's 
application.

     AMERICA'S BLOOD SUPPLY IN THE AFTERMATH OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2001

    Following up on oversight in past Congresses, on September 
10, 2002, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held 
a hearing that examined safety and supply issues confronting 
the nation's blood supply, in the context of lessons learned 
from the September 11th tragedies. The first hearing panel 
included witnesses from the Office of Public Health Emergency 
Preparedness, Department of Health and Human Services; the 
Office of Blood Research and Review at the Food and Drug 
Administration; the Armed Services Blood Program; and the 
General Accounting Office (GAO). The second panel included 
witnesses from the American Association of Blood Banks, the 
American Red Cross, America's Blood Centers, and the Society 
for the Advancement of Blood Management.
    The panels addressed several related issues, including the 
response to the events of September 11th; the capability of and 
preparation by the Federal government and the nation's blood 
suppliers to ensure supply following future disasters or 
terrorist attacks; factors that affect the stability of the 
blood supply, such as the impact of new blood-donor exclusion 
policies (such as new variant Creuztfeldt-Jakob Disease 
(nvCJD), known as Mad Cow Disease); and prospects for creating 
and maintaining a stable and adequate blood supply amidst 
growing demand. As part of this inquiry, GAO released a report, 
requested by Subcommittee Chairman James Greenwood, raising 
issues regarding the adequacy of the current supply, trends in 
supply and demand, the response to the events of September 11th 
and subsequent emergency planning, the potential impact of new 
donor restrictions, and changes in the price of blood.

                                ACCUTANE

    In the 107th Congress, the Committee continued its 
examination of safety concerns related to the prescription acne 
drug, Accutane (isotretinoin). The investigation focused on two 
safety concerns: birth defects and psychiatric side effects 
such as depression and suicide. In September 2001, the 
Committee requested additional information from the Food and 
Drug Administration (FDA) concerning Accutane, in order to 
better understand some of the potential side effects of the 
drugs and the actions taken by FDA to address these concerns. 
In 2002, the Committee requested additional records from Roche 
Pharmaceuticals, the manufacturer of Accutane.
    On December 11, 2002, the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations held a hearing to examine the safety issues 
relating to Accutane. Witnesses included representatives from 
FDA and Roche Pharmaceuticals, as well as the March of Dimes, 
the Organization of Teratology Information Services, a 
dermatologist, the parents of sons who committed suicide while 
on Accutane, and a patient and a mother of a patient who had 
positive experiences with Accutane.

        PATIENTS' FIRST: QUALITY AND AFFORDABLE HEALTH COVERAGE

    The Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held a 
series of joint hearings on quality and affordable health 
coverage with the Subcommittee on Health on March 1, April 4, 
May 10, and June 28, 2001. For a description of these hearings, 
entitled ``Patients' First: A 21st Century Promise to Ensure 
Quality and Affordable Health Coverage,'' refer to the 
Subcommittee on Health section of this report.

                        Investigative Activities


                            MAD COW DISEASE

    In January 2001, the Committee initiated a review of the 
adequacy of the measures instituted by the Federal government 
to protect the United States from bovine spongiform 
encephalopathy (BSE), commonly known as mad cow disease. The 
Committee requested and received budgetary and programmatic 
information and briefings from the Food and Drug Administration 
(FDA), and reviewed the adequacy of the resources and efforts 
devoted to ensuring compliance with FDA's guidance and rules to 
help prevent the spread of BSE.

                            BREAST IMPLANTS

    On July 11, 2002, the Committee requested certain records 
from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) relating to saline 
breast implant studies, and FDA's investigation of the Mentor 
Corporation, one of the two U.S. manufacturers of saline breast 
implants. After being advised that FDA had closed its four-year 
criminal investigation of Mentor Corporation without taking 
action, Subcommittee Chairman James Greenwood wrote to the FDA 
Commissioner on September 25, 2002, requesting additional 
records relating to the FDA's criminal investigation of Mentor 
Corporation and concerns over the integrity of breast implant 
safety data. The Committee has received responsive records and 
has begun a further review of this matter.

             ACTIVITIES OF PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY SYSTEMS

    On December 20 2000, retiring Committee Chairman Tom Bliley 
and Congressman Greenwood requested that the General Accounting 
Office (GAO) review the class-action lawsuit activities of the 
Protection and Advocacy (P&A) systems authorized by the 
Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act. 
Subsequently, Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee 
Chairman Greenwood wrote to the Commissioner of the 
Administration on Developmental Disabilities (ADD) on January 
23, 2002, requesting data on P&A legal activities. After 
receiving the data, Subcommittee Chairman Greenwood requested 
that GAO examine the extent to which P&A systems in selected 
States: (1) engage in class-action lawsuits on behalf of 
persons with developmental disabilities that are related to 
transferring people from institutional to community-based 
settings; (2) consult with legal guardians in actions that P&A 
systems take on behalf of persons with developmental 
disabilities; and (3) have processes for monitoring the health 
and welfare of persons with developmental disabilities who are 
transferred from institutional to community-based settings as a 
result of P&A class-action lawsuits.

                      OFFICE OF RESEARCH ANTEGRITY

    In February 2001, the Committee launched an inquiry into 
possible administrative procedure violations by the Office of 
Research Integrity (ORI) within the Department of Health and 
Human Services. ORI had issued a final policy that imposed new 
requirements on the nation's research institutions for all 
research funded by the Public Health Service, but neither the 
proposed policy nor the final policy were published in the 
Federal Register as required by the Administrative Procedure 
Act. As a result of the concerns raised by the Committee, ORI 
withdrew the final policy.

                             THE CHIMP ACT

    In December 1999, the Committee and the Congress passed the 
CHIMP Act, setting up a program to build retirement sanctuaries 
for chimpanzees used in medical and governmental research. In 
the 107th Congress, the Committee monitored the implementation 
of this Act by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), 
particularly with respect to the Act's deadlines for finding 
the appropriate organization to build the first sanctuary and 
to begin construction. In the Fall of 2002, NIH announced that 
it had awarded both the contract and a construction grant to 
Chimp Haven, with construction due to begin promptly.

  HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO ENERGY AND THE 
                              ENVIRONMENT


                                Hearings


                     MTBE IN REFORMULATED GASOLINE

    On November 1, 2001, the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations held a hearing on the use of MTBE in 
reformulated gasoline. The purpose of the hearing was to 
continue the Committee's examination of issues arising from the 
contamination of drinking water supplies by a constituent of 
reformulated gasoline, as well as the air quality achievements 
of the reformulated gasoline program. The Subcommittee received 
testimony from officials representing the Environmental 
Protection Agency, the Department of Energy, the General 
Accounting Office, and the U.S. Geological Survey. The 
Subcommittee also received testimony from a state environmental 
agency official, a homeowner with a contaminated drinking water 
well, and representatives from an environmental organization 
and groups involved with the production of reformulated 
gasoline.

                         THE FREEDOMCAR PROGRAM

    On June 6, 2002, the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations held a hearing on the Department of Energy's 
(DOE) FreedomCAR program. Specifically, the hearing reviewed 
the respective roles of DOE and the auto industry in the 
FreedomCAR research and development partnership; the 
partnerships' creation and goals; benchmarks by which to assess 
program progress and cost-effectiveness in developing advanced 
automobile technologies, especially fuel cell-based systems; 
potential benefits of intermediate advanced automobile 
technologies, such as advanced lean burn diesel; and lessons 
learned from related government-sponsored automotive research 
initiatives, including the program's predecessor--the 
Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles. The hearing also 
examined the challenges--technological and marketplace--that 
must be overcome for the program to achieve its stated goals of 
a reduction both in the nation's oil dependence and in 
undesirable air pollution and CO2 emissions. The hearing's two 
panels featured a DOE assistant secretary and representatives 
from the General Accounting Office, the National Research 
Council, and the auto, oil, and fuel cell industries.

           OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CLEANUP PROGRAM

    In the 107th Congress, the Committee continued its review 
of several major nuclear weapons waste cleanup projects managed 
by the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Environmental 
Management, in order to ensure that DOE proceeds in a timely 
and effective manner to reduce these environmental threats. As 
part of this review, on May 14, 2002, Subcommittee Chairman 
James Greenwood sent a letter to the General Accounting Office 
requesting a review of DOE's management of its high-level waste 
program; the review should be completed in early to mid-2003.
    In addition, on July 19, 2002, the Subcommittee on 
Oversight and Investigations held a hearing to review DOE's 
implementation of its new accelerated cleanup reform program 
and the status of state-based cleanup agreements. The hearing 
featured testimony from DOE's Assistant Secretary for 
Environmental Management about the accelerated cleanup reform 
efforts, and testimony from the General Accounting Office on 
its report on state-based compliance agreements. Other 
witnesses included representatives from the States of 
Washington, Idaho, and Tennessee.

        REVIEW OF CLIMATE MODELING FOR PREDICTING CLIMATE CHANGE

    On July 25, 2002, the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations held a hearing to examine the use of climate 
model simulations in the U.S. National Assessment of the 
Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change--an 
assessment that was initiated in 1997 to fulfill a mandate of 
the Global Change Research Act of 1990. The National Assessment 
was coordinated by the U.S. Global Change Research Program, 
which is a national research effort that operates under the 
auspices of the President's Office of Science and Technology 
Policy. The hearing examined whether use of the primary climate 
models in the National Assessment projected a picture of 
potential climate change that is useful for public 
understanding and legislative or regulatory action by policy 
makers.
    Witnesses at the hearing included two co-chairs of the 
National Assessment, three state climatologists, and a 
representative from an environmental group. The witnesses 
testified to the suitability and accuracy of climate models in 
assessing climate change impacts, especially at the national 
and regional level. They provided information on the prospects 
for improving climate modeling, as well as alternative public 
policy approaches to climate change assessments.

                        Investigative Activities


             GENERAL MANAGEMENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


    (including the national nuclear security administration and the 
                         national laboratories)

    During the 107th Congress, the Committee continued its 
comprehensive oversight of the Department of Energy's (DOE) 
operations and management. As part of the Committee's broader 
inquiry into the procurement practices of agencies within our 
jurisdiction, the Committee examined DOE's policies and 
practices regarding the use of government purchase and/or 
credit cards by agency and contractor personnel. (For a more 
complete description of these activities, see the Miscellaneous 
Hearings section of this report.) Further, in November 2002, 
the Committee launched a related inquiry into specific 
allegations of misuse of government money through purchase 
cards, blanket purchase agreements, and other procurement 
vehicles at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). The 
Committee requested information from LANL and University of 
California officials about the specific allegations as well as 
more general information on procurement processes and 
oversight, and Committee staff have been conducting interviews 
of relevant officials and employees.
    In addition, the Committee conducted oversight of site 
characterization and licensing activities at the proposed Yucca 
Mountain repository site. Committee staff obtained numerous 
briefings and made several site visits to Yucca Mountain as 
part of this review during the 107th Congress. The Committee 
also continued its review of DOE's use and management of 
performance-based incentive (PBI) contracting. Committee staff 
obtained briefings and updates on Fiscal Year 2001 PBI 
contracts at each major DOE site, including information on 
base, incentive, and performance fee payments made to each 
contractor. In August 2001, the Committee sent a letter to DOE 
requesting detailed information on how DOE incentivizes site 
safeguard and security activities at sites with category I and 
II special nuclear materials. The Department provided 
documents, including PBI contract language, and classified 
briefings from the Office of Environmental Management and the 
National Nuclear Security Administration.
    In the 106th Congress, the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations held a hearing on DOE policies and practices 
with respect to reimbursement of its contractors' legal fees 
when they are defending lawsuits alleging retaliation by safety 
or security whistleblowers. In the 107th Congress, the 
Committee continued to monitor DOE's activities in this area, 
and initiated a related review of DOE's policies and practices 
with respect to approval of contractor-initiated lawsuits 
against private sector competitors.

                    NUCLEAR SAFETY AT DOE FACILITIES

    The Committee continued its oversight of the Department of 
Energy's (DOE) nuclear and worker safety programs in the 107th 
Congress. Committee staff requested and received several 
briefings, and obtained responses to a series of questions, 
regarding the impact of the Department's July 26, 2001 
Department-wide reorganization on the Office of Environment, 
Safety, and Health, the Price-Anderson nuclear safety 
enforcement program, and the Office of Independent Oversight. 
Committee staff also obtained information and briefings 
regarding radiological exposures to workers at the Los Alamos 
National Laboratory (LANL), because of concerns about the 
delayed response of the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) to a recommended Notice of Violation 
(NOV) from the Office of Environment, Safety, and Health. 
Subsequently, NNSA officials approved the NOV, which promptly 
was issued to the University of California, which operates LANL 
under contract with DOE.

                       NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SAFETY

    In October 2001, the Committee sent a letter to Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC) Chairman Richard Meserve regarding 
the structural integrity of reactor penetration nozzles. The 
letter was in response to recent revelations of cracked and 
leaking vessel head penetration nozzles, including control rod 
drive mechanism nozzles, at four U.S. pressurized water 
reactors. This review led to a more extensive Committee 
examination of nozzle leakage at the Davis Besse Nuclear Power 
Plant. In May 2002, the Committee sent a letter to the NRC 
regarding Davis Besse, and Committee staff received several 
briefings and made a site visit to the plant.

             OTHER NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OVERSIGHT

    In addition to its oversight of security and safety at 
facilities regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
(NRC), the Committee reviewed matters relating to the NRC's 
budget and management. In April 2001, the Committee sent a 
letter to NRC Chairman Richard Meserve requesting information 
about the NRC's ability to respond to the significant increase 
in licensing activities at operating nuclear power reactors, as 
well as potential future licensing activities associated with 
applications for new site permits and new reactor licenses. 
After receiving the requested information, Committee staff 
interviewed NRC officials on several occasions to discuss the 
adequacy of its plan. On November 7, 2001, the Committee also 
sent a letter to the General Accounting Office requesting a 
review of the risk and security of commercial spent nuclear 
fuel facilities, and the transportation of spent nuclear fuel. 
This report is scheduled for completion in early to mid-2003.

                   THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICITY CRISIS

    In May 2002, the Committee began to examine electricity 
supply and market problems experienced by California and the 
potential impact of these problems on other western states. The 
Committee's continuing investigation of the financial collapse 
of the Enron Corporation and contemporaneous news accounts had 
indicated that certain energy-related companies may have 
engaged in trading schemes designed to manipulate electric 
energy and natural gas markets in the western United States or 
to boost their reported revenues and trading volumes. The 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) had issued three 
data requests, as well as an Order to Show Cause, to various 
parties who may have had information about these alleged 
trading schemes. In June 2002, the Committee requested that 
FERC produce all the data it had acquired from these data 
requests, in order to assist with the Committee's review. 
Committee staff reviewed the data as part of its examination of 
the California electricity crisis, as well as its investigation 
of Enron.
    The Committee also conducted a review of the steps taken by 
California to address power supply shortage, including issues 
surrounding California's negotiation of bilateral, long-term 
electricity purchasing contracts on behalf of the state's 
utilities.

    INTERNATIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REPORTING AND MONITORING

    Because past reviews by the General Accounting Office (GAO) 
concerning international climate treaty compliance have not 
been encouraging, the Committee examined the current state of 
international emissions reporting and monitoring during the 
107th Congress. In August 2001, the Committee requested that 
GAO undertake a study to determine: (1) how the United Nations 
and U.S. assess the quality of data on greenhouse gases for the 
Framework Convention on Climate Change; (2) how the quality of 
U.S. greenhouse gas emissions data compares with such data from 
selected developed and developing countries; and (3) what steps 
can and are planned to be taken to improve the quality and 
monitoring of these emissions data. GAO plans to complete this 
study for the Committee in the 108th Congress. In the meantime, 
the Committee continued its assessment of international 
compliance with such treaty obligations by analyzing the 
completeness, reliability, and consistency of emissions data 
reported from participating countries.

            ROLE OF AIR POLLUTANTS IN GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE

    Current debate on global climate change has focused 
primarily on the role of carbon dioxide. Because some 
researchers assert that there has been insufficient attention 
given to emissions of other ``greenhouse gases'' and pollutants 
as contributors to potential climate change, the Committee 
undertook an examination in the 107th Congress of the relative 
contribution of these other substances--principally black 
carbon, sulfate aerosols, and ground level ozone--to potential 
global climate change. In August 2001, the Committee requested 
that the General Accounting Office (GAO) determine the state of 
scientific understanding of the substances' varying climate 
change contributions, past and future trends in emissions/
concentrations of these substances in selected developed and 
developing countries, and the factors that influence these 
trends. The Committee also asked GAO to examine what steps 
certain foreign governments are taking to reduce emissions/
concentrations of these other substances. The GAO report is 
scheduled for completion in early 2003. Committee staff, in the 
meantime, continued to interview scientific experts and to 
monitor developments in research on this front throughout the 
107th Congress.

 HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO TELECOMMUNICATIONS


                        Investigative Activities


                HOTEL/MOTEL TELEPHONE CALLING PRACTICES

    In the 107th Congress, the Committee reviewed compliance 
and enforcement activities relating to the rate and disclosure 
practices of telephone calling cards, in an effort to ensure 
adequate consumer protections. In recent years, many consumers 
have found frustration and disappointment with exorbitant 
telephone rates when making telephone calls from payphones 
using calling cards, particularly those phones located in hotel 
and motel rooms. Some consumers using calling cards to make 
calls on payphones or at hotels and motels later receive their 
calling card bills, only to find their phone conversations had 
cost far more than they had anticipated. Under Federal law, 
callers making calls away from home must have the opportunity 
to use an operator service provider (OSP) of their choice. In 
addition, OSPs are required to provide rate and billing 
information on request to consumers calling from hotels, 
motels, and payphones.
    Committee majority staff met with representatives from the 
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to review what the FCC 
had done to ensure that the applicable requirements were being 
enforced. Committee staff received briefings on recent consent 
decrees in this area between the FCC and USLD Communications, 
AT&T Corporation, and WorldCom, Inc., as well as FCC citations 
to 97 entities, mainly hotels and motels, for non-compliance 
with the requirements. Committee staff also learned that the 
American Hotel and Motel Association had agreed with the FCC to 
implement an operator service education and compliance campaign 
for the hospitality industry.

          INTERNET DURABILITY/ELECTRICITY NETWORK RELIABILITY

    In March 2001, the Committee began a review of network 
reliability issues associated with increased Internet use, 
including the construction of Internet hotels and their effect 
on the power grid as a whole. Committee staff toured several of 
these facilities, and interviewed officials of the companies 
overseeing them. Committee staff also met with several trade 
organizations and agencies in order to understand their efforts 
to reduce and respond to potential network problems associated 
with increased Internet use.
    The Committee's review subsequently expanded to look at 
potential concerns with the reliability of the national 
electricity power grid, upon which the Internet relies. The 
Committee's review was prompted in part by an increased number 
of electricity black outs and brown outs across the nation. The 
Committee sent document requests to several of the larger U.S. 
electricity providers to gather data on the problem and to 
determine the adequacy of industry efforts to ensure the 
reliability of electric power. Committee staff also interviewed 
several industry officials on these issues.

                              SIGNAL BLEED

    During the 107th Congress, the Committee reviewed the 
implementation of Sections 503 and 504 of the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996. These provisions address what 
is commonly known as ``signal bleed,'' in which cable customers 
may experience some transmission of cable programming that they 
did not request or would prefer to be blocked entirely (such as 
adult-themed programming). Subcommittee Chairman James 
Greenwood sent a request to the Federal Communications 
Commission (FCC) to determine the extent of the signal bleed 
problem and ascertain what types of notice cable operators were 
providing parents about their rights under Federal law to be 
protected against signal bleed. In response to the Committee's 
inquiries, the FCC issued two notices--one notice informed 
parents of their rights to have objectionable programming 
blocked, and the second notice reminded cable providers of 
their responsibilities under the Act. In addition, the FCC 
collected additional data in order to better ascertain the 
extent of the signal bleed problem.

 HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO COMMERCE, TRADE, 
                        AND CONSUMER PROTECTION


                                Hearings


                          TIRE/VEHICLE SAFETY

    During the 106th Congress, the Committee's oversight of the 
Firestone tire recall led to the passage of legislation 
mandating that the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration (NHTSA) institute rulemakings to require the 
submission of data on safety-related problems, claims, and 
lawsuits (whether foreign or domestic) from manufacturers of 
products within NHTSA's purview, including tires and vehicles. 
The law also required that NHTSA update its standards for tires 
and tire testing. During the 107th Congress, the Committee 
continued its review of tire/vehicle safety issues, as well as 
NHTSA's implementation of these legislative provisions.
    Specifically, the Committee gathered and reviewed tire 
safety data from virtually every major tire maker for more than 
250 separate tire lines mounted as original equipment on sport 
utility vehicles, station wagons, and minivans. On June 19, 
2001, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations also 
held a hearing on the Ford Motor Company's May 1, 2001 
announcement of a unilateral and voluntary tire recall, broader 
than the previous year's recall, covering all Firestone 
Wilderness AT tires on Ford vehicles. The Committee examined 
claims and testing data provided by Ford and Firestone about 
the subject tires, as well as those tire lines Ford planned to 
use as replacements for the recalled Firestone tires. Lead 
executives from both companies testified at the hearing, as did 
the Deputy Secretary of the Department of Transportation. As a 
result of the hearing, NHTSA and Ford pledged to undertake 
expedited reviews of the proposed replacement tires, including 
additional and more vigorous testing of the replacement tires 
by Ford to ensure their safety. Ford also voluntarily removed 
one tire line from its replacement tire program, even though 
NHTSA determined that the tire was not defective.

            COMPUTER SECURITY AT THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

    In June 1999, the Committee initiated a review of computer 
security policies and practices at the Department of Commerce. 
Because of preliminary concerns over the possible extent of 
problems at the Department, the Committee requested that the 
General Accounting Office (GAO) conduct a more comprehensive 
review of the Department's computer security. On August 3, 
2001, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held a 
hearing to review the findings of the GAO's work, which found 
systemic and serious vulnerabilities in the Department's 
management of cyber security. GAO and the Deputy Secretary of 
the Department of Commerce testified at the hearing, and the 
Department pledged to undertake significant reforms of its 
security policies and practices. Subsequent to the hearing, 
Committee staff continued to monitor the Department's efforts 
in this area through briefings from agency computer officials.

                        Investigative Activities


        ACQUISITION OF SILICON VALLEY GROUP BY FOREIGN INTERESTS

    In March 2001, the Committee began a review of the proposed 
acquisition of the Silicon Valley Group (SVG)--a leading 
domestic producer of semiconductor lithography equipment and 
optics technology critical to the national and economic 
security of the United States--by ASM Lithography Holding N.V. 
(ASML) of the Netherlands. The Committee was concerned that the 
Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS)--
an inter-agency group chaired by the Treasury Department that 
reviews such acquisitions--planned to approve the acquisition 
without conducting the more thorough, 45-day investigation 
provided for under law in situations involving significant 
national security issues. The Committee Chairman and Ranking 
Member, in joint letters to the Secretary of Treasury and the 
President's National Security Advisor, urged that a full, 45-
day review be conducted to ensure that there was adequate 
review of the potential loss of domestically-owned, cutting-
edge technologies in these crucial areas, and the potential for 
these dual-use technologies to be shared with or transferred to 
other less-friendly nations following the ASML acquisition. 
Committee staff also interviewed relevant officials at the 
Departments of Defense and Commerce, as well as industry 
representatives. Subsequent to the Committee's involvement, 
ASML withdrew their application for acquisition approval, re-
submitting it after further review with the relevant agencies 
and after modifications were made to the proposal to respond to 
national security concerns.

                         AFTER-MARKET CAR PARTS

    During the 107th Congress, the Committee reviewed whether 
certain insurance companies were improperly requiring that 
repair shops use cheaper, after-market parts instead of 
original equipment replacement parts produced by the car 
manufacturer. Committee staff met with repair shop owners 
critical of such insurance requirements, as well as after-
market parts manufacturers.

                 CPSC REVIEW OF POTENTIAL BB GUN DEFECT

    In September 2001, Subcommittee Chairman James Greenwood 
sent a letter to the then-chairman of the Consumer Product 
Safety Commission (CPSC) requesting documents relating to 
CPSC's investigation into allegations of a potentially deadly 
defect present in certain BB guns manufactured by Daisy 
Manufacturing Company. The purported defect enables a BB to 
become lodged in the magazine area, permitting the gun to be 
shaken without hearing a BB and to be fired without expelling a 
BB, thus leading the user to believe the gun is empty when it 
is not. This purported defect has been claimed responsible for 
over 44 serious brain injuries and deaths, in addition to 
hundreds of other less serious injuries. The Subcommittee 
Chairman sent the letter out of concern that CPSC was not 
investigating the matter in a sufficiently thorough and speedy 
manner. Committee staff met with CPSC staff and representatives 
of Daisy Manufacturing to assess the extent of the potential 
defect, the adequacy of Daisy's efforts to address the 
potential defect, and the adequacy of the CPSC's efforts to 
investigate and monitor Daisy's activities in this regard.

 HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO HOMELAND SECURITY 
                 AND CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION


                                Hearings


                 PROTECTION OF CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURES

    In the 106th Congress, the Committee began a review of 
Federal and private sector efforts to secure the nation's 
critical infrastructures from attack or disruption, as promoted 
under Presidential Decision Directive (PDD) 63. During the 
107th Congress, the Committee continued and expanded this 
review, examining the progress of Federal agencies in 
identifying their own critical assets, analyzing 
interdependencies between and among such assets and other 
public and private sector systems, and taking corrective action 
to mitigate vulnerabilities of the identified assets.
    As part of this review, the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations held a hearing on April 5, 2001, focusing on 
critical Federal agency computer systems, and the lack of 
progress various agencies were making in identifying and 
protecting their critical systems. At the hearing, expert cyber 
hackers from the Department of Energy demonstrated for the 
Subcommittee the ease with which government computer systems 
could be penetrated by unauthorized users via the Internet. The 
first witness panel included representatives from the General 
Services Administration (GSA), which monitors computer security 
incidents at Federal agencies, the National Infrastructure 
Protection Center of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which 
assists Federal agencies and the private sector in monitoring 
and responding to computer security incidents, and a private 
company that develops technology to track and prevent such 
incidents. The second panel of witnesses included 
representatives from the General Accounting Office (GAO) and 
the Critical Infrastructure Assurance Office (CIAO) of the 
Department of Commerce, which serves as a liaison to other 
Federal agencies and the private sector in encouraging the 
identification of critical systems and the performance of 
vulnerability assessments of such systems. Subsequent to the 
hearing, Committee staff continued to receive briefings from 
various agency officials and the CIAO Director about efforts 
and progress in this area.
    Immediately following the September 11th terrorist attacks, 
Committee Members were briefed by representatives from key 
industries within the Committee's jurisdiction to discuss the 
private sector efforts underway to strengthen protection of 
critical infrastructures, including the electricity, oil & gas, 
nuclear, telecommunications, and information technology 
industries. Committee staff followed up with further visits to 
industry sites and other briefings from industry and Federal 
agency officials on this topic. In the area of chemical 
facility security, the Committee also requested that GAO 
conduct a review of both Federal and private sector efforts to 
strengthen chemical facility security in the wake of the 
terrorist attacks of September 11th. The GAO report is 
scheduled for completion in March 2003.
    The Committee also engaged in significant oversight 
activity in the area of drinking water facility security, which 
led to the passage of corrective legislation. Committee staff 
interviewed EPA and industry officials regarding progress in 
establishing a critical infrastructure information sharing and 
analysis center for the drinking water sector, potential 
threats to the water supply, and the status of vulnerability 
assessment modeling and performance. The Committee subsequently 
developed on a bipartisan basis legislation designed to enhance 
the security of drinking water systems by requiring such 
systems to conduct vulnerability assessments. This legislation 
passed the Congress in June 2002 as part of the ``Public Health 
Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act.'' For 
a description of the relevant provisions of this legislation, 
refer to the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous 
Materials Legislation section of this report. During the 107th 
Congress, Committee majority staff also monitored EPA's 
subsequent implementation of these new provisions.

               FEDERAL BIOTERRORISM PREPAREDNESS PROGRAMS

    In May 2001, the Committee launched an examination of the 
ability of Federal, state, and local public health officials to 
respond to acts of bioterrorism or other disease outbreaks or 
disasters with mass care consequences. As part of this review, 
the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held a hearing 
on October 10, 2001, to examine the effectiveness of Federal 
programs designed to improve the ability of state and local 
public health departments and hospitals to respond to such 
threats. The hearing focused on the testimony of various state 
and local witnesses, who raised concerns about the manner in 
which Federal assistance programs have been structured and 
implemented. The first panel consisted of representatives from 
the American Hospital Association, the American College of 
Emergency Physicians, the Joint Commission on Accreditation of 
Healthcare Organizations, the Boston Emergency Medical 
Services, the North Carolina Division of Emergency Management, 
and several other experts in the area of public health and 
terrorism preparedness. The second panel consisted of officials 
from the General Accounting Office, the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency, and the Department of Health and Human 
Services.
    The Subcommittee held a second hearing on this topic on 
November 1, 2001, focusing on the development of early warning 
public health surveillance systems. This hearing featured 
witnesses from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
and the Boston and Denver public health departments, who 
discussed efforts by these agencies to implement advanced 
surveillance systems. The hearing also featured testimony from 
private and non-profit developers of such systems.
    Subsequently, the Committee developed and the Congress 
passed the ``Public Health Security and Bioterrorism 
Preparedness and Response Act of 2002,'' which will greatly 
enhance bioterrorism preparedness activities at the Federal, 
state and local levels For a description of the relevant 
provisions of this law, refer to the Subcommittee on Health 
Legislation section of this report.

                   SECURITY OF NIH AND CDC FACILITIES

    As part of the Committee's oversight of security at 
sensitive, bioterrorism research facilities, Committee Members 
and staff visited the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention's (CDC) main campus, located outside Atlanta, 
Georgia, following the events of September 11th and the anthrax 
attacks on Florida, New York City, and Washington, D.C. The 
Committee also sent a number of written requests for 
information on this topic and worked with the Inspector General 
of the Department of Health and Human Services in order to 
assess the security at both CDC and National Institutes of 
Health (NIH) facilities. On October 30, 2001, Committee Members 
were briefed on this topic by the Inspector General of the 
Department of Health and Human Services.
    On November 7, 2001, the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations held a hearing that focused on the findings and 
recommendations contained in the Inspector General's draft 
report on security-related deficiencies at facilities operated 
by CDC and NIH. Based on consultations with the Inspector 
General and the Department of Health and Human Services, the 
Subcommittee closed the hearing to the public. Witnesses who 
testified were the Inspector General of the Department of 
Health and Human Services, and appropriate officials from NIH 
and CDC. At the hearing, NIH and CDC officials testified that 
they were in the process of implementing enhanced security 
measures at their facilities, particularly those storing or 
handling dangerous biological agents or toxins.

                    SECURITY AT NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS

    In the immediate aftermath of the September 11th terrorist 
attacks, Committee Members received a classified briefing from 
the Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) on 
October 3, 2001, to discuss the status of security at NRC-
licensed nuclear power plants. In addition, as part of the 
Committee's broader review of nuclear security issues, the 
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held two hearings 
during the 107th Congress to review security issues at nuclear 
power plants. The hearings were held on December 5, 2001, and 
April 1, 2002, and focused on the NRC's efforts to increase 
security requirements, and develop a new design basis threat, 
for nuclear power plants regulated by NRC, as well as the 
efforts of the nuclear industry to implement the new security 
requirements. Due to the classified nature of these hearings, 
both hearings were closed to the public. Witnesses at the 
December 5, 2001 hearing included representatives from NRC, the 
nuclear industry, and a public interest group. Witnesses at the 
April 11, 2002 hearing included four of the five NRC 
Commissioners, and representatives from the nuclear industry. 
Subsequent to these hearings, the Committee continued to review 
the reasons for a delay in establishing a new design basis 
threat for nuclear facilities, which currently is expected to 
be completed in early 2003.

            CREATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

    On June 25, 2002, the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations held the first day of its two-part hearing on 
the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. The 
purpose of the hearing was to review those aspects of President 
Bush's proposed Department that impacted matters within the 
Committee's jurisdiction--mainly, public health emergency 
preparedness and response, counter-terrorism research and 
development, and critical infrastructure protection. The first 
day of the hearing focused on Title V of the Administration's 
proposal, dealing with emergency response capabilities proposed 
for transfer to the new Department. The hearing featured four 
panels of witnesses, including the Honorable Tom Ridge, 
Director of the White House Office of Homeland Security; the 
Deputy Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services 
(HHS); and the Administrator of the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA). Other witnesses testifying represented 
the General Accounting Office (GAO), Lawrence Livermore 
National Laboratory (LLNL), Los Alamos National Laboratory 
(LANL), Sandia National Laboratories, the North Carolina 
Division of Emergency Management, the Washington Area National 
Medical Response Team, the American Society for Microbiology, 
the Center for Biodefense Studies at John Hopkins University, 
and the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
    The second day of this hearing was held on July 9, 2002, 
and featured testimony from six panels of witnesses, focused on 
Titles II and III of the Administration's proposal, dealing 
with critical infrastructure protection and counter-terrorism 
research and development. Witnesses included representatives of 
the HHS Office of Public Health Emergency Preparedness, the 
Critical Infrastructure Assurance Office of the Department of 
Commerce, the Energy Security and Assurance Office of the 
Department of Energy (DOE), the U.S. Customs Service, NNSA, the 
U.S. Postal Service, GAO, several DOE national laboratories, 
corporations and advocacy groups, and the information sharing 
and analysis centers for relevant critical infrastructure 
sectors.
    Based on this testimony, the Committee developed and 
ordered reported a bipartisan Committee Print making 
modifications to the Administration's proposal, which was 
forwarded under the guidelines of H. Res. 449 to the Select 
Committee on Homeland Security as the Committee's official 
recommendations concerning the creation of the Department of 
Homeland Security. The Select Committee adopted virtually all 
of the Committee's key recommendations. For a discussion of the 
Committee Print and subsequent House legislation creating the 
Department of Homeland Security (H.R. 5005), refer to the Full 
Committee Legislation section of this report.

                           NUCLEAR SMUGGLING

    In the 107th Congress, the Committee conducted a 
comprehensive investigation of the Federal government's 
response to the potential of nuclear terrorism and the 
unauthorized importation of radioactive or nuclear materials. 
In the months following the September 11th terrorist attacks, 
Committee staff traveled to three foreign countries and a dozen 
major U.S. ports and border points of entry, and worked closely 
with the Office of Homeland Security, the Department of Energy 
(DOE), the U.S. Customs Service, the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA), and the Department of Transportation in 
order to assess the Federal government's approach to protecting 
the country's ports and borders from a devastating terrorist 
attack, or from serving as entry ways for terrorists to smuggle 
in radioactive or nuclear materials. In addition, Committee 
staff met with and visited private firms such as FedEx and 
United Parcel Service whose operations could be used as a 
mechanism to ship such weapons or materials, in order to assess 
their efforts to prevent such activity. The Committee staff 
also met with numerous private firms that manufacture 
technology that can detect radiological or nuclear materials in 
order to assess the availability and potential uses of such 
technologies at the country's ports and borders.
    Due to the large volume of imports and limited resources, 
the Customs Service inspects approximately two percent of all 
cargo containers entering the country each year. Customs also 
is forced to rely on vague and inconsistent manifest data about 
the entering shipments in determining which containers to 
inspect, which hurts Customs' ability to accurately target 
suspect shipments. While sophisticated technological devices 
could assist Customs' inspectors in targeting potential 
shipments of nuclear or radiological material or weapons, the 
Committee review focused on the fact that the Customs Service 
had not installed such devices at U.S. ports and border 
crossings with Mexico and Canada.
    Subsequently, in April 2002, the Customs Service tasked 
Pacific Northwest Labs (PNNL), a DOE laboratory, with assessing 
currently-available technology and deploying detection devices 
at various U.S. ports and borders. The Committee's review, 
however, found that several other DOE/NNSA laboratories were 
working on developing and testing such devices for DOE and NNSA 
as part of their nuclear non-proliferation programs, and that 
the Customs Service and DOE were inadequately coordinating 
their efforts. To highlight these problems, the Subcommittee on 
Oversight and Investigations held a hearing on July 9, 2002, as 
part of its review of the Administration's proposal to create a 
Department of Homeland Security (discussed earlier in this 
section of this report). The last two panels of this hearing 
focused on nuclear terrorism readiness and testimony was closed 
to the public. Subsequent to the hearing, NNSA's Acting 
Administrator formally offered Customs the expertise and 
manpower of the NNSA and its laboratories, and Committee staff 
continued to follow up on this issue with Customs and the White 
House Office of Homeland Security to ensure that these agencies 
worked together to expeditiously address this issue.
    The Committee's continued oversight of government efforts 
to protect America from nuclear terrorism led to a second 
hearing of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on 
October 17, 2002. The hearing was held in response to 
continuing concerns about the Customs Service's efforts to 
deploy radiological and nuclear detection equipment at 
America's ports and border entries. While opening statements by 
Members and witnesses were open to the public, the hearing went 
into executive session for Member questioning of witnesses. 
Witnesses at the hearing included the Honorable Robert C. 
Bonner, Commissioner of the United States Customs Service, as 
well as representatives from NNSA, the Defense Threat Reduction 
Agency, the General Accounting Office, and the Inspector 
General's Office of the Department of Treasury. At the hearing, 
Customs pledged to expedite its deployment of detection devices 
at ports and border entry points. Subsequent to this hearing, 
Committee staff continued to meet with Customs and DOE 
personnel to assess the status of recently deployed portal 
monitoring systems and Customs' plan to deploy additional 
detection systems at vulnerable entry points along the U.S. 
borders.

                        Investigative Activities


                SECURITY AT DOE/NNSA NUCLEAR FACILITIES

    During the 107th Congress, the Committee continued its 
oversight of security matters at Department of Energy (DOE) and 
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) national 
laboratories and other nuclear facilities. Committee Members 
and majority staff obtained numerous briefings and conducted 
several site visits to NNSA laboratories and other facilities 
to review physical and cyber security protections in the 
aftermath of the terrorist attacks on September 11th, including 
site visits to Los Alamos National Laboratory, Sandia National 
Laboratories, the Y-12 site in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and the 
Nevada Test Site. The Committee monitored the development and 
implementation of enhanced security policies and measures, 
including the delay in the development of a new design basis 
threat for such facilities, which is expected to be completed 
in early 2003.

                    DOE'S NON-PROLIFERATION PROGRAMS

    In the 107th Congress, the Committee continued its review 
of the Department of Energy's (DOE) non-proliferation programs, 
and in particular the U.S./Russian Highly Enriched Uranium 
(HEU) Agreement. On January 30, 2001, the Committee sent a 
letter to the President's National Security Advisor requesting 
that the National Security Council (NSC) review the proposed 
amendment to the HEU agreement between the United States 
Enrichment Corporation and its Russian counterpart, Tenex. 
Committee staff received several briefings from DOE, the lead 
Federal agency for the HEU Agreement, and the NSC on issues 
relating to the proposed amendment. Subsequently, the amendment 
was rescinded, and certain changes to the amendment were made 
before it was re-approved in 2002.

                        CDC SELECT AGENT PROGRAM

    In the 107th Congress, the Committee continued its 
oversight of the management of the select agent registration 
program by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
(CDC). The select agent program regulates the transfer of 
dangerous biological agents, such as anthrax, ebola, and the 
plague, and imposes safety and security requirements on 
recipients of the agents. Committee staff received regular 
briefings from CDC and the General Accounting Office on the 
status of reforms to the program, and developed corrective 
legislation that became law as part of the ``Public Health 
Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 
2002.'' In part, this law required the registration of all 
possessors of select agents, the imposition of enhanced 
security measures on such possessors, and the creation of a 
national database of such agents. The law also imposed more 
stringent Federal criminal and civil penalties for failure to 
register or to comply with security requirements. For a 
description of the relevant provisions, see the Subcommittee on 
Health Legislation section of this report.

                       THREATS TO THE FOOD SUPPLY

    As part of the Committee's broader examination of terrorist 
threats during the 107th Congress, the Committee sought 
information from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 
concerning expert assessments of the various threats to the 
safety and security of the nation's food supply posed by 
terrorists. The Committee also obtained information about FDA 
food inspection resources and efforts, particularly at ports of 
entry into the United States. The Committee's oversight in this 
area contributed to the passage of enhanced food safety 
protections in the ``Public Health Security and Bioterrorism 
Preparedness and Response Act of 2002.'' For a description of 
the relevant provisions, see the Subcommittee on Health 
Legislation section of this report.

     HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO CORPORATE 
                   ACCOUNTING PRACTICES AND OVERSIGHT


                                Hearings


                    THE FINANCIAL COLLAPSE OF ENRON

    In the 107th Congress, the Committee conducted an extensive 
investigation into the surprising financial collapse of the 
Enron Corporation and the related accounting issues, which 
resulted in five days of hearings held by the Subcommittee on 
Oversight and Investigations in the early part of 2002. The 
Committee commenced its investigation in December 2001, and 
staff conducted a detailed review of hundreds of boxes of 
documents obtained from Enron and other related entities, 
including Andersen LLP, Enron's external auditor. Committee 
staff also conducted scores of interviews of Enron and Andersen 
executives and employees, accountants, and attorneys, as well 
as executives from several international banks and financial 
institutions and other key players in the multiple transactions 
and business schemes that contributed to Enron's ultimate 
bankruptcy.
    Information uncovered in the investigation revealed 
deliberate efforts by Enron, with the assistance of Andersen 
and several financial institutions, to manipulate and 
misrepresent Enron's financial condition over several years. 
The investigation also contributed to the discovery of 
Andersen's destruction of documents relevant to Enron 
investigations by the Committee, the Securities and Exchange 
Commission (SEC), and Federal criminal investigators. The 
Committee's efforts highlighted significant problems that 
ultimately led to the passage of corporate governance and 
accounting reform legislation in mid-2002. In addition, 
subsequent to the Committee's hearings, Federal criminal 
charges were brought against Andersen, one of its senior 
partners, and several former Enron executives and international 
financiers. Federal criminal investigations continue.
    The first Subcommittee hearing occurred on January 24, 
2002, focusing on the destruction of audit-related documents by 
Andersen personnel working on the Enron account. At the 
hearing, Andersen's senior management and its lead in-house 
counsel handling the Enron matter--Ms. Nancy Temple--were 
questioned at length about the destruction of Enron documents, 
and Andersen's policies and practices with respect to retention 
and destruction of records relevant to potential governmental 
investigations or private litigation. Andersen's lead Enron 
auditor, David Duncan, appeared at the hearing but asserted his 
Fifth Amendment right to not testify. In December 2002, the 
Committee's bipartisan leadership sent a criminal referral to 
the Department of Justice regarding possible perjury and/or 
materially false statements made by Ms. Temple in her testimony 
regarding whether she counseled the destruction of Enron-
related documents by Andersen personnel or anticipated 
governmental investigations or litigation at the time she 
instructed continued compliance with normal document retention 
and destruction practices.
    The second Subcommittee hearing occurred on February 5, 
2002, at which the only witness was William C. Powers, Jr., the 
dean of the University of Texas School of Law who was hired by 
Enron's Board of Directors to conduct an independent 
examination of the related-party transactions and special 
purpose entities (SPEs) that caused Enron's collapse, and to 
prepare a report for the Board on his findings. Mr. Powers 
testified regarding the report's conclusion that these SPEs 
were created and effectively controlled by senior Enron 
executives and employees in order for Enron to have friendly, 
third-party entities with which Enron could engage in various 
financial transactions in order to improve Enron's balance 
sheet by either transferring debt, enhancing earnings, or both. 
Mr. Powers discussed in detail the formation, structure, and 
legal/accounting concerns associated with Enron's multiple 
related-party partnerships, and offered significant criticism 
of Enron's senior management, its Board of Directors, and its 
outside accountants and attorneys for approving the 
questionable transactions and for failing to provide adequate 
oversight.
    On February 7, 2002, the Subcommittee continued its hearing 
into the financial collapse of Enron. Senior Enron and Andersen 
executives (including Jeffrey Skilling, Enron's former Chief 
Executive Officer) and members of Enron's Board of Directors 
appeared before the Subcommittee to discuss their role in and 
knowledge surrounding Enron's financial collapse. During the 
hearing, four then-current and former Enron executives invoked 
their Fifth Amendment right not to testify. Since the hearing, 
two of the executives have been charged with multiple counts of 
Federal fraud and conspiracy violations. One of the former 
executives, Michael Kopper, pled guilty to the charges against 
him, while the other--former Chief Financial Officer Andrew 
Fastow--has pled not guilty to 48 criminal counts and is 
awaiting trial.
    On February 14, 2002, the Subcommittee continued its 
hearing, receiving testimony from Ms. Sharron Watkins, an 
executive at Enron who had warned Enron's Chief Executive 
Officer Kenneth Lay in August 2001 that Enron was going to 
``implode in a wave of accounting scandals.'' Her letter to Mr. 
Lay was discovered and first revealed as a result of the 
Committee's investigation. Ms. Watkins testified regarding her 
accounting and ethical concerns, her efforts to address them 
internally at Enron, and her skepticism concerning an internal 
investigation of her allegations by the law firm of Vinson & 
Elkins.
    On March 14, 2002, the Subcommittee held the last day of 
its hearing on the Enron collapse, focusing on the role of 
Enron's in-house and outside counsel in approving and 
overseeing the questionable transactions and the public 
disclosures relating to them. Witnesses included partners at 
Vinson & Elkins and current and former in-house counsel for 
Enron, who were questioned about Enron's internal processes for 
approving related-party transactions, addressing potential 
conflicts of interest, and ensuring adequate investor 
disclosures. Vinson & Elkins' representatives also were 
questioned extensively about the adequacy of the firm's 
internal investigation of Ms. Watkins' allegations.
    As part of its investigation into the collapse of Enron, 
the Committee also sought information on the role of major 
financial institutions in structuring transactions that had 
significant impact on Enron's financial statements, and those 
of other energy industry corporations. Specifically, the 
Committee obtained information from major financial 
institutions and law firms involved in the structuring of these 
transactions, as well as the three major credit rating 
agencies, accounting and financial experts, corporations from 
the insurance and energy sectors, and several Federal agencies, 
including the SEC, the Commodity Futures Trading Corporation, 
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and the Departments 
of Justice and Energy. Committee staff conducted numerous 
interviews, and reviewed several thousand pages of documents on 
this separate matter, including information regarding the 
involvement of these entities with Enron and LJM2--a privately-
held investment group associated with Andrew Fastow--which 
played a central role in the questionable related-party 
transactions that forced Enron's bankruptcy.
    The Committee learned that several of the banks had multi-
million dollar investments in or commitments to LJM2. Merrill 
Lynch also provided the opportunity to certain senior domestic 
officers to invest in LJM2; 97 Merrill Lynch officers/
executives invested over $17 million in LJM2. Several of the 
banks have been the subject of further investigation by the 
Department of Justice, several state Attorneys General, and the 
SEC. In addition, the Committee reviewed the extent to which 
certain financial institutions facilitated the use of pre-paid/
forward gas and/or oil contracts by Enron as a means to inflate 
Enron's revenue and hide the company's debt.

         CAPACITY SWAP ACCOUNTING BY GLOBAL CROSSING AND QWEST

    The Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held two 
hearings on reciprocal capacity sale transactions between 
Global Crossing and Qwest, as part of the Committee's inquiry 
into whether these were sham transactions designed to boost 
revenue and mislead investors about the deteriorating financial 
conditions of the two firms. Beginning in March 2002, Committee 
staff commenced extensive document review and conducted 
numerous interviews of company executives and key players in 
the transactions in question. Although the investigation 
focused primarily on transactions between these two companies, 
Committee staff also looked into similar transactions between 
these companies and other telecommunications companies to 
determine the scope of the potential problem industry-wide. The 
investigation uncovered the existence of oral and written side 
agreements in several of these swap-type transactions that were 
not shared with relevant accounting personnel and caused 
serious accounting problems once discovered, particularly for 
Qwest. Information uncovered in the investigation also raised 
significant questions as to the legitimacy of these capacity 
swaps overall. During the course of the Committee's 
investigation, both Qwest and Global Crossing announced that 
they would restate their financial results due to improper 
accounting for these swap transactions.
    The first hearing was held on September 24, 2002, and had 
witnesses from Global Crossing and Qwest, as well as FLAG 
Telecom, another company that engaged in swap transactions with 
Qwest. The witnesses were either current or ex-employees who 
dealt directly with either the approval or negotiation of the 
swap transactions in question. The second hearing was held on 
October 1, 2002, and also had witnesses from both Qwest and 
Global Crossing. The first panel consisted of two ex-employees, 
one from each company, who lost significant amounts of their 
retirement funds due to the companies' financial troubles. The 
second panel of witnesses consisted of senior executives and 
board members from both companies.

                        Investigative Activities


                   ACCOUNTING FRAUD AT WORLDCOM, INC.

    As part of the Committee's overall examination of corporate 
governance and accounting issues, the Committee launched a 
separate inquiry into WorldCom's announcement that it would 
restate its prior earnings results by $3.9 billion, due to 
improper accounting for certain expenditures. Committee staff 
conducted several interviews with witnesses employed by, or 
associated with, WorldCom in the United States and the United 
Kingdom, and reviewed thousands of pages of requested 
documents--including transactional documents, WorldCom internal 
e-mails, accounting documents, and financial statements. The 
Committee investigation revealed internal WorldCom documents 
showing the company's efforts to prop up its financial 
performance in the face of rapidly eroding telecommunications 
business. The internal documents dated back as early as July 
2000 and showed internal WorldCom discussions among its finance 
and accounting officers, including those at the highest levels 
of WorldCom management, concerning ways to reduce operational 
expenses to maximize its earnings reports, such as by re-
classifying some operational expenditures as capital costs 
despite a lack of accounting justification for such re-
classification. The Committee's efforts highlighted significant 
problems that ultimately led to the passage of corporate 
governance and accounting reform legislation in mid-2002.
    The company subsequently filed for bankruptcy, and adjusted 
its financial restatement from $3.9 billion to over $9 billion. 
WorldCom executives have since been indicted on securities 
fraud and other charges, and others have pled guilty to related 
offenses. Civil and criminal investigations by Federal and 
state authorities continue in the areas addressed by the 
Committee's investigation.

                 CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AND SEC OVERSIGHT

    In the second year of the 107th Congress, the Committee 
began a review of corporate governance issues in light of the 
increasing number of alleged business accounting scandals and 
failures. To varying degrees, Committee staff conducted 
interviews and reviewed records relating to the corporate 
practices of 14 companies: Adelphia Communications; Enron 
Corp.; Global Crossing Ltd.; ImClone Systems, Inc.; Kmart 
Corporation; MicroStrategy Incorporated; Peregrine Systems, 
Inc.; Qwest Communications; Rite Aid Corporation; Sunbeam 
Corporation; Tyco International, Ltd.; Waste Management, Inc.; 
WorldCom, Inc.; and Xerox Corporation. The Committee reviewed 
such issues as board of directors' management oversight and 
conflict and compensation matters within such boards. The 
materials and information developed in this inquiry also 
supported and enhanced the Committee's more specific 
investigations into several of these same companies, such as 
ImClone, Global Crossing, Qwest, and WorldCom.
    The Committee also reviewed the role of the Securities and 
Exchange Commission (SEC) with respect to the oversight of the 
above-reference matters. Committee staff reviewed documentation 
and conducted interviews with relevant SEC officials concerning 
the SEC's own reviews and investigations of these companies 
over the course of several years, examining the extent to which 
the SEC scrutinized these companies' financial reports in the 
years leading up to the recent allegations of financial 
impropriety.

          MISCELLANEOUS HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES


                                Hearings


       USE OF CHARITABLE DONATIONS BY SEPTEMBER 11TH VICTIM FUNDS

    Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the 
Committee began an investigation into how effectively and 
efficiently the charitable organizations collecting money for 
the victims of the events of September 11 were distributing the 
money, and what actions the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) was 
taking to protect contributors from fraudulent charitable 
schemes. Victims of the attacks had raised concerns that they 
were not getting the assistance they needed, in spite of the 
fact that over $1 billion had been collected on their behalf by 
various charities. On November 6, 2001, the Subcommittee on 
Oversight and Investigations held a hearing on these issues. 
Executives from several of the leading charitable organizations 
testified, including representatives from the American Red 
Cross and the United Way. Two widows who lost their husbands in 
the World Trade Center attack also testified, describing the 
complications they dealt with in trying to obtain assistance 
from these organizations. Other witnesses included the Director 
of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection, the Attorney 
General of New York, and representatives from other victim 
advocacy groups. Much of the hearing focused on the Red Cross' 
October 29, 2001 announcement that only $320 million of the 
$547 million it had collected in its Liberty Fund would be used 
for disaster assistance related to the attacks of September 11. 
Shortly after the hearing, on November 14, 2001, the Red Cross 
announced that all contributions to the Liberty Fund would be 
used exclusively to meet the immediate and long-term needs of 
people directly affected by the September 11 tragedies.

          REVIEW OF FEDERAL AGENCY COMPUTER SECURITY PROGRAMS

    Pursuant to Title 14 of the Defense Authorization Act of 
2001, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) was provided 
substantial new authority and responsibilities to ensure that 
computer and information resources maintained by the Federal 
government are protected from cyber attacks, viruses and other 
threats. OMB's responsibilities include enhancing government-
wide policies for computer security, overseeing the development 
of Federal agency security plans, as well as reviewing the 
results of Federal agency efforts to conduct vulnerability 
assessments and penetration tests of their computer defenses. 
Under the law, each agency is required to develop comprehensive 
information security plans and conduct internal vulnerability 
audits. These audits also must be subject to external 
verification.
    During the 107th Congress, the Committee reviewed the 
efforts of Federal agencies within its jurisdiction to comply 
with the new government-wide cyber security law. In March 2001, 
the Committee sent detailed information requests to each of the 
Federal departments, agencies, and commissions within its 
jurisdiction, including the Departments of Commerce, Energy and 
Health and Human Services; the Food and Drug Administration; 
the National Institutes of Health; the Centers for Medicare and 
Medicaid Services (CMS); the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention; the Environmental Protection Agency; the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission; the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission; the Federal Trade Commission; the Federal 
Communications Commission; the Consumer Product Safety Board; 
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration; and the 
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. Committee staff 
reviewed scores of boxes of responsive materials from these 
agencies relating to their computer security policies, 
practices, and audits, and conducted interviews of numerous 
computer security officials at many of these agencies. The 
Committee's review of agency compliance with computer security 
requirements spurred corrective actions by many of these 
agencies during the 107th Congress.
    As part of this comprehensive review, the Subcommittee on 
Oversight and Investigations also held two hearings focusing on 
computer security problems at CMS and the Department of 
Commerce, respectively, as discussed earlier in this report.

             THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S PURCHASE CARD PROGRAM

    During the 107th Congress, the Committee launched a review 
of the Federal government's oversight and management of its 
purchase card program for agency procurements due to reports of 
fraud and misuse of such programs by Federal personnel, and a 
lack of sufficient administrative oversight and controls. 
Committee staff interviewed officials from the General Services 
Administration (GSA) and the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) to determine the impetus for the program, to understand 
more clearly how it was supposed to function, and to determine 
their roles in the oversight of the agency programs. Committee 
staff also conducted interviews with the Inspectors General 
(IG) from each of the agencies within its jurisdiction, as well 
as agency procurement staff, to determine what controls, if 
any, existed at each agency, and how well each agency was 
managing its purchase card program.
    On Wednesday, May 1, 2002, the Subcommittee on Oversight 
and Investigations held a hearing on the oversight and 
management of the government purchase card program at several 
agencies within its jurisdiction, including the Department of 
Energy, Department of Commerce, and the Department of Health 
and Human Services. Witnesses at the hearing included both IG 
and agency procurement officials, as well as individuals from 
GSA, OMB, and the General Accounting Office. Subsequent to the 
hearing, the Director of OMB directed each agency to send OMB a 
plan for overseeing its purchase card programs, and organized a 
task force to assist the agencies in this area.

                        Investigative Activities


                       AGENCY TRAVEL EXPENDITURES

    During the first year of the 107th Congress, the Committee 
began a review of international travel by personnel of Federal 
agencies within the Committee's jurisdiction. The focus of the 
review was on the frequency, expense, and necessity of certain 
international trips. In early 2002, the Committee requested 
that the General Accounting Office (GAO) conduct an audit of 
the travel card program at the Department of Health and Human 
Services (HHS). The GAO report is scheduled for completion in 
early 2003.

                             Hearings Held

    Patients First: A 21st Century Promise to Ensure Quality 
and Affordable Health Coverage.--Joint oversight hearing with 
the Subcommittee on Health on Patients First: A 21st Century 
Promise to Ensure Quality and Affordable Health Coverage. 
Hearings held on March 1, April 4, and May 10, 2001. PRINTED, 
Serial Number 107-23.
    Issues Raised by Human Cloning Research.--Oversight hearing 
on Issues Raised by Human Cloning Research. Hearing held on 
March 28, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-5.
    Protecting America's Critical Infrastructures: How Secure 
Are Government Computer Systems?--Oversight hearing on 
Protecting America's Critical Infrastructures: How Secure Are 
Government Computer Systems? Hearing held on April 5, 2001. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-13.
    How Secure is Private medical Information? A Review of 
Computer Security at the Health Care Financing Administration 
and Its Medicare Contractors.--Oversight hearing on How Secure 
is Private medical Information? A Review of Computer Security 
at the Health Care Financing Administration and Its Medicare 
Contractors. Hearing held on May 23, 2001. PRINTED, Serial 
Number 107-29.
    Has Medicare+Choice Reduced Variation in the Premiums and 
Benefits Offered by Participating Health Plans? A Review of 
Medicare+Choice Plan Payment Methodology.--Oversight hearing on 
Has Medicare+Choice Reduced Variation in the Premiums and 
Benefits Offered by Participating Health Plans? A Review of 
Medicare+Choice Plan Payment Methodology. Hearing held on May 
31, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-39.
    Continuing Concerns Over Imported Pharmaceuticals.--
Oversight hearing on Continuing Concerns Over Imported 
Pharmaceuticals. Hearing held on June 7, 2001. PRINTED, Serial 
Number 107-30.
    Ford Motor Company's Recall of Certain Firestone Tires.--
Joint oversight hearing with the Subcommittee on Commerce, 
Trade, and Consumer Protection on Ford Motor Company's Recall 
of Certain Firestone Tires. Hearing held on June 19, 2001. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-45.
    Patients First: A 21st Century Promise to Ensure Quality 
and Affordable Health Coverage.--Joint oversight hearing with 
the Subcommittee on Health on Patients First: A 21st Century 
Promise to Ensure Quality and Affordable Health Coverage. 
Hearing held on June 28, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-23.
    How Secure is Sensitive Commerce Department Data and 
Operations? A Review of the Department's Computer Security 
Policies and Practices.--Oversight hearing on How Secure is 
Sensitive Commerce Department Data and Operations? A Review of 
the Department's Computer Security Policies and Practices. 
Hearing held on August 3, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-56.
    OxyContin: Its Use and Abuse.--Oversight hearing on 
OxyContin: Its Use and Abuse. Hearing held on August 28, 2001. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-54.
    Medicare Drug Reimbursements: A Broken System for Patients 
and Taxpayers.--Joint oversight hearing with the Subcommittee 
on Health on Medicare Drug Reimbursements: A Broken System for 
Patients and Taxpayers. Hearing held on September 21, 2001. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-65.
    A Review of Federal Bioterrorism Preparedness Programs from 
a Public Health Perspective.--Oversight hearing on a Review of 
federal Bioterrorism Preparedness Programs from a Public Health 
Perspective. Hearing held on October 10, 2001. PRINTED, Serial 
Number 107-70.
    A Review of Federal Bioterrorism Preparedness Programs: 
Building an Early Warning Public Health Surveillance System.--
Oversight hearing on a Review of Federal Bioterrorism 
Preparedness Programs: Building an Early Warning Public Health 
Surveillance System. Hearing held on November 1. PRINTED, 
Serial Number 107-71.
    Issues Concerning the Use of MTBE in Reformulated Gasoline: 
An Update.--Oversight hearing on Issues Concerning the Use of 
MTBE in Reformulated Gasoline: An Update. Hearing held on 
November 1, 2001. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-73.
    Charitable Contributions for September 11: Protecting 
against Fraud, Waste, and Abuse.--Oversight hearing on 
Charitable Contributions for September 11: Protecting against 
Fraud, Waste, and Abuse. Hearing held on November 6, 2001. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-67.
    HHS Inspector General's Review of Security at NIH and CDC 
Facilities.--Oversight hearing on HHS Inspector General's 
Review of Security at NIH and CDC Facilities. Hearing held on 
November 7, 2001. NOT PRINTED.
    A Review of Security Issues at Nuclear Power Plants.--
Oversight hearing on A Review of Security Issues at Nuclear 
Power Plants. Hearing held on December 5, 2001. NOT PRINTED.
    The Destruction of Enron-Related Documents by Andersen 
Personnel.--Oversight hearing on The Destruction of Enron-
Related Documents by Andersen Personnel. Hearing held on 
January 24, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-80.
    The Findings of Enron's Special Investigative Committee 
With Respect to Certain Transactions Between Enron and Certain 
of its Current and Former Officers and Employees.--Oversight 
hearing on the Findings of Enron's Special Investigative 
Committee With Respect to Certain Transactions Between Enron 
and Certain of its Current and Former Officers and Employees. 
Hearing held on February 5, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-
86.
    The Financial Collapse of Enron Corporation: Certain 
Transactions Between Enron and Certain of its Current and 
Former Officers.--Oversight hearing on the Financial Collapse 
of Enron Corporation: Certain Transactions Between Enron and 
Certain of its Current and Former Officers. Hearing held on 
February 7, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-88.
    The Financial Collapse of Enron Corporation.--Oversight 
hearing on the Financial Collapse of Enron Corporation. Hearing 
held on February 14, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-89.
    The Financial Collapse of Enron Corporation, Focusing on 
Enron's Inside and Outside Counsel.--Oversight hearing on the 
Financial Collapse of Enron Corporation, Focusing on Enron's 
Inside and Outside Counsel. Hearing held on March 14, 2002. 
PRINTED, Serial Number 107-90.
    A Review of Enhanced Security Requirements at NRC Licensed 
Facilities.--Oversight hearing on a Review of Enhanced Security 
Requirements at NRC Licensed Facilities. Hearing held on April 
11, 2002. NOT PRINTED.
    Oversight and Management of the Government Purchase Card 
Program: Reviewing Its Weaknesses and Identifying.--Oversight 
hearing on Oversight and Management of the Government Purchase 
Card Program: Reviewing Its Weaknesses and Identifying. Hearing 
held on May 1, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-96.
    Assessing America's Health Risks: How Well Are Medicare's 
Clinical Preventive Benefits Serving America's Seniors? How 
Will the Next Generation of Preventive Medical Treatments be 
Incorporated and Promoted in the Health Care System?--Oversight 
hearing on Assessing America's Health Risks: How Well Are 
Medicare's Clinical Preventive Benefits Serving America's 
Seniors? How Will the Next Generation of Preventive Medical 
Treatments be Incorporated and Promoted in the Health Care 
System? Hearing held on May 23, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 
107-110.
    DOE's FreedomCAR: Hurdles, Benchmarks for Progress, and 
Role in Energy Policy.--Oversight hearing on DOE's FreedomCAR: 
Hurdles, Benchmarks for Progress, and Role in Energy Policy. 
Hearing held on June 6, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-111.
    An Inquiry into the ImClone Cancer-Drug Story.--Oversight 
hearings on An Inquiry into the ImClone Cancer-Drug Story. 
Hearings held on June 13 and October 10, 2002. PRINTED, Serial 
No. 107-142.
    Creating the Department of Homeland Security: Consideration 
of the Administration's Proposal.--Oversight hearings on 
Creating the Department of Homeland Security: Consideration of 
the Administration's Proposal. Hearings held on June 25 and 
July 9, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-113.
    A Review of DOE's Accelerated Cleanup Program and State-
Based Compliance Agreements.--Oversight hearing on A Review of 
DOE's Accelerated Cleanup Program and State-Based Compliance 
Agreements. Hearing held on July 19, 2002. PRINTED, Serial 
Number 107-124.
    The U.S. National Climate Change Assessment: Do the Climate 
Models Project a Useful Picture of Regional Climate?--Oversight 
hearing on the U.S. National Climate Change Assessment: Do the 
Climate Models Project a Useful Picture of Regional Climate? 
Hearing held on July 25, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-117.
    America's Blood Supply in the Aftermath of September 11, 
2001.--Oversight hearing on America's Blood Supply in the 
Aftermath of September 11, 2001. Hearing held on September 10, 
2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-137.
    Capacity Swaps by Global Crossing and Qwest: Sham 
Transactions Designed to Boost Revenues?--Oversight hearing on 
Capacity Swaps by Global Crossing and Qwest: Sham Transactions 
Designed to Boost Revenues? Hearings held on September 24 and 
October 1, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-129.
    Securing America: The Federal Government's Response to 
Nuclear Terrorism at Our Nation's Ports and Borders.--Oversight 
hearing on Securing America: The Federal Government's Response 
to Nuclear Terrorism at Our Nation's Ports and Borders. Hearing 
held on October 17, 2002. PRINTED, Serial Number 107-143.
 Committee on Energy and Commerce Oversight Plan for the 107th Congress

    Clause 2(d) of Rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives for the 107th Congress requires each standing 
Committee in the first session of a Congress to adopt an 
oversight plan for the two-year period of the Congress and to 
submit the plan to the Committee on Government Reform and to 
the Committee on House Administration.
    Clause 1(d)(1) of Rule XI requires each Committee to submit 
to the House not later than January 2 of each odd-numbered 
year, a report on the activities of that committee under Rules 
X and XI during the Congress ending at noon on January 3 of 
such year. Clause 1(d)(3) of Rule XI also requires that such 
report shall include a summary of the oversight plans submitted 
by the Committee pursuant to clause 2(d) of Rule X; a summary 
of the actions taken and recommendations made with respect to 
each such plan; and a summary of any additional oversight 
activities undertaken by the Committee, and any recommendations 
made or action taken thereon.
    Part A of this section contains the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce Oversight Plan for the 107th Congress, which was 
considered and adopted by a voice vote of the Full Committee on 
February 14, 2001, a quorum being present.
    Part B of this section contains a summary of the actions 
taken by the Committee on Energy and Commerce to implement the 
Oversight Plan for the 107th Congress and the recommendations 
made with respect to this plan.
                                 PART A

            Committee on Energy and Commerce Oversight Plan

                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             107th congress

              CONGRESSMAN W.J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, CHAIRMAN

    Rule X, clause 2(d) of the Rules of the House requires each 
standing Committee to adopt an oversight plan for the two-year 
period of the Congress and to submit the plan to the Committees 
on Government Reform and House Administration not later than 
February 15 of the first session of the Congress.
    This is the oversight plan of the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce for the 107th Congress. It includes the areas in which 
the Committee expects to conduct oversight during the 107th 
Congress, but does not preclude oversight or investigation of 
additional matters as the need arises.
                              ----------                              


            COMMERCE, TRADE, AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ISSUES

                            CONSUMER PRIVACY

    One of the primary concerns of on-line users is the 
protection of sensitive consumer information collected and 
transmitted over the Internet or other computer networks. As 
increasing numbers of consumers interface with the Internet to 
conduct electronic transactions, there are concerns that 
personal information collected by web sites, such as sensitive 
medical or financial information, may be misused or poorly 
protected. To alleviate these concerns, the private sector has 
undertaken self-regulatory efforts to create enforceable 
standards to protect the privacy of its customers. The 
Committee will examine existing privacy protections, evaluate 
the efforts of the private sector and the Federal Trade 
Commission to promote greater consumer privacy, and assess 
potential options to increase the privacy protections afforded 
the users of Internet and other electronic networks.
    Further, international privacy efforts, like the European 
Union Privacy Directive, are having an impact on U.S. Internet 
companies and American consumers. Privacy policies developed 
worldwide may be creating de facto standards for the U.S. The 
Committee plans to examine the international implications of 
on-line privacy, its impact on American society, and 
international coordination efforts.

                          TIRE/VEHICLE SAFETY

    During the 106th Congress, the Committee's oversight of the 
Firestone tire recall matter led to the passage of legislation 
mandating that the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration (NHTSA) institute rulemakings to require the 
submission of data on safety-related problems, claims, and 
lawsuits (whether foreign or domestic) from manufacturers of 
products within NHTSA's purview, including tires and vehicles. 
The new law also requires that NHTSA update its standards for 
tires and tire testing. The Committee intends to continue its 
review of tire/vehicle safety issues during the 107th Congress, 
as well as NHTSA's implementation of these legislative 
provisions.

                    FILTERING/BLOCKING TECHNOLOGIES

    While the Internet opens doors to a world of information 
that was not available in the analog world, it also makes 
available pornography and other material that may be 
inappropriate for children. Congress recently enacted 
legislation to promote the use of filtering and blocking 
technologies for those entities that receive Federal funds 
under specific programs. The Committee will look into how these 
filtering and blocking technologies are implemented at the 
Federal level. Additionally, the Committee will evaluate the 
effectiveness of differing filtering and blocking technologies.

                             TELEMARKETING

    Telemarketing has been, and continues to be, a 
controversial marketing practice. While telemarketing can 
provide benefits for consumers, it also can be an intrusive 
nuisance and promote consumer confusion. In some instances, 
rogue telemarketers can take advantage of this confusion to 
commit fraud against consumers, particularly against senior 
citizens. The Committee plans a general examination of 
telemarketing practices in light of existing law, and the range 
of potential safeguards to protect the privacy, safety, and 
pocketbooks of consumers. The Committee will also look at 
current enforcement and regulatory practices by the Federal 
Communications Commission and the Federal Trade Commission. 
Further, the Committee will examine the practices of some 
telemarketers to evaluate their harm to consumers and society.

  FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION INVOLVEMENT IN HIGH TECH AND OTHER POLICY 
                                 AREAS

    While the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has authority to 
protect consumers from deceptive practices and advertising over 
various mediums, including the Internet and electronic 
networks. The Committee plans to review the FTC's exercise of 
its authority in the high tech and e-commerce areas, as well as 
in other areas within the Committee's jurisdiction, such as 
energy policy, healthcare policy, and the regulation of food 
and drugs.

         VIOLENT CONTENT IN THE MEDIA AND MARKETING TO CHILDREN

    Over the past few decades, American media outlets have 
increased the amount of violent content, including gratuitous 
violence, within the overall programming offered to consumers. 
A number of recent studies detailing the effects media violence 
has on American society, especially on children, have concluded 
that there may be a link between the violent nature of media 
content and violent behavior. In addition, while opinions vary, 
the popular view today is that media violence does, in some 
way, influence impressionable young viewers. The Committee 
intends to review the practices and policies of all media 
sources, including television, motion pictures, audio 
recordings, video games, radio, and the Internet, to evaluate 
differing approaches to violent content. The Committee will 
review existing studies on the effects of media violence to 
determine their accuracy and methodology. Further, the 
Committee plans to examine the reasons for the inclusion of 
increased violent content in media programming, and different 
ways to empower parents to protect their children from such 
content.
    In addition, the Committee will continue to closely monitor 
the Federal Trade Commission's work in the area of marketing of 
violent media content to children by the entertainment 
industry, and its efforts to promote industry self-regulation 
in this area.

                          INTERNATIONAL TRADE

    The Committee will continue its efforts to monitor and 
examine World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements and 
activities affecting important segments of the U.S. economy, 
such as telecommunications, electronic commerce, food and 
drugs, the services industry, and commerce with foreign 
countries generally. The Committee also will continue to review 
the efforts of other nation's to comply with their trade 
obligations and open their markets to American companies, 
products and services.
    Pursuant to the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 
1988, the United States Trade Representative (USTR) reviews and 
requests comment on the operation, effectiveness, and 
implementation of international telecommunications trade 
agreements. USTR will release its annual assessment of these 
trade agreements on March 31, 2001. In order to evaluate the 
impact on the U.S. telecommunications industry, the Committee 
plans to examine the USTR's assessment of the international 
telecommunications trade, and review whether these trade 
agreements are being properly implemented. Further, the 
Committee will examine the issue of foreign government 
ownership and overall foreign ownership of U.S. 
telecommunications companies to determine whether existing law 
and policy in these areas needs to be changed.

               TELEPHONE CALLING CARD PRACTICES AND RATES

    Over the last few years, the telecommunications industry 
has undergone considerable change with the advent of new 
services, products, and rate plans by telecommunications 
companies. Telephone calling cards are one example of a 
relatively new telecommunications service that has become 
extremely popular with consumers. Telephone calling cards 
offered by or in partnership with telecommunications providers 
are very attractive to consumers because of their convenience 
and ease of operation. However, many consumers have found 
frustration and disappointment with exorbitant telephone rates, 
lack of information on policies and practices with respect to 
service and rates, and poor customer relations services. The 
Committee plans to review the use and potential abuses of these 
telephone calling cards to ensure adequate consumer 
protections.

                  HOTEL/MOTEL TELEPHONE CALLING RATES

    The excessive rates, added charges, and lack of choice of 
telephone service in certain hotels and motels is an increasing 
problem for consumers, who in essence are a captured audience. 
These charges often include operator assistance fees and access 
charges to a long distance company. This problem can be 
exacerbated with increased use of the Internet by hotel and 
motel guests. The Committee plans to examine the excessive 
rates, added charges, and lack of choice for telecommunications 
service in certain hotels and motels.

                            LIABILITY REFORM

    The Committee will continue to examine the need for further 
liability reform in a number of areas, including medical 
malpractice, product liability, and punitive damages generally. 
The Committee also will examine the proper relationship of 
Federal reform efforts to State laws, and the benefits and 
disadvantages of various models of liability reform.

                 THE CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

    The Committee will continue to review the management, 
operations, and activities of the Consumer Product Safety 
Commission in safeguarding consumers, and particularly their 
children, from faulty or dangerous products. In particular, the 
Committee will review the adequacy of the CPSC's data gathering 
and dissemination efforts with respect to products within its 
jurisdiction.

                           FTC CYBER SECURITY

    The FTC, as a law enforcement and regulatory body, is privy 
to sensitive and proprietary information provided by the 
parties it regulates. Further, the Commission generates vast 
amounts of internal documents, many of which are law-
enforcement sensitive. Accordingly, protection of the FTC's 
computer networks and non-public data is important to ensure 
that this information is not accessed by or shared with 
unauthorized parties. The Committee will examine what steps the 
Commission takes to protect the integrity and security of its 
network systems and confidential data, and whether further 
efforts in this area are necessary.

              CYBER SECURITY AT THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

    In June 1999, the Committee initiated a review of cyber-
security policies and practices at the Department of Commerce. 
The Committee also requested last year that the General 
Accounting Office conduct a more comprehensive review of 
computer security practices at the Department, which is now 
underway. In the 107th Congress, the Committee will continue to 
review cyber security at the Department and evaluate the 
findings of GAO's work.

        IMPLEMENTATION OF GOVERNMENT-WIDE CYBER-SECURITY PROGRAM

    Pursuant to Title 14 of the Defense Authorization Act of 
2001, enacted in October 2000, the OMB Deputy Director of 
Management was provided substantial new authority and 
responsibilities to ensure that computer and information 
resources maintained by the Federal government are protected 
from cyber-attacks, viruses and other threats. The Deputy 
Director's responsibilities include enhancing government-wide 
policies for computer security, overseeing the development of 
Federal agency security plans, as well as reviewing the results 
of Federal agency efforts to conduct vulnerability assessments 
and penetration tests of their computer defenses. Under the 
law, each agency is required to develop comprehensive 
information security plans and conduct internal vulnerability 
audits. These audits must also be subject to external 
verification. In the 107th Congress, the Committee will review 
the efforts of Federal agencies within its jurisdiction to 
comply with the new government-wide cyber-security law.

              CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE ASSURANCE ACTIVITIES

    In 1997, the President's Council on Critical Infrastructure 
Protections recommended that the Federal government initiate 
increased efforts to ensure that critical infrastructures 
within the United States, including the electric power grid, 
telecommunications and transportation systems, and water 
supplies, are adequately secure from threats posed by malicious 
actors, foreign governments, and terrorists. Partially in 
response to this report, the President issued Presidential 
Decision Directive 63 and created the Critical Infrastructure 
Assurance Office, which is currently housed within the 
Department of Commerce. In addition, the President formed the 
National Infrastucture Assurance Council (NIAC) to provide 
advice on various infrastructure assurance efforts. The 
Committee has closely followed the efforts to improve critical 
infrastructure protections, and, in the 107th Congress, the 
Committee intends to continue to review infrastructure 
assurance efforts that affect areas within the Committee's 
jurisdiction.

                            ON-LINE AUCTIONS

    The Committee will examine the conduct of on-line auctions 
for goods and services. It will examine the effectiveness of 
these auctions in fulfilment of customer orders, the 
transparency of pricing, protection of consumers from abusive 
practices like shilling, and the treatment of items of value 
generated as part of auction sales (such as market data). The 
Committee will examine whether legislation is needed specifying 
the obligations of auctions to consumers and third parties.

                  ACCOUNTING RULES AND INTERPRETATIONS

    The Committee seeks to ensure that the Financial Accounting 
Standards Board's (FASB) private-sector standard setting 
process that develops changes to accounting rules for U.S. 
companies is independent, open and thorough, and results in 
unbiased financial information that reflects economic reality 
and promotes transparency. The Committee will conduct oversight 
of existing accounting rules and proposed changes to examine 
the effect that the rules have on transparency, as well as on 
the domestic and global competitiveness of U.S. companies. 
Additionally, the Committee understands the value of high-
quality international accounting standards and will monitor the 
progress of the newly-established London-based International 
Accounting Standards Board. To the extent that such a single 
set of accounting standards could be accepted worldwide, 
especially by major countries, it would reduce the compliance 
costs for multinational companies and make it easier for 
investors to compare companies in different countries.
    The Committee will examine the independence and standard 
setting process of FASB, including the ongoing FASB 
deliberations on the treatment of mergers and acquisitions. The 
Committee will explore how the disclosure of information 
related to the creation of value in businesses and capital 
markets, including intangible items like knowledge and 
software, can be improved. In addition, the Committee will seek 
to determine the extent to which the Federal regulatory 
agencies use interpretive or similar authority to provide 
guidance on existing accounting rules and regulations to 
registrants.

                     GOVERNMENT-FORCED DIVESTITURES

    The Committee will examine the effects on competition and 
domestic and international commerce of government-forced 
divestitures or other restrictions placed upon business 
activities. The Committee will examine whether Federal agencies 
have acted in such manner outside the scope of their Federally-
granted authority or without sufficient economic analysis.

                     ENERGY AND AIR QUALITY ISSUES

                         NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY

    Over the past year, energy consumers have experienced a 
significant increase in oil and natural gas prices. Oil and 
gasoline prices have risen dramatically from historically low 
levels in 1999. Natural gas prices have more than tripled in 
some areas. In addition, several regions also have seen 
increased electricity prices and diminished reliability. During 
the 107th Congress, the Committee will continue to examine some 
of the factors that have led to these price increases and 
reliability concerns. The Committee also will undertake an 
examination of national energy policy, examining U.S. policies 
as they relate to the production and consumption of 
electricity, oil and natural gas, coal, hydroelectric power, 
and nuclear power. The Committee also will review the outlook 
for new power plant construction in the U.S., and the impact 
state and Federal regulations and other regional constraints 
have on the timing and cost for new power plant construction.

             EVALUATION OF STATE RETAIL RESTRUCTURING PLANS

    As many as 26 States have enacted legislation implementing 
retail competition in electricity markets. The Committee will 
examine key aspects of the various state restructuring programs 
to determine whether these programs have resulted in consumer 
benefits and improved interstate electricity markets.

                   THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICITY CRISIS

    The Committee will continue an in-depth examination of the 
California electricity crisis and the attempts to resolve the 
crisis by the Department of Energy, the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, the California State Legislature, the 
California Public Utilities Commission, utilities, and other 
market participants. The Committee will conduct oversight to 
examine the causes of the crisis and look for long-term 
solutions to ensure that electricity consumers have access to 
reliable and affordable electricity.

                 RELIABILITY OF THE NATIONAL POWER GRID

    The California electric power crisis and other power 
constraints in the Western U.S. highlight an increasingly 
important issue: the reliability of the national power grid. 
Electric power supply problems experienced by the Mid-west and 
New York State over the past few summers also raise serious 
questions about the reliability of the national grid. As the 
reliability of the grid is essential to our national economic 
strength, the Committee will closely examine the current state 
of the national power grid.

                    INCREASING U.S. ENERGY SECURITY

    The Committee will examine the impact government policies 
are having on the exploration, production and development of 
domestic energy resources. The Committee also will look at the 
Department of Energy's Office of Fossil Energy to ensure that 
its programs and resources are being directed to the areas of 
greatest need within the domestic petroleum industry. In 
addition, the Committee will examine other issues relating to 
the nation's current energy infrastructure and how it can be 
enhanced.

               VIABILITY OF THE DOMESTIC URANIUM INDUSTRY

    The electricity generated at 104 domestic nuclear power 
plants provide approximately 20% of the country's total 
electricity supply. Thus, the maintenance of a viable domestic 
uranium industry--the source of fuel used in nuclear power 
plants--is necessary for the country's energy security. Due to 
a recent worldwide oversupply of enriched uranium, the domestic 
uranium industry (which includes uranium mining, conversion, 
and enrichment service providers) has suffered a severely 
depressed market that threatens its future viability. The 
Committee will continue the review it began in the 106th 
Congress of the crisis facing the domestic uranium industry, 
and the impact further deterioration could have on domestic 
energy security.

                    THE STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE

    Last year, the Secretary of Energy released 30 million 
barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, despite 
the lack of an oil shortage. In the 106th Congress, the 
Committee began an examination of the use of the Strategic 
Petroleum Reserve in non-shortage situations. The Committee 
also began an examination of the bidding process used by the 
Department to sell the oil from the Reserve. During the 107th 
Congress, the Committee will continue its examination of the 
appropriate uses of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

                        CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGIES

    With the quadrupling of natural gas prices and the 
continuous increase in demand for natural gas, the Committee 
will examine the availability and efficacy of other energy 
sources. One such source, which is abundant in the U.S., is 
coal. The Committee will review recent technological advances 
making ``clean-coal'' possible. In the very recent past, some 
of these technologies have begun to attract private capital. 
Still, many of those technologies have yet to reach economic 
viability for various reasons. The Committee will examine 
whether the government has a role in the expedited deployment 
of ``clean-coal'' technologies.

       NATURAL GAS AND HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY PROGRAMS

    The natural gas and hazardous liquid pipeline safety 
programs are due for Congressional renewal. Pipeline accidents 
over the past several years indicate a need to review the 
efficacy of the existing programs. The Committee will look at 
the existing pipeline safety programs and determine how they 
should be updated and modified.

                         GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE

    The Committee will continue to monitor international 
negotiations on global climate change. The Committee review 
will consider whether international agreements are achievable, 
effective, and fair to U.S. interests. The Committee also will 
consider whether the agreements on climate change are 
scientifically well-grounded and economically sound. The 
Committee also will review the components of the Global Change 
Research Program and the Climate Change Technology Initiative 
to ensure compliance with Congressional intent and guidance.

                THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regulates 
electric utilities, hydropower facilities, and natural gas and 
oil pipelines. The Committee will review how FERC discharges 
these responsibilities, in light of sweeping changes in the 
industry. Some of the specific areas the Committee may examine 
are FERC's implementation of Order 2000 on Regional 
Transmission Organizations, and its series of orders regarding 
the California electricity program. The Committee also will 
examine FERC's procedures concerning the construction of 
interstate natural gas pipelines and the relicensing of 
hydropower facilities.

             GENERAL MANAGEMENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

    The Committee will continue to conduct oversight of the 
Department of Energy (DOE), including the National Nuclear 
Security Administration, to ensure improvements in management 
of the Department and its many contractors.

                          DOE'S BUDGET REQUEST

    The Committee will review the Department of Energy's (DOE) 
budget requests for Fiscal Year 2002 and 2003. The Committee 
will examine the DOE budget requests and determine whether they 
are consistent with the Committee's priorities.

             DOE'S MANAGEMENT OF THE NATIONAL LABORATORIES

    The Committee will continue to examine whether DOE is 
effectively managing the contractors that operate the national 
laboratories. The Committee will review proposals to improve 
management of the labs and other related matters.

             DOE'S SECURITY AND NON-PROLIFERATION PROGRAMS

    During the 106th Congress, the Committee conducted 
extensive oversight of security matters at DOE sites, 
particularly the national nuclear weapon laboratories. The 
Committee will continue to conduct such oversight in the 107th 
Congress to ensure that continuing improvements are made in the 
protection of such critical national assets. The Committee also 
will review DOE's various nuclear non-proliferation programs to 
determine their effectiveness.

                   CYBER SECURITY AT DOE HEADQUARTERS

    The Committee's past oversight in this area revealed that 
the Department's own headquarters offices have not yet 
implemented the computer security upgrades and policy changes 
DOE required of its contractors over the past two years. DOE 
pledged to promptly improve cyber security policies and 
practices at its own headquarters to better protect classified 
information on its network systems. In the 107th Congress, the 
Committee will review the Department's activities in this 
regard.

                    NUCLEAR SAFETY AT DOE FACILITIES

    As a result of the Committee's oversight of nuclear safety 
matters at DOE facilities in the 106th Congress, the Department 
issued new regulations to improve its nuclear safety program 
and further protect workers engaged in nuclear activities. The 
Committee will continue its oversight of DOE's implementation 
of nuclear safety regulations for its contractor employees. As 
part of this review, the Committee will closely monitor the 
National Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA) efforts to 
coordinate with the Office of Environment, Safety, and Health 
to ensure that investigations are initiated and enforcement 
actions are taken whenever nuclear safety violations occur at 
facilities managed by NNSA.

                DOE'S OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

    The Committee will continue its review of several major 
nuclear waste cleanup projects managed by DOE's Office of 
Environmental Management (EM). Major projects such as the 
Hanford Spent Nuclear Fuel Project, the Hanford Radioactive 
Tank Waste Program, and the Oak Ridge K-25 Decommissioning 
Project have experienced severe cost and schedule problems 
revealed by the Committee in the 105th and 106th Congresses. 
These and other major cleanup projects and policies will be 
monitored by the Committee in the 107th Congress to ensure that 
DOE proceeds in a timely and effective manner to reduce these 
environmental threats.

                 DOE'S OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

    The Office of Science and Technology (OST) was created by 
DOE in response to a Congressional directive in 1989 to begin a 
program to fund the development of innovative environmental 
technologies that will make DOE's cleanup activities faster, 
cheaper, and safer. However, the Committee's review of OST in 
the 105th Congress revealed that few technologies developed by 
OST have been deployed, in part due to OST's ineffective 
management, poor technology selection and review, and lack of 
integration with DOE's cleanup program offices. As a result of 
the Committee's ongoing review through the 106th Congress, some 
improvements in the OST program and an increase in deployments 
have occurred. The Committee will continue its oversight of OST 
in the 107th Congress to ensure that DOE's $3 billion 
investment in OST results in cheaper, faster and safer cleanups 
throughout the DOE nuclear waste complex.

                   FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

    Current law directs Federal agencies to cut their energy 
consumption by 20 percent through 2000 and 30 percent through 
2005. The Committee will examine whether Federal agencies met 
the goals for 2000, and whether Federal accounting of energy 
savings is accurate. The Committee also will examine ways the 
Federal government, as a major energy user, can further reduce 
its own consumption of energy.

                    DOE'S ALTERNATIVE FUELS PROGRAM

    Current law directs DOE to develop an alternative fuels 
program that displaces 10 percent of petroleum motor fuels by 
2000 and 30 percent by 2010. Currently, the United States uses 
alternative fuels for roughly four percent of its need, well 
short of the law's goals. The Committee will examine the 
alternative fuels program to determine why DOE has failed to 
meet these goals to date, whether DOE will meet the future 
goals, and whether reforms to the existing program are needed.

                          APPLIANCE STANDARDS

    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) directs DOE 
to establish energy efficiency standards for various appliances 
and to consider revisions to these standards that would reduce 
pollution and save a significant amount of energy. During the 
107th Congress, the Committee will review standards issued by 
DOE and their impact on consumers, manufacturers, and 
conservation.

                     FEDERAL ENERGY DATA COLLECTION

    The Energy Information Administration is a statistical 
agency of the Department of Energy. EIA provides policy-
independent data, forecasts, and analyses to promote sound 
policy making, efficient markets, and public understanding 
regarding energy and its interaction with the economy and 
environment. In the past, EIA has provided useful information 
for a heavily regulated energy industry. In light of the 
national trend toward competitive energy markets, EIA is 
undertaking a comprehensive review of Federal data collection, 
analysis, and dissemination. The Committee will review these 
efforts to ensure that they strike the right balance between 
privacy concerns and the need for useful information to monitor 
and promote market development.

                   THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

    The mission of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is 
to ensure adequate protection of public health and safety 
through regulation of commercial nuclear power plants; non-
power research; test and training reactors; fuel cycle 
facilities; medical, academic and industrial uses of nuclear 
materials; and the transport, storage and disposal of nuclear 
waste. The Committee will conduct oversight of how the 
Commission discharges these responsibilities, and whether the 
Commission is an effective regulator of nuclear facilities. The 
Committee will consider whether the Commission should be 
granted regulatory authority over DOE nuclear facilities, and 
will examine the Commission's licensing procedures for 
commercial nuclear power plants.

   EPA'S IMPLEMENTATION OF OZONE AND PARTICULATE MATTER AIR QUALITY 
                               STANDARDS

    The Committee has the responsibility to ensure that the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) implements the Clean Air 
Act in accordance with statutory language and Congress' intent. 
In late 1999, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 
Columbia Circuit invalidated certain elements of EPA's 1997 
revisions to the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) 
for particulate matter and ozone. In Spring 2001, the Supreme 
Court is expected to rule on EPA's appeal of that case. 
Additionally, EPA is in the process of a statute-mandated five-
year scientific review of the 1997 standards. Given the 
significance of these rules and programs to the environment and 
to States, local governments, and private entities, the 
Committee will continue its oversight of EPA's implementation 
of the revised NAAQS in the 107th Congress.

               EPA'S DIESEL ENGINE CERTIFICATION PROGRAM

    EPA and the Department of Justice are parties to a consent 
decree with the manufacturers of heavy-duty diesel engines for 
alleged Clean Air Act (CAA) violations. EPA claims that, for 
years, the manufacturers used a ``defeat device'' in their 
electronically-controlled engines that allowed the engines to 
pass the emissions test under urban driving conditions, while 
emitting levels of nitrogen oxide in excess of the regulatory 
standard when under highway driving conditions. The settlement 
raises concerns regarding the consistency and level of EPA's 
enforcement activities under the CAA. An additional issue is 
recent discord between EPA and the manufacturers regarding the 
emission performance required under the consent decree and 
proposed changes to the decree. During the 105th and 106th 
Congresses, the Committee requested and reviewed documentary 
information concerning this enforcement activity. The Committee 
will continue to monitor this situation in the 107th Congress

                      EPA'S REGIONAL HAZE PROGRAM

    In April 1999, EPA established a program to address 
``regional haze'' affecting visibility in Federal parks. EPA 
has indicated that its regional haze program gives States 
considerable flexibility to develop alternative implementation 
techniques to accomplish the visibility improvements required 
under the Clean Air Act. In early 2001, EPA issued a proposed 
regulation raising issues for the States' regional haze 
planning process. Given the significance of this program to the 
environment and to States, local governments, and private 
entities, the Committee will continue its oversight of EPA's 
regional haze program in the 107th Congress.

      EPA'S IMPLEMENTATION OF GASOLINE AND DIESEL SULFUR STANDARDS

    Last year, EPA issued regulations revising the sulfur 
content standards for both gasoline and diesel fuel used in 
motor vehicles. Both of these revised programs contained 
measures intended to increase flexibility to the regulated 
community and reduce costs, while achieving the environmental 
benefits required by the Clean Air Act. In the 107th Congress, 
the Committee will review implementation of gasoline and diesel 
fuel sulfur reduction programs to ensure that the flexibility 
and environmental benefits intended by EPA are achieved.

                    EPA'S NEW SOURCE REVIEW PROGRAM

    During the 106th Congress, the Committee continued its 
examination of Clean Air Act regulations establishing EPA's 
``new source review'' program. Among other things, this EPA 
program determines when alterations to existing facilities 
trigger a requirement that the facilities meet the air 
pollution standards for ``new'' facilities. To date, EPA has 
not issued formal recommendations for improvements to the new 
source review program. Given the significance of this program 
to the environment and to States, local governments, and 
private entities, the Committee will continue its oversight of 
EPA's new source review program in the 107th Congress.

                             MACT DEADLINES

    The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) required EPA to 
establish Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) 
standards for over 180 different sources of hazardous air 
pollutants. In order to ensure that these standards were set on 
a timely basis, the 1990 CAAA established 2, 5, 7 and 10-year 
deadlines for the promulgation of MACT standards, with the last 
deadline having occurred on November 15, 2000. EPA, however, 
failed to meet the statutory deadline for setting the majority 
of ``10 year'' MACT standards. The Committee will review the 
status of the MACT standards, including reasons why the 
statutory deadline was missed.

            STATE FUNDING/FLEXIBILITY IN CLEAN AIR PROGRAMS

    The Clean Air Act encourages cooperative activities by 
States and local governments for the prevention and control of 
air pollution. The Act authorizes, among other activities, 
training grants, research and development grants, and other 
financial assistance to air pollution control agencies and 
other appropriate public or private agencies. The Committee 
will review past implementation of these programs, the present 
level of effort and cooperation, and opportunities for future 
innovation.

               ENVIRONMENT AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ISSUES

                     EPA MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS

    During the 107th Congress, the Committee intends to 
continue its general oversight of the Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA), including reviewing EPA's mission and identifying 
programs or initiatives that deviate from that mission, and 
evaluating the operation of the 10 regional offices and the 
interaction of the regional offices with each other and with 
EPA Headquarters. In addition, the Committee will review EPA's 
structure to learn whether the Agency is properly staffed to 
support its mission and objectives. The Committee also will 
review the Agency's budget and funding decisions, resource 
allocation, grants, research activities, enforcement actions, 
relations with State and local governments, and program 
implementation.

                INNOVATIVE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS

    The Committee will continue to examine progress in 
innovation from the States' environmental programs, and 
evaluate whether there are Federal or State barriers to further 
success in these areas.

               EPA'S OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION

    In 1998, EPA created the Office of Environmental 
Information to develop agency-wide information policies 
(including policies for handling sensitive and confidential 
information and providing Freedom of Information Act 
disclosure), and to manage more effectively the Agency's 
information systems and resources, such as EPA's key data bases 
and wide area networks. In the 107th Congress, the Committee 
will continue to actively monitor the Agency's efforts to 
improve the quality, accuracy, and usefulness of EPA's 
information resources, to reduce the paperwork burden imposed 
upon recipients of EPA data requests, and to improve 
integration of its information resources.

                       EPA CYBER SECURITY REVIEW

    During the 106th Congress, the Committee conducted a 
detailed evaluation of computer security at EPA to determine 
the extent to which the Agency was adequately protecting its 
information systems and resources from loss, damage, misuse and 
unauthorized access. A detailed review of various Agency 
audits, policies, and plans by Committee staff revealed that 
the Agency had serious cyber-security problems. The General 
Accounting Office (GAO) reaffirmed that conclusion when it 
completed a comprehensive assessment of computer security at 
the Agency and found it riddled with security vulnerabilities. 
Thereafter, working with GAO and the Committee, EPA implemented 
a series of reforms designed to bolster its computer security. 
In the 107th Congress, the Committee will continue to oversee 
the Agency's efforts to respond to the deficiencies identified 
by the Committee and by GAO.

                 EPA'S ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ACTIVITIES

    In February 1998, EPA issued interim guidance setting forth 
how it would handle ``environmental justice'' claims filed with 
the Agency against the issuance of state environmental permits 
to industries located in certain areas. These claims generally 
allege that a specific state environmental permitting action 
discriminates against a class of citizens living near such 
sites, such as minority groups, who are protected under Title 
VI of the Federal Civil Rights Act. Many state and local 
government organizations have expressed concerns that EPA's 
approach to this issue may hurt urban revitalization efforts 
and the cleanup of contaminated ``brownfields'' by dissuading 
companies from seeking, or preventing States from issuing, 
permits in these areas, which often are in neighborhoods with 
large minority populations. The Committee raised concerns with 
EPA and sought information from the Agency about environmental 
justice matters during the 105th and 106th Congresses. The 
Committee intends to continue its oversight in the upcoming 
Congress in order to ensure that the views of States and other 
interested parties are considered in the final Agency decision 
on this important matter, and that EPA's actions in this regard 
do not negatively affect state and local urban revitalization 
efforts.

                      EPA'S BROWNFIELDS INITIATIVE

    During the past several Congresses, the Committee has 
conducted extensive oversight of EPA's various brownfields-
related programs. The Committee will continue to review 
progress in the programs, and whether EPA is properly managing 
them. The Committee intends to continue monitoring EPA's 
activities in this area during the 107th Congress.

            EPA TESTING AND OTHER NON-STATUTORY INITIATIVES

    Beginning in 1996, EPA launched a series of non-statutory 
testing initiatives to encourage the increased testing of new 
chemicals and products. These ``voluntary'' chemical testing 
initiatives include the High Production Volume Testing 
Initiative and the Children's Health Testing Initiative. In the 
107th Congress, the Committee will monitor EPA's development 
and implementation of these, and similar, non-statutory 
initiatives.

                   EPA'S RELATIONSHIP WITH THE STATES

    In a report released in January 2001, the General 
Accounting Office (GAO) identified EPA's relationship with the 
States as a ``major performance and accountability challenge,'' 
citing disagreements over respective roles and 
responsibilities, priorities, and the proper conduct of Federal 
oversight. The Committee will monitor efforts by EPA to address 
this management challenge, including the progress of the 
National Environmental Performance Partnership System 
(``NEPPS''), which was created in 1995 to address these same 
issues.

                         THE SUPERFUND PROGRAM

    In past Congresses, the Committee has conducted an 
extensive review of EPA's Superfund program, including 
evaluations of regional enforcement and implementation of the 
cleanup program, concerns identified by EPA's IG about program 
management, and EPA expenditures from the Superfund Trust Fund. 
In the 107th Congress, the Committee will continue its detailed 
review of the status and management of the Superfund program.

         RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT IMPLEMENTATION

    The Committee will review EPA's relationship to the States' 
toxic waste cleanup programs, and whether Federal program 
reforms under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act are 
necessary to expedite cleanups at toxic waste sites.

                     EPA RISK ASSESSMENT PRACTICES

    The Committee will conduct oversight with respect to EPA 
risk assessment practices to ensure they are consistent with 
the ``Best Management Practices'' of the Office of Management 
and Budget, the Recommendations of the President's Commission 
on Risk Assessment and Risk Management , and the risk 
assessment provisions of the 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act.

                   SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT AMENDMENTS

    During the 105th and 106th Congresses, the Committee 
examined EPA 's implementation of the 1996 Safe Drinking Water 
Act Amendments. The Committee held hearings on the conduct and 
adequacy of safe drinking water research and state funding of 
drinking water programs. The Committee will continue its review 
of the 1996 Amendments and pay close attention to projections 
of an infrastructure ``gap'' between identified resources and 
identified needs for drinking water systems.

                             HEALTH ISSUES

                    HCFA'S MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS

    The Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) was created 
in 1977 in order to consolidate the administration of Medicare 
and Medicaid in one agency. The Committee will review various 
Medicare reform proposals, and conduct oversight of how the 
Agency currently operates and manages the delivery of health 
care to nearly 80 million Americans.

             MEDICARE AND MEDICAID: WASTE, FRAUD AND ABUSE

    The Committee will continue its efforts to identify and 
expose instances or patterns of waste, fraud, and abuse in the 
Medicare and Medicaid programs, or opportunities for such 
activities due to inadequate policies, procedures, or controls. 
This oversight will focus on a range of program areas, 
including those specifically described in this oversight plan.

                   PROBLEMS WITH THE MEDICAID PROGRAM

    Medicaid, which receives funding from both States and the 
Federal government, pays for the health expenses of 
approximately 40 million Americans, consisting primarily of 
low-income individuals such as mothers with children, the 
elderly, the blind and other disabled persons. Committee 
hearings last year revealed that the cost of the Medicaid fraud 
problem could exceed $17 billion every year. This year, the 
Committee will examine ways in which States could adopt more 
rigorous enrollment controls to keep unscrupulous providers out 
of their programs and improve their program integrity 
standards. The Committee also will examine whether specific 
Federal regulations may create disincentives for States to 
vigorously pursue fraud and abuse. In addition, the Committee 
will review the Section 1115 Medicaid waiver process, with 
respect to children's health insurance, assisted suicide, and 
other Medicaid-related matters.

             HCFA'S MANAGEMENT OF ITS MEDICARE CONTRACTORS

    The Committee will continue to assess HCFA's management of 
the fiscal intermediaries and carriers that are responsible for 
processing all Medicare claims and payments. Although HCFA 
provides overall policy guidance for the administration of 
Medicare, day-to-day operation of the program is dependent on 
contractors who process beneficiary claims and make Medicare 
payments to healthcare providers. The Committee's prior 
oversight revealed how several of these contractors 
fraudulently misrepresented their performance, submitted false 
financial data, rigged audits, and destroyed relevant documents 
in order to receive greater incentive payments from HCFA--and 
how HCFA failed to detect these activities due to lax oversight 
coupled with complex and often contradictory directives issues 
from HCFA's Headquarters and regional offices. In response, 
HCFA initiated significant efforts to reform its management of 
Medicare contractors, and has sought new authority to expand 
the types of entities that can serve as Medicare contractors. 
The Committee will continue to review HCFA's oversight of these 
contractors and examine the current contractor eligibility 
requirements and the Medicare claims payment system.

             HCFA'S EFFORTS ON ANTI-FRAUD BILLING SOFTWARE

    During the 106th Congress, the Committee conducted a review 
of HCFA's failure to implement pre-payment, anti-fraud software 
in its Medicare claims systems, despite years of reports by the 
Department of Health and Human Services Inspector General and 
the General Accounting Office suggesting that Medicare could 
save hundreds of millions of dollars annually by implementing 
software systems similar to those currently available in the 
private sector. HCFA recently took steps to evaluate such 
systems, and the Committee will monitor the agency's activities 
in this regard during the 107th Congress.

 HCFA'S IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BALANCED BUDGET ACT, THE BALANCED BUDGET 
    REFINEMENT ACT, AND THE BENEFITS IMPROVEMENT AND PROTECTION ACT

    During the 107th Congress, the Committee will continue to 
monitor HCFA's implementation of the Balanced Budget Act of 
1997 (BBA), as well as the subsequently passed Balanced Budget 
Refinement Act (BBRA) and the Benefits Improvement and 
Protection Act (BIPA). Many of the changes required by these 
bills will help modernize Medicare, save money, and open the 
program to a wider range of private health plans. In addition, 
these bills contain provisions having an impact on the Medicaid 
and State Children's Health Insurance Program as well.

                           PRESCRIPTION DRUGS

    The Committee will conduct a comprehensive examination of 
the pharmaceutical market and policies that affect it. The 
review will examine methods to encourage additional access to 
coverage for Medicare beneficiaries and price competition 
consistent with equitable and efficient policies to promote 
innovation. The review will include taxpayer-funded research, 
product review and approval, and post-marketing activities.

                      MEDICARE SELF-REFERRAL LAWS

    Originally enacted in 1989 and amended in 1993, the 
physician self-referral laws prohibit a physician from making a 
referral to a provider for certain designated Medicare services 
if the physician has a financial relationship with that 
provider. These laws were designed to reduce overutilization 
and gaming of the Medicare program. HCFA recently issued 
complex and lengthy final regulations on this issue, seven 
years after the law's passage, but many questions have been 
raised about how the self-referral laws will be interpreted and 
enforced by HCFA. This year, the Committee will continue to 
oversee the implementation of the self-referral laws in a 
manner that assures program integrity and minimizes physicians' 
regulatory compliance costs.

                    TELEMEDICINE/ON-LINE HEALTH CARE

    During the 105th and 106th Congresses, the Committee 
followed the development of a number of on-line health care 
issues. In particular, a growing number of companies are now 
distributing prescription pharmaceuticals on-line, and some are 
moving into the realm of providing health care advice and 
diagnosis without physically meeting the patient. The Committee 
will continue to examine the growth of on-line health care, its 
costs and benefits, and the variety of new consumer protection 
issues that have arisen in relation to this emerging field.
    Relatedly, despite tremendous growth in telemedicine 
activity, current law may continue to impede this promising new 
health care delivery mechanism. In the 106th Congress, the 
Committee focused on ways to eliminate barriers to the practice 
of telemedicine in the Medicare program. This year, the 
Committee will expand this oversight to include the Medicaid 
program as well as private payors. Specifically, the Committee 
will examine the differences in state licensing requirements 
for telemedicine, and whether modernization of these rules 
could improve patient care.

             THE STATE CHILDREN'S HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM

    The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 amended the Social Security 
Act to add Title XXI--The State Children's Health Insurance 
Program (SCHIP). Under this Title, funds are provided to States 
to enable them to initiate and expand health assistance to 
uninsured, low-income children. SCHIP targets children in 
families whose income levels exceed Medicaid thresholds, but 
who lack private insurance. States may receive funds by 
providing child health assistance through a separate state-only 
SCHIP program, an SCHIP-financed Medicaid expansion, or a 
combination of the two. HCFA is charged with approving and 
reviewing States' plans for implementing the SCHIP program 
prior to their receiving SCHIP funds. The Committee will 
continue to oversee HCFA's implementation of this program.

                            CANCER RESEARCH

    The National Institutes of Health and other agencies have 
made tremendous progress in the ``War on Cancer.'' Scientists 
have been able to learn about the fundamental processes of 
cellular development, maintenance, and proliferation, and how 
these processes can be corrupted to cause cancer. The Committee 
will continue to oversee cancer research to help ensure that 
Federal efforts are properly managed, and that these recent 
scientific advances on the prevention, detection, and treatment 
of cancer are fully used to the benefit of all Americans.
    In particular, the Committee successfully pushed last year 
for the enactment of laws expanding activities relating to the 
prevention, surveillance, and treatment of cervical cancer. 
Cervical cancer is most often caused by the Human Pampilloma 
Virus, a viral infection that kills more women in America than 
even HIV, the cause of AIDS. An estimated 15,000 cases of 
cervical cancer are diagnosed in the United States each year, 
and 5,000 women die from the disease annually. Worldwide, 
cervical cancer affects 500,000 women each year and, after 
breast cancer, it is the second most common malignancy found in 
women. Continuing oversight of the Centers for Disease Control 
and HCFA, the Federal agencies charged with implementation of 
these laws, is necessary.

                       HUMAN GENOME DEVELOPMENTS

    The Human Genome Project is an international effort begun 
in 1990. The goals of the project are to discover all the 
approximate 100,000 human genes, make them accessible for 
further biological study, and determine the complete sequence 
of the three billion DNA subunits. In June 2000, the completion 
of the ``rough draft'' of the human genome sequence was 
announced. Scientists involved in the Human Genome Project 
reported that this rough draft consists of overlapping 
fragments covering 97% of the human genome, and a sequencing of 
85% of the genome. This breakthrough means that, within years, 
doctors may be able to discern individual susceptibilities to 
common disorders, allowing the design of a program of effective 
individualized preventive medicine or cures. Because of the 
importance of this discovery, the Committee will continue to 
oversee this Project.

                        ORGAN ALLOCATION REFORMS

    The National Organ Transplant Act (NOTA) governs organ 
distribution policy in the United States. Since the law's 
enactment, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) has 
contracted with an organ procurement and transplantation 
network (OPTN) to determine how the organs are to be allocated. 
In 1998, the Clinton Administration promulgated a rule that 
would, in effect, transfer final authority over organ 
distribution policies from the OPTN to the Secretary. The 
Committee will review implementation of the rule to insure that 
state and regional organ procurement and transplantation 
systems operate in the best interests of current and future 
patients.

                  THE NATIONAL PRACTITIONER DATA BANK

    The National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) was created in 
1990. The purpose of the NPDB is to serve as a repository for 
information pertaining to medical practitioners. The 
information in the NPDB contains a listing and description of 
disciplinary actions taken by medical societies and state 
licensing boards, medical malpractice payments, clinical 
privileges actions, and Medicare and Medicaid program 
exclusions. By law, the information in the NPDB is not 
available to the public. The Committee will continue to 
evaluate ways to improve the data gathered in the data bank and 
make it more useful for medical boards, hospitals, and 
insurers.

                                ADOPTION

    The Committee will continue to conduct oversight of 
adoption promotion programs within the purview of the 
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). In conducting 
this review, the Committee will determine the extent to which 
HHS programs have an impact on increasing the number of 
adoptions. The oversight activities associated with a review of 
adoption programs will include assessment of relevant 
authorizing statutes, Federal regulations, program guidelines 
and practices, and statistical data.
    Such a review will include the adoption awareness programs 
authorized by the Children's Health Act of 2000, which provides 
for grants to adoption organizations to train the staff of 
eligible health centers in providing adoption information and 
referrals based on guidelines developed by the adoption 
community. It further mandates that, not later than one year 
after the date of the enactment of the Children's Health Act of 
2000, the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate committees 
of the Congress a baseline report evaluating the extent to 
which adoption information and referrals are provided by 
eligible health centers. The Act also mandates a second report 
to Congress on the effect of the adoption information and 
referral training. Oversight of the baseline study and effects 
of the training program are needed to ensure HHS compliance 
with Congressional intent.

                            PALLIATIVE CARE

    As the American health system has reduced the rates of 
death by trauma or infection, long-term causes of death 
accompanied by persistent and debilitating pain are on the 
increase relative to other causes of death. But there is 
concern in the medical and patient communities that pain 
control has been a neglected area of inquiry in the health 
profession. The Committee will review programs within its 
jurisdiction to understand how better pain management can be a 
priority objective.

                       THE HEALTHY START PROGRAM

    Authorized by the Children's Health Act of 2000, Healthy 
Start is designed to reduce the rate of infant mortality and 
improve perinatal outcomes by providing grants to areas with a 
high rate of infant mortality and low birth weight infants. 
This Act authorizes a new grant program for research and 
additional services to enhance access to health care for 
pregnant women and infants, including increased access to 
prenatal care, ultrasound services, and prenatal surgery. The 
Committee plans to conduct oversight of the implementation of 
this Act.

             IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HEALTH CARE PRIVACY RULE

    Last year, the Department of Health and Human Services 
(HHS) issued regulations, required by law, addressing the 
confidentiality of individual identifiable health information 
stored or transmitted electronically. These regulations are not 
yet legally binding, however, and will be the subject of 
Committee oversight in the 107th Congress.

              HHS PROGRAMS AFFECTING CHILDREN AND FAMILIES

    The Committee will continue to conduct oversight of the 
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) grant programs 
that affect the health of children and families. According to 
some estimates, HHS funding for programs related to the health 
of children and families is more than $10 billion annually. The 
Committee's review will evaluate where the money is going, 
whether it is being spent effectively, and the extent to which 
these programs are consistent with statutory requirements and 
Congressional intent. In conjunction with the Committee's 
oversight of these HHS grant programs, the Committee also 
intends to conduct oversight of the various HHS agencies that 
have responsibility for children and family-related programs. 
For example, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
(CDC) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) conduct 
extensive studies of youth risk behaviors, including alcohol, 
drugs, tobacco, sex and violence. In addition, these two 
agencies are increasingly active in establishing health policy 
programs in areas such as school health, HIV education, 
pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease (STD) prevention. 
The Committee intends to review the effectiveness of these 
programs in the 107th Congress.

            IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WELFARE REFORM ACT OF 1996

    The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity 
Reconciliation Act of 1996, commonly known as the Welfare 
Reform Act, increased the accountability of parents in the 
welfare system by imposing strict work requirements and 
eligibility time limits on welfare recipients, and by 
establishing and enforcing strict child support obligations on 
non-custodial parents. The Committee will continue to conduct 
oversight of the role of the Department of Health and Human 
Services' (HHS) Child Support Enforcement efforts in 
implementing the Welfare Reform Act. In particular, the 
Committee will assess the effectiveness of the Child Support 
Multi-Agency Investigative Team (CSMAIT) in identifying and 
locating non-custodial parents who have not fulfilled their 
child support obligations. The Committee also will continue its 
review of the Title V Abstinence Education program, which was 
authorized by the Welfare Reform Act. Prior oversight 
identified problems and concerns in the implementation of this 
program, which the Committee will continue to assess in 
preparation for reauthorization of welfare reform in the 107th 
Congress.

                  DRUG ABUSE TREATMENT AND PREVENTION

    In the 105th and 106th Congresses, the Committee worked to 
broaden the war on drug abuse by focusing on innovative 
solutions to the area of drug treatment. Recent reports have 
raised concerns about the effectiveness of drug abuse 
rehabilitation programs, especially among adolescents seeking 
drug treatment. The Committee will conduct oversight of the 
incentives for developing anti-addictive medications and the 
potential of other methods of drug addiction treatment. The 
Committee also will inquire into Department of Health and Human 
Services (HHS) funding for research in the drug abuse area, and 
will evaluate state and local initiatives that may provide 
insights on successful programs. The Committee will conduct 
oversight of drug abuse programs and illegal drug use in order 
to determine the effectiveness of existing HHS efforts to 
reduce such usage, and will examine the relationship between 
HHS programs and other Federal anti-drug initiatives, and their 
overall impact on public health.

                      FALSE CLAIMS ACT ENFORCEMENT

    During the 105th and 106th Congresses, the Committee 
conducted oversight of the Department of Justice's (DOJ) 
application of the False Claims Act in the fight against waste, 
fraud, and abuse in the healthcare industry. In response to the 
Committee's review, DOJ issued new guidance on fair and 
appropriate use of the False Claims Act in this area. In the 
107th Congress, the Committee will monitor DOJ's application of 
the False Claims Act in order to evaluate the impact of the new 
guidelines.

                   THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH

    The National Institutes of Health (NIH), through its 24 
Institutes, Centers and Divisions, supports the research of 
scientists in universities, medical schools, hospitals, and 
research institutes throughout the country. The Committee will 
review NIH's management structure and research grant programs, 
and assess how to improve the overall efficiency and 
accountability of the Institute.

                    PUBLIC EDUCATION ON HEPATITIS C

    The Committee's past oversight revealed that the Surgeon 
General and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had 
failed to launch a promised nationwide public campaign to 
educate persons infected with the deadly Hepatitis C virus 
infection. This virus affects nearly four million Americans, 
many of whom do not know they have it and thus are not taking 
actions that could save their lives. In response to the 
Committee's oversight, the Surgeon General joined with Members 
of the Committee to launch a Hepatitis C public education 
campaign through Congressional communications to constituents. 
The Committee plans to review the Hepatitis C problem further, 
and whether a more extensive national public education campaign 
is still needed.

                          BIOENGINEERED FOODS

    Bioengineered foods are crop plants created for human or 
animal consumption using the latest molecular biology 
techniques. The genetic code of these plants have been modified 
in the laboratory to enhance desired traits, such as increased 
resistance to herbicides or improved nutritional content. The 
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ensures the safety of all 
domestic and imported foods for man or other animals, and 
bioengineered foods must adhere to the same standards of safety 
that apply to their conventionally-bred counterparts. FDA's 
view is that bioengineered foods are substantially equivalent 
to unmodified ``natural'' foods, and therefore no FDA pre-
approval is necessary prior to marketing. However, since 1992 
FDA has had a voluntary policy pursuant to which producers meet 
with FDA to review the science being used to alter the foods. 
FDA recently proposed a rule that would make the voluntary 
process established in 1992 a mandatory process. Further, 
questions have been raised about whether bioengineered foods 
should have special labeling requirements. The Committee 
intends to review such matters in the 107th Congress.

                       FDAMA/PDUFA IMPLEMENTATION

    In 1997, Congress enacted the Food and Drug Administration 
Modernization Act (FDAMA). Contained within that legislation 
was a five year reauthorization of the Prescription Drug User 
Fee Act (PDUFA), which was originally passed in 1992. FDAMA 
changed the FDA mission statement to ensure that FDA emphasizes 
the timeliness of FDA's review of foods, drugs, devices and 
cosmetics, and the Act allowed for third-party review of 
certain medical devices if the quality of the review would not 
be compromised. To ensure that FDA is accomplishing its mission 
to approve safe and effective products in a timely manner, and 
that it is hiring the personnel necessary to accomplish this 
objective, continued oversight of FDAMA and PDUFA 
implementation is necessary. In particular, the Committee 
intends to review the recent slow down in the drug approval 
process, and how to promote innovation while maintaining public 
confidence in drug safety.
    The Committee also will continue its oversight work to 
ensure seriously-ill patients have early access to treatment, 
especially in the cases of promising treatment for incurable, 
life-threatening diseases. In consultation with FDA and other 
public health resources, the Committee will review ways to 
provide more information to patients on clinical trials and 
other related matters.

                IDENTIFICATION OF FDA-REGULATED ENTITIES

    Two recent reports suggest that FDA has failed in its 
responsibility to identify entities subject to its regulation. 
A January 2001 Office of Inspector General report, and a 
January 2001 General Accounting Office report both found that 
FDA was unable to even identify and locate all the tissue 
banks, medical device reprocessing facilities, and foreign 
pharmaceutical facilities that it was supposed to inspect. The 
Committee intends to review these matters during the 107th 
Congress in order to ensure that FDA can promptly and fully 
identify the entities it is supposed to be regulating.

                             IMPORTED DRUGS

    Over the last decade, there has been a surge in shipments 
of drug products from overseas. With brand name prescription 
drugs costs so high, many Americans have come to rely on 
cheaper generic alternatives. Nearly 80 percent of drugs in the 
U.S. (especially generic drugs) have ingredients that have been 
manufactured in other countries. This trend has implications 
for the public health and the ability of FDA to ensure the 
safety and efficacy of such imported drugs. In connection with 
this area, the Committee has been examining FDA's foreign drug 
inspections, the Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA) between the 
U.S. and the European Union on drug inspections, and the 
problem with counterfeit bulk drugs.
    The Committee's prior investigation into the FDA's 
oversight of counterfeit foreign bulk drugs uncovered a total 
failure by FDA to identify and pursue counterfeit drug makers 
and distributors, despite internal FDA documents highlighting 
the dangers posed by specific imported medicines. The Committee 
plans to continue monitoring the problem and FDA's commitment 
to significantly upgrade its information technology and 
enforcement actions on imported drug products.

                     THE SPREAD OF MAD COW DISEASE

    Federal health officials are getting increasingly worried 
about mad cow disease because of new evidence of the spread of 
the disease throughout Europe. It is believed that millions of 
cows will have to be destroyed to contain the spread, and the 
concern is that some European farmers will try to contain their 
losses by selling the tainted meat under false labeling, 
transshipment, or selling or commingling some of the tainted 
beef to be used in animal feed or dietary supplements in the 
U.S. In January 2001, FDA reported that nearly a quarter of 
large companies involved in manufacturing animal feed are not 
complying with regulations meant to prevent the emergence and 
spread of mad cow disease. Because of FDA's weak import 
controls (see Imported Drugs above) and lack of adequate 
oversight of the animal feed industry, the U.S. may be 
vulnerable to imported European products with mad cow disease. 
The Committee will conduct oversight to ensure that the Federal 
government is adequately responding to this potential public 
health threat.

                      STUDIES OF DRUGS IN CHILDREN

    In 1997, as part of the FDA Modernization Act, Congress 
enacted a new law that provides marketing incentives to 
manufacturers who conduct studies of drugs in children. This 
law, which provides six months market exclusivity in return for 
conducting pediatric studies, is commonly known as the 
pediatric exclusivity provision. The purpose of the provision 
was to address the dearth of information about the effects of 
drugs and biological products in children. The provision has a 
sunset date of January 1, 2002. FDA recently reported to 
Congress that the pediatric exclusivity provision has been 
highly effective in generating pediatric studies on many drugs 
and in providing useful new information in product labeling. 
However, FDA contends that some categories of drugs and some 
age groups remain inadequately studied, despite the new 
incentives. The Committee will review the nature of these study 
gaps and whether there is a public health need to address them 
through appropriate modifications to current law.

               HUMAN RESEARCH SUBJECTS IN CLINICAL TRIALS

    During the last Congress, the Committee investigated the 
adequacy of Federal oversight with respect to the protection of 
human research subjects in gene transfer clinical trials. One 
question reviewed by the Committee was whether financial 
conflicts of interest may affect the conduct of gene transfer 
clinical trials. The Committee found that FDA did not gather or 
maintain aggregate data from on-site inspections of clinical 
sites about financial conflicts of interest, but was actively 
considering such a collection of data. The Committee will 
continue to monitor this area and oversee the implementation of 
recommendations by the HHS Inspector General on strengthening 
institutional review boards, improving recruiting practices for 
human research subjects, and strengthening FDA oversight of 
clinical investigators.
    Recently, in January 2001, FDA proposed a rule that would 
make safety data about gene transfer experiments available to 
the public. Under the proposal, FDA would disclose certain 
types of information now regarded as confidential. Such 
information includes how animals fared when given the 
experimental drug and any serious side effects suffered by 
people enrolled in human trials of the medicines. This proposed 
rule is in response to concern about the adequacy of Federal 
oversight of experimental medicine after a death in a gene 
transfer experiment, but concerns have been raised that the 
proposed rule might have negative consequences for such 
research. Given the potential that gene therapies hold, the 
Committee will review this matter to ensure that the recently 
proposed rule is promulgated in a fashion that maximizes public 
health.

                              FOOD SAFETY

    The Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA) directed the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reassess the safe 
level of all pesticide residues allowable on food crops using 
updated risk assessment standards. The law also required EPA to 
create an endocrine disruptor screening program. In the 107th 
Congress, the Committee will continue to actively review EPA, 
FDA, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture's efforts to 
implement and enforce the new law. The Committee will continue 
its detailed review of FQPA implementation, focusing on the 
agencies' FQPA policies, the scientific validity of the 
tolerance reassessments, and the impact of individual 
reassessment actions.
    The Committee also will review food safety programs at the 
FDA. Particular emphasis will be placed upon the adequacy of 
inspection procedures for imported agricultural products.

                           FDA CYBER SECURITY

    In July 1999, the Committee initiated a detailed review of 
cyber security at FDA. In the 107th Congress, the Committee 
will continue its evaluation of FDA's computer security 
programs and review the Agency's ongoing efforts to improve its 
cyber-security protections.

                       TELECOMMUNICATIONS ISSUES

   MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

    Congress created the Federal Communications Commission 
(FCC) in 1934 for the express purpose of regulating interstate 
and foreign communication via wire and radio. In 1996, Congress 
passed the most significant alteration of existing 
telecommunications law by enacting the Telecommunications Act 
of 1996. However, while the Telecommunications Act moved the 
telecommunications industry toward greater deregulation, it did 
little to alter the structure and functions of the FCC. 
Accordingly, the Commission has been implementing the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996 with a pre-1996 mind-set. In 
particular, the Commission has imposed regulations or provided 
regulatory relief for some parts of the telecommunications 
industry while not doing the same for other parts of the 
industry. This lack of regulatory parity is creating financial 
benefits and arbitrage opportunities for select parts of the 
telecommunications industry. Further, it is creating barriers 
to the development of free and open competition in the 
industry. The Committee will conduct a top-to-bottom review of 
the FCC to determine ways to improve its structure, functions, 
mission, operations and management. The Committee will examine 
ways to reform the FCC, including altering existing law or 
promoting reform from within the FCC using existing authority. 
The Committee will also conduct a thorough examination of FCC 
rules to determine whether they may be outdated, unnecessary, 
or stifling the development of competition and new services. 
Moreover, the Committee will evaluate complaints that the FCC 
is too bureaucratic, overreaching, and over-regulatory. In 
particular, the Committee will evaluate the Commission's role 
in reviewing mergers of companies in which there is a change in 
ownership or control of spectrum, including the slow pace with 
which the Commission has reviewed mergers and the demands 
placed on businesses participating in the FCC's merger review 
process.

                 THE NETWORKS' ELECTION NIGHT COVERAGE

    The Committee will continue its investigation into the 
numerous errors, irregularities, and inconsistencies in the 
network's reporting of results in the Presidential election on 
election night, November 7, 2000. Specifically, the Committee 
will review whether changes in the networks' policies and 
practices with respect to gathering and reporting of polling 
and voting data are necessary to ensure a fair election outcome 
and maximize voter turnout.

                                 ICANN

    The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers 
(ICANN), which governs the management and registration of 
``generic top-level domain'' names (gTLDs) such as .com or 
.gov., recently completed the process of approving seven new 
Internet suffixes. The application and selection process for 
the new gTLDs has raised controversy as some applicants argue 
that the gTLD selection process was unfair. The Committee plans 
to examine whether the selection process was open, fair, and 
competitive. In addition, the Committee plans to examine the 
structure and operations of ICANN, its effort to privatize the 
domain name system, and its effort to determine the rightful 
ownership of the root server.

                           DIGITAL TELEVISION

    In the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, Congress directed that 
the FCC authorize broadcasters to convert from analog to 
digital signals by 2006, and possibly beyond 2006 (in markets 
where a sufficient number of households cannot access a digital 
television signal). While many digital stations already are in 
operation in major metropolitan areas, the overall conversion 
to digital television has been criticized as being slow, 
unorganized and unrealistic. The FCC is currently in the 
process of considering whether ``must carry'' rules should 
apply to digital television channels during the transition, and 
if so, to what extent. The Committee intends to monitor the 
FCC's process on this and related matters in order to ensure 
the rapid deployment of digital television in all areas of the 
country in accordance with the schedule set forth in the 
Balanced Budget Act of 1997. Further, the Committee plans an 
in-depth review of the transition to digital television to 
determine what barriers exist to its full development and 
deployment.

                 AVAILABILITY OF BROADBAND TECHNOLOGIES

    The increase in use of the Internet and electronic commerce 
has led to an increase in the demand for faster networks and 
faster delivery of content. Today, consumers and businesses are 
frustrated by the slow speeds for connecting to and accessing 
information from the Internet. In addition, the creation of new 
advanced Internet applications--such as digital music and 
videos--creates a further demand for faster Internet 
connections. While new technologies and faster networks are 
being developed and deployed in some parts of the country and 
with some success, barriers exist that prevent these 
technologies from being available to all consumers. The 
Committee will examine all barriers--whether regulatory, 
market-based, or statutory in nature--to determine what factors 
are preventing the full deployment of broadband technologies to 
the American people. In particular, the Committee will examine 
whether additional deregulatory steps can be taken to improve 
the speed of broadband deployment nationwide.

                        TECHNOLOGY IN EDUCATION

    As the technology industry continues to develop new and 
innovative products and services, the educational community is 
finding that these products and services can have a positive 
impact on the education of our students. U.S. children can 
benefit from the vast array of telecommunications and Internet 
technologies available today, if they are implemented into the 
academic curriculum properly. For instance, the Internet brings 
a wide array of information from various sources that can be 
extremely helpful to students conducting research. Today, the 
Federal government runs a number of programs targeted at 
improving the use of technology in classrooms and by America's 
youth. These programs, however, often require burdensome 
paperwork requirements that can delay or prevent funding from 
reaching the intended parties. Further, these programs often 
target specific technologies or can be used for specific 
purposes only, which can be limiting and frustrating to school 
administrators and teachers. The Committee will examine the 
different Federal education technology programs with a goal of 
determining the best way to combine the many differing and 
competing programs into a single funding mechanism. Further, 
the Committee will examine ways to ease the application process 
to obtain funding for such purposes.

           EFFICIENT USE OF SPECTRUM AND SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT

    Management of spectrum within the U.S. is shared between 
the FCC (governing private sector use of the spectrum) and the 
National Telecommunications and Information Administration 
(NTIA) (governing governmental use of the spectrum). In the 
U.S., virtually all of the usable spectrum already has been 
allocated for a particular purpose. The recent popularity and 
growth of the wireless telecommunications industry has 
increased demand for the allocation and assignment of 
additional spectrum in order to provide new services, such as 
third generation (``3G'') wireless services. The tension 
created by the current shortfall has a significant impact on 
the U.S. economy and the ability of U.S. wireless providers to 
compete with wireless companies in other nations that are 
rushing to offer new wireless services. The Committee plans an 
extensive and comprehensive review of spectrum management 
functions to ensure efficient use of spectrum, particularly by 
Federal government users. In addition, the Committee will 
review efforts to promote spectrum sharing that may be 
beneficial to the promotion of new wireless technologies. 
Further, the Committee will review current spectrum polices, 
such as the FCC's spectrum cap, to determine whether these 
policies are still appropriate in today's marketplace.

                         BROADCAST DEREGULATION

    The broadcasters have traditionally been heavily regulated 
by the FCC due to the scarcity of spectrum available in the 
U.S. Both the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the Balanced 
Budget Act of 1997 mandated that the FCC liberalize its 
broadcast ownership rules. While the FCC has made some progress 
in reducing broadcast regulations, there still are at least two 
major areas that remain heavily regulated by FCC rules: the 
national ownership cap and the newspaper/broadcast station 
cross ownership restriction. The national ownership cap, which 
sets a maximum percentage of homes that a national network may 
reach (35%), is a key point of controversy between the networks 
and their affiliates. The cap was set by the Telecommunications 
Act of 1996, but authority was given to the FCC to relax the 
cap on a going forward basis.
    In 1975, the FCC adopted a regulation prohibiting the grant 
of a broadcast license to anyone who owns a newspaper in the 
same market. The newspaper publishing companies note that 
almost every other broadcast ownership regulation has been 
updated in the past several years, except for the newspaper 
ownership prohibition. However, supporters of the restriction 
point to the consolidation of news sources available within a 
market as the reason to keep this regulation in place. The 
Committee intends to closely monitor the FCC's implementation 
of these two provisions, and to evaluate whether it faithfully 
comports with Congressional intent.

                  COPYRIGHT RELATIONSHIP TO E-COMMERCE

    The exponential growth of the Internet raises questions 
about the protection of intellectual property that never 
existed in an analog world. Because digital copies are as 
perfect as originals, questions arise as to how to protect 
copyrighted works in a digital age. These fundamental questions 
are critically important to the content providing community, 
including the motion picture industry, the recording industry, 
and the software industry--as they all create material 
protected by copyright. However, overprotection of copyrights 
may stifle e-commerce and the further development of the 
Internet. The Committee intends to examine how developing 
technologies affect traditional copyright protections. Further, 
the Committee will determine whether traditional copyright 
protections warrant any changes, and whether new mechanisms are 
necessary to strike the proper balance between protecting works 
and encouraging the continued growth of the digital economy. 
Specifically, the Committee will examine the recent explosion 
of Internet music-sharing products (e.g., Napster), and the 
development of similar technologies for the sharing of movies.

                THE CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING

    Congress created the Corporation for Public Broadcasting 
(CPB) in the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967. Historically, the 
Committee has been charged with monitoring the activities of 
the CPB and authorizing appropriations. The Committee will 
review the level of Federal funding necessary for the 
continuation of public broadcasting. The Committee also will 
examine issues relating to the efficiency of CPB, the Public 
Broadcasting Service, and the National Public Radio. 
Furthermore, the Committee intends an in-depth examination of 
the estimated transition costs of the public broadcasters for 
converting from analog to digital television.

             CYBER CRIME/CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION

    American and multinational businesses are becoming more 
reliant on the infrastructure of the Internet and other 
electronic communications networks to conduct valuable 
transactions and to communicate. A well placed ``attack'' on 
this infrastructure could have a devastating impact on the 
American public and could paralyze vital functions. In 
addition, smaller attacks, such as hacking into a company's 
network, could be very costly and disruptive as well. The 
Committee will examine the existing and potential threats to 
this existing infrastructure, whether law enforcement is 
sufficiently combating existing and potential threats to the 
appropriate networks, whether the industry is prepared to 
handle threats to the infrastructure, whether the current 
agencies of the Federal government are properly coordinating 
with one another, and whether current law needs to be altered 
to deal with these issues.

                 WIRELESS PRIVACY/WIRELESS WIRETAPPING

    Personal wireless telecommunications devices are currently 
converting from analog to digital technologies. The increased 
capabilities of digital communications create new issues that 
are not present in the analog environment. For instance, the 
law enforcement community is presented with new technological 
obstacles when exercising its wiretapping authority. Further, 
privacy of wireless communications can be compromised when 
wireless tracking and location information is provided to 
wireless companies and then potentially shared with third 
parties. The Committee plans an extensive review of the policy 
impact of the conversion to digital communications. This review 
will include an examination of the costs and technological 
needs of the law enforcement community with regards to the 
Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA). This 
examination also will look at specific efforts proposed to 
improve the privacy protections afforded wireless 
telecommunications users with respect to location information.

                      VIOLENT CONTENT IN THE MEDIA

    Over the past few decades, American media outlets have 
increased the amount of violent content, including gratuitous 
violence, within the overall programming offered to consumers. 
A number of recent studies detailing the effects media violence 
has on American society, especially on children, have concluded 
that there may be a link between the violent nature of media 
content and violent behavior. In addition, while opinions vary, 
the popular view today is that media violence does, in some 
way, influence impressionable young viewers. The Committee 
intends to review the practices and policies of all media 
sources, including television, motion pictures, audio 
recordings, video games, radio, and the Internet, to evaluate 
differing approaches to violent content. The Committee will 
review existing studies on the effects of media violence to 
determine their accuracy and methodology. Further, the 
Committee plans to examine the reasons for the inclusion of 
increased violent content in media programming, and different 
ways to empower parents to protect their children from such 
content.

                           FCC CYBER SECURITY

    The FCC is privy to sensitive and proprietary information 
provided by the telecommunications industry. Further, the 
Commission generates vast amounts of internal documents and 
work product of a sensitive, non-public nature. Protection of 
the Commission's computer network is thus important to ensure 
that non-public information is not shared with unintended 
parties. For instance, as a result of a press leak regarding a 
high-profile merger before the Commission last year, the FCC 
examined whether the information was obtained through a breach 
in computer security. The Committee will examine what steps the 
Commission takes to protect the integrity and security of its 
network systems and confidential data, and whether further 
efforts in this area are necessary.

                  THE STATE OF THE HIGH-TECH INDUSTRY

    Over the last several years, the growth of e-commerce has 
been a significant catalyst for the success of the American 
economy overall. The high tech industry has seen considerable 
growth and innovation that has had ripple effects throughout 
many sectors of American business. However, no longer fueled by 
a turbo-charged Nasdaq or exuberant consumer spending, the 
tech-driven economy has experienced recent fluctuations. 
Recently, many ``dot com'' companies experienced lower than 
expected profits and defaults on debt, a trend that also has 
affected another pillar of the new economy--telecommunications. 
Experts differ over whether the high tech boom is officially 
over or merely delayed for a short period of time. The 
Committee will examine the causes and potential solutions to 
the economic malaise affecting the e-commerce industry. 
Further, the Committee will examine the success and failures of 
specific high tech industries to determine if there are any 
discernable patterns.
                                 PART B

 Implementation of the Committee on Energy and Commerce Overisght Plan 
                         for the 107th Congress

                              ----------                              


            COMMERCE, TRADE, AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ISSUES

                            CONSUMER PRIVACY

    One of the primary concerns of on-line users is the 
protection of sensitive consumer information collected and 
transmitted over the Internet or other computer networks. As 
increasing numbers of consumers interface with the Internet to 
conduct electronic transactions, there are concerns that 
personal information collected by web sites, such as sensitive 
medical or financial information, may be misused or poorly 
protected.
    The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer 
Protection held a series of six oversight hearings in the 107th 
Congress, beginning in March 1, 2001, in which the Subcommittee 
examined a large array of issues relating to consumer 
information privacy in the commercial context. The Subcommittee 
took extensive testimony on the following subjects: the 
limitations imposed by the U.S. Constitution to regulating free 
speech; the implications of the European Union (EU) Directive 
on Data Protection on U.S. law and private sector activity; 
existing Federal laws in the area of privacy; the value and 
results of opinion surveys on the subject of privacy; the best 
practices of companies and new technological solutions to 
protecting consumer privacy; and the real uses of consumer 
information by companies. Witnesses included constitutional 
scholars, representatives from a variety of industries and 
consumer groups, and representatives from foreign governments. 
The hearings, which were held on March 1, 2001, March 8, 2001, 
April 3, 2001, May 8, 2001, June 21, 2001, and July 26, 2001, 
highlighted a number of information privacy issues relating to 
commercial activities and the potential for additional 
legislation to protect American consumers' privacy in the 
commercial context.

                          TIRE/VEHICLE SAFETY

    During the 106th Congress, the Committee's oversight of the 
Firestone tire recall led to the passage of legislation 
mandating that the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration (NHTSA) institute rulemakings to require the 
submission of data on safety-related problems, claims, and 
lawsuits (whether foreign or domestic) from manufacturers of 
products within NHTSA's purview, including tires and vehicles. 
The law--entitled the ``Transportation Recall Enhancement, 
Accountability, and Documentation Act'' (TREAD)--also required 
that NHTSA update its standards for tires and tire testing. 
During the 107th Congress, the Committee continued its review 
of tire/vehicle safety issues, as well as NHTSA's 
implementation of these legislative provisions.
    Specifically, the Committee gathered and reviewed tire 
safety data from virtually every major tire maker for more than 
250 separate tire lines mounted as original equipment on sport 
utility vehicles, station wagons, and minivans. On June 19, 
2001, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations also 
held a hearing on the Ford Motor Company's May 1, 2001 
announcement of a unilateral and voluntary tire recall, broader 
than the previous year's recall, covering all Firestone 
Wilderness AT tires on Ford vehicles. The Committee examined 
claims and testing data provided by Ford and Firestone about 
the subject tires, as well as those tire lines Ford planned to 
use as replacements for the recalled Firestone tires. Lead 
executives from both companies testified at the hearing, as did 
the Deputy Secretary of the Department of Transportation. As a 
result of the hearing, NHTSA and Ford pledged to undertake 
expedited reviews of the proposed replacement tires, including 
additional and more vigorous testing of the replacement tires 
by Ford to ensure their safety. Ford also voluntarily removed 
one tire line from its replacement tire program, even though 
NHTSA determined that the tire was not defective.
    In addition, on February 28, 2002, the Subcommittee on 
Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection held an oversight 
hearing on NHTSA and the implementation of the TREAD Act one 
year following enactment. Testimony was received from 
representatives of NHTSA, the Office of Management and Budget, 
and the Department of Transportation's Office of the Inspector 
General. Committee staff also met with NHTSA officials to 
discuss the implementation of the many TREAD rulemakings 
throughout the 107th Congress.

                    FILTERING/BLOCKING TECHNOLOGIES

    While the Internet opens doors to a world of information 
that was not available in the analog world, it also makes 
available pornography and other material that may be 
inappropriate for children. As part of the Committee's 
continuing oversight in this area, on April 4, 2001, the 
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet held a 
hearing entitled ``E-Rate and Filtering: A Review of the 
Children's Internet Protection Act (CHIPA).'' The hearing 
focused on the implementation and effectiveness of provisions 
in CHIPA that require public libraries receiving Federal 
subsidies (e.g., through the E-Rate program) to implement 
filtering/blocking technologies in its Internet-enabled 
computers in order to protect children from inappropriate 
content on the Internet. Witnesses included representatives of 
family value advocacy groups, public libraries, civil liberties 
groups, and two Internet-filtering technology companies.

                             TELEMARKETING

    Telemarketing has been, and continues to be, a 
controversial marketing practice. While telemarketing can 
provide benefits for consumers, it also can be an intrusive 
nuisance and promote consumer confusion. In some instances, 
rogue telemarketers can take advantage of this confusion to 
commit fraud against consumers, particularly against senior 
citizens. In the 107th Congress, the Committee undertook a 
general examination of telemarketing practices in light of 
existing law, and the range of potential safeguards to protect 
the privacy, safety, and pocketbooks of consumers.
    As part of this effort, the Committee monitored the Federal 
Trade Commission's (FTC) proposed national do-not-call list 
through regular FTC briefings. The Committee also considered 
legislation on this matter introduced in the House by Mr. 
Frelinghuysen. On February 28, 2001, the Full Committee on 
Energy and Commerce met in open markup session to consider H.R. 
90, approved the bill by a voice vote that same day, and 
reported H.R. 90 to the House (H. Rpt. 107-13) on March 12, 
2001. The House considered H.R. 90 under suspension of the 
rules on December 4, 2001, and passed H.R. 90 by a voice vote. 
On December 5, 2001, H.R. 90 was received in the Senate and 
read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation.

  FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION INVOLVEMENT IN HIGH TECH AND OTHER POLICY 
                                 AREAS

    The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has authority to protect 
consumers from deceptive practices and advertising over various 
mediums, including the Internet and electronic networks. In the 
107th Congress, the Committee reviewed the FTC's exercise of 
its authority in various areas within the Committee's 
jurisdiction.
    The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection 
held an oversight hearing on November 7, 2001, focused on the 
challenges facing the FTC. The Subcommittee received testimony 
from the new Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, the 
Honorable Timothy Muris, who outlined the Commission's agenda 
under his leadership, specifically the Commission's enforcement 
and programmatic priorities.
    In addition, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and 
Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing on June 25, 2002, 
concerning the FTC's 23-year-old Franchise Rule. The hearing 
examined whether the rule needed to be revisited in light of 
changes in franchising that had occurred since its 
promulgation. The Subcommittee received testimony from 
representatives of the FTC, a state attorney general's office, 
franchise associations, and a franchise operators' association.

         VIOLENT CONTENT IN THE MEDIA AND MARKETING TO CHILDREN

    Over the past few decades, American media outlets have 
increased the amount of violent content, including gratuitous 
violence, within the overall programming offered to consumers. 
Several studies detailing the effects of media violence on 
American society, especially on children, have concluded that 
there may be a link between the violent nature of media content 
and violent behavior.
    In the 107th Congress, the Committee reviewed the practices 
and policies of various media sources, including television, 
motion pictures, audio recordings, video games, radio, and the 
Internet, to evaluate differing approaches to handling violent 
content. The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the 
Internet held a hearing on July 20, 2001, entitled ``Media 
Violence: An Examination of the Entertainment Industry's 
Efforts to Curb Children's Exposure to Violent Content.'' The 
hearing focused on the findings of a series of reports prepared 
by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) on the subject. Witnesses 
included representatives from the FTC, the motion picture, 
video game, and recording industries, a major retail chain, and 
a parents' advocacy group. In conjunction with the Committee's 
review, Committee staff also received briefings from the FTC 
upon the release of each version of its reports on the topic.
    The Subcommittee held a follow-up hearing on October 1, 
2002, to examine recording industry practices for labeling and 
marketing violent/explicit content to minors, because of the 
industry's poor marks from the FTC and its different approach 
to the problem as compared to its counterparts in the motion 
picture and video games industries. Witnesses included 
representatives from the FTC, the American Academy of 
Pediatrics, the Recording Industry Association of America, the 
Hip-Hop Summit Action Network, and two music retailer 
representatives. Eight members of the Committee sent a follow-
up letter to the Recording Industry Association of America to 
inquire whether more of its members would adopt the more 
stringent labeling system adopted by one of its members.

                          INTERNATIONAL TRADE

    In the 107th Congress, the Committee continued its efforts 
to monitor and examine trade agreements and activities 
affecting important segments of the U.S. economy, such as 
telecommunications. On October 9, 2002, the Subcommittee on 
Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection held an oversight 
hearing that focused on the inclusion of market access 
provisions for telecommunications services in bilateral and 
multilateral trade agreements. Witnesses included the Assistant 
United States Trade Representative for Industry and 
Telecommunications, a representative from a public policy 
research group, a trade lawyer, and an economics professor.

               TELEPHONE CALLING CARD PRACTICES AND RATES

    Over the last few years, the telecommunications industry 
has undergone considerable change with the advent of new 
services, products, and rate plans by telecommunications 
companies. Telephone calling cards are one example of a 
relatively new service that has become extremely popular with 
consumers. Telephone calling cards offered by or in partnership 
with telecommunications providers are very attractive to 
consumers because of their convenience and ease of operation. 
However, many consumers have found frustration and 
disappointment with exorbitant telephone card rates, lack of 
information on policies and practices with respect to service 
and rates, and poor customer relations services. In the 107th 
Congress, the Committee reviewed the use and potential abuses 
of these telephone calling cards to ensure adequate consumer 
protections. For more detail, see discussion of ``Hotel/Motel 
Telephone Calling Rates' below.

                  HOTEL/MOTEL TELEPHONE CALLING RATES

    In the 107th Congress, the Committee reviewed compliance 
and enforcement activities relating to the rate and disclosure 
practices of telephone calling cards, in an effort to ensure 
adequate consumer protections. In recent years, many consumers 
have found frustration and disappointment with exorbitant 
telephone rates when making telephone calls from payphones 
using calling cards, particularly those phones located in hotel 
and motel rooms. Some consumers using calling cards to make 
calls on payphones or from hotel and motel rooms later receive 
their calling card bills, only to find their phone 
conversations had cost far more than they had anticipated. 
Under Federal law, callers making calls away from home must 
have the opportunity to use an operator service provider (OSP) 
of their choice. In addition, OSPs are required to provide rate 
and billing information on request to consumers calling from 
hotels, motels, and payphones.
    Committee majority staff met with representatives from the 
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to review what the FCC 
had done to ensure that the applicable requirements were being 
enforced. Committee staff received briefings on recent consent 
decrees in this area between the FCC and USLD Communications, 
AT&T Corporation, and WorldCom, Inc., as well as FCC citations 
to 97 entities, mainly hotels and motels, for non-compliance 
with the requirements. Committee staff also learned that the 
American Hotel and Motel Association had agreed with the FCC to 
implement an operator service education and compliance campaign 
for the hospitality industry.

                            LIABILITY REFORM

    In the 107th Congress, the Committee continued to examine 
the need for further liability reform in a number of areas, 
particularly medical malpractice. The Committee undertook in a 
number of activities with respect to medical liability reform, 
engaging relevant stakeholders, and examining legislative 
initiatives to address the increasing costs of liability 
insurance. On June 22, 2002, Health Subcommittee Chairman 
Michael Bilirakis held a community field forum in the Tampa, 
Florida area to hear from providers about the need for 
liability reform. Individual doctors, nursing home executives, 
patients, and hospital executives discussed the impact of 
liability premium increases. Following the forum, on July 17, 
2002, the Subcommittee on Health held a hearing to further 
examine issues related to the medical liability subject. At the 
hearing, the Subcommittee took testimony from a number of 
experts in both the medical field and the insurance industry, 
who discussed the impact of litigation on health care providers 
and whether tort reform measures would impact medical liability 
insurance costs. The Subcommittee also heard testimony from 
patient advocates concerned about the impact of liability 
reform on victim compensation and the quality of care.
    On September 18, 2002, the Committee favorably reported 
H.R. 4600, the Help Efficient, Accessible, Low Cost, Timely 
Health Care (HEALTH) Act of 2002, which addressed medical 
malpractice reform. On September 26, 2002, the House passed 
H.R. 4600, the HEALTH Act of 2002.

                 THE CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

    In the 107th Congress, the Committee examined matters 
relating to the performance and activities of the Consumer 
Product Safety Commission (CPSC). On September 4, 2002, the 
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection held 
an oversight hearing on CPSC. The hearing focused on the issues 
facing the Commission, and the priorities and agenda of the new 
Commission Chairman, who testified at the hearing.
    In addition, in September 2001, Subcommittee on Oversight 
and Investigations Chairman James Greenwood sent a letter to 
CPSC requesting documents relating to the CPSC's investigation 
into allegations of a potentially deadly defect present in 
certain BB guns manufactured by Daisy Manufacturing Company. 
The purported defect enables a BB to become lodged in the 
magazine area, permitting the gun to be shaken without hearing 
a BB and to be fired without expelling a BB, thus leading the 
user to believe the gun is empty when it is not. This purported 
defect has been claimed responsible for over 44 serious brain 
injuries and deaths, in addition to hundreds of other less 
serious injuries. The Subcommittee Chairman sent the letter out 
of concern that CPSC was not investigating the matter in a 
sufficiently thorough and speedy manner. Committee staff met 
with CPSC staff and representatives of Daisy Manufacturing to 
assess the extent of the potential defect, the adequacy of 
Daisy's efforts to address the potential defect, and the 
adequacy of the CPSC's efforts to investigate and monitor 
Daisy's activities in this regard.

                           FTC CYBER SECURITY

    The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), as a law enforcement 
and regulatory body, is privy to sensitive and proprietary 
information provided by the parties it regulates. Further, the 
Commission generates vast amounts of internal documents, many 
of which are law-enforcement sensitive. Accordingly, protection 
of the FTC's computer networks and non-public data is important 
to ensure that this information is not accessed by or shared 
with unauthorized parties. During the 107th Congress, the 
Committee began an examination of the steps the Commission 
takes to protect the integrity and security of its network 
systems and confidential data, as part of its overall review of 
computer security policies and practices at Federal agencies 
within its jurisdiction.

              CYBER SECURITY AT THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

    In June 1999, the Committee initiated a review of computer 
security policies and practices at the Department of Commerce. 
Because of preliminary concerns over the possible extent of 
problems at the Department, the Committee requested that the 
General Accounting Office (GAO) conduct a more comprehensive 
review of the Department's computer security. On August 3, 
2001, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held a 
hearing to review the findings of the GAO's work, which found 
systemic and serious vulnerabilities in the Department's 
management of cyber security. GAO and the Deputy Secretary of 
the Department of Commerce testified at the hearing, and the 
Department pledged to undertake significant reforms of its 
security policies and practices. The Committee continued to 
monitor the Department's efforts in this area during the 107th 
Congress through briefings from relevant agency computer 
officials.

        IMPLEMENTATION OF GOVERNMENT-WIDE CYBER-SECURITY PROGRAM

    Pursuant to Title 14 of the Defense Authorization Act of 
2001, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) was provided 
substantial new authority and responsibilities to ensure that 
computer and information resources maintained by the Federal 
government are protected from cyber attacks, viruses and other 
threats. OMB's responsibilities include enhancing government-
wide policies for computer security, overseeing the development 
of Federal agency security plans, as well as reviewing the 
results of Federal agency efforts to conduct vulnerability 
assessments and penetration tests of their computer defenses. 
Under the law, each agency is required to develop comprehensive 
information security plans and conduct internal vulnerability 
audits. These audits also must be subject to external 
verification.
    During the 107th Congress, the Committee reviewed the 
efforts of Federal agencies within its jurisdiction to comply 
with the new government-wide cyber security law. In March 2001, 
the Committee sent detailed information requests to each of the 
Federal departments, agencies, and commissions within its 
jurisdiction, including the Departments of Commerce, Energy, 
and Health and Human Services; the Food and Drug 
Administration; the National Institutes of Health; the Centers 
for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS); the Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention; the Environmental Protection 
Agency; the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission; the Federal Trade Commission; the 
Federal Communications Commission; the Consumer Product Safety 
Board; the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration; and 
the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. Committee staff 
reviewed scores of boxes of responsive materials from these 
agencies relating to their computer security policies, 
practices, and audits, and conducted interviews of numerous 
computer security officials at many of these agencies. The 
Committee's review of agency compliance with computer security 
requirements spurred corrective actions by many of these 
agencies during the 107th Congress.
    As part of this comprehensive review, the Subcommittee on 
Oversight and Investigations held two hearings focusing on 
computer security problems at CMS and the Department of 
Commerce, respectively, as discussed elsewhere in this report.

              CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE ASSURANCE ACTIVITIES

    In 1997, the President's Council on Critical Infrastructure 
Protection recommended that the Federal government initiate 
increased efforts to ensure that critical infrastructures 
within the United States, including the electric power grid, 
telecommunications and transportation systems, and water 
supplies, are adequately secure from threats posed by malicious 
actors, foreign governments, and terrorists. Partially in 
response to this report, President Clinton issued Presidential 
Decision Directive (PDD) 63 and created the Critical 
Infrastructure Assurance Office (CIAO), which is currently 
housed within the Department of Commerce.
    In the 106th Congress, the Committee began a review of 
Federal and private sector efforts to secure the nation's 
critical infrastructures from attack or disruption, as promoted 
under PDD 63. During the 107th Congress, the Committee 
continued and expanded this review, examining the progress of 
Federal agencies in identifying their own critical assets, 
analyzing interdependencies between and among such assets and 
other public and private sector systems, and taking corrective 
action to mitigate vulnerabilities of the identified assets.
    As part of this review, the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations held a hearing on April 5, 2001, entitled 
``Protecting America's Critical Infrastructures: How Secure Are 
Government Computer Systems?'' The hearing focused on critical 
Federal agency computer systems, and the lack of progress 
various agencies were making in identifying and protecting 
their critical systems. At the hearing, expert cyber hackers 
from the Department of Energy demonstrated for Subcommittee 
Members the ease with which government computer systems could 
be penetrated by unauthorized users via the Internet. The first 
witness panel included representatives from the General 
Services Administration (GSA), which monitors computer security 
incidents at Federal agencies, the National Infrastructure 
Protection Center of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which 
assists Federal agencies and the private sector in monitoring 
and responding to computer security incidents, and a private 
company that develops technology to track and prevent such 
incidents. The second panel of witnesses included 
representatives from the General Accounting Office (GAO) and 
CIAO of the Department of Commerce. Subsequent to the hearing, 
Committee staff continued to receive briefings from various 
agency officials and the CIAO Director about efforts and 
progress in this area.
    Immediately following the September 11th terrorist attacks, 
Committee Members were briefed by representatives from key 
industries within the Committee's jurisdiction to discuss the 
private sector efforts underway to strengthen protection of 
critical infrastructures, including the electricity, oil & gas, 
nuclear, telecommunications, and information technology 
industries. Committee staff followed up with further visits to 
industry sites and other briefings from industry and Federal 
agency officials on this topic. In the area of chemical 
facility security, the Committee also requested that GAO 
conduct a review of both Federal and private sector efforts to 
strengthen chemical facility security in the wake of the 
terrorist attacks on September 11th. The GAO report is 
scheduled for completion in March 2003.
    The Committee also engaged in significant oversight 
activity in the area of drinking water facility security, which 
led to the passage of corrective legislation. Committee staff 
interviewed EPA and industry officials regarding progress in 
establishing a critical infrastructure information sharing and 
analysis center for the drinking water sector, potential 
threats to the water supply, and the status of vulnerability 
assessment modeling and performance. The Committee subsequently 
developed on a bipartisan basis legislation designed to enhance 
the security of drinking water systems by requiring such 
systems to conduct vulnerability assessments. This legislation 
passed the Congress in June 2002 as part of the ``Public Health 
Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act.'' For 
a description of the relevant provisions of this legislation, 
refer to the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous 
Materials Legislation section of the Committee's Activity 
Report for the 107th Congress. During the 107th Congress, 
Committee majority staff also monitored EPA's subsequent 
implementation of these new provisions.

                            ON-LINE AUCTIONS

    In the 107th Congress, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade 
and Consumer Protection held a hearing on May 23, 2001, to 
examine on-line fraud, including auction fraud. Full Committee 
Chairman W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin also held a public forum with 
the chief executive officer of an Internet auction site on June 
27, 2001, to highlight problems of auction fraud and potential 
solutions. The forum was followed up with a letter by Members 
of the Committee to three Internet auction sites, requesting a 
review of auction fraud and tools used to combat the fraud. The 
letter also requested information on state impediments to on-
line auctions.

                  ACCOUNTING RULES AND INTERPRETATIONS

    The Committee seeks to ensure that the Financial Accounting 
Standards Board's (FASB) process that develops changes to 
accounting rules for U.S. companies is independent, open and 
thorough, and results in unbiased financial information that 
reflects economic reality and promotes transparency. During the 
107th Congress, the Committee and Subcommittee on Commerce, 
Trade and Consumer Protection held several hearings on FASB-
related issues. Specifically, the Committee reviewed FASB 
independence, the FASB standard-setting process, as well as 
FASB standards. The Committee developed and passed out of the 
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection 
legislation making improvements to FASB and several standards 
found to be deficient as a result of the Committee's 
investigations into corporate failures and subsequent review of 
particular accounting standards. The FASB placed many of these 
issues on their agenda for further review and discussion.
    The Committee also participated in the House-Senate 
Conference Committee for H.R. 3763, a bill to protect investors 
by improving the accuracy and reliability of corporate 
disclosures. H.R. 3763, which was passed into law, reaffirms 
the Securities and Exchange Commission's oversight of FASB and 
provides a funding mechanism for FASB.

                     GOVERNMENT-FORCED DIVESTITURES

    Although the Committee did not take any direct oversight 
action with respect to this matter, the Committee continued to 
monitor developments in this area during the 107th Congress.

                     ENERGY AND AIR QUALITY ISSUES

                         NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY

    During the 107th Congress, the Committee undertook a 
thorough examination of our Nation's energy policy, including 
issues such as the production and consumption of electricity, 
oil and natural gas, coal, hydroelectric power, and nuclear 
power. The Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee held the first 
in a series of oversight hearings on national energy policy on 
February 28, 2001. This initial hearing focused on issues 
relating to natural gas. On March 14, 2001, the Subcommittee 
held a hearing on coal and related issues. On March 27, 2001, 
the Subcommittee held a hearing on nuclear energy. On March 30, 
2001, the Subcommittee continued its oversight with a hearing 
on crude oil and refined petroleum products. On May 15, 2001, 
the Subcommittee held a hearing on consumer perspectives on 
national energy policy, and on June 13, 2001, the Secretary of 
Energy testified at an oversight hearing to examine the 
President's National Energy Policy Report. Additional national 
energy policy hearings were held by the Subcommittee on June 
22, 2001 (conservation and energy efficiency), and on June 27, 
2001 (hydroelectric re-licensing and nuclear energy, including 
reauthorization of the Price-Anderson Act's nuclear industry 
liability caps). The Subcommittee also examined the nation's 
electric power industry in oversight hearings on July 27, 
September 20, and October 10 of 2001.
    As part of the Committee's ongoing examination of national 
energy policy, on June 6, 2002, the Subcommittee on Oversight 
and Investigations held a hearing on the Department of Energy's 
(DOE) FreedomCAR initiative, which the Administration launched 
in 2001 to ``reduce dependence on foreign oil by dramatically 
changing how we one day power our cars and light trucks.'' 
Specifically, the hearing reviewed the respective roles of DOE 
and the auto industry in the FreedomCAR research and 
development partnership; the partnerships' creation and goals; 
benchmarks by which to assess program progress and cost-
effectiveness in developing advanced automobile technologies, 
especially fuel cell-based systems; the potential benefits of 
intermediate advanced automobile technologies, such as advanced 
lean burn diesel; and lessons learned from related government-
sponsored automotive research initiatives, including the 
program's predecessor--the Partnership for a New Generation of 
Vehicles. The hearing also examined the challenges--
technological and marketplace--that must be overcome for the 
program to achieve its stated goals of a reduction both in the 
nation's oil dependence and in undesirable air pollution and 
CO2 emissions. The hearing's two panels featured a DOE 
assistant secretary and representatives from the General 
Accounting Office, the National Research Council, and the auto, 
oil, and fuel cell industries.

             EVALUATION OF STATE RETAIL RESTRUCTURING PLANS

    As part of the Committee's oversight of the California 
electricity crisis, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality 
held an oversight hearing on February 15, 2001, comparing 
California's experience with electricity restructuring to the 
experience in other states. The hearing was entitled 
``Electricity Markets: Lessons Learned from California.'' The 
hearing examined the factors contributing to the high energy 
prices facing California and Western consumers, and the 
difference between California's market structure and other 
state's restructuring programs, including those in 
Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Maryland.

                   THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICITY CRISIS

    In addition to the February 15, 2001 hearing on the 
California electricity market (discussed above), the Committee 
examined the California electricity crisis through other 
hearings and oversight. On March 6, 2001, the Subcommittee on 
Energy and Air Quality held a two-part oversight hearing 
regarding the status of electricity markets in California and 
the West, and the need for a comprehensive national energy 
policy. The Subcommittee continued its oversight of California 
electricity markets with two days of hearings on March 20 and 
22, 2001. The hearing focused on the causes of the electric 
supply and pricing problems in California, the state and 
Federal governments' responses, and potential short- and long-
term solutions. On June 12, 2001, Committee Members sent a 
letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) 
requesting that FERC take additional, immediate action to help 
mitigate wholesale electricity prices in California and the 
region and keep power flowing into California. On February 13, 
2002, the Subcommittee held an oversight hearing on the effects 
of the Enron bankruptcy on energy prices and supplies, 
including those in California and other western states. On May 
24, 2002, the Committee sent a letter to FERC requesting 
information and answers to specific questions regarding the 
Commission's investigation into electricity markets in 
California and the West. Committee staff reviewed the FERC data 
as part of its examination of the California electricity 
crisis, as well as its investigation of Enron.
    The Committee also conducted a review of the steps taken by 
the State of California to address power supply shortages, 
including issues surrounding California's negotiation of 
bilateral, long-term electricity purchasing contracts on behalf 
of the state's utilities.

                 RELIABILITY OF THE NATIONAL POWER GRID

    The California electric power crisis and other power 
constraints in the western United States highlighted an 
increasingly important issue: the reliability of the national 
power grid. Electric power supply problems experienced by the 
Mid-west and New York State over the past few summers also 
raised serious questions about the reliability of the national 
grid. As the reliability of the grid is essential to our 
national economic strength, the Committee examined its current 
state during the 107th Congress. Specifically, the Committee 
sent document requests to several of the larger U.S. 
electricity providers to gather data on the problem and to 
determine the adequacy of industry efforts to ensure the 
reliability of electric power. Committee staff also interviewed 
several industry officials on these issues.
    In addition, on October 10, 2001, the Subcommittee on 
Energy and Air Quality held an oversight hearing on the status 
and outlook for our Nation's electricity transmission system. 
The hearing addressed matters relating to the capacity and 
efficient use of the nation's electric transmission 
infrastructure, including reliability of the grid. Witnesses 
included representatives from the North American Electric 
Reliability Council, public and private energy producers and 
providers, and several consumer advocacy groups and state 
electric power regulators.

                    INCREASING U.S. ENERGY SECURITY

    Following the events of September 11, 2001, witnesses 
testifying at the September 20, 2001 Subcommittee hearing on 
Federal government perspectives on national electricity policy 
also were asked to address the status of the U.S. electric 
power infrastructure, the ability of that infrastructure to 
sustain a similar terrorist attack, and measures the Federal 
government was undertaking to protect the integrity of that 
infrastructure against future terrorist incidents. In addition, 
on November 7, 2001, a Committee Members' briefing was held 
with representatives from the energy industry regarding 
critical infrastructure protection. The energy sectors 
represented included electricity, oil and natural gas, nuclear, 
pipelines, refineries, liquefied natural gas, and hydropower.

               VIABILITY OF THE DOMESTIC URANIUM INDUSTRY

    The electricity generated at 104 domestic nuclear power 
plants provides approximately 20% of the country's total 
electricity supply. Thus, the maintenance of a viable domestic 
uranium industry--the source of fuel used in nuclear power 
plants--is necessary for the country's energy security. While 
the Committee did not take any direct oversight action, it 
continued to monitor developments in this area during the 107th 
Congress, including as part of its review of the Highly-
Enriched Uranium agreement between the United States and 
Russia.

                    THE STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE

    In October 2001, Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality 
Chairman Barton met with representatives of the Department of 
Energy to discuss the status and security of the Strategic 
Petroleum Reserve in light of the terrorist attacks of 
September 11, 2001. In addition, on April 12, 2002, members of 
the Committee sent a bipartisan letter to President Bush 
commending his decision to fill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve 
to capacity. The letter cited increasing tensions in the Middle 
East, such as the announced Iraqi oil embargo, as well as the 
governmental uncertainties and domestic unrest in Venezuela, 
and underscored the importance of the Strategic Petroleum 
Reserve as a vital economic and national security resource.

                        CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGIES

    On March 14, 2001, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 
Quality continued its series of oversight hearings on national 
energy policy with a hearing that focused on the role of coal 
in a comprehensive national energy policy. The hearing 
addressed the current and future role of coal as a fuel for the 
generation of electricity, impacts on the supply of coal, and 
the use of new technologies to reduce emissions of pollutants 
from coal-fired electric power plants. The Subcommittee 
received testimony from representatives of an electric utility, 
an environmental group, a state public service commission, a 
state environmental protection agency, a coal production 
company, the Department of Energy's Energy Information Agency, 
a university center for coal and minerals processing, and the 
United Mine Workers.
    The Committee also reviewed the clean coal technology 
program in connection with its legislative activity on H.R. 4, 
the Securing America's Future Energy Act of 2001. This 
legislation included authorization of $200 million each year in 
fiscal years 2002 through 2011 for public/private projects to 
utilize coal meeting certain cost and performance goals. 
Authorized funding for such projects under H.R. 4 was 
restricted to projects that advanced efficiency, environmental 
performance, and costcompetitiveness well beyond current 
technologies. In addition, the legislation restricted 80% of 
funds utilized to coal gasification projects.

       NATURAL GAS AND HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY PROGRAMS

    On March 19, 2002, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 
Quality held a hearing on the reauthorization of the Natural 
Gas Pipeline Safety Act and the Hazardous Liquids Pipeline 
Safety Act. The Subcommittee received testimony from the 
Administrator of the Research and Special Programs 
Administration of the Department of Transportation, the 
Director of the Office of Railroad, Pipeline and Hazardous 
Materials Investigations of the National Transportation Safety 
Board, the Director of Physical Infrastructure of the General 
Accounting Office, the National Vice-Chairperson of the 
National Association of Pipeline Safety Representatives, and 
representatives from oil and natural gas trade associations, a 
non-profit organization related to construction damage issues, 
an insurance company, a labor union, and an environmental 
organization.

                         GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE

    During the 107th Congress, the Committee continued to 
examine the state of current scientific understanding as to the 
extent to which human-induced emissions of non-carbon dioxide 
``greenhouse gases'' and pollutants may contribute to the 
earth's warming. In August 2001, the Committee requested that 
the General Accounting Office (GAO) review this matter, as well 
as past and future trends in emissions/concentrations of these 
substances in selected developed and developing countries and 
the factors that influence these trends. The Committee also 
asked GAO to examine what steps certain foreign governments are 
taking to reduce emissions/concentrations of these other 
substances. The GAO report is scheduled for completion in 2003. 
Committee staff, in the meantime, continued to interview 
scientific experts and to monitor developments in research on 
this front throughout the 107th Congress.
    The Committee also examined the current state of 
international emissions reporting and monitoring during the 
107th Congress. In August 2001, the Committee requested that 
GAO undertake a study to determine: (1) how the United Nations 
and U.S. assess the quality of data on greenhouse gases for the 
Framework Convention on Climate Change; (2) how the quality of 
U.S. greenhouse gas emissions data compares with such data from 
selected developed and developing countries; and (3) what steps 
can and are planned to be taken to improve the quality and 
monitoring of these emissions data. GAO plans to complete this 
study for the Committee in the 108th Congress.
    Moreover, in connection with the Committee's ongoing review 
of the components of the U.S. Global Change Research Program 
(GCRP), the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held a 
hearing to examine the use of climate model simulations in the 
U.S. National Assessment of the Potential Consequences of 
Climate Variability and Change, which was initiated in 1997 to 
fulfill a mandate of the Global Change Research Act of 1990 and 
which is coordinated by the GCRP. The hearing examined whether 
use of the primary climate models in the National Assessment 
projected a picture of potential climate change that is useful 
for the public and policy makers.

                THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regulates 
electric utilities, hydropower facilities, and natural gas and 
oil pipelines. The Committee exercised oversight of FERC during 
the 107th Congress, much of it focusing on the Commission's 
handling of the California energy crisis. The Committee held 
four hearings on the energy situation in California early in 
the 107th Congress, and took other related action (see 
``California Electricity Crisis'' oversight summary above).
    In addition to following FERC's handling of the California 
situation, the Committee monitored the development of regional 
electricity markets throughout the country. The Subcommittee on 
Energy and Air Quality held several hearings on national 
electricity policy, including hearings on: barriers to 
competitive generation markets on July 27, 2001; Federal 
government perspectives on electricity policy on September 20, 
2001; and electric transmission policy on October 10, 2001. 
Much of these hearings focused on the formation of Regional 
Transmission Organizations pursuant to FERC Order 2000. More 
recently, the Committee has initiated a review of FERC's 
proposed Standard Market Design (SMD) rulemaking. If finalized, 
the SMD rule would have significant effects on the nation's 
wholesale electric power markets, transmission infrastructure, 
and ultimately consumers, as reflected in the numerous comments 
from States and other stakeholders.

             GENERAL MANAGEMENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

    During the 107th Congress, the Committee continued its 
comprehensive oversight of the Department of Energy's (DOE) 
operations and management. As part of the Committee's broader 
inquiry into the procurement practices of agencies within our 
jurisdiction, the Committee examined DOE's policies and 
practices regarding the use of government purchase and/or 
credit cards by agency and contractor personnel. Further, in 
November 2002, the Committee launched a related inquiry into 
specific allegations of misuse of government money through 
purchase cards, blanket purchase agreements, and other 
procurement vehicles at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). 
The Committee requested information from LANL and University of 
California officials about the specific allegations as well as 
more general information on procurement processes and 
oversight, and Committee staff have been conducting interviews 
of relevant officials and employees.
    In addition, the Committee conducted oversight of site 
characterization and licensing activities at the proposed Yucca 
Mountain repository site. Committee staff obtained numerous 
briefings and made several site visits to Yucca Mountain as 
part of this review during the 107th Congress. The Committee 
also continued its review of DOE's use and management of 
performance-based incentive (PBI) contracting. Committee staff 
obtained briefings and updates on Fiscal Year 2001 PBI 
contracts at each major DOE site, including information on 
base, incentive, and performance fee payments made to each 
contractor. In August 2001, the Committee sent a letter to DOE 
requesting detailed information on how DOE incentivizes site 
safeguard and security activities at sites with category I and 
II special nuclear materials. The Department provided 
documents, including PBI contract language, and classified 
briefings from the Office of Environmental Management and the 
National Nuclear Security Administration.
    In the 106th Congress, the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations held a hearing on DOE policies and practices 
with respect to reimbursement of its contractors' legal fees 
when they are defending lawsuits alleging retaliation by safety 
or security whistleblowers. In the 107th Congress, the 
Committee continued to monitor DOE's activities in this area, 
and initiated a related review of DOE's policies and practices 
with respect to approval of contractor-initiated lawsuits 
against private sector competitors.

                          DOE'S BUDGET REQUEST

    As part of its general oversight over responsibilities, the 
Committee reviewed the Department of Energy's (DOE) budget 
requests for Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003, and provided its views 
and estimates with respect thereto.

             DOE'S MANAGEMENT OF THE NATIONAL LABORATORIES

    In the 107th Congress, the Committee continued to examine 
whether DOE was effectively managing the contractors that 
operate the national laboratories, as discussed in detail 
elsewhere in this report.

             DOE'S SECURITY AND NON-PROLIFERATION PROGRAMS

    During the 107th Congress, the Committee continued its 
oversight of security matters at Department of Energy (DOE) and 
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) national 
laboratories and other nuclear facilities. Committee Members 
and majority staff obtained numerous briefings and conducted 
several site visits to NNSA laboratories and other facilities 
to review physical and cyber security protections in the 
aftermath of the terrorist attacks on September 11th, including 
site visits to Los Alamos National Laboratory, Sandia National 
Laboratories, the Y-12 site in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and the 
Nevada Test Site. The Committee monitored the development and 
implementation of enhanced security policies and measures, 
including the delay in the development of a new design basis 
threat for such facilities, which is expected to be completed 
in early 2003.
    In the 107th Congress, the Committee continued its review 
of the Department of Energy's (DOE) non-proliferation programs, 
and in particular the U.S./Russian Highly Enriched Uranium 
(HEU) Agreement. On January 30, 2001, the Committee sent a 
letter to the President's National Security Advisor requesting 
that the National Security Council (NSC) review the proposed 
amendment to the HEU agreement between the United States 
Enrichment Corporation and its Russian counterpart, Tenex. 
Committee staff received several briefings from DOE, the lead 
Federal agency for the HEU Agreement, and the NSC on issues 
relating to the proposed amendment. Subsequently, the amendment 
was rescinded, and certain changes to the amendment were made 
before it was re-approved in 2002.

                   CYBER SECURITY AT DOE HEADQUARTERS

    The Committee's past oversight in this area revealed that 
the Department of Energy's (DOE) own headquarters offices have 
not yet implemented the computer security upgrades and policy 
changes DOE required of its contractors over the past two 
years. DOE pledged to promptly improve cyber security policies 
and practices at its own headquarters to better protect 
classified information on its network systems. During the 107th 
Congress, the Committee continued to review the Department's 
activities in this regard, receiving several briefings on the 
status of DOE actions to improve cyber security at DOE 
headquarters, as well as at its other facilities.

                    NUCLEAR SAFETY AT DOE FACILITIES

    The Committee continued its oversight of the Department of 
Energy's (DOE) nuclear and worker safety programs in the 107th 
Congress. Committee staff requested and received several 
briefings, and obtained responses to a series of questions, 
regarding the impact of the Department's July 26, 2001 
Department-wide reorganization on the Office of Environment, 
Safety, and Health, the Price-Anderson nuclear safety 
enforcement program, and the Office of Independent Oversight. 
Committee staff also obtained information and briefings 
regarding radiological exposures to workers at the Los Alamos 
National Laboratory (LANL), because of concerns about the 
delayed response of the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) to a recommended Notice of Violation 
(NOV) from the Office of Environment, Safety, and Health. 
Subsequently, NNSA officials approved the NOV, which promptly 
was issued to the University of California, which operates LANL 
under contract with DOE.

                DOE'S OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

    In the 107th Congress, the Committee continued its review 
of several major nuclear weapons waste cleanup projects managed 
by the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Environmental 
Management, in order to ensure that DOE proceeds in a timely 
and effective manner to reduce these environmental threats. As 
part of this review, on May 14, 2002, Subcommittee Chairman 
James Greenwood sent a letter to the General Accounting Office 
requesting a review of DOE's management of its high-level waste 
program; the review should be completed in early to mid-2003.
    In addition, on July 19, 2002, the Subcommittee on 
Oversight and Investigations held a hearing to review DOE's 
implementation of its new accelerated cleanup reform program 
and the status of state-based cleanup agreements. The hearing 
featured testimony from DOE's Assistant Secretary for 
Environmental Management about the accelerated cleanup reform 
efforts, and testimony from the General Accounting Office on 
its report on state-based compliance agreements. Other 
witnesses included representatives from the States of 
Washington, Idaho, and Tennessee.

                 DOE'S OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

    The Office of Science and Technology (OST) was created by 
the Department of Energy (DOE) in response to a Congressional 
directive in 1989 to begin a program to fund the development of 
innovative environmental technologies that would make DOE's 
cleanup activities faster, cheaper, and safer. However, the 
Committee's review of OST in the 105th Congress revealed that 
few technologies developed by OST have been deployed, in part 
due to OST's ineffective management, poor technology selection 
and review, and lack of integration with DOE's cleanup program 
offices. As a result of the Committee's ongoing review through 
the 106th Congress, some improvements in the OST program and an 
increase in deployments have occurred. Although the Committee 
did not engage in direct oversight activity in the 107th 
Congress, the Committee continued to monitor developments in 
this area.

                   FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

    Current law directs Federal agencies to cut their energy 
consumption by 20 percent through 2000 and 30 percent through 
2005. As part of the Committee's oversight in this area in the 
107th Congress, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality 
conducted a national energy policy hearing on June 22, 2001, 
which focused on conservation and energy efficiency. The 
hearing addressed the role of energy efficiency and 
conservation in helping manage the U.S.'s long-term energy 
needs. The hearing examined ways to promote continued increases 
in energy efficiency and conservation, including a review of 
programs to increase the energy efficiency of the Federal 
government and its agencies.

                    DOE'S ALTERNATIVE FUELS PROGRAM

    Current law directs the Department of Energy to develop an 
alternative fuels program that displaces 10 percent of 
petroleum motor fuels by 2000 and 30 percent by 2010. In the 
107th Congress, the Committee continued to monitor progress in 
this area.

                          APPLIANCE STANDARDS

    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) directs the 
Department of Energy (DOE) to establish energy efficiency 
standards for various appliances and to consider revisions to 
these standards that would reduce pollution and save a 
significant amount of energy. During the 107th Congress, the 
Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality conducted a national 
energy policy hearing on June 22, 2001, focusing on ways to 
promote continued increases in energy efficiency and 
conservation, including a review of programs to develop 
appliance efficiency standards.

                     FEDERAL ENERGY DATA COLLECTION

    The Energy Information Administration (EIA) is a 
statistical agency of the Department of Energy. EIA provides 
policy-independent data, forecasts, and analyses to promote 
sound policy making, efficient markets, and public 
understanding regarding energy and its interaction with the 
economy and environment.
    On February 13, 2002, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 
Quality held an oversight hearing on the effect of the Enron 
collapse on energy markets. As part of that hearing, the 
Committee considered issues of transparency and information 
disclosure in competitive energy markets. Witnesses included 
Federal and State government representatives, investor-owned 
utilities, independent power producers, an independent oil and 
gas exploration and development company, a consumer 
perspective, and a private energy and economic consultant. In 
addition, during the 107th Congress, the Committee monitored 
regulations recently promulgated at the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission to enhance its ability to collect 
information regarding sales and financial data.

                   THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

    The mission of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is 
to ensure adequate protection of public health and safety 
through regulation of commercial nuclear power plants; non-
power research; test and training reactors; fuel cycle 
facilities; medical, academic and industrial uses of nuclear 
materials; and the transport, storage and disposal of nuclear 
waste.
    In the immediate aftermath of the September 11th terrorist 
attacks, Committee Members received a classified briefing from 
the NRC Chairman on October 3, 2001, to discuss the status of 
security at NRC-licensed nuclear power plants. In addition, as 
part of the Committee's broader review of nuclear security 
issues, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held 
two hearings during the 107th Congress to review security 
issues at nuclear power plants. The hearings were held on 
December 5, 2001, and April 1, 2002, and focused on the NRC's 
efforts to increase security requirements, and develop a new 
design basis threat, for nuclear power plants regulated by NRC, 
as well as the efforts of the nuclear industry to implement the 
new security requirements. Due to the classified nature of 
these hearings, both hearings were closed to the public. 
Witnesses at the December 5, 2001 hearing included 
representatives from NRC, the nuclear industry, and a public 
interest group. Witnesses at the April 11, 2002 hearing 
included four of the five NRC Commissioners, and 
representatives from the nuclear industry. Subsequent to these 
hearings, the Committee continued to review the reasons for a 
delay in establishing a new design basis threat for nuclear 
facilities, which currently is expected to be completed in 
early 2003.
    With respect to nuclear safety, in October 2001, the 
Committee sent a letter to NRC Chairman Richard Meserve 
regarding the structural integrity of reactor penetration 
nozzles, in response to recent revelations of cracked and 
leaking vessel head penetration nozzles, including control rod 
drive mechanism nozzles, at four U.S. pressurized water 
reactors. This review led to a more extensive Committee 
examination of nozzle leakage at the Davis Besse Nuclear Power 
Plant. In May 2002, the Committee sent a letter to the NRC 
regarding Davis Besse, and Committee staff conducted several 
briefings and a site visit to the plant.
    In addition to its oversight of security and safety at NRC-
regulated facilities, the Committee reviewed matters relating 
to the Commission's budget and management. In April 2001, the 
Committee sent a letter to NRC Chairman Richard Meserve 
requesting information about the NRC's ability to respond to 
the significant increase in licensing activities at operating 
nuclear power reactors, as well as potential future licensing 
activities associated with applications for new site permits 
and new reactor licenses. After receiving the requested 
information, Committee staff interviewed NRC officials on 
several occasions to discuss the adequacy of its plan. On 
November 7, 2001, the Committee also sent a letter to the 
General Accounting Office requesting a review of the risk and 
security of commercial spent nuclear fuel facilities, and the 
transportation of spent nuclear fuel. This report is scheduled 
for completion in early to mid-2003.

   EPA'S IMPLEMENTATION OF OZONE AND PARTICULATE MATTER AIR QUALITY 
                               STANDARDS

    The Committee has closely followed the promulgation of the 
1997 air quality standards, holding a series of hearings on 
this matter during 1998. In addition, the Committee sent many 
separate inquiries to EPA and other Federal departments and 
agencies concerning their actions in considering and setting 
the new air standards. On March 26, 2002, the United States 
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected 
claims that national ambient air quality standards for ozone 
and particulate matter, promulgated by the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) in 1997, were set in an ``arbitrary and 
capricious'' manner.
    With the legal status of the new standards resolved during 
the 107th Congress, the Committee changed its focus to 
reviewing implementation of the new standards, including 
designation of new nonattainment areas and the timelines for 
compliance.

               EPA'S DIESEL ENGINE CERTIFICATION PROGRAM

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the 
Department of Justice are parties to a consent decree with the 
manufacturers of heavy-duty diesel engines for alleged Clean 
Air Act (CAA) violations. EPA alleged that, for years, the 
manufacturers used a ``defeat device'' in their electronically-
controlled engines that allowed the engines to pass the 
emissions test under urban driving conditions, while emitting 
levels of nitrogen oxide in excess of the regulatory standard 
when under highway driving conditions. During the 105th and 
106th Congresses, the Committee requested and reviewed 
documentary information concerning this enforcement activity. 
The Committee continued to monitor this situation in the 107th 
Congress, including the establishment of nonconformance 
penalties for diesel engines unable to meet 2004 model year 
standards (i.e., under the 1999 consent decree, such standards 
were applied to affected engines beginning in October 2002). 
The nonconformance penalties were finalized by EPA in August 
2002.

                      EPA'S REGIONAL HAZE PROGRAM

    In April 1999, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 
established a program to address ``regional haze'' affecting 
visibility in Federal parks. In early 2001, EPA issued a 
proposed regulation raising issues for the states' regional 
haze planning process. The Committee continued to monitor 
developments in this area in the 107th Congress.

      EPA'S IMPLEMENTATION OF GASOLINE AND DIESEL SULFUR STANDARDS

    Tier II regulations regarding the sulfur content of 
gasoline were published as a final rule by the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) on February 10, 2000. A final rule 
concerning the sulfur content of diesel was published by EPA in 
the Federal Register on January 18, 2001, and reaffirmed by the 
EPA on February 28, 2001. Full compliance with Tier II gasoline 
standards is required for most refiners by 2006. Diesel fuel 
meeting the new sulfur standards must be produced by June 1, 
2006, although early compliance is encouraged through banking 
and trading, and flexibility for fuel not meeting a 15 ppm 
sulfur standard is allowed under temporary compliance, small 
refiner, and hardship options. In the 107th Congress, the 
Committee reviewed the implementation of gasoline and diesel 
fuel sulfur reduction programs as contained in these rules.

                    EPA'S NEW SOURCE REVIEW PROGRAM

    In 1996, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 
commenced a regulatory process to revise certain regulations 
issued under the Clean Air Act governing ``new source review,'' 
the process by which actions undertaken at existing stationary 
sources of air emissions can trigger certain additional 
obligations under the Act. On November 22, 2002, EPA issued 
final regulations implementing a number of the proposals from 
the 1996 proposed rule. EPA also issued a new proposed rule 
regarding the interpretation of the ``routine maintenance'' 
provision of the new source review program. During the 107th 
Congress, Committee staff met with EPA officials on a regular 
basis regarding the status of these provisions. Committee staff 
initiated a review of the EPA final and proposed rules in 
preparation for Committee activity in the 108th Congress.

                             MACT DEADLINES

    Section 112 (e) of the Clean Air Act requires that the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgate by November 
15, 2000, Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) 
standards for sources of air toxics listed under section 
112(c). Yet EPA's Fiscal Year 2003 budget submission indicated 
that at least nine MACT standards would remain in preproposal 
stage through May 2002, and that final rules for MACT standards 
would be promulgated through Fiscal Year 2004, or nearly four 
years past the statutory deadline. The Committee contacted EPA 
several times during the 107th Congress to monitor and assess 
progress in this area.

            STATE FUNDING/FLEXIBILITY IN CLEAN AIR PROGRAMS

    The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held a hearing 
on June 5, 2002, to review the experience of state and local 
environmental regulators in implementing the Clean Air Act. At 
that hearing, representatives of state and local governments 
provided testimony and suggestions for changes to the Clean Air 
Act in order to provide increased flexibility that would allow 
states to pursue additional air pollutant reductions in a 
timely and efficient manner.

               ENVIRONMENT AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ISSUES

                     EPA MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS

    During the 107th Congress, the Committee continued its 
general oversight of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 
Committee staff obtained briefings on various EPA actions and 
activities, and the Committee sent numerous letters to the 
Agency requesting information regarding the Agency's operations 
in all areas under the jurisdiction of the Committee, including 
drinking water, hazardous and solid waste, and citizen liaison 
programs.

                INNOVATIVE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS

    During the 107th Congress, the Committee continued to 
examine progress in innovation in the states' environmental 
programs, and to evaluate whether there were Federal or state 
barriers to further success in these areas, particularly with 
respect to brownfield redevelopment. The Subcommittee on 
Environment and Hazardous Materials held a hearing on March 7, 
2001, on removing barriers to brownfields cleanups. This 
hearing examined the work that the states were performing to 
help protect human health and the environment and recycle 
contaminated land. In addition, on August 1, 2001, and May 21, 
2002, the Subcommittee held hearings to explore state solutions 
to solid waste management and groundwater remediation of MTBE.

               EPA'S OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION

    In 1998, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) created 
the Office of Environmental Information to develop agency-wide 
information policies (including policies for handling sensitive 
and confidential information and providing Freedom of 
Information Act disclosure), and to manage more effectively the 
agency's information systems and resources, such as EPA's key 
databases and wide area networks. In the 107th Congress, the 
Committee continued to actively monitor the agency's efforts to 
improve the quality, accuracy, and usefulness of EPA's 
information resources, to reduce the paperwork burden imposed 
upon recipients of EPA data requests, and to improve 
integration of its information resources. The Committee 
monitored the development by EPA and the Department of Justice, 
in the wake of the attacks of September 11, 2001, of 
appropriate information sharing guidelines to protect sensitive 
information, especially information maintained on EPA's cyber 
systems. In addition, the Committee addressed controls on 
drinking water facility security information as part of Title 
IV of the ``Public Health Security and Bioterrorism 
Preparedness and Response Act of 2002,'' which is described in 
relevant part in the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous 
Materials Legislation section of the Committee's Activity 
Report for the 107th Congress.

                       EPA CYBER SECURITY REVIEW

    During the 106th Congress, the Committee and, at the 
Committee's request, the General Accounting Office (GAO) 
conducted a detailed evaluation of computer security at the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to determine the extent 
to which EPA was adequately protecting its information systems 
and resources from loss, damage, misuse and unauthorized 
access. Thereafter, working with GAO and the Committee, EPA 
implemented a series of reforms designed to bolster its 
computer security. In the 107th Congress, the Committee 
continued to oversee EPA's efforts to respond to the 
deficiencies identified by the Committee and by GAO, and 
received additional documents and briefings from agency 
personnel on this matter.

                 EPA'S ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ACTIVITIES

    In February 1998, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 
issued interim guidance setting forth how it would handle 
``environmental justice'' claims filed with the agency against 
the issuance of state environmental permits to industries 
located in certain areas. During the 107th Congress, the 
Committee continued to monitor developments in this area. In 
addition, the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous 
Materials held a hearing on brownfields legislation on June 28, 
2001, in which EPA's Deputy Administrator discussed the current 
status of environmental justice programs at EPA and whether the 
agency required additional resources for this task.

                      EPA'S BROWNFIELDS INITIATIVE

    During the past several Congresses, the Committee has 
conducted extensive oversight of the Environmental Protection 
Agency's (EPA) various brownfields-related programs. During the 
107th Congress, the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous 
Materials held one oversight and one legislative hearing on 
this matter, in addition to continuing general oversight of 
agency progress in promoting brownfields redevelopment. These 
activities led to the drafting, passage, and enactment of H.R. 
2869, to promote enhanced redevelopment of such areas.

            EPA TESTING AND OTHER NON-STATUTORY INITIATIVES

    Beginning in 1996, the Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA) launched a series of non-statutory testing initiatives to 
encourage the increased testing of new chemicals and products. 
In the 107th Congress, the Committee continued its monitoring 
of EPA's development and implementation of ``voluntary'' 
chemical testing initiatives, including the High Production 
Volume Testing Initiative and the Children's Health Testing 
Initiative, as well as other non-statutory initiatives.

                   EPA'S RELATIONSHIP WITH THE STATES

    In a report released in January 2001, the General 
Accounting Office (GAO) identified the relationship between the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the states as a 
``major performance and accountability challenge,'' citing 
disagreements over respective roles and responsibilities, 
priorities, and the proper conduct of Federal oversight. During 
the 107th Congress, the Committee monitored efforts by EPA to 
address this management challenge, including the Subcommittee 
on Environment and Hazardous Materials's hearings on drinking 
water needs, brownfields cleanups, and tank cleanups of MTBE.

                         THE SUPERFUND PROGRAM

    In past Congresses, the Committee has conducted an 
extensive review of the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) 
Superfund program, including evaluations of regional 
enforcement and implementation of the cleanup program, concerns 
identified by EPA's Inspector General about program management, 
and EPA expenditures from the Superfund Trust Fund. In the 
107th Congress, the Committee continued its review of the 
status and management of the Superfund program. The 
Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials held 
meetings and a hearing on March 7, 2001, to review the need for 
legislation to protect small businesses that may have disposed 
of small amounts of regular household trash in Superfund sites 
from being held responsible under the Superfund liability 
system. In addition, the Subcommittee, on July 16, 2002, held 
an oversight hearing on the independence and operation of the 
EPA Ombudsman's Office, which reviews complaints about 
Superfund-related activities.

         RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT IMPLEMENTATION

    During the 107th Congress, Committee staff conducted 
reviews of the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) 
activities under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as 
well as explored the relationship between EPA actions and the 
states' toxic waste cleanup programs.

                     EPA RISK ASSESSMENT PRACTICES

    The Committee Chairman requested and received a General 
Accounting Office (GAO) report reviewing risk assessment 
practices within the Federal government. This report led to a 
series of meetings between Committee majority staff and various 
agency offices, as well as letters of comment from Committee 
Members to the Office of Management and Budget and the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with respect to EPA risk 
assessment practices and the Federal rulemaking on ``Best 
Management Practices.''

                   SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT AMENDMENTS

    During the 105th and 106th Congresses, the Committee 
examined the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) 
implementation of the 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments. 
In the 107th Congress, the Subcommittee on Environment and 
Hazardous Materials held hearings on March 28, 2001, and April 
11, 2002, on the financial needs of drinking water delivery 
systems. In the hearings, representatives from EPA, the General 
Accounting Office, the Congressional Budget Office, and water 
utilities provided their analyses of the situation, including 
the adequacy of Federal and state funding of drinking water 
programs. In addition, the Committee worked with EPA to find 
provisions within the Safe Drinking Water Act that needed 
amendment in order to address terrorist threats, leading to the 
passage of Title IV of the ``Public Health Security and 
Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002.'' The 
relevant provisions of this law are described in the 
Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials Legislation 
section of the Committee's Activity Report for the 107th 
Congress.

                             HEALTH ISSUES

                    HCFA'S MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS

    During the 107th Congress, the Committee initiated a 
comprehensive review of the major programs, policies, and 
operations of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services 
(CMS), formerly called the Health Care Financing Administration 
(HCFA). This initiative became known as ``Patients First: A 
21st Century Promise to Ensure Quality and Affordable Health 
Coverage.'' The ``Patients First'' project has been aimed at 
improving the quality of health care delivered by CMS programs 
to Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries.
    As part of this project, the Committee held hearings, 
requested and obtained information from relevant parties, and 
organized stakeholder and work group meetings. In particular, 
the Subcommittee on Health held four joint hearings with the 
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations as part of the 
``Patients First'' initiative during the 107th Congress.
    The first hearing, held on March 1, 2001, examined 
Medicare's processes for determining coverage, assigning 
billing codes, and setting payment levels. The Subcommittees 
received testimony from representatives of CMS, the United 
Seniors Association, the University of Michigan Medical Center, 
Brigham and Women's Hospital, a research and consulting 
organization, and the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission.
    The second hearing, held on April 4, 2001, focused on how 
CMS interacts with health care providers regarding the rules 
and regulations that guide the Medicare program. The 
Subcommittees received testimony from representatives of CMS, 
the Office of Inspector General in the Department of Health and 
Human Services (HHS), the Pinellas County (Florida) Medical 
Society, the Medical Group Management Association, the Mayo 
Foundation, and the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association.
    The third hearing, held on May 10, 2001, featured the 
testimony of four former HCFA administrators to discuss what 
works at the agency and what can be improved. The Subcommittees 
received testimony from Mr. William L. Roper, Dean of the 
School of Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel 
Hill; Dr. Gail R. Wilensky, John M. Olin Senior Fellow, Project 
HOPE, and Chair of the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission; 
Dr. Bruce C. Vladeck, Senior Vice President for Policy, 
Institute for Medicare Practice, Mount Sinai School of 
Medicine; and Ms. Nancy-Ann Min DeParle, the immediate former 
HCFA Administrator.
    The fourth hearing, held on June 28, 2001, examined 
Medicare's existing contracting authority and proposals to 
refine this authority to secure the efficient and responsive 
delivery of high-quality services to Medicare beneficiaries. 
The Subcommittees received testimony from the Honorable Thomas 
Scully, CMS Administrator, as well as the Acting HHS Inspector 
General and representatives from the General Accounting Office 
(GAO), the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, United 
Government Services, LLC, and the Health Care Rights Project of 
the Center for Medicare Advocacy.
    In addition to this series of hearings, the Committee 
initiated an effort to identify concerns and burdens that 
Medicare beneficiaries and health care providers face on a 
daily basis. The Committee disseminated two surveys--one for 
beneficiaries and the other for health care providers--that 
were designed to elicit input about ways the delivery of 
quality health care could be improved and waste, mismanagement, 
and bureaucratic delays could be eliminated. The informal 
surveys asked Medicare's stakeholders--beneficiaries and health 
care providers--to report on their interactions with the 
Medicare program and identify areas in which problems existed. 
The provider survey also asked physicians, practitioners, 
facilities, and suppliers to identify some of the most 
burdensome regulations with which they routinely face, as well 
as to provide recommendations to improve the Federal health 
care system. The Committee received more than 3,500 survey 
responses.
    Through the ``Patients First'' project, the Committee 
documented and identified many of the complexities of the 
Medicare program and the systemic problems faced by Medicare 
beneficiaries and health care providers. This information 
formed the basis for a letter sent by Chairman Tauzin, 
Subcommittee on Health Chairman Bilirakis, and Subcommittee on 
Oversight and Investigations Chairman Greenwood to the 
Secretary of Health and Human Services on July 31, 2001, 
setting forth suggestions to improve the Medicare program 
administratively.
    The ``Patients First'' project also contributed to the 
development of legislation to streamline Medicare's regulatory 
process, ease paperwork burdens, and improve Medicare's 
responsiveness to beneficiaries and health care providers 
(i.e., H.R. 3046, the ``Medicare Regulatory, Appeals, 
Contracting, and Education Reform Act of 2001,'' and H.R. 3391, 
the ``Medicare Regulatory and Contracting Reform Act of 
2001''). On December 4, 2001, H.R. 3391 was considered by the 
House under suspension of the rules. The motion to suspend the 
rules and pass the bill was unanimously agreed to by a roll 
call vote of 408 yeas and 0 nays.
    In addition to the ``Patients First'' project, the 
Committee continued to conduct oversight of CMS management and 
operations in other areas, including computer security, 
prescription drug reimbursements, and other matters discussed 
elsewhere in this report.

             MEDICARE AND MEDICAID: WASTE, FRAUD AND ABUSE

    During the 107th Congress, the Committee held several 
hearings and conducted extensive oversight on the need to 
reduce fraud and abuse in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. 
In particular, the Committee continued its focus on oversight 
of reimbursement practices for drugs currently covered by the 
Medicare program, particularly how such practices may permit 
medical providers and drug manufacturers to profit at the 
expense of beneficiaries and taxpayers. Medicare currently 
provides a very limited prescription drug benefit, under which 
coverage is restricted primarily to those drugs either 
administered by a physician or provided in conjunction with 
durable medical equipment. Under Federal law, Medicare 
reimburses the providers of these drugs at 95 percent of the 
drug's Average Wholesale Price (AWP). On September 21, 2001, 
the Subcommittees on Health and Oversight and Investigations 
conducted a joint hearing that examined abuses prevalent in the 
current Medicare drug benefit. The hearing featured the 
testimony of several witnesses, including a plaintiff in an 
ongoing qui tam lawsuit against several drug manufacturers, and 
the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid 
Services (CMS). Also testifying were the director of health 
care issues for the General Accounting Office (GAO), a deputy 
Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human 
Services, the Chief of the Bioethics Department at the National 
Institutes of Health (NIH), and representatives from three 
health care provider groups that administer Medicare-covered 
drugs.
    The hearing testimony, along with information uncovered in 
the course of the Committee's two-year investigation into this 
issue, demonstrated how some drug manufacturers caused inflated 
AWPs to be reported and used to set Medicare's reimbursement 
rates, and then marketed their drugs to providers based on the 
``spread'' between the reported AWP--upon which provider 
reimbursement and beneficiary co-payments are calculated--and 
the price at which the drug company actually sold the drug to 
the providers, which generally was significantly lower. These 
inflated AWPs have caused the Medicare program and its 
beneficiaries to pay each year billions of extra dollars in 
reimbursements and co-payments to providers who administer 
Medicare-covered drugs. Based on the information revealed in 
the hearing, the Committee worked to develop legislation that 
would reform the Medicare drug benefit and eliminate the 
overpayments. Further, on December 3, 2002, CMS sent a program 
memorandum to its Medicare carriers announcing that, as of 
January 1, 2003, it would use a single drug pricer to determine 
the AWPs that Medicare pays for covered drugs. Each carrier 
currently calculates its own AWPs from published data, which 
has led to discrepancies in reimbursements for the same drugs 
among multiple carriers. This new policy will implement a 
change first requested by the Committee during the 106th 
Congress as part of its oversight of the AWP issue, and is a 
first step towards reform of the AWP reimbursement process.
    In addition, the Committee examined the need to modernize 
and strengthen the Medicare program overall. The Subcommittee 
on Health held a hearing on July 26, 2001, which featured the 
testimony of Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy 
Thompson. As part of this testimony, Secretary Thompson 
identified procedures that the Administration intended to 
pursue for streamlining current administrative structures, 
while reducing instances of fraud and abuse.
    The Committee also sought to reduce the overall number of 
improper Medicare fee-for-service payments. On April 5, 2001, 
Chairman Tauzin, Ranking Member Dingell and the Chairmen and 
Ranking Members of the Health and Oversight & Investigations 
Subcommittees wrote to the Acting CMS Deputy Administrator 
requesting that CMS identify what steps it was taking to 
curtail improper Medicare payments.

                   PROBLEMS WITH THE MEDICAID PROGRAM

    The Medicaid program, which is funded by both states and 
the Federal government, pays for the health expenses of 
approximately 40 million Americans, consisting primarily of 
low-income individuals such as mothers with children, the 
elderly, the blind and other disabled persons. Committee 
hearings last year revealed that the cost of the Medicaid fraud 
and improper payment problem could exceed $17 billion every 
year. During the 107th Congress, the Committee continued to 
examine ways in which states could adopt more rigorous controls 
to improve their program integrity standards. In June 2001, the 
Committee released a General Accounting Office (GAO) report, 
prepared at the Committee's request, which provided an analysis 
of state efforts to curb fraud and abuse within their Medicaid 
programs. The report, which reflected information obtained in a 
GAO survey requested by the Committee, revealed that lax 
administration, uneven funding, and insufficient Federal 
guidance have combined to undercut effective efforts to reduce 
fraud and abuse in the Medicaid program.

             HCFA'S MANAGEMENT OF ITS MEDICARE CONTRACTORS

    The day-to-day operations of the Medicare program are 
managed by contractors who process beneficiary claims and make 
Medicare payments to health care providers. In the 107th 
Congress, the Committee's ``Patients First'' project (described 
in more detail above) included a review of Medicare's existing 
contracting authority and ways to refine it to secure the 
efficient and responsive delivery of high quality services to 
Medicare beneficiaries.
    The ``Patients First'' project also contributed to the 
development of legislation to reform Medicare's contracting 
authority (H.R. 3046, the ``Medicare Regulatory, Appeals, 
Contracting, and Education Reform Act of 2001,'' and H.R. 3391, 
the ``Medicare Regulatory and Contracting Reform Act of 
2001''). On December 4, 2001, H.R. 3391 was considered by the 
House under suspension of the rules. The motion to suspend the 
rules and pass the bill was unanimously agreed to by a roll 
call vote of 408 yeas and 0 nays.
    In addition, the Committee conducted oversight of the 
computer security practices of the contractors of the Centers 
for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) (formerly known as the 
Health Care Financing Administration, or HCFA), including the 
adequacy of CMS oversight of such practices.

             HCFA'S EFFORTS ON ANTI-FRAUD BILLING SOFTWARE

    During the 106th Congress, the Committee conducted a review 
of the failure of the Health Care Financing Administration (now 
known as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) to 
implement pre-payment, anti-fraud software in its Medicare 
claims systems, despite years of reports by the Department of 
Health and Human Services Inspector General and the General 
Accounting Office suggesting that Medicare could save hundreds 
of millions of dollars annually by implementing software 
systems similar to those currently available in the private 
sector. Although the Committee did not take any direct 
oversight action on this matter, it continued to monitor 
developments in the agency's activities in this regard during 
the 107th Congress.

 HCFA'S IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BALANCED BUDGET ACT, THE BALANCED BUDGET 
    REFINEMENT ACT, AND THE BENEFITS IMPROVEMENT AND PROTECTION ACT

    In the 107th Congress, the Committee's ``Patients First'' 
project (described in more detail above) included a review of 
Federal agency actions taken to implement health legislation 
enacted within the last several years. Through stakeholder and 
work group meetings, the Committee focused on Medicare's 
appeals and coverage processes and changes enacted in the 
Benefits Improvement and Protection Act of 2000. This 
examination led to the submission of a bipartisan request for a 
General Accounting Office study in 2002, which will be 
completed in the 108th Congress. In addition, the ``Patients 
First'' project led to the incorporation of modifications to 
Medicare's coverage process in legislation, which the Committee 
considered and the House passed this year.
    The Committee also conducted extensive oversight of the 
implementation of the hospital outpatient prospective payment 
system, which was first authorized under the Balanced Budget 
Act, and substantially modified by the Balanced Budget 
Refinement Act. Committee majority staff convened several 
meetings with drug and device manufacturers, as well as 
hospitals and patient advocates, to assess the impact of the 
new prospective payment rates on patients' access to quality 
care in the hospital outpatient setting. Based on the 
information obtained in these meetings, Chairman Tauzin and 
Ranking Member Dingell, along with the Chairman and Ranking 
Members of the Ways and Means and Senate Finance Committees, 
sent a December 12, 2001 letter to the Administrator of the 
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) (formerly 
known as the Health Care Financing Administration, or HCFA), 
requesting that CMS delay implementation of the proposed new 
payment rates. On December 31, 2001, CMS published its final 
rule, which delayed implementation of the 2002 payment rates 
until April 1, 2002.
    As part of the Committee's continuing oversight of the 
implementation of the new hospital outpatient payment system, 
Chairman Tauzin, along with Ways and Means Committee Chairman 
Thomas and Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Grassley, 
wrote a letter to the CMS Administrator on October 21, 2002, 
identifying concerns relating to some of the dramatic changes 
in reimbursement rates for certain drugs and devices, as well 
as the need to continue to assess and improve the accuracy of 
the claims data used by CMS to set new rates. The letter also 
requested that CMS consider setting reimbursement corridors for 
certain drugs and devices, which would limit the overall 
reimbursement reductions for these products. In the published 
final rule for 2003, CMS established corridors that limited the 
reductions for products that would otherwise have had their 
reimbursements decreased by more than 15 percent.

                           PRESCRIPTION DRUGS

    As part of an ongoing effort to create a comprehensive 
prescription drug benefit for Medicare beneficiaries, the 
Committee focused its oversight activities on several related 
issues that were explored during the 107th Congress. Through 
various oversight efforts, the Committee gathered information 
relating to ways to provide Medicare beneficiaries with access 
to prescription drug coverage and harness competitive market 
forces to lower the cost of these drugs. On February 15 and May 
16, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health held two hearings that 
examined these and other related issues. These hearings 
featured the testimony of witnesses representing health 
insurance plans, employers, pharmacies, state programs 
providing assistance to low-income seniors, beneficiaries, 
academia, health care foundations, a biotechnology association, 
and the Congressional Budget Office. This testimony highlighted 
many of the issues associated with prescription drug coverage 
offered by private and employer-sponsored plans, as well as the 
provision of assistance to Medicare beneficiaries who currently 
lack such coverage.
    In addition, on April 17, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health 
held a hearing to specifically examine efforts to assist low-
income Medicare beneficiaries with the costs of their 
prescription drugs. The hearing featured testimony that focused 
upon the Administration's proposal to create new discount cards 
for Medicare beneficiaries, as well as other state-developed 
alternatives that are attempting to lower prescription drug 
costs for eligible persons.

                      MEDICARE SELF-REFERRAL LAWS

    Originally enacted in 1989 and amended in 1993, the 
physician self-referral laws prohibit a physician from making a 
referral to a provider for certain designated Medicare services 
if the physician has a financial relationship with that 
provider. These laws were designed to reduce overutilization 
and gaming of the Medicare program. Although the Committee did 
not engage in any direct oversight action on this topic during 
the 107th Congress, it continued to monitor developments in 
this area.

                    TELEMEDICINE/ON-LINE HEALTH CARE

    During the 105th and 106th Congresses, the Committee 
followed the development of a number of on-line health care 
issues, in particular, the growing number of companies that are 
distributing prescription pharmaceuticals on-line. The 
Committee also focused on ways to eliminate barriers to the 
practice of telemedicine in the Medicare program. While the 
Committee did not engage in any direct oversight activity on 
this topic during the 107th Congress, it continued to monitor 
developments in this area. In addition, as part of the 
Committee's review of ``Imported Drugs'' described below, the 
Committee examined safety concerns with respect to foreign 
Internet pharmacies.

             THE STATE CHILDREN'S HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM

    The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 amended the Social Security 
Act to add Title XXI--the State Children's Health Insurance 
Program (SCHIP). Under this Title, funds are provided to States 
to enable them to initiate and expand health assistance to 
uninsured, low-income children. Because of provisions included 
in the Benefits Improvement and Protection Act of 2000, states 
were given additional time to spend their 1998 and 1999 
allotments. This extension expired on October 1, 2002, and all 
unspent 1998 and 1999 funds reverted to the Federal Treasury. 
As a result, Committee staff convened several meetings and 
briefings during the 107th Congress to understand the impact of 
the loss of this funding, as well as the effect of a full 
redistribution of unspent 2000 funds (as required under current 
law). Based upon this information, Committee Chairman Tauzin 
and Ranking Member Dingell introduced legislation to extend the 
availability of unspent funds and institute a more balanced 
approach to redistribute unspent funds.

                            CANCER RESEARCH

    While the Committee did not engage in any direct oversight 
activity on this topic during the 107th Congress, it continued 
to monitor developments in this area.

                       HUMAN GENOME DEVELOPMENTS

    While the Committee did not engage in any direct oversight 
activity on this topic during the 107th Congress, it continued 
to monitor developments in this area.

                        ORGAN ALLOCATION REFORMS

    The National Organ Transplant Act (NOTA) governs organ 
distribution policy in the United States. Since the law's 
enactment, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) has 
contracted with an organ procurement and transplantation 
network (OPTN) to determine how the organs are to be allocated. 
In 1998, HHS promulgated a rule that would, in effect, transfer 
final authority over organ distribution policies from the OPTN 
to the Secretary. The Committee reviewed implementation of the 
rule during the 107th Congress, and advanced legislation (H.R. 
624, the ``Organ Donation Improvement Act of 2001'') that would 
create new incentives for people to become organ donors and 
expand demonstration projects to encourage organ donation 
education efforts across the country.

                  THE NATIONAL PRACTITIONER DATA BANK

    The National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) was created in 
1990. The purpose of the NPDB is to serve as a repository for 
information pertaining to medical practitioners. It contains a 
listing and description of disciplinary actions taken by 
medical societies and state licensing boards, medical 
malpractice payments, clinical privileges actions, and Medicare 
and Medicaid program exclusions. By law, the information in the 
NPDB is not available to the public. In the 106th Congress, the 
Committee evaluated ways to improve the data gathered in the 
data bank and make it more useful for medical boards, 
hospitals, and insurers. While the Committee did not take any 
direct oversight action on this topic during the 107th 
Congress, it continued to monitor developments in this area.

                                ADOPTION

    While the Committee did not engage in any direct oversight 
activity on this topic during the 107th Congress, it continued 
to monitor developments in this area.

                            PALLIATIVE CARE

    While the Committee did not engage in any direct oversight 
activity on this topic during the 107th Congress, it continued 
to monitor developments in this area.

                       THE HEALTHY START PROGRAM

    Authorized by the Children's Health Act of 2000, Healthy 
Start is designed to reduce the rate of infant mortality and 
improve perinatal outcomes by providing grants to areas with a 
high rate of infant mortality and low birth weight infants. 
While the Committee did not engage in any direct oversight 
activity on this topic during the 107th Congress, it continued 
to monitor developments in this area.

             IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HEALTH CARE PRIVACY RULE

    In 2000, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) 
issued regulations, required by law, addressing the 
confidentiality of individual identifiable health information 
stored or transmitted electronically. As part of an ongoing 
effort to ensure that health care privacy regulations are 
workable and balance the need for privacy with efficient 
operation of the health care system, the Subcommittee on Health 
held a hearing regarding the privacy regulations on March 22, 
2001. The purpose of this hearing was to focus on the benefits 
and unintended consequences of the HHS regulations to implement 
the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act's 
(HIPAA) medical record privacy provisions. The Subcommittee 
heard testimony from representatives of the public and private 
sector, including the Cleveland Clinic Foundation, the American 
Nurses Association, the Marshfield Clinic, the University of 
Massachusetts Medical School, CVS Pharmacy, Georgetown 
University, and Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield.
    In addition, Health Subcommittee Chairman Bilirakis and 
Vice-Chairman Norwood sent a letter to the HHS Secretary on 
March 6, 2002, encouraging the Secretary to issue a new 
proposal to revise the HHS privacy regulations on certain 
points. Another letter, sent on April 30, 2002, was signed by 
Full Committee Chairman Tauzin, Health Subcommittee Chairman 
Bilirakis, and Mssrs. Upton, Stearns, Greenwood, Burr, Norwood, 
Shadegg, Bryant, and Buyer. This letter provided an extensive 
set of comments on the Department's notice of proposed 
rulemaking. Many of the recommendations of these Committee 
Members were adopted in the final HHS regulation.
    In addition, on May 23, 2001, the Subcommittee on Oversight 
and Investigations held a hearing on the security of private 
medical information. The hearing reviewed the Committee's 
oversight of cyber security practices at HCFA, now known as the 
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and featured 
testimony from CMS computer security officials and private 
cyber experts who had examined the CMS Medicare computer 
network. As a result of the hearing, CMS officials altered the 
agency's network configuration to eliminate a significant 
vulnerability uncovered by the Committee that could have 
exposed private Medicare information to unauthorized users or 
hackers, and pledged to take a series of additional actions to 
address the Committee's other findings.

              HHS PROGRAMS AFFECTING CHILDREN AND FAMILIES

    During the 107th Congress, the Committee continued its 
oversight of programs of the Department of Health and Human 
Services that affect children and families, as described in 
more detail in the discussion of ``Implementation of the 
Welfare Reform Act of 1996'' below.

            IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WELFARE REFORM ACT OF 1996

    The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity 
Reconciliation Act of 1996, commonly known as the Welfare 
Reform Act, imposed strict work requirements and eligibility 
time limits on welfare recipients, and established strict child 
support obligations on non-custodial parents. It also included 
a mandatory appropriation of $50 million over five years for 
abstinence-only sex education, and provided transitional 
medical assistance to those who move off welfare to work.
    The 1996 welfare reform law was due to be reauthorized 
during the second half of the 107th Congress. As part of this 
process, the Subcommittee on Health held an oversight hearing 
on April 23, 2002. This hearing focused on two welfare reform 
issues within the Committee's jurisdiction--abstinence 
education and transitional medical assistance. Witnesses 
included a title V abstinence education state block grant 
recipient, a gynecologist who is directing the Medical 
Institute for Sexual Health, a pediatrician who is the head of 
the adolescent medicine department at Children's Hospital, a 
senior fellow at the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the 
Uninsured, and the director of health care issues for the 
General Accounting Office (GAO).
    This hearing contributed to the development of legislation 
that the Committee considered on April 24, 2002. The Committee 
considered two Committee Prints pertaining to welfare reform--
one extending the authorization of transitional medical 
assistance for one year, and the other extending abstinence 
education funding through fiscal year 2007. Both Committee 
Prints were favorably reported by the Committee, and were later 
introduced by Representative Upton as H.R. 4584 and H.R. 4585. 
Provisions of H.R. 4584 and H.R. 4585, as ordered reported from 
the Committee on April 24, 2002, were incorporated into H.R. 
4737, the ``Personal Responsibility, Work, and Family Promotion 
Act of 2002.'' On May 16, 2002, H.R. 4737 was considered by the 
House and passed by a recorded vote of 229 yeas and 197 nays.

                  DRUG ABUSE TREATMENT AND PREVENTION

    In the 105th and 106th Congresses, the Committee worked to 
broaden the war on drug abuse by focusing on innovative 
solutions to the area of drug treatment. During the 107th 
Congress, the Committee reviewed several substance abuse 
programs managed by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health 
Services Administration. Recent reports have raised concerns 
about the effectiveness of drug abuse programs, especially 
among adolescents seeking drug treatment. The Committee, 
working in cooperation with the Committee on the Judiciary, 
included a provision in the reauthorization of the Department 
of Justice that requested that the President, in consultation 
with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services, the Secretary of Education, and other appropriate 
Federal officers, review all Federal drug treatment, 
prevention, education, and research programs and recommend to 
Congress ways in which those programs could be streamlined. The 
reauthorization bill, which also authorized the expansion of 
current and ongoing interdisciplinary research and clinical 
trials relating to drug abuse and addiction, was signed by the 
President and became P.L. 107-752.

                      FALSE CLAIMS ACT ENFORCEMENT

    During the 105th and 106th Congresses, the Committee 
conducted oversight of the Department of Justice's (DOJ) 
application of the False Claims Act in the fight against waste, 
fraud, and abuse in the healthcare industry. In response to the 
Committee's review, DOJ issued new guidance on fair and 
appropriate use of the False Claims Act in this area. In the 
107th Congress, the Committee continued to monitor DOJ's 
application of the False Claims Act in order to evaluate the 
impact of the new guidelines.

                   THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH

    The National Institutes of Health (NIH) supports the 
research of scientists in universities, medical schools, 
hospitals, and research institutes throughout the country. 
During the 107th Congress, the Committee held a hearing on June 
6, 2002, to review NIH's management structure and research 
grant programs, and to assess how to improve the overall 
efficiency and accountability of the Institutes. Two NIH 
Directors--the Director of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood 
Institute, and the Acting Director of the National Institute 
for Neurological Disorders and Stroke--presented testimony to 
the Subcommittee about how their respective Institutes were 
utilizing the additional Federal dollars appropriated over the 
past five fiscal years.

                    PUBLIC EDUCATION ON HEPATITIS C

    The Committee's past oversight revealed that the Surgeon 
General and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had 
failed to launch a promised nationwide public campaign to 
educate persons infected with the deadly Hepatitis C virus 
infection. In the 107th Congress, the Committee continued to 
monitor developments in this area, although it did not engage 
in any direct oversight activity on this topic.

                          BIOENGINEERED FOODS

    Bioengineered foods are crop plants created for human or 
animal consumption using molecular biology techniques. These 
foods are bioengineered in that their genetic code is modified 
in the laboratory to enhance desired traits. In the 107th 
Congress, the Committee worked with stakeholder groups and 
government agencies to evaluate issues relating to mandatory 
labeling of bioengineered foods and the possible prohibition on 
Federal funds from being used to approve bioengineered fish for 
human consumption. In addition, the Committee also worked to 
secure inclusion in a new Federal agricultural law language 
allowing all foods treated with a process producing pathogen 
elimination at the same level as the pasteurization process to 
be labeled as ``pasteurized.''

                       FDAMA/PDUFA IMPLEMENTATION

    In 1997, Congress enacted the Food and Drug Administration 
Modernization Act (FDAMA). Contained within that legislation 
was a five-year reauthorization of the Prescription Drug User 
Fee Act (PDUFA), which was originally passed in 1992. FDAMA 
changed the FDA mission statement to ensure that FDA emphasizes 
the timeliness of FDA's review of foods, drugs, devices and 
cosmetics, and the Act allowed for third-party review of 
certain medical devices if the quality of the review would not 
be compromised.
    During the 107th Congress, the Committee actively 
considered the implementation of FDAMA and PDUFA through a 
number of actions. First, on May 3, 2001, the Subcommittee on 
Health conducted a hearing to evaluate the effectiveness of 
FDAMA. Second, because the ``pediatric exclusivity'' provision 
of FDAMA (providing incentives for drug manufacturers to 
conduct testing of their drugs in pediatric populations) was 
set to expire in 2001, the Committee undertook a review of this 
aspect of the legislation. A reauthorization bill was 
introduced, and then passed by the Subcommittee on Health, then 
the full Committee. The bill then passed the House under 
suspension of the rules. Following negotiations with the 
Senate, this reauthorization, entitled ``The Best 
Pharmaceuticals for Children Act,'' was passed by the House and 
Senate and signed into law by the President on January 4, 2002.
    Another aspect of FDAMA considered by the Committee was 
comprehensive device reforms. In reviewing the reforms enacted 
in FDAMA, the Committee determined that more needed to be done 
to ensure that safe and effective medical devices were reviewed 
and approved by FDA in a timely manner. As a result of this 
consideration, reform legislation was introduced. This bill was 
subsequently signed into law.
    The Committee also reauthorized the Prescription Drug User 
Fee Act (PDUFA), a law under which industry pays fees for 
review of drug and biologics applications. Since passage of 
this Act in 1992, the review times for drugs and biologics had 
decreased dramatically. Because the authority to collect fees 
expired in 2002, the Committee engaged in reauthorization 
activity. First, on March 6, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health 
conducted a hearing on PDUFA reauthorization. This 
reauthorization subsequently was negotiated and then included 
in the ``Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness 
and Response Act of 2002,'' which was ultimately signed into 
law in June 2002.

                IDENTIFICATION OF FDA-REGULATED ENTITIES

    Two reports from January 2001 suggested that the Food and 
Drug Administration (FDA) had failed in its responsibility to 
identify entities subject to its regulation, and thus to ensure 
compliance. In the 107th Congress, the Committee oversaw 
efforts to ensure that FDA had better tools to identify the 
entities it is required to regulate. After the events of 
September 11, 2001, the Committee considered initiatives to 
better protect both the food and drug supplies. This effort 
ultimately resulted in certain legislative provisions being 
included in the ``Public Health Security and Bioterrorism 
Preparedness and Response Act of 2002,'' to enhance FDA's 
ability to identify and inspect entities and shipments subject 
to its regulations.

                             IMPORTED DRUGS

    Over the last decade, there has been a surge in shipments 
of drug products from overseas, both finished dosage forms and 
raw materials. With brand name prescription drugs costs so 
high, many Americans have come to rely on cheaper generic 
alternatives. Nearly 80 percent of drugs in the U.S. 
(especially generic drugs) have ingredients that have been 
manufactured in other countries. This trend has implications 
for the public health and the ability of the Food and Drug 
Administration (FDA) to ensure the safety and efficacy of such 
imported drugs. In the 106th Congress, the Committee examined 
FDA's foreign drug inspections, the Mutual Recognition 
Agreement (MRA) between the U.S. and the European Union on drug 
inspections, and FDA's oversight of the importation of 
potentially counterfeit bulk drugs.
    As part of the Committee's oversight on this topic in the 
107th Congress, the Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations held a hearing on June 7, 2001, to examine 
continuing concerns over imported pharmaceuticals, including 
through Internet-based pharmacies--a subject of inquiry during 
the 106th Congress as well. This hearing assessed four areas of 
interest: (1) personal imports of controlled substances; (2) 
overseas mail deliveries of prescription drugs; (3) counterfeit 
bulk-drug imports; and (4) the global counterfeiting and 
diversion threat in the pharmaceutical market. The purposes of 
the hearing were to highlight the safety concerns with imported 
prescription drugs, and to examine actions taken in response to 
the Committee's previous oversight on this topic. The first 
panel of witnesses featured parents of a young man who 
apparently had died from an overdose or interaction involving 
prescription drugs he ordered without a prescription from a 
foreign-based Internet pharmacy. The second panel featured 
governmental witnesses from the Office of National Drug Control 
Policy, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the U.S. Customs 
Service, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National 
Institute on Drug Abuse, and the Virginia State Police. The 
third panel featured expert witnesses from the University of 
Texas College of Pharmacy; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company; 
Novartis Pharmaceuticals; GlaxoSmithKline; a consultant on 
controlled drugs and chemical law, policy, administration and 
enforcement; and an international trade lawyer who had closely 
studied counterfeiting and diversion in the pharmaceutical 
trade. Testimony during the hearing focused on the danger to 
the public health from FDA's use of enforcement discretion that 
resulted in personal imports of drugs of unknown origin into 
the United States at the rate of two million per year and 
increasing. While these imports entered primarily through the 
mails and contract carriers of overnight parcels, there also 
was extensive testimony regarding personal imports, 
particularly of controlled substances over the Mexican border. 
The FDA witness testified that the Department of Health and 
Human Services was considering proposals to address this issue, 
which may require Congressional action.
    In this Congress, the Committee also conducted a number of 
Member and staff briefings to further consider the risks and 
benefits of allowing third parties to reimport into the United 
States FDA-approved drugs. Along with these numerous briefings, 
on July 25, 2002, the Subcommittee on Health conducted a 
hearing entitled ``Examining Prescription Drug Reimportation: A 
Review of a Proposal to Allow Third Parties to Reimport 
Prescription Drugs.'' At this hearing, the Committee heard from 
interested stakeholders who described the consequences of 
legalizing third-party reimportation and the personal 
importation of prescription drugs from foreign countries.
    The Committee's oversight in this area was highlighted in 
House floor debate of an Agriculture Appropriation amendment 
that would have allowed for commercial re-importation of 
prescription drugs from foreign countries. That amendment was 
defeated.

                     THE SPREAD OF MAD COW DISEASE

    In January 2001, the Committee initiated a review of the 
adequacy of the measures instituted by the Federal government 
to protect the United States from bovine spongiform 
encephalopathy (BSE), commonly known as mad cow disease. The 
Committee requested and received budgetary and programmatic 
information and briefings from the Food and Drug Administration 
(FDA), and reviewed the adequacy of the resources and efforts 
devoted to ensuring compliance with FDA's guidance and rules to 
help prevent the spread of BSE.

                      STUDIES OF DRUGS IN CHILDREN

    In 1997, as part of the Food and Drug Administration 
Modernization Act (FDAMA), Congress enacted a new law that 
provides marketing incentives to manufacturers who conduct 
studies of drugs in children. This law, which provides six 
months market exclusivity in return for conducting pediatric 
studies, is commonly known as the ``pediatric exclusivity'' 
provision. The provision had a sunset date of January 1, 2002. 
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had reported to Congress 
that the pediatric exclusivity provision was effective in 
generating pediatric studies on many drugs and in providing 
useful new information in product labeling. However, FDA also 
noted that some categories of drugs and some age groups remain 
inadequately studied, despite the new incentives.
    As part of the Committee's oversight of this matter during 
the 107th Congress, on May 3, 2001, the Subcommittee on Health 
conducted a hearing to evaluate the effectiveness of FDAMA, 
which in part considered the ``pediatric exclusivity'' 
provision of FDAMA. A reauthorization bill was introduced, and 
then passed by the Committee. The bill then passed the House 
under suspension of the rules. Following negotiations with the 
Senate, this reauthorization, entitled ``The Best 
Pharmaceuticals for Children Act,'' was passed by the House and 
Senate and signed into law by the President on January 4, 2002.

               HUMAN RESEARCH SUBJECTS IN CLINICAL TRIALS

    During the last Congress, the Committee investigated the 
adequacy of Federal oversight with respect to the protection of 
human research subjects in gene transfer clinical trials. In 
this Congress, the Committee convened multiple stakeholder 
briefings, and then led negotiations, on this subject, 
resulting in the introduction of legislation intended to 
provide all Federal agencies, including FDA, with greater 
authority to ensure the protection of human subjects involved 
in clinical trials. Further, the legislation would offer a vast 
array of new protections to human subjects involved in clinical 
trials, irrespective of whether the research is funded 
Federally or privately. Relatedly, the Committee also conducted 
oversight of the FDA Office of Research Integrity.

                              FOOD SAFETY

    The Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA) directed the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reassess the safe 
level of all pesticide residues allowable on food crops using 
updated risk assessment standards. The law also required EPA to 
create an endocrine disruptor screening program. Enacted in 
1996, FQPA was intended to improve the overall safety of both 
raw and processed food products by requiring the reassessment 
of all pesticide tolerances, based on an analysis of the best 
available scientific data by both EPA and the U.S. Department 
of Agriculture (USDA).
    As part of the Committee's continuing oversight of the 
FQPA, the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous materials 
held a field hearing in Bowling Green, Ohio, on March 25, 2002. 
The hearing featured the testimony of senior officials from 
both EPA and USDA, along with witnesses from groups 
representing farmers, environmentalists, and other 
stakeholders. The testimony provided at the hearing was used to 
assist the Committee's efforts to determine whether the FQPA is 
being properly implemented in an open and transparent manner, 
using sound science, with proper consultation with the public 
and affected stakeholders. Committee staff also received 
briefings from various agency and industry officials with 
respect to FQPA matters during the 107th Congress.
    In addition, as part of the Committee's broader examination 
of terrorist threats during the 107th Congress, the Committee 
sought information from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 
concerning expert assessments of the various threats to the 
safety and security of the nation's food supply posed by 
terrorists. The Committee also obtained information about FDA 
food inspection resources and efforts, particularly at ports of 
entry into the United States. The Committee's oversight in this 
area contributed to the passage of enhanced food safety 
protections in the ``Public Health Security and Bioterrorism 
Preparedness and Response Act of 2002,'' which is more fully 
described in the Subcommittee on Health Legislation section of 
the Committee's Activity Report for the 107th Congress.

                           FDA CYBER SECURITY

    In July 1999, the Committee initiated a review of cyber 
security at FDA. In the 107th Congress, the Committee continued 
its evaluation of FDA's computer security programs and reviewed 
the Agency's ongoing efforts to improve its cyber-security 
protections.

                       TELECOMMUNICATIONS ISSUES

   MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

    Congress created the Federal Communications Commission 
(FCC) in 1934 for the express purpose of regulating interstate 
and foreign communication via wire and radio. In 1996, Congress 
passed the most significant alteration of existing 
telecommunications law by enacting the Telecommunications Act 
of 1996. However, while the Telecommunications Act moved the 
telecommunications industry toward greater deregulation, it did 
little to alter the structure and functions of the FCC. 
Accordingly, the Commission has been implementing the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996 with a pre-1996 mind-set.
    As part of the Committee's oversight of the general 
management and operations of the FCC, on March 29, 2001, the 
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet conducted a 
hearing at which FCC Chairman Michael Powell presented his plan 
for the structural reform of the Commission. The Subcommittee 
also held a number of hearings on specific FCC proceedings and 
regulations, and Committee staff closely monitored the FCC's 
continuing implementation of the Telecommunications Act 
deregulation mandates. Furthermore, 52 Members of the Committee 
objected to the FCC's intent to auction frequencies in the so-
called 700 MHz band, which is heavily encumbered by broadcasts 
from television stations. When the FCC announced that it would 
conduct the auction despite the Committee's objection, the 
Committee passed legislation to prohibit the FCC from 
conducting the auction. The legislation, the Auction Reform Act 
of 2002, was signed into law on June 19, 2002. In addition to 
prohibiting the FCC from conducting the 700 MHz auction in the 
timeframe envisioned by the Commission, the legislation 
fundamentally changed the manner in which auctions are 
conducted by the FCC by removing all statutory deadlines 
regarding when auctions must occur.

                 THE NETWORKS' ELECTION NIGHT COVERAGE

    Shortly after the November 2000 Presidential election, the 
Committee began a critical review of the media's coverage of 
Election Night 2000, concerned about a series of incorrect 
projections made by the major television and cable networks 
during the evening and potential bias in polling and reporting 
practices. The Committee sent information requests to CBS, NBC, 
ABC, Fox, CNN, the Associated Press (AP), and the Voter News 
Service (VNS)--the exit polling and vote-gathering conglomerate 
owned by all the major networks and the AP--requesting 
documentation on their polling and reporting systems, including 
how and why they ``called'' certain states for a Presidential 
candidate and the role that exit polls and incorrect and 
incomplete VNS data played in their projections. Committee 
staff met with representatives of the networks and VNS to 
discuss the problems and their plans to avoid similar ones in 
the future.
    On February 14, 2001, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
held an oversight hearing on the problems that arose on 
election night in November 2000. Witnesses at the hearing 
included the heads of all the major networks, as well as top 
officials from the AP and VNS. Also testifying at the hearing 
were several experts who performed independent reviews of the 
problems that occurred on election night. At the hearing, the 
networks made a variety of pledges to the Committee regarding 
how they intended to report on future elections, including 
promises not to call any state for a particular candidate until 
all of the polls within that state were closed, to use a 
secondary source of voting and polling data to serve as a check 
on VNS, and to either reform VNS' operations or refrain from 
using its data. Recently, Committee majority staff contacted 
the networks prior to the November 2002 elections to discuss 
the status of these corrective actions.

                                 ICANN

    Two year ago, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names 
and Numbers (ICANN), which governs the management and 
registration of ``generic top-level domain'' names (gTLDs) such 
as .com or .gov., approved seven new Internet suffixes. The 
application and selection process for the new gTLDs raised a 
controversy, as some applicants argued that the gTLD selection 
process was unfair. In the 107th Congress, the Committee 
examined whether the selection process was open, fair, and 
competitive.
    Specifically, on February 8, 2001, the Subcommittee on 
Telecommunications and the Internet held an oversight hearing 
focused on the process by which the Internet Corporation for 
Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), approved the seven new top 
level domain (TLD) names (i.e., ``.aero'', ``.coop'', 
``.info'', ``.museum'', ``.name'', ``.pro.'', and ``.biz''), 
and examined whether ICANN's selection process adequately 
promoted competition in the TLD name business. Testimony was 
received from ICANN, two companies whose TLD applications were 
accepted by ICANN, two companies whose TLD applications were 
not accepted by ICANN, one company which chose not to apply at 
all because it considered ICANN's application process to be 
flawed, and a law professor who specializes in Internet 
governance. In addition, the Committee sent to Department of 
Commerce Secretary Evans two letters (March 13, 2002, and June 
20, 2002) expressing the Committee's displeasure with the lack 
of transparency and accountability in the ICANN reform process, 
and to communicate the Committee's concerns relating to the 
fairness in selecting new generic top-level domains.

                           DIGITAL TELEVISION

    In the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, Congress directed that 
the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) authorize 
broadcasters to convert from analog to digital signals by 2006, 
and possibly beyond 2006 (in markets where a sufficient number 
of households cannot access a digital television signal). While 
many digital stations already are in operation in major 
metropolitan areas, the overall conversion to digital 
television has been criticized as being slow, unorganized and 
unrealistic. In January 200l, the FCC issued two decisions in 
an effort to resolve issues critical to the rapid conversion to 
digital television: the Report and Order in its first periodic 
review of the digital television transition, and the Report and 
Order in the Digital Must Carry proceeding.
    On March 15, 2001, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 
and the Internet held a hearing intended to explore why the 
television industry's transition from analog to digital was 
``off-track'' and how to put it back on track. The hearing 
examined the recent policy decisions made by the FCC and 
reviewed a number of issues still outstanding. Subsequently, 
Chairman Tauzin, along with other Subcommittee Members, hosted 
a series of six roundtable discussions on the transition, which 
included participants from the relevant private industries as 
well as the FCC. The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the 
Internet held a hearing September 25, 2002, to discuss a 
proposed staff discussion draft addressing the outstanding 
issues relating to the transition to digital television.

                 AVAILABILITY OF BROADBAND TECHNOLOGIES

    The increase in use of the Internet and electronic commerce 
has led to an increase in the demand for faster networks and 
faster delivery of content. Today, consumers and businesses are 
frustrated by the slow speeds for connecting to and accessing 
information from the Internet. In addition, the creation of new 
advanced Internet applications--such as digital music and 
videos--creates a further demand for faster Internet 
connections. While new technologies and faster networks are 
being developed and deployed in some parts of the country and 
with some success, barriers exist that prevent these 
technologies from being available to all consumers.
    In the 107th Congress, the Committee continued to examine 
all barriers--regulatory, market-based, and statutory in 
nature--to determine what factors are preventing the full 
deployment of broadband technologies to the American people. To 
ensure that all broadband service providers have the maximum 
incentive to invest in broadband equipment and technology, the 
Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the Committee 
introduced H.R. 1542, the Internet Freedom and Broadband 
Deployment Act of 2001. The Committee conducted a hearing and 
favorably reported the bill in April 2001. The House of 
Representatives passed H.R. 1542 on February 27, 2002.

                        TECHNOLOGY IN EDUCATION

    As the technology industry continues to develop new and 
innovative products and services, such products and services 
can be effectively used in the education of our students, if 
they are implemented into the academic curriculum properly. The 
Federal government currently runs a number of programs targeted 
at improving the use of technology in classrooms and by 
America's youth. These programs, however, often require 
burdensome paperwork requirements that can delay or prevent 
funding from reaching the intended parties. Further, these 
programs often target specific technologies or can be used for 
specific purposes only, which can be limiting and frustrating 
to school administrators and teachers.
    As part of the Committee's oversight on this issue in the 
107th Congress, on March 8, 2001, the Subcommittee on 
Telecommunications and the Internet held a hearing focused on 
Federal, state and local government and private sector 
investments in programs that promote the use of technology to 
improve education, and examined what the programs are, how the 
programs work, who benefits from the programs, and what levels 
of funding are associated with such programs.

           EFFICIENT USE OF SPECTRUM AND SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT

    Management of spectrum within the United States is shared 
between the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) (governing 
private sector use of the spectrum) and the National 
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) 
(governing governmental use of the spectrum). Virtually all of 
the usable spectrum in this country already has been allocated 
for a particular purpose. The recent popularity and growth of 
the wireless telecommunications industry has increased demand 
for the allocation and assignment of additional spectrum in 
order to provide new services and public safety, such as third 
generation (``3G'') wireless services. The tension created by 
the current shortfall has a significant impact on the U.S. 
economy and the ability of domestic wireless providers to 
compete with wireless companies in other nations that are 
rushing to offer new wireless services, as well as the ability 
of the public safety community to perform its duties 
efficiently. The FCC currently is reviewing the needs of the 
public safety community in numerous proceedings.
    During the 107th Congress, the Committee conducted vigorous 
oversight of the spectrum management operations of the FCC and 
NTIA. Based in part on this oversight, the Committee and the 
Congress passed H.R. 4560 (P.L. 107-195), which removed all 
statutory deadlines regarding when spectrum auctions must be 
conducted. Because of the bill's enactment, auctions will be 
conducted according to sound spectrum management policy, rather 
than according to budgetary considerations. In addition, the 
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet conducted a 
hearing on June 5, 2002 on the FCC's progress with respect to 
the allocation and assignment of additional spectrum for the 
deployment of third-generation wireless services. Subsequently, 
the Bush Administration and the FCC announced the allocation 
and assignment of additional spectrum for such purposes. The 
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet also 
conducted a hearing on the FCC's ultra-wideband (UWB) 
proceeding. The hearing also explored whether the statutory 
delineation between the spectrum management responsibilities of 
the FCC and NTIA had been breached during the UWB proceeding.

                         BROADCAST DEREGULATION

    The broadcasters have traditionally been heavily regulated 
by the FCC due to the scarcity of spectrum available in the 
U.S. Both the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the Balanced 
Budget Act of 1997 mandated that the FCC liberalize its 
numerous broadcast ownership rules. While the FCC has made some 
progress in reducing broadcast regulations, there still are at 
least two major areas that remain heavily regulated by FCC 
rules: the national ownership cap and the newspaper/broadcast 
station cross-ownership restriction. The national ownership 
cap, which sets a maximum percentage of homes that a national 
network may reach (35%), is a key point of controversy between 
the networks and their affiliates. The cap was set by the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996, but authority was given to the 
FCC to relax the cap on a going forward basis. In 1975, the FCC 
adopted a regulation prohibiting the grant of a broadcast 
license to anyone who owns a newspaper in the same market. The 
newspaper publishing companies note that almost every other 
broadcast ownership regulation has been updated in the past 
several years, except for the newspaper ownership prohibition. 
However, supporters of the restriction point to the 
consolidation of news sources available within a market as the 
reason to keep this regulation in place. In 2001, the FCC began 
rulemaking proceedings on two of its broadcast ownership rules 
- the Broadcast-Newspaper Cross-Ownership Rule and the Local 
Radio Ownership Rule. Then in September of 2002, the Commission 
issued a Biennial Review Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) 
in which it sought comment on its four other broadcast 
ownership rules: the Television-Radio Cross-Ownership Rule; the 
Dual Network Rule; the Local Television Ownership Rule; and the 
National Television Ownership Rule. The September NPRM 
consolidated all three proceedings into a single Biennial 
Review for all broadcast ownership rules.
    During the 107th Congress, the Committee closely monitored 
the FCC's progress on the Biennial Review, which is expected to 
be completed by the Spring of 2003. Chairman Tauzin and various 
members of the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the 
Internet have sent letters to the FCC urging swift action on 
various media ownership rules on the following dates: April 
2001; Sept 2001; June 4, 2002; and June 26, 2002. Moreover, on 
February 22, 2002, Chairman Tauzin and Rep. Bonilla sent a 
letter to the FCC expressing concern over its application of a 
``flagging'' process to broadcast radio ownership transfer 
applications, in apparent violation of the ownership limits set 
forth in the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

                  COPYRIGHT RELATIONSHIP TO E-COMMERCE

    The exponential growth of the Internet raises questions 
about the protection of intellectual property that never 
existed in an analog world. Specifically, the protection of 
high quality content played a substantial part of the 
Committee's examination of the transition to digital 
television. On March 15, 2002, the Subcommittee held a hearing 
on the digital television transition that focused greatly on 
content protection issues in the digital age. Subsequently, 
Chairman Tauzin, along with other Members of the Subcommittee 
on Telecommunications and the Internet, hosted a series of six 
roundtable discussions on the transition, which included 
participants from the relevant private industries as well as 
the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Content protection 
in the digital age comprised a paramount part of these 
discussions. The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the 
Internet held a hearing on April 25, 2002, entitled ``Ensuring 
Content Protection in the Digital Age,'' in order to further 
address the issue. Additionally, the topic was a focal point in 
a Subcommittee hearing held on Septmber 25, 2002, to discuss a 
proposed staff discussion draft on the transition to digital 
television.
    The Committee also worked throughout the 107th Congress on 
the issue of database protection. Since a 1990 Supreme Court 
decision was handed down, pure facts comprised in databases 
have not been afforded copyright protection. A series of public 
meetings were hosted by the Committee, in conjunction with 
other relevant House committees, throughout the 107th Congress. 
These 11 months of public meetings culminated in a staff 
discussion draft, which served as the basis for negotiations 
between committees.

                THE CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING

    Congress created the Corporation for Public Broadcasting 
(CPB) in the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967. Historically, the 
Committee has been charged with monitoring the activities of 
the CPB and authorizing appropriations. The Committee continued 
its oversight and authorization roles relating to CPB 
throughout the 107th Congress. In October 2001, the Committee 
sent a letter to the FCC regarding its Order on the use of 
ancillary and supplemental digital spectrum for public 
broadcasters. Committee staff met with representatives of CPB 
and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) to examine how the 
Community Service grant program intersected with the dues that 
public television stations are required to pay to receive a 
national programming service. These meetings helped to spur a 
change in the formulation utilized by both organizations. The 
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet also held a 
general hearing about public broadcasting on July 10, 2002, and 
the Committee sent a letter to PBS in late July 2002, inquiring 
about a press report concerning controversial content proposed 
for a popular children's program.

             CYBER CRIME/CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION

    American and multinational businesses are becoming more 
reliant on the infrastructure of the Internet and other 
electronic communications networks to conduct valuable 
transactions and to communicate. A well placed ``attack'' on 
this infrastructure could have a devastating impact on the 
American public and could paralyze vital functions. In 
addition, smaller attacks, such as hacking into a company's 
network, could be very costly and disruptive as well. During 
the 107th Congress, the Committee examined the existing and 
potential threats to this existing infrastructure, whether law 
enforcement is sufficiently combating existing and potential 
threats to the appropriate networks, whether the industry is 
prepared to handle threats to the infrastructure, whether the 
current agencies of the Federal government are properly 
coordinating with one another, and whether current law needs to 
be altered to deal with these issues.
    The Committee's focus on cyber crime and protecting the 
country's critical infrastructure expanded after the events of 
September 11, 2001. Very soon after those attacks, the 
Committee held a roundtable discussion with representatives 
from the telecommunications and high technology industries to 
discuss not only how to protect the infrastructure within their 
own industries, but how their infrastructure affects the 
physical security of other major industries around the country. 
Members of the Committee also traveled to New York City soon 
after the September 11th attacks to view how the 
telecommunications infrastructure was affected and rebuilt in 
order to facilitate business operations in New York City and 
around the world, both during and after the crisis.
    In addition, on November 15, 2001, the Subcommittee on 
Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection held a hearing, 
entitled ``Cyber Security: Private-Sector Efforts Addressing 
Cyber Threats.'' The hearing examined how security is handled 
by the private sector, and how comfortable consumers and 
businesses feel with how information is protected based on the 
levels of security utilized by American industries.

                 WIRELESS PRIVACY/WIRELESS WIRETAPPING

    Although the Committee took no direct oversight action on 
this topic during the 107th Congress, the Committee monitored 
developments in the area of wireless privacy and security, and 
Committee staff received briefings from industry 
representatives on this topic.

                      VIOLENT CONTENT IN THE MEDIA

    Over the past few decades, American media outlets have 
increased the amount of violent content, including gratuitous 
violence, within the overall programming offered to consumers. 
Several studies detailing the effects of media violence on 
American society, especially on children, have concluded that 
there may be a link between the violent nature of media content 
and violent behavior.
    In the 107th Congress, the Committee reviewed the practices 
and policies of various media sources, including television, 
motion pictures, audio recordings, video games, radio, and the 
Internet, to evaluate differing approaches to handling violent 
content. The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the 
Internet held a hearing on July 20, 2001, entitled ``Media 
Violence: An Examination of the Entertainment Industry's 
Efforts to Curb Children's Exposure to Violent Content.'' The 
hearing focused on the findings of a series of reports prepared 
by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) on the subject. Witnesses 
included representatives from the FTC, the motion picture, 
video game, and recording industries, a major retail chain, and 
a parents' advocacy group. In conjunction with the Committee's 
review, Committee staff also received briefings from the FTC 
upon the release of each version of its reports on the topic.
    The Subcommittee held a follow-up hearing on October 1, 
2002, to examine recording industry practices for labeling and 
marketing violent/explicit content to minors, because of the 
industry's poor marks from the FTC and its different approach 
to the problem as compared to its counterparts in the motion 
picture and video games industries. Witnesses included 
representatives from the FTC, the American Academy of 
Pediatrics, the Recording Industry Association of America, the 
Hip-Hop Summit Action Network, and two music retailer 
representatives. Eight members of the Committee sent a follow-
up letter to the Recording Industry Association of America to 
inquire whether more of its members would adopt the more 
stringent labeling system adopted by one of its members.

                           FCC CYBER SECURITY

    The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is privy to 
sensitive and proprietary information provided by the 
telecommunications industry. Further, the Commission generates 
vast amounts of internal documents and work product of a 
sensitive, non-public nature. Protection of the Commission's 
computer network is thus important to ensure that non-public 
information is not shared with unintended parties. In the 107th 
Congress, the Committee examined what steps the Commission 
takes to protect the integrity and security of its network 
systems and confidential data, as part of the Committee's 
overall review of Federal agency computer security policies and 
practices.

                  THE STATE OF THE HIGH-TECH INDUSTRY

    Although the Committee took no direct oversight action on 
this topic, the Committee monitored developments in this area 
during the 107th Congress, particularly as part of the 
Committee's review of corporate governance and accounting 
issues involving the telecommunications industry.


                               APPENDIX I

                         Legislative Activities

                    COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

                    Summary of Committee Activities

Total Bills and Resolutions Referred to Committee................  1131
Public Laws......................................................    41
Bills and Resolutions Reported to the House......................    52
Hearings Held:
    Days of Hearings.............................................   162
        Full Committee...........................................     4
        Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection.    32
        Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality...................    25
        Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials......     8
        Subcommittee on Health...................................    33
        Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet......    20
        Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.............    39
    Hours of Sitting.............................................537:31
        Full Committee........................................... 23:47
        Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 81:42
        Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality................... 91:52
        Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials...... 24:42
        Subcommittee on Health...................................117:09
        Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet...... 57:16
        Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.............141:03
Legislative Markups:
    Days of Markups..............................................    45
        Full Committee...........................................    25
        Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection.     4
        Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality...................     8
        Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials......     1
        Subcommittee on Health...................................     4
        Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet......     3
    Hours of Sitting............................................. 97:33
        Full Committee........................................... 64:54
        Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection.  2:10
        Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality................... 17:31
        Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials......  0:12
        Subcommittee on Health...................................  6:42
        Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet......  6:04
Business Meetings:
    Days of Meetings.............................................     2
        Full Committee...........................................     1
        Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.............     1
    Hours of Sitting.............................................  0:27
        Full Committee...........................................  0:16
        Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.............  0:11
Executive Sessions:
    Days of Meetings.............................................     4
        Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.............     4
    Hours of Sitting.............................................  8:16
        Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.............  8:16


                              APPENDIX II

    This list includes: (1) legislation on which the Committee 
on Energy and Commerce acted directly; (2) legislation 
developed through Committee participation in House-Senate 
conferences; and (3) legislation which included provisions 
within the Committee's jurisdiction, including legislation 
enacted by reference as part of other legislation.

                             Public Laws: 41
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Date
       Public Law Number           Approved    Bill          Title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
107-9                            5/24/2001    S. 700  Animal Disease
                                                       Risk Assessment,
                                                       Prevention and
                                                       Control Act of
                                                       2001
107-56                           10/26/2001   H.R.    Uniting and
                                               3162    Strengthening
                                                       America by
                                                       Providing
                                                       Appropriate Tools
                                                       Required to
                                                       Intercept and
                                                       Obstruct
                                                       Terrorism (USA
                                                       PATRIOT ACT) Act
                                                       of 2001
107-82                           12/14/2001   H.R.    To extend the
                                               2291    authorization of
                                                       the Drug-Free
                                                       Communities
                                                       Support Program
                                                       for an additional
                                                       5 years, to
                                                       authorize a
                                                       National
                                                       Community
                                                       Antidrug
                                                       Coalition
                                                       Institute, and
                                                       for other
                                                       purposes.
107-84                           12/18/2001   H.R.    MD-CARE Act
                                               717
107-105                          11/16/2001   H.R.    Administrative
                                               3323    Simplification
                                                       Compliance Act
107-107                          12/28/2001   S.      National Defense
                                               1438    Authorization Act
                                                       for Fiscal Year
                                                       2002
107-109                          1/4/2002     S.      Best
                                               1789    Pharmaceuticals
                                                       for Children Act
107-118                          1/11/2002    H.R.    Small Business
                                               2869    Liability Relief
                                                       and Brownfields
                                                       Revitalization
                                                       Act
107-121                          1/15/2002    S.      Native American
                                               1741    Breast and
                                                       Cervical Cancer
                                                       Treatment
                                                       Technical
                                                       Amendment Act of
                                                       2001
107-155                          3/27/2002    H.R.    Bipartisan
                                               2356    Campaign Reform
                                                       Act of 2002
107-171                          5/13/2002    H.R.    Farm Security and
                                               2646    Rural Investment
                                                       Act of 2002
107-172                          5/14/2002    S.      Hematological
                                               1094    Cancer Research
                                                       Investment and
                                                       Education Act of
                                                       2002
107-174                          5/15/2002    H.R.    Notification and
                                               169     Federal Employee
                                                       Antidiscriminatio
                                                       n and Retaliation
                                                       Act of 2002
107-188                          6/12/2002    H.R.    Public Health
                                               3448    Security and
                                                       Bioterrorism
                                                       Preparedness and
                                                       Response Act of
                                                       2002
107-195                          6/19/2002    H.R.    Auction Reform Act
                                               4560    of 2002
107-200                          7/23/2002    H. J.   Approving the site
                                               Res.    at Yucca
                                               87      Mountain, Nevada,
                                                       for the
                                                       development of a
                                                       repository for
                                                       the disposal of
                                                       high-level
                                                       radioactive waste
                                                       and spent nuclear
                                                       fuel, pursuant to
                                                       the Nuclear Waste
                                                       Policy Act of
                                                       1982.
107-204                          7/23/2002    H.R.    Sarbanes-Oxley Act
                                               3763    of 2002
107-205                          8/1/2002     H.R.    Nurse Reinvestment
                                               3487    Act
107-210                          8/6/2002     H.R.    Trade Act of 2002
                                               3009
107-220                          8/21/2002    H.R.    To amend the
                                               24417   Public Health
                                                       Service Act to
                                                       redesignate a
                                                       facility as the
                                                       National Hansen's
                                                       Disease Programs
                                                       Center, and for
                                                       other purposes.
107-222                          8/21/2002    H.R.    To amend title X
                                               3343    of the Energy
                                                       Policy Act of
                                                       1992, and for
                                                       other purposes.
107-230                          10/01/2002   H.R.    To provide a
                                               3880    temporary waiver
                                                       from certain
                                                       transportation
                                                       conformity
                                                       requirements and
                                                       metropolitan
                                                       transportation
                                                       planning
                                                       requirements
                                                       under the Clean
                                                       Air Act and under
                                                       other laws for
                                                       certain areas in
                                                       New York where
                                                       the planning
                                                       offices and
                                                       resources have
                                                       been destroyed by
                                                       acts of
                                                       terrorism, and
                                                       for other
                                                       purposes.
107-233                          10/1/2002    S.      A bill to amend
                                               2810    the
                                                       Communications
                                                       Satellite Act of
                                                       1962 to extend
                                                       the deadline for
                                                       the INTELSAT
                                                       initial public
                                                       offering.
107-250                          10/26/2002   H.R.    Medical Device
                                               5651    User Fee and
                                                       Modernization Act
                                                       of 2002
107-251                          10/26/2002   S.      Health Care Safety
                                               1533    Net Amendments of
                                                       2002
107-260                          10/29/2002   S.      Benign Brain Tumor
                                               2558    Cancer Registries
                                                       Amendment Act
107-273                          11/2/2002    H.R.    21st Century
                                               2215    Department of
                                                       Justice
                                                       Appropriations
                                                       Authorization Act
107-280                          11/6/2002    H.R.    Rare Diseases Act
                                               4013    of 2002
107-281                          11/6/2002    H.R.    Rare Diseases
                                               4014    Orphan Product
                                                       Development Act
                                                       of 2002
107-296                          11/25/2002   H.R.    Homeland Security
                                               5005    Act of 2002
107-298                          11/26/2002   H.R.    Real Interstate
                                               2546    Driver Equity Act
                                                       of 2002
107-313                          12/2/2002    H.R.    Mental Health
                                               5716    Parity
                                                       Reauthorization
                                                       Act of 2002
107-314                          12/2/2002    H.R.    Bob Stump National
                                               4546    Defense
                                                       Authorization Act
                                                       for Fiscal Year
                                                       2003
107-317                          12/4/2002    H.R.    Dot Kids
                                               3833    Implementation
                                                       and Efficiency
                                                       Act of 2002
107-318                          12/4/2002    H.R.    Anton's Law
                                               5504
107-319                          12/4/2002    H.R.    To amend the
                                               727     Consumer Product
                                                       Safety Act to
                                                       provide that low-
                                                       speed electric
                                                       bicycles are
                                                       consumer products
                                                       subject to such
                                                       Act.
107-322                          12/4/2002    S.      A bill to extend
                                               1010    the deadline for
                                                       commencement of
                                                       construction of a
                                                       hydroelectric
                                                       project in the
                                                       State of North
                                                       Carolina.
107-345                          12/17/2002   H.R.    To amend title 10,
                                               2187    United States
                                                       Code, to make
                                                       receipts
                                                       collected from
                                                       mineral leasing
                                                       activities on
                                                       certain naval oil
                                                       shale reserves
                                                       available to
                                                       cover
                                                       environmental
                                                       restoration,
                                                       waste management,
                                                       and environmental
                                                       compliance costs
                                                       incurred by the
                                                       United States
                                                       with respect to
                                                       the reserves.
107-355                          12/17/2002   H.R.    Pipeline
                                               3609    Infrastructure
                                                       Protection To
                                                       Enhance Security
                                                       and Safety Act
107-360                          12/17/2002   H.R.    To amend the
                                               5738    Public Health
                                                       Service Act with
                                                       respect to
                                                       special diabetes
                                                       programs for Type
                                                       I diabetes and
                                                       Indians.
107-376                          12/17/2002   H.R.    To extend the
                                               5436    deadline for
                                                       commencement of
                                                       construction of a
                                                       hydroelectric
                                                       project in the
                                                       State of Oregon.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              Appendix III

                                 part a

        Printed Hearings of the Committee on Energy and Commerce
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Hearing
           Serial No.                   Hearing Title          Date(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
107-1                             Medicare Reform:           February
                                   Providing Prescription     15, 2001
                                   Drug Coverage for
                                   Seniors (Subcommittee on
                                   Health)
107-2                             National Energy Policy:    March 14,
                                   Coal (Subcommittee on      2001
                                   Energy and Air Quality)
107-3                             The Airline Mergers and    March 21,
                                   Their Effect on American   2001
                                   Consumers (Subcommittee
                                   on Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-4                             Is ICANN's New Generation  February 8,
                                   of Internet Domain Name    2001
                                   Selection Process
                                   Thwarting Competition?
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Telecommunications and
                                   the Internet)
107-5                             Issues Raised by Human     March 28,
                                   Cloning Research           2001
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-6                             Electricity Markets:       March 20,
                                   California (Subcommittee   2001
                                   on Energy and Air           March 22,
                                   Quality)                   2001
107-7                             Electricity Markets:       February
                                   Lessons Learned from       15, 2001
                                   California (Subcommittee
                                   on Energy and Air
                                   Quality)
107-8                             Congressional              March 6,
                                   Perspectives on            2001
                                   Electricity Markets in
                                   California and the West
                                   and National Energy
                                   Policy (Subcommittee on
                                   Energy and Air Quality)
107-9                             A Smarter Partnership for  March 15,
                                   American Families:         2001
                                   (Subcommittee on Health)
107-10                            National Energy Policy:    March 27,
                                   Nuclear Energy             2001
                                   (Subcommittee on Energy
                                   and Air Quality)
107-11                            National Energy Policy     February
                                   (Subcommittee on Energy    28, 2001
                                   and Air Quality)
107-12                            National Energy Policy:    March 30,
                                   Crude Oil and Refined      2001
                                   Petroleum Products
                                   (Subcommittee on Energy
                                   and Air Quality)
107-13                            Protecting America's       April 5,
                                   Critical Infrastructure:   2001
                                   How Secure Are
                                   Government Computer
                                   Systems? (Subcommittee
                                   on Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-14                            Consumer Perspectives on   May 15,
                                   Energy Policy              2001
                                   (Subcommittee on Energy
                                   and Air Quality)
107-15                            Assessing HIPAA: How       March 22,
                                   Federal Medical Record     2001
                                   Privacy Regulations Can
                                   Be Improved
                                   (Subcommittee on Health)
107-16                            Privacy in the Commercial  March 1,
                                   World (Subcommittee on     2001
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-17                            A Smarter Partnership:     March 7,
                                   Removing Barriers to       2001
                                   Brownfields Cleanups
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Environment and
                                   Hazardous Materials)
107-18                            Technology and Education:  March 8,
                                   A Review of Federal,       2001
                                   State, and Private
                                   Sector Programs
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Telecommunications and
                                   the Internet)
107-19                            The EU Data Protection     March 8,
                                   Directive: Implications    2001
                                   for the U.S. Privacy
                                   Debate (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-20                            Digital Television: A      March 15,
                                   Private Sector             2001
                                   Perspective on the
                                   Transition (Subcommittee
                                   on Telecommunications
                                   and the Internet)
107-21                            FCC Chairman Michael K.    March 29,
                                   Powell: Agenda and Plans   2001
                                   for Reform of the FCC
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Telecommunications and
                                   the Internet)
107-22                            An Examination of          April 3,
                                   Existing Federal           2001
                                   Statutes Addressing
                                   Information Privacy
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-23                            Patients First: A 21st     March 1,
                                   Century Promise to         2001
                                   Ensure Quality and          April 4,
                                   Affordable Health          2001
                                   Coverage (Subcommittee      May 10,
                                   on Health and the          2001
                                   Subcommittee on
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-24                            The Internet Freedom and   April 25,
                                   Broadband Deployment Act   2001
                                   of 2001 (Full Committee)
107-25                            Election Night 2000        February
                                   Coverage by the Networks   14, 2001
                                   (Full Committee)
107-26                            The Electricity Emergency  May 1,
                                   Act of 2001                2001,
                                   (Subcommittee on Energy     May 3,
                                   and Air Quality)           2001
107-27                            Increase Penalties for     May 17,
                                   Common Carrier             2001
                                   Violations of the
                                   Communications Act of
                                   1934 (Subcommittee on
                                   Telecommunications and
                                   the Internet)
107-28                            Medicare Reform:           May 16,
                                   Providing Prescription     2001
                                   Drug Coverage for
                                   Seniors (Subcommittee on
                                   Health)
107-29                            How Secure is Private      May 23,
                                   Medical Information?       2001
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-30                            Continuing Concerns Over   June 7,
                                   Imported Pharmaceuticals   2001
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-31                            Ensuring Compatibility     June 14,
                                   with Enhanced 911          2001
                                   Emergency Calling
                                   Systems: A Progress
                                   Report (Subcommittee on
                                   Telecommunications and
                                   the Internet)
107-32                            Advancing the Health of    June 27,
                                   the American People:       2001
                                   Addressing Various
                                   Public Health Needs
                                   (Subcommittee on Health)
107-33                            E-Rate and Filtering: A    April 4,
                                   Review of the Children's   2001
                                   Internet Protection Act
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Telecommunications and
                                   the Internet)
107-34                            Recent Developments Which  June 13,
                                   May Impact Consumer        2001
                                   Access to, and Demand
                                   for Pharmaceuticals
                                   (Subcommittee on Health)
107-35                            Opinion Surveys: What      May 8, 2001
                                   Consumers Have to Say
                                   About Information
                                   Privacy (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-36                            Impediments to Digital     May 22,
                                   Trade (Subcommittee on     2001
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-37                            On-Line Fraud and Crime:   May 23,
                                   Are Consumers Safe?        2001
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-38                            Information Privacy:       June 21,
                                   Industry Best Practices    2001
                                   and Technological
                                   Solutions (Subcommittee
                                   on Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-39                            Has Medicare+Choice        May 31,
                                   Reduced Variation in the   2001
                                   Premiums and Benefits
                                   Offered by Participating
                                   Health Plans? A Review
                                   of Medicare+Choice Plan
                                   Payment Methodology
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-40                            Medicare Reform:           June 14,
                                   Modernizing Medicare and   2001
                                   Merging Parts A and B
                                   (Subcommittee on Health)
107-41                            The Human Cloning          June 20,
                                   Prohibition Act of 2001    2001
                                   and the Cloning
                                   Prohibition Act of 2001
                                   (Subcommittee on Health)
107-42                            Campaign Finance Reform:   June 20,
                                   Proposals Impacting        2001
                                   Broadcasters, Cable
                                   Operators and Satellite
                                   Providers (Subcommittee
                                   on Telecommunications
                                   and the Internet)
107-43                            Brownfields Legislation:   June 28,
                                   ``The Brownfields          2001
                                   Revitalization and
                                   Environmental
                                   Restoration Act of
                                   2001,'' and ``Gillmor
                                   Discussion Draft,'' and
                                   ``Democratic Discussion
                                   Draft'' (Subcommittee on
                                   Environment and
                                   Hazardous Materials)
107-44                            Priorities of the Dept of  April 26,
                                   HHS as Reflected in the    2001
                                   FY 2001 Budget
                                   (Subcommittee on Health)
107-45                            Ford Motor Company's       June 19,
                                   Recall of Certain          2001
                                   Firestone Tires
                                   (Subcommittees on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection and
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-46                            The Potential for          July 11,
                                   Discrimination in Health   2001
                                   Insurance Based on
                                   Predictive Genetic Tests
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-47                            National Energy Policy     June 13,
                                   Report of the National     2001
                                   Energy Policy
                                   Development Group
                                   (Subcommittee on Energy
                                   and Air Quality)
107-48                            Current Issues Before the  July 31,
                                   Financial Standards        2001
                                   Accounting Board
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-49                            ``How do Businesses Use    July 26,
                                   Customer Information: Is   2001
                                   the Customer's Privacy
                                   Protected?''
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-50                            National Energy Policy:    June 22,
                                   Conservation and Energy    2001
                                   Efficiency (Subcommittee
                                   on Energy and Air
                                   Quality)
107-51                            Evaluating the             May 3, 2001
                                   Effectiveness of the FDA
                                   Modernization Act
                                   (Subcommittee on Health)
107-52                            Patients First: A 21st     June 28,
                                   Century Promise to         2001
                                   Ensure Quality and
                                   Affordable Health Care
                                   Coverage (Subcommittee
                                   on Health and
                                   Subcommittee on
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-53                            Modernizing Medicare:      July 26,
                                   (Subcommittee on Health)   2001
107-54                            Oxycontin: Its Use and     August 28,
                                   Abuse (Subcommittee on     2001
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-55                            Hydroelectric Relicensing  June 27,
                                   and Nuclear Energy         2001
                                   (Subcommittee on Energy
                                   and Air Quality)
107-56                            How Secure Is Sensitive    August 3,
                                   Commerce Dept. Data and    2001
                                   Operations? A Review of
                                   the Dept's. Computer
                                   Security Policies and
                                   Practices (Subcommittee
                                   on Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-57                            Authorizing Safety Net     August 1,
                                   Public Health Programs     2001
                                   (Subcommittee on Health)
107-58                            U.S. Deployment of Third   July 24,
                                   Generation Wireless        2001
                                   Services: When Will It
                                   Happen and Where Will It
                                   Happen? (Subcommittee on
                                   Telecommunications and
                                   the Internet)
107-59                            Drinking Water Needs and   March 28,
                                   Infrastructure             2001
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Environment and
                                   Hazardous Materials)
107-60                            An Examination of the      July 20,
                                   Entertainment Industry's   2001
                                   Efforts to Curb
                                   Children's Exposure to
                                   Violent Content
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Telecommunications and
                                   the Internet)
107-61                            Perspectives on            August 1,
                                   Interstate and             2001
                                   International Shipment
                                   of Municipal Solid Waste
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Environment and
                                   Hazardous Materials)
107-62                            National Electricity       July 27,
                                   Policy: Barriers to        2001
                                   Competitive Generation
                                   (Subcommittee on Energy
                                   and Air Quality)
107-63                            Dot Kids Name Act of 2001  November 1,
                                   (Subcommittee on           2001
                                   Telecommunications and
                                   the Internet)
107-64                            Electric Transmission      October 10,
                                   Policy: Regional           2001
                                   Transmission
                                   Organizations, Open
                                   Access, and Federal
                                   Jurisdiction
                                   (Subcommittee on Energy
                                   and Air Quality)
107-65                            Medicare Drug              September
                                   Reimbursements: A Broken   21, 2001
                                   System for Patients and
                                   Taxpayers (Subcommittee
                                   on Health and the
                                   Subcommittee on
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-66                            The State of the U.S.      October 17,
                                   Tourism Industry           2001
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-67                            Charitable Contributions   November 6,
                                   for September 11:          2001
                                   Protecting Against
                                   Fraud, Waste, and Abuse
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-68                            Challenges Facing the      November 7,
                                   Federal Trade Commission   2001
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-69                            Reauthorization of the     September
                                   Price-Anderson Act         6, 2001
                                   (Subcommittee on Energy
                                   and Air Quality)
107-70                            A Review of Federal        October 10,
                                   Bioterrorism               2001
                                   Preparedness Programs
                                   From a Public Health
                                   Perspective
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-71                            A Review of Federal        November 1,
                                   Bioterrorism               2001
                                   Preparedness Programs:
                                   Building an Early
                                   Warning Public Health
                                   Surveillance System
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-72                            Bioterrorism and           November
                                   Proposals to Combat        15, 2001
                                   Bioterrorism (Full
                                   Committee)
107-73                            Issues Concerning the Use  November 1,
                                   of MTBE in Reformulated    2001
                                   Gasoline (Subcommittee
                                   on Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-74                            Cyber Security: Private-   November
                                   Sector Efforts             15, 2001
                                   Addressing Cyber Threats
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-75                            Raising Health Awareness   November
                                   Through Examining Brain    15, 2001
                                   Tumor Cancer, Alpha One,
                                   and Breast Implant
                                   Issues (Subcommittee on
                                   Health)
107-76                            National Electricity       September
                                   Policy: Federal            20, 2001
                                   Government Perspectives
                                   (Subcommittee on Energy
                                   and Air Quality)
107-77                            The Status of Competition  December 4,
                                   in the Multi-Channel       2001
                                   Video Programming
                                   Distribution Marketplace
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Telecommunications and
                                   the Internet)
107-78                            The Settlement Between     December
                                   the U.S. Government and    11, 2001
                                   Nextwave Telecom Inc. to
                                   Resolve Disputed
                                   Spectrum Licenses
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Telecommunications and
                                   the Internet)
107-79                            Electronic Communication   December
                                   Networks in the Wake of    19, 2001
                                   September 11
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-80                            Destruction of Enron-      January 24,
                                   Related Documents by       2002
                                   Andersen Personnel
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-81                            The Electric Supply and    December
                                   Transmission Act of 2001   12, 2001
                                   (Subcommittee on Energy     December
                                   and Air Quality)           13, 2001
107-82                            The Effect of the          February
                                   Bankruptcy of Enron on     13, 2002
                                   the Functioning of
                                   Energy Markets
                                   (Subcommittee on Energy
                                   and Air Quality)
107-83                            Lessons Learned from       February 6,
                                   Enron's Collapse:          2002
                                   Auditing the Accounting
                                   Industry (Full
                                   Committee)
107-84                            Are Current Financial      February
                                   Accounting Standards       14, 2002
                                   Protecting Investors?
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-85                            Challenges Facing Amateur  February
                                   Athletics (Subcommittee    13, 2002
                                   on Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-86                            The Financial Collapse of  February 5,
                                   Enron--Part 1              2002
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-87                            Reauthorization of the     March 19,
                                   Natural Gas Pipeline       2002
                                   Safety Act and the
                                   Hazardous Liquid
                                   Pipeline Safety Act
                                   (Subcommittee on Energy
                                   and Air Quality)
107-88                            The Financial Collapse of  February 7,
                                   Enron--Part 2              2002
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-89                            The Financial Collapse of  February
                                   Enron--Part 3              14, 2002
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-90                            The Financial Collapse of  March 14,
                                   Enron--Part 4              2002
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-91                            Medicare Payment Policy:   February
                                   Ensuring Stability and     14, 2002
                                   Access Through Physician
                                   Payments (Subcommittee
                                   on Health)
107-92                            The Implementation of the  February
                                   TREAD Act: One Year        28, 2002
                                   Later (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-93                            Reauthorization of the     March 6,
                                   PDUFA (Subcommittee on     2002
                                   Health)
107-94                            The Protection of Lawful   April 18,
                                   Commerce in Arms Act       2002
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-95                            Ensuring Content           April 25,
                                   Protection in the          2002
                                   Digital Age
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Telecommunications and
                                   the Internet)
107-96                            Oversight and Management   May 1, 2002
                                   of the Government
                                   Purchase Card Program:
                                   Reviewing Its Weaknesses
                                   and Identifying
                                   Solutions (Subcommittee
                                   on Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-97                            The Status of              March 25,
                                   Implementation of the      2002
                                   Food Quality Protection
                                   Act of 1996
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Environment and
                                   Hazardous Materials)
107-98                            The Uninsured and          February
                                   Affordable Health Care     28, 2002
                                   Coverage (Subcommittee
                                   on Health)
107-99                            A Review of the            April 18,
                                   President's                2002
                                   Recommendation to
                                   Develop a Nuclear Waste
                                   Repository at Yucca
                                   Mountain, Nevada
                                   (Subcommittee on Energy
                                   and Air Quality)
107-100                           The 2003 Budget: A Review  March 13,
                                   of the HHS Health Care     2002
                                   Priorities (Subcommittee
                                   on Health)
107-101                           Creating a Medicare        April 17,
                                   Prescription Drug          2002
                                   Benefit: Assessing
                                   Efforts to Help
                                   America's Low-income
                                   Seniors
107-102                           Chatting On-Line: A        May 13,
                                   Dangerous Proposition      2002
                                   for Children
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Telecommunications and
                                   the Internet)
107-103                           The American Travel        May 23,
                                   Promotion Act              2002
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-104                           Welfare Reform: A Review   April 23,
                                   of Abstinence Education    2002
                                   and Transitional Medical
                                   Assistance (Subcommittee
                                   on Health)
107-105                           Medicare Modernization:    March 20,
                                   Examining FEHBP as a       2002
                                   Model for Seniors
                                   (Subcommittee on Health)
107-106                           Accomplishments of the     May 1, 2002
                                   Clean Air Act
                                   (Subcommittee on Energy
                                   and Air Quality)
107-107                           Drinking Water Needs and   April 11,
                                   Infrastructure             2002
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Environment and
                                   Hazardous Materials)
107-108                           MTBE Contamination in      May 21,
                                   Groundwater: Identifying   2002
                                   and Addressing the
                                   Problem (Subcommittee on
                                   Environment and
                                   Hazardous Materials)
107-109                           The Financial Accounting   June 26,
                                   Standards Board Act        2002
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-110                           Assessing America's        May 23,
                                   Health Risks:              2002
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-111                           DoE's FreedomCAR:          June 6,
                                   Hurdles, Benchmarks for    2002
                                   Progress, and Role in
                                   Energy Policy
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-112                           Reducing Medical Errors:   May 8, 2002
                                   A Review of Innovative
                                   Strategies to Improve
                                   Patient Safety
                                   (Subcommittee on Health)
107-113                           Creating the Department    June 25,
                                   of Homeland Security       2002
                                   (Subcommittee on            July 9,
                                   Oversight and              2002
                                   Investigations)
107-114                           FCC's UWB Proceeding:      June 5,
                                   (Subcommittee on           2002
                                   Telecommunications and
                                   the Internet)
107-115                           Area Code Exhaustion:      June 26,
                                   (Subcommittee on           2002
                                   Telecommunications and
                                   the Internet)
107-116                           FTC's Franchise Rule:      June 25,
                                   (Subcommittee on           2002
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-117                           U.S. National Climate      July 25,
                                   Change Assessment:         2002
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-118                           Insurance Coverage of      July 23,
                                   Mental Health Benefits     2002
                                   (Subcommittee on Health)
107-119                           Clean Air Act              June 5,
                                   Implementation:            2002
                                   (Subcommittee on Energy
                                   and Air Quality)
107-120                           Are All Online Travel      July 18,
                                   Sites Good for the         2002
                                   Consumer: (Subcommittee
                                   on Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-121                           Oath Taking, Truth         July 26,
                                   Telling, and Remedies in   2002
                                   the Business World
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-122                            The NIH: Investing in     June 6,
                                   Research (Subcommittee     2002
                                   on Health)
107-123                           Recent Developments in     July 17,
                                   the EPA Office of the      2002
                                   Ombudsman (Subcommittee
                                   on Health and the
                                   Subcommittee on
                                   Environment and
                                   Hazardous Materials)
107-124                           DoE's Accelerated Cleanup   July 19,
                                   (Subcommittee on           2002
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-125                           Sports Agent               June 5,
                                   Responsibility and Trust   2002
                                   Act (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-126                           Protecting the Rights of   July 11,
                                   Conscience of Health       2002
                                   Care Providers and a
                                   Parents Right to Know
                                   (Subcommittee on Health)
107-127                           Harming Patient Access to  July 17,
                                   Care: The Impact of        2002
                                   Excessive Litigation
                                   (Subcommittee on Health)
107-128                           The CPSC: The New          September
                                   Chairman's Agenda          4, 2002
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-129                           Capacity Swaps by Global   September
                                   Crossing: (Subcommittee    24 and
                                   on Oversight and           October 1,
                                   Investigations)            2002
107-130                           State Impediments to E-    September
                                   Commerce: (Subcommittee    26, 2002
                                   on Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-131                           The Consumer Privacy       September
                                   Protection Act of 2002     24, 2002
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-132                           Recording Industry         October 1,
                                   Marketing Practices:       2002
                                   (Subcommittee on
                                   Telecommunications and
                                   the Internet)
107-133                           CPB Oversight              July 10,
                                   (Subcommittee on           2002
                                   Telecommunications and
                                   the Internet)
107-134                           ECNs and Market            October 17,
                                   Structure: (Subcommittee   2002
                                   on Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-135                           Examining Prescription     July 25,
                                   Drug Importation           2002
                                   (Subcommittee on Health)
107-136                           Steel Industry Relief Act  September
                                   of 2002 (Subcommittee on   10, 2002
                                   Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-137                           Americas Blood Supply      September
                                   After 9-11 (Subcommittee   10, 2002
                                   on Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-138                           Telecommunications and     October 9,
                                   Trade Promotion            2002
                                   Authority (Subcommittee
                                   on Commerce, Trade, and
                                   Consumer Protection)
107-139                           Securing America:          October 17,
                                   (Subcommittee on           2002
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
107-140                           Examining Issues Related   October 9,
                                   to Competition in the      2002
                                   Pharmaceutical
                                   Marketplace
                                   (Subcommittee on Health)
107-141                           Transition to Digital      September
                                   (Subcommittee on           25, 2002
                                   Telecommunications and
                                   the Internet)
107-142                           Inquiry Into Imclone       June 13,
                                   (Subcommittee on           2002 and
                                   Oversight and              October
                                   Investigations)            10, 2002
107-143                           Safety of Accutane         December
                                   (Subcommittee on           11, 2002
                                   Oversight and
                                   Investigations)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                 part b

                            Committee Prints
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Serial No.                              Title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
107-A                                       Committee Rules
107-B                                       Compilation of Selected
                                             Energy-Related Legislation--
                                             Oil, Gas, and Nonnuclear
                                             Fuels
107-C                                       Compilation of Selected
                                             Energy-Related Legislation--
                                             Organization and
                                             Miscellaneous Laws
107-D                                       Compilation of Selected
                                             Acts--Food, Drug, and
                                             Related Law
107-E                                       Compilation of Selected
                                             Energy-Related Legislation--
                                             Electricity
107-F                                       Compilation of Selected
                                             Energy-Related Legislation--
                                             Energy Conservation, Low-
                                             Income Assistance, and
                                             Related Matters
107-G                                       Compilation of Selected
                                             Energy-Related Legislation--
                                             Nuclear Energy and
                                             Radioactive Waste
107-H                                       Compilation of Selected
                                             Acts--Environmental Law--
                                             Vol. 1
107-I                                       Compilation of Selected
                                             Acts--Communications Law
107-J                                       Compilation of Selected
                                             Acts--Health Law
107-K                                       Compilation of Selected
                                             Acts--Consumer Protection
                                             Law
107-L                                       Compilation of Selected
                                             Acts--Environmental Law--
                                             Vol. 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpr.gov  Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512ï¿½091800  
Fax: (202) 512ï¿½092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402ï¿½090001
                                     

                                     

                                                 Union Calendar No. 503
107th Congress 
 2d Session             HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES                 Report
                                                                107-802
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     

                         REPORT ON THE ACTIVITY

                                 OF THE

                    COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

                                FOR THE

                      ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

                                     



January 2, 2003.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed
?

                    COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

                      One Hundred Seventh Congress

               W.J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana, Chairman

MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida           JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan
JOE BARTON, Texas                    HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
FRED UPTON, Michigan                 EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
CLIFF STEARNS, Florida               RALPH M. HALL, Texas
PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio                RICK BOUCHER, Virginia
JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania     EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
CHRISTOPHER COX, California          FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
NATHAN DEAL, Georgia                 SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina         BART GORDON, Tennessee
ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky               PETER DEUTSCH, Florida
GREG GANSKE, Iowa                    BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois
CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia             ANNA G. ESHOO, California
BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming               BART STUPAK, Michigan
JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois               ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico           TOM SAWYER, Ohio
JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona             ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland
CHARLES ``CHIP'' PICKERING,          GENE GREEN, Texas
Mississippi                          KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri
VITO FOSSELLA, New York              TED STRICKLAND, Ohio
ROY BLUNT, Missouri                  DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado
TOM DAVIS, Virginia                  THOMAS M. BARRETT, Wisconsin
ED BRYANT, Tennessee                 BILL LUTHER, Minnesota
ROBERT L. EHRLICH, Jr., Maryland     LOIS CAPPS, California
STEVE BUYER, Indiana                 MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania
GEORGE RADANOVICH, California        CHRISTOPHER JOHN, Louisiana
CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire       JANE HARMAN, California
JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania
MARY BONO, California
GREG WALDEN, Oregon
LEE TERRY, Nebraska
ERNIE FLETCHER, Kentucky

                                  (ii)

  
?

                         LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

                              ----------                              


                     U.S. House of Representatives,
                          Committee on Energy and Commerce,
                                   Washington, DC, January 2, 2003.
Hon. Jeff Trandahl
Clerk,
House of Representatives
H-154, The Capitol
Washington, D.C. 20515

    Dear Mr. Trandahl: Purusant to clause 1(d) of Rule XI of 
the Rules of the House of Representatives, I present herewith a 
report on the activity of the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
for the 107th Congress, including the Committee's review and 
study of legislation within its jurisdiction and the oversight 
activities undertaken by the Committee.
            Sincerely,
                                   W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin, Chairman,

                                 (iii)
?



                            C O N T E N T S

                               __________
                                                                   Page

    Jurisdiction.................................................     1
    Rules for the Committee......................................     2
    Members and Organization.....................................    21
    Legislative and Oversight Activity...........................    27
    Full Committee...............................................    29
    Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection.....    37
    Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality.......................    55
    Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials..........    83
    Subcommittee on Health.......................................    99
    Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet..........   163
    Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.................   187
    Oversight Plan for the 107th Congress........................   221
    Appendix I--Legislative Summary..............................   301
    Appendix II--Public Laws.....................................   303
    Appendix III--Publications of the Committee..................   305

                                  (v)

